Management of patients with T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study on patient management and risk of metastatic disease

Reasons for fear of cancer recurrence after endoscopic treatment of T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma. A semi-structured interview study

Prior research has shown that patients with early Barrett's neoplasia treated endoscopically report at least the same level of fear for cancer recurrence as patients treated surgically for a more advanced disease stage. The aim of this qualitative study was to gain insight into the reasons why endoscopically treated patients fear or not fear cancer recurrence. Patients treated endoscopically for T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma participated in a semi-structured interview. Patients were asked open questions about their fear of cancer recurrence and presented an a priori list of possible reasons for experiencing or not experiencing fear of cancer recurrence. Data saturation was reached with 12 patients who added 7 new reasons. Reasons that induced fear of cancer recurrence were related to physical symptoms, if cancer was diagnosed as an accidental finding and experiences with cancer in close relations. Endoscopic surveillance was mentioned as a reason for not experiencing fear of cancer recurrence. Patients reduced their fear of cancer recurrence by talking to close relations and seeking distraction. Caregivers reduced patients fear of cancer recurrence by giving adequate information and by showing photo of the treatment and the results of the treatment. According to patients with early Barrett's neoplasia, receiving comprehensible information about the risk of recurrence and potential symptoms that may or may not be indicative of cancer recurrence, and continuing endoscopic surveillance, reduced fear of cancer recurrence. We recommend that healthcare providers discuss fear of cancer recurrence with their patients to enable tailoring information provision to their needs.

Risk of metastasis among patients diagnosed with high-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent endoscopic follow-up

Esophagectomy and lymphadenectomy have been the standard of care for patients at high risk (HR) of lymph node metastasis following a diagnosis of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) after endoscopic resection (ER). However, recent cohorts suggest lymph node metastasis risk is lower than initially estimated, suggesting organ preservation with close endoscopic follow-up is a viable option. We report on the 3- and 5-year risk of lymph node/distant metastasis among patients diagnosed with early HR-T1 OAC undergoing endoscopic follow-up. Patients diagnosed with HR-T1a or T1b OAC following ER at a tertiary referral center were identified and retrospectively analyzed from clinical records between 2010 and 2021. Patients were included if they underwent endoscopic follow-up after resection and were divided into HR-T1a, low risk (LR)-T1b and HR-T1b cohorts. After ER, 47 patients underwent endoscopic follow-up for early HR OAC. In total, 39 patients had an R0 resection with a combined 3- and 5-year risk of LN/distant metastasis of 6.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-25] and 10.9% (95% CI, 3.6-30.2%), respectively. There was no significant difference when stratifying by histopathological subtype (P = 0.64). Among those without persistent luminal disease on follow-up, the 5-year risk was 4.1% (95% CI, 0.6-26.1). Two patients died secondary to OAC with an all-cause 5-year survival of 57.5% (95% CI, 39.5-71.9). The overall risk of LN/distant metastasis for early HR T1 OAC was lower than historically reported. Endoscopic surveillance can be a reasonable approach in highly selected patients with an R0 resection and complete luminal eradication, but clear, evidence-based surveillance guidelines are needed.

Risk of lymph node metastasis in T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

Patients with early (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are increasingly having definitive local therapy endoscopically. Endoscopic resection is not able to pathologically stage or treat lymph node metastasis (LNM). Accurate identification of patients having nodal metastasis is critical to select endoscopic therapy over surgery. This study aimed to define the risk of LNM in T1 EAC. A meta-analysis of studies of patients who underwent surgery and lymphadenectomy with assessment of LNM was performed according to PRISMA. Main outcome was probability of LNM in T1a and T1b disease. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for LNM and rate of LNM in submucosal T1b (SM1, SM2, and SM3) disease. Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341794). Twenty cohort studies involving 2264 patients with T1 EAC met inclusion criteria: T1a (857 patients) with 36 (4.2%) node positive and T1b (1407 patients) with 327 (23.2%) node positive. Subgroup analysis of T1b lesions was available in 10 studies (405 patients). Node positivity for SM1, SM2, and SM3 was 16.3%, 16.2%, and 29.4%, respectively. T1 substage (odds ratio [OR] 7.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.45-13.38, P < 0.01), tumor differentiation (OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.06-3.87, P < 0.01), and lymphovascular invasion (OR 13.65, 95% CI 6.06-30.73, P < 0.01) were associated with LNM. T1a disease demonstrated a 4.2% nodal metastasis rate and T1b disease a rate of 23.2%. Endoscopic therapy should be reserved for T1a disease and perhaps select T1b disease, which has a moderately high rate of nodal metastasis. There were inadequate data to stratify T1b SM disease into 'low-risk' and 'high-risk' based on tumor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion.

Predictors for lymph node metastasis and survival of patients with T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with surgery and endoscopic therapy: an analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Limited data exist regarding the long-term outcomes of endoscopic therapy (ET) with or without chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Our aim was to identify the risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) in T1b EAC and assess how the chosen treatment modality affects overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

METHODS

We analyzed patients with histologically confirmed T1b EAC diagnosed between 2004 and 2018 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Focusing on T1bN0M0 staging, the patients were divided into 2 groups (ET [n = 174] and surgery [n = 769]), and OS and CSS rates were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 1418 patients with T1b EAC, 228 cases (16.1%) exhibited LNM at diagnosis. Notable risk factors for LNM included poorly differentiated tumor and lesion size ≥20 mm. For T1bN0M0 cases, ET was commonly performed from 2009 to 2018 (odds ratio [OR], 4.3), especially for patients aged ≥65 years (OR, 3.1) with tumor size <20 mm (OR, 2.3). During the median 50 months of follow-up, age ≥65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.9), ET (HR, 1.5), and CRT (HR, 1.4) were associated with poorer OS. Factors linked to decreased CSS were age ≥65 years (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.6), poorly differentiated tumors (SHR, 1.5), and CRT (SHR, 1.5).

CONCLUSIONS

In T1b EAC, tumor size ≥20 mm and poor differentiation are notable risk factors for LNM. ET exhibited comparable CSS outcomes to surgery for carefully selected T1bN0M0 lesions. CRT did not provide additional survival benefit for these lesions; however, large-scale studies are required to validate this finding.

History and evidence for state of the art of lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer surgery

The current curative multimodal treatment of advanced esophageal cancers consists of neoadjuvant or perioperative chemo(radio)therapy followed by a radical surgical resection of the primary tumor and a 2- or 3-field lymphadenectomy. One of the most important predictors of long-term survival of esophageal cancer patients is lymph node involvement. The distribution pattern of lymph node metastases in esophageal cancer is unpredictable and depends on the primary tumor location, histology, T-stage and application of neoadjuvant or perioperative treatment. The optimal extent of the lymphadenectomy remains controversial; there is no global consensus on this topic yet. Some surgeons advocate an aggressive and extended lymph node dissection to remove occult metastatic disease, to optimize oncological outcomes. Others promote a more restricted lymphadenectomy, since the benefit of an extended lymphadenectomy, especially after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, has not been clearly demonstrated, and morbidity may be reduced. In this review, we describe the development of lymphadenectomy, followed by a summary of current evidence for lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer treatment.

