Evaluation of Clinical and Safety Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy Combined With Chemotherapy for Patients With Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Influence of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy-Chemotherapy on Perioperative Outcomes in Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the perioperative outcomes for patients who had locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) and chemotherapy versus a matched cohort of patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone.

METHODS

A single-center non-randomized phase 2 trial was undertaken with locally advanced (cT3-4 and/or N+) EAC, and 49 patients completed neoadjuvant avelumab + docetaxel, cisplatin, 5FU (DCF) and esophagectomy between February 2018 and February 2020. These patients were matched with contemporary patients (January 2018 to June 2020) who met the inclusion criteria but received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (NAC) with a comparable docetaxel-based therapy. The postoperative outcomes then were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

For this study, 99 patients with locally advanced EAC underwent esophagectomy and met the enrolment criteria. Of these patients, 50 received NAC alone and 49 received IO + NAC. Baseline characteristics such as age, gender, and clinical stage were comparable between the two groups. Operative approach and rate of minimally invasive esophagectomy (~ 60%) were similar in the two groups. For the NAC-alone and IO + NAC groups, the respective overall and major complication rates were similar between the two groups (50% vs. 51% [p = 0.91] and 20% vs. 26% [p = 0.44], respectively), with concordant rates for anastomotic leak (6 [12%] vs. 6 [12%]; p = 0.86) and respiratory complications (13 [26%] vs. 11 [22%]; p = 0.68). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of hospital length of stay or 30- and 90-day mortality rates.

CONCLUSION

The addition of immunotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma does not appear to alter perioperative short-term outcomes significantly after esophagectomy.

Impacts of tumor microenvironment during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

With the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), a better understanding of tumor microenvironment (TME) is becoming crucial in managing esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients. We investigated the survival impact of TME status and changes in patients with ESCC who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery (n = 264). We examined immunohistochemical status (CD4+, CD8+, CD20+, Foxp3+, HLA class-1+, CD204+, and programmed death ligand-1 [PD-L1+]) on 264 pre-NAC and 204 paired post-NAC specimens. Patients were classified by their pre- and post-NAC immune cell status and their changes following NAC. Our findings showed that pre-NAC TME status was not significantly associated with survival outcomes. In contrast, post-NAC TME status, such as low level of T cells, CD4+ T cells, and high PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS), were significantly associated with poor overall survival (OS). Notably, TME changes through NAC exerted significant survival impacts; patients with consistently low levels of T cells, low levels of CD4+ T cells, or high levels of PD-L1 (CPS) had very poor OS (3-year OS: 35.5%, 40.2%, and 33.3%, respectively). Tumor microenvironment changes of consistently low T cells, low CD4+ T cells, and high PD-L1 were independent predictors of poor OS in multivariate Cox hazards analyses, while factors indicating post-NAC status (T cells, CD4+, and PD-L1 [CPS]) alone were not. Therefore, we suggest that the consistently low T/high PD-L1 group could benefit from additional therapies, such as ICIs, and the importance of stratification by the TME, which has recently been recognized.

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy was associated with better short-term survival of patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The chemotherapy and immunotherapy combination is currently the primary strategy to treat metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIT) is being intensively investigated for treating locally advanced ESCC.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the efficacy and safety of NCIT and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) to treat locally advanced ESCC.

METHODS

We included 214 locally advanced ESCC patients who were administered neoadjuvant therapy from May 2014 to April 2022. The patients were grouped according to two neoadjuvant protocols (NCIT and NCRT) routinely used at our institution. Perioperative findings, pathological results, and survival data were compared between the two groups by conducting unmatched and 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analyses.

RESULTS

Following 1:1 PSM analysis of the confounders, 66 patients were allocated to each of the two groups. Time span between neoadjuvant therapy completion and esophagectomy was significantly longer after NCRT than that after NCIT (47.1 ± 13.2 days vs. 34.7 ± 8.8 days; p < 0.001). The NCIT group exhibited significantly greater number of harvested lymph nodes than the NCRT group (33.6 ± 12.7 vs. 21.7 ± 10.2; p < 0.001). The pathological complete response and major pathological response rates were similar between the two groups [NCIT group: 25.8% (17/66) and 62.1% (41/66), respectively; NCRT group: 27.3% (18/66) and 56.1% (37/66), respectively (p > 0.05)]. The overall incidence of pneumonia, anastomotic leakage, or postoperative complications did not differ significantly between the two groups. The 2-year cumulative overall survival rates and the 2-year disease-free survival rates of the NCIT and NCRT groups were 80.2% and 62.2%, respectively (p = 0.029) and 70.0% and 50.8%, respectively (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

In locally advanced ESCC patients, short-term survival after NCIT is superior to that after NCRT, with similar perioperative and pathological outcomes.

The safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy following laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a multicentre real-world clinical study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remain controversial.

METHODS

Patients with LAGC who received either nICT or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) at 3 tertiary referral teaching hospitals in China between January 2016 and October 2022 were analyzed. After propensity-score matching (PSM), comparing the radiological response, pathological response rate, perioperative outcomes, and early recurrence between the two groups.

RESULTS

After PSM, 585 patients were included, with 195 and 390 patients comprising the nICT and nCT groups, respectively. The nICT group exhibited a higher objective response rate (79.5% vs. 59.0%; P <0.001), pathological complete response rate (14.36% vs. 6.41%; P =0.002) and major pathological response rate (39.49% vs. 26.15%; P =0.001) compared with the nCT group. The incidence of surgical complications (17.44% vs. 16.15%, P =0.694) and the proportion of perioperative textbook outcomes (80.0% vs. 81.0%; P =0.767) were similar in both groups. The nICT group had a significantly lower proportion of early recurrence than the nCT group (29.7% vs. 40.8%; P =0.047). Furthermore, the multivariable logistic analysis revealed that immunotherapy was an independent protective factor against early recurrence [odds ratio 0.62 (95% CI 0.41-0.92); P =0.018]. No significant difference was found in neoadjuvant therapy drug toxicity between the two groups (51.79% vs. 45.38%; P =0.143).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with nCT, nICT is safe and effective, which significantly enhanced objective and pathological response rates and reduced the risk for early recurrence among patients with LAGC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov.

Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy improves clinical outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer by mediating anti-tumor immunity of CD8+ T (Tc1) and CD16+ NK cells

Background

Esophageal cancer (ESCA) is one of the most common tumors in the world, and treatment using neoadjuvant therapy (NT) based on radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy has still unsatisfactory results. Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) has also become an effective treatment strategy nowadays. However, its impact on the tumor microenvironment (TME) and regulatory mechanisms on T cells and NK cells needs to be further elucidated.

Methods

A total of 279 cases of ESCA who underwent surgery alone [non-neoadjuvant therapy (NONE)], neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), and NICT were collected, and their therapeutic effect and survival period were compared. Further, RNA sequencing combined with biological information was used to analyze the expression of immune-related genes. Immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) were used to verify the activation and infiltration status of CD8+ T and CD16+ NK cells, as well as the function and regulatory pathway of killing tumor cells.

