Adjuvant chemotherapy and outcomes in esophageal carcinoma.

181 Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCRT) and surgery is standard treatment for esophageal cancer (EC) in the U.S. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) is unclear. Providers assign ACT inconsistently, and both its rationales and benefits have yet to be clearly defined. We sought to evaluate rationales and benefits for ACT in EC. Methods: This single institution retrospective review included 382 patients (pts) with EC who were treated at our tertiary referral center. All pts received NCRT and 46 received ACT. We reviewed medical records to obtain demographic and clinical information. Survival outcomes were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier method from date of death or last follow up and log-rank analysis. Case-control analysis was performed using a 2:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching algorithm, and included 113 pts, 41 of which received ACT. Results: 46 of the 382 pts in our study who received NCRT and surgery for EC also underwent ACT; two pts had single agent paclitaxel, 9 had 5-F/U and leucovorin, 7 had 5-F/U and cisplatin, 5 had carboplatin and paclitaxel, 2 had carboplatin alone, and the remainder had other combinations. Pts who received ACT were younger (med. age = 60.2 v 63.8 yr, p = 0.047), more likely to have adenocarcinoma (91.3% v 85.1%, p = 0.034), and less likely to have positive LNs on pre-treatment EUS (60.1% v 77.4%, p = 0.018). Pts with pCR were less likely to receive further treatment (6.5% v 45.8%, p < 0.001), and pts with R1 resection were more likely to do so (15.2% v 4.2%, p = 0.007). With case-control analysis, no variables were significantly different between the two groups. The median follow-up times for the entire cohort and case-control analysis were 7.98 years and 8.89 years, respectively. There were no significant differences in overall (p = 0.975) or recurrence-free (p = 0.824) survival associated with ACT in either analysis. Conclusions: The role of CT following NCRT and surgical resection in pts with locally advanced ECis unclear. In the largest series to date, our single institution retrospective review found no significant difference in survival in pts who received ACT and those who did not. Prospective studies are needed to further identify the rationales for delivery of ACT, and to investigate any potential survival benefits.