| Literature DB >> 36013201 |
Jing-Wei Lin1,2, Chuan Li1, Hui-Ling Yeh1, Cheng-Yen Chuang3, Chien-Chih Chen1,4.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of the present study is to determine the impact on survival using adjuvant chemotherapy on patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: adjuvant chemotherapy; esophageal cancer; squamous cell carcinoma
Year: 2022 PMID: 36013201 PMCID: PMC9409802 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12081252
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pers Med ISSN: 2075-4426
Patients’ characteristics.
| Total | SOC + Adjuvant CT | SOC + Follow-Up | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Patients | 127 | 26 | 101 | ||
| Sex | Male | 122 | 23 | 99 | 0.058 |
| Female | 5 | 3 | 2 | ||
| Age, years | Range | 35–75 | 35–66 | 35–75 | 0.631 |
| Mean ± SD | 54.77 ± 8.21 | 54.08 ± 8.63 | 54.95 ± 8.14 | ||
| Site | C | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.244 |
| U | 15 | 2 | 13 | ||
| M | 24 | 2 | 22 | ||
| L | 80 | 19 | 61 | ||
| 2 sites | 7 | 3 | 4 | ||
| cT | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.592 |
| 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||
| 3 | 120 | 26 | 94 | ||
| 4 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||
| cN | 0 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 0.909 |
| 1 | 70 | 13 | 57 | ||
| 2 | 46 | 11 | 35 | ||
| 3 | 5 | 1 | 4 | ||
| pT | 0 | 77 | 12 | 65 | 0.363 |
| 1 | 13 | 4 | 9 | ||
| 2 | 17 | 4 | 13 | ||
| 3 | 20 | 6 | 14 | ||
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| pN | 0 | 81 | 2 | 79 | <0.001 |
| 1 | 32 | 18 | 14 | ||
| 2 | 12 | 5 | 7 | ||
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||
| pCR | 56 | 2 | 54 | <0.001 | |
Abbreviations: SOC, standard-of-care; SD, standard deviation; C, cervical; U, upper thoracic; M, middle thoracic; L, lower thoracic; cT, clinical T classification; cN, clinical N classification; pT, pathological T classification; pN, pathological N classification; pCR, pathological complete response.
Acute toxicities during adjuvant chemotherapy.
| Leucopenia | |
| Total | 19 (73.1%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 17 (65.4%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 2 (7.7%) |
| Anemia | |
| Total | 20 (76.9%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 19 (73.1%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 1 (3.8%) |
| Thrombocytopenia | |
| Total | 9 (34.6%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 9 (34.6%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 0 |
| Hypokalemia | |
| Total | 7 (26.9%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 4 (15.4%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 3 (11.5%) |
| Hyponatremia | |
| Total | 13 (50.0%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 10 (38.5%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 3 (11.5%) |
| Hypocalcemia | |
| Total | 6 (23.1%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 4 (15.4%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 2 (7.7%) |
| Body weight loss | |
| Total | 8 (41.9%) |
| Grade 1–2 | 8 (41.9%) |
| Grade 3–4 | 0 |
Results of univariate and multivariate analyses with the Cox proportional hazards model on overall survivals.
| Univariate | Multivariate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | ||||
| Sex | (male–female) | 0.415 (0.057–3.005) | 0.384 | ||
| Age | 1.008 (0.975–1.043) | 0.632 | |||
| Histology | (grade 3–grade 1–2) | 1.157 (0.661–2.024) | 0.610 | ||
| Clinical stage | 0.717 | ||||
| III–II | 1.510 (0.470–4.855) | 0.489 | |||
| IVA–II | 1.844 (0.413–8.245) | 0.423 | |||
| Pre-Tx tumor length | 1.034 (0.951–1.125) | 0.430 | |||
| Time of CCRT to surgery | 1.011 (0.995–1.026) | 0.171 | |||
| Adjuvant CT (with–without) | 1.596 (0.875–2.911) | 0.128 | |||
| cCR (with–without) | 0.456 (0.265–0.787) | 0.005 | 0.527 (0.255–1.091) | 0.085 | |
| pT | 0.400 | ||||
| pT1: pT0 | 1.281 (0.496–3.308) | 0.609 | |||
| pT2: pT0 | 1.295 (0.549–2.827) | 0.516 | |||
| pT3: pT0 | 1.819 (0.909–3.637) | 0.091 | |||
| pN | <0.001 | ||||
| pN1: pN0 | 2.320 (1.261–4.269) | 0.007 | |||
| pN2: pN0 | 6.363 (2.853–14.194) | <0.001 | |||
| pN3: pN0 | 2.027 (0.271–15.152) | 0.491 | |||
| pN+: pN0 | 2.838 (1.641–4.907) | <0.001 | 4.117 (1.366–12.404) | 0.012 | |
| pCR (with–without) | 0.466 (0.264–0.824) | 0.009 | 1.883 (0.704–5.039) | 0.207 | |
| pT size | 1.264 (1.103–1.449) | 0.001 | 1.188 (0.934–1.511) | 0.160 | |
| No. of dissected LN | 1.000 (0.982–1.018) | 0.978 | |||
| LN ratio | 1.024 (1.007–1.042) | 0.007 | 1.005 (0.977–1.033) | 0.736 | |
| T responder (SD–CR + PR) | 1.886 (0.991–3.590) | 0.053 | |||
| N responder | 0.144 | ||||
| SD–CR + PR | 1.415 (0.779–2.569) | 0.254 | |||
| PD–CR + PR | 2.616 (0.916–7.467) | 0.072 | |||
| Post-CCRT SUVmax | 1.114 (0.978–1.269) | 0.103 | |||
| ΔSUVmax/pre-CCRT SUVmax | 0.984 (0.974–0.994) | 0.003 | 0.988 (0.976–1.001) | 0.066 | |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; Pre-Tx tumor length, pretreatment tumor length by endoscopy; CCRT, concurrent chemoradiotherapy; Adjuvant CT, adjuvant chemotherapy; cCR, clinical complete response; pN+, pathologically node-positive; pCR, pathological complete response; pT size, pathological tumor size; LN, lymph node; LN ratio, the ratio of positive lymph nodes over dissected lymph nodes; SD, stable disease; PR, partial response; PD, progressive disease; Post-CCRT SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value of the esophageal tumor after concurrent chemoradiotherapy; ΔSUVmax, the change of maximum standardized uptake value of the esophageal tumor before and after concurrent chemoradiotherapy; pre-CCRT SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value of the esophageal tumor before concurrent chemoradiotherapy.
Figure 1Forest plot for subgroup analysis of overall survival. Abbreviations: 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; adjuvant CT, adjuvant chemotherapy; cCR, clinical complete response; HR, hazard ratio; pCR, pathological complete response; pN+, pathologically node-positive; T responder, the patients with downstaging by T classification.
Figure 2The overall survival curves for the group of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (AdjCT) and the group without adjuvant chemotherapy (AdjCT).
Figure 3The overall survival curves for pathologic positive-node disease patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (AdjCT) and patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (AdjCT).