Early surgery for failure after chemoradiation in operable thoracic oesophageal cancer. Analysis of the non-randomised patients in FFCD 9102 phase III trial: Chemoradiation followed by surgery versus chemoradiation alone

Effect of cervical paraesophageal lymph node metastasis versus supraclavicular lymph node metastasis on the overall survival of patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: an observational study

Background

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a major global health burden, with a particularly high incidence in East Asia. The authors aimed to investigate the effect of metastasis in cervical paraesophageal lymph nodes (station 101) and supraclavicular lymph nodes (station 104) on the survival of patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Materials and Methods

Data were obtained from the database of the authors' hospital. The authors retrospectively analyzed the patients with EC who underwent esophagectomy from January 2010 to December 2017. These patients were allocated into two groups based on the presence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in the cervical paraesophageal or supraclavicular regions. Clinical outcomes and survival data were compared using the TNM staging system of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC).

Results

After a median follow-up of 62.1 months, 122 patients with LNM in the supraclavicular region were included in the study. Among these patients, 53 showed cervical paraesophageal LNM and an overall survival (OS) of 19.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 16.3-23.5]. In contrast, 69 patients showed supraclavicular LNM with an OS of 34.9 months (95% CI 25.7-44.1). The OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 77%, 29%, and 21%, respectively, for patients with cervical paraesophageal LNM. Moreover, patients with supraclavicular LNM demonstrated OS rates of 88%, 48%, and 34%, respectively [Hazard ratio (HR): 0.634, 95% CI: 0.402-1.000, P=0.042].

Conclusions

Patients with ESCC with cervical paraesophageal LNM had significantly worse OS than those with supraclavicular LNM. This study underscores the importance of accurately identifying and managing ESCC with cervical paraesophageal LNM, as it may require more tailored and aggressive treatment strategies to prolong patient survival.

Esophageal cancer - French intergroup clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatments and follow-up (TNCD, SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, SFP, RENAPE, SNFCP, AFEF, SFR)

INTRODUCTION

This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of esophageal cancer (EC) published in July 2022, available on the website of the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org).

METHODS

This collaborative work was conducted under the auspices of several French medical and surgical societies involved in the management of EC. Recommendations were graded in three categories (A, B and C), according to the level of evidence found in the literature until April 2022.

RESULTS

EC diagnosis and staging evaluation are mainly based on patient's general condition assessment, endoscopy plus biopsies, TAP CT-scan and 18F FDG-PET. Surgery alone is recommended for early-stage EC, while locally advanced disease (N+ and/or T3-4) is treated with perioperative chemotherapy (FLOT) or preoperative chemoradiation (CROSS regimen) followed by immunotherapy for adenocarcinoma. Preoperative chemoradiation (CROSS regimen) followed by immunotherapy or definitive chemoradiation with the possibility of organ preservation are the two options for squamous cell carcinoma. Salvage surgery is recommended for incomplete response or recurrence after definitive chemoradiation and should be performed in an expert center. Treatment for metastatic disease is based on systemic therapy including chemotherapy, immunotherapy or combined targeted therapy according to biomarkers testing such as HER2 status, MMR status and PD-L1 expression.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines are intended to provide a personalised therapeutic strategy for daily clinical practice and are subject to ongoing optimization. Each individual case should be discussed by a multidisciplinary team.

Cardiac Dose Predicts the Response to Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Definitive concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) is the standard treatment for cervical esophageal cancer and non-surgical candidates. Initial treatment response affects survival; however, few validated markers are available for prediction. This study evaluated the clinical variables and chemoradiation parameters associated with treatment response. Between May 2010 and April 2016, 86 completed CCRT patients' clinical, dosimetric, and laboratory data at baseline and during treatment were collected. Cox regression analysis assessed the risk factors for overall survival (OS). A receiver operating characteristic curve with Youden's index was chosen to obtain the optimal cut-off value of each parameter. Treatment response was defined per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v.1.1 at the first post-CCRT computed tomography scan. Responders had complete and partial responses; non-responders had stable and progressive diseases. Logistic regression (LR) was used to evaluate the variables associated with responders. The Cox regression model confirmed the presence of responders (n = 50) vs. non-responders (n = 36) with a significant difference in OS. In multivariate LR, cardiac dose-volume received ≥10 Gy; the baseline hemoglobin level, highest neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio during CCRT, and cumulative cisplatin dose were significantly associated with the responders. The initial clinical treatment response significantly determines disease outcome. Cardiac irradiation may affect the treatment response.

