未必越多越好:食管腺癌诱导化疗加化疗放疗与单纯化疗放疗的肿瘤学疗效比较。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Elliott J Yee, Jake Read, Ioannis A Ziogas, Christina M Stuart, Jeffrey Olsen, Sunnie S Kim, John D Mitchell, Robert A Meguid, Martin D McCarter, Benedetto Mungo
{"title":"未必越多越好:食管腺癌诱导化疗加化疗放疗与单纯化疗放疗的肿瘤学疗效比较。","authors":"Elliott J Yee, Jake Read, Ioannis A Ziogas, Christina M Stuart, Jeffrey Olsen, Sunnie S Kim, John D Mitchell, Robert A Meguid, Martin D McCarter, Benedetto Mungo","doi":"10.1002/jso.27952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The oncologic benefit of induction chemotherapy (IC) before chemoradiation (CRT) compared to CRT alone for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is not well defined. We hypothesized that IC with CRT would improve survival and pathologic complete response rate compared to CRT alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of patients with biopsy proven esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with preoperative CRT and IC + CRT and surgical resection from 2007 to 2023 at a single institution was performed. First order outcomes were overall survival and pathologic complete response rate; secondary outcomes included disease-free survival and distant metastasis failure. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on baseline characteristics and tumor-specific features. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and Cox regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 205 patients that met inclusion criteria, 76 (38%) patients underwent IC + CRT. There were no significant differences in demographic or tumor-specific characteristics between the two cohorts. There were no differences in the median overall survival between CRT and IC + CRT groups (47 months vs. not reached, p = 0.194). The rate of pathologic complete response in the overall cohort was 22%; IC + CRT was not associated with higher complete tumor response than CRT alone (20% vs. 23%, p = 0.557). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes between the two treatment paradigms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We could not detect added oncologic benefit in survival or pathologic complete response with IC over CRT alone for resectable esophageal and GEJ cancer. Biomarker driven prospective studies exploring the optimal perioperative treatment regimens are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":17111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"More May Not Be Better: Comparison of Oncologic Outcomes Following Induction Chemotherapy Plus Chemoradiation and Chemoradiation Alone for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Elliott J Yee, Jake Read, Ioannis A Ziogas, Christina M Stuart, Jeffrey Olsen, Sunnie S Kim, John D Mitchell, Robert A Meguid, Martin D McCarter, Benedetto Mungo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jso.27952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The oncologic benefit of induction chemotherapy (IC) before chemoradiation (CRT) compared to CRT alone for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is not well defined. We hypothesized that IC with CRT would improve survival and pathologic complete response rate compared to CRT alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of patients with biopsy proven esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with preoperative CRT and IC + CRT and surgical resection from 2007 to 2023 at a single institution was performed. First order outcomes were overall survival and pathologic complete response rate; secondary outcomes included disease-free survival and distant metastasis failure. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on baseline characteristics and tumor-specific features. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and Cox regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 205 patients that met inclusion criteria, 76 (38%) patients underwent IC + CRT. There were no significant differences in demographic or tumor-specific characteristics between the two cohorts. There were no differences in the median overall survival between CRT and IC + CRT groups (47 months vs. not reached, p = 0.194). The rate of pathologic complete response in the overall cohort was 22%; IC + CRT was not associated with higher complete tumor response than CRT alone (20% vs. 23%, p = 0.557). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes between the two treatment paradigms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We could not detect added oncologic benefit in survival or pathologic complete response with IC over CRT alone for resectable esophageal and GEJ cancer. Biomarker driven prospective studies exploring the optimal perioperative treatment regimens are warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Surgical Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Surgical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27952\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27952","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:对于局部晚期食管和胃食管交界处(GEJ)腺癌,在化疗放疗(CRT)前进行诱导化疗(IC)与单独进行CRT相比,其肿瘤学益处尚不明确。我们假设,与单纯 CRT 相比,IC 联合 CRT 可提高生存率和病理完全缓解率:我们对 2007 年至 2023 年期间在一家机构接受术前 CRT 和 IC + CRT 及手术切除治疗的活检证实食管或 GEJ 腺癌患者进行了回顾性研究。第一顺序结果为总生存期和病理完全反应率;第二顺序结果包括无病生存期和远处转移失败率。根据基线特征和肿瘤特异性特征进行了分组分析。生存期分析采用 Kaplan-Meier 曲线和对数秩检验以及 Cox 回归分析:在符合纳入标准的205名患者中,76名(38%)患者接受了IC+CRT治疗。两组患者的人口统计学特征和肿瘤特异性特征无明显差异。CRT 组和 IC + CRT 组的中位总生存期没有差异(47 个月 vs. 未达到,p = 0.194)。总体队列中的病理完全反应率为22%;IC + CRT组的肿瘤完全反应率并不比单独CRT组高(20% vs. 23%,p = 0.557)。两种治疗模式的次要结果均无明显差异:结论:对于可切除的食管癌和胃食管癌,我们无法发现 IC 比单纯 CRT 在生存期或病理完全缓解方面带来更多的肿瘤学益处。有必要开展生物标志物驱动的前瞻性研究,探索最佳的围手术期治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
More May Not Be Better: Comparison of Oncologic Outcomes Following Induction Chemotherapy Plus Chemoradiation and Chemoradiation Alone for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Introduction: The oncologic benefit of induction chemotherapy (IC) before chemoradiation (CRT) compared to CRT alone for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is not well defined. We hypothesized that IC with CRT would improve survival and pathologic complete response rate compared to CRT alone.

Methods: A retrospective review of patients with biopsy proven esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with preoperative CRT and IC + CRT and surgical resection from 2007 to 2023 at a single institution was performed. First order outcomes were overall survival and pathologic complete response rate; secondary outcomes included disease-free survival and distant metastasis failure. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on baseline characteristics and tumor-specific features. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and Cox regression analysis.

Results: Of 205 patients that met inclusion criteria, 76 (38%) patients underwent IC + CRT. There were no significant differences in demographic or tumor-specific characteristics between the two cohorts. There were no differences in the median overall survival between CRT and IC + CRT groups (47 months vs. not reached, p = 0.194). The rate of pathologic complete response in the overall cohort was 22%; IC + CRT was not associated with higher complete tumor response than CRT alone (20% vs. 23%, p = 0.557). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes between the two treatment paradigms.

Conclusions: We could not detect added oncologic benefit in survival or pathologic complete response with IC over CRT alone for resectable esophageal and GEJ cancer. Biomarker driven prospective studies exploring the optimal perioperative treatment regimens are warranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
367
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Oncology offers peer-reviewed, original papers in the field of surgical oncology and broadly related surgical sciences, including reports on experimental and laboratory studies. As an international journal, the editors encourage participation from leading surgeons around the world. The JSO is the representative journal for the World Federation of Surgical Oncology Societies. Publishing 16 issues in 2 volumes each year, the journal accepts Research Articles, in-depth Reviews of timely interest, Letters to the Editor, and invited Editorials. Guest Editors from the JSO Editorial Board oversee multiple special Seminars issues each year. These Seminars include multifaceted Reviews on a particular topic or current issue in surgical oncology, which are invited from experts in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信