Management of high risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma following endoscopic resection

High-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR-T1 EAC) is defined as T1 cancer, with one or more of the following histological criteria: submucosal invasion, poorly or undifferentiated cancer, and/or presence of lympho-vascular invasion. Esophagectomy has long been the only available treatment for these HR-T1 EACs and was considered necessary because of a presumed high risk of lymph node metastases up to 46%. However, endoscopic submucosal disscection have made it possible to radically remove HR-T1 EAC, irrespective of size, while leaving the esophageal anatomy intact. Parallel to this development, new publications demonstrated that the risk of lymph node metastases for HR-T1 EAC may be even <24%. Therefore, indications for endoscopic treatment of HR-T1 EAC are being reconsidered and current research aims at finding the optimal management strategy for this indication, where watchful waiting may proof to be an acceptable strategy in selected patients. In this review, we will discuss the latest developments in this field.

Latest Advances in Endoscopic Detection of Oesophageal and Gastric Neoplasia

Endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of cancers and cancer precursors in the oesophagus and stomach. Early detection of upper GI cancers requires high-quality endoscopy and awareness of the subtle features these lesions carry. Endoscopists performing surveillance of high-risk patients including those with Barrett's oesophagus, previous squamous neoplasia or chronic atrophic gastritis should be familiar with endoscopic features, classification systems and sampling techniques to maximise the detection of early cancer. In this article, we review the current approach to diagnosis of these conditions and the latest advanced imaging and diagnostic techniques.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2:  ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3:  ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4:  ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5:  ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6:  ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7:  ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8:  ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9:  ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B:  ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C:  ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D:  ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E:  ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11:  After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

Management of Esophago-Gastric Junction Carcinoma: A Narrative Multidisciplinary Review

Esophagogastric junction (EGJ) carcinoma represents a specific site of disease, given the opportunities for multimodal clinical care and management and the possibilities of combined treatments. It encompasses various clinical subgroups of disease that are heterogeneous and deserve different treatments; therefore, the guidelines have progressively evolved over time, considering the evidence provided by clinical trials. The aim of this narrative review was to summarize the main evidence, which orientates the current guidelines, and to collect the main ongoing studies to address existing gray areas.

Feasibility and Safety of Tailored Lymphadenectomy Using Sentinel Node-Navigated Surgery in Patients with High-Risk T1 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Selective lymphadenectomy using sentinel node-navigated surgery (SNNS) might offer a less invasive alternative to esophagectomy in patients with high-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new treatment strategy, consisting of radical endoscopic resection of the tumor followed by SNNS.

METHODS

In this multicenter pilot study, ten patients with a radically resected high-risk pT1cN0 EAC underwent SNNS. A hybrid tracer of technetium-99m nanocolloid and indocyanine green was injected endoscopically around the resection scar the day before surgery, followed by preoperative imaging. During surgery, sentinel nodes (SNs) were identified using a thoracolaparoscopic gammaprobe and fluorescence-based detection, and subsequently resected. Endpoints were surgical morbidity and number of detected and resected (tumor-positive) SNs.

RESULTS

Localization and dissection of SNs was feasible in all ten patients (median 3 SNs per patient, range 1-6). The concordance between preoperative imaging and intraoperative detection was high. In one patient (10%), dissection was considered incomplete after two SNs were not identified intraoperatively. Additional peritumoral SNs were resected in four patients (40%) after fluorescence-based detection. In two patients (20%), a (micro)metastasis was found in one of the resected SNs. One patient experienced neuropathic thoracic pain related to surgery, while none of the patients developed functional gastroesophageal disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

SNNS appears to be a feasible and safe instrument to tailor lymphadenectomy in patients with high-risk T1 EAC. Future research with long-term follow-up is warranted to determine whether this esophageal preserving strategy is justified for high-risk T1 EAC.

A population-based investigation: How to identify high-risk T1-2N0 esophageal cancer patients?

Purpose

Newly diagnosed T1-2N0 esophageal cancer (EC) is generally deemed as early local disease, with distant metastases (DM) easily overlooked. This retrospective study aimed to describe the metastatic patterns, identify risk factors and established a risk prediction model for DM in T1-2N0 EC patients.

Methods

A total of 4623 T1-2N0 EC patients were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2004 to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for DM. A nomogram was developed for presentation of the final model.

Results

Of 4623 T1-2N0 patients, 4062 (87.9%) had M0 disease and 561 (12.1%) had M1 disease. The most common metastatic site was liver (n = 156, 47.3%), followed by lung (n = 89, 27.0%), bone (n = 70, 21.2%) and brain (n = 15, 4.5%). Variables independently associated with DM included age at diagnosis, gender, tumor grade, primary site, tumor size and T stage. A nomogram based on the variables had a good predictive accuracy (area under the curve: 0.750). Independent risk factors for bone metastases (BoM), brain metastases (BrM), liver metastases (LiM) and lung metastases (LuM) were identified, respectively.

Conclusions

We identified independent predictive factors for DM, as well as for BoM, BrM, LiM and LuM. Above all, a practical and convenient nomogram with a great accuracy to predict DM probability for T1-2N0 EC patients was established.

Measuring the Submucosal Depth of Invasion in Endoscopic Mucosal Resections for Barrett-associated Adenocarcinoma: Practical Issues and Relevance for the Decision for Esophagectomy

CONTEXT.—

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has made it possible for Barrett esophagus patients with superficial cancers to be treated without esophagectomy. Recent guidelines recommend measuring depth of invasion (DOI) in submucosal cancers based on reports that in low-risk cancers, submucosal invasion 500 μm or less is associated with low nodal metastasis rates. However, pathologists face challenges in reproducibly measuring DOI.

OBJECTIVE.—

To determine how often DOI measurements could impact treatment and to evaluate reproducibility in measuring submucosal DOI in EMR specimens.

DESIGN.—

Consecutive adenocarcinoma EMR cases were identified, including cases of "low histologic risk" submucosal cancer, as follows: those with negative deep margins, no high-grade histology (G3), and no lymphovascular invasion. Submucosal DOI was measured by 7 pathologists according to guidelines.

RESULTS.—

Of 213 cancer EMR cases, 46 were submucosa invasive and 6 cases were low histologic risk submucosal cancers for which measurement could impact decision-making. Of these low histologic risk cases, 3 were categorized as superficial, indicating that measurement would be a clinically actionable decision point in only 1.4% of adenocarcinoma EMRs. Interobserver agreement for in-depth categorization between 7 pathologists was moderate (κ = 0.42), and the range of measurements spanned the 500-μm relevant threshold in 40 of 55 measured samples (72.7%).

