All authors: The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Dec 1;31(34):4306-10. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.51.7250. Epub 2013 Oct 21.
The primary purpose of surveillance of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and/or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma after local therapy (eg, chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery or trimodality therapy [TMT]) is to implement a potentially beneficial salvage therapy to overcome possible morbidity/mortality caused by locoregional failure (LRF). However, the benefits of surveillance are not well understood. We report on LRFs and salvage strategies in a large cohort.
Between 2000 and 2010, 518 patients with EAC who completed TMT were analyzed for the frequency of LRF over time and salvage therapy outcomes. Standard statistical techniques were used.
For 518 patients, the median follow-up time was 29.3 months (range, 1 to 149 months). Distant metastases (with or without LRF) occurred in 188 patients (36%), and LRF only occurred in 27 patients (5%). Eleven of 27 patients had lumen-only LRF. Most LRFs (89%) occurred within 36 months of surgery. Twelve patients had salvage chemoradiotherapy, but only five survived more than 2 years. Four patients needed salvage surgery, and three who survived more than 2 years developed distant metastases. The median overall survival of 27 patients with LRF was 17 months, and 10 patients (37%) survived more than 2 years. Thus, only 2% of all 518 patients benefited from surveillance/salvage strategies.
Our surveillance strategy, which is representative of many others currently being used, raises doubts about its effectiveness and benefits (along with concerns regarding types and times of studies and costs implications) to patients with EAC who have LRF only after TMT. Fortunately, LRFs are rare after TMT, but the salvage strategies are not highly beneficial. Our data can help develop an evidence-based surveillance strategy.
对接受局部治疗(如放化疗后手术或三联疗法[TMT])后的食管腺癌(EAC)和/或食管胃交界腺癌患者进行监测的主要目的是实施可能有益的挽救性治疗,以克服局部区域失败(LRF)可能导致的发病率/死亡率。然而,监测的益处尚不清楚。我们报告了在一个大队列中发生的 LRF 和挽救策略。
在 2000 年至 2010 年间,分析了 518 例完成 TMT 的 EAC 患者的 LRF 随时间发生的频率和挽救性治疗结果。采用标准统计技术。
对于 518 例患者,中位随访时间为 29.3 个月(范围为 1 至 149 个月)。远处转移(伴或不伴 LRF)发生在 188 例患者(36%)中,仅发生 LRF 的患者为 27 例(5%)。27 例患者中有 11 例仅发生管腔 LRF。大多数 LRF(89%)发生在手术后 36 个月内。12 例患者接受挽救性放化疗,但只有 5 例患者生存时间超过 2 年。4 例患者需要挽救性手术,3 例生存时间超过 2 年的患者发生远处转移。27 例 LRF 患者的中位总生存期为 17 个月,10 例患者(37%)生存时间超过 2 年。因此,在接受 TMT 治疗后仅发生 LRF 的 518 例患者中,只有 2%的患者从监测/挽救策略中受益。
我们的监测策略代表了目前许多其他正在使用的策略,对接受 TMT 治疗后仅发生 LRF 的 EAC 患者的有效性和获益提出了质疑(同时也对研究的类型和时间以及成本影响提出了担忧)。幸运的是,TMT 后 LRF 很少见,但挽救策略的获益不高。我们的数据可以帮助制定基于证据的监测策略。