Hotspots and prospects of esophageal cancer research in China / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Esophageal cancer is a malignant tumor with a high incidence in China. At pesent, advanced esophageal cancer patients are still frequently encountered. The primary treatment for resectable advanced esophageal cancer is surgery-based multimodality therapy, including preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, such as chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy plus immunotherapy, followed by radical esophagectomy with thoraco-abdominal two-field or cervico-thoraco-abdominal three-field lymphadenectomy via minimally invasive approach or thoracotomy. In addition, adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy, or immunotherapy may also be administered if suggested by postoperative pathological results. Although the treatment outcome of esophageal cancer has improved significantly in China, many clinical issues remain controversial. In this article, we summarize the current hotspots and important issues of esophageal cancer in China, including prevention and early diagnosis, treatment selection for early esophageal cancer, surgical approach selection, lymphadenectomy method, preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, postoperative adjuvant therapy, and nutritional support treatment.

A Model Predicting Lymph Node Status for Patients with Clinical Stage T1aN0-2M0 Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Lymph node status of patients with early-stage nonsmall cell lung cancer has an influence on the choice of surgery. To assess the lymph node status more correspondingly and accurately, we evaluated the relationship between the preoperative clinical variables and lymph node status and developed one model for predicting lymph node involvement.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>We collected clinical and dissected lymph node information of 474 patients with clinical stage T1aN0-2M0 nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Logistic regression analysis of clinical characteristics was used to estimate independent predictors of lymph node metastasis. The prediction model was validated by another group.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Eighty-two patients were diagnosed with positive lymph nodes (17.3%), and four independent predictors of lymph node disease were identified: larger consolidation size (odds ratio [OR] = 2.356, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.517-3.658, P < 0.001,), central tumor location (OR = 2.810, 95% CI: 1.545-5.109, P = 0.001), abnormal status of tumor marker (OR = 3.190, 95% CI: 1.797-5.661, P < 0.001), and clinical N1-N2 stage (OR = 6.518, 95% CI: 3.242-11.697, P < 0.001). The model showed good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit, P < 0.766) with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.842 (95% [CI]: 0.797-0.886). For the validation group, the AUC was 0.810 (95% CI: 0.731-0.889).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>The model can assess the lymph node status of patients with clinical stage T1aN0-2M0 NSCLC, enable surgeons perform an individualized prediction preoperatively, and assist the clinical decision-making procedure.</p>

A Matched Comparison Study of Uniportal Versus Triportal Thoracoscopic Lobectomy and Sublobectomy for Early-stage Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Both uniportal and triportal thoracoscopic lobectomy and sublobectomy are feasible for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of uniportal and triportal thoracoscopic lobectomy and sublobectomy for early-stage NSCLC.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>A total of 405 patients with lung lesions underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy or sublobectomy through a uniportal or triportal procedure in approximately 7-month period (From November 2014 to May 2015). A propensity-matched analysis, incorporating preoperative variables, was used to compare the short-term outcomes of patients who received uniportal or triportal thoracoscopic lobectomy and sublobectomy.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Fifty-eight patients underwent uniportal and 347 patients underwent triportal pulmonary resection. The conversion rate for uniportal and triportal procedure was 3.4% (2/58) and 2.3% (8/347), respectively. The complication rate for uniportal and triportal procedure was 10.3% and 9.5%, respectively. There was no perioperative death in either group. Most patients had early-stage NSCLC in both groups (uniportal: 45/47, 96%; triportal: 313/343, 91%). Propensity score-matching analysis demonstrated no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, numbers of dissected lymph nodes, number of stations of lymph node dissected, duration of chest tube, and complication rate between uniportal and triportal group for early-stage NSCLC. However, the duration of postoperative hospitalization was longer in the uniportal group (6.83 ± 4.17 vs. 5.42 ± 1.86 d, P = 0.036) compared with the triportal group.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Uniportal thoracoscopic lobectomy and sublobectomy is safe and feasible, with comparable short-term outcomes with triportal thoracoscopic pulmonary resection. Uniportal lobectomy and sublobectomy lead to similar cure rate as triportal lobectomy and sublobectomy for early NSCLC.</p>

Comparison of the short-term outcomes of surgical treatment for non-small cell lung cancer via video assisted thoracoscopic surgery and open thoracotomy / 中华肿瘤杂志

