Visser Els, Edholm David, Smithers B Mark, Thomson Iain G, Burmeister Bryan H, Walpole Euan T, Gotley David C, Joubert Warren L, Atkinson Victoria, Mai Tao, Thomas Janine M, Barbour Andrew P
Upper Gastrointestinal/Soft Tissue Unit, Discipline of Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Institution of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Sweden.
J Surg Oncol. 2018 Jun;117(8):1687-1696. doi: 10.1002/jso.25089. Epub 2018 May 28.
The optimal treatment strategy for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) remains undetermined. This study compared outcomes in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for EAC.
Patients who underwent nCT or nCRT followed by surgery for EAC were identified from a prospective database (2000-2017) and included. After propensity score matching, the impact of the treatments on postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, pathological outcomes, and survival rates were compared.
Of the 396 eligible patients, 262 patients were analysed following matching with 131 patients in both groups. There were no significant differences between the nCT and nCRT groups for overall complications (59% vs 57%, P = 0.802) or in-hospital mortality (2% vs 0%, P = 0.156). Patients who had nCRT had more R0 resections (93% vs 83%, P = 0.013), and higher pathological complete response rates (15% vs 5%, P < 0.001). No differences in 5-year overall survival rates (nCT vs nCRT; 44% vs 33%, P = 0.645) were found.
In this study no differences between nCT and nCRT were seen in postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality in patients treated for EAC. Inspite of improved complete resection and pathological response there was no difference in the overall survival between the treatment modalities.
食管腺癌(EAC)患者的最佳治疗策略仍未确定。本研究比较了接受新辅助化疗(nCT)和新辅助放化疗(nCRT)的EAC患者的治疗结果。
从一个前瞻性数据库(2000 - 2017年)中确定并纳入接受nCT或nCRT后行手术治疗的EAC患者。在倾向评分匹配后,比较两种治疗方法对术后并发症、院内死亡率、病理结果和生存率的影响。
在396例符合条件的患者中,两组各131例患者匹配后进行分析。nCT组和nCRT组在总体并发症(59%对57%,P = 0.802)或院内死亡率(2%对0%,P = 0.156)方面无显著差异。接受nCRT的患者有更多的R0切除(93%对83%,P = 0.013)和更高的病理完全缓解率(15%对5%,P < 0.001)。未发现5年总生存率有差异(nCT对nCRT;44%对33%,P = 0.645)。
在本研究中,接受EAC治疗的患者在术后并发症和院内死亡率方面,nCT和nCRT之间未观察到差异。尽管完全切除率和病理反应有所改善,但两种治疗方式的总生存率并无差异。