Background: For patients with clinical T1aN0M0 thoracic esophageal
squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or
endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) are the standard treatment modalities. For
patients with clinical staging higher than clinical T1aN0M0 thoracic ESCC,
surgery alone, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or concurrent chemoradiotherapy are
the standard treatment options. For patients with clinical T1aN0M0 thoracic
ESCC, surgery is currently the recommended clinical treatment, but surgery may
entail potential risks and loss of organ function. Therefore, the study
conducted a retrospective analysis comparing the long-term outcomes of patients
with clinical T1bN0M0 thoracic ESCC treated with radical esophagectomy to those
treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT).
Methods: A total of 320 consecutive patients with clinical T1bN0M0
thoracic ESCC who initially underwent radical esophagectomy or
chemoradiotherapy during 2001–2011 were deemed eligible. Of these patients, 102
and 218 underwent radical esophagectomy and dCRT, respectively. Overall
survival (OS) and causes of death were compared between the esophagectomy group
and the chemoradiotherapy group.
Results: Five-year OS in the esophagectomy group was significantly
better than that of the chemoradiotherapy group in both the overall sample and
a subset of patients aged 70 years (P=0.004 and P=0.040). Male patients
appeared to benefit more from radical esophagectomy (P=0.005). Until 2006,
radical esophagectomy yielded superior results relative to dCRT (P=0.009).
However, the survival outcomes after chemoradiotherapy were non-inferior to
those after esophagectomy since 2007 (P=0.255). Up to 2006, esophagectomy and
chemoradiotherapy groups exhibited significant differences in the causes of
death (P=0.024), such that the latter group had a significantly higher rate of
deaths due to respiratory complications (P=0.025). However, the introduction of
3-dimensional radiation with CT-guided planning in 2007 resolved this
inter-group difference (P=0.460). The SANO study's findings in organ
preservation in esophageal cancer have spurred further research into more
organ-sparing treatment strategies for esophageal cancer and have provided
patients with a new therapeutic option.
Conclusions: Significant advancements in radiation technology have
facilitated comparable long-term outcomes for patients with clinical T1bN0M0
thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the chemoradiotherapy
group, rivaling those of the esophagectomy group.
In recent years, the increasingly prominent role of
immunotherapeutic drugs in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
has made organ preservation an increasingly viable option for early-stage
esophageal cancer. The SANO clinical study from the Netherlands, which has
achieved notable results in organ-sparing strategies for esophageal cancer, has
propelled further research into esophageal organ preservation treatment
approaches. This progress also offers patients a novel therapeutic alternative.
Author
(s) Details
Hongbo Zhao
Department of Esophageal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo,
Japan and Department of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center / National
Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese
Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen 518116,
China.
Kazuo Koyanagi
Department of Esophageal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo,
Japan and Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tokai University School of
Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Ken Kato
Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center
Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshinori Ito
Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo,
Japan.
Jun Itami
Department of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo,
Japan.
Hiroyasu Igaki
Department of Esophageal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo,
Japan.
Yuji Tachimori
Cancer Care Center, Kawasaki Saiwai Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan.
Please see the book here:- https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/mmrnp/v10/2584
No comments:
Post a Comment