To compare neoadjuvant concurrent chemo-radiotherapy followed by surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery in carcinoma esophagus patients: A single institutional study in the Indian population

Objective

This single institutional study compared neoadjuvant concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (NACCRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by surgery in locally advanced middle and lower-1/3 carcinoma esophagus patients in terms of toxicity, clinical response, operative complications, disease downstaging, resection rates, pathological response, recurrence, and survival.

Materials

and

Methods

This randomized prospective comparative study comprised 40 consecutive patients divided equally between two study arms NACCRT (n = 20; 41.4 Gy radiation dose; carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 2/paclitaxel 50 mg/m2; 5 cycles) and NACT (n = 20; carboplatin AUC 5/paclitaxel 175 mg/m2; 2 cycles) from March 2014 to December 2016. Follow-up was done for 4 years. Chi-square test, Fischer's-exact test were used for comparative analysis and Kaplan-Meier analysis for survival.

Results

Statistically significant esophagitis in NACCRT and peripheral-neuropathy in NACT was observed (P < 0.001). NACCRT recorded more postoperative complications, higher complete resection (R0) rates, and pathologically complete response (pCR). Tumor downstaging was significant in both study groups (n < 0.001). Four-year median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were 28.50 months and 38 months in NACCRT versus 28 months and 35.5 months in NACT, respectively. In both NACCRT and NACT, pCR cases showed improved median DFS and OS compared to pathological partial response (pPR) (n < 0.001).

Conclusion

This study demonstrated significant activity and tolerable toxicity of taxane-based therapy in NACCRT and NACT. Both groups recorded no survival benefit over each other, although pCR cases resulted in statistically significant survival advantage compared to clinical partial response. NACCRT resulted in lesser toxicity, numerically higher R0-resection, pCRs, median DFS, and OS compared to NACT.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Versus Definitive Chemoradiotherapy With Salvage Surgery as Needed: The Study Protocol for the Randomized Controlled NEEDS Trial

Background

The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC.

Methods

This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04460352.

Update on Management of Squamous Cell Esophageal Cancer

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Esophageal cancer is the sixth most common cause of cancer death globally. Squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus (ESCC) is the predominant histologic type in the world. Treatment strategies have evolved in the last decade and new paradigms are replacing traditional approaches at all stages of cancer. This review will summarize the epidemiology, diagnosis, staging, and treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Novel approaches to screening may be cost-effective in regions with a high incidence of ESCC. Multi-disciplinary evaluation and treatment has become the standard of care. Endoscopic resection may be an option for early stage ESCC. Minimally invasive esophagectomy can be performed safely as a primary therapy or after-induction chemoradiation. Several recent studies have found a survival benefit to immunotherapy for patients with metastatic or persistent disease. Multi-disciplinary evaluation and multi-modal therapy including cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiation, surgery, and immunotherapy have improved survival compared to surgery alone.

PET Imaging and Rate of Pathologic Complete Response in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

For locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), chemoradiation (ChemoRT) followed by surgery offers the best chance of cure, with a 35-50% pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Given the morbidity of esophagectomy and the possibility of pCR with ChemoRT, a 'watch and wait' strategy has been proposed, particularly for squamous cell carcinoma. The ability to accurately predict which patients will have pCR from ChemoRT is critical in treatment decision making. This study assessed positron emission tomography (PET) in predicting pCR after neoadjuvant ChemoRT for ESCC.

