Literature DB >> 28151801

Accuracy of Clinical Staging and Outcome With Primary Resection for Local-Regionally Limited Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Stephanie G Worrell1, Evan T Alicuben1, Daniel S Oh1, Jeffrey A Hagen1, Steven R DeMeester2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of clinical staging, to assess survival with surgical resection alone, and to determine factors associated with understaging in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma thought to have limited local-regional disease.
BACKGROUND: Primary surgical resection is the preferred treatment in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma clinically staged to have limited nodal disease. This approach requires reliable clinical staging.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who had primary esophagectomy for clinical stage T1-3 N0-1 adenocarcinoma (seventh edition AJCC) from January 2002 to May 2013. Clinical and pathologic stages were compared and overall survival was analyzed.
RESULTS: There were 88 patients who met inclusion criteria. Final pathology confirmed appropriate clinical staging (≤T3N1) in 76% of patients (67/88). There were 21 patients who were understaged (>T3N1), and in all cases, understaging was based on the presence of advanced nodal (N2 or N3) disease. Factors independently associated with understaging were the presence of dysphagia, tumor length >3 cm, and poor differentiation. At a median follow-up of 35 months, 63% of all patients (55/88) remain alive. The 5-year survival in correctly staged patients was 67%, compared with 33% for those who were understaged (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Modern clinical staging will accurately identify the majority of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma and limited local-regional disease (≤pT3N1). Survival with surgery alone in correctly staged patients was excellent and unlikely to be improved with neoadjuvant therapy. A combination of dysphagia, poor differentiation, and tumor length >3 cm was associated with understaging in 92% of patients. Patients with these factors are likely to have more advanced disease than clinically suspected and may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy before resection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28151801     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002139

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  3 in total

1.  Inaccurate Clinical Stage Is Common for Gastric Adenocarcinoma and Is Associated with Undertreatment and Worse Outcomes.

Authors:  Michelle R Ju; John D Karalis; James-Michael Blackwell; John C Mansour; Patricio M Polanco; Mathew Augustine; Adam C Yopp; Herbert J Zeh; Sam C Wang; Matthew R Porembka
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  An artificial neural network model predicting pathologic nodal metastases in clinical stage I-II esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients.

Authors:  Xiao-Long Liu; Chen-Ye Shao; Lei Sun; Yi-Yang Liu; Li-Wen Hu; Zhuang-Zhuang Cong; Yang Xu; Rong-Chun Wang; Jun Yi; Wei Wang
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Comparison of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and left transthoracic esophagectomy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Qi Wang; Zixiang Wu; Tianwei Zhan; Shuai Fang; Sai Zhang; Gang Shen; Ming Wu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 4.638

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.