TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatment and clinical outcome of clinical T4 esophageal cancer
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Makino, Tomoki
AU - Yamasaki, Makoto
AU - Tanaka, Koji
AU - Miyazaki, Yasuhiro
AU - Takahashi, Tsuyoshi
AU - Kurokawa, Yukinori
AU - Motoori, Masaaki
AU - Kimura, Yutaka
AU - Nakajima, Kiyokazu
AU - Mori, Masaki
AU - Doki, Yuichiro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Authors. Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of The Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery.
PY - 2019/3
Y1 - 2019/3
N2 - Background: Survival of patients with cT4 esophageal cancer is dismal. Although the optimal treatment strategy remains to be established, two treatment options are available for cT4 esophageal cancers: definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) and induction treatment followed by conversion surgery (CS). However, little is known concerning the differences in clinical outcome between patients with T4 esophageal tumors treated with dCRT and those eventually treated with CS. Methods: A systematic search of the scientific literature on PubMed/MEDLINE was carried out using the keywords “T4 esophageal cancer,” “invading (involving) adjacent organ,” “definitive chemoradiation,” “induction therapy,” “salvage surgery,” and “conversion surgery,” obtaining 28 reports published up to July 2018. Results/Conclusion: We found that CS was superior to dCRT with respect to local disease control and short-term survival; however, CS was associated with relatively higher perioperative mortality and morbidity. Alternatively, although dCRT might often cause fistula formation, a clinical complete response to dCRT is likely to lead to a better prognosis. Recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents have led to triple induction chemotherapy, with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF), which has shown promise as an initial induction treatment for cT4 esophageal cancer. Indeed, this regimen could control both local and systemic disease, which enables curative resection without preoperative CRT. Moreover, some appropriate changes in perioperative management and intensive systemic chemotherapy might enhance patient outcome. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size are needed to establish the standard treatment for cT4 esophageal cancer.
AB - Background: Survival of patients with cT4 esophageal cancer is dismal. Although the optimal treatment strategy remains to be established, two treatment options are available for cT4 esophageal cancers: definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) and induction treatment followed by conversion surgery (CS). However, little is known concerning the differences in clinical outcome between patients with T4 esophageal tumors treated with dCRT and those eventually treated with CS. Methods: A systematic search of the scientific literature on PubMed/MEDLINE was carried out using the keywords “T4 esophageal cancer,” “invading (involving) adjacent organ,” “definitive chemoradiation,” “induction therapy,” “salvage surgery,” and “conversion surgery,” obtaining 28 reports published up to July 2018. Results/Conclusion: We found that CS was superior to dCRT with respect to local disease control and short-term survival; however, CS was associated with relatively higher perioperative mortality and morbidity. Alternatively, although dCRT might often cause fistula formation, a clinical complete response to dCRT is likely to lead to a better prognosis. Recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents have led to triple induction chemotherapy, with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF), which has shown promise as an initial induction treatment for cT4 esophageal cancer. Indeed, this regimen could control both local and systemic disease, which enables curative resection without preoperative CRT. Moreover, some appropriate changes in perioperative management and intensive systemic chemotherapy might enhance patient outcome. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size are needed to establish the standard treatment for cT4 esophageal cancer.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074019024&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074019024&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ags3.12222
DO - 10.1002/ags3.12222
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85074019024
SN - 2475-0328
VL - 3
SP - 169
EP - 180
JO - Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery
JF - Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery
IS - 2
ER -