Definitive radiotherapy has an affirmative role in treating non-operable esophageal cancer; however, the controversy between elective lymph node irradiation (ENI) and involved-field irradiation (IFI) still remains. To ascertain the benefits and disadvantages of the two radiation target volumes, we performed a meta-analysis with 7 related publications. According to our findings, patients treated with ENI and IFI had nearly identical 1, 2, and 3-year survival rates (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 1.004, p = 0.980, and pooled OR = 1.15, p = 0.594, and pooled OR = 0.918, p = 0.679, respectively). Likewise, no significant differences were detected in local recurrence rates (pooled OR = 1.04, p = 0.883), regional recurrence rates (pooled OR = 0.65, p = 0.555), and distant metastasis rates (pooled OR = 1.29, p = 0.309) between the two treatment groups. However, IFI could significantly decrease the incidences of acute radiation esophagitis (pooled OR = 2.30, p = 0.001) and late pneumonia (pooled OR = 2.52, p = 0.04) compared with ENI. This meta-analysis provides evidence that IFI is more feasible for non-operable esophageal cancer than ENI.
Keywords: Elective lymph node irradiation; Esophageal cancer; Involved-field irradiation; Meta-analysis; Pattern of failure.
© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.