Low dose preoperative radiotherapy for carcinoma of the oesophagus: results of a randomized clinical trial

Esophageal Cancer: Whether and What Before or After Surgery?

Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer and the sixth most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Surgery has been the mainstay of the treatment of esophageal cancer. However, given the dismal survival with surgery alone, other modalities, e.g., chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT), have been used for the management of these cancers. This review aims to look at the evolution of multi-modality management of esophageal cancer and tries to answer certain questions pertaining to the management of these cancers.

Construction and Verification of a Hypoxia-Stemness-Based Gene Signature for Risk Stratification in Esophageal Cancer

Background

Numerous studies have shown that esophageal cancer (ESCA) contains areas of intertumoral hypoxia. It is widely accepted that the association of hypoxia with cancer stemness in the tumor microenvironment of ESCA is of profound clinical significance. However, reliable prognostic signatures based on hypoxia and cancer stemness are still lacking in ESCA.

Material/Methods

The t-SNE algorithm was used to estimate the hypoxia status based on the transcriptome profiles of the discovery cohort in the TCGA database. Median values of the stemness index were used to group and identify stemness-associated differentially expressed genes (DEGs). The LASSO method and Cox regression model were combined to screen for prognostic genes and to establish a genetic signature based on hypoxia-stemness. The robustness of the prognostic model was then tested in an external independent validation cohort of the GEO database.

Results

A total of 8 genes – FBLN2, IL17RB, CYP2W1, AMTN, FABP1, FOXA2, GAS1, and CTSF – were identified to construct a gene signature for ESCA risk stratification. Overall survival was significantly lower in the high-risk group than in the low-risk group in both the internal discovery set and the external validation set. The risk score was found to be an independent prognostic factor for ESCA patients. In addition, a higher risk score was significantly associated with the sensitivity of ESCA patients to gefitinib, bexarotene, dasatinib, and imatinib.

Conclusions

The hypoxia-stemness-based genetic signature established for the first time in our study could be a promising tool for ESCA cancer risk stratification.

Management of Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer is diagnosed usually at a locally advanced stage. Surgery alone has less optimal results and a multimodality approach has been established as the standard of care for cII-III stages of esophageal cancer. This review focuses on the recent evidences of management of esophageal cancer with various variations in approaches in Eastern and Western countries. The major difference is the selection of induction treatment. Till the results of some ongoing trials become available, most of the evidences support neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery for squamous cell carcinoma and perioperative chemotherapy and surgery for adenocarcinoma.

The Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Therapy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Inconclusive results are available as to whether chemo/radiotherapy should be administered to resectable esophageal cancer patients before surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) or after surgery (adjuvant therapy). The paper, via a meta-analysis of effects of treatment modalities when administering chemo/radiotherapy, aims to systematically evaluate the effect of timing of chemo/radiotherapy and surgery.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search for clinical trials of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal cancer. Using meta-analysis, we conducted direct and adjusted indirect comparisons of overall survival, complete resection rate (R0 resection), perioperative mortality, leakage rate and local recurrence in patients with resectable esophageal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies involving 7985 patients with esophageal cancer were included in the meta-analysis. Twenty-five randomized controlled studies indirectly compared neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy with surgery alone, while five non-randomized controlled studies and two randomized controlled studies directly compared neoadjuvant with adjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery, compared with surgery along with adjuvant therapy, showed a significant overall survival advantage in our pooled analysis (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.79-0.98). Directly compared with adjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant therapy demonstrated a lower local recurrence rate (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.43-0.74) with low heterogeneity (I² = 1%). Neoadjuvant therapy, comparing to surgery with or without adjuvant therapy, showed a significantly higher R0 resection rate (OR 2.86; 95% CI 2.02-4.04) with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 38%) and no significant differences in postoperative anastomotic leakage (P = 0.50). However, neoadjuvant therapy, compared with surgery adjuvant therapy, significantly increased perioperative mortality in both direct and indirect comparisons (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that neoadjuvant therapy was associated with higher overall survival and R0 resection rate without increasing postoperative anastomotic leakage for patients with resectable esophageal cancer, whereas neoadjuvant therapy was associated with higher perioperative mortality after esophagectomy.

Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

The survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable carcinoma esophagus has been elucidated. We performed a meta-analysis in light of new studies and long-term results of past trials. The search strategy was refined to include only "neoadjuvant" so that any bias by adjuvant treatment is eliminated.

METHODS

A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was done. Only published randomized English language trials were included. Data were categorized as neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation (NACRT), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART), and neoadjuvant sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT). Meta-analysis was done using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI using fixed/random effects model. Heterogeneity was tested by chi-square and I2 test. Z probability calculated significant difference across subgroups. Outcomes assessed were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 and 5 years, respectively, mortality (30/90 day) and failures (local/systemic).

