Objective:To analyze the local recurrence patterns after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) through image fusion, and to explore the risk factors of local recurrence and its relationships with dosimetric indices.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted for 209 thoracic ESCC patients who received radical CCRT in Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University during 2016-2019. For the patients diagnosed as the local recurrence of esophageal lesions, their CT images were fused with the original planning CT images using image registration software to identify the recurrence sites. Through 1∶1 propensity score matching (PSM) of the clinal data of patients with local recurrence (the recurrence group, nbefore = 81, nafter = 62) and those without local recurrence (the recurrence-free group, nbefore = 128, nafter=62), the dose and volume parameters of the treatment plans for the two groups were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox regression model to analyze the factors affecting the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results:All patients had 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates of 80.9%, 42.6%, and 33.0%, respectively, 1-, 3-, and 5-year PFS rates of 67.9%, 34.0%, and 27.9%, respectively, and 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS rates of 71.3%, 39.2%, and 30.5%, respectively. T stage, N stage, and radiation dose were independent prognostic factors for the OS, PFS, and RFS ( HR = 1.42-1.87, P < 0.05) of the patients, respectively. Among 68 patients with local recurrence, 62 cases (91.2%) suffered recurrence within the gross tumor volume (GTV). The dose and volume parameters of patients with local recurrence, such as GTV- D95%, clinical target volume (CTV)- D95%, GTV- D50%, CTV- D50%, and planning target volume (PTV)- D50%, GTV- V60, CTV- V60, and PTV- V60, were significantly lower than those of patients free from the local recurrence ( t=1.90-2.15, P < 0.05). Conclusions:Local recurrence of patients with thoracic ESCC after radical CCRT occurs mainly within the GTV. Increasing radiation doses may contribute to their survival benefits. The D50% for each target volume in the radiotherapy plan may be related to local recurrence, and it is necessary to conduct further research.

Objective:To analyze whether involved-field irradiation (IFI) was associated with improved survival and reduced treatment-related adverse events compared with elective nodal irradiation (ENI) in Chinese patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving radiotherapy.Methods:Literature review was conducted from CNKI, Wanfang Data, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central databases (until July 31, 2022). Relevant data were collected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) rate and treatment-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS) rate and local control rate (LCR). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The quality of the results was assessed by using the meta analysis of Evidence Evaluation and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methods.Results:A total of 7 articles with 918 patients were included of which 465 received IFI and 453 received ENI. The 1-, 2-, 3-and 5-year OS rates in the IFI group were not significantly different from those in the ENI group (1-year OS rate: RR=1.00, 95% CI=0.94-1.07, P=0.97, high certainty; 2-year OS rate: RR=1.01, 95% CI=0.90-1.13, P=0.90, high certainty; 3-year OS rate: RR=0.86, 95% CI=0.71-1.05, P=0.14, high certainty; 5-year OS rate: RR=0.76, 95% CI=0.42-1.37, P=0.36, low certainty). In the IFI group, patients with ≥grade 2 acute radiation esophagitis ( RR=0.71, 95% CI=0.58-0.87, P=0.001, high certainty), ≥grade 3 acute radiation esophagitis ( RR=0.39, 95% CI=0.24-0.64, P<0.001, high certainty) and ≥grade 2 acute radiation pneumonitis ( RR=0.72, 95% CI=0.52-0.99, P=0.04, high certainty) were significantly lower compared with those in the ENI group. However, no significant differences were observed in the incidence of ≥grade 3 late radiation esophagitis, ≥grade 3 acute radiation pneumonitis and ≥grade 3 late radiation pneumonitis between two groups. No significant differences were noted in the 1-, 2-, 3-PFS rates and LCR between two groups. Conclusions:For Chinese patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, IFI and ENI yield similar efficacy in terms of OS, PFS and LCR. However, IFI has a lower incidence of ≥grade 2 acute radiation esophagitis, ≥grade 3 acute radiation esophagitis and ≥grade 2 acute radiation pneumonitis than ENI.

