Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Lymph Node Harvest in Esophageal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

  • Thoracic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study was designed to determine the effects of lymph node (LN) harvest on survival in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT).

Methods

An analysis of surgically resected esophageal cancer patients after nCRT was performed to determine an association between the number of LNs resected and survival. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) curves were calculated according to the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank analysis. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was performed by the Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

We identified 358 patients with a mean follow-up of 27.3 months. The number of LN removed was not impacted by the type of surgical procedure. The number of LNs removed (<10 vs. ≥10, <12 vs. ≥12, and <15 vs. ≥15) did not impact OS or DFS. We found a significant difference in OS and DFS by pathologic response. The median and 5-year OS for patients with complete, partial, and no response was 65.6 months and 52.7 %, 29.7 months and 30.4 %, and 17.7 months and 25.4 % (p = 0.0002). However, the number of LN harvested did not impact OS and DFS when patients were stratified by pathologic response. MVA also revealed that the number of lymph nodes removed was not prognostic for OS or DFS. Higher age, higher stage, and less than a complete response were associated with a decreased OS. Higher stage and less than a complete response were prognostic for worse DFS.

Conclusions

The number of LNs harvested during esophagectomy does not impact survival after nCRT. Stage and pathologic response continue to be the strongest prognostic factors for survival in esophageal cancer after nCRT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel R, Ward E, Brawley O, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2011: the impact of eliminating socioeconomic and racial disparities on premature cancer deaths. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61(4):212–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sjoquist KM, Burmeister BH, Smithers BM, Zalcberg JR, Simes RJ, Barbour A, Gebski V; Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group. Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for resectable oesophageal carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(7):681–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Greenstein AJ, Litle VR, Swanson SJ, Divino CM, Packer S, Wisnivesky JP. Effect of the number of lymph nodes sampled on postoperative survival of lymph node-negative esophageal cancer. Cancer. 2008;112(6):1239–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hsu PK, Wang BY, Chou TY, Huang CS, Wu YC, Hsu WH. The total number of resected lymph node is not a prognostic factor for recurrence in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergone transthoracic esophagectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2011;103(5):416–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Peyre CG, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, Altorki NK, Ancona E, Griffin SM et al. The number of lymph nodes removed predicts survival in esophageal cancer: an international study on the impact of extent of surgical resection. Ann Surg. 2008;248(4):549–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rizk NP, Ishwaran H, Rice TW, Chen LQ, Schipper PH, Kesler KA et al. Optimum lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg. 2010;251(1):46–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schwarz RE, Smith DD. Clinical impact of lymphadenectomy extent in resectable esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11(11):1384–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Meredith KL, Weber JM, Turaga KK, Siegel EM, McLoughlin J, Hoffe S et al. Pathologic response after neoadjuvant therapy is the major determinant of survival in patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(4):1159–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dittrick GW, Weber JM, Shridhar R, Hoffe S, Melis M, Almhanna K et al. Pathologic nonresponders after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer demonstrate no survival benefit compared with patients treated with primary esophagectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(5):1678–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shridhar R, Dombi GW, Finkelstein SE, Meredith KL, Hoffe SE. Improved survival in patients with lymph node-positive gastric cancer who received preoperative radiation: an analysis of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Cancer. 2011;117(17):3908–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Govindarajan A, Gönen M, Weiser MR, Shia J, Temple LK, Guillem JG, Paty PB, Nash GM. Challenging the feasibility and clinical significance of current guidelines on lymph node examination in rectal cancer in the era of neoadjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(34):4568–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Roh MS, Colangelo LH, O’Connell MJ, Yothers G, Deutsch M, Allegra CJ et al. Preoperative multimodality therapy improves disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the rectum: NSABP R-03. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(31):5124–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stahl M, Stuschke M, Lehmann N, Meyer HJ, Walz MK, Seeber S et al. Chemoradiation with and without surgery in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(10):2310–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest

None to report for any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ravi Shridhar MD, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shridhar, R., Hoffe, S.E., Almhanna, K. et al. Lymph Node Harvest in Esophageal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 20, 3038–3043 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-2988-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-2988-4

Keywords

Navigation