Results

Patients with ESCA in the NICT group showed better clinical response, median survival, and 2-year survival rates (p < 0.05) compared with the NCT group. Our RNA sequencing data revealed that NICT could promote the expression of immune-related genes. The infiltration and activation of immune cells centered with CD8+ T cells were significantly enhanced. CD8+ T cells activated by PD-1 inhibitors secreted more IFN-γ and cytotoxic effector factor cells through the transcription factor of EOMES and TBX21. At the same time, activated CD8+ T cells mediated the CD16+ NK cell activation and secreted more IFN-γ to kill ESCA cells. In addition, the immunofluorescence co-staining results showed that more CD276+ tumor cells and CD16+ NK cells were existed in pre-NCT and pre-NICT group. However, CD276+ tumor cells were reduced significantly in the post-NICT group, while they still appeared in the post-NCT group, which means that CD16+ NK cells can recognize and kill CD276+ tumor cells after immune checkpoint blocker (ICB) treatment.

Conclusion

NICT can improve the therapeutic effect and survival period of resectable ESCA patients. NICT could promote the expression of immune-related genes and activate CD8+ T and CD16+ NK cells to secrete more IFN-γ to kill ESCA cells. It provides a theoretical basis and clinical evidence for its potential as an NT strategy in ESCA.

Association of the Scottish inflammatory prognostic score with treatment-related adverse events and prognosis in esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy

Background

To investigate the relationship between the Scottish inflammatory prognostic score (SIPS), treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and prognostication in patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

A retrospective investigation was carried out on 208 ESCC patients treated with NICT. The relationships between the SIPS, TRAEs, and prognosis [disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS)] were analyzed.

Results

The patients, comprising 62 (29.8%) cases of SIPS0, 103 (49.5%) cases of SIPS1, and 43 (20.7%) cases of SIPS2, were categorized into three groups based on SIPS. Among patients with SIPS2, the oldest age (P=0.006), lowest BMI (P=0.001), longest tumor length (P=0.001), most advanced ypT stage (P=0.014), and ypN stage (P<0.001) were identified. Pathological complete response (PCR) rates showed statistically significant variations between the three groups (SIPS0: 45.2%, SIPS1: 27.2%, SIPS2: 16.3%, P=0.004). All TRAEs were found in 63.9% (133 cases) of the cases, with serious TRAEs (grade 3-4) accounting for 13.9% (29 cases). TRAEs themselves were not linked with SIPS (P=0.668), while serious TRAEs had a significant correlation with SIPS (P=0.002). Multivariate logistic analysis showed that SIPS2 seemed to confer serious TRAEs [odds radio (OR)=4.044; 95% CI: 1.395-11.722; P=0.010]. For patients classified as SIPS0, 1, or 2, the 3-year DFS was 83.9%, 58.3%, and 39.5% (P<0.001). The 3-year OS for those with SIPS0, 1, or 2 was 88.7%, 72.8%, and 53.5%, respectively (P<0.001). SIPS was substantially correlated with DFS (but not with OS) and could be utilized as an independent predictor [SIPS2: hazard ratio (HR)=3.743, 95% CI: 1.770-7.914, P=0.001; SIPS1: HR=2.303, 95% CI: 1.149-4.616, P=0.019].

Conclusion

The SIPS is associated with serious TRAEs and can be used as a predictor of serious TRAEs in ESCC receiving NICT. SIPS may be employed for pretreatment assessment since it was found to be substantially correlated with DFS.

The Role of Immunotherapy in the Management of Esophageal Cancer in Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network advises neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for locally advanced cases of esophageal cancer. The role of immunotherapy in this context is under heavy investigation.

METHODS

Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2019. Three groups were generated as follows: (a) no immunotherapy, (b) neoadjuvant immunotherapy, and (c) adjuvant immunotherapy. Overall survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard analysis, adjusting for previously described risk factors for mortality.

RESULTS

Of the total 14,244 patients diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation, 14,065 patients did not receive immunotherapy, 110 received neoadjuvant immunotherapy, and 69 received adjuvant immunotherapy. When adjusting for established risk factors, adjuvant immunotherapy was associated with significantly improved survival compared to no immunotherapy and neoadjuvant immunotherapy during a median follow-up period of 35.2 months. No difference was noted among patients who received no immunotherapy vs. neoadjuvant immunotherapy in the same model.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis of the NCDB, receiving adjuvant immunotherapy offered a significant survival advantage compared to no immunotherapy and neoadjuvant immunotherapy in the treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma. The addition of neoadjuvant immunotherapy to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation did not improve survival in this cohort. Further studies are warranted to investigate the long-term outcomes of immunotherapy in esophageal cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without camrelizumab in resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: the randomized phase 3 ESCORT-NEO/NCCES01 trial

Recent single-arm studies involving neoadjuvant camrelizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, plus chemotherapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESCC) have shown promising results. This multicenter, randomized, open-label phase 3 trial aimed to further assess the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant camrelizumab, compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. A total of 391 patients with resectable thoracic LA-ESCC (T1b-3N1-3M0 or T3N0M0) were stratified by clinical stage (I/II, III or IVA) and randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to undergo two cycles of neoadjuvant therapy. Treatments included camrelizumab, albumin-bound paclitaxel and cisplatin (Cam+nab-TP group; n = 132); camrelizumab, paclitaxel and cisplatin (Cam+TP group; n = 130); and paclitaxel with cisplatin (TP group; n = 129), followed by surgical resection. Both the Cam+nab-TP and Cam+TP groups also received adjuvant camrelizumab. The dual primary endpoints were the rate of pathological complete response (pCR), as evaluated by a blind independent review committee, and event-free survival (EFS), as assessed by investigators. This study reports the final analysis of pCR rates. In the intention-to-treat population, the Cam+nab-TP and Cam+TP groups exhibited significantly higher pCR rates of 28.0% and 15.4%, respectively, compared to 4.7% in the TP group (Cam+nab-TP versus TP: difference 23.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.1-32.0, P < 0.0001; Cam+TP versus TP: difference 10.9%, 95% CI 3.7-18.1, P = 0.0034). The study met its primary endpoint of pCR; however, EFS is not yet mature. The incidence of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events during neoadjuvant treatment was 34.1% for the Cam+nab-TP group, 29.2% for the Cam+TP group and 28.8% for the TP group; the postoperative complication rates were 34.2%, 38.8% and 32.0%, respectively. Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated superior pCR rates compared to chemotherapy alone for LA-ESCC, with a tolerable safety profile. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier: ChiCTR2000040034 .

Immunotherapy for Resectable Locally Advanced Esophageal Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The current standard of care for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy with surgical resection; however, disease-free survival in these patients remains poor. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved for adjuvant treatment of locally advanced esophageal and GEJ cancers, but their benefit in the perioperative and neoadjuvant settings remains under investigation.

METHODS

We used the PubMed online database to conduct a literature search to identify studies that investigated immunotherapy for locally advanced esophageal and GEJ carcinoma. A review of ClinicalTrials.gov yielded a list of ongoing trials.

