Utility of Initial Tumor Reduction as a Prognostic Factor in Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Surgery

BackgroundWhile a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen using docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (NAC-DCF) is considered the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) in Japan, a reliable marker for early prediction of treatment efficacy remains unclear. We investigated the uti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of surgical oncology 2024-08, Vol.31 (8), p.5064-5074
Hauptverfasser: Hagi, Takaomi, Shiraishi, Osamu, Nakanishi, Tomoya, Kohda, Masashi, Hiraki, Yoko, Kato, Hiroaki, Yasuda, Atsushi, Shinkai, Masayuki, Imano, Motohiro, Yasuda, Takushi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; jpn
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BackgroundWhile a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen using docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (NAC-DCF) is considered the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) in Japan, a reliable marker for early prediction of treatment efficacy remains unclear. We investigated the utility of the tumor response after a first course of NAC-DCF as a post-surgery survival predictor in patients with EC.MethodsWe enrolled 150 consecutive patients who underwent NAC-DCF followed by surgery for EC between September 2009 and January 2019. The initial tumor reduction (ITR), defined as the percentage decrease in the shorter diameter of the tumor after the first course of NAC-DCF, was evaluated using computed tomography. We analyzed the relationship between ITR, clinicopathological parameters, and survival.ResultsThe median ITR was 21.07% (range −11.45 to 50.13%). The optimal cut-off value for ITR for predicting prognosis was 10% (hazard ratio [HR] 3.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.98–5.51), based on univariate logistic regression analyses for recurrence-free survival (RFS). Compared with patients with ITR
ISSN:1068-9265
1534-4681
DOI:10.1245/s10434-024-15314-9