CONCLUSIONS.—

While therapeutic decisions would rarely have depended on DOI measurements alone in our cohort, interobserver variability raises concerns about their use as a sole factor on which to offer patients conservative therapy. Responsibly reporting and clinically using submucosal DOI measurements will require practical experience troubleshooting common histologic artifacts, as well as multidisciplinary awareness of the impact of variable specimen-handling practices.

Analysis of metastases rates during follow-up after endoscopic resection of early "high-risk" esophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

After endoscopic resection (ER) of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), the optimal management of patients with high-risk histologic features for lymph node metastases (ie, submucosal invasion, poor differentiation grade, or lymphovascular invasion) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of endoscopic follow-up after ER for high-risk EAC.

METHODS

For this retrospective cohort study, data were collected from all Dutch patients managed with endoscopic follow-up (endoscopy, EUS) after ER for high-risk EAC between 2008 and 2019. We distinguished 3 groups: intramucosal cancers with high-risk features, submucosal cancers with low-risk features, and submucosal cancers with high-risk features. The primary outcome was the annual risk for metastases during follow-up, stratified for baseline histology.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty patients met the selection criteria. Median follow-up was 29 months (interquartile range, 15-48). Metastases were observed in 5 of 25 (annual risk, 6.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-15) high-risk intramucosal cancers, 1 of 55 (annual risk, .7%; 95% CI, 0-4.0) low-risk submucosal cancers, and 3 of 40 (annual risk, 3.0%; 95% CI, 0-7.0) high-risk submucosal cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas the annual metastasis rate for high-risk submucosal EAC (3.0%) was somewhat lower than expected in comparison with previous reported percentages, the annual metastasis rate of 6.9% for high-risk intramucosal EAC is new and worrisome. This calls for further prospective studies and suggests that strict follow-up of this small subgroup is warranted until prospective data are available.

The 8th Wonder of the Cancer World: Esophageal Cancer and Inflammation

Esophageal cancer is a devastating malignancy which can be detected at an early stage but is more often diagnosed as an advanced process. It affects both men and women and inflicts the young and the elderly. There are multiple underlying factors involved in the pathogenesis of this cancer including inflammation. The interplay of these factors promotes inflammation through various mechanisms including the recruitment of pro-inflammatory cells, mediators such as cytokines, reactive oxygen species, and interleukins, among others. The presentation can vary widely with one of the most notable symptoms being dysphagia. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptomatology, imaging and endoscopy with biopsy. Once the diagnosis has been established, treatment and prognosis are based on the stage of the disease. This review outlines esophageal cancer and its link to inflammation in relation to pathogenesis, along with clinical features, diagnosis and treatment.

Extending treatment criteria for Barrett's neoplasia: results of a nationwide cohort of 138 endoscopic submucosal dissection procedures

BACKGROUND

The use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is gradually expanding for treatment of neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to report outcomes of all ESDs for BE neoplasia performed in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Retrospective assessment of outcomes, using treatment and follow-up data from a joint database.

RESULTS

130/138 patients had complete ESDs, with 126/130 (97 %) en bloc resections. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) procedure time was 121 minutes (90-180). Pathology findings were high grade dysplasia (HGD) (5 %) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) T1a (43 %) or T1b (52 %; 19 % sm1, 33 % ≥ sm2). Among resections of HGD or T1a EAC lesions, 87 % (95 %CI 75 %-92 %) were both en bloc and R0; the corresponding value for T1b EAC lesions was 49 % (36 %-60 %). Among R1 resections, 10/34 (29 %) showed residual cancer, all detected at first endoscopic follow-up. The remaining 24 patients (71 %) showed no residual neoplasia. Six of these patients underwent surgery with no residual tumor; the remaining 18 underwent endoscopic follow-up during median 31 months with 1 local recurrence (annual recurrence rate 2 %). Among R0 resections, annual local recurrence rate during median 27 months was 0.5 %.

CONCLUSION

In expert hands, ESD allows safe removal of bulky intraluminal neoplasia and submucosal cancer. ESD of the latter showed R1 resection margins in 50 %, yet only one third had persisting neoplasia at follow-up. To better stratify R1 patients with an indication for additional surgery, repeat endoscopy after healing of the ESD might be a helpful possible prognostic factor for residual cancer.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common condition associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. BE is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma, a highly lethal cancer with an increasing incidence over the last 5 decades. These revised guidelines implement Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the definition and diagnosis of BE, screening for BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma, surveillance of patients with known BE, and the medical and endoscopic treatment of BE and its associated early neoplasia. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include a broadening of acceptable screening modalities for BE to include nonendoscopic methods, liberalized intervals for surveillance of short-segment BE, and volume criteria for endoscopic therapy centers for BE. We recommend endoscopic eradication therapy for patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia and those with BE and low-grade dysplasia. We propose structured surveillance intervals for patients with dysplastic BE after successful ablation based on the baseline degree of dysplasia. We could not make recommendations regarding chemoprevention or use of biomarkers in routine practice due to insufficient data.

Barrett’s esophagus: Review of natural history and comparative efficacy of endoscopic and surgical therapies

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Progression to cancer typically occurs in a stepwise fashion through worsening dysplasia and ultimately, invasive neoplasia. Established EAC with deep involvement of the esophageal wall and/or metastatic disease is invariably associated with poor long-term survival rates. This guides the rationale of surveillance of Barrett’s in an attempt to treat lesions at an earlier, and potentially curative stage. The last two decades have seen a paradigm shift in management of Barrett’s with rapid expansion in the role of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for management of dysplastic and early neoplastic BE, and there have been substantial changes to international consensus guidelines for management of early BE based on evolving evidence. This review aims to assist the physician in the therapeutic decision-making process with patients by comprehensive review and summary of literature surrounding natural history of Barrett’s by histological stage, and the effectiveness of interventions in attenuating the risk posed by its natural history. Key findings were as follows. Non-dysplastic Barrett’s is associated with extremely low risk of progression, and interventions cannot be justified. The annual risk of cancer progression in low grade dysplasia is between 1%-3%; EET can be offered though evidence for its benefit remains confined to highly select settings. High-grade dysplasia progresses to cancer in 5%-10% per year; EET is similarly effective to and less morbid than surgery and should be routinely performed for this indication. Risk of nodal metastases in intramucosal cancer is 2%-4%, which is comparable to operative mortality rate, so EET is usually preferred. Submucosal cancer is associated with nodal metastases in 14%-41% hence surgery remains standard of care, except for select situations.

Transition from esophagectomy to endoscopic therapy for early esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

To assess the outcomes of patients with early esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia comparing esophagectomy, the historical treatment of choice, to endoscopic eradication therapy (EET).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with early esophageal cancer/high-grade dysplasia, treated between 2000 and 2018 at a tertiary center. Primary outcomes were all-cause and disease-specific mortality assessed by multivariable Cox regression and a propensity score matching sub analysis, providing hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for age, tumor grade (G1/2 vs. G3), tumor stage, and lymphovascular invasion. Secondary outcomes included complications, hospital stay, and overall costs.