RESULTS

Adjuvant nivolumab for residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery is the only approved immunotherapy regimen for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Early-phase trials investigating the addition of neoadjuvant or perioperative ICIs to standard-of-care multimodality approaches have observed pathologic complete response rates as high as 60%. Response rates are highest for ICIs plus chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and dual checkpoint inhibition in mismatch repair-deficient adenocarcinomas. Safety profiles are acceptable, with a pooled adverse event rate of 27%. Surgical morbidity and mortality with immunotherapy are similar to historical controls with no immunotherapy, and R0 resection rates are high. When reported, disease-free survival among patients treated with perioperative immunotherapy is promising.

CONCLUSIONS

Outside of clinical trials, immunotherapy for resectable esophageal carcinoma is limited to the adjuvant setting. Phase III trials investigating neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy are now underway and will provide much-needed data on survival that may ultimately lead to practice-changing recommendations.

A prospective single-center, single-arm, open-label, phase II study of sintilimab and anlotinib combined with chemotherapy in neoadjuvant treatment of resectable esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Antiangiogenic treatment and immunochemotherapy effectively treat patients with advanced esophageal cancer. However, there remains a dearth of studies concerning neoadjuvant therapy for resectable esophageal cancer.

METHODS

The study focused on patients with T2-4NxM0 resectable esophageal carcinoma. Neoadjuvant treatment involved administering anlotinib (10 mg orally, once a day, 2 weeks on and 1 week off) for antiangiogenesis and sintilimab (200 mg) and chemotherapy for three cycles. Surgical treatment was performed 4-6 weeks after the last chemotherapy cycle was completed. The primary endpoints assessed were pathological complete response (pCR) and safety.

RESULTS

Out of the 34 screened patients, 17 were successfully enrolled in the study, and 14 completed the entire treatment process. The pCR was 35.3% (6/17). However, two patients experienced mortality. The occurring rate of grade 3 or higher complications after the surgery was 78.6% (11/14) according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Specifically, anastomotic leakage was observed in 57.1% (8/14) of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the current regimen demonstrated improved pCR. However, it did not show significant improvement compared to immunochemotherapy. It is essential to exercise caution when using this treatment approach in patients with esophageal cancer as it might increase postoperative complications, especially anastomotic leakage.

Perioperative outcomes and survival after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the difference in perioperative outcomes and prognosis between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS

The patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were identified from a prospectively maintained database at Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University between January 2018 and March 2022. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the 2 groups.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patient pairs were enrolled in the final analysis. The complete pathological response rate (20.2% vs 29.0%, P = .140) was similar in the 2 groups, whereas the lower major pathological response rate (44.4% vs 61.3%, P = .011) was observed in the neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy group. Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy was associated with a lower rate of adverse events (42.7% vs 55.6%, P = .047) without additional postoperative complications (38.7% vs 35.5%, P = .693). The neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy group had lower distant metastasis (6.5% vs 16.1%, P = .027) and overall recurrence (11.3% vs 23.4%, P = .019) in the postoperative 1 year. Also, neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy was associated with better progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32-0.77; P = .002). Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (univariable: hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.82; P = .003; multivariable: hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.29-0.65; P < .001) was one of the independent prognostic factors for progression-free survival. The 2 groups had similar overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.36-1.09; P = .094) at the latest follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study showed that neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy was safe and effective for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Further verification is needed in randomized controlled trials.

Cell Membrane Hybrid Lipid Nanovesicles Enhance Innate Immunity for Synergistic Immunotherapy by Promoting Immunogenic Cell Death and cGAS Activation

Immunotherapy shows great therapeutic potential for long-term protection against tumor relapse and metastasis. Innate immune sensors, such as cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) and stimulator of interferon genes (STING), dissolve DNA and induce type I interferon. Through activation of the cGAS/STING pathway, chemotherapy drugs and reversine (REV) may provide synergetic anti-tumor effects. Here, we prepared drug-loaded cell membrane hybrid lipid nanovesicles (LEVs) (designated LEV@DOX@REV) by fusion of cell membranes, phospholipids, doxorubicin (DOX), and REV, to realize accurate delivery to tumors and chemo-immunotherapy. The cell membranes of LEVs confer "homing" abilities. DOX can induce immunogenic cell death as a result of its specific immunomodulatory effects, which promotes the maturation of immune cells and improves the microenvironment of the immune system. REV is proven to efficiently activate cGAS/STING signaling, thereby enhancing the immune system. The antitumor efficacy of LEV@DOX@REV was evaluated in a 4T1 subcutaneous tumor xenograft model, a distant metastatic tumor model, and a liver metastatic tumor model. LEV@DOX@REV facilitated the infiltration of cytotoxic T lymphocytes within tumors, increased the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines, and modified the tumor microenvironment. In conclusion, LEV@DOX@REV displayed favorable antitumor effects and extended the survival of tumor-bearing mice. We therefore successfully developed nanoparticles capable of enhancing immune activation that have potential therapeutic applications for cancer immunotherapy.

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy followed by robot esophagectomy has no effect on short-term results compared with surgery alone

BACKGROUND

To determine the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCI).

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent RAMIE between January 2020 and June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The oncological and operative outcomes of the NCI and surgery-only (S) groups were compared by both unmatched and 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patients with ESCC who underwent three-incision RAMIE were included in this study (143 patients in the S group and 58 patients in the NCI group). Of the 58 patients who underwent NCI, a pathologically complete response (pCR) (ypT0N0) was identified in 14 (24.1%) patients. The patients in the NCI group were younger than those in the S group (p = 0.017), and had more advanced cT (p < 0.001) and cN stage diseases (p = 0.002). After 1:1 PSM of the confounders, 55 patients were allocated to each of the NCI and S groups. No significant differences were found in oncological and operative results, including surgical blood loss, operative time, and lymph node harvest (all p > 0.05). However, the NCI group exhibited a lower rate of pulmonary complications than the S group (3.6% vs. 14.5%, p = 0.047). No significant difference between the groups was found for other complications (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

These findings indicate that NCI could result in a high pCR rate without increased complications in locally advanced ESCC. RAMIE is safe and feasible in patients with ESCC after NCI.

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Data from literature review and a real-world analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (NCIT) for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is supported by increasing data, but the sample size is limited, and the findings are not completely consistent. We conducted a real-world study and a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NCIT in locally advanced ESCC.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed the outcomes of patients with locally advanced ESCC who completed NICT and subsequent esophagectomy at our hospital between January 2019 and December 2022, including pathological complete response (pCR) rate, major pathological response (MPR) rate, 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates, disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), 1-year recurrence rate, R0 resection rate and adverse events. Moreover, a meta-analysis of 27 published literatures was also conducted for comparison.