Objective:To investigate the prognostic value of Onodera's prognostic nutrition index (PNI) before treatment in patients with cervical and upper thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CUTESCC) undergoing definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) and its predictive value in the occurrence of ≥ grade 2 radiation esophagitis (RE).Methods:The data of 163 CUTESCC patients eligible for inclusion criteria admitted to the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University from January 2012 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to calculate the best cut-off value of PNI for predicting the prognosis of patients. The prognosis of patients was analyzed by univariate and Cox multivariate analyses. Logistics binary regression model was adopted to analyze the risk factors of ≥ grade 2 RE in univariate and multivariate analyses. The significant factors in logistic multivariate analysis were used to construct nomogram for predicting ≥ grade 2 RE.Results:The optimal cut-off value of PNI was 48.57 [area under the curve (AUC): 0.653, P<0.001]. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 26.1 and 19.4 months, respectively. The OS ( χ2=6.900, P=0.009) and PFS ( χ2=9.902, P=0.003) of patients in the PNI ≥ 48.57 group ( n=47) were significantly better than those in the PNI < 48.57 group ( n=116). Cox multivariate analysis showed that cTNM stage and PNI were the independent predictors of OS ( HR=1.513, 95% CI: 1.193-1.920, P=0.001; HR=1.807, 95% CI: 1.164-2.807, P=0.008) and PFS ( HR=1.595, 95% CI: 1.247-2.039, P<0.001; HR=2.260, 95% CI: 1.439-3.550, P<0.001). Short-term efficacy was another independent index affecting PFS ( HR=2.072, 95% CI: 1.072-4.003, P=0.030). Logistic multivariate analysis showed that the maximum transverse diameter of the lesion ( OR=3.026, 95% CI: 1.266-7.229, P=0.013), gross tumor volume (GTV) ( OR=3.456, 95% CI: 1.373-8.699, P=0.008), prescription dose ( OR=3.124, 95% CI: 1.346-7.246, P=0.009) and PNI ( OR=2.072, 95% CI: 1.072-4.003, P=0.030) were the independent factors affecting the occurrence of ≥ grade 2 RE. These four indicators were included in the nomogram model, and ROC curve analysis showed that the model could properly predict the occurrence of ≥ grade 2 RE (AUC=0.686, 95% CI: 0.585-0.787). The calibration curve indicated that the actually observed values were in good agreement with the predicted RE. Decision curve analysis (DCA) demonstrated satisfactory nomogram positive net returns in most threshold probabilities. Conclusions:PNI before treatment is an independent prognostic factor for patients with CUTESCC who received definitive chemoradiotherapy. The maximum transverse diameter of the lesion, GTV, prescription dose and PNI are the risk factors for ≥ grade 2 RE in this cohort. Establishing a prediction model including these factors has greater predictive value.

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and prognostic factors of radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy as the first-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA/M ESCC).Methods:A single-center, retrospective analysis was conducted for the recent efficacy, survival, prognostic factors, post-treatment failure modes, and treatment-related adverse reactions of 57 LA/M ESCC patients eligible for enrollment.Results:The entire group of patients had 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival (OS) of 86.0%, 57.5%, and 53.9%, respectively and 1-, 2-, and 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) of 61.4%, 31.0%, and 31.0%, respectively. The median OS was not reached, and the median PFS was 15.0 (95% CI: 10.77-19.23) months. These patients had an overall response rate (ORR) of 80.7% (46/57) and a disease control rate (DCR) of 94.7% (54/57). As indicated by the result of the multivariate analysis, the independent prognostic factors affecting the OS of the patients included their age, clinical stage, number of immunotherapy cycles, and recent efficacy ( HR = 0.25, 2.58, 0.35, 4.05, P < 0.05), and the independent factors influencing the PFS of the patients included their clinical stage and recent efficacy ( HR = 2.27, 1.97, P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the effects of irradiation ranges and the combination modes of immunologic drugs and chemoradiotherapy on both OS and PFS of the patients ( P > 0.05). A total of 32 patients suffered post-treatment failure. After the second treatment, they had 1- and 2-year OS of 55.7% and 25.3%, respectively, with median OS of 14.0 (95% CI: 5.17-22.83) months. A total of 26 cases experienced treatment-associated adverse reactions of grades 2 or higher during and after treatment. Conclusions:The combination of radiotherapy and immunotherapy is effective and safe as the first-line treatment for LA/M ESCC patients. The post-treatment failure modes still include local recurrence and distant metastasis. Therefore, such combination merits further investigation.

