Oncological recurrence following pathological complete response after neoadjuvant treatment in patients with esophageal cancer - a retrospective cohort study.

Chemoradiation Chemotherapy Esophageal cancer Esophagogastric junction cancer Multimodal treatment Neoadjuvant treatment Oncologic surgery Pathological complete response Visceral surgery

Journal

Langenbeck's archives of surgery
ISSN: 1435-2451
Titre abrégé: Langenbecks Arch Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9808285

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 29 03 2023
accepted: 07 09 2023
medline: 19 9 2023
pubmed: 18 9 2023
entrez: 18 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

To evaluate recurrence in patients with post-neoadjuvant pathological complete response (pCR) and in patients with complete response of primary tumor but persisting lymphatic spread of disease (non-pCR, ypT0ypN +) of esophageal cancer. Seventy-five patients (63 pCR, 12 non-pCR) were analyzed retrospectively. Pattern and incidence of local and distant recurrence as well as the impact on overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were evaluated. The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to FLOT protocol was compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation according to CROSS protocol. In the pCR group, isolated local recurrence was diagnosed in 3%, while no isolated local recurrence was observed in the non-pCR group due to the high incidence of distant recurrence. Distant recurrence was most common in both cohorts (isolated distant recurrence: pCR group 10% to non-pCR group 55%; simultaneous distant and local recurrence: pCR group 3% to non-pCR group 18%). Median time to distant recurrence was 5.5 months, and median time to local recurrence was 8.0 months. Cumulative incidence of distant recurrence (with and without simultaneous local recurrence) was 16% (± 6%) in pCR patients and 79% (± 13%) in non-pCR patients (hazard ratio (HR) 0.123) estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. OS (HR 0.231) and DFS (HR 0.226) were significantly improved in patients with pCR compared to patients with non-pCR. Advantages for FLOT protocol compared to CROSS protocol, especially with regard to distant control of disease (HR 0.278), were observed (OS (HR 0.361), DFS (HR 0.226)). Distant recurrence is the predominant site of treatment failure in patients with pCR and non-pCR grade 1a regression, whereby recurrence rates are much higher in patients with non-pCR.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
To evaluate recurrence in patients with post-neoadjuvant pathological complete response (pCR) and in patients with complete response of primary tumor but persisting lymphatic spread of disease (non-pCR, ypT0ypN +) of esophageal cancer.
METHODS METHODS
Seventy-five patients (63 pCR, 12 non-pCR) were analyzed retrospectively. Pattern and incidence of local and distant recurrence as well as the impact on overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were evaluated. The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to FLOT protocol was compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation according to CROSS protocol.
RESULTS RESULTS
In the pCR group, isolated local recurrence was diagnosed in 3%, while no isolated local recurrence was observed in the non-pCR group due to the high incidence of distant recurrence. Distant recurrence was most common in both cohorts (isolated distant recurrence: pCR group 10% to non-pCR group 55%; simultaneous distant and local recurrence: pCR group 3% to non-pCR group 18%). Median time to distant recurrence was 5.5 months, and median time to local recurrence was 8.0 months. Cumulative incidence of distant recurrence (with and without simultaneous local recurrence) was 16% (± 6%) in pCR patients and 79% (± 13%) in non-pCR patients (hazard ratio (HR) 0.123) estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. OS (HR 0.231) and DFS (HR 0.226) were significantly improved in patients with pCR compared to patients with non-pCR. Advantages for FLOT protocol compared to CROSS protocol, especially with regard to distant control of disease (HR 0.278), were observed (OS (HR 0.361), DFS (HR 0.226)).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Distant recurrence is the predominant site of treatment failure in patients with pCR and non-pCR grade 1a regression, whereby recurrence rates are much higher in patients with non-pCR.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37721586
doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03100-2
pii: 10.1007/s00423-023-03100-2
pmc: PMC10506930
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

363

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Ann Surg. 2022 Nov 1;276(5):792-798
pubmed: 35876385
J Thorac Dis. 2019 Apr;11(Suppl 5):S621-S631
pubmed: 31080638
Acta Oncol. 2021 Apr;60(4):497-504
pubmed: 33491513
BJS Open. 2021 Mar 5;5(2):
pubmed: 33876211
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Sep;16(9):1090-1098
pubmed: 26254683
Lancet. 2019 May 11;393(10184):1948-1957
pubmed: 30982686
Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Jun;28(6):3044-3045
pubmed: 33175259
BMC Cancer. 2016 Jul 19;16:503
pubmed: 27435280
Cancer. 2003 Oct 1;98(7):1521-30
pubmed: 14508841
Dis Esophagus. 2022 Dec 14;35(12):
pubmed: 35758407
Lancet Oncol. 2018 Jul;19(7):965-974
pubmed: 29861116
Ann Surg Oncol. 2022 Apr 11;:
pubmed: 35403919
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7
pubmed: 18064739
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017 Aug;43(8):1572-1580
pubmed: 28666624
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Jan 23;13(3):
pubmed: 33561090
J Clin Oncol. 1991 Jan;9(1):191-2
pubmed: 1985169
Cancer. 2017 Nov 1;123(21):4106-4113
pubmed: 28885712
Br J Surg. 2010 May;97(5):772-81
pubmed: 20306528
Ann Surg. 2013 Jul;258(1):1-7
pubmed: 23728278
Chirurg. 2020 May;91(5):379-383
pubmed: 32140748
BMC Cancer. 2020 Sep 15;20(1):886
pubmed: 32933498
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 Jul 1;17(7):855-883
pubmed: 31319389
Ann Surg. 2022 Jan 27;:
pubmed: 35099168
Ann Surg. 2022 Mar 1;275(3):467-476
pubmed: 34191461
Dis Esophagus. 2023 Jul 3;36(7):
pubmed: 36572398
N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 1;384(13):1191-1203
pubmed: 33789008
Gut. 2020 Sep;69(9):1564-1571
pubmed: 32606208
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019 Mar;157(3):1249-1259.e5
pubmed: 30655068
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Jul 8;67(4):304-317
pubmed: 28556024

Auteurs

Julian Hipp (J)

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79100, Freiburg, Germany.

Jasmina Kuvendjiska (J)

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79100, Freiburg, Germany.

Hans Christian Hillebrecht (HC)

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79100, Freiburg, Germany.

Stephan Herrmann (S)

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79100, Freiburg, Germany.

Sylvia Timme-Bronsert (S)

Institute for Surgical Pathology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.

Stefan Fichtner-Feigl (S)

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79100, Freiburg, Germany.

Jens Hoeppner (J)

Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany.

Markus K Diener (MK)

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79100, Freiburg, Germany. markus.diener@uniklinik-freiburg.de.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH