Incidence and Risk Factors for Isolated Esophageal Cancer Recurrence to the Brain

Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and brain metastases in gastroesophageal carcinoma: a real-world analysis of clinical and pathologic characteristics and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Brain metastasis (BrM) and Leptomeningeal Carcinomatosis (LMC) are uncommon complications in gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) patients. These patients have a poor prognosis and are challenging to treat. We described the clinicopathologic features and outcomes in the largest cohort of Central Nervous System (CNS) metastasis in GEC patients.

METHODS

single-center retrospective study of GEC treated from 2007 to 2021. Clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment modalities were reviewed. Survival was calculated from the date of CNS diagnosis until date of death/last follow-up using the Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used.

RESULTS

Of 3283 GEC patients, 100 (3.04%) were diagnosed with BrM and 20 with LMC (0.61%). Patients with known human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status (N = 48), 60% were HER2 positive (defined as IHC 3 + or IHC 2+/FISH+). Among LMC patients most were signet-ring subtype (85%), and only 15% (2/13) were HER2 positive. Median survival was 0.7; 3.8; and 7.7 months in BrM patients treated with best supportive care, radiation, and surgery, respectively (p < 0.001). In LMC, median survival was 0.7 month in patients who had best supportive care (7/19) and 2.8 months for those who had whole brain radiation therapy (p = 0.015). Multivariate analysis showed worse outcomes in ECOG ≥ 2 (p = 0.002), number of BrM ≥ 4 (p < 0.001) and number of metastatic sites (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

HER2 expression were enriched in patients with BrM, while it is uncommon in LMC. Patients treated with surgery followed by radiation had an improved OS in BrM and WBRT benefited patients with LMC.

Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Presenting as an Isolated Brain Lesion 6 Years After Treatment

Intracranial metastasis is a rare sequela of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), typically presenting within the first 2 years after primary tumor detection. Our patient is a 72-year-old man diagnosed with an EAC in 2015 and presented with recurrence of a distant solitary brain lesion approximately 6 years after the initial diagnosis. Histological diagnosis was confirmed as EAC with all relevant indicators. In addition, we used genomic profiling to detect biomarkers that can be useful in the future for therapies.

Prognostic value of Mandard score and nodal status for recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the association of pathological tumour response (tumour regression grade, TRG) and a novel scoring system, combining both TRG and nodal status (TRG-ypN score; TRG1-ypN0, TRG>1-ypN0, TRG1-ypN+ and TRG>1-ypN+), with recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

This Dutch nationwide cohort study included patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy for distal oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2016. The primary endpoint was the association of Mandard score and TRG-ypN score with recurrence patterns (rate, location, and time to recurrence). The secondary endpoint was overall survival.

RESULTS

Among 2746 inclusions, recurrence rates increased with higher Mandard scores (TRG1 30.6%, TRG2 44.9%, TRG3 52.9%, TRG4 61.4%, TRG5 58.2%; P < 0.001). Among patients with recurrent disease, the distribution (locoregional versus distant) was the same for the different TRG groups. Patients with TRG1 developed more brain recurrences (17.7 versus 9.8%; P = 0.001) and had a longer mean overall survival (44 versus 35 months; P < 0.001) than those with TRG>1. The TRG>1-ypN+ group had the highest recurrence rate (64.9%) and worst overall survival (mean 27 months). Compared with the TRG>1-ypN0 group, patients with TRG1-ypN+ had a higher risk of recurrence (51.9 versus 39.6%; P < 0.001) and worse mean overall survival (33 versus 41 months; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Improved tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy was associated with lower recurrence rates and higher overall survival rates. Among patients with recurrent disease, TRG1 was associated with a higher incidence of brain recurrence than TRG>1. Residual nodal disease influenced prognosis more negatively than residual disease at the primary tumour site.

Patients with Isolated Brain Metastases from Esophageal Carcinoma After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy May Not Have a Dismal Prognosis

BACKGROUND

After esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma, 2-13% of patients develop brain metastases (BM) which are associated with a poor prognosis. Further investigation into treatment and prognosis is beneficial given the limited available literature and varying outcomes.

METHODS

Case files of all 339 patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in a single high-volume center between January 2015 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with BM and isolated brain metastases (iBM) were identified and a survival analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen out of 339 patients (4,4%) undergoing MIE developed BM of which 9 (60,0%) had iBM. Most patients were diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma (55,6%), localized in the middle third of the esophagus (66,7%), and had a pathologic complete response (66,7%) after initial treatment. Treatment of iBM consisted of gamma knife (GK) radiosurgery (44,4%), surgical resection (22,2%), GK and surgical resection (11,1%), and best supportive care (22,2%). Median time to diagnose iBM was 8,4 months (range 0,2-37,5) and survival after detection of iBM was 14,3 months (95% CI 0,0-45.9). The 2-year survival rate after detection of iBM was 44,4%.

CONCLUSIONS

iBM after esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma is rare, but when encountered can and should be treated with a curative intent in selected cases in close collaboration with large neurosurgical centers. A large-scale study should be conducted to confirm our findings.

How to handle brain tumors after esophagectomy with curative intent: A single center 20-year experience

BACKGROUND

Brain metastases after esophagectomy are rare. Moreover, a diagnostic uncertainty remains as pathology is rarely obtained and radiological features can show similarities to primary brain tumors. Our aim was to demonstrate the diagnostic uncertainty and identify risk factors associated with brain tumors (BT) after esophagectomy with curative intent.

METHODS

All patients who underwent an esophagectomy with curative intent from 2000 to 2019 were reviewed. Diagnostics and characteristics of BT were analyzed. Multivariable logistic and cox regression were performed to determine factors associated with development of BT and survival, respectively.

RESULTS

In total, 2131 patients underwent esophagectomy with curative intent, of which 72 patients (3.4%) developed BT. Pathological diagnosis was obtained in 26 patients (1.2%), of which 2 patients were diagnosed with glioblastoma. On multivariate analysis, radiotherapy (OR, 7.71; 95%CI: 2.66-22.34, p < 0.001) was associated with an increased risk of BT and early-stage tumors (OR, 0.29; 95%CI: 0.10-0.90, p = 0.004) with a decreased risk of BT. Median overall survival was 7.4 months (95%CI: 4.80-9.96). BT treated with curative intent (surgery or stereotactic radiation) had a significantly better median overall survival (16 months; 95%CI: 11.3-20.7) compared to those without (3.7 months; 95%CI: 0.9-6.6, p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: Advanced stage tumors and radiotherapy seem related to the development of brain tumors after esophagectomy with curative intent. However, an important diagnostic uncertainty remains in these patients as pathological diagnosis is only obtained in a minority of cases. Tissue confirmation can be useful to inform a patient-tailored multimodality treatment strategy in select patient.

Distinct Differences in Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Adenocarcinoma in 2194 Patients: In Memory of Rebecca A. Carr, February 24, 1988-January 19, 2021

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer and gastric cancer (GC) and identify clinicopathological and oncological differences.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

GEJ cancer and GC are frequently studied together. Although the treatment approach for each often differs, clinico-pathological and oncological differences between the 2 have not been fully evaluated.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with GEJ cancer or GC who underwent R0 resection at our center between January 2000 and December 2016. Clinicopathological characteristics, disease-specific survival (DSS), and site of first recurrence were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 2194 patients were analyzed: 1060 (48.3%) with GEJ cancer and 1134 (51.7%) with GC. Patients with GEJ cancer were younger (64 vs 66 years; P < 0.001), more often received neoadjuvant treatment (70.9% vs 30.2%; P < 0.001), and had lower pathological T and N status. Five-year DSS was 62.2% in patients with GEJ cancer and 74.6% in patients with GC ( P < 0.001). After adjustment for clinicopathological factors, DSS remained worse in patients with GEJ cancer (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.26; P < 0.001). The cumulative incidence of recurrence was approximately 10% higher in patients with GEJ cancer ( P < 0.001). The site of first recurrence was more likely to be hematogenous in patients with GEJ cancer (60.1% vs 31.4%; P < 0.001) and peritoneal in patients with GC (52.9% vs 12.5%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

GEJ adenocarcinoma is more aggressive, with a higher incidence of recurrence and worse DSS, compared with gastric adenocarcinoma. Distinct differences between GEJ cancer and GC, especially in patterns of recurrence, may affect evaluation of optimal treatment strategies.

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.