RESULTS

Twenty-five randomized trials involving 5272 patients were included for quantitative analysis. NACRT was evaluated in 12 studies (2676 patients). Superior 3-year OS (OR = 0.68 CI 0.52-0.90, p = 0.007), 3-year DFS (OR = 0.55 CI 0.45-0.68, p = 0.00001), and 5-year DFS (OR = 0.59 CI 0.47-0.74, p = 0.00001), with lower failures (OR = 0.52 CI 0.37-0.73, p = 0.0001), were seen in favor of NACRT at the cost of increased perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79 CI 1.15-2.80, p = .01). However, 5-year OS (OR = 0.78 CI 0.60-0.1.01, p = 0.06) was not found to be significantly superior. NACT, NART, and SCRT were not found to have any benefit over surgery alone.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis presents strong evidence favoring NACRT over upfront surgery. It also shows no survival advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Prognostic and Predictive Factors for the Curative Treatment of Esophageal and Gastric Cancer in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

An overview of promising prognostic variables and predictive subgroups concerning the curative treatment of esophageal and gastric cancer from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO conferences were searched up to March 2019 for RCTs on the curative treatment of esophageal or gastric cancer with data on prognostic and/or predictive factors for overall survival. Prognostic factors were deemed potentially clinically relevant according to the following criteria; (1) statistically significant (p < 0.05) in a multivariate analysis, (2) reported in at least 250 patients, and (3) p < 0.05, in ≥ 33% of the total number of patients in RCTs reporting this factor. Predictive factors were potentially clinically-relevant if (1) the p-value for interaction between subgroups was <0.20 and (2) the hazard ratio in one of the subgroups was significant (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

For gastric cancer, 39 RCTs were identified (n = 13,530 patients) and, for esophageal cancer, 33 RCTs were identified (n = 8618 patients). In total, we identified 23 potentially clinically relevant prognostic factors for gastric cancer and 16 for esophageal cancer. There were 15 potentially clinically relevant predictive factors for gastric cancer and 10 for esophageal cancer.

CONCLUSION

The identified prognostic and predictive factors can be included and analyzed in future RCTs and be of guidance for nomograms. Further validation should be performed in large patient cohorts.

Combined Modality Therapy for Management of Esophageal Cancer: Current Approach Based on Experiences from East and West

Human evolutionary genetic divergence and distinctive environmental exposures have contributed to the development of clinicopathologic variations of esophageal cancer in Eastern and Western countries. Different treatment strategies have derived from the disparate regional experiences. Treatment strategy is more standardized in the West. Trimodality treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery is widely accepted as the standard treatment of locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Trimodality treatment has not been adopted in many Eastern countries, and standard treatment is neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Several randomized trials are ongoing that may alter the standard management of esophageal cancer worldwide.

Stage selection for neoadjuvant radiotherapy in non-cervical esophageal cancer: A propensity score-matched study based on the SEER database

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NRT) was controversial in non-cervical esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to identify which stage of non-cervical esophageal cancer would get benefit from NRT using propensity score matching (PSM) and survival analysis based on the Surveillance Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

METHODS

A selection process was used for case screening from the SEER database. Seven baseline variables were included in PSM. The survival analysis were based on T stage (T2 and T3 ) and status of lymph node involvement (N0 and N+ ) using Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test for comparing the overall survival of patient with NRT plus surgery versus those who with surgery alone (SA).

RESULTS

A total of 1631 cases were included in this study. After PSM, 225 cases of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and 606 cases of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) were enrolled in survival analysis. We found that only T3 N+ stage of EAC would got survival benefit from NRT (P = 0.0052), while NRT showed no significant benefit in overall survival in other stages of EAC and ESCC.

CONCLUSIONS

NRT followed by resection had a significant survival benefit in non-cervical EAC patients with T3 N+ stage. For patients with ESCC and other EAC stages, NRT versus SA did not demonstrate a statistical significant survival difference.

Prognosis of surgery combined with different adjuvant therapies in esophageal cancer treatment: a network meta-analysis

This network meta-analysis was conducted to assess whether the efficacy of surgery with adjuvant therapies, including radiotherapy (RT+S), chemotherapy (CT+S), and chemoradiotherapy (CRT+S) have better performance in esophageal cancer treatment and management. PubMed and EMBASE were used to search for relevant trials. Both conventional pair-wise and network meta-analyses were carried out. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank interventions based on the efficacy of the treatment method. As for 3-year overall survival (OS), CRT+S showed the highest efficacy (CRT+S vs.

SURGERY

HR=0.81, 95% CrI =0.73-0.90; CRT+S vs. CT+S: HR=0.82, 95% CrI =0.70-0.95; CRT+S vs. RT+S: HR=0.77, 95% CrI =0.62-0.95). For disease-free survival, CRT+S showed efficacy over CT+S ((HR =0.70, 95% CrI =0. 59-0.83). In conclusion, CRT+S showed a better performance for survival outcomes and ranks best among all therapies. The results of our study can provide guidance for medical decisions and treatment options that may help clinical practitioners improve the efficacy of EC treatment.

