D J Crull1, M C H Hogenes2, R Hoekstra3, E M Hendriksen4, M J van Det5, E A Kouwenhoven5. 1. Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands. d.crull@zgt.nl. 2. Department of Pathology, LabPon, Hengelo, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 5-year survival for patients with esophageal carcinoma remains poor despite neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. The eighth American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging, based on the neoadjuvant treated TNM (ypTNM) stage of the resection specimen, is used for prognosis. Tumor characteristics such as tumor grade, subtype of adenocarcinoma, and tumor regression scores are not included in this classification. This study aimed to determine the impact of these tumor characteristics on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 228 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Tumor regression was determined by the Mandard tumor regression (MTR) score. Subtype and grade of adenocarcinoma were confirmed using either the preoperative biopsy or residual tumor tissue after surgery. The MTR was modified to a three-tier classification. The study classified MTR 1 and 2 in one group as a "major response," with MTR 4 and 5 classified in one group as a "minimal response." RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 2.1 years. Combining MTR with AJCC staging did not improve the prognostic value for the prediction of OS. However, the multivariate analysis showed that the prognostic value of AJCC staging for DFS was improved by adding the three-tiered MTR (odds ratio for MTR4+5: 2.46; 95 % confidence interval, 1.07-5.67). Grade or subtype correlated with neither OS nor DFS in the univariate analyses and did not improve the prognostic value of the AJCC staging. CONCLUSION: Neither adenocarcinoma subtype nor grade influenced OS or DFS. However, the eighth AJCC staging combined with a three-tier MTR provided a better prognostic tool for DFS in esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
BACKGROUND: The 5-year survival for patients with esophageal carcinoma remains poor despite neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. The eighth American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging, based on the neoadjuvant treated TNM (ypTNM) stage of the resection specimen, is used for prognosis. Tumor characteristics such as tumor grade, subtype of adenocarcinoma, and tumor regression scores are not included in this classification. This study aimed to determine the impact of these tumor characteristics on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 228 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Tumor regression was determined by the Mandard tumor regression (MTR) score. Subtype and grade of adenocarcinoma were confirmed using either the preoperative biopsy or residual tumor tissue after surgery. The MTR was modified to a three-tier classification. The study classified MTR 1 and 2 in one group as a "major response," with MTR 4 and 5 classified in one group as a "minimal response." RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 2.1 years. Combining MTR with AJCC staging did not improve the prognostic value for the prediction of OS. However, the multivariate analysis showed that the prognostic value of AJCC staging for DFS was improved by adding the three-tiered MTR (odds ratio for MTR4+5: 2.46; 95 % confidence interval, 1.07-5.67). Grade or subtype correlated with neither OS nor DFS in the univariate analyses and did not improve the prognostic value of the AJCC staging. CONCLUSION: Neither adenocarcinoma subtype nor grade influenced OS or DFS. However, the eighth AJCC staging combined with a three-tier MTR provided a better prognostic tool for DFS in esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
Authors: M van Putten; J de Vos-Geelen; G A P Nieuwenhuijzen; P D Siersema; V E P P Lemmens; C Rosman; M J C van der Sangen; R H A Verhoeven Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Milan Vošmik; Jan Laco; Igor Sirák; Josef Dvořák; Petr Lochman; Miroslav Hodek; Petra Malá; Stanislav Rejchrt; Rudolf Repák; Michal Leško; Alexander Ferko; Aleš Ryška; Bohuslav Melichar; Jiří Petera Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2017-05-27 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Joel Shapiro; J Jan B van Lanschot; Maarten C C M Hulshof; Pieter van Hagen; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen; Geke A P Hospers; Johannes J Bonenkamp; Miguel A Cuesta; Reinoud J B Blaisse; Olivier R C Busch; Fiebo J W Ten Kate; Geert-Jan M Creemers; Cornelis J A Punt; John Th M Plukker; Henk M W Verheul; Ernst J Spillenaar Bilgen; Herman van Dekken; Maurice J C van der Sangen; Tom Rozema; Katharina Biermann; Jannet C Beukema; Anna H M Piet; Caroline M van Rij; Janny G Reinders; Hugo W Tilanus; Ewout W Steyerberg; Ate van der Gaast Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Fergus Noble; Luke Nolan; Adrian C Bateman; James P Byrne; Jamie J Kelly; Ian S Bailey; Donna M Sharland; Charlotte N Rees; Timothy J Iveson; Tim J Underwood; Andrew R Bateman Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-12-28 Impact factor: 5.742