TY - JOUR
T1 - Long-term survival of patients with T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer after thoracoscopic esophagectomy using data from JCOG0502
T2 - a prospective multicenter trial
AU - Nozaki, Isao
AU - Machida, Ryunosuke
AU - Kato, Ken
AU - Daiko, Hiroyuki
AU - Ito, Yoshinori
AU - Kojima, Takashi
AU - Yano, Masahiko
AU - Ueno, Masaki
AU - Nakagawa, Satoru
AU - Kitagawa, Yuko
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported in part by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (2020-J-3). JCOG0502 was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Cancer Research (20S-3, 18-1) from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.
Funding Information:
We thank the members of the JCOG Data Center and JCOG Operations Office for their support in preparing the report, managing the data (Ms. Hiromi Katsuki), and overseeing the study (Dr. Haruhiko Fukuda). We also thank Dr. Shigeru Tsunoda for advising us for this study, and Ms. Susan Specht for editing English language. This study was supported in part by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (2020-J-3). JCOG0502 was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Cancer Research (20S-3, 18-1) from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - Background: Thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) is considered the standard surgery for esophageal cancer because of its superiority over open esophagectomy (OE) in terms of short-term outcomes. However, few prospective multicenter studies have evaluated its long-term survival after TE. This study aimed to investigate whether the prognosis for patients with T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer after TE is not inferior to OE using data from the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study (JCOG0502), a prospective multicenter trial comparing esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy. Methods: Data of patients in JCOG0502 after esophagectomy were used to compare the overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) after OE versus TE. OE or TE was selected at the surgeon’s discretion. A hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated via Cox proportional-hazards model. Results: Of the 210 patients who underwent esophagectomy, 109 underwent OE, whereas 101 underwent TE. The 5-year OS was 88.9% after OE and 85.0% after TE. The hazard ratio of TE for OS was 1.53 (95% CI, 0.84–2.78; p = 0.16) and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.52–2.35; p = 0.80) in the univariable and multivariable analyses, respectively. The 5-year RFS was 85.3% after OE and 79.1% after TE. The hazard ratio of TE for RFS was 1.39 (95% CI, 0.81–2.38; p = 0.23) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.44–1.74; p = 0.70) in the univariable and multivariable analyses, respectively. Conclusion: The prognosis for patients with T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer after TE was not inferior to OE.
AB - Background: Thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) is considered the standard surgery for esophageal cancer because of its superiority over open esophagectomy (OE) in terms of short-term outcomes. However, few prospective multicenter studies have evaluated its long-term survival after TE. This study aimed to investigate whether the prognosis for patients with T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer after TE is not inferior to OE using data from the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study (JCOG0502), a prospective multicenter trial comparing esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy. Methods: Data of patients in JCOG0502 after esophagectomy were used to compare the overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) after OE versus TE. OE or TE was selected at the surgeon’s discretion. A hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated via Cox proportional-hazards model. Results: Of the 210 patients who underwent esophagectomy, 109 underwent OE, whereas 101 underwent TE. The 5-year OS was 88.9% after OE and 85.0% after TE. The hazard ratio of TE for OS was 1.53 (95% CI, 0.84–2.78; p = 0.16) and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.52–2.35; p = 0.80) in the univariable and multivariable analyses, respectively. The 5-year RFS was 85.3% after OE and 79.1% after TE. The hazard ratio of TE for RFS was 1.39 (95% CI, 0.81–2.38; p = 0.23) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.44–1.74; p = 0.70) in the univariable and multivariable analyses, respectively. Conclusion: The prognosis for patients with T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer after TE was not inferior to OE.
KW - Esophageal cancer
KW - Laparoscopy
KW - Minimally invasive esophagectomy
KW - Survival
KW - Thoracoscopy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85118127804&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85118127804&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00464-021-08768-5
DO - 10.1007/s00464-021-08768-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 34698936
AN - SCOPUS:85118127804
SN - 0930-2794
VL - 36
SP - 4275
EP - 4282
JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
IS - 6
ER -