Tumor Volume as Outcome Determinant in Patients Treated With Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

Abstract

For patients that the TNM staging system is not applicable, tumor volume is a new powerful determinant of survival. Further clinical trials need to be carried out to validate this prospectively.

Oesophageal cancer: assessment of tumour response to chemoradiotherapy with tridimensional CT

“…The mean TV in our study (33.8 cm 3) was much smaller than that in Créhange's (57.5 cm 3) suggesting that the geometric formula utilised by those investigators might overestimate tumour size. The different techniques for measuring TV could also explain the different results obtained [15]. The concordance correlation coefficient obtained comparing radiological and pathological TV was modest while precision, accuracy and determination coefficient were more adequate.…”

“…Oesophageal TV at diagnosis appeared to be a prognostic factor in a study published by Créhange in 2006. In that study, TV was calculated using a geometric formula, considering three tumour diameters (upper, maximum and lower) and tumour length.…”

“…Tumour volume >100 cc 3 was found to be a poor prognostic factor at multivariate analysis in the 148 patients studied by that protocol. However, this method was relatively inexpensive, it was found to be complicated and difficult to reproduce [15].…”

Prognostic significance of endoluminal ultrasound-defined disease length and tumor volume (EDTV) for patients with the diagnosis of esophageal cancer

“…Tumor burden or volume as measured by both CT and EUS are reported to be important prognostic factors [28,29], yet no data exists at the time of this writing on the prognostic significance of EUS-defined tumor volumes derived from the total length of disease. Tumor volumes calculated by means of CT, assuming the form of truncated cones, are to have prognostic value for patients who have inoperable tumors, with the greatest difference in survival observed at a large tumor volume of 100 cm 3 [28].…”

“…Tumor volumes calculated by means of CT, assuming the form of truncated cones, are to have prognostic value for patients who have inoperable tumors, with the greatest difference in survival observed at a large tumor volume of 100 cm 3 [28]. However, the stratification method was unclear, and the skew of data toward patients with tumor volumes less than 100 cm 3 means that this data must be interpreted with caution.…”