Neoadjuvant treatments for locally advanced, resectable esophageal cancer: A network meta-analysis

The relative survival benefits and postoperative mortality among the different types of neoadjuvant treatments (such as chemotherapy only, radiotherapy only or chemoradiotherapy) for esophageal cancer patients are not well established. To evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapies in resectable esophageal cancer, a Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for publications up to May 2016. ASCO and ASTRO annual meeting abstracts were also searched up to the 2015 conferences. Randomized controlled trials that compared at least two of the following treatments for resectable esophageal cancer were included: surgery alone, surgery preceded by neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant radiotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The primary outcome assessed from the trials was overall survival. Thirty-one randomized controlled trials involving 5496 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. The network meta-analysis showed that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy improved overall survival when compared to all other treatments including surgery alone (HR 0.75, 95% CR 0.67-0.85), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.83. 95% CR 0.70-0.96) and neoadjuvant radiotherapy (HR 0.82, 95% CR 0.67-0.99). However, the risk of postoperative mortality increased when comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to either surgery alone (RR 1.46, 95% CR 1.00-2.14) or to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RR 1.58, 95% CR 1.00-2.49). In conclusion, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy improves overall survival but may also increase the risk of postoperative mortality in patients locally advanced resectable esophageal carcinoma.

Nimotuzumab combined with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in Japanese patients with esophageal cancer: A phase I study

Nimotuzumab is a humanized anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor IgG1 monoclonal antibody. This phase I study assessed the tolerability, safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of nimotuzumab in combination with chemoradiotherapy in Japanese patients with esophageal cancer. Patients with stage II, III, and IV esophageal cancer were enrolled. Patients were planned to receive nimotuzumab (level 1: 200 mg/wk for 25 weeks; or level 2: 400 mg/wk in the chemoradiation period, 400 mg biweekly in an additional chemotherapy period [8 weeks after the chemoradiation period] and a maintenance therapy period [after chemotherapy to 25 weeks]) combined with cisplatin (75 mg/m² on day 1) and fluorouracil (1000 mg/m² on days 1‐4) in the chemoradiation and additional chemotherapy periods. Radiotherapy was given concurrently at 50.4 Gy. A total of 10 patients were enrolled in level 1. Dose‐limiting toxicities were observed in 2 patients (grade 3 infection and renal disorder). Maximum‐tolerated dose was estimated to be at least 200 mg/wk and the dose was not escalated to level 2. The most common grade ≥3 toxicities were lymphopenia (90%), leukopenia (60%), neutropenia (50%), and febrile neutropenia, decreased appetite, hyponatremia, and radiation esophagitis (30% each). Neither treatment‐related death nor grade ≥3 skin toxicity was observed in any patient. Complete response rate was 50%. Progression‐free survival was 13.9 months. One‐ and 3‐year survival rates were 75% and 37.5%, respectively. Immunogenicity was not reported in any patient. Nimotuzumab in combination with concurrent chemoradiotherapy was tolerable and effective for Japanese patients with esophageal cancer.

Active surveillance in clinically complete responders after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery is standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer in many countries. After nCRT up to one third of all patients have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen, posing an ethical imperative to reconsider the necessity of standard surgery in all operable patients after nCRT. An active surveillance strategy following nCRT, in which patients are subjected to frequent clinical investigations after the completion of neoadjuvant therapy, has been evaluated in other types of cancer with promising results. In esophageal cancer, both patients who are cured by neoadjuvant therapy alone as well as patients with subclinical disseminated disease at the time of completion of neoadjuvant therapy may benefit from such an organ sparing approach. Active surveillance is currently applied in selected patients with esophageal cancer who refuse surgery or are medically unfit for major surgery after completion of nCRT, but this strategy is not (yet) adopted as an alternative to standard surgery or definitive chemoradiation. The available literature is scarce, but suggests that long-term oncological outcomes after active surveillance are noninferior compared to standard surgical resection, providing justification for comparison of both treatments in a phase III trial. This review gives an overview of the current knowledge regarding active surveillance after completion of nCRT in esophageal cancer and outlines future research perspectives.

An Update on Randomized Clinical Trials in Gastric Cancer

The optimal treatment of esophageal cancer is still being defined. The timing of surgical management and the application of chemotherapy and radiation in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings have been studied in several prospective, randomized, controlled trials. This article outlines some of the historical as well as updated research that has been published regarding the management of esophageal cancer.

Pre-operative treatments for adenocarcinoma of the lower oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction: a review of the current evidence from randomized trials

Adenocarcinomas of the lower oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction are a complex clinico-pathological setting. Multimodality therapy is considered mandatory in most disease presentations. Nevertheless, the most appropriate treatment package has yet to be established. We herein summarize the evidence derived from randomized phase III trials on pre-operative treatments in this oncological scenario.

Preoperative therapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is an aggressive malignancy associated with dismal treatment outcomes. Presence of two distinct histopathological types distinguishes it from other gastrointestinal tract malignancies. Surgery is the cornerstone of treatment in locally advanced esophageal cancer (T2 or greater or node positive); however, a high rate of disease recurrence (systemic and loco-regional) and poor survival justifies a continued search for optimal therapy. Various combinations of multimodality treatment (preoperative/perioperative, or postoperative; radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy) are being explored to lower disease recurrence and improve survival. Preoperative therapy followed by surgery is presently considered the standard of care in resectable locally advanced esophageal cancer as postoperative treatment may not be feasible for all the patients due to the morbidity of esophagectomy and prolonged recovery time limiting the tolerance of patient. There are wide variations in the preoperative therapy practiced across the centres depending upon the institutional practices, availability of facilities and personal experiences. There is paucity of literature to standardize the preoperative therapy. Broadly, chemoradiotherapy is the preferred neo-adjuvant modality in western countries whereas chemotherapy alone is considered optimal in the far East. The present review highlights the significant studies to assist in opting for the best evidence based preoperative therapy (radiotherapy, chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) for locally advanced esophageal cancer.

Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable esophageal carcinoma: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of surgery alone for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) is still unsatisfactory. Presently, induction therapy followed by surgery is the standard treatment. Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) and chemoradiation (CRT) are proven effective induction therapies; however, few sample studies have addressed these treatments, thus, their superiority remains uncertain. We performed a systemic review and meta analysis to test the hypothesis that induction CRT prior to surgery could improve survival compared with induction CT alone.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed and the Ovid database for relevant studies comparing EC patients undergoing resection after treatment with induction CT alone or induction CRT was conducted. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were extracted from these studies to provide pooled estimates of the effect of induction therapy on overall survival.

RESULTS

Five studies met the criteria for analysis. Statistical analysis demonstrated a survival benefit of induction CRT compared with induction CT alone (HR0.73, 95% CI 0.61-0.89; P = 0.002). Further analysis showed that induction CRT perioperative mortality and complication rates were higher than for induction CT alone (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.38-6.37; HR1.6, 95% CI 1.30-1.98; P = 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Published evidence comparing the different efficacies of induction CT and induction CRT is sparse, with few samples of adenocarcinoma. This analysis supports the view that, compared with induction CT, induction CRT could achieve a long-term survival benefit in EC patients.

Cancer stem cells in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Identification, prognostic and treatment perspectives

Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are a vital subpopulation of cells to target for the treatment of cancers. In oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), there are several markers such as CD44, ALDH, Pygo2, MAML1, Twist1, Musashi1, Side population (SP), CD271 and CD90 that have been proposed to identify the cancer stem cells in individual cancer masses. It has also been demonstrated that stem cell markers like ALDH1, HIWI, Oct3/4, ABCG2, SOX2, SALL4, BMI-1, NANOG, CD133 and podoplanin are associated with patient's prognosis, pathological stages, cancer recurrence and therapy resistance. Finding new cancer stem cell targets or designing drugs to manipulate the known molecular targets in CSCs could be useful for improvements in clinical outcomes of the disease. To conclude, data suggest that CSCs in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma are related to resistance to therapy and poor prognosis of patients with ESCC. Therefore, innovative insights into CSC biology and CSC-targeted therapies will help to achieve more effective management of patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Role of radiotherapy in the pre-operative management of carcinoma of the esophagus

The use of radiotherapy in the management of carcinoma of the esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction has undergone much evolution over the past 2 decades. Advances to define its role have been slow with meta-analyses often providing the most useful data. In spite of this many institutions around the world are divided about the role of radiotherapy in this disease and attribute different roles to radiotherapy based on clinical stage, tumor site and histology. The purpose of this review is to try to define the role of radiotherapy given our current knowledge base and to review which current and future trials may fill the gaps of knowledge that we currently have. It will also highlight the difficulties in making firm recommendations about the use of radiotherapy especially in a time when technology and treatments are rapidly evolving.

Neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is increasing in incidence more than any other visceral malignancy in North America. Adenocarcinoma has become the most common cell type. Surgery remains the primary treatment modality for locoregional disease. Overall survival with surgery alone has been dismal, with metastatic disease the primary mode of treatment failure after an R0 surgical resection. Cure rates with chemotherapy or radiation therapy alone have been disappointing as well. For these reasons, over the last decade multi-modality treatment has gained increasing acceptance as the standard of care. This review examines the present data and role of neoadjuvant treatment using chemotherapy and radiation therapy followed by surgery for the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Trends and outcomes in the use of surgery and radiation for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer: a propensity score adjusted analysis of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results registry from 1998 to 2008

We examined outcomes and trends in surgery and radiation use for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, for whom optimal treatment isn't clear. Trends in surgery and radiation for patients with T1-T3N1M0 squamous cell or adenocarcinoma of the mid or distal esophagus in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 1998 to 2008 were analyzed using generalized linear models including year as predictor; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results doesn't record chemotherapy data. Local treatment was unimodal if patients had only surgery or radiation and bimodal if they had both. Five-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using propensity-score adjusted Cox proportional-hazard models. Overall 5-year survival for the 3295 patients identified (mean age 65.1 years, standard deviation 11.0) was 18.9% (95% confidence interval: 17.3-20.7). Local treatment was bimodal for 1274 (38.7%) and unimodal for 2021 (61.3%) patients; 1325 (40.2%) had radiation alone and 696 (21.1%) underwent only surgery. The use of bimodal therapy (32.8-42.5%, P = 0.01) and radiation alone (29.3-44.5%, P < 0.001) increased significantly from 1998 to 2008. Bimodal therapy predicted improved CSS (hazard ratios [HR]: 0.68, P < 0.001) and OS (HR: 0.58, P < 0.001) compared with unimodal therapy. For the first 7 months (before survival curve crossing), CSS after radiation therapy alone was similar to surgery alone (HR: 0.86, P = 0.12) while OS was worse for surgery only (HR: 0.70, P = 0.001). However, worse CSS (HR: 1.43, P < 0.001) and OS (HR: 1.46, P < 0.001) after that initial timeframe were found for radiation therapy only. The use of radiation to treat locally advanced mid and distal esophageal cancers increased from 1998 to 2008. Survival was best when both surgery and radiation were used.

