食管鳞状细胞癌的新辅助放化疗与化学免疫治疗

IF 15.7 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Xufeng Guo, Chunji Chen, Jinbo Zhao, Changchun Wang, Xinyu Mei, Jianfei Shen, Huilai Lv, Yongtao Han, Qifeng Wang, Jiahua Lv, Hainan Chen, Xiaolong Yan, Zhichao Liu, Zhengyang Zhang, Qihong Zhong, Youhua Jiang, Liwei Xu, Xiaoyang Li, Dong Qian, Dehua Ma, Minhua Ye, Chunguo Wang, Zimin Wang, Jiangbo Lin, Ziqiang Tian, Xuefeng Leng, Zhigang Li
{"title":"食管鳞状细胞癌的新辅助放化疗与化学免疫治疗","authors":"Xufeng Guo, Chunji Chen, Jinbo Zhao, Changchun Wang, Xinyu Mei, Jianfei Shen, Huilai Lv, Yongtao Han, Qifeng Wang, Jiahua Lv, Hainan Chen, Xiaolong Yan, Zhichao Liu, Zhengyang Zhang, Qihong Zhong, Youhua Jiang, Liwei Xu, Xiaoyang Li, Dong Qian, Dehua Ma, Minhua Ye, Chunguo Wang, Zimin Wang, Jiangbo Lin, Ziqiang Tian, Xuefeng Leng, Zhigang Li","doi":"10.1001/jamasurg.2025.0220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ImportanceThe association of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIT) vs chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) with tumor downstaging and survival in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains unclear because of limited evidence.ObjectiveTo compare the associations of NCIT and NCRT with tumor regression and long-term survival in patients with locally advanced ESCC.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this comparative effectiveness research study, from January 2016 to March 2023, patients with locally advanced ESCC who underwent esophagectomy following NCRT or NCIT were identified from a prospective database of 8 high-volume esophageal surgery centers in China. Follow-up began on the date of surgery and continued until the last recorded contact or March 2024, whichever occurred first. Data were analyzed between April and September 2024.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end points were 2-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary end points included major pathologic response (MPR) and pathologic complete response (pCR). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to investigate the risk factors for OS and DFS.ResultsThe study included 1428 patients (median [IQR] age, 63 [57-68] years; 1184 men [82.9%]), with 704 patients in the NCRT group and 724 patients in the NCIT group. After propensity score matching, there were 532 patients in each group. The 2-year OS (81.3% vs 71.3%; hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.26-1.96; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &amp;amp;lt; .001) and DFS (73.9% vs 63.4%; hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.69; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &amp;amp;lt; .001) rates were significantly higher in NCIT group than in the NCRT group. The NCRT group had a higher MPR rate than that of the NCIT group (71.8% vs 61.5%), whereas the pCR rates were similar (25.9% vs 22.9%). Multivariable Cox analysis demonstrated that NCIT and MPR were independently associated with both OS and DFS. The NCIT group exhibited a lower overall recurrence rate (126 patients [23.7%] vs 190 patients [35.7%]) and distant metastasis rate (72 patients [13.5%] vs 133 patients [25.0%]), although locoregional metastasis rates were similar (98 patients [18.4%] vs 111 patients [20.9%]). Better OS and DFS were obtained for the NCIT group than for the NCRT group, regardless of whether adjuvant immunotherapy was given.Conclusions and RelevanceCompared with NCRT, patients with locally advanced ESCC receiving NCIT had better 2-year OS and DFS. The decrease in distant metastasis may be the main reason, but further prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to verify this finding.","PeriodicalId":14690,"journal":{"name":"JAMA surgery","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy vs Chemoimmunotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma\",\"authors\":\"Xufeng Guo, Chunji Chen, Jinbo Zhao, Changchun Wang, Xinyu Mei, Jianfei Shen, Huilai Lv, Yongtao Han, Qifeng Wang, Jiahua Lv, Hainan Chen, Xiaolong Yan, Zhichao Liu, Zhengyang Zhang, Qihong Zhong, Youhua Jiang, Liwei Xu, Xiaoyang Li, Dong Qian, Dehua Ma, Minhua Ye, Chunguo Wang, Zimin Wang, Jiangbo Lin, Ziqiang Tian, Xuefeng Leng, Zhigang Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamasurg.2025.0220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ImportanceThe association of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIT) vs chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) with tumor downstaging and survival in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains unclear because of limited evidence.ObjectiveTo compare the associations of NCIT and NCRT with tumor regression and long-term survival in patients with locally advanced ESCC.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this comparative effectiveness research study, from January 2016 to March 2023, patients with locally advanced ESCC who underwent esophagectomy following NCRT or NCIT were identified from a prospective database of 8 high-volume esophageal surgery centers in China. Follow-up began on the date of surgery and continued until the last recorded contact or March 2024, whichever occurred first. Data were analyzed between April and September 2024.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end points were 2-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary end points included major pathologic response (MPR) and pathologic complete response (pCR). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to investigate the risk factors for OS and DFS.ResultsThe study included 1428 patients (median [IQR] age, 63 [57-68] years; 1184 men [82.9%]), with 704 patients in the NCRT group and 724 patients in the NCIT group. After propensity score matching, there were 532 patients in each group. The 2-year OS (81.3% vs 71.3%; hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.26-1.96; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &amp;amp;lt; .001) and DFS (73.9% vs 63.4%; hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.69; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &amp;amp;lt; .001) rates were significantly higher in NCIT group than in the NCRT group. The NCRT group had a higher MPR rate than that of the NCIT group (71.8% vs 61.5%), whereas the pCR rates were similar (25.9% vs 22.9%). Multivariable Cox analysis demonstrated that NCIT and MPR were independently associated with both OS and DFS. The NCIT group exhibited a lower overall recurrence rate (126 patients [23.7%] vs 190 patients [35.7%]) and distant metastasis rate (72 patients [13.5%] vs 133 patients [25.0%]), although locoregional metastasis rates were similar (98 patients [18.4%] vs 111 patients [20.9%]). Better OS and DFS were obtained for the NCIT group than for the NCRT group, regardless of whether adjuvant immunotherapy was given.Conclusions and RelevanceCompared with NCRT, patients with locally advanced ESCC receiving NCIT had better 2-year OS and DFS. The decrease in distant metastasis may be the main reason, but further prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to verify this finding.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA surgery\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2025.0220\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2025.0220","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于证据有限,新辅助化疗免疫治疗(NCIT)与放化疗(NCRT)与局部晚期食管鳞状细胞癌(ESCC)肿瘤分期降低和生存率的关系尚不清楚。目的比较NCIT和NCRT与局部晚期ESCC患者肿瘤消退和长期生存的关系。设计、环境和参与者在这项比较疗效的研究中,从2016年1月至2023年3月,从中国8个大容量食管手术中心的前瞻性数据库中筛选了在NCRT或NCIT后行食管切除术的局部晚期ESCC患者。随访从手术当日开始,一直持续到最后一次有记录的接触者或2024年3月,以先发生者为准。研究人员分析了2024年4月至9月之间的数据。主要终点为2年总生存期(OS)和无病生存期(DFS)。次要终点包括主要病理反应(MPR)和病理完全缓解(pCR)。采用Cox比例风险回归分析探讨OS和DFS的危险因素。结果纳入1428例患者(中位[IQR]年龄63[57-68]岁;男性1184例(82.9%),其中NCRT组704例,NCIT组724例。经倾向评分匹配后,每组532例。2年OS (81.3% vs 71.3%;风险比为1.57;95% ci, 1.26-1.96;P, amp;肝移植;.001)和DFS (73.9% vs 63.4%;风险比1.37;95% ci, 1.11-1.69;P, amp;肝移植;.001), NCIT组的发生率明显高于NCRT组。NCRT组的MPR率高于NCIT组(71.8%比61.5%),而pCR率相似(25.9%比22.9%)。多变量Cox分析显示NCIT和MPR与OS和DFS独立相关。NCIT组总体复发率(126例[23.7%]对190例[35.7%])和远处转移率(72例[13.5%]对133例[25.0%])较低,尽管局部转移率相似(98例[18.4%]对111例[20.9%])。无论是否给予辅助免疫治疗,NCIT组的OS和DFS均优于NCRT组。结论及相关性与NCRT相比,局部晚期ESCC患者接受NCIT有更好的2年OS和DFS。远处转移的减少可能是主要原因,但需要进一步的前瞻性随机临床试验来验证这一发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy vs Chemoimmunotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
ImportanceThe association of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIT) vs chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) with tumor downstaging and survival in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains unclear because of limited evidence.ObjectiveTo compare the associations of NCIT and NCRT with tumor regression and long-term survival in patients with locally advanced ESCC.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this comparative effectiveness research study, from January 2016 to March 2023, patients with locally advanced ESCC who underwent esophagectomy following NCRT or NCIT were identified from a prospective database of 8 high-volume esophageal surgery centers in China. Follow-up began on the date of surgery and continued until the last recorded contact or March 2024, whichever occurred first. Data were analyzed between April and September 2024.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end points were 2-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary end points included major pathologic response (MPR) and pathologic complete response (pCR). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to investigate the risk factors for OS and DFS.ResultsThe study included 1428 patients (median [IQR] age, 63 [57-68] years; 1184 men [82.9%]), with 704 patients in the NCRT group and 724 patients in the NCIT group. After propensity score matching, there were 532 patients in each group. The 2-year OS (81.3% vs 71.3%; hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.26-1.96; P &amp;lt; .001) and DFS (73.9% vs 63.4%; hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.69; P &amp;lt; .001) rates were significantly higher in NCIT group than in the NCRT group. The NCRT group had a higher MPR rate than that of the NCIT group (71.8% vs 61.5%), whereas the pCR rates were similar (25.9% vs 22.9%). Multivariable Cox analysis demonstrated that NCIT and MPR were independently associated with both OS and DFS. The NCIT group exhibited a lower overall recurrence rate (126 patients [23.7%] vs 190 patients [35.7%]) and distant metastasis rate (72 patients [13.5%] vs 133 patients [25.0%]), although locoregional metastasis rates were similar (98 patients [18.4%] vs 111 patients [20.9%]). Better OS and DFS were obtained for the NCIT group than for the NCRT group, regardless of whether adjuvant immunotherapy was given.Conclusions and RelevanceCompared with NCRT, patients with locally advanced ESCC receiving NCIT had better 2-year OS and DFS. The decrease in distant metastasis may be the main reason, but further prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to verify this finding.
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
JAMA surgery
JAMA surgery SURGERY-
CiteScore
20.80
自引率
3.60%
发文量
400
期刊介绍: JAMA Surgery, an international peer-reviewed journal established in 1920, is the official publication of the Association of VA Surgeons, the Pacific Coast Surgical Association, and the Surgical Outcomes Club.It is a proud member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications.
×
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