2008
DOI: 10.1159/000165056
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Overall Survival with Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil Neoadjuvant Treatment in Patients with Esophageal Cancer: Single-Center Experience

Abstract: Background: The survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer is unclear. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively identified 37 patients with resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma, who prior to surgery received 2 cycles of chemotherapy, consisting of cisplatin 80 mg/m2 as 3-h intravenous infusion on day 1 followed by 5-fluorouracil 1,000 mg/m2 as 96-h continuous infusion on days 1–4, separated by a 3-week inter… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, compared with a group of historicalcontrolstreatedwithcisplatinand5-FUalone [13], the addition of bevacizumab did not improve the resection rate,PFS,OS,or1-and3-yearsurvivalrates. The biologic effects of neoadjuvant treatment appear to specificallyinfluencetheextentofsurgery,anditissuggested that it is this influence which confers the survival advantage [1,18].Inourstudy,theincidenceofunresectabletumorswas greater than in the group of historical controls (25 vs. 13%, p = 0.05), and the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase the R0 resection rate (43 vs. 44%).MedianOSwassimilarinrespondersvs.non-responders(16vs.15months)whereasinthehistoricalcontrolsitwas longerinpatientswhorespondedtochemotherapycompared with non-responders (32 vs. 19 months).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…However, compared with a group of historicalcontrolstreatedwithcisplatinand5-FUalone [13], the addition of bevacizumab did not improve the resection rate,PFS,OS,or1-and3-yearsurvivalrates. The biologic effects of neoadjuvant treatment appear to specificallyinfluencetheextentofsurgery,anditissuggested that it is this influence which confers the survival advantage [1,18].Inourstudy,theincidenceofunresectabletumorswas greater than in the group of historical controls (25 vs. 13%, p = 0.05), and the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase the R0 resection rate (43 vs. 44%).MedianOSwassimilarinrespondersvs.non-responders(16vs.15months)whereasinthehistoricalcontrolsitwas longerinpatientswhorespondedtochemotherapycompared with non-responders (32 vs. 19 months).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Interestingly, the onlysignificantdifferencewasinmedianOSinpatientswho responded to neoadjuvant therapy, which was 16 months inthephaseIIstudyvs.32monthsinthehistoricalcontrols (p=0.05). Theapparentlackofeffectofbevacizumabontherateof distant metastases is counterintuitive if neoadjuvant therapy with bevacizumab is expected to reduce micrometastases presentatthetimeofdiagnosis.Theadditionofbevacizumab tochemotherapyinpatientswithadvancedgastroesophageal cancerhasdemonstratedpromisingactivityinphaseIIstudies,withresponseratesof42-67% [10][11][12].Inourstudy,the responseratewas39%whichwassimilartothatwithcisplatin and5-FUalone(30%) [13].Similarly,theadditionofbevacizumabdidnotleadtoanincreaseintheR0rate.Itispossible thatthesimilarresponseratewasresponsibleforthesimilar R0resectionrate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%
See 3 more Smart Citations