• Annals of surgery · Feb 2017

    Prognostic Value of Pretreatment Pathological Tumor Extent in Patients Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Plus Surgery for Esophageal or Junctional Cancer.

    • Joel Shapiro, Katharina Biermann, David van Klaveren, G Johan A Offerhaus, Fiebo J W Ten Kate, Sybren L Meijer, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen, Ewout W Steyerberg, Bas P L Wijnhoven, and J Jan B van Lanschot.
    • *Department of Surgery †Department of Pathology ‡Department of Public Health, Rotterdam §Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht ¶Department of Pathology ||Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    • Ann. Surg. 2017 Feb 1; 265 (2): 356-362.

    ObjectiveWe aimed to determine pretreatment pathological tumor extent in the resection specimen after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and to assess its prognostic value in patients with esophageal cancer.MethodsPatients with esophageal cancer, treated with nCRT plus surgery were included (2003-2011). Pretreatment pathological T-stage (prepT-stage) and N-stage (prepN-stage) were estimated based on the extent of regressional changes and residual tumor cells in the resection specimen. Interobserver agreement was determined between 3 pathologists. The prognostic performance of prepT-stage and prepN-stage was scored using the difference in Akaike information criterion (ΔAIC). PrepN-stage and posttreatment pathological N-stage (ypN-stage) were combined to determine the effect of nodal sterilization on prognosis.ResultsOverall concordance for prepT-stage and prepN-stage was 0.69 and 0.84, respectively. Prognostic strength of prepT-stage was similar to clinical T-stage and worse compared with ypT-stage (ΔAIC 1.3 versus 2.0 and 8.9, respectively). In contrast, prognostic strength of prepN-stage was better than cN-stage and similar to ypN-stage (ΔAIC 17.9 versus 6.2 and 17.2, respectively). PrepN+ patients who become ypN0 after nCRT have a worse survival compared with prepN0 patients, with a five year overall survival of 51% versus 68%, P = 0.019, respectively.ConclusionsPrepT-stage and prepN-stage can be estimated reproducibly. Prognostic strength of prepT-stage is comparable with clinical T-stage, whereas prepN-stage is better than cN-stage. PrepN+ patients who become ypN0 after nCRT have a worse survival compared with prepN0 patients. Pretreatment pathological staging should be considered useful as a new staging parameter for esophageal cancer and could also be of interest for other tumor types.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…