No abstract

No abstract

Postoperative radiotherapy using cRT is strongly associated with improved OS and DFS in patients with pT3N0M0 TESCC. A multicenter, randomized phase III clinical trial is warranted to confirm these findings.

PURPOSE We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management in the early period after lung cancer surgery. METHODS Before surgery, patients with clinically diagnosed lung cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive postoperative PRO-based symptom management or usual care. All patients reported symptoms on MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer presurgery, daily postsurgery, and twice a week after discharge for up to 4 weeks via an electronic PRO system. In the intervention group, treating surgeons responded to overthreshold electronic alerts driven by any of the five target symptom scores (score ≥ 4 on a 0-10 scale for pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, shortness of breath, and coughing). The control group patients received usual care and no alerts were generated. The primary outcome was the number of symptom threshold events (any target symptom with a score of ≥ 4) at discharge. Per-protocol analyses were conducted. RESULTS Of the 166 participants, 83 were randomly allocated to each group. At discharge, the intervention group reported fewer symptom threshold events than the control group (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-2] v 2 [0-3]; P = .007). At 4 weeks postdischarge, this difference was maintained between the intervention and control groups (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-0] v 0 [0-1]; P = .018). The intervention group had a lower complication rate than the control group (21.5% v 40.6%; P = .019). Surgeons spent a median of 3 minutes managing an alert. CONCLUSION PRO-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery showed lower symptom burden and fewer complications than usual care for up to 4 weeks postdischarge.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) versus chemotherapy alone for patients with stage IV esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).MethodsEligible patients were retrospectively enrolled at the authors’s institution from January 2010 to October 2015. Of the 141 patients enrolled, 55 (39.0%) received CCRT and 86 (61.0%) received chemotherapy alone. The outcomes and adverse events (AEs) were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe baseline clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. However, the CCRT group showed a significantly better primary tumor objective response rate (ORR) than that of the chemotherapy group (74.5% versus 45.3%, p = 0.001). The 1-year, 2-year, 3-year overall survival (OS) rates and median OS were 58.0% versus 43.0%, 25.5% versus 14.0%, 10.7% versus 4.7%, and 14 months versus 11 months for patients treated with CCRT or chemotherapy, respectively (p = 0.007). The 1-year and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 29.8% versus 14.9% and 8 months versus 6 months (p = 0.005). Multivariate analysis identified CCRT (p = 0.013) and solitary metastasis (p = 0.037) as independent factors for greater OS. The frequency of leucocytopenia (grade 3 or higher) was significantly higher in the CCRT group than in the chemotherapy-alone group (p = 0.040), whereas the rates of other AEs did not differ.ConclusionsIn this study, it is suggested that CCRT is more effective than chemotherapy alone for stage IV ESCC, yielding better primary responses and survival outcomes with tolerable side effects.

No abstract

We aimed to establish a risk model using computed tomography-based compactness to predict overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after multimodal treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). We extracted pre-treatment computed tomography-based tumor data (volume, surface area, and compactness) for 512 cases of ESCC that were treated at 3 centers. A risk model based on compactness was trained using Cox regression analyses of data from 83 cases, and then the model was validated using two independent cohorts (98 patients and 283 patients). The largest cohort (283 patients) was then evaluated using the risk model to predict response to radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. In the three datasets, the pre-treatment compactness risk model provided good accuracy for predicting OS (P = 0.012, P = 0.022, and P = 0.003) and PFS (P < 0.001, P = 0.003, and P = 0.005). Patients in the low-risk group did not experience a significant OS benefit from concurrent chemoradiotherapy (P = 0.099). Furthermore, after preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy, the OS outcomes were similar among patients in the low-risk group who did and did not achieve a pathological complete response (P = 0.127). Tumor compactness was correlated with clinical T stage but was more accurate for predicting prognosis after treatment for ESCC, based on higher C-index values in all three datasets. The compactness-based risk model was effective for predicting OS and PFS after multimodal treatment for ESCC. Therefore, it may be useful for guiding personalized treatment.