Objective:To investigate the relationship between Onodera′s prognostic nutritional index (PNI) and prognosis of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after definitive chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy, aiming to provide a convenient, effective and accurate predictive indicator for evaluating the long-term survival of patients after treatment.Methods:Clinical data of 231 ESCC patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy at the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University from 2013 to 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. The PNI values of each patient at different radiotherapy periods were calculated and the ROC curve was used to determine the optimal cutoff value of PNI before radiotherapy, 231 patients were divided into the better-nourishment group ( n=86) and worse-nourishment group ( n=145). Kaplan- Meier method was used for survival analysis. Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to analyze the relationship between different nutritional status and prognosis. The short-term clinical efficacy and incidence of acute toxicities were statistically compared between two groups. Results:The mean values of PNI before, at week 3, week 6 and 1 month after radiotherapy were48.68±5.08, 39.68±4.87, 43.74±4.89 and48.31±4.92, respectively. The optimal cutoff value of pretreatment PNI was 49.25, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.655, the sensitivity and specificity were 68.6% and 60.9%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates in the better-nourishment group (PNI≥49.25) were 36.0% and 31.3%, significantly better than 19.3% and 18.6% in the worse-nourishment group (PNI<49.25)( P=0.001, P=0.039). Multivariate analysis showed PNI before the therapy was an independent prognostic factor for OS ( P=0.021). Stratified analysis demonstrated that Stage Ⅰ/Ⅱ and concurrent chemotherapy patients in the better-nourishment group all obtained significantly better OS than their counterparts in the worse-nourishment group ( P=0.007, P=0.004). In addition, the objective response rate in the better-nourishment group was significantly higher than that in the worse-nourishment group ( P=0.047), whereas the incidence of ≥3 grade radiation esophagitis was lower than that in the worse-nourishment group ( P=0.060). Conclusions:Pretreatment PNI is a convenient and reliable indicator for predicting the long-term survival of ESCC patients after definitive chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy. Patients with higher PNI have relatively better prognosis and radiotherapy tolerance, especially in those with early stage or concurrent chemotherapy.

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy of target area of radical radiotherapy for inoperable esophageal carcinoma patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).Methods:A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 564 Ⅰ-Ⅳ non-surgical esophageal cancer who received definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy alone in our hospital from 2006 to 2015. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to identify well-balanced patients for comparison. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate local-regional failure-free survival (LRFFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) rates and univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were tested by COX proportional hazard model.Results:The last follow-up time was December 2018, the median follow-up time was 99.7 (95% CI: 77.5-122.1) months. Follow-up rate was 95.9%. For the 564 patients, the 1-, 3-, 5- year LRFFS were 61.5%, 26.5%, 14.3%, PFS were 56.7%, 25.0%, 13.4%, OS were 73.0%, 31.1%, 16.8%. After PSM, for the elective-nodal irradiation (ENI) ( n=141) and involved-nodal irradiation (IFI) ( n=141) groups, the 1-, 3-, 5- year LRFFS were 68.8%, 34.2%, 19.1% vs. 65.2%, 32.1%, 17.9% ( P>0.05), PFS were 63.1%, 31.0%, 16.6% vs. 60.3%, 29.3%, 16.6% ( P>0.05), OS were 80.9%, 41.5%, 23.3% vs. 80.1%, 35.0%, 20.2% ( P>0.05). In multivariate analysis, tumor volume≤37 cm 3 and Ⅰ+ Ⅱ stage were independent factors for LRFFS, PFS and OS. Subgroup analysis showed that there were no significant differences in the survival rates between the ENI group and IFI group ( P>0.05). Comparing to the IFI group, ENI reduced the local-regional failure rate ( P=0.048). Conclusions:Using intensity-modulated radiation therapy alone for inoperable esophageal carcinoma, ENI can significantly reduce the local-regional failure rate, but not improve survival rates compared to the IFI.