RESULTS

In the analysis, 128 patients were studied, with 25% achieving pCR, 46.1% MPR, and 99.2% R0 resection. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 91.41% (95% CI: 85.15%-95.63%), 75.00% (95% CI: 66.58%-82.23%) and 64.84% (95% CI: 55.91%-73.07%).ORR and DCR were 31.2% (95% CI: 23.31-39.99) and 64.1% (95% CI: 55.15%-72.38%), and the 1-year recurrence rate was 26.7% (95% CI: 22.5%-38.1%). Treatment-related events occurred in 96.1% but were acceptable. In a meta-analysis of 27 studies with 1734 patients, pooled rates for pCR, MPR, ORR, DCR, and R0 resection were 29%, 52%, 71%, 97%, and 98%, respectively, with a 1-year recurrence rate of 12%.

CONCLUSION

NCIT is safe and provides potential survival benefits for patients with locally advanced ESCC. However, randomized phase 3 trial data is still needed.

Lymphatic endothelial cell-mediated accumulation of CD177+Treg cells suppresses antitumor immunity in human esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Regulatory T (Treg) cells are critical in shaping an immunosuppressive microenvironment to favor tumor progression and resistance to therapies. However, the heterogeneity and function of Treg cells in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remain underexplored. We identified CD177 as a tumor-infiltrating Treg cell marker in ESCC. Interestingly, expression levels of CD177 and PD-1 were mutually exclusive in tumor Treg cells. CD177+ Treg cells expressed high levels of IL35, in association with CD8+ T cell exhaustion, whereas PD-1+ Treg cells expressed high levels of IL10. Pan-cancer analysis revealed that CD177+ Treg cells display increased clonal expansion compared to PD-1+ and double-negative (DN) Treg cells, and CD177+ and PD-1+ Treg cells develop from the same DN Treg cell origin. Importantly, we found CD177+ Treg cell infiltration to be associated with poor overall survival and poor response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in ESCC patients. Finally, we found that lymphatic endothelial cells are associated with CD177+ Treg cell accumulation in ESCC tumors, which are also decreased after anti-PD-1 immunotherapy plus chemotherapy. Our work identifies CD177+ Treg cell as a tumor-specific Treg cell subset and highlights their potential value as a prognostic marker of survival and response to immunotherapy and a therapeutic target in ESCC.

Neoadjuvant therapy for non-small cell lung cancer and esophageal cancer

As the major malignant tumors in the chest, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and esophageal cancer (EC) bring huge health burden to human beings worldwide. Currently, surgery is still the mainstay for comprehensive treatment for NSCLC and EC, but the prognosis is still poor as the results of cancer recurrence and distant metastasis. Neoadjuvant therapy refers to a single or combined treatment before surgery, aiming to improve the therapeutic effects of the traditional therapies. Unfortunately, the clinical outcomes and effects of neoadjuvant therapy are still controversial due to its apparent advantages and disadvantages, and different patients may respond differentially to the same scheme of neoadjuvant therapy, which makes it urgent and necessary to develop personalized scheme of neoadjuvant therapy for different individuals. Therefore, this review summarizes the novel schemes and strategies of neoadjuvant therapy, which may help to significantly improve of life quality of patients suffering from chest-related malignancies.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy as second-line therapy for advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Background

Recently, several novel programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors have been approved for second-line treating advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), including camrelizumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, sintilimab and tislelizumab. However, the optimal treatment regimen remained ambiguous.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy, safety and economy of available PD-1 inhibitors to determine the optimal treatment from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

Design

A systematic review and economic evaluation.

Data sources and methods

A systematic review was undertaken utilizing PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase and Scopus databases to identify eligible studies until 31 August 2023. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs). We also developed a partitioned survival model at 3-week intervals based on five clinical trials to predict long-term costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for various treatment options. Direct medical costs and utility values were obtained from public drug bidding databases, clinical trials or published literature. The parameter uncertainties within the model were determined via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

Five randomized controlled trials involving 2837 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with other treatments examined, camrelizumab provided the best PFS benefits [hazard ratio (HR): 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-0.86], and pembrolizumab provided the best OS benefits (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37-0.82). Nivolumab caused a relatively lower incidence of treatment-related AEs (HR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.05-0.20) and grade 3-5 AEs (HR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.21) than other immunotherapy regimens. In the economic evaluation, average 10-year costs ranged from $5,433.86 (chemotherapy) to $50,617.95 (nivolumab) and mean QALYs ranged from 0.55 (chemotherapy) to 0.82 (camrelizumab). Pembrolizumab was eliminated because of dominance. Of the remaining strategies, when the willingness-to-pay thresholds were 1, 2 and 3 times GDP per capita in 2022, sintilimab, tislelizumab and camrelizumab were the most cost-effective treatment options, respectively.

Conclusion

Sintilimab might be the optimal treatment alternative for second-line therapy of advanced OSCC in China, followed by tislelizumab and camrelizumab.

Trial registration

This study has been registered on the PROSPERO database with the registration number CRD42023495204.

Induction immunotherapy plus chemotherapy followed by definitive chemoradiation therapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity-score matched study

BACKGROUND

For patients with unresectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is the current standard treatment; however, the prognosis remains poor. Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy has demonstrated improved survival outcomes in advanced ESCC. Nevertheless, there is a lack of reports on the role of induction immunotherapy plus chemotherapy prior to CCRT for unresectable locally advanced ESCC. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of induction immunotherapy plus chemotherapy followed by definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable locally advanced ESCC.

METHODS

This study retrospectively collected clinical data of patients diagnosed with locally advanced ESCC who were treated with radical CCRT between 2017 and 2021 at our institution. The patients were divided into two groups: an induction immunotherapy plus chemotherapy group (induction IC group) or a CCRT group. To assess progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), we employed the Kaplan-Meier method after conducting propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients with unresectable locally advanced ESCC were included in this study, with 61 (45.26%) patients in the induction IC group and 71 (54.74%) patients in the CCRT group. With a median follow-up of 37.0 months, median PFS and OS were 25.2 and 39.2 months, respectively. The patients in the induction IC group exhibited a significant improvement in PFS and OS in comparison with those in the CCRT group (median PFS: not reached [NR] versus 15.9 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.526 [95%CI 0.325-0.851], P = 0.0077; median OS: NR versus 25.2 months, HR 0.412 [95%CI 0.236-0.719], P = 0.0012). After PSM (50 pairs), both PFS and OS remained superior in the induction IC group compared to the CCRT group (HR 0.490 [95%CI 0.280-0.858], P = 0.011; HR 0.454 [95%CI 0.246-0.837], P = 0.0093), with 2-year PFS rates of 67.6 and 42.0%, and the 2-year OS rates of 74.6 and 52.0%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that lower tumor stage, concurrent chemotherapy using double agents, and induction immunotherapy plus chemotherapy before CCRT were associated with better prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed for the first time that induction immunotherapy plus chemotherapy followed by CCRT for unresectable locally advanced ESCC provided a survival benefit with manageable safety profile. More prospective clinical studies should be warranted.

