同步放化疗治疗食管癌术后复发的临床效果及预后因素分析

目的:分析同步放化疗治疗食管癌术后复发患者的治疗效果及预后因素。方法:回顾性分析103例食管癌术后复发患者行同步放化疗的治疗结果及预后因素。所有患者行同步放化疗,中位放疗剂量60Gy。治疗后1~3月评价肿瘤的治疗反应。结果:中位随访时间30个月（3~103月）。3年总生存率47.6%,中位存活时间35月。总体反应率70.9%（73/103),完全缓解率41.7%（43/103)。单因素分析显示同步放化疗后肿瘤的反应（P=0.000)、至复发的时间(P=0.028)及ECOG评分(P=0.090),有益于总生存率,多因素分析显示同步放化疗后肿瘤的反应(P=0.000)及ECOG评分(P=0.010)为总生存率的独立预后因素。同步放化疗后,共70例患者出现肿瘤进展,39例局部复发,22例远处转移,9例远处转移伴局部复发。结论:同步放化疗是治疗食管癌术后复发的有效手段,治疗后取得完全缓解的患者预后较好。     

Role of chemoradiotherapy in intermediate prognosis nasopharyngeal carcinoma

To evaluate the long term impact of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) compared to radiotherapy (RT) alone in patients with T2N1M0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) retrospectively. Three hundred and ninety-two patients with T2N1M0 NPC according to the AJCC 2002 stage classification system were analyzed. Among them, 211 patients were treated with RT alone and the rest of 181 patients were treated with CCRT. A planned dose of 70 Gy was delivered in 2.0 Gy per fraction over 7 weeks to the primary tumor with 6-MV photons or (60)Cobalt γ-ray. The chemotherapy regimen of cisplatin with a dose of 100mg/m(2) was delivered for 2-3 cycles. With a median follow-up of 66 months (range 2.4-117.1 months), the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates was higher in CCRT group compared to RT alone group, though they failed to reach statistical significance (80.2% vs. 76.6%, P=0.778 and 70.5% vs. 64.2%, P=0.413, respectively). A significant improvement was detected in 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate in CCRT group than RT alone group (91.5% vs. 77.3%, P=0.008). Moreover, chemotherapy was the only independent prognostic factor for the 5-year RFS (P=0.007). Concurrent chemoradiotherapy appeared to improve the 5-year RFS rate for patients with T2N1M0 NPC. Large prospective, randomized clinical studies are needed to confirm its therapeutic gain.     

诱导化疗序贯同期化放疗治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌

  目的  比较诱导化疗加同期化放疗(IC/CCRT)与单纯同期化放疗(CCRT)在治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌中的近期疗效及不良反应的发生率。  方法  2003年9月至2006年5月广西百色市人民医院肿瘤科接受治疗的200例鼻咽癌患者随机分为诱导化疗加同期化放疗组(IC/CCRT)和单纯同期化放疗组(CCRT)。两组患者接受相同的同期化放疗方案: 在放疗的第7、28、49天接受卡铂(AUC=6)化疗, 诱导化疗加同期放化疗组在同期化放疗前接受了诱导化疗: 2个疗程5-FU(750 mg/m2)+卡铂(AUC=6)。  结果  IC/CCRT组与CCRT组Ⅲ、Ⅳ级不良反应的发生率分别为24.5%和17.8%(P < 0.001), 两组3年总生存率分别为83.5%和79.4%(P=0.30), 两组方案的3年无瘤生存率、局部控制率和远处转移控制率比较差异均无统计学意义。  结论  与单纯同期化放疗相比, 诱导化疗加同期化放疗治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌, 患者的总生存率及无复发生存未明显提高, 但不良反应有所增加。      

ERCC1 expression as a predictive marker of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiation

The excision repair cross-complementation group 1 (ERCC1) enzyme plays a rate-limiting role in the nucleotide excision repair pathway and is associated with resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of ERCC1 expression as a predictive marker of survival in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) treated with cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT). ERCC1 expression was assessed by immunohistochemical staining. The median age of the 45 patients analysed was 56 years (range 27-75 years), and 82% were men; 73% of all specimens showed high expression of ERCC1. The overall tumour response rate after CCRT was 89%. The median follow-up was 53.6 months (95% CI, 34.5-72.7 months). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 58.7 and 61.3%, respectively. Univariate analyses showed that patients with low expression of ERCC1 had a significantly higher 3-year PFS (83.3 vs 49.4%, P=0.036) and OS (91.7 vs 45.5%, P=0.013) rates. Multivariate analysis showed that low expression of ERCC1 was an independent predictor for prolonged survival (HR, 0.120; 95% CI, 0.016-0.934, P=0.043). These results suggest that ERCC1 expression might be a useful predictive marker of locally advanced SCCHN in patients treated with cisplatin-based CCRT.     

Can histopathologic assessment of circumferential margin after preoperative pelvic chemoradiotherapy for T3-T4 rectal cancer predict for 3-year disease-free survival?

PURPOSE: This study set out to determine the impact of a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) (R1-R2) and pathologic downstaging on local recurrence and survival in patients with borderline resectable or unresectable rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 150 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer were treated with long-course neoadjuvant CRT using low-dose folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil. CRT was followed 6-12 weeks later by surgical excision. The CRM rate and incidence, site, and pattern of local and systemic recurrences were recorded. The median follow-up was 25 months. RESULTS: The overall median survival was 37 months, with a 5-year overall survival rate of 34%. Of the 150 patients, 122 underwent curative resection; 12% had a complete pathologic response, and downstaging to pT1-T2 occurred in an additional 16%. A negative CRM (R0) was achieved in 65% overall (98 of 150). Local recurrence occurred in 10% of those with R0 resection and 62% of those with R1-R2 resections. Distant metastases occurred in 29% of those with R0 resections and 75% of those with R1-R2 resections. The 3-year disease-free and 3-year overall survival rate was 9% and 25% and 52% and 64%, respectively, for patients with and without a histologically positive CRM. CONCLUSION: After 5-fluorouracil-based CRT, a positive CRM predicted for a high risk of subsequent local recurrence and a 3-year disease-free survival rate of only 9%. For this reason, the CRM should be considered a major prognostic factor and should be validated in future trials as an early alternative clinical endpoint.     

Treatment outcome and recursive partitioning analysis-based prognostic factors in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE: To analyze the clinical outcomes and devise a prognostic model for patients with operable esophageal carcinoma who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 269 patients were enrolled into three clinical trials assessing preoperative CRT at our institution. We assessed the significance of the pretreatment and treatment factors with regard to tumor recurrence and long-term survival and used recursive partitioning analysis to create a decision tree. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 31 months for the surviving patients, the median overall survival of all 180 patients in this study was 31.8 months, and the 5-year overall survival rate was 33.9%. The median event-free survival was 24.1 months, and the 5-year event-free survival rate was 29.3%. Of the 180 patients, 129 (71.7%) also underwent esophagectomy, and the perioperative mortality rate was 7.8%. A pathologic complete response was achieved by 58 patients (45%). The 5-year overall survival rate was 57.1% for patients who attained a pathologic complete response and 22.4% for those with gross residual disease (p = 0.0008). Recursive partitioning analysis showed that female patients who achieved a clinical response and underwent esophagectomy had the most favorable prognosis (p <0.0001). Among the patients who underwent esophagectomy, the group with good performance status, clinical Stage II, and a major pathologic response to CRT had the most favorable prognosis (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSION: Although preoperative CRT was generally effective and well-tolerated, an individualized approach is necessary to improve outcomes. Strategies to increase the response and reduce treatment failure should be investigated.     

