Oligometastases After Curative Esophagectomy Are Not One Size Fits All

Advances in the Surgical Management of Esophageal Cancer

Radical esophagectomy with two or three-field lymphadenectomy remains the mainstay of curative treatment for localized esophageal cancer, often in combination with systemic chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. In this article, we describe notable advances in the surgical management of esophageal cancer over the past decade that have led to an improvement in both surgical and oncologic outcomes. In addition, we discuss new approaches to surgical management currently under investigation that have the potential to offer further benefits to appropriately selected patients. These incremental breakthroughs primarily include advances in endoscopic and minimally invasive techniques, perioperative management protocols, as well as the application of local therapies, including surgery, to oligometastatic disease.

Survival outcomes of esophageal cancer patients with recurrence after curative treatments

BACKGROUND

Little is known about predictive factors for survival outcomes of esophageal carcinoma (EC) patients who developed recurrence after undergoing multimodal therapies. We aimed to investigate long-term outcomes and identify prognostic factors in patients with relapsed EC, focusing especially on those with oligometastasis (OM).

METHODS

EC patients who developed recurrence after curative treatments (radical esophagectomy or definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT)) between 2010 and 2017 were reviewed. Multivariate Cox hazards models were applied to determine independent predictors of poor post-recurrence survival (PRS).

RESULTS

In total, 178 patients were included. The median PRS was 12.9 months. Of the 178 patients, 98 had OM and 80 non-OM (NOM) disease. The survival outcomes of patients with OM were significantly better than those of patients with NOM (P < 0.01). Surgical treatments provided significantly better survival outcomes than CRT or chemo-/radiotherapy alone (3-year overall survival (OS); 78.1% vs. 42.5% vs. 28.9%, P < 0.01), mainly due to prolonging survival after the recurrence (3-year PRS 62.9% vs. 16.7% vs. 16.2%, P < 0.01). Multivariable analysis focusing on patients with OM revealed cStage III-IV disease (P < 0.01), high GPS at the time of recurrence (P = 0.02) and non-curative treatments (P < 0.01), to be independently associated with poor PRS. In contrast, in patients with NOM, no independent predictors for poor PRS were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival outcomes of patients with relapsed EC remain poor. Surgical treatments could provide survival benefits for patients with recurrent EC, especially for patients with OM.

Patterns of recurrent disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and esophageal cancer surgery with curative intent in a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

Recurrence is frequently observed after esophageal cancer surgery, with dismal post-recurrence survival. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy is the gold standard for resectable esophageal tumors in the Netherlands. This study investigated the recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal therapy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients with recurrent disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy for an esophageal adenocarcinoma in the Amsterdam UMC between 01 and 01-2010 and 31-12-2018. Post-recurrence treatment and survival of patients were investigated and grouped by recurrence site (loco-regional, distant, or combined loco-regional and distant).

RESULTS

In total, 278 of 618 patients (45.0%) developed recurrent disease after a median of 49 weeks. Thirty-one patients had loco-regional (11.2%), 145 distant (52.2%), and 101 combined loco-regional and distant recurrences (36.3%). Post-recurrence survival was superior for patients with loco-regional recurrences (33 weeks, 95%CI 7.3-58.7) compared to distant (12 weeks, 95%CI 6.9-17.1) or combined loco-regional and distant recurrent disease (18 weeks, 95%CI 9.3-26.7). Patients with loco-regional recurrences treated with curative intent had the longest survival (87 weeks, 95%CI 6.9-167.4).

CONCLUSION

Recurrent disease after potentially curative treatment for esophageal cancer was most frequently located distantly, with dismal prognosis. A subgroup of patients with loco-regional recurrence was treated with curative intent and had prolonged survival. These patients may benefit from intensive surveillance protocols, and more research is needed to identify these patients.

Incidence and management of esophageal cancer recurrence to regional lymph nodes after curative esophagectomy

Up to 50% of patients treated with curative esophagectomy for esophageal cancer will develop recurrence, contributing to the dismal survival associated with this disease. Regional recurrence may represent disease that is not yet widely metastatic and may therefore be amenable to more-aggressive treatment. We sought to assess all patients treated with curative esophagectomy for esophageal cancer who developed regional recurrence. We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma at a single institution from January 2000 to August 2019. In total, 1626 patients were included in the study cohort. As of June 2022, 595 patients had disease recurrence, which was distant or systemic in 435 patients (27%), regional in 125 (7.7%) and local in 35 (2.2%). On multivariable analysis, neoadjuvant chemoradiation with a total radiation dose <45 Gy (hazard ratio [HR], 3.5 [95% CI, 1.7-7.3]; P = .001), pathologic node-positive disease (HR, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.3-3.0]; P = .003) and lymphovascular invasion (HR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.0-2.5]; P = .049) were predictors of isolated nodal recurrence, whereas increasing age (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96-0.99]; P = .001) and increasing number of excised lymph nodes (HR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.95-1.00]; P = .021) were independently associated with decreased risk of regional recurrence. Patients treated with a combination of local and systemic therapies had better survival outcomes than patients treated with systemic therapy alone (P < .001). In patients with recurrence of esophageal cancer limited to regional lymph nodes, salvage treatment may be possible. Higher radiation doses and more-extensive lymphadenectomy may reduce the risk of regional recurrence.

