Taylor Lauren J, Greenberg Caprice C, Lidor Anne O, Leverson Glen E, Maloney James D, Macke Ryan A
Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Cancer. 2017 Feb 1;123(3):410-419. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30368. Epub 2016 Sep 28.
Previous studies have suggested that esophagectomy is severely underused for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. The recent expansion of endoscopic local therapies, advances in surgical techniques, and improved postoperative outcomes have changed the therapeutic landscape. The impact of these developments and evolving treatment guidelines on national practice patterns is unknown.
Patients diagnosed with clinical stage 0 to III esophageal cancer were identified from the National Cancer Database (2004-2013). The receipt of potentially curative surgical treatment over time was analyzed, and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with surgical treatment.
The analysis included 52,122 patients. From 2004 to 2013, the overall rate of potentially curative surgical treatment increased from 36.4% to 47.4% (P < .001). For stage 0 disease, the receipt of esophagectomy decreased from 23.8% to 17.9% (P < .001), whereas the use of local therapies increased from 34.3% to 58.8% (P < .001). The use of surgical treatment increased from 43.4% to 61.8% (P < .001), from 36.1% to 45.0% (P < .001), and from 30.8% to 38.6% (P < .001) for patients with stage I, II, and III disease, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, divergent practice patterns and adherence to national guidelines were noted between academic and community facilities.
The use of potentially curative surgical treatment has increased for patients with stage 0 to III esophageal cancer. The expansion of local therapies has driven increased rates of surgical treatment for early-stage disease. Although the increased use of esophagectomy for more advanced disease is encouraging, significant variation persists at the patient and facility levels. Cancer 2017;123:410-419. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
先前的研究表明,对于可切除食管癌患者,食管切除术的应用严重不足。近期内镜局部治疗的扩展、手术技术的进步以及术后结果的改善改变了治疗格局。这些进展以及不断演变的治疗指南对全国治疗模式的影响尚不清楚。
从国家癌症数据库(2004 - 2013年)中识别出诊断为临床0至III期食管癌的患者。分析随时间推移接受潜在根治性手术治疗的情况,并采用多因素逻辑回归来确定与手术治疗相关的因素。
分析纳入了52122例患者。从2004年到2013年,潜在根治性手术治疗的总体比率从36.4%增至47.4%(P <.001)。对于0期疾病,食管切除术的接受率从23.8%降至17.9%(P <.001),而局部治疗的使用从34.3%增至58.8%(P <.001)。I期、II期和III期疾病患者的手术治疗使用率分别从43.4%增至61.8%(P <.001)、从36.1%增至45.0%(P <.001)以及从30.8%增至38.6%(P <.001)。在多因素分析中,学术机构和社区机构之间存在不同的治疗模式以及对国家指南的遵循情况。
对于0至III期食管癌患者,潜在根治性手术治疗的应用有所增加。局部治疗的扩展推动了早期疾病手术治疗率的提高。尽管对更晚期疾病增加食管切除术的使用令人鼓舞,但在患者和机构层面仍存在显著差异。《癌症》2017年;123:410 - 419。© 2016美国癌症协会