鼻咽癌T3N0-1M0期单纯放疗和同期放化疗疗效回顾分析

 目的　回顾分析T3N0~1M0期鼻咽癌患者临床资料,探讨单纯放射治疗与同期放化疗两种治疗方式与预后的关系。方法　中山大学肿瘤防治中心2004年1月至12月收治的经病理学证实的初治鼻咽癌患者781例,均有完整鼻咽和颈部MRI资料,且均无远处转移。按照2008中国鼻咽癌分期标准重新分期,82例行单纯放疗或同期放化疗的T3N0~1M0期患者入组,分为单纯放疗（A组）46例,同时期放化疗（B组）36例。结果　两组患者的临床资料具有可比性,单因素分析显示A组和B组的5年总生存（OS）率分别为93.5 %和100 %（P＝0.046）,5年无瘤生存（DFS）率分别为85.2 %和91.7 %（P＝0.498）。N分期是鼻咽癌DFS的影响因素（P＝0.026）。分层分析显示：T3N0M0期患者A组和B组5年OS率分别为94.7 %和100 %（P＝0.432）;T3N1M0期A组和B组5年OS率分别为92.6 %和100 %（P＝0.066）;T3N1M0期A组和B组5年DFS率分别为73.7 %和89.3 %（P＝0.244）。多因素分析显示,同期放化疗不是 T3N0~1M0期鼻咽癌患者OS的独立预后因素（HR＝0.019;95 % CI 0～21.793）,N分期不是影响T3N0~1M0期鼻咽癌患者DFS的独立预后因素（HR＝0.203;95 % CI 0.135～1.231×104）。结论　T3N0M0期患者同期放化疗与单纯放疗疗效无差异, T3N1M0期患者行同期放化疗能否改善生存有待进一步研究。     

N晚期鼻咽癌调强放疗远期疗效评价

目的 评价N晚期鼻咽癌根治性调强放疗(IMRT)的远期疗效及IMRT联合不同化疗模式对N晚期鼻咽癌患者预后影响。
方法 回顾分析2001-2008年间收治的179例N晚期鼻咽癌患者临床资料,其中单纯IMRT 33例,放化疗146例(同期放化疗71例、诱导化疗加同期放化疗66例,同期放化疗加辅助化疗9例)。
结果 随访率96.5%,随访时间满5年者133例。全组5年总生存率为69.0%。单纯IMRT和放化疗的5年总生存率、无远处转移生存率、无复发生存率、无进展生存率分别为47.7%和73.7%(χ²=13.91,P=0.000)、49.2%和68.3%(χ²=4.97,P=0.026)、74.5%和92.4%(χ²=9.87,P=0.002)、37.5%和65.1%(χ²=11.65,P=0.001),放化疗中同期放化疗、诱导化疗加同期放化疗、同期放化疗加辅助化疗的生存率相似,但诱导化疗加同期放化疗的无远处转移生存率比单纯IMRT的高(χ²=4.65,P=0.031)。
结论 N晚期鼻咽癌患者单纯IMRT后远处转移率仍较高,诱导化疗加IMRT联合同期化疗也许是较为合理的治疗手段。     

Equivalent outcome of patients with clinical Stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiation compared with induction chemotherapy followed by surgical resection

PURPOSE: To compare the outcome of induction chemotherapy followed by surgery (C/S) and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for clinical Stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1990 and 2000, 107 patients underwent either induction C/S (n = 55) or concurrent CRT (n = 52) for clinical Stage IIIA NSCLC at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced in the two treatment groups with respect to T and N stage, race, median age, performance status, weight loss, and histologic findings. In the C/S group, induction chemotherapy included two to four cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by lobectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection. Postoperative RT was delivered in 35 patients, with referral for RT made at the discretion of the treating physician. CRT consisted of three cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy given every 3 weeks concurrent with RT to 60-63 Gy in 30-35 fractions in 27 patients and 69.6 Gy in 58 fractions (b.i.d.) in 25 patients. Local control, overall disease-free survival, and distant metastasis-free survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median follow-up duration was 20 months in all patients and 32 months in surviving patients. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in the end points measured in the two treatment groups. Specifically, the median survival time was 31 and 27 months and the 5-year overall survival rate was 33% and 30% in the C/S and CRT groups, respectively. Likewise, the 5-year local control (58% vs. 61%), disease-free (24% vs. 23%), and distant metastasis-free (44% vs. 36%) survival rates in the two groups were not significantly different. In the C/S group, postoperative RT significantly improved the 5-year local control rate from 33.8% to 81.5% (p = 0.007) but did not significantly improve overall survival. Additionally, patients in the C/S group whose disease responded to induction chemotherapy had a significantly improved 5-year overall survival rate (50%) compared with those who had stable or progressive disease (16%, p = 0001). CONCLUSION: Treatment of Stage IIIA NSCLC using either induction C/S or CRT resulted in similar outcomes in terms of local control and median overall, 5-year overall, distant metastasis-free, and disease-free survival. However, patients undergoing induction C/S often needed postoperative RT to achieve local control equivalent to that achieved with concurrent CRT. Advances in radiation-based treatment as reflected in this study have resulted in similar outcomes compared with modern induction C/S. To improve survival, however, newer systemic agents that reduce and control distant metastasis are required.     