METHODS

ESCC patients treated with ChemoRT followed by surgery were identified. Maximum standard uptake value (SUV), metabolic tumor volume, total lesion glycolysis, and first-order textual features of standard deviation, kurtosis and skewness were measured from PET. Univariable and multivariable generalized linear method analyses were performed. A metabolic complete response (mCR) was defined as a post-therapy PET scan with maximum SUV < 4.0.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients underwent ChemoRT followed by surgery, with overall pCR seen in 11 (41%) patients and radiographic mCR seen in 12 (44%) patients. Final pathology for these 12 patients revealed pCR (ypT0N0M0) in 5 (42%) patients and persistent disease in 7 (58%) patients. Univariate analysis did not reveal PET parameters predictive of pCR.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of ESCC with ChemoRT often results in a robust clinical response. Among patients with an mCR after ChemoRT, disease persistence was found in 58%. The inability of PET to predict pCR is important in the context of a 'watch and wait' strategy for ESCC treated with ChemoRT.

Evolving treatment paradigms in esophageal cancer

A heterogenous disease with a dismal prognosis, esophageal cancer poses a major health challenge worldwide. In recent years, the treatment landscape for esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) has undergone major evolution, with the elucidation of underlying biologic pathways and predispositions. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation has emerged as a leading approach for the management of locoregional esophageal cancer, while perioperative chemotherapy has shown promising outcomes specifically in adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). Studies also explore the implementation of chemoradiation in various sequential preoperative strategies, as well as in the adjuvant setting. Definitive chemoradiation is considered a valid alternative for non-surgical candidates with SCC. Clinical trials currently evaluating the potential benefits of different approaches may shed light on existing controversies regarding optimal management of locoregional disease. For patients with metastatic cancer, chemotherapy remains the backbone of antineoplastic treatment alongside palliative care, moreover the discovery of novel biological targets has led to the initiation of targeted and immune therapy for specific subpopulations. Taken together, an era of burgeoning clinical trials and changing paradigms has evolved in esophageal oncology. Multidisciplinary collaboration is key to effective combination and sequencing of treatment modalities tailored per patient and per tumor histology. This work aims to provide a comprehensive overview of state-of-the-art oncological management of esophageal cancer, with consideration of new challenges and obstacles to be overcome.

Esophageal Cancer in Elderly Patients, Current Treatment Options and Outcomes; A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

Simple Summary

Any given treatment may provide improve survival for elderly patients with oesophageal cancer compared to best supportive care. Although surgery may be related to a higher rate of complications in these patients, it also offers the best chance for survival, especially when combined with perioperative chemo-or chemoradiation. Definitive chemoradiation remains also a valid and widely used curative approach in this population. Quality of life after oesophageal cancer treatment does not seem to be particularly compromised in elderly patients, although the risk of loss of autonomy after the disease is higher. Based on the available data, excluding a priori elderly patients from curative treatment based on age alone cannot be supported. A thorough general health status and geriatric assessment is necessary to offer the optimal treatment, tailored to the individual patient.

Abstract

Esophageal cancer, despite its tendency to increase among younger patients, remains a disease of the elderly, with the peak incidence between 70–79 years. In spite of that, elderly patients are still excluded from major clinical trials and they are frequently offered suboptimal treatment even for curable stages of the disease. In this review, a clear survival benefit is demonstrated for elderly patients treated with neoadjuvant treatment, surgery, and even definitive chemoradiation compared to palliative or no treatment. Surgery in elderly patients is often associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to younger patients and may put older frail patients at increased risk of autonomy loss. Definitive chemoradiation is the predominant modality offered to elderly patients, with very promising results especially for squamous cell cancer, although higher rates of acute toxicity might be encountered. Based on the all the above, and although the best available evidence comes from retrospective studies, it is not justified to refrain from curative treatment for elderly patients based on their age alone. Thorough assessment and an adapted treatment plan as well as inclusion of elderly patients in ongoing clinical trials will allow better understanding and management of esophageal cancer in this heterogeneous and often frail population.

