Michael Buckstein1, Jerry Liu2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1184 5th Avenue, First Floor, New York, NY, 10029, USA. michael.buckstein@mountsinai.org. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, Suite 4G, 10 Union Square East, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Cervical esophageal cancers (CECs) are a rare subset of esophageal cancers that are distinct in their management and outcomes. This review explores current data on the optimal management of this disease. RECENT FINDINGS: While outcomes for CEC have been suboptimal, several strategies have been proven beneficial in recent years. These include selective surgical resection or salvage surgery, chemoradiation (CRT) vs. radiation (RT) alone, dose escalation, IMRT, and induction chemotherapy. The optimal management of CEC to achieve the best oncological outcomes and minimize morbidity appears to be definitive chemoradiation with surgery reserved for selective salvage. While the benefit of dose escalated vs. standard dosing for radiation is unclear, most appear to use doses in excess of 50.4 Gy, even in the United States. IMRT might provide a benefit independent of allowing for dose escalation. Induction chemotherapy might allow for "chemoselection", but the benefit is unclear.
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Cervical esophageal cancers (CECs) are a rare subset of esophageal cancers that are distinct in their management and outcomes. This review explores current data on the optimal management of this disease. RECENT FINDINGS: While outcomes for CEC have been suboptimal, several strategies have been proven beneficial in recent years. These include selective surgical resection or salvage surgery, chemoradiation (CRT) vs. radiation (RT) alone, dose escalation, IMRT, and induction chemotherapy. The optimal management of CEC to achieve the best oncological outcomes and minimize morbidity appears to be definitive chemoradiation with surgery reserved for selective salvage. While the benefit of dose escalated vs. standard dosing for radiation is unclear, most appear to use doses in excess of 50.4 Gy, even in the United States. IMRT might provide a benefit independent of allowing for dose escalation. Induction chemotherapy might allow for "chemoselection", but the benefit is unclear.
Authors: Robert Haddad; Anne O'Neill; Guilherme Rabinowits; Roy Tishler; Fadlo Khuri; Douglas Adkins; Joseph Clark; Nicholas Sarlis; Jochen Lorch; Jonathan J Beitler; Sewanti Limaye; Sarah Riley; Marshall Posner Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Bruce D Minsky; Thomas F Pajak; Robert J Ginsberg; Thomas M Pisansky; James Martenson; Ritsuko Komaki; Gordon Okawara; Seth A Rosenthal; David P Kelsen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Colin Schieman; Dennis A Wigle; Claude Deschamps; Francis C Nichols; Stephen D Cassivi; K Robert Shen; Mark S Allen Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Marshall R Posner; Diane M Hershock; Cesar R Blajman; Elizabeth Mickiewicz; Eric Winquist; Vera Gorbounova; Sergei Tjulandin; Dong M Shin; Kevin Cullen; Thomas J Ervin; Barbara A Murphy; Luis E Raez; Roger B Cohen; Monica Spaulding; Roy B Tishler; Berta Roth; Rosana del Carmen Viroglio; Varagur Venkatesan; Ilya Romanov; Sanjiv Agarwala; K William Harter; Matthew Dugan; Anthony Cmelak; Arnold M Markoe; Paul W Read; Lynn Steinbrenner; A Dimitrios Colevas; Charles M Norris; Robert I Haddad Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-10-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Armando De Virgilio; Andrea Costantino; Carlo Castoro; Giuseppe Spriano; Bianca Maria Festa; Giuseppe Mercante; Davide Franceschini; Ciro Franzese; Marta Scorsetti; Andrea Marrari; Raffaele Cavina; Salvatore Marano Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 3.236
Authors: Dezuo Dong; Dan Zhao; Shuai Li; Weixin Liu; Feng Du; Xiaolong Xu; Shaowen Xiao; Baomin Zheng; Yan Sun; Weihu Wang Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2020-12