Neoadjuvant treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma are types of esophageal cancer, one of the most aggressive malignant diseases. Since both histological types present entirely different diseases with different epidemiology, pathogenesis and tumor biology, separate therapeutic strategies should be developed against each type. While surgical resection remains the dominant therapeutic intervention for patients with operable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), alternative strategies are actively sought to reduce the frequency of post-operative local or distant disease recurrence. Such strategies are particularly sought in the preoperative setting. Currently, the optimal management of resectable ESCC differs widely between Western and Asian countries (such as Japan). While Western countries focus on neoadjuvant or definitive chemoradiotherapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery is the standard treatment in Japan. Importantly, each country and region has established its own therapeutic strategy from the results of local randomized control trials. This review discusses the current knowledge, available data and information regarding neoadjuvant treatment for operable ESCC.

Multimodality therapy for cancers of the esophagus and gastric cardia

The role of multimodal treatment in the management of esophageal cancer is controversial. There are conflicting results from studies on the effect of neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment on long-term survival. Following a search of the Medline database, the authors examine the results of randomized studies on the various treatment protocols available and discuss future therapeutic improvements.

Neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for resectable esophageal cancer: is there a standard of care?

BACKGROUND

Carcinoma of the esophagus is an aggressive and lethal disease with an increasing incidence worldwide. Despite changes in the treatment approach over the past two decades and even following complete resection, most patients will eventually relapse and die as a result of their disease. Several clinical trials evaluated different modalities in treating locally advanced esophageal cancer; however, because of stage migration and the changes in disease epidemiology, applying these trials to clinical practice has become a daunting task.

METHODS

We searched Medline and conference abstracts for randomized studies published in the past three decades. We restricted our search to articles published in English.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection is an accepted standard of care in the United States for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Esophagectomy remains an essential component of treatment and can lead to improved overall survival, especially when performed at high-volume institutions. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection in patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation remains unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Several questions still need to be answered regarding the use of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. The optimal chemotherapy regimen has not yet been identified for these patients, although newer therapies show promise.

Induction therapy for esophageal cancer

Despite advances in treatment, long-term outcomes for esophageal cancer remain poor, with overall survival rates of between 15% and 35%. Poor long-term survival reflects locoregionally advanced disease or metastatic disease at presentation. Among patients undergoing surgical resection, 40% to 50% have stage III disease. Surgery alone results in poor locoregional control and poor long-term outcomes, with survival rates ranging from 10% to 30%. Induction therapy combining surgery with chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy attempts to improve long-term survival in these patients. This article examines the merits of various modalities of induction therapy for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer.

Radiation Therapy and Esophageal Cancer

Background

Squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma account for more than 90% of all esophageal cancer cases. Although the incidence of squamous cell carcinoma has declined, the incidence of adenocarcinoma has risen due to increases in obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Methods

The authors examine the role of radiation therapy alone (external beam and brachytherapy) for the management of esophageal cancer or combined with other modalities. The impact on staging and appropriate stratification of patients referred for curative vs palliative intent with modalities is reviewed. The authors also explore the role of emerging radiation technologies.

Results

Current data show that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection is the accepted standard of care, with 3-year overall survival rates ranging from 30% to 60%. The benefit of adjuvant radiation therapy is limited to patients with node-positive cancer. The survival benefit of surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy remains controversial. External beam radiation therapy alone results in few long-term survivors and is considered palliative at best. Radiation dose-escalation has failed to improve local control or survival. Brachytherapy can provide better long-term palliation of dysphagia than metal stent placement. Although three-dimensional conformal treatment planning is the accepted standard, the roles of IMRT and proton therapy are evolving and potentially reduce adverse events due to better sparing of normal tissue.

Conclusions

Future directions will evaluate the benefit of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy, the role of surgery in locally advanced disease, and the identification of responders prior to treatment based on microarray analysis.

Does surgery improve outcomes for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma? An analysis using the surveillance epidemiology and end results registry from 1998 to 2008

