Author:
Lorenz Eric,Weitz Anna,Reinstaller Therese,Hass Peter,Croner Roland S.,Benedix Frank
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
In 2012, the CROSS trial implemented a new neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy protocol for patients with locally advanced, resectable cancer of the esophagus prior to scheduled surgery. There are only limited studies comparing the CROSS protocol with a PF-based (cisplatin/5-fluorouracil) nRCT protocol.
Methods
In this retrospective, monocentric analysis, 134 patients suffering from esophageal cancer were included. Those patients received either PF-based nRCT (PF group) or nRCT according to the CROSS protocol (CROSS group) prior to elective en bloc esophagectomy. Perioperative mortality and morbidity, nRCT-related toxicity, and complete pathological regression were compared between both groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed in order to identify independent factors for pathological complete response (pCR).
Results
Thirty-day/hospital mortality showed no significant differences between both groups. Postoperative complications ≥ grade 3 according to Clavien-Dindo classification were experienced in 58.8% (PF group) and 47.6% (CROSS group) (p = 0.2) respectively. nRCT-associated toxicity ≥ grade 3 was 30.8% (PF group) and 37.2% (CROSS group) (p = 0.6). There was no significant difference regarding the pCR rate between both groups (23.5% vs. 30.5%; p = 0.6). In multivariate analysis, SCC (OR 7.7; p < 0.01) and an initial grading of G1/G2 (OR 2.8; p = 0.03) were shown to be independent risk factors for higher rates of pCR.
Conclusion
We conclude that both nRCT protocols are effective and safe. There were no significant differences regarding toxicity, pathological tumor response, and postoperative morbidity and mortality between both groups. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and favorable preoperative tumor grading (G1 and G2) are independent predictors for higher pCR rate in multivariate analysis.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference41 articles.
1. Pennathur A, Gibson MK, Jobe BA, Luketich JD (2013) Oesophageal carcinoma. Lancet (London, England) 381(9864):400–412
2. Kaatsch P, Spix C, Katalinic A, Hentschel S, Luttmann S, Stegmaier C (2016) Cancer in Germany 2011/2012. Robert Koch Institute and the association of population-based cancer registries in Germany, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin https://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/EN/Content/Publications/Cancer_in_Germany/cancer_chapters_2011_2012/cancer_germany_2011_2012.pdf?__blob=publicationFile; Accessed 15 Jan 2023
3. Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF (2006) Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol 24(14):2137–2150
4. Melhado RE, Alderson D, Tucker O (2010) The changing face of esophageal cancer. Cancers. 2(3):1379–1404
5. Shapiro J, van Lanschot JJ, Hulshof MC, van Hagen P, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BP et al (2015) Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 16(9):1090–1098