Abstract
To evaluate the differences in pathologic complete response (pCR) rates, TRG score, pathologic T stage and the pattern of lymphatic spread among patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) or neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) prior to esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). A total of 702 patients with ESCC who completed transthoracic esophagectomy followed neoadjuvant therapy at three cancer centers from January 2017 to December 2022 were enrolled. Among the included patients, 382 patients were treated with NCR, 172 with NCRT, and 148 with NICT. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to control potential confounding factors. Pathological response of primary tumor was evaluated using the Chirieac modified tumor regression grade (TRG) system. The complete regression of primary lesion and nodal metastases were considered pCR. Lymph node classification system used the 8th edition of AJCC. Specimens were assessed for pattern of lymphatic spread. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the R0 resection rate did not significantly differ between the patients receiving NCT or NCRT or NICT (99.48% vs.100% vs.98.65%, P = 0.273). Compared with the NCT group, the NCRT group and NICT group had an advantage in pathological response (P<0.05). The pCR rate was 7.07% in the NCT group, 30.23% in the NCRT group, and 22.30% in the NICT group. Compared to the other two groups, the TRG score (P<0.05) and pathologic T stage (P<0.05) in the NCT group were significantly higher. In the NCT group, 9.97% had ypT0 disease, compared with 35.76% in the NCRT group and 25.68% in the NICT group. And in the NCT group, 9.71% had TRG1 disease, compared with 32.76% in the NCRT group and 25% in the NICT group. Compared with NICT, NCRT can significantly reduce the rate of LNM in station 1R (0 vs 3.38%, P<0.05) and 2R (1.15% vs 6.76%, P<0.05). Subgroup analysis according to the tumor location distribution showed that in upper thoracic cases, there was no statistical difference in LNM rates among stations no matter whether patients received NCT or NCRT or NICT. NICT group had higher LNM rates in station 2R (9.1%) in middle thoracic cases (P<0.05) and in station 18 (7.5%) (P<0.05) in lower thoracic cases, compared with the NCRT group and NCT group. NCRT or NICT followed by surgery may result in a promising pCR rate and show a better performance in therapeutic response of primary lesion. No matter whether patients received NCT or NCRT or NICT, multiple level and skip node metastases are common, and adequate lymphadenectomy should be achieved to ensure the complete removal of metastatic lymph nodes.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call