Loading…

Does chemotherapy regimen matter in the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer?

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has become the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. CALGB 9781 trial established cisplatin and 5-flourouracil (5-Fu) with radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone while the CROSS trial established paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiotherapy as su...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of gastrointestinal oncology 2022-12, Vol.13 (6), p.2713-2720
Main Authors: Logarajah, Shankar, Jeyarajah, Prashan, Darwish, Muhammad, Moslim, Maitham, Jureller, Michael, Osman, Houssam, Jeyarajah, D Rohan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-770c0150f4863c85cb5db4c5b167b5aa99fca5574a6af79880ed6f8d397cb88c3
cites
container_end_page 2720
container_issue 6
container_start_page 2713
container_title Journal of gastrointestinal oncology
container_volume 13
creator Logarajah, Shankar
Jeyarajah, Prashan
Darwish, Muhammad
Moslim, Maitham
Jureller, Michael
Osman, Houssam
Jeyarajah, D Rohan
description Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has become the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. CALGB 9781 trial established cisplatin and 5-flourouracil (5-Fu) with radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone while the CROSS trial established paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone. Previous data has been unclear as to which regimen provides a superior pathologic response. This study aims to look at this. This study aims to look at this. A retrospective chart review at a single institution of patients who underwent esophagectomies after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with either cisplatin and 5-Fu or carboplatin and paclitaxel between 2012-2020 was performed. Demographics as well as staging, response rates, and modified Ryan scores were collected. Univariate analysis between the two groups was performed. A total of 82 patients were identified between 2012-2020 who underwent esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In total, 74 (90.2%) received carboplatin and paclitaxel while 8 (9.8%) received 5-Fu and carboplatin. Both groups included patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma. No significant factors were found in terms of patient comorbidities or pathologic staging. There was no significant difference in modified Ryan score between the two groups (P=0.745). This study evaluates the degree and presence of pathologic response between the two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy modalities used for esophageal cancer. Our results, in contrast to other studies, suggest no significant difference with regards to pathologic response rate. Furthermore, our findings suggest that use of the least toxic regimen would make sense.
doi_str_mv 10.21037/jgo-22-70
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9830326</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2765775050</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-770c0150f4863c85cb5db4c5b167b5aa99fca5574a6af79880ed6f8d397cb88c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkU1LJDEQhoMoKurFHyA5LkJrOpl8XZRl_FoQ9qCCt1Cdrp7pobszJhnBf7_xY2W3LlVQD2-9VUXIcc3OeM2EPl8tQsV5pdkW2ee8tpXS9nm71EybShlb75GjlFasxMxKJvku2RNKCcWU2icPVwET9UscQ15ihPUbjbjoR5zoCDljpP1ES4dOGKBdbV5hyjRHhFyQTENHMYX1EhYIA_UweYyXh2SngyHh0Vc-IE8314_zu-r-9-2v-c_7ygttcqU186yWrJsZJbyRvpFtM_OyqZVuJIC1nQcp9QwUdNoaw7BVnWmF1b4xxosDcvGpu940I7a-GIowuHXsR4hvLkDv_u9M_dItwquzRjDBVRH48SUQw8sGU3ZjnzwOA5RtN8lxraTW5WasoKefqI8hpYjd95iauY9HuPIIx7nT7_DJv8a-0b9nF38AiHeF5w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2765775050</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does chemotherapy regimen matter in the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer?</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Logarajah, Shankar ; Jeyarajah, Prashan ; Darwish, Muhammad ; Moslim, Maitham ; Jureller, Michael ; Osman, Houssam ; Jeyarajah, D Rohan</creator><creatorcontrib>Logarajah, Shankar ; Jeyarajah, Prashan ; Darwish, Muhammad ; Moslim, Maitham ; Jureller, Michael ; Osman, Houssam ; Jeyarajah, D Rohan</creatorcontrib><description>Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has become the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. CALGB 9781 trial established cisplatin and 5-flourouracil (5-Fu) with radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone while the CROSS trial established paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone. Previous data has been unclear as to which regimen provides a superior pathologic response. This study aims to look at this. This study aims to look at this. A retrospective chart review at a single institution of patients who underwent esophagectomies after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with either cisplatin and 5-Fu or carboplatin and paclitaxel between 2012-2020 was performed. Demographics