RESULTS

Among 269 patients, 133 underwent esophagectomy and 136 received EET. Adjusted survival analysis showed no difference between groups regarding all-cause mortality (HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.73, 4.72) and disease-specific mortality (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.26, 4.65). In-hospital and 30-day mortality was 0% in both groups. The surgical group had a significantly higher rate of complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3 26.3% vs. endoscopic therapy 0.74%), longer in-patient stay (median 14 vs. 0 days endoscopic therapy) and higher hospital costs(£16 360 vs. £8786 per patient).

CONCLUSION

This series of patients treated during a transition period from surgery to EET, demonstrates a primary endoscopic approach does not compromise oncological outcomes with the benefit of fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower costs compared to surgery. It should be available as the gold standard treatment for patients with early esophageal cancer. Those with adverse prognostic features may still benefit from esophagectomy.

Individual risk calculator to predict lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lymph node metastasis (LNM) is possible after endoscopic resection of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). This study aimed to develop and internally validate a prediction model that estimates the individual risk of metastases in patients with pT1b EAC.

METHODS

A nationwide, retrospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted in patients with pT1b EAC treated with endoscopic resection and/or surgery between 1989 and 2016. The primary end point was presence of LNM in surgical resection specimens or detection of metastases during follow-up. All resection specimens were histologically reassessed by specialist gastrointestinal pathologists. Subdistribution hazard regression analysis was used to develop the prediction model. The discriminative ability of this model was assessed using the c-statistic.

RESULTS

248 patients with pT1b EAC were included. Metastases were seen in 78 patients, and the 5-year cumulative incidence was 30.9 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 25.1 %-36.8 %). The risk of metastases increased with submucosal invasion depth (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 1.08, 95 %CI 1.02-1.14, for every increase of 500 μm), lymphovascular invasion (SHR 2.95, 95 %CI 1.95-4.45), and for larger tumors (SHR 1.23, 95 %CI 1.10-1.37, for every increase of 10 mm). The model demonstrated good discriminative ability (c-statistic 0.81, 95 %CI 0.75-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

A third of patients with pT1b EAC experienced metastases within 5 years. The probability of developing post-resection metastases was estimated with a personalized predicted risk score incorporating tumor invasion depth, tumor size, and lymphovascular invasion. This model requires external validation before implementation into clinical practice.

Endoscopic management of Barrett's dysplasia and early neoplasia: efficacy, safety and long-term outcomes in a UK tertiary centre

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are effective treatments for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). This study evaluates efficacy, durability and safety in a single high-volume UK tertiary centre with 15-years' experience.

METHODS

Prospective data were collected from Nottingham University Hospitals 2004-2019 for endotherapy of dysplastic BE or intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Procedural outcome measures include complete resection, complications and surgery rates. Efficacy outcomes include complete remission of dysplasia (CR-D) and intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM), recurrence, treatment failure rates, durability of RFA, median follow up and tumor-associated mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 319 lesions were resected; 671 RFAs were performed on 239 patients. Median age was 67 (±9.5) years, male:female ratio was 5:1 and median BE length was C3 [interquartile range (IQR): 6] M6 (IQR: 5). The most common lesion was Paris IIa (64%) with a median size of 10 mm (3-70). Final histology was adenocarcinoma in 50%. Complete resection rates were 96%. The multiband mucosectomy technique (91%) was most commonly used. The median number of RFA sessions was 3 (IQR: 2). The rates of CR-D and CR-IM were 90.4%% and 89.8% achieved after a median of 20.1 (IQR: 14) months. The most common complications: EMR was bleeding 2.2% and RFA was stricture (5.4%) requiring a median of 2 (range 1-7) dilatations. Median follow up post CR-IM/CR-D was 38 months (14-60). Metachronous lesions developed in 4.7% after CR-D and tumor-related mortality was 0.8%. Dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia-free survival at 5 years was 95 and 90%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

BE endotherapy is minimally invasive, effective, safe and deliverable in a day-case setting.

Measuring depth of invasion of submucosa - invasive adenocarcinoma in oesophageal endoscopic specimens: how good are we?☆

AIMS

Emerging data support that submucosa-invasive (pT1b) esophageal adenocarcinomas are cured via endoscopic resection, provided that invasion measures ≤500 μm, they lack other histological features predictive of nodal metastasis and have negative margins. Hence, pathologists' measurement of the depth of submucosal invasion in endoscopic resections may dictate further management (i.e. endoscopic follow-up versus oesophagectomy). In this study, we assessed the interobserver agreement in measuring the depth of submucosal invasion in oesophageal endoscopic resections.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Six subspecialised gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists from five academic centres independently measured the depth of submucosal invasion in μm from the deepest muscularis mucosae on 37 oesophageal endoscopic resection slides (round 1 scoring). A consensus meeting with a systematic approach for measuring and discussion of pitfalls was undertaken and remeasuring (round 2 scoring) was conducted. Interobserver agreement was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen's kappa statistics. A lack of agreement was seen among the six reviewers with a poor ICC for both rounds: 1 [0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.26-0.56] and 2 (0.49, 95% CI = 0.34-0.63). When measurements were categorised as < or >500 μm, the overall agreement among the six reviewers was only fair for both rounds: 1 (kappa = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.22-0.53) and 2 (kappa = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.12-0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows a lack of agreement among gastrointestinal pathologists in measuring the depth of submucosal invasion in oesophageal endoscopic resections despite formulating a consensus approach for scoring. If important management decisions continue to be based upon this parameter, more reproducible and concrete guidelines are needed.

Recent advances in early esophageal cancer: diagnosis and treatment based on endoscopy

Esophageal cancer (EC) often cannot be discovered in time because of its asymptomatic or symptom-atypical characteristics in early stage. The risk and probability of lymph node metastasis and distant metastasis increase correspondingly as the cancer aggressively invades deeper layers. Treatment regimens may be shifted to surgery and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) from endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) with poor quality of life and prognosis. It is imperative to identify dysplasia and EC early and enable early curative endoscopic treatments. Newer methods have been attempted in the clinical setting to achieve early detection at a more microscopic and precise level. Newer imaging techniques and artificial intelligence (AI) technology have been involved in targeted biopsies and will gradually unveil the visualization of pathology in the future. Early detection and diagnosis are the prerequisite to choose personal and precise treatment regimens. EET has also been undergoing development and improvement to benefit more patients as the first option or the firstly chosen alternative therapy, when compared with esophagectomy. More clinical studies are needed to provide more possibilities for EET.

Laparoscopic lymph node sampling: a new concept for patients with high-risk early esophagogastric junction cancer resected endoscopically

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection is considered a curative treatment for early upper GI cancers under certain histologic (low-risk) criteria. In tumors not completely fulfilling these criteria but resected R0 endoscopically, esophagectomy is still advised because of an increased risk of lymph node (LN) metastases (LNM). However, the benefit-risk ratio, especially in elderly patients at higher risk for radical surgery, can be debated. We now present the outcome of our case series of laparoscopic LN sampling (LLS) in patients with T1 esophagogastric junction tumors, which had been completely resected by endoscopy but did not fulfill the low-risk criteria (G1/2, m, L0, V0).