Survival after Lung Metastasectomy from Esophageal Cancer: Results from a Multi-Institutional Database

To clarify the clinical impact and to identify prognostic predictors of surgical intervention for pulmonary metastasis from esophageal cancer, a registry database analysis was performed. From January 2000 to March 2020, patients who underwent resection of pulmonary metastases from primary esophageal cancer at 18 institutions were registered in a database developed by the Metastatic Lung Tumor Study Group of Japan. An amount of 109 cases were reviewed and examined for the prognostic factors for pulmonary metastasectomy of metastases from esophageal cancer. As a result, five-year overall survival after pulmonary metastasectomy was 34.4% and five-year disease-free survival was 22.1%. The multivariate analysis for overall survival revealed that initial recurrence site, maximum tumor size, and duration from primary tumor treatment to lung surgery were selected as the significant prognostic factors (p = 0.043, p = 0.048, and p = 0.037, respectively). In addition, from the results of the multivariate analysis for disease free survival, number of lung metastases, initial recurrence site, duration from primary tumor treatment to lung surgery, and preoperative chemotherapy for lung metastasis were selected as the significant prognostic factors (p = 0.037, p = 0.008, p = 0.010, and p = 0.020, respectively). In conclusion, eligible patients with pulmonary metastasis from esophageal cancer selected based on the identified prognostic predictors would be good candidates for pulmonary metastasectomy.

Incidence and survival of patients with oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer: a multicenter cohort study

PURPOSE /OBJECTIVE

This multicenter study assessed the incidence and survival of patients with esophagogastric cancer and oligometastatic disease (OMD) in two tertiary referral cancer centers in The Netherlands and Switzerland.

MATERIALS /METHODS

Between 2010-2021, patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer were identified. Patients with de-novo OMD were included (first-time diagnosis of ≤5 distant metastases on ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT). Control of the primary tumor was considered in patients who underwent primary tumor resection or definitive chemoradiotherapy without locoregional recurrence. Treatment of OMD was categorized into 1) systemic therapy, 2) local treatment (stereotactic body radiotherapy or metastasectomy), 3) local plus systemic therapy, or 4) best supportive care. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and independent prognostic factors for OS. Independent prognostic factors for OS were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

In total, 830 patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer were identified of whom 200 patients with de-novo OMD were included (24%). The majority of included patients had esophageal cancer (73%) with adenocarcinoma histology (79%) and metachronous OMD (52%). The primary tumor was controlled in 68%. Treatment of OMD was systemic therapy (25%), local treatment (43%), local plus systemic therapy (13%), or best supportive care (18%). Median follow-up was 14 months (interquartile range: 7-27). Median OS was 16 months (95% CI: 13-21). Improved OS was independently associated with local plus systemic therapy compared with systemic therapy alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-0.87). Worse OS was independently associated with squamous cell carcinoma (HR 1.70, 95% CI: 1.07-2.74), bone oligometastases (HR 2.44, 95% CI: 1.28-4.68), brain oligometastases (HR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.05-4.69), and two metastatic locations (HR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.04-4.12). Median OS after local plus systemic therapy was 35 months (95% CI: 22-NA) as compared with 13 months (95% CI: 9-21, p<0.001) after systemic therapy alone for OMD.

CONCLUSION

Patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer present in 25% with de-novo OMD. Local treatment of OMD plus systemic therapy was independently associated with long-term OS and independently improved OS when compared with systemic therapy alone. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these results.

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.

Metastasectomy or Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With or Without Systemic Therapy for Oligometastatic Esophagogastric Cancer

Background

The primary goal of this study was to determine overall survival (OS) in patients who underwent local treatment (metastasectomy or stereotactic body radiotherapy [SBRT]) or systemic therapy (chemotherapy or targeted therapy) for oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer. The secondary goal was to determine prognostic factors for OS.

Methods

Patients with synchronous or metachronous oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer who underwent local treatment or systemic therapy were included in this single-center, retrospective cohort study. Oligometastatic disease (OMD) included 1 organ or 1 extraregional lymph node station with ≤ 3 lesions. OS was determined after OMD detection. Treatment for OMD was categorized as (1) local treatment, (2) local plus systemic, (3) systemic therapy. The primary tumor was controlled after resection or definitive chemoradiotherapy.

Results

In total, 85 patients were included. Treatment for OMD was local treatment (58%), local plus systemic (14%), or systemic therapy (28%). The primary tumor was controlled in 68% of patients. Most patients were diagnosed with distal esophageal cancer (61%), with adenocarcinoma histology (76%), and presented with synchronous OMD (51%). OS after local treatment was 17 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 12–40), after local plus systemic therapy 35 months (95% CI 29–NA), and after systemic therapy 16 months (95% CI 11–NA). Better OS was independently associated with local plus systemic compared with local treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 2.11, 95% CI 1.05–5.07) or systemic therapy (HR 2.28, 95% CI 1.04–6.07).

Conclusions

Local plus systemic therapy for oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer was independently associated with improved OS and better OS compared with either systemic therapy or local treatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-022-11541-0.