Shawn S Groth1, Bryan M Burt2, Farhood Farjah3, Brandon G Smaglo4, Yvonne H Sada4, David J Sugarbaker2, Nader N Massarweh5. 1. Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex. Electronic address: Shawn.Groth@bcm.edu. 2. Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex. 3. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Wash. 4. Section of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex. 5. Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Tex; Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation therapy on completeness of pathologic response and to assess the impact of primary tumor versus nodal response on survival after esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients aged 18 to 80 years in the National Cancer Data Base (2006-2016) with clinically staged, locally advanced (cT2-4 or cN+) esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent an R0 esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation therapy were included. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed to assess the association between treatment response and survival. RESULTS: Among 2870 patients, there was a significant dose-response association between completeness of response and overall survival: no response (reference), partial response (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.91), and complete response (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.47-0.65). Compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with higher pathologic primary tumor (33.9% vs 21.3%; P < .001) and pathologic nodal response rates (55.9% vs 32.7%; P < .001). Both a primary and nodal response were associated with improved survival. However, among patients with a primary but no nodal response, primary tumor response was not associated with risk of death (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.69-1.11). In contrast, among patients who had a nodal but no primary response, the survival benefit of a nodal response was maintained (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic nodal (rather than primary tumor) response to neoadjuvant therapy is associated with improved survival. These data suggest a need to optimize neoadjuvant strategies associated with more complete nodal response rates and to consider more aggressive adjuvant treatment for patients with residual nodal disease after esophagectomy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation therapy on completeness of pathologic response and to assess the impact of primary tumor versus nodal response on survival after esophagectomy. METHODS:Patients aged 18 to 80 years in the National Cancer Data Base (2006-2016) with clinically staged, locally advanced (cT2-4 or cN+) esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent an R0 esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation therapy were included. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed to assess the association between treatment response and survival. RESULTS: Among 2870 patients, there was a significant dose-response association between completeness of response and overall survival: no response (reference), partial response (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.91), and complete response (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.47-0.65). Compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with higher pathologic primary tumor (33.9% vs 21.3%; P < .001) and pathologic nodal response rates (55.9% vs 32.7%; P < .001). Both a primary and nodal response were associated with improved survival. However, among patients with a primary but no nodal response, primary tumor response was not associated with risk of death (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.69-1.11). In contrast, among patients who had a nodal but no primary response, the survival benefit of a nodal response was maintained (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic nodal (rather than primary tumor) response to neoadjuvant therapy is associated with improved survival. These data suggest a need to optimize neoadjuvant strategies associated with more complete nodal response rates and to consider more aggressive adjuvant treatment for patients with residual nodal disease after esophagectomy.
Authors: Rebecca A Carr; Caitlin Harrington; Elvira Vos; Manjit S Bains; Matthew J Bott; James M Isbell; Bernard J Park; Smita Sihag; David R Jones; Daniela Molena Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2021-09-10 Impact factor: 5.102
Authors: Smita Sihag; Tamar Nobel; Meier Hsu; Kay See Tan; Rebecca Carr; Yelena Y Janjigian; Laura H Tang; Abraham J Wu; Matthew J Bott; James M Isbell; Manjit S Bains; David R Jones; Daniela Molena Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2020-11-17 Impact factor: 13.787