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare the short-term outcomes of surgical treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open thoracotomy (OT).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Data of 737 consecutive NSCLC patients who underwent surgical treatment for non-small cell lung cancer by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and 630 patients who underwent pulmonary resection via open thoracotomy (as controls) in Cancer Institute & Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences between January 2009 and August 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. The risk factors after lobectomy were also analyzed.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>In the 506 NSCLC patients who received VATS lobectomy, postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients (2.6%) and one patient died of acute respiratory distress syndrome (0.2%). In the 521 patients who received open thoracotomy (OT) lobectomy, postoperative complications occurred in 21 patients (4.0%) and one patient died of pulmonary infection (0.2%). There was no significant difference in the morbidity rate (P > 0.05) and mortality rate (P > 0.05) between the VATS group and OT group. In the 190 patients who received VATS wedge resections, postoperative complications occurred in 3 patients (1.6%). One hundred and nine patients received OT wedge resections. Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients (3.7%). There were no significant differences for morbidity rate (P = 0.262) between these two groups, and there was no perioperative death in these two groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that age (OR = 1.047, 95%CI: 1.004 - 1.091), history of smoking (OR = 6.374, 95%CI: 2.588 - 15.695) and operation time (OR = 1.418, 95%CI: 1.075 - 1.871) were independent risk factors of postoperative complications.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>To compare with the NSCLC patients who should undergo lobectomy or wedge resection via open thoracotomy, a similar short-term outcome can be achieved via VATS approach.</p>

Preliminary experience of clinical applications of the 7th UICC-AJCC TNM staging system of esophageal carcinoma / 中华肿瘤杂志

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare the instructive value of the 6th and 7th editions of the UICC-AJCC staging system in prognosis of esophageal cancer (EC) patients.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>The staging and prognosis of 1397 esophageal carcinoma patients undergoing curative resection from Jan. 2003 to Dec. 2006 in our hospital were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed according to the 6th AJCC staging system and the 7th UICC-AJCC staging system.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The 5-year overall survival (OS) of EC patients with curative resection was 38.5% (481/1250 cases), with a follow-up rate of 89.5% (1250/1397 case). In overall terms, both the editions were statistically significant discriminators of OS (P < 0.05). The 5-year OS of stages I, II and III patients were 64.9%, 43.5%, 25.2% according to the 6th edition, and 63.5%, 44.5%, 23.5% according to the 7th edition, respectively. Distinct differences in survival were present among patients categorized as stage Ia and Ib according to the 7th edition (P < 0.05), with a 5-year OS of 80.0% and 58.3%, respectively. Similarly, according to the 7th edition, the 5-year overall survivals (OS) of the stages IIIa, IIIb and IIIc patients were 28.2%, 18.4% and 16.7%, respectively, showing that the prognoses were significantly different (P < 0.05). In addition, according to the 7th edition, the prognoses of patients in stages N0, N1, N2 and N3 were also significantly different (P < 0.01), and the 5-year OS were 50.0%, 31.5%, 18.7% and 16.7%, respectively.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Both the 6th and 7th editions of UICC-AJCC staging system are significant discriminators for survival of esophageal cancer patients. The 7th edition is proved to be more accurate in prognosis. The number of lymph node metastases is an important predictor of prognosis.</p>

Comparison of clinical and surgico-pathological TNM stage of 2007 lung cancer patients / 中华肿瘤杂志

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>An accurate clinical TNM staging of lung cancer is essential for the precise determination of the extent of the disease in order that an optimal therapeutic strategy can be planned. This is especially true in patients with marginally resectable tumors. Clinical over-staging of the disease may deny a patient the benefit of surgery, whereas under-staging may oblige a patient to accept a fruitless or even harmful surgery. We aimed to analyze preoperative clinical (c-TNM) and postoperative surgico-pathologic staging (p-TNM) of lung cancer patients in order to evaluate the accuracy of our clinical staging and its implications on the surgical strategy for lung cancer.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>We did a retrospective comparison of c-TNM and p-TNM staging of 2007 patients with lung cancer surgically treated from January 1999 to May 2003. Preoperative evaluation and c-TNM staging of all patients were based on physical examination, laboratory studies, routine chest X-ray and CT scan of the chest and upper abdomen. Other examinations included sputum cytology, bronchoscopy, abdominal ultrasonography, bone scintiscan, brain CT/MRI, and mediastinoscopy whenever indicated.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>In the present study the comparison of c-TNM and p-TNM staging of 2007 patients with lung cancer revealed an overall concurrence rate of only 39.0%. In the entire series the extent of disease was clinically underestimated in 45.2% and overestimated in 15.8% of the patients. Among all c-TNM stages the c-IA/B stage of 1105 patients gave the highest rate (55.2%) of underestimating the extent of disease. Clinical staging of T subsets was relatively easy with an overall accuracy rate of 72.9%, while that of N subsets was relatively more difficult with an overall accuracy rate of 53.5%. Analysis also showed that c-IV stage may not be an absolute contraindication to surgery, because in half of the patients, c-M1 turned out to be p-M0, providing the possibility of resectional surgery depending on the status of T and N.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>For reasons to be further determined, the present preoperative clinical TNM staging of lung cancer remains a crude evaluation. Further efforts to improve its accuracy are needed.</p>