Suppr超能文献

新辅助治疗后临床完全缓解的可切除食管癌行手术与非手术治疗的结局比较。

Comparison of Outcome of Esophagectomy Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Resectable Esophageal Cancer with Clinical Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Toranomon Hospital and Okinaka Memorial Institute for Medical Research, Tokyo, Japan.

Department of Gastroenterology, Toranomon Hospital and Okinaka Memorial Institute for Medical Research, Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Aug;25(8):2428-2433. doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6437-2. Epub 2018 Mar 21.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Treatment for patients who have achieved clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy has not been established, and there is no consensus regarding the indications for either esophagectomy or nonsurgical treatment.

METHODS

Among 1,545 patients with esophageal cancer at Toranomon Hospital between January 2006 and August 2017, 39 who achieved cCR after neoadjuvant treatment were divided into two groups according to treatment: esophagectomy group (n = 18) and nonsurgical treatment group (n = 21) for comparison.

RESULTS

No significant intergroup difference was observed in baseline characteristics. Pathological complete response was confirmed in 13 (72.2%) of the 18 patients who underwent esophagectomy, whereas residual tumor was detected at the location of primary tumor in 2 (11.1%) patients, and lymph node metastasis was found in 3 (16.7%) patients. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was significantly longer in the esophagectomy group than in the nonsurgical group (p = 0.002). Disease-specific survival (DSS) was significantly longer in the esophagectomy group (p = 0.007). However, no significant intergroup difference was observed in overall survival estimated based on all deaths, including respiratory failure and aspiration pneumonia (p = 0.451).

CONCLUSIONS

With improved diagnostic accuracy, nonsurgical treatment can be an option for patients estimated as cCR after treatment administered in a neoadjuvant setting. However, surgical resection is considered more appropriate because of residual tumor in some patients with cCR and because of superior DSS and RFS following esophagectomy compared with nonsurgical treatment. Future studies must focus on ameliorating late postoperative complications, such as respiratory failure and aspiration pneumonia.

摘要

背景

新辅助治疗后达到临床完全缓解(cCR)的患者的治疗方法尚未确定,对于是否进行食管切除术或非手术治疗也没有共识。

方法

在 2006 年 1 月至 2017 年 8 月期间,在 Toranomon 医院的 1545 例食管癌患者中,有 39 例患者在新辅助治疗后达到 cCR,根据治疗方法将其分为两组:食管切除术组(n=18)和非手术治疗组(n=21)进行比较。

结果

两组患者的基线特征无显著差异。18 例行食管切除术的患者中,有 13 例(72.2%)病理完全缓解,2 例(11.1%)患者原发肿瘤部位残留肿瘤,3 例(16.7%)患者淋巴结转移。食管切除术组无复发生存率(RFS)显著长于非手术治疗组(p=0.002)。食管切除术组疾病特异性生存率(DSS)显著长于非手术治疗组(p=0.007)。然而,根据所有死亡(包括呼吸衰竭和吸入性肺炎)计算的总生存率,两组间无显著差异(p=0.451)。

结论

随着诊断准确性的提高,对于新辅助治疗后预计为 cCR 的患者,非手术治疗可能是一种选择。然而,由于一些 cCR 患者仍有残留肿瘤,且食管切除术组的 DSS 和 RFS 优于非手术治疗组,因此手术切除被认为更为合适。未来的研究必须侧重于改善术后晚期并发症,如呼吸衰竭和吸入性肺炎。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验