Failure of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Neoadjuvant treatment has become standard care for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. However, some patients cannot undergo surgery or curative resection because of disease progression during neoadjuvant treatment. The aim of this study is to identify the pretreatment characteristics of patients in whom neoadjuvant treatment failed. The study enrolled 231 patients who underwent chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) as neoadjuvant therapy for T1N1-3 or T2-3 any-N esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Of these patients, 201 (87.0%) underwent curative resection (R0) and 30 (13.0%) could not undergo curative resection; 19 patients (8.2%) underwent incomplete resection (R1 or R2), and 11 patients (4.8%) could not undergo surgery because of disease progression. We compared clinical characteristics and survival between patients who underwent curative resection (curative group) and those who could not undergo curative resection (noncurative group) to determine the factors predicting noncurative treatment. The noncurative group had significantly worse disease-specific survival than the curative group (P < 0.001). All patients in the noncurative group had cT3 tumors. In 141 patients with cT3 tumors, those in the noncurative group were more likely to have higher serum SCC antigen concentration (P = 0.021), location of the main tumor in the upper to the middle third of the esophagus (P = 0.071), intramural metastases (P < 0.001), advanced N category (P = 0.016), and bulky lymph node metastases (P = 0.060). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified location of the main tumor in the upper to the middle third of the esophagus (P = 0.047), intramural metastases (P = 0.002), and nodal metastases (N1, P = 0.014; N2, P = 0.015, respectively) as independent predictors of treatment failure in patients with cT3 tumors. Neoadjuvant CF therapy alone may not be effective for patients with cT3 tumors accompanied by these risk factors, and the efficacy of alternative strategies, such as triplet chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, should be evaluated.
Okamura A
，Watanabe M
，Mine S
，Kurogochi T
，Yamashita K
，Hayami M
，Imamura Y
，Ogura M
，Ichimura T
，Takahari D
，Chin K
... -
《-》
Comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus upfront surgery with or without chemotherapy for patients with clinical stage III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and chemoradiotherapy have been shown to extend postoperative survival, and preoperative therapy followed by esophagectomy has become the standard treatment worldwide for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The Japan Clinical Oncology Group 9907 study showed that NAC significantly extended survival in advanced ESCC, but the survival benefit for patients with clinical stage III disease remains to be elucidated. We compared the survival rates of NAC and upfront surgery in patients with clinical stage III ESCC. Consecutive patients histologically diagnosed as clinical stage III (excluding cT4) ESCC were eligible for this retrospective study. Between September 2002 and April 2007, upfront transthoracic esophagectomy was performed initially and, for patients with positive lymph node (LN) metastasis in a resected specimen, adjuvant chemotherapy using cisplatin and 5-fluororouracil every 3 weeks for two cycles was administered (Upfront surgery group). Since May 2007, a NAC regimen used as adjuvant chemotherapy followed by transthoracic esophagectomy has been administered as the standard treatment in our institution (NAC group). Patient characteristics, clinicopathological factors, treatment outcomes, post-treatment recurrence, and overall survival (OS) were compared between the NAC and upfront surgery groups. Fifty-one and 55 patients were included in the NAC and upfront surgery groups, respectively. The R0 resection rate was significantly lower in the NAC group than in the upfront surgery group (upfront surgery, 98%; NAC, 76%; P = 0.003). In the upfront surgery group, of 49 patients who underwent R0 resection and pathologically positive for LN metastasis, 22 (45%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. In the NAC group, 49 (96%) of 51 patients completed two cycles of NAC. In survival analysis, no significant difference in OS was observed between the NAC and upfront surgery groups (NAC: 5-year OS, 43.8%; upfront surgery: 5-year overall surgery, 57.5%; P = 0.167). Patients who underwent R0 resection showed significantly longer OS than did those who underwent R1, R2, or no resection (P = 0.001). In multivariate analysis using age, perioperative chemotherapy, depth of invasion, LN metastasis, surgical radicality, postoperative pneumonia, and anastomotic leakage as covariates, LN metastasis [cN2: hazard ratio (HR), 1.389; P = 0.309; cN3: HR, 16.019; P = 0.012] and surgical radicality (R1: HR, 3.949; P = 0.009; R2 or no resection: HR, 2.912; P = 0.022) were shown to be significant independent prognostic factors. In clinical stage III ESCC patients, no significant difference in OS was observed between NAC and upfront surgery. Although potential patient selection bias might be a factor in this retrospective analysis, the noncurative resection rate was higher after NAC than after upfront surgery. The survival benefit of more intensive NAC needs to be further evaluated.
Matsuda S
，Tsubosa Y
，Sato H
，Takebayashi K
，Kawamorita K
，Mori K
，Niihara M
，Tsushima T
，Yokota T
，Onozawa Y
，Yasui H
，Takeuchi H
，Kitagawa Y
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
