Huang D T, Johnson C R, Schmidt-Ullrich R, Grimes M
MCV Department of Radiation Oncology, Richmond 23298-0058.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992;23(4):737-42. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(92)90646-y.
In head and neck carcinoma, the finding of extracapsular lymph node extension and/or positive resection margins portends poor locoregional control and survival. The effectiveness of postoperative radiotherapy in these patients has been controversial due to insufficient studies comparing resected patients with those also receiving radiation. Between 1982 and 1988, 441 radical head and neck resections were performed at the Medical College of Virginia. Pathologic review of these cases identified 125 with extracapsular lymph node extension and/or positive resection margins. Of these, 43 had extracapsular lymph node extension only, 24 had both positive resection margins and extracapsular lymph node extension, and 58 demonstrated positive resection margins only. Surgery alone was performed in 71 of these patients while 54 cases received surgery and postoperative radiotherapy, (combined modality treatment) CMT. Radiotherapy doses ranged from 50 to 70 Gy. The surgery alone and combined modality treatment groups were comparable with respect to the distribution of positive resection margins and extracapsular lymph node extension. Slightly more CMT patients had clinical T4 disease compared with the surgery alone group (22% vs 14%). Slightly fewer combined modality treatment patients had clinical N0 necks than the surgery alone group (20% vs 29%). Multivariate analysis was performed with the variables T, N stages, radiotherapy, margin status, primary tumor sites, microscopic and macroscopic extracapsular lymph node extension, number of positive lymph nodes, number of nodes with extracapsular lymph node extension. Locoregional control was maintained at 5 years in 59% of the combined modality treatment group and 31% of the surgery alone group (p.0001). Subgroup analysis likewise reveals significant differences favoring the combined modality treatment group for positive resection margins only (49% vs 41%; p = .04), extracapsular lymph node extension only (66% vs 31%; p = .03) and extracapsular lymph node extension+positive resection margins (68% vs 0%; p = .001). Adjusted survival also shows a significant benefit of combined modality treatment vs surgery alone for the entire group (72% vs 41%; p = .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the use of radiotherapy is a strongly favorable variable for local control and adjusted survival. Macroscopic extracapsular lymph node penetration and positive resection margins are unfavorable independent variables for local control. T-stage is the only variable predicting local control in the combined modality group. Extracapsular extension remains an important negative prognostic variable for survival in both treatment groups. In conclusion, this study demonstrates a locoregional control and survival benefit for postoperative radiotherapy in patients with the high risk pathologic findings of extracapsular lymph node extension and positive resection margins.
在头颈部癌中,发现有包膜外淋巴结转移和/或手术切缘阳性预示着局部区域控制不佳和生存率较低。由于对接受手术的患者与接受放疗的患者进行比较的研究不足,这些患者术后放疗的有效性一直存在争议。1982年至1988年期间,弗吉尼亚医学院进行了441例根治性头颈部切除术。对这些病例的病理检查发现125例有包膜外淋巴结转移和/或手术切缘阳性。其中,43例仅有包膜外淋巴结转移,24例既有手术切缘阳性又有包膜外淋巴结转移,58例仅显示手术切缘阳性。这些患者中71例仅接受了手术,而54例接受了手术及术后放疗(综合治疗)。放疗剂量范围为50至70 Gy。单纯手术组和综合治疗组在手术切缘阳性和包膜外淋巴结转移的分布方面具有可比性。与单纯手术组相比,综合治疗组中临床T4期疾病的患者略多(22%对14%)。综合治疗组中临床N0颈部的患者比单纯手术组略少(20%对29%)。对T分期、N分期、放疗、切缘状态、原发肿瘤部位、显微镜下和肉眼可见的包膜外淋巴结转移、阳性淋巴结数量、有包膜外淋巴结转移的淋巴结数量等变量进行了多因素分析。综合治疗组59%的患者在5年时维持了局部区域控制,单纯手术组为31%(p<0.0001)。亚组分析同样显示,对于仅手术切缘阳性(49%对41%;p = 0.04)、仅包膜外淋巴结转移(66%对31%;p = 0.03)和包膜外淋巴结转移+手术切缘阳性(68%对0%;p = 0.001)的情况,综合治疗组有显著差异。调整后的生存率也显示,综合治疗组相对于单纯手术组对整个组有显著益处(72%对41%;p = 0.001)。多因素分析显示,放疗的使用是局部控制和调整后生存率的一个非常有利的变量。肉眼可见的包膜外淋巴结浸润和手术切缘阳性是局部控制的不利独立变量。T分期是综合治疗组中预测局部控制的唯一变量。包膜外转移在两个治疗组中仍然是生存的一个重要不良预后变量。总之,本研究表明,对于有包膜外淋巴结转移和手术切缘阳性等高危病理表现的患者,术后放疗可带来局部区域控制和生存益处。