The impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on radically resected T3 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Abstract

Adjuvant radiotherapy is effective in local control of radically resected T3 stage ESCC and may improve the overall survival in certain subgroups, such as the patients with tumor length >5 cm, pN0 and pN1 categories, pTNM stage IIa, IIb and IIIa. Further studies are required to confirm our results.

Comparison and Prognostic Analysis of Adjuvant Radiotherapy versus Salvage Radiotherapy for Treatment of Radically Resected Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

“…These results imply that the OS tends to be associated with factors related to the patients' general condition, for example, PS and age, while DFS tends to depend on factors related to the disease condition, such as pathological stage, lymph node metastasis, tumor location, and adjuvant chemotherapy. However, we did not find that the OS and DFS were related to pT stage and histological grade in either univariate or multivariate analyses, which is inconsistent with the historical results [8–10]. This difference in our results compared to previous studies might be due to the small sample size of some our subgroups, such as the pT1, pT4, histological grade 1, and histological grade 3 subgroups.…”

Adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with pathologic node‐negative esophageal carcinoma: A population based propensity matching analysis

“…Another single institution series of 692 patients with radically resected T3 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (246 received postop RT) by Chen et al . found that postop RT was associated with better local control and OS for patients with tumor length >5 cm, pN0 and pN1 categories, pTNM stage IIa/IIb/IIIa may be improved . Therefore, there is also a paucity of data regarding which patient population among upfront esophagectomy and node negative esophageal carcinomas derives more benefit from postoperative therapy.…”

The role of postoperative radiotherapy for radically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systemic review and meta-analysis

“…The survival effect of PORT for different lymph node status remains undetermined. Most of the retrospective studies showed the survival benefit of PORT in patients with pN+ compared with S alone (19)(20)(21)(22)(23)25,26). Results from one RCT performed by Xiao et al (12) showed that the 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates for patients with pN+ were 69.7%, 24.7%, and 14.7% in S alone group and 72.3%, 38.2%, and 29.2% in PORT group, respectively.…”

“…Item 1, representativeness of the exposed cohort; item 2, selection of the non-exposed cohort; item 3, ascertainment of exposure; item 4, demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study; item 5, comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design (study controls for the most important factor); item 6, comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design (study controls for other additional factor); item 7, assessment of outcome; item 8, follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur; item 9, adequacy of follow-up of cohorts. Lv [11] Xiao [12] Fok [16] Ténière [14] Zieren [ Chen [26] Chen [28] Hsu [23] Hwang [19] Lyu [27] Qiu [24] Shimizu [29] Wori [18] Xu [20] Yang [17] Zhang [21] Zou [22] Xiao [12] Lv [11] Zieren [13] Ténière [14] Fok [15] Fok […”

“…However, many patients developed local recurrence or distant metastasis (10). A number of studies have investigated whether PORT leads to improved cure rates compared with S alone, but individual reports have been conflicting (11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29). A meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed by Malthaner et al found no benefit from PORT in patients with ESCC (30).…”