Multi-omics approaches for biomarker discovery in predicting the response of esophageal cancer to neoadjuvant therapy: A multidimensional perspective

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) followed by surgery has been established as the standard treatment strategy for operable locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC). However, achieving pathologic complete response (pCR) or near pCR to NCRT is significantly associated with a considerable improvement in survival outcomes, while pCR patients may help organ preservation for patients by active surveillance to avoid planned surgery. Thus, there is an urgent need for improved biomarkers to predict EC chemoradiation response in research and clinical settings. Advances in multiple high-throughput technologies such as next-generation sequencing have facilitated the discovery of novel predictive biomarkers, specifically based on multi-omics data, including genomic/transcriptomic sequencings and proteomic/metabolomic mass spectra. The application of multi-omics data has shown the benefits in improving the understanding of underlying mechanisms of NCRT sensitivity/resistance in EC. Particularly, the prominent development of artificial intelligence (AI) has introduced a new direction in cancer research. The integration of multi-omics data has significantly advanced our knowledge of the disease and enabled the identification of valuable biomarkers for predicting treatment response from diverse dimension levels, especially with rapid advances in biotechnological and AI methodologies. Herein, we summarize the current status of research on the use of multi-omics technologies in predicting NCRT response for EC patients. Current limitations, challenges, and future perspectives of these multi-omics platforms will be addressed to assist in experimental designs and clinical use for further integrated analysis.

Study on the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy regimen for III-IVA esophageal squamous cell carcinoma post-surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is still controversial, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy is a hot topic of current research. We investigated the recent efficacy and surgical safety of patients with III-IVA esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant regimen of paclitaxel + cisplatin/nedaplatin/carboplatin + sindilizumab, to provide a theoretical basis for evaluating the feasibility of surgery after neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with stage III-IVA esophageal squamous cell carcinoma admitted from January 2022 to April 2023 at our hospital were collected for retrospective analysis. The patients were divided into the neoadjuvant combination surgery group (34 patients with the regimen of paclitaxel + cisplatin/nedaplatin/carboplatin + sintilimab two/three cycles of preoperative neoadjuvant therapy) and surgery-only group (36 patients). Statistical analysis was performed to compare the differences between both groups particularly for intraoperative bleeding, operative time, incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, laryngeal recurrent nerve injury, thoracic duct injury, anastomotic fistula, and postoperative hospital days. Additionally, the pCR/MPR rates of the neoadjuvant group were analysed.

RESULTS

Significant differences were present in the clinical and pathological staging before and after neoadjuvant treatment (P ≤ 0.001). The neoadjuvant group had a pCR rate of 26.47% and an ORR rate of 88.23%. No significant differences were discovered in R0 resection rate between both groups, as well as intraoperative bleeding, operative time, intraoperative laryngeal recurrent nerve injury rate, thoracic duct injury rate, postoperative anastomosis incidence, postoperative hospital days, and postoperative lung infection incidence (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The neoadjuvant immune combination chemotherapy regimen had considerable tumor regression and pathological remission benefits, without reducing the safety of surgery, possibly presenting as a new treatment plan.

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, the optimal treatment for neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer is not clear, and there is no evidence that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT). Due to the publication of new clinical trials and defects in previous meta-analyses, we conducted an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nCRT and nCT.

METHODS

The following databases were searched for studies: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library (updated to April 22, 2023). All randomized trials comparing nCRT with nCT in locally advanced esophageal cancer met the inclusion criteria. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.1 (Cochrane collaboration software). Primary outcomes assessed from the trials included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), pathological complete response (pCR), R0 resection rate, postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, and grade 3 or higher adverse events (3 + AEs).

RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 7 randomized controlled studies involving 1372 patients (686 receiving nCRT and 686 receiving nCT). Compared with nCT, nCRT significantly improved OS (HR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.68-0.94), PFS (HR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66-0.93), pCR (OR = 13.00; 95% CI: 7.82-21.61) and R0 resection (OR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.32-2.57), but was associated with higher postoperative mortality (OR = 2.31; 95% CI: 1.26-4.25) and grade 3 + AEs (OR = 2.21; 95% CI: 1.36-3.58). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between nCRT and nCT (OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 0.82-1.61). Subgroup analysis showed significant survival benefit in squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.68-0.98), but not in adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.63-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis found superior efficacy associated with nCRT compared with nCT in both tumor regression and prolonged survival, but increased the risk of postoperative mortality and grade 3 + AEs. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma was more likely to benefit from nCRT than esophageal adenocarcinoma in the term of OS.

Pretreatment Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value (PIV) in Predicting Therapeutic Response and Clinical Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Immunochemotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

The pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV), which reflects the balance between the host immune and inflammatory status, is a readily available index for evaluating cancer outcomes. Until now, however, no study has demonstrated the clinical response of PIV to neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 218 patients with ESCC who underwent NICT. The relationship between PIV and therapeutic response (pathological complete response [PCR]) and clinical outcomes (overall survival [OS] and disease-free survival [DFS]) was examined. Cox proportional, hazard-regression analyses and the Kaplan-Meier method were used for survival analyses. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to establish a novel risk stratification model.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients (30.3%) achieved PCR after NICT. Using PCR as the endpoint of interest, patients were compared in groups based on the optimal threshold. PIV was closely related to PCR (odds ratio [OR] 0.311, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.140-0.690, P = 0.004). Compared with patients in the low PIV cohort, patients with high PIV had worse 3-year OS (58.7% vs. 83.6%, P < 0.001) and DFS (51.9% vs. 79.1%, P < 0.001). PIV was an independent predictor of OS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.364, 95% CI 1.183-4.724, P = 0.015) and DFS (HR 1.729, 95% CI 1.026-2.913, P = 0.040). Three risk groups with varied DFS and OS were staged by using an RPA method, and the prognostication accuracy was considerably improved.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment PIV can predict the therapeutic efficacy of NICT for ESCC. Because of better prognostic stratification, pretreatment PIV is a novel, sensitive, and effective indicator in ESCC receiving NICT. The prognostic results of PIV need to be verified in additional prospective studies.

Treatment options for neoadjuvant strategies of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (Review)

Compared with postoperative adjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant therapy has more potential advantages, such as decreasing tumor stage, killing micrometastatic cells. Because of these advantages, neoadjuvant therapy is recommended for numerous types of tumor, such as breast, lung and rectal cancer. To determine the role of neoadjuvant therapy on overall survival and adverse for patients with resectable esophageal carcinoma. we summarized clinical studies on 7 types of neoadjuvant therapies in this review. Currently, patients with esophageal cancer (EC) in China mainly receive postoperative treatment with <30% of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. One reason for the limited use of neoadjuvant therapy in China is inaccurate staging based on imaging and neoadjuvant treatment may increase difficulties in surgery. After neoadjuvant therapy, there may be tissue edema, blurry surgical field of view and unclear tissue gaps, resulting in greater difficulty in surgical procedures. However, oncologists are interested in neoadjuvant treatment, especially neoadjuvant immunotherapy to treat EC. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the most common neoadjuvant treatment regimen and increases the pathological complete response (pCR) and 5- and 10-year survival rates. Preoperative induction chemotherapy and sequential concurrent chemoradiotherapy are currently the most widely treatments used in clinical practice in China. However, this treatment strategy does not yield long-term survival. The pCR rate of neoadjuvant immunotherapy is greater than that of concurrent chemoradiotherapy but, to the best of our knowledge, no evidence of long-term survival benefit has been found in phase I and II clinical trials. Neoadjuvant treatment should be considered for patients with locally advanced ESCC.

