Pamela Samson1, Varun Puri1, Stephen Broderick2, G Alexander Patterson1, Bryan Meyers1, Traves Crabtree3. 1. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri. 2. St. Luke's Hospital, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Chesterfield, Missouri. 3. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Southern Illinois University College of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois. Electronic address: tcrabtree53@siumed.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend sampling 15 or more lymph nodes during esophagectomy. The proportion of patients meeting this guideline is unknown, as is its influence on overall survival (OS). METHODS: Univariate analysis and logistic regression were performed to identify variables associated with sampling 15 or more lymph nodes among patients undergoing esophagectomy in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). The NCCN guideline was evaluated in Cox proportional hazards modeling, along with alternative lymph node thresholds. Positive to examined node (PEN) ratios were calculated, and OS was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2012, only 6,961 of 18,777 (37.1%) patients undergoing esophagectomy had sampling of 15 or more lymph nodes. Variables associated with sampling 15 or more lymph nodes included income greater than or equal to $38,000, procedure performed in an academic facility, and increasing clinical T and N stages. Induction therapy was associated with a decreased likelihood of 15 or more lymph nodes being sampled. The largest decrease in mortality hazard in patients undergoing upfront esophagectomy was detected when 25 lymph nodes or more were sampled (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.89; p < 0.001), whereas for patients undergoing induction therapy, sampling of 10 or 15 or more lymph nodes was associated with optimal survival benefit (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.90; p < 0.001). PEN ratios of 0 to 0.10 were associated with maximum survival benefit among all patients undergoing esophagectomy. For patients with a PEN ratio of 0, increases in OS were detected with higher lymph node sampling (85.3 months for sampling of 20 or more lymph nodes versus 52.0 months for sampling 1-9 lymph nodes; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing upfront esophagectomy, there may be an increased survival benefit for examining 20 to 25 lymph nodes, which is higher than current recommendations. However, only a minority of patients are meeting current guidelines.
BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend sampling 15 or more lymph nodes during esophagectomy. The proportion of patients meeting this guideline is unknown, as is its influence on overall survival (OS). METHODS: Univariate analysis and logistic regression were performed to identify variables associated with sampling 15 or more lymph nodes among patients undergoing esophagectomy in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). The NCCN guideline was evaluated in Cox proportional hazards modeling, along with alternative lymph node thresholds. Positive to examined node (PEN) ratios were calculated, and OS was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2012, only 6,961 of 18,777 (37.1%) patients undergoing esophagectomy had sampling of 15 or more lymph nodes. Variables associated with sampling 15 or more lymph nodes included income greater than or equal to $38,000, procedure performed in an academic facility, and increasing clinical T and N stages. Induction therapy was associated with a decreased likelihood of 15 or more lymph nodes being sampled. The largest decrease in mortality hazard in patients undergoing upfront esophagectomy was detected when 25 lymph nodes or more were sampled (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.89; p < 0.001), whereas for patients undergoing induction therapy, sampling of 10 or 15 or more lymph nodes was associated with optimal survival benefit (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.90; p < 0.001). PEN ratios of 0 to 0.10 were associated with maximum survival benefit among all patients undergoing esophagectomy. For patients with a PEN ratio of 0, increases in OS were detected with higher lymph node sampling (85.3 months for sampling of 20 or more lymph nodes versus 52.0 months for sampling 1-9 lymph nodes; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing upfront esophagectomy, there may be an increased survival benefit for examining 20 to 25 lymph nodes, which is higher than current recommendations. However, only a minority of patients are meeting current guidelines.
Authors: Jennifer M Hanna; Loretta Erhunmwunsee; Mark Berry; Thomas D'Amico; Mark Onaitis Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Traves D Crabtree; Wael N Yacoub; Varun Puri; Riad Azar; Jennifer Bell Zoole; G Alexander Patterson; A Sasha Krupnick; Daniel Kreisel; Bryan F Meyers Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Brendon M Stiles; Abu Nasar; Farooq A Mirza; Paul C Lee; Subroto Paul; Jeffrey L Port; Nasser K Altorki Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-04-04 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Alexander J Greenstein; Virginia R Litle; Scott J Swanson; Celia M Divino; Stuart Packer; Juan P Wisnivesky Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Nasser K Altorki; Xi Kathy Zhou; Brendon Stiles; Jeffrey L Port; Subroto Paul; Paul C Lee; Madhu Mazumdar Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Nabil P Rizk; Hemant Ishwaran; Thomas W Rice; Long-Qi Chen; Paul H Schipper; Kenneth A Kesler; Simon Law; Toni E M R Lerut; Carolyn E Reed; Jarmo A Salo; Walter J Scott; Wayne L Hofstetter; Thomas J Watson; Mark S Allen; Valerie W Rusch; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Mario Musella; Giovanna Berardi; Alessio Bocchetti; Roberta Green; Valeria Cantoni; Nunzio Velotti; Katia Di Lauro; Domenico Manzolillo; Antonio Vitiello; Marco Milone; Giovanni Domenico De Palma Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Brendan T Heiden; Daniel B Eaton; Su-Hsin Chang; Yan Yan; Martin W Schoen; Mayank R Patel; Daniel Kreisel; Ruben G Nava; Bryan F Meyers; Benjamin D Kozower; Varun Puri Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Stepan M Esagian; Ioannis A Ziogas; Konstantinos Skarentzos; Ioannis Katsaros; Georgios Tsoulfas; Daniela Molena; Michalis V Karamouzis; Ioannis Rouvelas; Magnus Nilsson; Dimitrios Schizas Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Siva Raja; Thomas W Rice; Sudish C Murthy; Usman Ahmad; Marie E Semple; Eugene H Blackstone; Hemant Ishwaran Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Stefan Gabrielson; Jon A Tsai; Fuat Celebioglu; Magnus Nilsson; Ioannis Rouvelas; Mats Lindblad; Annie Bjäreback; Artur Tomson; Rimma Axelsson Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 1.698