BACKGROUND

We examined survival associated with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (SCC) to evaluate if treatment without surgery could be considered adequate.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Registry (SEER) registry with stage II-III SCC of the mid or distal esophagus from 1998-2008 were grouped by treatment with definitive radiation versus esophagectomy with or without radiation. Information on chemotherapy is not recorded in SEER. Tumor stage was defined as first clinical tumor stage in case of neo-adjuvant therapy and pathological report if no neo-adjuvant therapy was performed. Cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier approach and propensity-score adjusted Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Of the 2,431 patients analyzed, there were 844 stage IIA (34.7%), 428 stage IIB (17.6%), 1,159 stage III (47.7%) patients. Most were treated with definitive radiation (n = 1,426, 58.7%). Of the 1,005 (41.3%) patients who underwent surgery, 369 (36.7%) had preoperative radiation, 160 (15.9%) had postoperative radiation, and 476 (47.4%) had no radiation. Five-year survival was 17.9% for all patients, and 22.1%, 18.5%, and 14.5% for stages IIA, IIB, and stage III, respectively. Compared to treatment that included surgery, definitive radiation alone predicted worse propensity-score adjusted survival for all patients (CSS Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.48, p < 0.001; OS HR 1.46, p < 0.001) and for stage IIA, IIB, and III patients individually (all p values ≤ 0.01). Compared to surgery alone, surgery with radiation predicted improved survival for stage III patients (CSS HR 0.62, p = 0.001, OS HR 0.62, p < 0.001) but not stage IIA or IIB (all p values > 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Esophagectomy is associated with improved survival for patients with locally advanced SCC and should be considered as an integral component of the treatment algorithm if feasible.

Multidisciplinary approach for patients with esophageal cancer

Patients with esophageal cancer have a poor prognosis because they often have no symptoms until their disease is advanced. There are no screening recommendations for patients unless they have Barrett's esophagitis or a significant family history of this disease. Often, esophageal cancer is not diagnosed until patients present with dysphagia, odynophagia, anemia or weight loss. When symptoms occur, the stage is often stage III or greater. Treatment of patients with very early stage disease is fairly straight forward using only local treatment with surgical resection or endoscopic mucosal resection. The treatment of patients who have locally advanced esophageal cancer is more complex and controversial. Despite multiple trials, treatment recommendations are still unclear due to conflicting data. Sadly, much of our data is difficult to interpret due to many of the trials done have included very heterogeneous groups of patients both histologically as well as anatomically. Additionally, studies have been underpowered or stopped early due to poor accrual. In the United States, concurrent chemoradiotherapy prior to surgical resection has been accepted by many as standard of care in the locally advanced patient. Patients who have metastatic disease are treated palliatively. The aim of this article is to describe the multidisciplinary approach used by an established team at a single high volume center for esophageal cancer, and to review the literature which guides our treatment recommendations.

Management of advanced-stage operable esophageal cancer

The incidence of esophageal cancer is increasing in the developed world, with a relative increase in adenocarcinoma compared with squamous cell carcinoma. The distensible nature of the esophagus results in delayed development of symptoms associated with esophageal cancer; hence many patients have locally advanced or metastatic cancer at the time of initial presentation. Although resection remains the treatment of choice for early-stage esophageal cancer, the best treatment strategy for locally advanced esophageal cancer is debatable and, consequently, varies at different centers. This article discusses the published literature on various available therapeutic options for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy could improve survival outcomes for esophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with resectable esophageal carcinoma remains controversial.

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on operable esophageal carcinoma.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science and identified all randomized controlled trials published up until July 2011 that directly compared chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery with surgery alone. The risk ratio (RR) with its corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI) was the principal measure of effects.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria were identified. Chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery was associated with significantly improved 1-year (RR = 0.86, 95 % CI = 0.74-0.98, P = 0.03), 3-year (RR = 0.82, 95 % CI = 0.73-0.92, P = 0.0007) and 5-year (RR = 0.83, 95 % CI = 0.72-0.96, P = 0.01) survival times compared with surgery alone. Subgroup analysis suggested that this benefit was associated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy but not sequential chemoradiotherapy. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy could improve 3- and 5-year survival outcomes for squamous cell carcinoma but not those for adenocarcinoma. Postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.97, 95 % CI = 0.86-1.09, P = 0.56) and mortality (RR = 1.56, 95 % CI = 0.97-2.50, P = 0.07) did not increase in patients treated by chemoradiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings revealed that compared with surgery alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was associated with improved 1-, 3- and 5-year survival times, but not associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients with esophageal carcinoma.

Multimodality approach for locally advanced esophageal cancer

Carcinoma of the esophagus is an aggressive and lethal malignancy with an increasing incidence worldwide. Incidence rates vary internationally, with the highest rates found in Southern and Eastern Africa and Eastern Asia, and the lowest in Western and Middle Africa and Central America. Patients with locally advanced disease face a poor prognosis, with 5-year survival rates ranging from 15%-34%. Recent clinical trials have evaluated different strategies for management of locoregional cancer; however, because of stage migration and changes in disease epidemiology, applying these trials to clinical practice has become a daunting task. We searched Medline and conference abstracts for randomized studies published in the last 3 decades. We restricted our search to articles published in English. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection is an accepted standard of care in the United States. Esophagectomy remains an essential component of treatment and can lead to improved overall survival, especially when performed at high volume institutions. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection is still unclear. External beam radiation therapy alone is considered palliative and is typically reserved for patients with a poor performance status.

The role of radiation therapy in resected T2 N0 esophageal cancer: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of even early-stage esophageal cancer is poor. Because there is not a consensus on how to manage T2 N0 disease, we examined survival after resection of T2 N0 esophageal cancer, with or without radiation therapy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for T2 N0 squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the mid or distal esophagus, with or without radiation therapy, were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry from 1998 to 2008. The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) after resection alone and combined resection with radiation therapy were compared using the Kaplan-Meier approach, risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazard models, and competing risk models.

