Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Dec:22 Suppl 3:S1301-9.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4827-2. Epub 2015 Aug 28.

Prognostic Value of the Circumferential Resection Margin in Esophageal Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

Affiliations

Prognostic Value of the Circumferential Resection Margin in Esophageal Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

J B Hulshoff et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Circumferential resection margins (CRM) for esophageal cancer (EC), defined by the College of American Pathologists (CAP; >0 mm) or the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP; >1 mm) as tumor-free (R0), are based on a surgery-alone approach. We evaluated the usefulness of both definitions in current practice with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).

Methods: CRMs were measured in 209 patients (104 with nCRT) with locally advanced EC after transthoracic esophagectomy. Local recurrence and cancer related death were scored as events. Patients were followed for at least 2 years or until death. Prognostic factors (P < 0.1 in univariate analyses) for 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were incorporated in multivariate Cox regression analyses. Both CRM measurements were analyzed separately and prognostic cutoff values (0-1.0 mm) were assessed in both groups.

Results: Independent prognostic factors (P < 0.05) for 2-year DFS were tumor length, lymph node ratio, angioinvasion, and CAP R0 in the surgery-alone group and pN stage (P < 0.01) in the nCRT group. Prognostic factors (P < 0.05) for 2-year LRFS were CAP, lymph node ratio, and tumor length in the surgery-alone group, and CAP and grade in the nCRT group. Optimal CRM cutoff values between 0.0 and 0.2 mm were prognostic for 2-year DFS in the surgery-alone and at 0.3 mm for the nCRT group.

Conclusions: nCRT affected the CRM cutoff values. After nCRT, the CRM R0 according to the CAP was only prognostic for 2-year LRFS. However, in the surgery-alone group, it was prognostic for both the 2-year DFS and LRFS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Disease-free survival in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery-alone, with circumferential microscopic tumor-free (R0) or involved resection margins (R1), according to a CAP (0 mm) and b RCP (1 mm)

References

    1. van Hagen P, Hulshof MC, van Lanschot JJ, et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2074–2084. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1112088. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pultrum BB, Honing J, Smit JK, et al. A critical appraisal of circumferential resection margins in esophageal carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:812–820. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0827-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mirnezami R, Rohatgi A, Sutcliffe RP, Hamouda A, Chandrakumaran K, Botha A, Mason RC. Multivariate analysis of clinicopathological factors influencing survival following esophagectomy for cancer. Int J Surg. 2010;8:58–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2009.11.001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rao VS, Yeung MM, Cooke J, Salim E, Jain PK. Comparison of circumferential resection margin clearance criteria with survival after surgery for cancer of esophagus. J Surg Oncol. 2012;105:745–749. doi: 10.1002/jso.23006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Deeter M, Dorer R, Kuppusamy MK, Koehler RP, Low DE. Assessment of criteria and clinical significance of circumferential resection margins in esophageal cancer. Arch Surg. 2009;144:618–624. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2009.115. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms