Chemotherapy followed by surgery in patients with carcinoma of the distal esophagus and celiac lymph node involvement

Lymph node metastases near the celiac trunk should be considered separately from other nodal metastases in patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction after neoadjuvant treatment and surgery

Background

The aim of the present study is to identify the incidence and prognostic significance of lymph node metastases near the celiac trunk in patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy followed by esophagectomy.

Methods

Between March 1994 and September 2013 a total of 462 consecutive patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) who underwent potentially curative esophageal resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (N=88; 19.0%) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) (N=374; 81.0%) were included.

Results

Seventy one (15.4%) patients had truncal node metastases in the resection specimen. Metastases to these nodes occurred more frequently in male patients with adenocarcinoma and in tumors at the gastro-esophageal junction. A lower response to neoadjuvant treatment, higher ypT and ypN stages and a poorer grade of differentiation were significantly related with truncal node metastases. Patients with tumor positive truncal nodes had a worse median overall survival (17 vs. 55 months). In multivariate analysis, truncal node metastases were independently associated with a worse survival. Only 22 (31.0%) of the 71 patients with tumor positive truncal nodes were identified preoperatively with EUS or CT. In contrast, 37 patients had suspicious truncal nodes on EUS or CT, but metastases in the pathology specimen were absent.

Conclusions

In the present study, it is demonstrated that positive truncal nodes in the resection specimen after neoadjuvant therapy, are associated with advanced tumor stages and are an independent factor for inferior survival.

Prognostic Significance of the Location of Lymph Node Metastases in Patients With Adenocarcinoma of the Distal Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

OBJECTIVE

To identify the prognostic significance of the location of lymph node metastases in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND

Detection of lymph node metastases in the upper mediastinum and around the celiac trunk after neoadjuvant therapy and resection does not alter the TNM classification of esophageal carcinoma. The impact of these distant lymph node metastases on survival remains unclear.

METHODS

Between March 2003 and September 2013, 479 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or GEJ who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with en bloc 2-field lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant therapy were included, and survival was analyzed according to the location of positive lymph nodes in the resection specimen.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-three patients had nodal metastases in the resection specimen. Of these patients, 92 patients had metastases in locoregional nodes, 114 patients in truncal nodes, 21 patients in the proximal field of the chest, and 26 patients had both positive truncal and proximal field nodes. Median disease-free survival was 170 months in the absence of nodal metastases, 35 months for metastases limited to locoregional nodes, 16 months for positive truncal nodes, 15 months for positive nodes in the proximal field, and 8 months for nodal metastases in both truncal and the proximal field. On multivariate analysis, location of lymph node metastases was independently associated with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Location of lymph node metastases is an independent predictor for survival. Relatively distant lymph node metastases along the celiac axis and/or the proximal field have a negative impact on survival. Location of lymph node metastases should therefore be considered in future staging systems of esophageal and GEJ adenocarcinoma.

The prognostic role of coeliac node metastasis after resection for distal oesophageal cancer

It is uncertain whether coeliac node metastasis precludes long-term survival in distal oesophageal cancer. This nationwide population-based cohort study included patients who underwent surgical resection for stage III or IV distal oesophageal cancer in 1987-2010 with follow-up until 2014. A minority (17.0%) had neoadjuvant therapy. The prognosis in patients with coeliac node metastasis was compared with patients with no such metastasis and patients with more distant metastasis. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of disease-specific and overall mortality. Among 446 patients, 346 (77.6%) had no coeliac node metastasis, 56 (12.6%) had coeliac node metastasis, and 44 (9.9%) had more distant metastasis. Compared to coeliac node negative patients, coeliac node positive patients were at a 52% increased risk of disease-specific mortality (HR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.10-2.10), while patients with more distant metastasis had a 27% statistically non-significant increase (HR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.88-1.83). Patients with distant metastasis had no increase in disease-specific mortality compared to those with coeliac node metastasis (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.40-1.27). Thus, patients with distal oesophageal cancer with coeliac node metastasis seem to have a similarly poor survival as patients with more distant metastasis, and thus may not benefit from surgery.

Determinants of improved survival after oesophagectomy for cancer

Background

Survival after oesophagectomy for cancer seems to be improving. This study aimed to identify the most important contributors to this change.

Methods

Patients who underwent oesophagectomy from 1999 to 2010 were extracted from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Four time periods were compared: 1999–2001 (period 1), 2002–2004 (period 2), 2005–2007 (period 3) and 2008–2010 (period 4). Hospital type, tumour location, tumour type, tumour differentiation, neoadjuvant therapy, operation type, (y)pT category, involvement of surgical resection margins, number of removed lymph nodes and number of involved lymph nodes were investigated in relation to trends in survival using multivariable analysis.