RESULTS

The 5-year OS of 490 T2 N0 patients was 40.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 35.2% to 45.4%). Surgical resection alone was used in 267 patients (54%) and combined therapy in 223 (46%). The 5-year OS was 38.6% (95% CI, 31.7% to 45.5%) in patients undergoing resection only and 42.3% (95% CI, 34.7% to 49.6%) for combined therapy (p = 0.48). No difference in OS was found, even after risk adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.48; p = 0.35). However, in landmark studies with left truncation for 3 and 6 months, resection only showed better OS than combined therapy (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.75; p = 0.04 vs HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.83; p = 0.04, respectively). No such difference for CSS was detected, even for the landmark study after 6 months (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.39, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining radiation therapy with esophagectomy did not result in improved outcomes compared with esophagectomy alone for patients with T2 N0 esophageal cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database.

Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant treatment: which one is better for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma?

Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer worldwide, and especially in some areas of China is the fourth most common cause of death and is of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) histology in >90% of cases. Surgery alone was the mainstay of therapeutic intervention in the past, but high rates of local and systemic failure have prompted investigation into multidisciplinary management. In this review, we discuss the key issues raised by the recent availability of esophageal SCC treatment with the addition of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy to the surgical management of resectable disease and discuss how clinical trials and meta-analysis inform current clinical practice. None of the randomized trials that compared neoadjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy with surgery alone in esophageal SCC has demonstrated an increase in overall survival in those patients treated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has been accepted recently for esophageal cancer because such a regimen offers great opportunity for margin negative resection, improved loco-regional control and increased survival. The majority of the available evidence currently reveals that only selected locally advanced esophageal SCC are more likely to benefit from the adjuvant therapy. The focus of future trials should be on identification of the optimum regimen and should aim to minimize treatment toxicities and effect on quality of life, as well as attempt to identify and select those patients most likely to benefit from specific treatment options.

Esophageal carcinoma advances in treatment results for locally advanced disease: review

The treatment results of patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinomas have evolved since the publication of the first trial of concurrent mitomycin C and 5-fluorouracil with radiotherapy (RT) in 1983. Subsequent studies refined and improved on the concurrent chemotherapy (chemo) with administration of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil infusion (PF). Chemo (PF) before surgery improved overall survival (OS) in those patients in most of the randomized trials and in meta-analyses. Two courses of PF concurrent with irradiation followed by additional two courses of PF were superior to RT alone without surgery for both groups. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery was found to have statistically improved OS as compared with surgery only in randomized trials and meta-analyses. In most of these studies, it was found that those patients with pathologic complete response to the initial treatment(s) did better than those who had no improvement at all. Current treatment outcome for these diseases is disappointing; newer strategies including induction chemo with the optimal combination, proper dosage of each drug, and proper number of courses before concurrent chemoradiotherapy; improvement in RT; and immunotherapy with or without subsequent surgery are exciting and definitely need to be investigated in prospective randomized trial(s).

Choosing the best treatment for esophageal cancer : criteria for selecting the best multimodal therapy

The best multimodal therapy in esophageal cancer comprises neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in patients with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy is only appropriate for patients with adenocarcinoma. However, the 2-year survival benefit by this induction therapy compared to surgery alone is only 5-9 %. Targeted drugs seem to be promising in order to improve the response rate. The choice of the best multimodal therapy by response prediction seems only to be possible in patients during chemotherapy for adenocarcinoma, whereas during neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy a response prediction by FDG-PET is not possible. The principle item of multimodal therapy is still transthoracic en bloc esophagectomy which should be performed in high volume centers in order to guarantee stable and good results.

An expert opinion on esophageal cancer therapy

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, esophageal cancer (EC) is the seventh leading cause of cancer-related death, with its incidence increasing in the US, where a change in its epidemiology has been noted. Most patients present with regional or distant disease and, therefore, have a very poor prognosis.

AREAS COVERED

Progress made over the last 20 years in the diagnosis, staging and management of EC is focused on in this review, with the emphasis on locally-advanced disease treated with curative intent. Evidence is reviewed from prospective randomized trials and meta-analyses and data are presented regarding new therapy with targeted agents. Although surgery has been the mainstay of treatment for EC, survival with this approach alone remains disappointing. As a result, combined modality treatment (CMT) including chemotherapy and radiation has been incorporated into the treatment paradigm for both operable and inoperable disease. The evidence supporting CMT for EC, the role of surgery at different stages, and how treatment strategies differ based on histology are outlined.

EXPERT OPINION

Trends in 5-year overall survival rates over the last 30 years have increased (from 5 to 17%), suggesting that small, yet significant, improvements in diagnosis, staging, treatment and supportive care are being made. Clearly, the choice of treatment should be guided by disease stage, histology and patient co-morbidities.

