Suppr超能文献

Ⅱ期至Ⅲ期食管癌的生存和治疗模式。

Survival and Treatment Patterns in Stage II to III Esophageal Cancer.

机构信息

Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California.

Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco-Fresno, Fresno.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Oct 1;7(10):e2440568. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.40568.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Existing clinical trials favor neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NCRT) followed by surgery alone for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) and perioperative chemotherapy as the preferred modality for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, it is unclear whether these trial findings are reflected in the patterns of care and survival outcomes among patients in the clinical setting.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate survival outcomes in the clinical setting among patients with EC after various treatment modalities.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study examined data from the National Cancer Database maintained by the American College of Surgeons and focused on patients with clinical stage II or III EC, excluding those with gastroesophageal junction cancer, who underwent trimodality therapy (NCRT followed by esophagectomy), definitive chemoradiation therapy (DCRT), radiotherapy (RT) alone, or perioperative chemotherapy from January 2006 to December 2020. Analyses were conducted from December 2023 to August 2024.

EXPOSURES

Perioperative chemotherapy, trimodality therapy, DCRT, and single-modality RT.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to compare overall survival (OS) between treatment groups in the entire cohort, among patients with squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma, and among those older than 65 years. Landmark survival analysis at 6 months was performed to reduce survivorship bias.

RESULTS

The study included 57 116 patients (median age, 64 [IQR, 57-72] years; 45 410 [79.5%] male); 21 619 patients (37.9%) received trimodality therapy, 32 493 (57.1%) received DCRT, 2692 (4.7%) received single-modality RT, and 312 (0.5%) received perioperative chemotherapy. In the overall study population, 37 698 patients (66.0%) had EAC, and of the 312 patients that received perioperative chemotherapy, 283 (90.7%) had EAC. In adjusted survival analysis, perioperative chemotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.28-0.39; P <.001) and trimodality therapy (AHR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.44-0.46; P < .001) were associated with improved OS compared with DCRT. In contrast, RT alone was associated with worse outcomes compared with DCRT (AHR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.30-1.45; P < .001). The median OS for perioperative chemotherapy of 66.2 months (95% CI, 43.1-111.9 months; P < .001) was longer compared with that for DCRT alone (18.1 months; 95% CI, 17.8-18.4 months; P < .001). Trimodality therapy was associated with a median OS of 43.9 months (95% CI, 42.8-45.5 months; P < .001), which was shorter than that for perioperative chemotherapy but improved compared with DCRT and RT alone, which was associated with a median OS of 13.5 months (95% CI, 12.8-14.0 months; P < .001). In the subgroup of patients older than 65 years, those who received perioperative chemotherapy had longer median OS (56.7 months; 95% CI, 36.4-115.2 months; P < .001) compared with those receiving other treatment modalities (eg, trimodality therapy: 40.1 months; 95% CI, 38.1-42.0 months; P < .001). Patients who received RT alone had the worst median OS (13.6 months; 95% CI, 12.8-14.4 months; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of patients with stage II to III EC, trimodality therapy was associated with improved OS compared with DCRT or RT alone for locally advanced EC and perioperative chemotherapy was associated with improved OS for adenocarcinoma.

摘要

重要性

现有的临床试验倾向于对局部晚期食管癌(EC)采用新辅助放化疗(NCRT)加手术,对食管腺癌(EAC)采用围手术期化疗。然而,尚不清楚这些试验结果是否反映在临床环境中患者的治疗模式和生存结果中。

目的

调查临床环境中接受不同治疗方式的 EC 患者的生存结果。

设计、设置和参与者:本回顾性队列研究分析了美国外科医师学院维护的国家癌症数据库中的数据,重点关注临床分期为 II 期或 III 期的 EC 患者,排除胃食管交界处癌患者,这些患者接受了三联疗法(NCRT 后行食管切除术)、单纯放化疗(DCRT)、放疗(RT)或围手术期化疗,时间范围为 2006 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月。分析于 2023 年 12 月至 2024 年 8 月进行。

暴露情况

围手术期化疗、三联疗法、DCRT 和单一模式 RT。

主要结果和测量

使用 Cox 比例风险回归模型比较了整个队列、鳞癌或腺癌患者以及 65 岁以上患者的治疗组之间的总生存期(OS)。进行了 6 个月的生存分析,以减少生存偏倚。

结果

研究纳入了 57116 名患者(中位年龄,64 [IQR,57-72] 岁;45410 名 [79.5%] 为男性);21619 名患者(37.9%)接受三联疗法,32493 名患者(57.1%)接受 DCRT,2692 名患者(4.7%)接受单一模式 RT,312 名患者(0.5%)接受围手术期化疗。在整个研究人群中,37698 名患者(66.0%)患有 EAC,312 名接受围手术期化疗的患者中,283 名(90.7%)患有 EAC。在调整后的生存分析中,围手术期化疗(调整后的危险比 [AHR],0.33;95%CI,0.28-0.39;P<0.001)和三联疗法(AHR,0.45;95%CI,0.44-0.46;P<0.001)与 DCRT 相比,与 OS 改善相关。相比之下,RT 单一疗法与 DCRT 相比,与较差的结局相关(AHR,1.37;95%CI,1.30-1.45;P<0.001)。围手术期化疗的中位 OS 为 66.2 个月(95%CI,43.1-111.9 个月;P<0.001),明显长于 DCRT 单独治疗的 18.1 个月(95%CI,17.8-18.4 个月;P<0.001)。三联疗法的中位 OS 为 43.9 个月(95%CI,42.8-45.5 个月;P<0.001),虽然短于围手术期化疗,但与 DCRT 和 RT 单一疗法相比,有所改善,RT 单一疗法的中位 OS 为 13.5 个月(95%CI,12.8-14.0 个月;P<0.001)。在年龄大于 65 岁的患者亚组中,接受围手术期化疗的患者中位 OS 更长(56.7 个月;95%CI,36.4-115.2 个月;P<0.001),与接受其他治疗方式的患者相比(例如,三联疗法:40.1 个月;95%CI,38.1-42.0 个月;P<0.001)。单独接受 RT 的患者中位 OS 最差(13.6 个月;95%CI,12.8-14.4 个月;P<0.001)。

结论和相关性

在这项 II 期至 III 期 EC 患者的队列研究中,与 DCRT 或 RT 单一疗法相比,三联疗法与 OS 改善相关,对于局部晚期 EC,围手术期化疗与 OS 改善相关。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ab0e/11581628/9c9bd3951594/jamanetwopen-e2440568-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验