Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
Do you wish to request the book?
Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
2020
Overview
Background
The survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable carcinoma esophagus has been elucidated. We performed a meta-analysis in light of new studies and long-term results of past trials. The search strategy was refined to include only “neoadjuvant” so that any bias by adjuvant treatment is eliminated.
Methods
A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was done. Only published randomized English language trials were included. Data were categorized as neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation (NACRT), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART), and neoadjuvant sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT). Meta-analysis was done using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI using fixed/random effects model. Heterogeneity was tested by chi-square and
I
2
test.
Z
probability calculated significant difference across subgroups. Outcomes assessed were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 and 5 years, respectively, mortality (30/90 day) and failures (local/systemic).
Results
Twenty-five randomized trials involving 5272 patients were included for quantitative analysis. NACRT was evaluated in 12 studies (2676 patients). Superior 3-year OS (OR = 0.68 CI 0.52–0.90,
p
= 0.007), 3-year DFS (OR = 0.55 CI 0.45–0.68,
p
= 0.00001), and 5-year DFS (OR = 0.59 CI 0.47–0.74,
p
= 0.00001), with lower failures (OR = 0.52 CI 0.37–0.73,
p
= 0.0001), were seen in favor of NACRT at the cost of increased perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79 CI 1.15–2.80,
p
= .01). However, 5-year OS (OR = 0.78 CI 0.60–0.1.01,
p
= 0.06) was not found to be significantly superior. NACT, NART, and SCRT were not found to have any benefit over surgery alone.
Conclusion
This meta-analysis presents strong evidence favoring NACRT over upfront surgery. It also shows no survival advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BMC
Subject
/ Esophageal Neoplasms - mortality
/ Esophageal Neoplasms - pathology
/ Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery
/ Esophageal Neoplasms - therapy
/ Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma - pathology
/ Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma - surgery
/ Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma - therapy
/ Humans
/ Medicine
/ Patients
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
/ Review
/ Surgery
/ Survival
