A prospective comparison of multidisciplinary treatment of oesophageal cancer with curative intent in a UK cancer network.

AIMS: Combined modality therapy (with chemotherapy+/-radiotherapy) has become a standard treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. However, there appears to be no compelling evidence for one treatment type or combination to suit all and at this time the clinical multi-disciplinary team (MDT) forms an important role in selecting optimal therapies for the individual. This prospective comparison in one cancer network, looks at the outcomes of this decision making process. METHODS: Over a five year period 1998-2003, data were prospectively collected on all 330 consecutive patients, referred to a tertiary specialised MDT for whom curative treatment was the planned intent. Patients were managed according to an agreed local protocol and allocated to receive one of 5 treatments: surgery alone (S), pre-operative chemotherapy (C+S), pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy (CRT+S), definitive chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) and radiotherapy alone (RT). RESULTS: The 2 and 5 year survival for all patients receiving potentially curative treatment were 49% and 26% respectively. With 2 and 5 year survival for S, CRT+S, C+S, CRT and RT being 53,21; 57,40; 37,27; 50,27; 23,0 months respectively. Of the surgical therapies, mortality was highest in the CRT+S group, versus C+S and S; 12.5%, 1.6%, 4.5% respectively (p=0.025). Non-surgical based therapies had more than double the incidence of local relapses compared to surgical based therapies; however the CRT group had an overall survival comparable with S alone. The commonest sites of distant relapse were liver (56%), lung (38%), bone (32%) and non-regional lymph nodes (24%). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that in patients who are deemed unfit for surgical intervention, definitive chemoradiotherapy remains a viable alternative; they also lend further support to selected case triple modality therapy. These areas should be further examined in the context of randomised controlled phase III trials.

Rotationplasty type BI versus type BIIIa in children under the age of ten years. Should the knee be preserved?

Type BI rotationplasty is currently indicated for children with tumours of the proximal femur whereas type BIIIa rotationplasty is reserved for those in which the entire femur has to be removed. Our aim was to compare these two types of rotationplasty and determine whether the knee should be preserved in children with tumours of the proximal femur. We compared the post-operative complications, oncological outcome, range of movement, Enneking score and radiographs of six children, who had undergone type BI rotationplasty with those of 12 who had undergone type BIIIa rotationplasty. Patients with type BI rotationplasty had a mean Enneking score of 21.6 compared with 24.4 in those with type BIIIa rotationplasty, and worse mean results in all of the parameters investigated. We conclude that type BI rotationplasty has a worse functional outcome and more complications than type BIIIa rotationplasty in children under the age of ten years.