Comparison of efficacy and safety between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The application of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy (NICT) in treating locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is a subject of considerable research interest. In light of this, we undertook a comprehensive meta-analysis aiming to compare the efficacy and safety of this novel approach with conventional neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) in the management of ESCC.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to gather relevant literature on the efficacy and safety of NICT compared to conventional NCT in locally advanced ESCC published before June 2023. Effect indicators, including odds ratios (ORs) with associated 95% CIs, were employed to evaluate the safety and efficacy outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane bias risk assessment tool, and s ubgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted to investigate the findings further.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies qualified for the meta-analysis, all of which investigated the efficacy and safety of NICT compared to conventional NCT. The pooled rates of pathologic complete response and major pathologic response in the NICT group were significantly higher compared to the NCT group, with values of 26.9% versus 8.3% ( P <0.00001) and 48.1% versus 24.6% ( P <0.00001), respectively. The ORs for achieving pathologic complete response and major pathologic response were 4.24 (95% CI, 2.84-6.32, I 2 =14%) and 3.30 (95% CI, 2.31-4.71, I 2 =0%), respectively, indicating a significant advantage for the NICT group. Regarding safety outcomes, the pooled incidences of treatment-related adverse events and serious adverse events in the NICT group were 64.4% and 11.5%, respectively, compared to 73.8% and 9.3% in the NCT group. However, there were no significant differences observed between the two groups in terms of treatment-related adverse events (OR=0.67, 95% CI, 0.29-1.54, P =0.35, I 2 =58%) or serious adverse events (OR=1.28, 95% CI, 0.69-2.36, P =0.43, I 2 =0%). Furthermore, no significant differences were found between the NICT and NCT groups regarding R0 resection rates, anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, and postoperative hoarseness.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy demonstrate efficacy and safety in treating resectable oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Nevertheless, additional randomized trials are required to confirm the optimal treatment regimen.

Research Priorities in Prehabilitation for Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgery: An International Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

Recently, the number of prehabilitation trials has increased significantly. The identification of key research priorities is vital in guiding future research directions. Thus, the aim of this collaborative study was to define key research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery.

METHODS

The Delphi methodology was implemented over three rounds of surveys distributed to prehabilitation experts from across multiple specialties, tumour streams and countries via a secure online platform. In the first round, participants were asked to provide baseline demographics and to identify five top prehabilitation research priorities. In successive rounds, participants were asked to rank research priorities on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was considered if > 70% of participants indicated agreement on each research priority.

RESULTS

A total of 165 prehabilitation experts participated, including medical doctors, physiotherapists, dieticians, nurses, and academics across four continents. The first round identified 446 research priorities, collated within 75 unique research questions. Over two successive rounds, a list of 10 research priorities reached international consensus of importance. These included the efficacy of prehabilitation on varied postoperative outcomes, benefit to specific patient groups, ideal programme composition, cost efficacy, enhancing compliance and adherence, effect during neoadjuvant therapies, and modes of delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

This collaborative international study identified the top 10 research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. The identified priorities inform research strategies, provide future directions for prehabilitation research, support resource allocation and enhance the prehabilitation evidence base in cancer patients undergoing surgery.

A novel immune-nutritional score predicts response to neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

The role of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) has gradually attracted attention in recent years. To date, sensitive and reliable blood indicators to forecast the therapeutic response are still lacking. This study aimed to conduct a novel predictive score based on a variety of peripheral hematological immune-nutritional indicators to predict the therapeutic response in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) receiving NICT.

Methods

There were 206 ESCC patients receiving NICT retrospectively recruited. With pathological complete response (pCR) as the dependent variable, independent risk variables of various peripheral blood immune-nutritional indexes were screened by logistic regression analyses to establish an integrative score.

Results

By logical regression analyses, lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR) and body mass index (BMI) were independent risk factors among all immune-nutritional indices. Then, an integrative score named BMI-LMR score (BLS) was established. Compared with BMI or LMR, BLS was related to complications, especially for respiratory complication (P=0.012) and vocal cord paralysis (P=0.021). Among all patients, 61 patients (29.6%) achieved pCR after NICT. BLS was significantly related to pCR [odds ratio (OR)=0.269, P<0.001)]. Patients in high BLS cohort demonstrated higher 3-year overall survival (OS) (89.9% vs. 67.9%, P=0.001) and disease-free survival (DFS) (81.2% vs. 62.1%, P=0.001). BLS served as an independent factor of DFS [hazard ratio (HR) =2.044, P =0.020) and OS (HR =2.960, P =0.019).

Conclusion

The BLS, based on immune-nutritional indicators of BMI and LMR, employed as a straightforward, accurate, and useful indicator of pCR and prognostic prediction in ESCC patients undergoing NICT.

Perioperative immunotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Now and future

Esophageal cancer (EC) ranks among the most prevalent malignant tumors affecting the digestive tract. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) stands as the prevailing pathological subtype, encompassing approximately 90% of all EC patients. In clinical stage II-IVA locally advanced ESCC cases, the primary approach to treatment involves a combination of neoadjuvant therapy and surgical resection. Despite concerted efforts, the long-term outcomes for ESCC patients remain unsatisfactory, with dismal prognoses. However, recent years have witnessed remarkable strides in immunotherapy, particularly in the second- and first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic ESCC, with the development of monoclonal antibodies that inhibit programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 demonstrating encouraging responses and perioperative clinical benefits for various malignancies, including ESCC. This comprehensive review aims to present the current landscape of perioperative immunotherapy for resectable ESCC, focusing specifically on the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors during the perioperative period. Additionally, the review will explore promising biomarkers and offer insights into future prospects.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with or without radio(chemo)therapy for locally advanced or recurrent/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and prognostic factors for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with or without radio(chemo)therapy and to evaluate their toxicity in patients with locally advanced or recurrent/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA/RM ESCC).