METHODS

Retrospective review was done of all patients with T1 cancer undergoing LLS with at least 1 high-risk parameter after endoscopic resection during an 8-year period. Repeated endoscopy with biopsy and abdominothoracic CT had been performed before. The patients were divided into 2 periods: before (n = 8) and after (n = 12) the introduction of an extended LLS protocol (additional resection of the left gastric artery). In cases of positive LN, patients underwent conventional oncologic surgery; if negative, follow-up was performed. The main outcome was the number of harvested LNs by means of LLS and the percentage of positive LNs found.

RESULTS

Twenty patients with cardia (n = 1) and distal esophageal/Barrett's cancer (n = 19) were included. The LN rate with use of the extended LLS technique increased by 12% (period 1: median 12 [range, 5-19; 95% CI, 3.4-15.4] vs period 2: median 17.5 [range, 12-40; 95% CI, 12.8-22.2]; P = .013). There were 2 adverse events: 1 inadvertent chest tube removal and 1 postoperative pneumonia. In 15% of cases, patients had positive LNs. and in 2 cases there was local recurrence at the endoscopic resection site, all necessitating surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

An extended technique of laparoscopic LN sampling appears to provide adequate LN numbers and is a safe approach with short hospital stay only. Only long-term follow-up of larger patient numbers will allow conclusions about miss rate as well as oncologic adequacy of this concept.

Feasibility of sentinel node navigated surgery in high-risk T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma patients using a hybrid tracer of technetium-99 m and indocyanine green

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy is standard of care for T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) with a high risk of lymph node metastasis. Sentinel node navigation surgery (SNNS) is a well-known concept to tailor the extent of lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of SNNS with a hybrid tracer (technetium-99 m/indocyanine green/nanocolloid) for patients with high-risk T1b EAC.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicenter pilot study, 5 patients with high-risk T1b EAC were included. The tracer was injected endoscopically around the endoscopic resection scar the day before surgery, followed by preoperative imaging (lymphoscintigraphy/SPECT-CT). During surgery, first the SNs were localized and resected based on preoperative imaging and intraoperative gammaprobe- and fluorescence-based detection, followed by esophagectomy. Primary endpoints were the percentage of patients with detectable SNs, concordance between preoperative and intraoperative SN detection, and the additive value of indocyanine green.

RESULTS

SNs could be identified and resected in all patients (median 3 SNs per patient, range 2-7). There was a high concordance between preoperative and intraoperative SN detection. In 2 patients additional peritumoral SNs were identified with fluorescence-based detection. None of the resected lymph nodes showed signs of (micro)metastases and no nodal metastases were detected in the surgical resection specimen.

CONCLUSIONS

SNNS using technetium-99 m/indocyanine green/nanocolloid seems feasible and safe in patients with high-risk T1b EAC. Indocyanine green fluorescence seems to be of additive value for detection of peritumoral SNs. Whether this approach can optimize selection for esophagectomy needs to be studied in future research.

Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for patients with small-sized T1N0 esophageal cancer: A propensity-matched study

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic resection (ER) has been rapidly adopted in the treatment of early-stage esophageal cancer. We aimed to compare the outcomes of ER with esophagectomy for patients with small-sized (≤2 cm) stage T1a and T1b esophageal cancer in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

We queried the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for patients with T1N0M0 esophageal cancer who underwent ER or esophagectomy and generated a balanced cohort with 217 matched pairs using propensity score matching (PSM). Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression analysis were employed to investigate the matched cohort. Subgroup analyses of T stage were also performed.

RESULTS

We identified 702 patients; 309 (44.0 %) underwent ER, and 393 (56.0 %) underwent esophagectomy. In the unmatched cohort, patients who underwent ER were older, more likely to have a T1a stage, and less likely to receive lymph node sampling. In the entire matched cohort, multivariate analysis found esophagectomy were associated with better overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.62, 95 % CI: 0.40-0.96, p = 0.032) than ER, but no significant difference in esophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS) (HR: 1.37, 95 % CI: 0.64-2.96, p = 0.420) between the two procedures. The results were similar for subgroup analyses of stage T1b patients. However, ER and esophagectomy were associated with similar OS (HR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.41-1.36; p = 0.334) and ECSS (HR: 3.69, 95 % CI: 0.95-14.39; p = 0.060) in patients with stage T1a disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stage T1 esophageal cancer, ER was similar to esophagectomy in terms of oncologic outcomes. More prospective studies should be implemented to determine the optimal treatment for T1b esophageal cancer patients with risk factors.

Optimizing Outcomes with Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus: Candidates, Efficacy and Durability

The treatment of early Barrett's esophagus (BE) has undergone a paradigm shift from surgical subtotal esophagectomy to organ-saving endoluminal treatment. Over the past 15 years, several high-quality studies were conducted to assess safe oncological outcome of endoscopic resection of mucosal adenocarcinoma and high-grade dysplasia. It became clear that add-on ablative therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) significantly reduces recurrence risk of neoplasia after resection. In this review, we highlight the most essential elements to optimize outcomes of RFA of BE, addressing the correct indication and patient selection in combination with the most efficient and safest treatment protocols to obtain long-term durability.

Measuring Quality in Barrett's Esophagus: Time to Embrace Quality Indicators

Endoscopic eradication therapy is a safe and effective therapy that has revolutionized the management of patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia. Despite this, there remains significant heterogeneity in clinical practice with consequent variation in patient outcomes. The aim of this article was to align consensus statements based on the best available evidence and expert opinion from the United States and United Kingdom to develop robust and measurable quality indicators that help to ensure patients with BE-related neoplasia receive the highest possible quality of care uniformly.

Role of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Management of Barrett's Related Neoplasia

Endoscopic resection has been proven to be safe and highly effective for removing early neoplastic lesions in Barrett esophagus. It enables accurate histopathological assessment and is therefore considered as the cornerstone in the endoscopic work-up for patients with Barrett neoplasia. Various techniques are available to perform endoscopic resection. Multiband mucosectomy is the most commonly used resection technique. However, endoscopic submucosal dissection is gaining ground in the Western world. Endoscopic resection for low-risk submucosal lesions already is fully justified. Future studies have to point out whether endoscopic resection and subsequent follow-up are also justified in selected patients with high-risk submucosal tumors.

Infiltration Depth is the Most Relevant Risk Factor for Overall Metastases in Early Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Research in early esophageal adenocarcinoma focused on prediction of lymph node metastases in order to stratify patients for endoscopic treatment instead of esophagectomy. Although distant metastases were described in rates of up to 13% of patients within a follow-up of 3 years, their prediction has been neglected so far.

