Literature DB >> 34353984

Presentation, Treatment, and Prognosis of Esophageal Carcinoma in A Nationwide Comparison of Sweden and the Netherlands.

Marianne C Kalff1, Eivind Gottlieb-Vedi, Rob H A Verhoeven, Hanneke W M van Laarhoven, Jesper Lagergren, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Sheraz R Markar, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This population-based study aimed to compare presentation, treatment allocation and survival of potentially curable esophageal cancer patients between Sweden and the Netherlands. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Identification of inter-country differences in treatment allocation and survival may be used for targeted esophageal cancer care improvement.
METHODS: Nationwide datasets were acquired from a Swedish cohort study and the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients with potentially curable (cT1-T4a/Tx, cN0/+, cM0/x) esophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) diagnosed in 2011-2015 were included. Multivariable logistic regression provided odds ratios (OR) for treatment allocation, and multivariable Cox model provided hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for age, sex, year, tumor sub-location and stage.
RESULTS: Among 1980 Swedish and 7829 Dutch esophageal cancer patients, Swedish patients were older (71 vs 69 years, P <0.001) and had higher cT-stage (cT3: 49% vs 46%, P <0.001). After adjustment for confounders, Swedish patients were less frequently allocated to curative treatment (adenocarcinoma: OR=0.31, 95%CI 0.26-0.36; SCC: OR=0.28, 95%CI 0.22-0.36). Overall survival was lower in Swedish patients (adenocarcinoma: HR=1.36, 95%CI 1.27-1.46; SCC: HR=1.38, 95%CI 1.24-1.53), also when allocated to curative treatment (adenocarcinoma: HR=1.12, 95%CI 1.01-1.24; SCC: HR=1.34, 95%CI 1.14-1.59).
CONCLUSION: Swedish patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer were less frequently allocated to curative treatment, and showed lower survival compared to Dutch patients. The less pronounced inter-country survival difference after curative treatment suggests that the overall survival difference could at least partly be due to relative undertreatment of Swedish patients. Shared curative treatment thresholds across Europe may help improve survival of esophageal cancer patients.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34353984     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005127

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


  6 in total

1.  Nomogram for prognosis of patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer after minimally invasive esophagectomy established based on non-textbook outcome.

Authors:  Shao-Jun Xu; Lan-Qin Lin; Ting-Yu Chen; Cheng-Xiong You; Chao Chen; Rui-Qin Chen; Shu-Chen Chen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Population-Based Cohort Study from a Prospective National Registry: Better Long-Term Survival in Esophageal Cancer After Minimally Invasive Compared with Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Masaru Hayami; Nelson Ndegwa; Mats Lindblad; Gustav Linder; Jakob Hedberg; David Edholm; Jan Johansson; Jesper Lagergren; Lars Lundell; Magnus Nilsson; Ioannis Rouvelas
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 4.339

3.  Improving Oncologic Outcomes for Esophageal Cancer After Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Alexandra I Mansour; Rishindra M Reddy
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-07-02       Impact factor: 4.339

4.  Long-Term Survival After Transhiatal Versus Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Population-Based Nationwide Study in Finland.

Authors:  Anna Junttila; Olli Helminen; Mika Helmiö; Heikki Huhta; Raija Kallio; Vesa Koivukangas; Arto Kokkola; Simo Laine; Elina Lietzen; Sanna Meriläinen; Vesa-Matti Pohjanen; Tuomo Rantanen; Ari Ristimäki; Jari V Räsänen; Juha Saarnio; Eero Sihvo; Vesa Toikkanen; Tuula Tyrväinen; Antti Valtola; Joonas H Kauppila
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 4.339

5.  Completely minimally invasive versus hybrid Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy for oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer: a UK multi-centre comparative study.

Authors:  Krashna Patel; Alan Askari; Omar Abbassi; Naga Venkatesh Jayanthi; Oliver Claydon; James Laycock; Aravindh Ramalingam; Bhaskar Kumar; Joshua Wong; Mohamed Aly; Periyathambi Jambulingam
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 3.453

6.  Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Versus Definitive Chemoradiotherapy With Salvage Surgery as Needed: The Study Protocol for the Randomized Controlled NEEDS Trial.

Authors:  Magnus Nilsson; Halla Olafsdottir; Gabriella Alexandersson von Döbeln; Fernanda Villegas; Giovanna Gagliardi; Mats Hellström; Qiao-Li Wang; Hemming Johansson; Val Gebski; Jakob Hedberg; Fredrik Klevebro; Sheraz Markar; Elizabeth Smyth; Pernilla Lagergren; Ghazwan Al-Haidari; Lars Cato Rekstad; Eirik Kjus Aahlin; Bengt Wallner; David Edholm; Jan Johansson; Eva Szabo; John V Reynolds; C S Pramesh; Naveen Mummudi; Amit Joshi; Lorenzo Ferri; Rebecca Ks Wong; Chris O'Callaghan; Jelena Lukovic; Kelvin Kw Chan; Trevor Leong; Andrew Barbour; Mark Smithers; Yin Li; Xiaozheng Kang; Feng-Ming Kong; Yin-Kai Chao; Tom Crosby; Christiane Bruns; Hanneke van Laarhoven; Mark van Berge Henegouwen; Richard van Hillegersberg; Riccardo Rosati; Guillaume Piessen; Giovanni de Manzoni; Florian Lordick
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 5.738

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.