局部进展期直肠癌术前3DCRT与VMAT同期化疗远期疗效比较

目的:比较术前三维适形放疗(3DCRT)与容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)同期化疗用于局部进展期直肠癌(LARC)的5年总生存(OS)及无进展生存(DFS)结果,并分析该新辅助模式下的诱导/巩固化疗的价值。方法:回顾收集2007—2013年间在中山大学肿瘤防治中心接受术前3DCRT或VMAT同期联合化疗(主要为Xelox方...     

Stepwise neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in the management of mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer

BackgroundThis study aimed to compare the treatment response, complications and prognosis in mid-low locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients who underwent stepwise neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (SCRT) or traditional neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).MethodsThe medical records of patients with mid-low rectal cancer who underwent SCRT or CRT were retrospectively analyzed. Differences in the treatment response, pathologic complete response (pCR), R0 resection, local recurrence, anastomotic leakage, presacral infection, anal preservation, defunctioning stoma, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between patients who underwent SCRT and CRT were compared.ResultsA total of 430 medical records were investigated, including 194 patients in the SCRT group and 236 patients in the CRT group. There was no significant difference in the rates of treatment response, pCR, R0 resection, local recurrence, anastomotic leakage, presacral infection, anal preservation or TEAEs between the two groups. However, the rate of defunctioning stoma in the SCRT group was significantly lower than that in the CRT group (20.1% vs. 44.1%, respectively, P < 0.01). Moreover, the median OS time of the SCRT and CRT groups was 44.0 and 50.5 months, respectively (P = 0.17). The median DFS time of the SCRT and CRT groups was 41.0 and 46.8 months, respectively (P = 0.32).ConclusionCompared with the CRT group, the SCRT group had a similar treatment response, local control and long-term prognosis, and more importantly, a portion of the patients in the SCRT group were exempted from excessive radiation.     

Preoperative Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Stage IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Thirty-one patients with stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were treated with preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) followed by surgery. The treatment protocol could not be completed in eight patients. The acute hematologic toxicities of grade III or IV occurred in 48.4% (15/31) after the first chemotherapy cycle, and in 39.1% (9/23) after the second cycle. The most common non-hematologic toxicity was radiation esophagitis. Surgery was attempted in 23 patients and successful in 22 patients (resection rate = 71.0%). Pathologic complete response and down-staging were achieved in 13.6% (3/22) and 68.2% (15/22). The median survival period, 2-year overall survival, local control and disease-free survival rates of all 31 patients and of 22 patients who underwent surgery were 19 months, 37.2%, 49.1%, 35.5%, and 19 months, 43.2%, 51.8%, 25.6%, respectively. On the basis of our observations, preoperative CCRT followed by surgery for stage IIIA NSCLC has resulted in outcomes comparable with those in previous reports.     