METHODS

In a secondary analysis, a cohort of 217 patients (53 T1a and 164 T1b) treated by esophagectomy was analyzed for histopathological risk factors. Their ability to predict the combination of lymph node metastases at surgery as well as metachronous locoregional and distant metastases (overall metastatic rate) was assessed by uni- and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Tumor invasion depth was correlated with both lymph node metastases at surgery (τ = 0.141; P = .012), tumor recurrences (τ = 0.152; P = .014), and distant metastases (τ = 0.122; P = 0.04). Multivariate analysis showed an odds ratio of 1.31 (95% CI 1.02-1.67; P = .033) per increasing tumor invasion depth and of 3.5 (95% CI 1.70-6.56; P < .001) for lymphovascular invasion. The pre-planned subgroup analysis in T1b tumors demonstrated an even lower predictive ability of lymphovascular invasion with an odds ratio of 2.5 (95% CI 1.11-5.65; P = 0.028), whereas the predictive effect of sm2 (odds ratio 3.44; 95% CI 1.00-11.9; P = 0.049) and sm3 (odds ratio 3.44; 95% CI 1.00-11.9; P = 0.049) tumor invasion depth was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The present report demonstrates the insufficient risk prediction of histopathologic risk factors for the overall metastatic rate.

The management and long-term outcomes of endoscopic and surgical treatment of early esophageal adenocarcinoma

Endoscopic resection (ER) for early (pT1) esophageal adenocarcinoma can be justified if the rate of coexisting lymph node (LN) metastasis is less than the mortality rate from esophagectomy. This study examines endoscopic and surgical outcomes, histological assessment of submucosal (sm) disease, factors influencing LN metastasis, and the safety of treating pT1b disease endoscopically. Histopathological reexamination recorded thickness, width and depth of sm invasion, grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), resection margin status and tumor stage. Multivariate analysis was employed to evaluate the factors influencing survival and LN metastasis. Rate of LN metastasis for pT1 low-risk (LR: sm invasion < 500 μm, G1-2, no LVI) or high-risk (HR: sm invasion >500 μm, G3-4 or LVI) disease were analyzed. Ninety three patients underwent ER and 96 underwent esophagectomy. We demonstrate conflicting histological methods of sm disease reporting, which may explain the difference in LN metastasis rate between reported surgical & endoscopic series. Multivariate analysis confirmed age, T stage, and presence of LN metastases were the independent factors predicting poor prognosis. Tumor thickness as well as grade, T stage, LVI were predictors of LN metastasis. Rates of LN metastasis are <2% in LR sm1 disease, and >15% in HR sm1 disease. Pathological reporting of sm invasion should be updated for uniform analysis of endoscopic and surgical specimens. Following rigorous histopathological examination and within a close endoscopic follow-up regimen, pT1a and pT1b LRsm1 disease may be treated with curative intent endoscopically, whereas pT1b HRsm1-sm3 disease should be offered surgery.

Outcomes of patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The treatment of submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) remains in evolution, with some evidence supporting endoscopic management of low-risk lesions. Using a multicenter cohort, we evaluated outcomes of patients with T1b EAC and predictors of survival.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed between 2001 and 2016 with T1b EAC were identified from 3 academic medical centers in the United States. Demographic, clinical, and outcome data were collected. Outcomes studied were overall and cancer-free survival. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to assess independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-one patients were included, of whom 68 (48%) underwent esophagectomy and 73 (52%) were treated endoscopically. Most patients (85.8%) had high-risk histologic features. Thirty-day operative mortality was 2.9%. Median follow-up in the esophagectomy and endoscopic cohorts was 49.4 and 43.4 months, respectively. Patients treated endoscopically were older with higher comorbidity scores, with 46 (63%) achieving histologic remission. Nineteen patients (26.0%) also received chemoradiation. Five-year overall survival rates in the surgical and endoscopic cohorts were 89% and 59%, respectively, whereas 5-year cancer-free survival rates were 92% and 69%. Presence of high-risk histologic features was associated with reduced overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large multicenter study of patients with T1b EAC, esophagectomy was associated with improved overall but not cancer-free survival. High-risk histologic features were associated with poorer survival.

Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus: Have We Gone Too Far, or Not Far Enough?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a premalignant condition of the esophagus associated with an increased risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a safe and effective first-line treatment for dysplastic BE and early stage EAC. This report reviews clinically relevant evidence published over the last 3 years regarding RFA for BE.

RECENT FINDINGS

Our use of this technology has simultaneously gone too far, in that many patients who may not derive a benefit from these treatments are receiving them, and not far enough, in that many patients who would be eligible for ablative therapy never undergo screening exams to assess them for dysplastic BE, or do not have endoscopic therapy considered part of the treatment of superficial invasive cancer. Research to better identify patients with BE, risk stratify those patients, improve the quality of RFA treatment, and inform surveillance practices has the potential to optimize the benefit of RFA, and minimize the harms, costs, and risks.

Outcomes of esophagectomy after noncurative endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend performing esophagectomy after endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer when the risk of lymph node metastasis or residual cancer is found to be significant and endoscopic treatment is therefore noncurative. Our aim was to assess the safety and oncological outcomes of esophagogastric resection in this specific clinical setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review from 2012 to 2018 was performed at four tertiary referral centers. All patients had a noncurative endoscopic resection of a clinical T1 esophageal cancer, followed by esophagectomy. Outcome measures were the rates of T0N0 specimens, overall survival, disease-free and cancer-specific survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 30 patients (13 with squamous cell carcinoma and 17 with adenocarcinoma) were included. The reasons for noncurative endoscopic resection were: positive vertical margins (n = 12), squamous cell carcinoma with muscularis mucosae or submucosal layer invasion (n = 3 and 9), adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (n = 11), poorly differentiated tumor (n = 6) and lymphovascular invasion (n = 6). Overall, 63% of the esophagi were T0N0: most residual lesions were T1a metachronous lesions, and four (13%) patients had advanced pT status (n = 3) or lymph node metastases (n = 2). Overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival were 83%, 75%, and 90% respectively. A total of 43% of patients had severe postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality was 7%.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort, esophagectomy allowed the resection of residual advanced cancer or lymph node metastases in 13% of cases, at the cost of 43% severe morbidity and 7% mortality. Therefore, the possibility of close follow up needs to be balanced with a highly morbid surgical management in these patients.

Treatment of early stage (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma: Personalizing the best therapy choice

Esophagectomy is considered the primary form of management for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC); however, the surgery is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. For patients with early-stage EAC, endoscopic resection (ER) presents a potential curative treatment option that is less invasive and carries fewer risks procedure related risks, but it is associated with higher rates of cancer recurrence following the procedure. For some patients, age and comorbidities may prevent them from having esophagectomy as a treatment option, while other patients may be operative candidates but do not wish to undergo esophagectomy for a variety of reasons related to their values and preferences. Furthermore, while anxiety of cancer recurrence following ER may significantly diminish a patient’s quality of life (QOL), so might the morbidity surrounding esophagectomy. In addition to considering health status, patient preferences, and impacts on QOL, physicians and patients must also consider what treatments would be both beneficial and available to the patient, considering esophagectomy methods-minimally invasive vs open-or the use of chemoradiotherapy in addition to ER. Our article reviews and summarizes available treatment options for patients with early EAC and their potential effects on the health and wellbeing of patients based on the current data. We conclude with a request for more research of available options for early EAC patients, the conditions that determine when each option should be employed, and their effects not only on patient health but also QOL.