Results

A total of 4382 patients were identified. Two-year overall survival rates improved from 49·3 per cent in period 1 to 58·4, 56·2 and 61·0 per cent in periods 2, 3 and 4 respectively (P < 0·001). Multivariable survival analysis revealed that the improvement in survival between periods 3 and 4 was related to the introduction of neoadjuvant therapy. The improvement in survival between periods 1 and 2 could not be explained completely by the factors studied. The number of examined lymph nodes increased, especially between periods 2 and 3, but this increase was not associated with the improvement in survival.

Conclusion

The observed increase in long-term survival after surgery for oesophageal cancer between 1999 and 2010 in the Netherlands is difficult to explain fully, although the recent increase seems to be partly attributable to the introduction of neoadjuvant therapy.

Preoperative evaluation of oesophageal adenocarcinoma

The preoperative evaluation of oesophageal adenocarcinoma involves endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), computed tomography (CT), and positron emission tomography (PET). With routine Barrett's oesophagus surveillance, superficial cancers are often identified. EUS, CT and PET have a limited role in the staging of superficial tumours. Standard EUS has limited accuracy, but high frequency ultrasound miniprobes are valuable for assessing tumour stage in superficial tumours. However, the best method for determining depth of invasion, and thereby stage of disease, is endoscopic mucosal resection. In contrast, in advanced oesophageal cancers, a multi-modality approach is crucial. Accurate tumour staging is very important since the treatment of advanced cancers involves a combination of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. EUS is very useful for staging of the tumour and nodes. High frequency ultrasound miniprobes provide the ability to perform staging when the lesion is obstructing the oesophageal lumen. CT and PET provide valuable information regarding node and metastasis staging.

Preoperative assessment of tumor location and station-specific lymph node status in patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction

BACKGROUND

In esophageal cancer patients preoperative staging will determine the type of surgical procedure and use of neoadjuvant therapy. Tumor location and lymph node status play a pivotal role in this tailored strategy. The aim of the present study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of preoperative assessment of tumor location according to the Siewert classification and lymph node status per station with endoscopy/endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

In 50 esophagectomy patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), tumor location according to Siewert and N-stage per nodal station as determined preoperatively by endoscopy/EUS and CT were compared with the histopathologic findings in the resection specimen.

RESULTS

Overall accuracy in predicting tumor location according to the Siewert classification was 70 % for endoscopy/EUS and 72 % for CT. Preoperative data could not be compared with the pathologic assessment in 11 patients (22 %), as large tumors obscured the landmark of the gastric folds. The overall accuracy for predicting the N-stage in 250 lymph node stations was 66 % for EUS and 68 % for CT. The accuracy was good for those stations located high in the thorax, but poor for celiac trunk nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the frequent discrepancy between the endoscopic and pathologic location of the GEJ and the common problem of advanced tumors obscuring the landmarks used in the assessment of the Siewert classification, its usefulness is limited. The overall accuracy for EUS and CT in predicting the N-stage per station was moderate.

Influence of young age on outcome after esophagectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence of esophageal cancer has risen among all age groups. Controversy exists about the clinical presentation and prognosis of young patients. The aim of this study was to compare the clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes after surgery between patients with esophageal cancer who were <50 years of age and those ≥50 years of age.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy between January 1990 and December 2010 in a single institution were selected from a prospective database. Patients aged <50 years at diagnosis (n = 163) were compared with those ≥50 years (n = 1151) with respect to clinicopathologic stage and oncologic outcome.

RESULTS

Younger patients had less co-morbidity (p < 0.001). There were no significantly differences in tumor localization, histology, differentiation, or TNM stage in the two groups. In both groups, 37 % of the patients underwent neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy. One or more nonsurgical complications developed in 53 % of the older group versus 42 % in the younger group (p = 0.012). In-hospital mortality was 6.3 % for patients ≥50 years compared to 1.8 % for younger patients (p = 0.021). The 5 year overall survival was significantly better for the younger patients than for those ≥50 years (41 vs. 31 %, p < 0.001), but median disease-specific and disease-free survival did not differ between the groups (37 vs. 30 months, p = 0.140 and 49 vs. 28 months, p = 0.079, respectively). Multivariate analysis identified moderate, poorly, and undifferentiated tumors; tumor-positive resection margins (pR1-2); and TNM stage IIB-IV as independent predictors of disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable proportion (12 %) of patients diagnosed with resectable esophageal carcinoma were <50 years. Phenotypic tumor characteristics and disease-specific survival were comparable for the two age groups.