It's not always too late: a case for minimally invasive salvage esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Standard of care for locally advanced esophageal carcinoma is neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) and surgical resection 4-8 weeks after completion of nCRT. It is recommended that the CRT to surgery interval not exceed 90 days. Many patients do not undergo surgery within this timeframe due to patient/physician preference, complete clinical response, or poor performance status. Select patients are offered salvage esophagectomy (SE), defined in two ways: resection for recurrent/persistent disease after complete response to definitive CRT (dCRT) or esophagectomy performed > 90 days after completion of nCRT. Salvage esophagectomy reportedly has higher postoperative morbidity and poor survival outcomes. In this study, we assessed outcomes, overall, and disease-free survival of patients undergoing salvage esophagectomy by both definitions (recurrent/persistent disease after dCRT and/or > 90 days), compared to planned (resection after nCRT/within 90 days) esophagectomy (PE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database identified patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy at a single institution from 2009 to 2019. Esophagectomy for benign disease and patients who did not receive nCRT were excluded. Outcomes included postoperative complications, length of stay (LOS), disease-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

97 patients underwent minimally invasive esophageal resection for esophageal carcinoma. 89.7% of patients were male. Mean age was 64.9 years (range 36-85 years). 94.8% of patients had adenocarcinoma, with 16 transthoracic and 81 transhiatal approaches. On comparing planned esophagectomy (n = 87) to esophagectomy after dCRT failure (n = 10), no significant differences were identified in overall survival (p = 0.73), disease-free survival (p = 0.32), 30-day or major complication rate, anastomotic leak, or LOS. Similarly, when comparing esophagectomy < 90 days after CRT (n = 62) to > 90 days after CRT completion (n = 35), no significant differences were identified in overall survival (p = 0.39), disease-free survival (p = 0.71), 30-day or major complication rate, LOS, or anastomotic leak rate between groups. In this comparison, local recurrence was noted to be elevated with SE as compared to PE (64.3% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Overall survival and disease-free survival were equivalent between SE and PE. Local recurrence was noted to be increased with SE, though this did not appear to affect survival. Although planned esophagectomy remains the standard of care, salvage esophagectomy has comparable outcomes and is appropriate for selected patients.

Management of Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

Management of locally advanced esophageal cancer is evolving. Trimodality therapy with chemoradiation followed by surgical resection has become the standard of care. However, the value of planned surgery after response to therapy is in question. In this article, we discuss the current practice principles and evidence for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Topics will include various neoadjuvant therapies, trimodality versus bimodality therapy, and outcomes for salvage esophagectomies. In addition, emerging novel therapies, such as HER2 inhibitors and immunotherapy, are available for unresectable or metastatic disease, enabling a greater armamentarium of tumor biology-specific treatments.

Esophageal brachytherapy: Institut Gustave Roussy's experience

PURPOSE

Esophageal cancer is characterized by its propension to local evolution, which conditions prognosis and quality of life. Brachytherapy may be a therapeutic option for all stages of esophageal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective unicentric study included all consecutive patients treated for an esophageal high-dose-rate brachytherapy in our institution from 1992 to 2018.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were included. They were treated in four distinct indications: exclusive (7 patients), boost after external beam radiotherapy (41), reirradiation (36), or palliative aim (6). Most frequently prescribed schemes were 3 × 5 Gy (boost) or 6 × 5 Gy (exclusive treatment and reirradiation) at applicator's surface or at 5 mm. At the end of follow-up, 50% of patients had presented with local recurrence. Seventeen percent of patients had a metastatic relapse. Median overall survival was 15 months in the whole cohort: 22 months in the boost setting, 25 months for exclusive brachytherapy, 15 months for reirradiation, and only 2 months for palliative treatment. Tumor length at brachytherapy, brachytherapy dose, and interfraction response were significantly associated to overall survival. 40% of patients presented with grade 2+ toxicity, mostly esophagitis, including three toxic deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local control outcomes are still poor, one must remember that patients are unfit for any curative therapeutic option and that palliative chemotherapy offers mediocre results. The most promising setting probably is reirradiation because brachytherapy offers a remarkable dose gradient allowing best organ at risk sparing, with an encouraging rate of long survivors (19% at 2 years). Esophageal brachytherapy deserves to be further investigated because some patients, even unfit, may benefit from it, with acceptable toxicity.

