Abstract
BACKGROUND: It remains unclear if patients with clinical stage T2 N0 (cT2 N0) esophageal cancer should be offered induction therapy vs surgical intervention alone. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of cT2 N0 patients undergoing induction therapy, followed by surgical resection, or resection alone, at the Johns Hopkins Hospital from 1989 to 2009. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare all-cause mortality in cT2 N0 patients who had resection alone vs those who had induction chemoradiation therapy, followed by resection. RESULTS: A study cohort of 69 patients was identified and divided into two groups: 55 patients (79.7%) received induction therapy and 14 (20.3%) did not. No statistically significant difference in 5-year survival rate was observed for the two groups: 49.5% for the resection-only group and 53.8% for the induction group. More than 50% of cT2 N0 patients were understaged. CONCLUSIONS: For cT2 N0 esophageal cancer patients, the benefit of neoadjuvant therapy is still unclear. Induction therapy for cT2 N0 did not translate into a statistically significant improvement in survival. However, due to the significant understaging of T2 N0 patients, we recommend neoadjuvant therapy to all cT2N0 patients before operation.