Management of esophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing in Western countries with a tendency to exceed that of squamous-cell carcinoma. Prognosis is unfavorable with 5-year survival less than 15%, irrespective of treatment and the stage. At the time of diagnosis, more than two thirds of patients have a non-operable cancer because of extension or associated co-morbidities. Most studies have included different tumoral locations (esophagus and stomach) and different histological types (adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma), making it difficult to interpret results. Surgery is currently the standard treatment for small tumors. Surgery should be preceded by neo-adjuvant treatment for patients with locally advanced resectable tumors, either preoperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiation therapy. The therapeutic choice should be decided during multidisciplinary meetings according to patient and tumor characteristics and the expertise of the center. For patients with contraindications to surgery, exclusive chemoradiation therapy is recommended. Herein we reviewed and synthesized the different therapeutic strategies for esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Prognosis of esophageal cancer patients with pathologic complete response after preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

To define failure patterns and predictive factors in esophageal cancer patients who had a pathologic complete response (pCR) after preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (PCRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 61 esophageal cancer patients who were enrolled in prospective studies and showed pCR after PCRT. All of the patients had squamous cell carcinoma. Of the patients, 40 were treated with hyperfractionated radiotherapy (4,560 cGy in 28 fractions) with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin (FP), and 21 patients received conventional fractionation radiotherapy with capecitabine and cisplatin (XP).

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 45.2 months (range, 6.5-162.3 months). The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival rates (DFS) were 60.2% and 80.4%, respectively. In univariate analysis, age and lymph node (LN) metastasis were poor prognostic factors for OS, and pretreatment weight loss (>2 kg) was a poor prognostic factor for DFS. In multivariate analysis, lymph node metastasis and pretreatment weight loss were independent prognostic factors for OS and DFS. Nine patients (15%) had disease recurrence. Of the nine patients, 5 patients had locoregional failure, 1 patients had distant metastasis, and 3 patients had distant and locoregional failure. In-field failure occurred in 5 patients; out-of-field failure occurred in 1 patient; both in-field and out-of-field failure occurred in 2 patients; and both marginal and out-of-field failure occurred in 1 patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Even in pCR patients, the most common failure site was within the radiation field, which suggests that more efficient local treatment is needed. Tumor recurrence was more common in patients with older age and with pretreatment weight loss.

Neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer

The management of esophageal cancer has been evolving over the past 30 years. In the United States, multimodality treatment combining chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) prior to surgical resection has come to be accepted by many as the standard of care, although debate about its overall effect on survival still exists, and rightfully so. Despite recent improvements in detection and treatment, the overall survival of patients with esophageal cancer remains lower than most solid tumors, which highlights why further advances are so desperately needed. The aim of this article is to provide a complete review of the history of esophageal cancer treatment with the addition of chemotherapy, RT, and more recently, targeted agents to the surgical management of resectable disease.

Neoadjuvant strategies for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer

Patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma have consistently poor survival following surgery with associated high systemic and local-regional failure rates. Neoadjuvant therapeutic strategies have been employed in an attempt to improve outcome with variable success. Randomized trials of either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy have shown conflicting results regarding survival and local-regional control. Future efforts should focus on identifying novel agents and targets to improve therapeutic efficacy.

Salvage esophagectomy after definitive chemoradiotherapy for thoracic esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Although locoregional failure frequently occurs after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT), the role of salvage esophagectomy has not been fully evaluated. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of salvage esophagectomy after high-dose definitive CRT with neoadjuvant CRT.

METHODS

From 1994 to 2007, 33 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer underwent salvage esophagectomy after definitive CRT, and 115 patients underwent neoadjuvant CRT followed by surgery.

RESULTS

The postoperative mortality rate in the salvage group (12%) was higher than in the neoadjuvant group (3.6%, P = 0.059). The rates of postoperative complications were significantly higher in the salvage group than in neoadjuvant group: Anastomotic leakage (39% vs. 22%, respectively, P = 0.049), bleeding (15% vs. 1.7%, respectively, P = 0.002), cardiovascular complications (24% vs. 5.4%, respectively, P = 0.001). Univariate analysis showed that pretherapy T stage, pretherapy lymph node status, pathological T stage, and operative curability were significant prognostic factors affecting survival of patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy. In particular, patients with cT3-T4 tumors or cN1 tumors before definitive CRT showed worse prognosis after salvage esophagectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage esophagectomy after high-dose definitive CRT was associated with higher postoperative mortality and morbidity rates compared with neoadjuvant CRT. Only selected patients can be rescued by salvage esophagectomy.

Preoperative therapy for esophageal cancer

This article examines the role of combined-modality therapy for treating locally advanced esophageal cancer. Although surgery remains a cornerstone of treatment, recent studies have demonstrated that pre- or perioperative chemotherapy is associated with improved survival for patients who have adenocarcinoma histology. Primary chemoradiotherapy is the accepted standard of care for medically inoperable patients. Recent studies also suggest that definitive chemoradiotherapy is acceptable for patients who have squamous histology, while subsequent surgery improves local control without conferring a clear survival benefit. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy continues to be investigated but is associated with several advantages over neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, including an improvement in the pathologic complete response rate and resectability. Patients who achieve a pathologic complete response also appear to have improved survival. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy may be considered for patients who undergo primary resection of lower esophageal/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.