Martin Stuschke

PURPOSE: Combined chemoradiotherapy with and without surgery are widely accepted alternatives for the curative treatment of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. The value of adding surgery to chemotherapy and radiotherapy is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the esophagus were randomly allocated to either induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (40 Gy) followed by surgery (arm A), or the same induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (at least 65 Gy) without surgery (arm B). Primary outcome was overall survival time. RESULTS: The median observation time was 6 years. The analysis of 172 eligible, randomized patients (86 patients per arm) showed overall survival to be equivalent between the two treatment groups (log-rank test for equivalence, P < .05). Local progression-free survival was better in the surgery group (2-year progression-free survival, 64.3%; 95% CI, 52.1% to 76.5%) than in the chemoradiotherapy group (2-year progression-free survival, 40.7%; 95% CI, 28.9% to 52.5%; hazard ratio [HR] for arm B v arm A, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.5; P = .003). Treatment-related mortality was significantly increased in the surgery group than in the chemoradiotherapy group (12.8% v 3.5%, respectively; P = .03). Cox regression analysis revealed clinical tumor response to induction chemotherapy to be the single independent prognostic factor for overall survival (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.47; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Adding surgery to chemoradiotherapy improves local tumor control but does not increase survival of patients with locally advanced esophageal SCC. Tumor response to induction chemotherapy identifies a favorable prognostic group within these high-risk patients, regardless of the treatment group.

PURPOSE: Preoperative chemotherapy is an accepted standard in the treatment of localized esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Adding radiation therapy to preoperative chemotherapy appears promising, but its definitive value remains unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced (uT3-4NXM0) adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus or gastric cardia were randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups: induction chemotherapy (15 weeks) followed by surgery (arm A); or chemotherapy (12 weeks) followed by chemoradiotherapy (3 weeks) followed by surgery (arm B). Primary outcome was overall survival time. A total of 354 patients were needed to detect a 10% increase in 3-year survival from 25% to 35% by addition of radiation therapy. The study was prematurely closed due to low accrual. RESULTS: The median observation time was 46 months. A total of 126 patients were randomly assigned and 119 eligible patients were evaluated. The number of patients undergoing complete tumor resection was not different between treatment groups (69.5% v 71.5%). Patients in arm B had a significant higher probability of showing pathologic complete response (15.6% v 2.0%) or tumor-free lymph nodes (64.4% v 37.7%) at resection. Preoperative radiation therapy improved 3-year survival rate from 27.7% to 47.4% (log-rank P = .07, hazard ratio adjusted for randomization strata variables 0.67, 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.07). Postoperative mortality was nonsignificantly increased in the chemoradiotherapy group (10.2% v 3.8%; P = .26). CONCLUSION: Although the study was closed early and statistical significance was not achieved, results point to a survival advantage for preoperative chemoradiotherapy compared with preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction.

PURPOSE: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with or without surgery are options for stage IIIA(N2) non-small-cell lung cancer. Our previous phase II study had shown the efficacy of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and surgery in patients with IIIA(N2) disease and with selected IIIB disease. Here, we compared surgery with definitive chemoradiotherapy in resectable stage III disease after induction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with pathologically proven IIIA(N2) and selected patients with IIIB disease that had medical/functional operability received induction chemotherapy, which consisted of three cycles of cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 21 days, as well as concurrent chemoradiotherapy to 45 Gy given as 1.5 Gy twice daily, concurrent cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9, and concurrent vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9. Those patients whose tumors were reevaluated and deemed resectable in the last week of radiotherapy were randomly assigned to receive a chemoradiotherapy boost that was risk adapted to between 65 and 71 Gy in arm A or to undergo surgery (arm B). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After 246 of 500 planned patients were enrolled, the trial was closed after the second scheduled interim analysis because of slow accrual and the end of funding, which left the study underpowered relative to its primary study end point. Seventy-five patients had stage IIIA disease and 171 had stage IIIB disease according to the Union for International Cancer Control TNM classification, sixth edition. The median age was 59 years (range, 33 to 74 years). After induction, 161 (65.4%) of 246 patients with resectable tumors were randomly assigned; strata were tumor-node group, prophylactic cranial irradiation policy, and region. Patient characteristics were balanced between arms, in which 81 were assigned to surgery and 80 were assigned to a chemoradiotherapy boost. In arm B, 81% underwent R0 resection. With a median follow-up after random assignment of 78 months, 5-year OS and progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ between arms. Results were OS rates of 44% for arm B and 40% for arm A (log-rank P = .34) and PFS rates of 32% for arm B and 35% for arm A (log-rank P = .75). OS at 5 years was 34.1% (95% CI, 27.6% to 40.8%) in all 246 patients, and 216 patients (87.8%) received definitive local treatment. CONCLUSION: The 5-year OS and PFS rates in randomly assigned patients with resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer were excellent with both treatments. Both are acceptable strategies for this good-prognosis group.