Drivers of 30- and 90-day Postoperative Death After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation, followed by esophagectomy, is a standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancers. The ChemoRadiOtherapy plus Surgery versus Surgery alone (CROSS) trial reported a 30-day mortality rate of 6%. We sought to evaluate 30- and 90-day mortality in similar patients in the United States and identify predictors of higher mortality rates.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with cT3-4/N+ esophageal cancers treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy. Bivariate univariable and multivariable regression analysis was used to identify predictors of 30- and 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 7691 patients. Readmission within 30 days of surgery occurred in 6.0% of patients. Mortality was 2.9% at 30 days and 7.2% at 90 days. Positive surgical margins conferred a more than doubled risk of 30- and 90-day mortality, 5.5% vs 2.7% and 14.6% vs 6.8% (both P < .001). Facility surgical volume impacted 30-day mortality, whereas readmission was associated with 90-day mortality, both exceeding 10% (P = .004 and P = .001, respectively). In patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery converted to open, 90-day mortality was 12.1% (P < .01). For patients 69 years and older, 90-day mortality was also 12.1% (P < .001). Patients who underwent esophagectomy more than 45 days from completion of chemoradiation also had higher 90-day mortality at 8.3% vs 6.2% (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative death at 30 and 90 days after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy appears to be on par with randomized data. Positive surgical margins, squamous cell carcinomas, age 69 and older, readmission within 30 days, and conversion from a minimally invasive operation to an open operation all carry a 90-day mortality risk exceeding 10%.

Recurrence Patterns and Long-term Results After Induction Chemotherapy, Chemoradiotherapy, and Curative Surgery in Patients With Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The long-term follow up data of 2 prospective phase II trials is reported (NCT00072033, NCT00445861), which investigated neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Postoperative complications as well as prognostic factors and patterns of relapse during long-term observation are shown.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Long-term follow-up is often missing in the complex setting of multimodal treatments of esophageal carcinoma; this leads to rather undifferentiated follow-up guidelines for this tumor entity.

METHODS

In the first trial, patients received induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery. In the second trial, cetuximab was added to the same neoadjuvant treatment concomitant with induction chemotherapy and chemoradiation.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients underwent surgery; the median follow-up time was 6.8 and 6.4 years, respectively. Fifty-five percent were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, 80% clinically node-positive, 68% received transthoracic esophagectomy, and 32% transhiatal or transmediastinal resection. Five patients died postoperatively in-hospital due to complications (6%). The median overall survival was 4.3 years, and the median event-free survival was 2.7 years. Patients with adenocarcinoma rarely relapsed after a 3-year event-free survival. Whereas patients with residual tumor cells after neoadjuvant therapy primarily experienced relapse within the first 2 postoperative years, this in contrast to several patients with complete remission who also experienced late relapses 4 years after surgery.

CONCLUSION

After curative surgery in a multimodal setting, the histological type and the response to neoadjuvant therapy predicted the time frame of relapse; this knowledge may influence further follow-up guidelines for esophageal carcinoma.

Early metabolic response to chemoradiotherapy by interim FDG PET/CT is associated with better overall survival and histological response in esophageal cancers

BACKGROUND

Early assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is crucial in determining the most suitable treatment strategy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer (LAEC).

AIMS

We evaluated the impact of early metabolic response during CRT on overall survival (OS) and histological response.

METHODS

Patients with biopsy-proven oesophageal carcinoma underwent FDG PET/CT with evaluation of the standardized uptake value (SUV) before any treatment and during CRT after 20 Gy.