Objective:To evaluate the effects of different irradiation ranges in definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) combined with chemotherapy on the survival of esophageal cancer patients.Methods:Clinical data of 360 esophageal cancer patients who received definitive chemoradiotherapy in the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University from 2006 to 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 131 patients received elective nodal irradiation (ENI) and 229 patients underwent involved-field irradiation (IFI). Platinum-based chemotherapy was adopted. The overall survival (OS) rate was analyzed by Kaplan- Meier method and Logrank test. Results:Until the final follow-up at the end of December 2018, the follow-up rate was 96%. The median follow-up time was 64 months (95% CI: 53-76). The median survival time was 24 months (95% CI: 20-28). The 1-, 3-, 5-year OS rates were 76.1%, 38.7% and 21.0%, respectively. After propensity score matching, the 1-, 3-, 5-year OS rates were 83.9%, 48.6%, 26.8% vs. 74.0%, 33.8%, 17.5% between the ENI ( n=131) and IFI groups ( n=131)( P=0.011), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that patients with male, aged≤66 years, cervical and upper-thoracic location, tumor length≤7 cm, tumor volume≤50 cm 3, T 1-3 stage, dosage>60 Gy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy obtained better OS rates in the ENI group than their counterparts in the IFI group (all P<0.05). In the ENI group, the total failure rate, locoregional failure rate and distant metastasis rate were significantly lower, whereas the incidence of ≥Grade Ⅲ myelosuppression was remarkably higher than those in the IFI group (all P<0.05). Conclusion:Compared with IFI, ENI can significantly improve the survival for patients with early-stage and cervical and upper-thoracic esophageal cancer receiving definitive IMRT combined with chemotherapy.

Objective:To explore the therapeutic efficacy and safety of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) and involved field irradiation (IFI) in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, screen the patients suitable to undergo ENI radiotherapy and provide evidences for individual treatment of esophageal cancer.Methods:A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 924 patients with esophageal cancer who received definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy in our hospital from January 2006 to December 2015. Among them, 272 patients received ENI and the other 652 patients received IFI. The clinicopathologic characteristics of 272 cases in ENI group and 652 cases in IFI group, who were recruited according to the balance of propensity score matching method, were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate 1-year, 3-years and 5-years local-regional failure-free survival (LRFFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates. The univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were also determined by Cox proportional hazard model and Long-rank test.Results:The clinicopathologic characteristics of these two group were not significantly different ( P>0.05). The median follow-up time was 85.9 months and the follow-up rate was 95.9%. The 1-year, 3-years, 5-years PFS rates of the ENI groups were 65.3%, 31.7%, 18.4%, respectively, higher than 54.0%, 20.9%, 12.7% of the IFI group ( P=0.001). The 1-year, 3-years, 5-years OS rates of the ENI groups were 79.0%, 43.7%, 24.9%, respectively, higher than 75.0%, 31.8%, 17.2% of the IFI group ( P=0.003). In multivariate analysis, the sex, tumor volume, N stage and radiation field were independent factors for PFS and OS ( P<0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with male, age≤66 year, cervical and upper-thoracic location, tumor length≤6 cm, T1-2 stage, N0-1 stage, Ⅰ-Ⅱ stage, tumor volume≤50 cm 3, dosage>60 Gy and≤2 cycles of chemotherapy in the ENI group had a better survival rate than those in the IFI group ( P<0.05). The total failure rate, local-regional failure rate in ENI group were significantly lower than those of IFI group ( P=0.001, P=0.004). The incidence of bone marrow depression≥ grade 2 and 3 in ENI group was higher than that of the IFI group ( P<0.05). However, the incidences of radioactive esophagitis≥ grade 3, radioactive pneumonia and late adverse reactions were not significantly different between these two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:Compared with IFI, ENI can significantly improve the long-term survival for young, early TN stage and cervical/upper-thoracic esophageal cancer patients underwent chemotherapy.