晚期鼻咽癌诱导化疗+同步放化疗与诱导化疗+放疗疗效比较

目的 比较诱导化疗+同步放化疗与诱导化疗+放疗在T3～4N0～1M0和T1～4N2～3M0期鼻咽癌患者的疗效.方法 对2002-2005年间收治的92分期为Ⅲ、Ⅳa期的400例鼻咽癌患者随机分为诱导化疗+同步放化疗组和诱导化疗+放疗组,其中对T3～4N0～1M0(197例)和T1～4N2～3M0(203例)期分别进行亚组分析.放疗采用常规分割方案,化疗采用氟尿嘧啶脱氧核苷+卡铂.结果 中位随访3.9年,随访率96.2%.T3～4N0～1M0期鼻咽癌患者诱导化疗+同步放化疗组(104例)和诱导化疗+放疗组(93例)的3年总生存率、无瘤生存率、无局部区域复发生存率、无远处转移生存率分别为84.0%和85.9%(χ2=0.08,P=0.780)、77.0%和72.0%(χ2=0.44,P=0.510)、89.5%和92.3%(χ2=0.65,P=0.420)、84.9%和77.0%(χ2=1.59,P=0.210);T1～4 N2～3 M0期(97例和106例)的分别为67.4%和82.2%(χ2=3.48,P=0.060)、61.5%和68.0%(χ2=1.86,P=0.170)、86.2%和87.0%(χ2=0.57,P=0.450)、66.2%和75.6%(χ2=2.07,P=0.150).急性毒副反应只有白细胞减少诱导化疗+同步放化疗比诱导化疗+放疗严重,其余相似.结论 采用诱导化疗+同步放化疗方案未能较诱导化疗+放疗进一步提高T3～4N0～1M0、T1～4N2～3M0期鼻咽癌总生存率.     

Ⅱ+Ⅲ期直肠癌根治术后卡培他滨单药±奥沙利铂同期放化疗疗效对比

目的 比较Ⅱ、Ⅲ期直肠癌根治术后卡培他滨 ±奥沙利铂同期放化疗疗效。方法 回顾分析2002—2010年分别接受卡培他滨术后同期放化疗(单药组,427例)和奥沙利铂+卡培他滨术后同期放化疗(双药组,248例)的临床资料。治疗模式均为全直肠系膜切除术+同期放化疗 ±辅助化疗。放疗方法为真骨盆 45.0~50.4 Gy分25次。结果 采用倾向评分配比法按1∶1平衡基线特征后产生单双药组各 248例,其中单药、双药组 5年样本数分别为81、104例。匹配后单、双药组的 5年OS (78.1%∶74.9%)、DFS (74.4%∶67.9%)、LRC (94.5%∶92.8%)和DMFS (77.1%∶70.9%)均相近(P=0.547、0.292、0.484、0.364),但双药组3、4级不良反应发生率显著高于单药组(38.3%∶24.6%,P=0.001)。结论 Ⅱ、Ⅲ期直肠癌根治术后卡培他滨+奥沙利铂同期放化疗疗效未优于卡培他滨单药同期放化疗,而不良反应增加。单药卡培他滨同期放化疗仍为标准方案。     

局部晚期食管鳞状细胞癌术后放疗和化疗的前瞻性研究

目的 评价局部晚期食管鳞状细胞癌(FSCC)手术后放射治疗和化疗的疗效.方法 将1997年1月至2004年6月间入院的158例ESCC(Ⅱ-Ⅲ期)患者随机分为术后放化疗组(78例)和单纯手术组(80例).后经微调和排查,实际术后放化疗组为74例,单纯手术组为77例.对比两组患者的并发症发生率、局部复发率和远处转移率、生存率及无进展生存率.结果 患者平均随访45个月,术后放化疗组的并发症发生率与单纯手术组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).术后放化疗组局部复发和远处转移率低于单纯手术组(P<0.05).术后放化疗组的中位生存时间(53.5个月)与单纯手术组(37个月)比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组的1年生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但3、5和10年生存率比较,术后放化疗组优于单纯手术组(P<0.05).术后放化疗组的中位无进展生存期(46个月)与单纯手术组(34个月)比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组1年无进展生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但3、5和10年无进展生存率比较,术后放化疗组优于单纯手术组(P<0.05).结论 术后合理应用放化疗可有效提高局部晚期ESCC患者的无进展生存时间及长期生存率.     

