Survival rates and safety associated with chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and chemoradiotherapy alone for patients with T4 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment approach for T4 esophageal cancer is not well established. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the survival rates and safety of chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRT-S) and chemoradiotherapy alone (CRT) in patients with T4 Nany M0 esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched databases for eligible prospective or retrospective studies. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) at 1, 3 and 5 years, treatment-related fistula formation and mortality rates. Meta-analyses were performed using the random effects models separately for studies evaluating CRT-S and CRT. Subgroup analyses were performed based on histology, radiation dose, chemotherapy regimen and duration of the interval between CRT and surgery. RESULTS: We identified 23 studies including 1,119 patients with predominantly squamous cell carcinoma (93%) and adenocarcinoma (3%) histology. The OS rates of patients receiving CRT-S were 65%, 36% and 20% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. The OS rates of patients receiving CRT were 30%, 11% and 10% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related fistula formation rates were 4% for CRT-S and 9% for CRT. Treatment-related mortality rates were 3% for both groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the interval of >2 months between CRT and surgery was associated with significantly improved OS rates at 1, 3 and 5 years. CONCLUSION: Chemoradiotherapy is an efficacious treatment approach for T4 esophageal cancer, with clinically acceptable rates of treatment-related fistula formation and mortality. Tri-modality approach with surgery can be considered in carefully selected patients. Our study findings should be interpreted with caution due to the lack of high-quality evidence. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Prophylactic irradiation of tracts in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

INTRODUCTION: The role of prophylactic irradiation of tracts (PIT) to prevent tumor seeding at the site of a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is controversial. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of PITs in preventing procedure tract metastases (PTM) after a chest wall procedure in MPM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched various databases from inception date to April 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PIT with no PIT in patients who had a chest wall procedure for MPM. We assessed the risk of bias of individual RCT using the RoB2 tool. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PTM. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model. We employed the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We identified five RCTs including 737 patients. Two RCTs had a low risk of bias. PIT was associated with a significant reduction in the odds of PTM (odd ratio, 0.55; 95 % confidence interval, 0.32 to 0.95; P-value = 0.03; I2 = 13 %; GRADE: moderate certainty). One RCT reported no difference in overall survival outcome with the use of PIT. None of the RCTs performed subgroup analyses. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results when limited to RCTs with low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: PIT significantly reduces the occurrence of PTM in patients with MPM who had a diagnostic or therapeutic chest wall procedure.

Applying the ASCO and European Society for Medical Oncology Value Frameworks to Nasopharyngeal Cancer Treatments: Is Adding Induction Chemotherapy or Adjuvant Chemotherapy to Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Worthwhile?

PURPOSE: To determine and compare the incremental clinical benefit (ICB) and costs of induction chemotherapy (IC) when added to concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), concurrent chemotherapy (CC) when added to radiotherapy (RT), and CC plus adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) when added to RT for locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer (LA-NPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported overall survival benefit with the use of IC, CC, and CC + AC in LA-NPC. We quantified the ICB using the ASCO and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) value frameworks. We calculated the incremental drug costs in US dollars using the lowest average wholesale price reported in the Lexicomp drug database. RESULTS: We identified three RCTs on IC, three RCTs on CC, and four RCTs on CC + AC. The ICB was judged to be grade A based on the ESMO framework. The ASCO Net Health Benefit score ranged from 17.43 to 57.39. The incremental drug costs ranged from $133.46 to $626.14. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean Net Health Benefit scores (39.37 for IC v 37.61 for CC v 33.98 for CC + AC; P = .89) and costs ($383 for IC v $253 for CC v $460 for CC + AC; P = .27) between the three approaches. There was no statistically significant correlation between ICB and costs. CONCLUSION: The magnitudes of ICB and incremental drug costs of adding of IC to CCRT, CC to RT, and CC + AC to RT for LA-NPC are not significantly different.