Vignesh Raman1, Oliver K Jawitz2, Soraya L Voigt2, Norma E Farrow2, Chi-Fu J Yang3, Thomas A D'Amico2, David H Harpole2. 1. Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. Electronic address: vignesh.raman@duke.edu. 2. Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 3. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend consideration of surgery for clinical T4a esophageal adenocarcinoma. There are limited data on the outcomes of patients with T4a adenocarcinoma treated with surgery vs definitive chemoradiation, however. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients from 2010-2015 with clinical T4aN0-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma, and grouped by receipt of surgery (with or without perioperative therapy) or definitive, concurrent chemoradiation. Patients receiving incomplete definitive therapy or with missing survival information were excluded. Overall survival was evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses. RESULTS: Of 182 patients in the study, 85 (47%) underwent esophagectomy and 97 (53%) underwent chemoradiation. In the surgery cohort, 79 patients (93%) received perioperative chemotherapy. Unadjusted and multivariable analyses demonstrated a significant survival benefit associated with surgery compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0.32; 95% confidence interval 0.21, 0.50). A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis of 63 patient pairs also revealed a significant overall survival benefit with surgery compared with chemoradiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.26; 95% confidence interval 0.16, 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: In this national analysis, surgery for cT4a esophageal adenocarcinoma was associated with improved outcomes when compared with definitive chemoradiation. Surgery should be considered for medically fit patients with cT4aN0-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma.
BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend consideration of surgery for clinical T4a esophageal adenocarcinoma. There are limited data on the outcomes of patients with T4a adenocarcinoma treated with surgery vs definitive chemoradiation, however. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients from 2010-2015 with clinical T4aN0-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma, and grouped by receipt of surgery (with or without perioperative therapy) or definitive, concurrent chemoradiation. Patients receiving incomplete definitive therapy or with missing survival information were excluded. Overall survival was evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses. RESULTS: Of 182 patients in the study, 85 (47%) underwent esophagectomy and 97 (53%) underwent chemoradiation. In the surgery cohort, 79 patients (93%) received perioperative chemotherapy. Unadjusted and multivariable analyses demonstrated a significant survival benefit associated with surgery compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0.32; 95% confidence interval 0.21, 0.50). A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis of 63 patient pairs also revealed a significant overall survival benefit with surgery compared with chemoradiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.26; 95% confidence interval 0.16, 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: In this national analysis, surgery for cT4a esophageal adenocarcinoma was associated with improved outcomes when compared with definitive chemoradiation. Surgery should be considered for medically fit patients with cT4aN0-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma.
Authors: K Ikeda; K Ishida; N Sato; K Koeda; K Aoki; Y Kimura; T Iwaya; S Ogasawara; S Iijima; R Nakamura; N Uesugi; C Maesawa; K Saito Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2001 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: A Chak; M Canto; H Gerdes; C J Lightdale; R H Hawes; M J Wiersema; G Kallimanis; T L Tio; T W Rice; H W Boyce Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1995-12 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: M Yano; T Tsujinaka; H Shiozaki; M Inoue; Y Doki; M Yamamoto; E Tanaka; T Inoue; M Monden Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 3.454