RESULTS

116 patients (Male: 66.4%, Median age: 63; squamous cell carcinomas (SCC): 70%) met inclusion criteria. Median OS was 21.7 months. There was a significant positive correlation between interim metabolic response and OS. In multivariate analysis, only metabolic response using the 50% cut-off value remained significantly associated with OS (IC95% = 0.28-0.73; p = 0.001). In this statistical analysis, surgery (p = 0.007) and T stage (p = 0.023) were also correlated with OS. There was a significant correlation between early metabolic response and local recurrence (Chi-squared test p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Early metabolic response using FDG PET/CT is associated with better OS, disease-free survival, local control and pathological response in patients treated by CRT for LAEC.

[Chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer: A critical review of the literature]

Locally advanced oesophageal cancer treatment requires a multidisciplinary approach with the combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for preoperative and definitive strategy. Preoperative chemoradiation improves the locoregional control and overall survival after surgery for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. Definitive chemoradiation can also be proposed for non-resectable tumours or medically inoperable patients. Besides, definitive chemoradiation is considered as an alternative option to surgery for locally advanced squamous cell carcinomas. Chemotherapy regimen associated to radiotherapy consists of a combination of platinum derived drugs (cisplatinum or oxaliplatin) and 5-fluorouracil or a weekly scheme combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel according to CROSS protocol in a neoadjuvant strategy. Radiation doses vary from 41.4Gy to 45Gy for a preoperative strategy or 50 to 50.4Gy for a definitive treatment. The high risk of lymphatic spread due to anatomical features could justify the use of an elective nodal irradiation when the estimated risk of microscopic involvement is higher than 15% to 20%. An appropriate delineation of the gross tumour volume requires an exhaustive and up-to-date evaluation of the disease. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy represents a promising approach to spare organs-at-risk. This critical review of the literature underlines the roles of radiotherapy for locally advanced oesophageal cancers and describes doses, volumes of treatment, technical aspects and dose constraints to organs-at-risk.

Survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Whether there is a difference in survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (CRT-S) compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) in patients with locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) remains controversial.

Methods

Patients with SCC who underwent curative treatment from 2008 to 2014 were identified from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. Propensity score matching was undertaken to balance pretreatment clinical variables. Overall survival was compared between patients undergoing CRT-S or dCRT. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for overall survival.

Results

A total of 5832 patients with clinical stage II and III oesophageal SCC receiving CRT-S (1754) or dCRT (4078) were included. After propensity score matching, each group included 1661 patients. The 3-year overall survival rate for patients treated with CRT-S was 41·1 per cent compared with 17·9 per cent for those who had dCRT (P &lt; 0·001). In multivariable analysis, treatment modality was an independent prognostic factor in the overall cohort before propensity score matching: hazard ratio 0·45 (95 per cent c.i. 0·40 to 0·51) for CRT-S versus dCRT (P &lt; 0·001). In separate analyses of patients with clinical stage II and those with stage III disease, CRT-S was associated with significantly better overall survival than dCRT.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy is associated with better overall survival than dCRT in patients with stage II and III oesophageal SCC.

[Surgery after upfront radiochemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer: To do or not to do?]

The treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer is still evolving. Surgery was considered as the backbone of the therapeutic management for a long time. Nowadays, chemoradiation has taken a major place in the neoadjuvant setting or as an exclusive treatment. Although some patients benefit from esophagectomy after chemoradiotherapy, a large subset of patients has no benefit and morbi-mortality rates are increased with a trimodality strategy. Patients who will have a local failure are at high risk of distant metastases in the follow-up. A third group of patients will have persistent locoregional disease after chemoradiotherapy and may benefit from surgery, but only a minority of patients with locally advanced disease are eligible. The impact of surgery after upfront chemoradiotherapy on survival and the quality of life of patients with locally advanced squamous cell esophageal cancer remain uncertain. An active surveillance strategy after chemoradiation or salvage esophagectomy for a locally residual disease might improve the prognosis of these patients. An optimized bimodality such as chemoradiotherapy delivering at least 50Gy is still standard and salvage surgery for local persistent disease or a local failure must be discussed in the framework of a multidisciplinary group for selected patients only.