METHODS

In this study, 198 patients with locally advanced or recurrent/metastatic (LA/RM) ESCC who received ICIs combined with or without radiotherapy/chemotherapy in the Department of Radiotherapy of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). The factors affecting treatment response and the occurrences of treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median OS and PFS were 30.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.1-45.7 months) and 15.3 months (95% CI 12.8-17.8 months), respectively. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that the number of ICI cycles, the intervention of radiotherapy and dysphagia were independent factors affecting OS (Hazard ratio [HR] = 0.39, 2.043 and 0.365, respectively; P = 0.018, 0.001 and 0.032, respectively). The intervention of radiotherapy was an independent factor for PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 18.149, P = 0.013). The median OS and PFS for patients who had complete response and partial response (Objective response, ORR) were 50.8 months (95% CI 25.8-75.7 months) and 20.5 months (95% CI 14.1-27.0), respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the non-ORR group (OSnon-ORR:17.5 months, 95% CI 14.0-21.0; χ2 = 13.881, P < 0.001; PFSnon-ORR: 12.1 months, 95% CI 10.1-14.1, χ2 = 10.676, P = 0.001). The intervention of radiotherapy could improve treatment response (χ2 = 47.725, P = 0.000). In entire study population, 83 patients (41.9%) had ≥ grade 2 trAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

ICIs combined with radiotherapy/chemotherapy are safe and effective in LA/RM ESCC patients. Intervention of radiotherapy, the number of immunotherapy cycles and occurrence of dysphagia affecting the overall survival of LR/RM ESCC patients. Intervention of radiotherapy was an independent prognosis factor for OS and PFS and associated with better treatment response.

Additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy does not increase the risk of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nICT) is a novel and promising therapy model for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.The objective of this study aimed to assessed the impact of additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy on patients' short-term outcomes, particularly the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) and pathological response.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT)/ nICT combination with radical esophagectomy were enrolled from three medical centers in China. The authors used propensity score matching (PSM, ration:1:1, caliper=0.01) and inverse probability processing weighting (IPTW) to balance the baseline characteristics and compare the outcomes. Conditional logistic regression and weighted logistic regression analysis were used to further evaluate whether additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy would increase the risk of postoperative AL.

RESULTS

A total of 331 patients getting partially advanced ESCC receiving nCT or nICT were enrolled from three medical centers in China. After PSM/IPTW, the baseline characteristics reached an equilibrium between the two groups. After matching, there were no significant difference in the AL incidence between the two groups ( P =0.68, after PSM; P =0.97 after IPTW), and the incidence of AL in the two groups was 15.85 versus 18.29%, and 14.79 versus 15.01%, respectively. After PSM/IPTW, both groups were similar in pleural effusion and pneumonia. After IPTW, the nICT group had a higher incidence of bleeding (3.36 vs. 0.30%, P =0.01), chylothorax (5.79 0.30%, P =0.001), and cardiac events (19.53 vs. 9.20%, P =0.04). recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (7.85 vs. 0.54%, P =0.003). After PSM, both groups were similar in palsy of the recurrent laryngeal nerve (1.22 vs. 3.66%, P =0.31) and cardiac events (19.51 vs. 14.63%, P =0.41). Weighted logistic regression analysis showed that additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy was not responsible for AL (OR=0.56, 95% CI: [0.17, 1.71], after PSM; 0.74, 95% CI: [0.34,1.56], after IPTW). The nICT group had dramatically higher pCR in primary tumor than the nCT group ( P =0.003, PSM; P =0.005, IPTW), 9.76 versus 28.05% and 7.72 versus 21.17%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy could benefit pathological reactions without increasing the risk of AL and pulmonary complications. The authors require further randomized controlled research to validate whether additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy would make a difference in other complications, and determine whether pathologic benefits could translate into prognostic benefits, which would require longer follow-up.

Comprehensive nutritional index predicts clinical outcomes for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

No study has reported the clinical outcomes of comprehensive nutritional index (CNI) in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) receiving neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy (nICT).

METHODS

This retrospective study involved 233 ESCC patients who underwent nICT. Principal component analysis was performed to establish the CNI based on 5 indexes including body mass index, usual body weight percentage, total lymphocyte count, albumin and hemoglobin. The relationships between the CNI and therapeutic response, postoperative complications and prognosis were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-nine and 84 patients were assigned to the high and low CNI group, respectively. The incidences of respiratory complications (33.3% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.013) and vocal cord paralysis (17.9% vs. 8.1%, P = 0.025) in low CNI were significantly higher than those in high group, respectively. Seventy (30.0%) patients achieved pathological complete response (pCR). High CNI patients achieved a better pCR rate than those with low CNI (41.6% vs. 9.5%, P < 0.001). The CNI served as an independent pCR predictor [odds ratio (OR) = 0.167, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.074-0.377, P < 0.001)]. High CNI patients had better 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) (85.4% vs. 52.6%, P < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (85.5% vs. 64.5%, P < 0.001) than those with low CNI, respectively. The CNI served as an independent prognostic score regarding DFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 3.878, 95% CI = 2.214-6.792, P < 0.001)] and OS (HR = 4.386, 95% CI = 2.006-9.590, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on nutrition-related indicators, the pretreatment CNI serves as a sensitive and effective predictor of therapeutic response, postoperative complications and prognosis in ESCC receiving nICT.

The genomic signature of resistance to platinum-containing neoadjuvant therapy based on single-cell data

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) becomes the first-line option for advanced tumors, while patients who are not sensitive to it may not benefit. Therefore, it is important to screen patients suitable for NACT.

METHODS

Single-cell data of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) and esophageal squamous carcinoma (ESCC) before and after cisplatin-containing (CDDP) NACT and cisplatin IC50 data of tumor cell lines were analyzed to establish a CDDP neoadjuvant chemotherapy score (NCS). Differential analysis, GO, KEGG, GSVA and logistic regression models were performed by R. Survival analysis were applied to public databases. siRNA knockdown in A549, PC9, TE1 cell lines, qRT-PCR, western-blot, cck8 and EdU experiments were used for further verification in vitro.

RESULTS

485 genes were expressed differentially in tumor cells before and after neoadjuvant treatment for LUAD and ESCC. After combining the CDDP-associated genes, 12 genes, CAV2, PHLDA1, DUSP23, VDAC3, DSG2, SPINT2, SPATS2L, IGFBP3, CD9, ALCAM, PRSS23, PERP, were obtained and formed the NCS score. The higher the score, the more sensitive the patients were to CDDP-NACT. The NCS divided LUAD and ESCC into two groups. Based on differentially expressed genes, a model was constructed to predict the high and low NCS. CAV2, PHLDA1, ALCAM, CD9, IGBP3 and VDAC3 were significantly associated with prognosis. Finally, we demonstrated that the knockdown of CAV2, PHLDA1 and VDAC3 in A549, PC9 and TE1 significantly increased the sensitivity to cisplatin.

CONCLUSIONS

NCS scores and related predictive models for CDDP-NACT were developed and validated to assist in selecting patients who might benefit from it.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and traditional neoadjuvant therapy for resectable esophageal cancer: a systematic review and single-arm and network meta-analysis

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the role of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy with or without radiotherapy [NIC(R)T] compared to traditional neoadjuvant therapies, without immunotherapy [NC(R)T].

Summary background data

NCRT followed by surgical resection is recommended for patients with early-stage esophageal cancer. However, it is uncertain whether adding immunotherapy to preoperative neoadjuvant therapy would improve patient outcomes when radical surgery is performed following neoadjuvant therapy.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases, as well as international conference abstracts. Outcomes included R0, pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (mPR), overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates.