Objective:To explore the therapeutic efficacy and safety of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) and involved field irradiation (IFI) in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, screen the patients suitable to undergo ENI radiotherapy and provide evidences for individual treatment of esophageal cancer.Methods:A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 924 patients with esophageal cancer who received definitive intensity-modulated radiotherapy in our hospital from January 2006 to December 2015. Among them, 272 patients received ENI and the other 652 patients received IFI. The clinicopathologic characteristics of 272 cases in ENI group and 652 cases in IFI group, who were recruited according to the balance of propensity score matching method, were compared. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate 1-year, 3-years and 5-years local-regional failure-free survival (LRFFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates. The univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were also determined by Cox proportional hazard model and Long-rank test.Results:The clinicopathologic characteristics of these two group were not significantly different ( P>0.05). The median follow-up time was 85.9 months and the follow-up rate was 95.9%. The 1-year, 3-years, 5-years PFS rates of the ENI groups were 65.3%, 31.7%, 18.4%, respectively, higher than 54.0%, 20.9%, 12.7% of the IFI group ( P=0.001). The 1-year, 3-years, 5-years OS rates of the ENI groups were 79.0%, 43.7%, 24.9%, respectively, higher than 75.0%, 31.8%, 17.2% of the IFI group ( P=0.003). In multivariate analysis, the sex, tumor volume, N stage and radiation field were independent factors for PFS and OS ( P<0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with male, age≤66 year, cervical and upper-thoracic location, tumor length≤6 cm, T1-2 stage, N0-1 stage, Ⅰ-Ⅱ stage, tumor volume≤50 cm 3, dosage>60 Gy and≤2 cycles of chemotherapy in the ENI group had a better survival rate than those in the IFI group ( P<0.05). The total failure rate, local-regional failure rate in ENI group were significantly lower than those of IFI group ( P=0.001, P=0.004). The incidence of bone marrow depression≥ grade 2 and 3 in ENI group was higher than that of the IFI group ( P<0.05). However, the incidences of radioactive esophagitis≥ grade 3, radioactive pneumonia and late adverse reactions were not significantly different between these two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:Compared with IFI, ENI can significantly improve the long-term survival for young, early TN stage and cervical/upper-thoracic esophageal cancer patients underwent chemotherapy.

To establish the experts consensus on the management of delirium in critically ill patients.A special committee was set up by 15 experts from the Chinese Critical Hypothermia-Sedation Therapy Study Group.Each statement was assessed based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment,Development,and Evaluation) principle.Then the Delphi method was adopted by 36 experts to reassess all the statements.(1) Delirium is not only a mental change,but also a clinical syndrome with multiple pathophysiological changes.(2) Delirium is a form of disturbance of consciousness and a manifestation of abnormal brain function.(3) Pain is a common cause of delirium in critically ill patients.Analgesia can reduce the occurrence and development of delirium.(4) Anxiety or depression are important factors for delirium in critically ill patients.(5) The correlation between sedative and analgesic drugs and delirium is uncertain.(6) Pay attention to the relationship between delirium and withdrawal reactions.(7) Pay attention to the relationship between delirium and drug dependence/ withdrawal reactions.(8) Sleep disruption can induce delirium.(9) We should be vigilant against potential risk factors for persistent or recurrent delirium.(10) Critically illness related delirium can affect the diagnosis and treatment of primary diseases,and can also be alleviated with the improvement of primary diseases.(11) Acute change of consciousness and attention deficit are necessary for delirium diagnosis.(12) The combined assessment of confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit and intensive care delirium screening checklist can improve the sensitivity of delirium,especially subclinical delirium.(13) Early identification and intervention of subclinical delirium can reduce its risk of clinical delirium.(14) Daily assessment is helpful for early detection of delirium.(15) Hopoactive delirium and mixed delirium are common and should be emphasized.(16) Delirium may be accompanied by changes in electroencephalogram.Bedside electroencephalogram monitoring should be used in the ICU if conditions warrant.(17) Pay attention to differential diagnosis of delirium and dementia/depression.(18) Pay attention to the role of rapid delirium screening method in delirium management.(19) Assessment of the severity of delirium is an essential part of the diagnosis of delirium.(20) The key to the management of delirium is etiological treatment.(21) Improving environmental factors and making patient comfort can help reduce delirium.(22) Early exercise can reduce the incidence of delirium and shorten the duration of delirium.(23) Communication with patients should be emphasized and strengthened.Family members participation can help reduce the incidence of delirium and promote the recovery of delirium.(24) Pay attention to the role of sleep management in the prevention and treatment of delirium.(25) Dexmedetomidine can shorten the duration of hyperactive delirium or prevent delirium.(26) When using antipsychotics to treat delirium,we should be alert to its effect on the heart rhythm.(27) Delirium management should pay attention to brain functional exercise.(28) Compared with non-critically illness related delirium,the relief of critically illness related delirium will not accomplished at one stroke.(29) Multiple management strategies such as ABCDEF,eCASH and ESCAPE are helpful to prevent and treat delirium and improve the prognosis of critically ill patients.(30) Shortening the duration of delirium can reduce the occurrence of long-term cognitive impairment.(31) Multidisciplinary cooperation and continuous quality improvement can improve delirium management.Consensus can promote delirium management in critically ill patients,optimize analgesia and sedation therapy,and even affect prognosis.