Outcomes and Molecular Features of Brain Metastasis in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma

IMPORTANCE

Brain metastasis (BrM) in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) is a rare and poorly understood phenomenon associated with poor prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the clinical and genomic features of patients with BrM from GEA and evaluate factors associated with survival.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this single-institution retrospective cohort study, 68 patients with BrM from GEA diagnosed between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2020, were identified via review of billing codes and imaging reports from the electronic medical record with follow-up through November 3, 2021. Genomic data were derived from the Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets clinical sequencing platform.

EXPOSURES

Treatment with BrM resection and/or radiotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overall survival after BrM diagnosis.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients (median age at diagnosis, 57.4 years [IQR, 49.8-66.4 years]; 59 [86.8%] male; 55 [85.9%] White) participated in the study. A total of 57 (83.8%) had primary tumors in the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Median time from initial diagnosis to BrM diagnosis was 16.9 months (IQR, 8.5-27.7 months). Median survival from BrM diagnosis was 8.7 months (95% CI, 5.5-11.5 months). Overall survival was 35% (95% CI, 25%-48%) at 1 year and 24% (95% CI, 16%-37%) at 2 years. In a multivariable analysis, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or greater (hazard ratio [HR], 4.66; 95% CI, 1.47-14.70; P = .009) and lack of surgical or radiotherapeutic intervention (HR, 7.71; 95% CI, 2.01-29.60; P = .003) were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, whereas 3 or more extracranial sites of disease (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 0.64-5.29; P = .25) and 4 or more BrMs (HR, 2.15; 95% CI, 0.93-4.98; P = .07) were not statistically significant. A total of 31 patients (45.6%) had ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)-positive tumors, and alterations in ERBB2 were enriched in BrM relative to primary tumors (8 [47.1%] vs 7 [20.6%], P = .05), as were alterations in PTPRT (7 [41.2%] vs 4 [11.8%], P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that that a notable proportion of patients with BrM from GEA achieve survival exceeding 1 and 2 years from BrM diagnosis, a more favorable prognosis than previously reported. Good performance status and treatment with combination surgery and radiotherapy were associated with the best outcomes. ERBB2 positivity and amplification as well as PTPRT alterations were enriched in BrM tissue compared with primary tumors; therefore, further study should be pursued to identify whether these variables represent genomic risk factors for BrM development.

Survival Prediction Model for Patients with Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Based on the Parameter-Optimized Deep Belief Network Using the Improved Archimedes Optimization Algorithm

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is one of the highest incidence and mortality cancers in the world. An effective survival prediction model can improve the quality of patients' survival. Therefore, a parameter-optimized deep belief network based on the improved Archimedes optimization algorithm is proposed in this paper for the survival prediction of patients with ESCC. Firstly, a combination of features significantly associated with the survival of patients is found by the minimum redundancy and maximum relevancy (MRMR) algorithm. Secondly, a DBN network is introduced to make predictions for survival of patients. Aiming at the problem that the deep belief network model is affected by parameters in the construction process, this paper uses the Archimedes optimization algorithm to optimize the learning rate α and batch size β of DBN. In order to overcome the problem that AOA is prone to fall into local optimum and low search accuracy, an improved Archimedes optimization algorithm (IAOA) is proposed. On this basis, a survival prediction model for patients with ESCC is constructed. Finally, accuracy comparison tests are carried out on IAOA-DBN, AOA-DBN, SSA-DBN, PSO-DBN, BES-DBN, IAOA-SVM, and IAOA-BPNN models. The results show that the IAOA-DBN model can effectively predict the five-year survival rate of patients and provide a reference for the clinical judgment of patients with ESCC.

Post-recurrence survival analysis in patients with oligo-recurrence after curative esophagectomy

Background

Recurrent esophageal cancer is associated with dismal prognosis. There is no consensus about the role of surgical treatments in patients with limited recurrences. This study aimed to evaluate the role of surgical resection in patients with resectable recurrences after curative esophagectomy and to identify their prognostic factors.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients with recurrent esophageal cancer after curative esophagectomy between 2004 and 2017 and included those with oligo-recurrence that was amenable for surgical intent. The prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and post-recurrence survival (PRS), as well as the survival impact of surgical resection, were analyzed.

