title: The quality of swallowing for patients with operable esophageal carcinoma: a randomized trial comparing surgery with radiotherapy.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Surgery is considered the standard treatment for operable esophageal carcinoma, although there is no compelling evidence that surgery can achieve better results than radiotherapy. There has previously been no direct randomized comparison of these two modalities with survival or disease specific outcome end points.
  
  
  METHODS
  Ninety-nine patients with operable squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus were randomly allocated to surgery or radiotherapy after stratification for tumor length (< or = or >5 cm). Those randomized to surgery underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with limited lymphadenectomy, whereas those in the radiotherapy arm received 50 gray in 28 fractions followed by a 15-gray boost to the primary tumor. Disease specific outcome was assessed for 4 subgroups: 1) disease specific symptoms, 2) physical symptoms, 3) ability to work, and 4) social/family interaction and global perception of disease specific outcome. The questionnaire was given prior to treatment and posttreatment at 3-month intervals for 1 year. Death was a secondary end point.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There was an overall improvement in the quality of swallowing in both treatment arms after treatment and with the passage of time. The swallowing status was better in the surgery arm than in the radiotherapy arm at 6 months after treatment (P = 0.03, Fisher's exact test). Logistic regression analysis showed randomization arm (P = 0.035), time since treatment (P = 0.003), and pretreatment swallowing status to be significant determinants of posttreatment swallowing status. Surgery was twice as likely to result in improvement in swallowing than radiotherapy after correction for time and pretreatment swallowing status. Overall survival was better in the surgery arm than in the radiotherapy arm (P = 0.002, log rank test) (OR = 2.74 with 95% confidence intervals 1.51-4.98; P < 0.009, Cox proportional hazards model).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Both surgery and radiotherapy can improve the quality of swallowing significantly for patients with operable esophageal carcinoma. Surgery is marginally superior to radiotherapy in improving the quality of swallowing. In this trial, survival in the surgery arm was significantly better than in the radiotherapy arm, although the small number of patients is a limitation.
authors: Department of Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
authors: R A
authors: RA
authors: Badwe
authors: V
authors: V
authors: Sharma
authors: M S
authors: MS
authors: Bhansali
authors: K A
authors: KA
authors: Dinshaw
authors: P K
authors: PK
authors: Patil
authors: N
authors: N
authors: Dalvi
authors: S G
authors: SG
authors: Rayabhattanavar
authors: P B
authors: PB
authors: Desai
mesh_terms: D002294:Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000532:radiotherapy* / Q000601:surgery*; D003679:Deglutition; D004938:Esophageal Neoplasms / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000532:radiotherapy* / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D016016:Proportional Hazards Models; D012044:Regression Analysis; D016019:Survival Analysis; D016896:Treatment Outcome