Neoadjuvant treatment is standard for locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, whether the addition of radiation to neoadjuvant regimen improves survival remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare survival in locally advanced esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiation.
A prospectively maintained database of esophagectomies (1999-2012) was analyzed. We identified 297 patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer that underwent either neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 231) or chemoradiation (n = 66) followed by esophagectomy. Pretreatment and pathologic staging were compared to assess response. Overall survival was recorded.
Most patients in the chemotherapy and chemoradiation groups had pretreatment stage III disease (66.7% versus 65.2%; P = 0.44). Median follow-up was 79.3 and 64.9 mo for chemotherapy and chemoradiation cohorts, respectively. Complete response rate was higher in chemoradiation than chemotherapy groups (30.3% versus 13.8%; P < 0.001). Overall survival was similar between complete responders in both groups (median not reached versus 121.1 mo; chemotherapy versus chemoradiation). However, partial responders in the chemotherapy cohort had improved median survival (147.2 mo) versus those in the chemoradiation cohort (83.7 mo, P < 0.03). Within the chemotherapy-only group, partial responders had improved survival compared with nonresponders (P = 0.041); however, there was no difference in survival between partial and complete responders (P = 0.36).
In patients undergoing esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with an equivalent overall survival, when compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Adding neoadjuvant radiation may enhance complete response rates but does not appear to be associated with improved survival.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,755,393
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Research
#3,185
of 5,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,458
of 324,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Research
#50
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,779 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