Results

We included data from 5,034 patients from 86 studies published between 2019 and 2022. We found no significant differences between NICRT and NCRT in pCR or mPR rates. Both were better than NICT, with NCT showing the lowest response rate. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy has a significant advantage over traditional neoadjuvant therapy in terms of 1-year OS and DFS, with NICT having better outcomes than any of the other three treatments. There were no significant differences among the four neoadjuvant treatments in terms of R0 rates.

Conclusions

Among the four neoadjuvant treatment modalities, NICRT and NCRT had the highest pCR and mPR rates. There were no significant differences in the R0 rates among the four treatments. Adding immunotherapy to neoadjuvant therapy improved 1-year OS and DFS, with NICT having the highest rates compared to the other three modalities.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-12-0060/, identifier INPLASY2022120060.

Towards artificial intelligence to multi-omics characterization of tumor heterogeneity in esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is a unique and complex heterogeneous malignancy, with substantial tumor heterogeneity: at the cellular levels, tumors are composed of tumor and stromal cellular components; at the genetic levels, they comprise genetically distinct tumor clones; at the phenotypic levels, cells in distinct microenvironmental niches acquire diverse phenotypic features. This heterogeneity affects almost every process of esophageal cancer progression from onset to metastases and recurrence, etc. Intertumoral and intratumoral heterogeneity are major obstacles in the treatment of esophageal cancer, but also offer the potential to manipulate the heterogeneity themselves as a new therapeutic strategy. The high-dimensional, multi-faceted characterization of genomics, epigenomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabonomics, etc. of esophageal cancer has opened novel horizons for dissecting tumor heterogeneity. Artificial intelligence especially machine learning and deep learning algorithms, are able to make decisive interpretations of data from multi-omics layers. To date, artificial intelligence has emerged as a promising computational tool for analyzing and dissecting esophageal patient-specific multi-omics data. This review provides a comprehensive review of tumor heterogeneity from a multi-omics perspective. Especially, we discuss the novel techniques single-cell sequencing and spatial transcriptomics, which have revolutionized our understanding of the cell compositions of esophageal cancer and allowed us to determine novel cell types. We focus on the latest advances in artificial intelligence in integrating multi-omics data of esophageal cancer. Artificial intelligence-based multi-omics data integration computational tools exert a key role in tumor heterogeneity assessment, which will potentially boost the development of precision oncology in esophageal cancer.

Comparison of neoadjuvant immunotherapy versus routine neoadjuvant therapy for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The neoadjuvant use of immune checkpoint inhibitor combined with chemotherapy (nICT) or chemoradiotherapy (nICRT) in locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) is currently an area of active ongoing research. Therefore, we carried out a comprehensive meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of the new strategy with routine neoadjuvant strategy, which included neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).

Patients and methods

MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (via OVID), ISI Web of Science database and Cochrane Library were included. And, all of them were searched for eligible studies between January, 2000 and February, 2023. The pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) were primary outcome of our study. The second outcome of interest was R0 resection rate. Odds ratio (OR) and associated 95% CI were used as the effect indicators comparing the safety and efficiency of the neoadjuvant immunotherapy with the routine neoadjuvant therapy. Fixed-effect model (Inverse Variance) or random-effect model (Mantel-Haenszel method) was performed depending on the statistically heterogeneity.

Results

There were eight trials with 652 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The estimated pCR rate was higher in the neoadjuvant immunotherapy group (OR =1.86; 95% CI, 1.25-2.75; I² = 32.8%, P=0.166). The different results were found in the esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) subgroups, the estimated OR was 2.35 (95%CI, 1.00-2.72; I² = 30.9%, P=0.215) in the EAC subgroup, and 2.35 (95% CI, 1.20-4.54; I² = 45.3%, P=0.161) in the ESCC subgroup, respectively. The neoadjuvant immunotherapy also showed the advantage in the MPR rates (OR =2.66; 95% CI, 1.69-4.19; I² = 24.3%, P=0.252). There was no obvious difference between the neoadjuvant immunotherapy and routine neoadjuvant therapy with respect to surgical resection rate, R0 resection rate, surgical delay rate; while more treatment-related adverse events were observed for the neoadjuvant immunotherapy for pneumonitis/pneumonia (OR=3.46, 95% CI, 1.31-9.16; I² = 67.3%, P=0.005) and thyroid dysfunction (OR=4.69, 95% CI, 1.53-14.36; I² = 56.5%, P=0.032).

Conclusion

The pooled correlations indicated that the neoadjuvant immunotherapy (both nICT and nICRT) could significantly increase the rates of pCR and MPR, compared with routine neoadjuvant therapy (both nCT and nCRT) in the treatment of locally advanced EC. The neoadjuvant immunotherapy and routine neoadjuvant therapy were with acceptable toxicity. However, randomized studies with larger groups of patients need to performed to confirm these results.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42020155802.

Perioperative outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus camrelizumab compared with chemotherapy alone and chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer

Purpose

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nCIT) is becoming a new therapeutic frontier for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); however, crucial details and technical know-how regarding surgical techniques and the perioperative challenges following nCIT remain poorly understood. The study investigated and compared the advantages and disadvantages of esophagectomy following nCIT with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data of patients initially diagnosed with resectable ESCC at clinical stage T2-4N+ and received neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy at the Hunan Cancer Hospital between October 2014 and February 2021. Patients were divided into three groups according to neoadjuvant treatment: (i) nCIT; (ii) nCT; and (iii) nCRT.

Results

There were 34 patients in the nCIT group, 97 in the nCT group, and 31 in the nCRT group. Compared with nCT, nCIT followed by esophagectomy achieved higher pathological complete response (pCR; 29.0% versus 4.1%, p<0.001) and major pathological response (MPR; 52.9% versus 16.5%, p<0.001) rates, more resected lymph nodes during surgery (25.06 ± 7.62 versus 20.64 ± 9.68, p=0.009), less intraoperative blood loss (200.00 ± 73.86 versus 266.49 ± 176.29 mL, p=0.035), and comparable results in other perioperative parameters. Compared with nCRT, nCIT achieved similar pCR (29.0% versus 25.8%) and MPR (52.9% versus 51.6%, p=0.862) rates, with significantly more lymph nodes resected during surgery (25.06 ± 7.62 versus 16.94 ± 7.24, p<0.001), shorter operation time (267.79 ± 50.67 versus 306.32 ± 79.92 min, p=0.022), less intraoperative blood loss (200.00 ± 73.86 versus 264.53 ± 139.76 mL, p=0.022), and fewer ICU admissions after surgery (29.4% versus 80.6%, p<0.001). Regarding perioperative adverse events and complications, no significant statistical differences were detected between the nCIT and the nCT or nCRT groups. The 3-year overall survival rate after nCIT was 73.3%, slightly higher than 46.1% after nCT and 39.7% after nCRT, with no statistically significant differences (p=0.883).

Conclusions

This clinical analysis showed that nCIT is safe and feasible, with satisfactory pCR and MPR rates. Esophagectomy following nCIT has several perioperative advantages over nCT and nCRT, with comparable perioperative morbidity and mortality. The long-term survival benefits after nCIT still requires further investigation.