Vellayappan Balamurugan A, Soon Yu Yang, Ku Geoffrey Y, Leong Cheng Nang, Lu Jiade J, Tey Jeremy Cs
Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block, Level 7, Singapore, Singapore, 119228.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Aug 22;8(8):CD010511. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010511.pub2.
Please see Appendix 4 for a glossary of terms.The outcome of patients with esophageal cancer is generally poor. Although multimodal therapy is standard, there is conflicting evidence regarding the addition of esophagectomy to chemoradiotherapy.
To compare the effectiveness and safety of chemoradiotherapy plus surgery with that of chemoradiotherapy alone in people with nonmetastatic esophageal carcinoma.
We performed a computerized search for relevant studies, up to Feburary 2017, on the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases using MeSH headings and keywords. We searched five online databases of clinical trials, handsearched conference proceedings, and screened reference lists of retrieved papers.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chemoradiotherapy plus esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy alone for localized esophageal carcinoma. We excluded RCTs comparing chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone with esophagectomy.
Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of the evidence, using standardized Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), estimated with Hazard Ratio (HR). Secondary outcomes, estimated with risk ratio (RR), were local and distant progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life (QoL), treatment-related mortality and morbidity, and use of salvage procedures for dysphagia. Data were analyzed using a random effects model in Review Manager 5.3 software.
From 2667 references, we identified two randomized studies, in six reports, that included 431 participants. All participants were clinically staged to have at least T3 and/or node positive thoracic esophageal carcinoma, 93% of which was squamous cell histology. The risk of methodological bias of the included studies was low to moderate.High-quality evidence found the addition of esophagectomy had little or no difference on overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.24; P = 0.92; I² = 0%; two trials). Neither study reported PFS, therefore, freedom from loco-regional relapse was used as a proxy. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that the addition of esophagectomy probably improved freedom from locoregional relapse (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.76; P = 0.0004; I² = 0%; two trials), but low-quality evidence suggested it may increase the risk of treatment-related mortality (RR 5.11, 95% CI 1.74 to 15.02; P = 0.003; I² = 2%; two trials).The other pre-specified outcomes (quality of life, treatment-related toxicity, and use of salvage procedures for dysphagia) were reported by only one study, which found very low-quality evidence that use of esophagectomy was associated with reduced short-term QoL (MD 0.93, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.62), and low-quality evidence that it reduced use of salvage procedures for dysphagia (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.75). Neither study compared treatment-related morbidity between treatment groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, the addition of esophagectomy to chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, provides little or no difference on overall survival, and may be associated with higher treatment-related mortality. The addition of esophagectomy probably delays locoregional relapse, however, this end point was not well defined in the included studies. It is undetermined whether these results can be applied to the treatment of adenocarcinomas, tumors involving the distal esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction, and to people with poor response to chemoradiation.
术语表请见附录4。食管癌患者的总体预后通常较差。尽管多模式治疗是标准治疗方法,但关于在放化疗基础上加做食管切除术的证据存在矛盾。
比较放化疗联合手术与单纯放化疗在非转移性食管癌患者中的有效性和安全性。
我们使用医学主题词和关键词,在CENTRAL、MEDLINE和Embase数据库中进行了计算机检索,检索截至2017年2月的相关研究。我们检索了五个临床试验在线数据库,手工检索了会议论文集,并筛选了检索论文的参考文献列表。
我们纳入了比较放化疗联合食管切除术与单纯放化疗治疗局限性食管癌的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们排除了比较单纯化疗或放疗与食管切除术的RCT。
两位作者独立选择研究、提取数据,并使用标准化的Cochrane方法程序评估偏倚风险和证据质量。主要结局是总生存期(OS),用风险比(HR)估计。次要结局用风险比(RR)估计,包括局部和远处无进展生存期(PFS)、生活质量(QoL)、治疗相关死亡率和发病率,以及吞咽困难的挽救治疗使用情况。使用Review Manager 5.3软件中的随机效应模型对数据进行分析。
从2667篇参考文献中,我们在六篇报告中识别出两项随机研究,共纳入431名参与者。所有参与者经临床分期均为至少T3期和/或胸段食管癌淋巴结阳性,其中93%为鳞状细胞组织学类型。纳入研究的方法学偏倚风险为低到中度。高质量证据表明,加做食管切除术对总生存期几乎没有差异(HR 0.99,95%CI 0.79至1.24;P = 0.92;I² = 0%;两项试验)。两项研究均未报告PFS,因此,将无局部区域复发作为替代指标。中等质量证据表明,加做食管切除术可能改善无局部区域复发情况(HR 0.55,95%CI 0.39至0.76;P = 0.0004;I² = 0%;两项试验),但低质量证据表明这可能增加治疗相关死亡风险(RR 5.11,95%CI 1.74至15.02;P = 0.003;I² = 2%;两项试验)。仅一项研究报告了其他预先设定的结局(生活质量、治疗相关毒性以及吞咽困难的挽救治疗使用情况),该研究发现极低质量证据表明使用食管切除术与短期生活质量降低相关(MD 0.93,95%CI 0.24至1.62),低质量证据表明这减少了吞咽困难的挽救治疗使用情况(HR 0.52,95%CI 0.36至0.75)。两项研究均未比较治疗组之间的治疗相关发病率。
基于现有证据,在局部晚期食管鳞状细胞癌中,放化疗基础上加做食管切除术对总生存期几乎没有差异,且可能与较高的治疗相关死亡率相关。加做食管切除术可能会延迟局部区域复发,然而,纳入研究中该终点并未明确界定。这些结果是否可应用于腺癌、累及食管远端和胃食管交界的肿瘤以及对放化疗反应不佳的患者的治疗尚不确定。