» Articles » PMID: 29309563

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Radiation Dose Levels for Surgically Resectable Esophageal Cancer: Predictors of Use and Outcomes

Overview
Journal Dis Esophagus
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2018 Jan 9
PMID 29309563
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) followed by surgical resection is the standard of care for resectable, locally advanced esophageal cancer. There are promising results using 41.4 Gy relative to historical controls using higher doses, but the utilization and efficacy of lower neoadjuvant radiation dosing is unclear. This study uses the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to explore patterns of care for neoadjuvant CRT dose levels and outcomes. The NCDB was queried for localized invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma (AC) or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) receiving neoadjuvant CRT with doses from 40 to 54 Gy followed by surgical resection. Patients were divided into radiation levels: 40-41.4, 45, 50.4, and 54 Gy, respectively. Factors predicting use of 40-41.4 Gy vs. all other dose levels were compared using multivariable logistic regression. Factors affecting overall survival (OS) were compared using univariate and multivariate modeling. A total of 6,274 patients with AC (n = 5,176) or SCC (n = 1,098) receiving neoadjuvant CRT and definitive resection were identified. Hispanic race (OR 2.67 [95% CI 1.22-5.81]) and treatment at an academic center (OR 2.72 [95% CI 1.15-6.41]) predicted for use of low-dose CRT. Lower dose CRT increased from 3.9% in 2004 to 7.2% in 2013. There was no difference in OS when stratified according to radiation dose level (P = 0.48). Multivariable analysis found private/government insurance, higher education, higher median income, and treatment at an academic center were associated with improved OS. Age, male gender, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score, stage, tumor grade, and treatment in the South were associated with worse OS. Use of lower neoadjuvant CRT dose is more common at academic centers and shows possible increasing usage. Neoadjuvant radiation dose for esophageal cancer is not associated with differences in OS in this large database.

Citing Articles

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Followed by Surgery for Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma Esophagus: Demographics and Evaluation of Prognostic Factors at a Tertiary Care Center in India.

Mithi M, Sharma M, Puj K, Hazarika P, Pandya S, Gandhi J Indian J Surg Oncol. 2024; 15(1):129-135.

PMID: 38511020 PMC: 10948642. DOI: 10.1007/s13193-023-01828-3.


Nivolumab adjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer: a review based on subgroup analysis of CheckMate 577 trial.

Lin Y, Liang H, Liu Y, Pan X Front Immunol. 2023; 14:1264912.

PMID: 37860010 PMC: 10582756. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1264912.


Safety and efficacy of paclitaxel plus carboplatin versus paclitaxel plus cisplatin in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma: a retrospective study.

Jiang L, Zhu J, Chen X, Wang Y, Wu L, Wan G Radiat Oncol. 2022; 17(1):218.

PMID: 36585731 PMC: 9801619. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02190-4.


Nonregional Lymph Nodes as the Only Metastatic Site in Stage IV Esophageal Cancer.

Zhan P, Canavan M, Ermer T, Pichert M, Li A, Maduka R JTO Clin Res Rep. 2022; 3(12):100426.

PMID: 36444359 PMC: 9700291. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100426.


Prognostic Effect of the Dose of Radiation Therapy and Extent of Lymphadenectomy in Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Carcinoma.

Pai C, Chien L, Huang C, Hsu H, Hsu P J Clin Med. 2022; 11(17).

PMID: 36078989 PMC: 9457289. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11175059.


References
1.
Nabavizadeh N, Shukla R, Elliott D, Mitin T, Vaccaro G, Dolan J . Preoperative carboplatin and paclitaxel-based chemoradiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma: results of a modified CROSS regimen utilizing radiation doses greater than 41.4 Gy. Dis Esophagus. 2015; 29(6):614-20. DOI: 10.1111/dote.12377. View

2.
Fuchs H, Harnsberger C, Broderick R, Chang D, Sandler B, Jacobsen G . Mortality after esophagectomy is heavily impacted by center volume: retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Surg Endosc. 2016; 31(6):2491-2497. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5251-9. View

3.
Lin S, Wang L, Myles B, Thall P, Hofstetter W, Swisher S . Propensity score-based comparison of long-term outcomes with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy vs intensity-modulated radiotherapy for esophageal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 84(5):1078-85. PMC: 3923623. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.02.015. View

4.
Walsh T, Noonan N, Hollywood D, Kelly A, Keeling N, Hennessy T . A comparison of multimodal therapy and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1996; 335(7):462-7. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199608153350702. View

5.
Tepper J, Krasna M, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, Reed C, Goldberg R . Phase III trial of trimodality therapy with cisplatin, fluorouracil, radiotherapy, and surgery compared with surgery alone for esophageal cancer: CALGB 9781. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(7):1086-92. PMC: 5126644. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.9593. View