The effectiveness of planned esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for advanced esophageal carcinomas

BACKGROUND: The best treatment option for patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma has not yet been determined, especially because the benefits of esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy are still controversial. We report the results of a retrospective cohort comparison of definitive chemoradiotherapy without surgery (CRT) versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by planned surgery (CRTS) in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1991 and December 2002, 67 patients were enrolled in this study. Fifty of the 67 patients were considered to have inoperable tumors due to distant organ metastasis, distant lymph node metastasis, severe organ dysfunction or rejection of surgery by the patient and received CRT, while the remaining 17 patients were treated with CRTS. The clinical responses of the primary tumors were evaluated. RESULTS: In the 50 CRT patients, the one- and 2-year survival rates were 33.8% and 20.2%, respectively, and the median survival time (MST) was 13.5 months. In the 17 CRTS patients, the response rate (CR + PR) was 76.5%, and the pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 29.4%. Their one- and 2-year survival rates were 61.6% and 35.9%, respectively, and the MST was 24.4 months. The survival rates of the CRT patients were lower than those of the CRTS patients (p = 0.1288). When the 12 patients with distant organ metastases were removed from the CRT group, the one- and 2-year survival rates of the remaining 38 patients were 36.5% and 24.1%, respectively, and the MST was 14.7 months. The survival rates of these 38 CRT patients without distant organ metastases were similar to those of the 12 CRTS patients in the pathological partial response (pPR) group (p = 0.6279). CONCLUSION: This retrospective cohort comparison of CRT versus CRTS demonstrated that there may not be any survival benefit from the addition of surgery in the pPR group for advanced esophageal carcinomas. For patients with a poor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, we suggest that the addition of chemoradiotherapy, instead of planned esophagectomy, may show a similar survival rate to definitive CRT. Thus, a large series of a randomized control study will be required to confirm the benefit of surgery after chemoradiotherapy.     

多西他赛加顺铂诱导化疗联合同期放化疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床观察

目的 评价TP方案诱导化疗联合同期放化疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的近期疗效和不良反应。方法 病理证实的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌86例,随机分成同期放化疗联合TP方案诱导化疗(ICCRT) 组和单纯同期放化疗(CCRT) 组。放疗均采用调强放疗。治疗结束后比较两组疗效、生存率和不良反应。结果 86例患者的随访率为100%。ICCRT组和CCRT组的有效率分别为80%和70%(χ²=1.26,P=0.261),1、2、3年总生存率分别为85%和65%、50%和40%、44%和33%(χ²=3.90,P=0.048),主要不良反应白细胞减少(43例和32例,χ²=3.48,P=0.062)、放射性食管炎(26例和20例,χ²=0.12,P=0.730)、血红蛋白减低(26例和16例,χ²=2.34,P=0.126)和放射性肺炎(13例和9例,χ²=0.37,P=0.541)。结论 ICCRT能明显提高局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的总生存率,且与CCRT相比并不增加局部不良反应。     

调强放疗联合化疗在T1-2N1M0期鼻咽癌患者中的作用回顾性研究

目的 探索调强放疗(IMRT)联合化疗在治疗T1-2N1M0期鼻咽癌患者中的作用。方法 收集2008—2016年间浙江省肿瘤医院和中山大学肿瘤防治中心接受根治性治疗的T1-2N1M0期鼻咽癌患者343例。所有患者均接受IMRT,分为单纯放疗组(RT组)和放化疗组(CRT组),后者又分为同步放化疗组(CCRT组)、诱导化疗+同步放化疗组(IC+CCRT组)和同步放化疗+辅助化疗组(CCRT+AC组)。采用Kaplan-Meier法评价局部区域无复发生存率(LRFFS)、远处无转移生存率(DMFS)、无进展生存率(PFS)、肿瘤特异生存率(CSS)和总生存率(OS)。Cox模型多因素预后分析。结果 303例存活患者的中位随访时间为91个月(49~138个月)。CRT组∶RT组的5年OS、CSS、PFS、LRFFS、DMFS均相近(93.7%∶93.9%、93.7%∶93.9%、89.0%∶87.7%、93.8%∶92.8%、93.8%∶91.2%,均P>0.05)。T1N1期和T2N1期亚组分析也显示CRT组与RT组的治疗结果均相近(均P>0.05)。多因素分析显示只有年龄是OS、PFS、CSS和DMFS的独立预后因素,随年龄增长与上述结局呈负相关。CCRT组、IC+CCRT组、CCRT+AC组与RT组的治疗结局均未给患者带来生存获益,且上述3种联合治疗方式之间的疗效也相近(均P>0.05)。结论 T1-2N1M0期鼻咽癌患者接受单纯IMRT获得了满意的治疗效果,预后与联合化疗相当。但未来是否可在T1-2N1M0期人群中取消化疗仍需要前瞻性随机对照临床试验的进一步证实。     