The overall metastatic rate in early esophageal adenocarcinoma: long-time follow-up of surgically treated patients

The overall metastatic potential of surgically treated early esophageal adenocarcinoma has not been studied in detail. This paper therefore assessed lymph node metastases at surgery, loco regional and distant metastases, in order to assess the metastatic potential of early esophageal adenocarcinoma. Two hundred and seventeen patients (53 T1a, 164 T1b; median follow-ups 87 and 75 months, 187 males) diagnosed with early esophageal adenocarcinoma and treated with esophagectomy in our tertiary center's database between July 2000 and December 2015 were included. All metastatic events were retrospectively analyzed, their topographic distribution was assessed, and the overall metastatic rate was calculated. Lymph node metastases occurred in 39 patients (18%) and 29 (13.4%) developed recurrences. Lymph node metastases were absent in m1 and m2 tumors and rare in m3 (1/18), m4 (5/21), and sm1 (4/42), but more frequent in sm2 (11/44) and sm3 tumors (18/78). Locoregional recurrences were exceedingly rare in m3 (2/18), m4 (1/21), sm1 (1/42), and sm2 (2/44), but frequent in sm3 (12/78). In contrast, distant metastases were more frequent with 2/18 in m3, 1/21 in m4, 4/42 in sm1, 4/44 in sm2, and 13/78 in sm3. Overall metastatic rates of 11.9% in sm1 (submucosal layer divided into equal thirds), 27.3% in sm2, and 32.1% in sm3 tumors were calculated. This first report of the metastatic potential of early esophageal adenocarcinoma provides a meticulous assessment of the overall metastatic risk. Metastatic events pose a relevant risk in surgically treated patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma with distant metastases being more frequent than locoregional recurrences.

Resection of early esophageal neoplasms: The pendulum swings from surgical to endoscopic management

Esophageal cancer is a highly lethal disease and is the sixth leading cause of cancer related mortality in the world. The standard treatment is esophagectomy which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This led to development of minimally invasive, organ sparing endoscopic therapies which have comparable outcomes to esophagectomy in early cancer. These include endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. In early squamous cell cancer, endoscopic submucosal dissection is preferred as it is associated with cause specific 5-year survival rates of 100% for M1 and M2 tumors and 85% for M3 and SM1 tumors and low recurrence rates. In early adenocarcinoma, endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities is followed by ablation of the remaining flat Barrett’s mucosa to prevent recurrences. Radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used ablation modality with others being cryotherapy and argon plasma coagulation. Focal endoscopic mucosal resection followed by radiofrequency ablation leads to eradication of neoplasia in 93.4% of patients and eradication of intestinal metaplasia in 73.1% of patients. Innovative techniques such as submucosal tunneling with endoscopic resection are developed for management of submucosal tumors of the esophagus. This review includes a discussion of various endoscopic techniques and their clinical outcomes in early squamous cell cancer, adenocarcinoma and submucosal tumors. An overview of comparison between esophagectomy and endoscopic therapy are also presented.

The influence of adjuvant radiation therapy after endoscopic resection on survival for early stage EC: an analysis of the surveillance epidemiology and end results (SEER) database

Background

Endoscopic resection (ER) followed by radiation therapy (RT) is a treatment option for early stage esophageal cancer (EC). We used the surveillance epidemiology and end results (SEER) database to investigate the influence of adjuvant RT after ER on survival for early stage EC.

Methods

The SEER database [1998-2013] was queried for locoregional cases of EC. Tumor staging was redefined with the 8th Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)/Union for International Cancer Control tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system. The T1-2 stage EC cases in which ER were followed by radiation or observation were included. Kaplan-Meier methods were performed to compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) between the patients who received radiation and those who did not. Subgroup analysis was made according to AJCC stage. A multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used to identify independent covariates which may influence survival.

Results

The median survival of the no-radiation group was significantly longer than that of the radiation group [74 vs. 31 months; hazard risk (HR), 2.39; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.782-3.197; P<0.001]. In T1a stage subgroup, patients who did not receive RT had significantly better OS and CSS outcomes (OS: 90 vs. 31 months; HR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.766-4.773; P<0.001; CSS: 105 vs. 48 months; HR, 5.40; 95% CI, 2.636-8.226; P<0.001). In the T1b and T2 subgroup analyses, both the OS and CSS were not significantly different between the radiation group and the no-radiation group (all P>0.05). In multivariate regression analysis, radiation was not a significant factor for OS and CSS after adjustment for confounding factors (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Using SEER data, we revealed that RT after ER did not improve survival in early stage EC patients; specifically, RT did not benefit T1b and T2 patients and may lead to poorer survival in T1a patients. Our findings do not support the addition of RT after ER for early stage EC, especially T1a EC.

Quality indicators for Barrett's endotherapy (QBET): UK consensus statements for patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for Barrett's neoplasia

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic therapy for the management of patients with Barrett's oesophagus (BE) neoplasia has significantly developed in the past decade; however, significant variation in clinical practice exists. The aim of this project was to develop expert physician-lead quality indicators (QIs) for Barrett's endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to combine the best available scientific evidence with the collective judgement of experts to develop quality indicators for Barrett's endotherapy in four subgroups: pre-endoscopy, intraprocedure (resection and ablation) and postendoscopy. International experts, including gastroenterologists, surgeons, BE pathologist, clinical nurse specialist and patient representative, participated in a three-round process to develop 15 QIs that fulfilled the RAND/UCLA definition of appropriateness.

RESULTS

17 experts participated in round 1 and 20 in round 2. Of the 24 proposed QIs in round 1, 20 were ranked as appropriate (put through to round 2) and 4 as uncertain (discarded). At the end of round 2, a final list of 15 QIs were scored as appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS

This UK national consensus project has successfully developed QIs for patients undergoing Barrett's endotherapy. These QIs can be used by service providers to ensure that all patients with BE neoplasia receive uniform and high-quality care.