Results

Among 654 patients after curative esophagectomies reviewed, 284 (43.4%) had disease recurrences. The recurrences were found resectable in 63 (9.6%) patients, and 30 (4.6%) patients received surgery. The significant prognostic factors of PRS with poor outcome included mediastinum lymph node (LN) recurrence and pathologic T3 stage. In patients with and without surgical resection for recurrence cancer, the 3-year OS rates were 65.6 and 47.6% (p = 0.108), while the 3-year PRS rates were 42.9 and 23.5% (p = 0.100). In the subgroup analysis, surgery for resectable recurrence, compared with non-surgery, could achieve better PRS for patients without any comorbidities (hazard ratio 0.36, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.94, p = 0.038).

Conclusions

Mediastinum LN recurrence or pathologic T3 was associated with worse OS and PRS in patients with oligo-recurrences after curative esophagectomies. No definite survival benefit was noted in patients undergoing surgery for resectable recurrence, except in those without comorbidities.

Oligometastases After Curative Esophagectomy Are Not One Size Fits All

BACKGROUND

More than one-half of patients treated with esophagectomy for esophageal cancer experience recurrence. Oligometastasis, a proposed intermediate state of isolated local or solid organ recurrence that occurs before widespread systemic disease, is a potential target for aggressive local intervention. This study investigated presentation and prognosis among solid organ recurrence sites.

METHODS

Patients with isolated solid organ recurrence at the liver, lung, or brain who underwent R0 esophagectomy from 1995 to 2016 were identified. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were compared among sites of recurrence. Overall survival was quantified using the Kaplan-Meier approach and Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

In total, 104 patients were included (site: brain, 37; lung, 27; liver, 40). Eighty percent of liver, 51% of brain, and 44% of lung oligometastases occurred in the first 12 months after esophagectomy. Despite the limited use of aggressive therapy, patients with lung oligometastasis had significantly longer median overall survival (2.41 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58 to 3.31) than did patients with brain (0.95 years; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.49) or liver (0.95 years; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.41) oligometastasis (P < .001). This difference remained after patient and tumor characteristics were adjusted for (brain: hazard ratio, 4.48; 95% CI, 2.24 to 8.99; liver: hazard ratio, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.48 to 5.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Presentations and prognoses differ by site of esophageal cancer recurrence. Lung oligometastases are associated with a more indolent course, and patients with these lesions may benefit from more aggressive treatment to improve their more favorable outcomes further. These differences by site of recurrence advocate for moving beyond a standardized palliative approach to all esophageal cancer recurrences.

The risk and prognostic factors for brain metastases in esophageal cancer patients: an analysis of the SEER database

BACKGROUND

Brain metastases were rare in esophageal cancer patients. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, the present study investigated the incidence, risk and prognostic factors of brain metastases in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

Retrieving esophageal cancer patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2018 from the SEER database, univariable and multivariable logistic and cox regression models were used to investigate the risk factors for brain metastases development and prognosis, respectively. The brain metastases predicting nomogram was constructed, evaluated and validated. The overall survival (OS) of patients with brain metastases was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 34,107 eligible esophageal cancer patients were included and 618 of them were diagnosed with brain metastases (1.8%). The median survival of the brain metastatic esophageal cancer patients was 5 (95% CI: 5-7) months. The presence of bone metastases and lung metastases were the homogeneously associated factors for the development and prognosis of brain metastases in esophageal cancer patients. Patients younger than 65 years, American Indian/Alaska Native race (vs. White), overlapping lesion (vs. Upper third), esophageal adenocarcinoma histology subtype, higher N stage, and liver metastases were positively associated with brain metastases occurrence. The calibration curve, ROC curve, and C-index exhibited good performance of the nomogram for predicting brain metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Homogeneous and heterogeneous factors were found for the development and prognosis of brain metastases in esophageal cancer patients. The nomogram had good calibration and discrimination for predicting brain metastases.

Presentation of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma with synchronous metastases at the small intestine. Could treatment with curative intent be considered? A case report

Introduction

Introduction of multimodality treatment as the standard of care for management of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer over the last years has led to significant improvement in survival for patients with localized disease. Nevertheless, treatment with curative intent is not considered in the case of metastatic disease. We report a case of a locally advanced GEJ adenocarcinoma with solitary resectable synchronous metastases at the jejunum and a good response to neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy with curative intention.

