Department of Surgical Oncology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, 221005, India.
Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, 400012, India.
World J Surg Oncol. 2020 Mar 21;18(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12957-020-01830-x.
The survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable carcinoma esophagus has been elucidated. We performed a meta-analysis in light of new studies and long-term results of past trials. The search strategy was refined to include only "neoadjuvant" so that any bias by adjuvant treatment is eliminated.
A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was done. Only published randomized English language trials were included. Data were categorized as neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation (NACRT), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART), and neoadjuvant sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT). Meta-analysis was done using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI using fixed/random effects model. Heterogeneity was tested by chi-square and I test. Z probability calculated significant difference across subgroups. Outcomes assessed were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 and 5 years, respectively, mortality (30/90 day) and failures (local/systemic).
Twenty-five randomized trials involving 5272 patients were included for quantitative analysis. NACRT was evaluated in 12 studies (2676 patients). Superior 3-year OS (OR = 0.68 CI 0.52-0.90, p = 0.007), 3-year DFS (OR = 0.55 CI 0.45-0.68, p = 0.00001), and 5-year DFS (OR = 0.59 CI 0.47-0.74, p = 0.00001), with lower failures (OR = 0.52 CI 0.37-0.73, p = 0.0001), were seen in favor of NACRT at the cost of increased perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79 CI 1.15-2.80, p = .01). However, 5-year OS (OR = 0.78 CI 0.60-0.1.01, p = 0.06) was not found to be significantly superior. NACT, NART, and SCRT were not found to have any benefit over surgery alone.
This meta-analysis presents strong evidence favoring NACRT over upfront surgery. It also shows no survival advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
新辅助治疗在可切除食管癌中的生存获益已经得到阐明。我们根据新研究和过去试验的长期结果进行了荟萃分析。搜索策略经过了细化,只包括“新辅助”,以消除辅助治疗的任何偏差。
对 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆进行了详细搜索。仅纳入已发表的随机英语临床试验。数据分为新辅助同步放化疗(NACRT)、新辅助化疗(NACT)、新辅助放疗(NART)和新辅助序贯放化疗(SCRT)。使用固定/随机效应模型,使用比值比(OR)和 95%置信区间(CI)进行荟萃分析。通过卡方检验和 I 检验测试异质性。Z 概率计算亚组之间的显著差异。评估的结果是分别为 3 年和 5 年的总生存(OS)和无病生存(DFS)、30/90 天死亡率和失败(局部/全身)。
纳入了 25 项涉及 5272 名患者的随机试验进行定量分析。评估了 12 项研究(2676 名患者)中的 NACRT。3 年 OS (OR=0.68,95%CI 0.52-0.90,p=0.007)、3 年 DFS(OR=0.55,95%CI 0.45-0.68,p=0.00001)和 5 年 DFS(OR=0.59,95%CI 0.47-0.74,p=0.00001)更高,失败率(OR=0.52,95%CI 0.37-0.73,p=0.0001)更低,但未发现 5 年 OS(OR=0.78,95%CI 0.60-0.1.01,p=0.06)有显著优势。也未发现 NACT、NART 和 SCRT 优于单独手术。
这项荟萃分析提供了强有力的证据,表明 NACRT 优于 upfront 手术。它还表明新辅助化疗没有生存优势。