Staging of T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma with volumetric laser endomicroscopy: a feasibility study

Background and study aims  Precise staging in T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is critical in determining candidacy for curative endoscopic resection. High-frequency endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has demonstrated suboptimal accuracy in T1 EAC staging due to insufficient spatial resolution. Volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE) allows for high-resolution wide-field visualization of the esophageal microstructure. We aimed to investigate the role of VLE in staging T1 EAC. Patients and methods  Patients undergoing endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) were prospectively enrolled and only T1 EAC cases were included. EMR specimens were imaged using second-generation VLE immediately after resection. VLE images were analyzed for signal intensity by depth and signal attenuation (dB/mm) in both cross-sectional and en-face orientation. A decision tree model was constructed to combine measured VLE parameters and delineate diagnostic thresholds. Results  Thirty EMR scans were obtained - 15 T1a specimens from 9 patients and 15 T1b specimens from 11 patients. T1b specimen VLE scans exhibited higher signal intensity ( P  < 0.0001) and higher signal attenuation compared to T1a specimens ( P  = 0.03). A combination of signal attenuation and signal intensity at 150 µm depth yielded optimal diagnostic thresholds and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.77. VLE signal attenuation was significantly associated with grade of differentiation, irrespective of EAC stage. Conclusions  VLE signal intensity and signal attenuation are quantitatively distinct in T1a and T1b EAC and associated with grade of differentiation. This is the first study examining the role of VLE for staging of T1 EAC and demonstrates promising diagnostic performance. With further in vivo validation, VLE may serve a role in staging superficial EAC.

Endoscopic resection for early esophageal carcinoma

Endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer is a very precise endoscopic surgical technique and having experience in endoscopic resection is mandatory to perform these kinds of procedures safely. In case of adequate resection and favorable histological outcome, long-term prognosis of the patient is excellent. The basic principle for endoscopic treatment of early adenocarcinoma is based on the fact that the risk of lymph node metastasis gradually increases with the depth of invasion. Inspection and evaluation of all mucosal and submucosal lesions need to be done carefully before endoscopic resection. Endoscopic resection of mucosal (T1m1-3) and superficial submucosal (T1sm1) adenocarcinoma can be curative as well as for superficial mucosal (T1m1-m2) squamous cell carcinoma. In Paris type I lesions in Barrett's esophagus and for early squamous cell carcinoma endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the preferred option. The risk of severe adverse events associated with endoscopic resection are low. Most adverse events are managed endoscopically and can be treated conservatively. Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used ablation technique for Barrett's epithelium and highly effective to achieve full remission of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia. The role of radiofrequency ablation in the treatment armamentarium in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus has still to be determined.

Do pathologists agree with each other on the histological assessment of pT1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma?

Background

In early (T1) oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), the histological profile of an endoscopic resection specimen plays a pivotal role in the prediction of lymph node metastasis and the potential need for oesophagectomy with lymphadenectomy.

Objective

To evaluate the inter-observer agreement of the histological assessment of submucosal (pT1b) OAC.

Methods

Surgical and endoscopic resection specimens with pT1b OAC were independently reviewed by three gastrointestinal pathologists. Agreement was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient for continuous variables, and Fleiss' kappa (κ) for categorical variables. Bland–Altman plots of the submucosal invasion depth were made.

Results

Eighty-five resection specimens with pT1b OAC were evaluated. The agreement was good for differentiation grade (κ=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68–0.87), excellent for lymphovascular invasion (κ=0.88, 95% CI 0.76–1.00) and moderate for submucosal invasion depth using the Paris and Pragmatic classifications (κ=0.60, 95% CI 0.49–0.72 and κ=0.42, 95% CI 0.33–0.51, respectively). Systematic mean differences between pathologists were detected for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth, ranging from 297 µm to 602 µm.

Conclusions

A substantial discordance was found between pathologists for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth in pT1b OAC. Differences may lead to an over- or underestimation of the lymph node metastasis risk, with grave implications for the treatment strategy. Review by a second gastrointestinal pathologist is recommended to improve differentiating between a favourable and an unfavourable histological profile.

Risk of lymph node metastases in patients with T1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma: A retrospective single centre experience

AIM

To assess clinical outcomes for submucosal (T1b) oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) patients managed with either surgery or endoscopic eradication therapy.

METHODS

Patients found to have T1b OAC following endoscopic resection between January 2008 to February 2016 at University College London Hospital were retrospectively analysed. Patients were split into low-risk and high-risk groups according to established histopathological criteria and were then further categorised according to whether they underwent surgical resection or conservative management. Study outcomes include the presence of lymph-node metastases, disease-specific mortality and overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were included; 22 patients were surgically managed (1 low-risk and 21 high-risk patients) whilst 38 patients were treated conservatively (12 low-risk and 26 high-risk). Overall, lymph node metastases (LNM) were detected in 10 patients (17%); six of these patients had undergone conservative management and LNM were detected at a median of 4 mo after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). All LNM occurred in patients with high-risk lesions and this represented 21% of the total high-risk lesions. Importantly, there was no statistically significant difference in tumor-related deaths between those treated surgically or conservatively (P = 0.636) and disease-specific survival time was also comparable between the two treatment strategies (P = 0.376).

CONCLUSION

T1b tumours without histopathological high-risk markers of LNM can be treated endoscopically with good out-comes. In selected patients, endoscopic therapy may be appropriate for high-risk lesions.

Management of Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and early-stage adenocarcinoma is amenable to curative treatment by endoscopic resection. Histopathological correlation has established that mucosal cancer has minimal risk of nodal metastases and that long-term complete remission can be achieved. Although surgery is the gold-standard treatment once there is submucosal involvement, even T1sm1 (submucosal invasion ≤ 500 μm) cases without additional risk factors for nodal metastases might also be cured with endoscopic resection. Endoscopic resection is foremost an initial diagnostic procedure, and once histopathological assessment confirms that curative criteria are met, it will be considered curative. Endoscopic resection may be achieved by endoscopic mucosal resection, which, although easy to perform with relatively low risk, is limited by an inability to achieve en bloc resection for lesions of size more than 1.5 cm. Conversely, the technique of endoscopic submucosal dissection is more technically demanding with higher risk of complications but is able to achieve en bloc resection for lesions larger than 1.5 cm. Endoscopic submucosal dissection would be particularly important in specific situations such as suspected submucosal invasion and lesion size more than 1.5 cm. In other situations, since endoscopic resection would always be combined with radiofrequency ablation to ablate the remaining Barrett's epithelium, piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection would suffice since any remnant superficial invisible dysplasia would be ablated.

Endoscopic Treatment of Early-Stage Esophageal Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Esophageal cancer is a leading cause of global cancer-related mortality. Here, we discuss the major endoscopic treatment modalities for management of early esophageal cancer (EEC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in endoscopic imaging and therapy have shifted the paradigm of managing early esophageal cancers. Though esophagectomy remains the preferred management for advanced cancers, guidelines now recommend endoscopic resection followed by ablative therapy for early (Tis and T1a) cancers. Available data suggests endoscopic treatment is comparable to surgery with regard to overall and cancer-specific survival with lower procedural morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic modalities are emerging as frontline treatment options for patients with early esophageal cancers. Accurate clinical staging with assessment of disease extent, tumor grade, and risk of nodal metastases is crucial when determining eligibility for endoscopic management of EEC. High-quality routine surveillance endoscopy is critical in patients who have undergone resection and/or ablation.