Case presentation

This is the case of a patient with poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the GEJ with synchronous metastases at the jejunum. The patient underwent extensive work-up including PET-CT. The metastases at the jejunum were completely resected during an initial staging laparoscopy and there was no evidence of further metastatic disease. The patient received chemotherapy and re-staging showed remarkable tumor response. Esophagectomy with curative intent was performed. Histopathology showed complete pathologic response after chemotherapy. Although our patient had a stage IV disease at presentation, he remained metastasis-free for a significant period of time, with no evidence of any distant recurrence during a follow-up of 16 months after esophagectomy.

Discussion and conclusions

Synchronous metastasis to the small bowel from an esophageal carcinoma is a rare entity. Routine PET-CT in addition to conventional CT may assist in more precise staging of a patient with resectable disease. Stage IV esophageal cancer with limited and resectable metastatic disease and good tumor response to oncological therapy may be considered for treatment with potentially curative intent.

•

Synchronous metastasis to the small bowel from an esophageal carcinoma is a rare entity.

•

PET-CT in addition to conventional CT may assist in more precise staging of esophageal cancer.

•

Esophageal cancer with resectable metastases may be considered for treatment with curative intent.

Staging of Esophageal Malignancy

Optimal treatment of esophageal cancer is a complex process dependent on many factors, including stage at diagnosis, medical fitness, physician judgment, and expertise. Despite significant advances in understanding of this cancer, survival remains low. Identifying patients with early-stage disease can enhance their outcomes dramatically. On a broader scale, staging is critical in advancing the quality of care delivered to these patients now and in the future. This article is designed to review clinicians' expertise with staging and to elaborate on the nuances frequently encountered when doing so.

Current status of gastrointestinal tract cancer brain metastasis and the use of blood-based cancer biomarker biopsy

Brain metastasis (BM) frequently occurs in patients with cutaneous melanoma, lung, and breast cancer; although, BM rarely arises from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). The reported incidence of GIT cancer BM is less than 4%. In the last few years, effective systemic therapy has prolonged the survival of GIT patients and consequently, the incidence of developing BM is rising. Therefore, the epidemiology and biology of BM arising from GIT cancer requires a more comprehensive understanding. In spite of the development of new therapeutic agents for patients with metastatic GIT cancers, survival for patients with BM still remains poor, with a median survival after diagnosis of less than 4 months. Limited evidence suggests that early detection of isolated intra-cranial lesions will enable surgical resection plus systemic and/or radiation therapy, which may lead to an increase in overall survival. Novel diagnostic methods such as blood-based biomarker biopsies may play a crucial role in the early detection of BM. Circulating tumor cells and circulating cell-free nucleic acids are known to serve as blood biomarkers for early detection and treatment response monitoring of multiple cancers. Blood biopsy may improve early diagnosis and treatment monitoring of GIT cancers BM, thus prolonging patients' survivals.

A Rare Case of Metastatic Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Presenting as an Isolated Cerebellar Lesion 5 Years After Treatment

Isolated brain metastasis (IBM) as a recurrence of primary esophageal adenocarcinoma (AC) has rarely been reported in the literature and typically manifests within a short period of time after diagnosing the primary lesion. We present here an unusual case of an IBM presenting nearly 5 years after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and surgical resection of a primary distal esophageal tumor with no interval evidence of recurrence. A 53-year-old man presented to our gastroenterology clinic with progressive dysphagia and weight loss. On upper endoscopy, the patient was found to have a large obstructing distal esophageal mass with biopsies reported as moderately differentiated AC. Subsequent computed tomography (CT) chest/abdomen/pelvis (C/A/P) and magnetic resource imaging (MRI) brain were negative for any distant metastases. The patient received preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy, followed by distal esophagectomy with findings of stage IIIB disease. He did well after surgery and was monitored closely by his oncologist with no evidence of recurrence on interval imaging or follow-up endoscopy. Several years after his diagnosis, however, the patient developed new neurologic symptoms, and an MRI brain revealed a solitary cerebellar lesion with surrounding edema concerning for metastatic disease. Positron emission tomography and CT C/A/P were negative for any other new lesions. The tumor was resected, and pathology was confirmed as metastatic AC of esophageal origin. To our knowledge, this is the first case of recurrent esophageal AC presenting as an isolated cerebellar lesion 5 years after treatment of the primary tumor.