新辅助放化疗对mrT3 期低位直肠癌患者不同浸润深度远期疗效的影响*

目的:探讨新辅助放化疗（neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy ，CRT ）对cT 3 期低位直肠癌及其各亚分期预后的影响，进一步评估是否所有T 3 期低位直肠癌患者均应行CRT 。方法:对2008年1 月至2012年12月间福建医科大学附属协和医院结直肠外科收治的223 例cT 3 期低位直肠癌患者，按北美放射协会（RSNA）影像学分期标准回顾性进行亚分期，即根据高分辨率MRI 测量下肿瘤浸润直肠系膜的深度（depth of mesorectal invasion，DMI）分为mrT3a 期（DMI<5 mm），mrT3b 期（DMI 为5～10mm）和mrT3c 期（DMI>10mm），并根据是否行CRT 分为新辅助放化疗组（CRT 组，115 例）和未行新辅助放化疗组（nCRT组，108 例），比较两组患者及其各亚分期（mrT3a、mrT3b、mrT3c）之间预后的差异。结果:对于整体mrT3 期，CRT 组和nCRT组的3 年无病生存率（78.2% vs . 71.9% ，P =0.608）和局部复发率（4.4% vs . 8.5% ，P = 0.120）无统计学差异。对于mrT3 各亚分期，CRT 组和nCRT组预后分别为:mrT3a:3 年无病生存率82.4% vs . 81.8%（P = 0.837）、局部复发率5.8% vs . 5.9%（P = 0.658）；mrT3b:3 年无病生存率84.4% vs . 42.4%（P = 0.032）、局部复发率0 vs . 18.2%（P = 0.014）；mrT3b、mrT3c:3 年无病生存率72.8% vs . 42.4%（P = 0.060）、局部复发率2.4% vs . 18.2%（P = 0.021）。 单因素分析提示DMI 和环周切缘（circumferential resection margin ，CRM）是mrT3 期直肠癌患者3 年无病生存时间的影响因素，Cox 风险回归模型多因素分析提示CRM是独立影响因素（OR= 2.249，CI :1.067～4.742，P = 0.033）。 结论:CRT 能改善mrT3b、mrT3c 期低位直肠癌患者的预后，但可能无法改善mrT3a 且CRM阴性低位直肠癌患者的预后，对这部分患者可直接行手术治疗。      

Chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus with clinical evidence of adjacent organ invasion

BACKGROUND: The role of surgery for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) with clinical evidence of adjacent organ invasion (cT4) is a debated issue. This study was aimed at analyzing our experience with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by surgery as treatment for non-metastatic cT4 SCC of the thoracic esophagus. METHODS: The results of 51 patients consecutively treated at the First Department of General Surgery, University of Verona, from January 1987 to December 2004 were analyzed. RESULTS: The most frequently clinically involved structures were the trachea (43.1%), the main left bronchus (17.6%), and the thoracic aorta (15.7%). CRT was completed in all but one of the patients (98.0%) without toxicity-related deaths. After completion of induction treatment 49 patients underwent surgery (96.1%), and resection was possible in 40 patients (78.4%) but R0 surgery was rarely obtained (39.2%). Pathologic downstaging was achieved in 18 cases (35.3%) while a major response (responders) was observed in 10 patients (19.6%) and a complete response (pT0N0) in 7 (13.7%). The overall median survival time was 11.1 months with a 3-year survival rate of 8.8%. A significantly better survival (P < 0.001) was observed after a R0 resection (median: 22.3 months; 3-year survival: 25.4%; P < 0.001) and for responders (median: 33.1 months; 3-year survival: 25.7%; P = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive multi-modal therapy with CRT followed by surgery in cT4 SCC of the thoracic esophagus is feasible. Surgery should be limited to patients with significant response to induction treatment and a high probability of R0 resection.