as well as staging, response rates, and modified Ryan scores were collected. Univariate analysis between the two groups was performed. A total of 82 patients were identified between 2012-2020 who underwent esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In total, 74 (90.2%) received carboplatin and paclitaxel while 8 (9.8%) received 5-Fu and carboplatin. Both groups included patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma. No significant factors were found in terms of patient comorbidities or pathologic staging. There was no significant difference in modified Ryan score between the two groups (P=0.745). This study evaluates the degree and presence of pathologic response between the two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy modalities used for esophageal cancer. Our results, in contrast to other studies, suggest no significant difference with regards to pathologic response rate. Furthermore, our findings suggest that use of the least toxic regimen would make sense.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2078-6891</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2219-679X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.21037/jgo-22-70</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36636066</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>China: AME Publishing Company</publisher><subject>Original</subject><ispartof>Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2022-12, Vol.13 (6), p.2713-2720</ispartof><rights>2022 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2022 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved. 2022 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-770c0150f4863c85cb5db4c5b167b5aa99fca5574a6af79880ed6f8d397cb88c3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830326/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9830326/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36636066$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Logarajah, Shankar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeyarajah, Prashan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darwish, Muhammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moslim, Maitham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jureller, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osman, Houssam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeyarajah, D Rohan</creatorcontrib><title>Does chemotherapy regimen matter in the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer?</title><title>Journal of gastrointestinal oncology</title><addtitle>J Gastrointest Oncol</addtitle><description>Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has become the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. CALGB 9781 trial established cisplatin and 5-flourouracil (5-Fu) with radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone while the CROSS trial established paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone. Previous data has been unclear as to which regimen provides a superior pathologic response. This study aims to look at this. This study aims to look at this. A retrospective chart review at a single institution of patients who underwent esophagectomies after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with either cisplatin and 5-Fu or carboplatin and paclitaxel between 2012-2020 was performed. Demographics as well as staging, response rates, and modified Ryan scores were collected. Univariate analysis between the two groups was performed. A total of 82 patients were identified between 2012-2020 who underwent esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In total, 74 (90.2%) received carboplatin and paclitaxel while 8 (9.8%) received 5-Fu and carboplatin. Both groups included patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma. No significant factors were found in terms of patient comorbidities or pathologic staging. There was no significant difference in modified Ryan score between the two groups (P=0.745). This study evaluates the degree and presence of pathologic response between the two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy modalities used for esophageal cancer. Our results, in contrast to other studies, suggest no significant difference with regards to pathologic response rate. Furthermore, our findings suggest that use of the least toxic regimen would make sense.</description><subject>Original</subject><issn>2078-6891</issn><issn>2219-679X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkU1LJDEQhoMoKurFHyA5LkJrOpl8XZRl_FoQ9qCCt1Cdrp7pobszJhnBf7_xY2W3LlVQD2-9VUXIcc3OeM2EPl8tQsV5pdkW2ee8tpXS9nm71EybShlb75GjlFasxMxKJvku2RNKCcWU2icPVwET9UscQ15ihPUbjbjoR5zoCDljpP1ES4dOGKBdbV5hyjRHhFyQTENHMYX1EhYIA_UweYyXh2SngyHh0Vc-IE8314_zu-r-9-2v-c_7ygttcqU186yWrJsZJbyRvpFtM_OyqZVuJIC1nQcp9QwUdNoaw7BVnWmF1b4xxosDcvGpu940I7a-GIowuHXsR4hvLkDv_u9M_dItwquzRjDBVRH48SUQw8sGU3ZjnzwOA5RtN8lxraTW5WasoKefqI8hpYjd95iauY9HuPIIx7nT7_DJv8a-0b9nF38AiHeF5w</recordid><startdate>20221201</startdate><enddate>20221201</enddate><creator>Logarajah, Shankar</creator><creator>Jeyarajah, Prashan</creator><creator>Darwish, Muhammad</creator><creator>Moslim, Maitham</creator><creator>Jureller, Michael</creator><creator>Osman, Houssam</creator><creator>Jeyarajah, D Rohan</creator><general>AME Publishing Company</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20221201</creationdate><title>Does chemotherapy regimen matter in the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer?</title><author>Logarajah, Shankar ; Jeyarajah, Prashan ; Darwish, Muhammad ; Moslim, Maitham ; Jureller, Michael ; Osman, Houssam ; Jeyarajah, D Rohan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-770c0150f4863c85cb5db4c5b167b5aa99fca5574a6af79880ed6f8d397cb88c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Original</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Logarajah, Shankar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeyarajah, Prashan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Darwish, Muhammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moslim, Maitham</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jureller, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osman, Houssam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jeyarajah, D Rohan</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of gastrointestinal oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Logarajah, Shankar</au><au>Jeyarajah, Prashan</au><au>Darwish, Muhammad</au><au>Moslim, Maitham</au><au>Jureller, Michael</au><au>Osman, Houssam</au><au>Jeyarajah, D Rohan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does chemotherapy regimen matter in the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of gastrointestinal oncology</jtitle><addtitle>J Gastrointest Oncol</addtitle><date>2022-12-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>2713</spage><epage>2720</epage><pages>2713-2720</pages><issn>2078-6891</issn><eissn>2219-679X</eissn><abstract>Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has become the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. CALGB 9781 trial established cisplatin and 5-flourouracil (5-Fu) with radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone while the CROSS trial established paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiotherapy as superior to surgery alone. Previous data has been unclear as to which regimen provides a superior pathologic response. This study aims to look at this. This study aims to look at this. A retrospective chart review at a single institution of patients who underwent esophagectomies after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with either cisplatin and 5-Fu or carboplatin and paclitaxel between 2012-2020 was performed. Demographics as well as staging, response rates, and modified Ryan scores were collected. Univariate analysis between the two groups was performed. A total of 82 patients were identified between 2012-2020 who underwent esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In total, 74 (90.2%) received carboplatin and paclitaxel while 8 (9.8%) received 5-Fu and carboplatin. Both groups included patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma. No significant factors were found in terms of patient comorbidities or pathologic staging. There was no significant difference in modified Ryan score between the two groups (P=0.745). This study evaluates the degree and presence of pathologic response between the two neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy modalities used for esophageal cancer. Our results, in contrast to other studies, suggest no significant difference with regards to pathologic response rate. Furthermore, our findings suggest that use of the least toxic regimen would make sense.</abstract><cop>China</cop><pub>AME Publishing Company</pub><pmid>36636066</pmid><doi>10.21037/jgo-22-70</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2078-6891
ispartof Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2022-12, Vol.13 (6), p.2713-2720
issn 2078-6891
2219-679X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9830326
source PubMed Central
subjects Original
title Does chemotherapy regimen matter in the neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T00%3A38%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20chemotherapy%20regimen%20matter%20in%20the%20neoadjuvant%20treatment%20of%20esophageal%20cancer?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20gastrointestinal%20oncology&rft.au=Logarajah,%20Shankar&rft.date=2022-12-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=2713&rft.epage=2720&rft.pages=2713-2720&rft.issn=2078-6891&rft.eissn=2219-679X&rft_id=info:doi/10.21037/jgo-22-70&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2765775050%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-770c0150f4863c85cb5db4c5b167b5aa99fca5574a6af79880ed6f8d397cb88c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2765775050&rft_id=info:pmid/36636066&rfr_iscdi=true