Prognostic significance of cancer within 1 mm of the circumferential resection margin in oesophageal cancer patients following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

Department of Upper GI Surgery, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery (Impact Factor: 2.4). 06/2012; DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezs331
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: The prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin (CRM) status in oesophageal cancer patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radical resection is controversial. Furthermore, it is currently unclear whether patients with cancer located at the CRM have a prognosis different from that of those with cancer within 1 mm of the CRM. This is the first study aiming to establish the optimal tumour-free distance from the CRM of an oesophagectomy in patients who have undergone neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: The clinicopathological data of 232 oesophageal cancer patients from two UK centres were analysed. The CRM status was classified as Group A (cancer at the CRM), Group B (cancer within 1 mm but not at the CRM) and Group C (no cancer within 1 mm from the CRM). The relationship between the CRM status and patient survival was investigated. RESULTS: Thirty-eight specimens were classified as Group A, 89 as Group B and 105 as Group C. CRM status was related to the depth of tumour invasion (P < 0.001) and lymph node status (P < 0.001). The prognoses of the Group A and the Group B patients were similar. Both were poorer than that of the Group C patients (P = 0.008). Lymph node status was the only independent prognostic marker in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Oesophageal cancer patients treated with pre-operative chemotherapy with cancer cells at the CRM or within 1 mm of the CRM of the resected specimen have a significantly worse survival than patients with no cancer cells within 1 mm of the margin. However, this study suggests that the overall prognostic significance of the CRM status is limited in this cohort and the post-operative lymph node status is the most important prognostic factor in oesophageal cancer patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The optimal surgical approach to tumours of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction remains controversial. The principal randomized trial comparing transhiatal (THO) and transthoracic (TTO) oesophagectomy showed no survival difference, but suggested that some subgroups of patients may benefit from the more extended lymphadenectomy typically conducted with TTO. This was a cohort study based on two prospectively created databases. Short- and long-term outcomes for patients undergoing THO and TTO were compared. The primary outcome measure was overall survival, with secondary outcomes including time to recurrence and patterns of disease relapse. A Cox proportional hazards model provided hazard ratios (HRs) and 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.), with adjustments for age, tumour stage, tumour grade, response to chemotherapy and lymphovascular invasion. Of 664 included patients (263 THO, 401 TTO), the distributions of age, sex and histological subtype were similar between the groups. In-hospital mortality (1·1 versus 3·2 per cent for THO and TTO respectively; P = 0·110) and in-hospital stay (14 versus 17 days respectively; P < 0·001) favoured THO. In the adjusted model, there was no difference in overall survival (HR 1·07, 95 per cent c.i. 0·84 to 1·36) or time to tumour recurrence (HR 0·99, 0·76 to 1·29) between the two operations. Local tumour recurrence patterns were similar (22·8 versus 24·4 per cent for THO and TTO respectively). No subgroup could be identified of patients who had benefited from more radical surgery on the basis of tumour location or stage. There was no difference in survival or tumour recurrence for TTO and THO.
    British Journal of Surgery 02/2014; 101(5). · 4.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Multiple factors are implicated in the long-term survival of patients who have undergone esophagectomy, among these the involvement of longitudinal and circumferential resection margins are well known important prognostic factors. A few studies have assessed the impact of the operative approach on the status of the resection margins, and the data are not well reported, often unclear and, more importantly, there is no scientific evidence or published guideline on what the optimal proximal, distal or circumferential resection margin clearance should be. Owing to the lack of clarity on these points, we undertook a systematic literature review of the impact of longitudinal and circumferential resection margins in patients with operable esophageal cancer, the prognostic significance of margin involvement and the role of neoadjuvant therapy.
    Future Oncology 04/2014; 10(5):891-901. · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the prognostic significance of positive circumferential resection margin on overall survival in patients with esophageal cancer, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Studies were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Survival data were extracted from eligible studies to compare overall survival in patients with a positive circumferential resection margin with patients having a negative circumferential resection margin according to the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) criteria and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) criteria. Survival data were pooled with hazard ratios (HRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A random-effects model meta-analysis on overall survival was performed. The pooled HRs for survival were 1.510 (95% CI, 1.329-1.717; p < 0.001) and 2.053 (95% CI, 1.597-2.638; p < 0.001) according to the RCP and CAP criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin was associated with worse survival in patients with T3 stage disease according to the RCP (HR, 1.381; 95% CI, 1.028-1.584; p = 0.001) and CAP (HR, 2.457; 95% CI, 1.902-3.175; p < 0.001) criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin was associated with worse survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy according to the RCP (HR, 1.676; 95% CI, 1.023-2.744; p = 0.040) and CAP (HR, 1.847; 95% CI, 1.226-2.78; p = 0.003) criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin is associated with poor prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer, particularly in patients with T3 stage disease and patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy.
    The Annals of thoracic surgery 12/2013; · 3.45 Impact Factor


Available from
Jun 1, 2014