Recent advancements in esophageal cancer treatment in Japan

The 11th edition of the Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer (EC) was published in 2017. Some correction was made in the depth of tumor invasion to be consistent with the TNM classification by the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC). With regard to surgery, short-term safety and long-term effectiveness under thoracotomy/video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery are expected to be proven by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG)1409 study. Results of nutritional management and countermeasures for adverse events not only during the perioperative period but also during EC chemotherapy were reported. From now on, the pursuit of low invasiveness and radicality is desired. Esophageal surgery is also expected to be safe at all institutions. To determine the optimal modality of preoperative treatment and a novel chemo(radio)therapy regimen for patients with distant metastasis, the results of the ongoing JCOG1109 and 0807 studies are being released. The effect of the addition of molecular targeted drugs on chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiation has not yet improved overall survival. Immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs could offer a potential new treatment approach for patients with treatment-refractory advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network reported the results of a comprehensive genome analysis and molecular analysis of SCC and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Further differentiation of SCC and adenocarcinoma by molecular characterization analysis may be useful for the development of clinical trials and targeted drug therapies as precision medicine. The era of ultimate minimally invasive surgery and personalized treatment has begun. Large, prospective studies will be required to confirm the value of these advancements.

Salvage Surgery for Esophageal Cancer: How to Improve Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Locoregional recurrence rates after definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) are high. Salvage surgery (SALV) is considered the best treatment option in case of persistent or recurrent disease for operable patients, but SALV has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to identify factors linked to outcomes after SALV to better select candidates and to optimize perioperative care.

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively analyzed data from 308 consecutive SALV patients from a large multicenter European cohort. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with in-hospital postoperative morbidity, anastomotic leakage (AL), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The in-hospital postoperative mortality and morbidity rates were 8.4 and 34.7%, respectively. Squamous cell histology (p = 0.040) and radiation dose ≥ 55 Gy (p = 0.047) were independently associated with major morbidity. The AL rate was 12.7%, and cervical anastomosis was independently associated with AL (p = 0.002). OS at 5 years was 34.0%. Radiation dose ≥ 55 Gy (p = 0.003), occurrence of postoperative complications (p = 0.006), ypTNM stage 3 (p = 0.019), and positive surgical margins (p < 0.001) were linked to poor prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

SALV is a valuable option for patients with persistent or recurrent disease after dCRT and offers long-term survival. Factors such as radiation dose and anastomosis location identified here will help to optimize outcomes after SALV, which may be considered a standard treatment in the EC therapeutic armamentarium.

Surveillance versus esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients with a clinical complete response after induction chemoradiation

There currently exists an area of controversy in treatment of esophageal cancer for patients who have an apparent clinical complete response (cCR) after induction chemoradiation. A standard treatment is to offer these patients an esophagectomy, but increasingly there is interest from both the patient and provider for active surveillance with so-called "salvage" esophagectomies for local recurrence as an alternative treatment paradigm. In this article, we review the existing evidence that stakeholders should consider for clinical decision-making in this specific patient population, including: the accuracy of post-induction clinical restaging, the reliability of operative risk assessment, the feasibility and adherence to surveillance strategies, and the observed outcomes in these patients after salvage esophagectomy or continued active surveillance. We also briefly discuss quality of life and future directions for this field.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer : Surgery improves locoregional control while response based on FDG-PET/CT predicts survival

INTRODUCTION

To retrospectively analyze the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

METHODS

A total of 41 patients received neoadjuvant intent chemoradiation for esophageal cancer. Most patients had a locally advanced disease (T3/4: 82%, N+: 83%, M0: 100%) and squamous cell carcinoma (83%). All patients received concurrent chemotherapy with cisplatin/5-fluorouracil or mitomycin/5-fluorouracil. Median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy in the 25 patients who proceeded to surgery and 57.4 Gy in 16 patients who did not undergo surgery. FDG-PET/CT was used for treatment planning in 24 patients. A second FDG-PET/CT was available for response evaluation in 18 patients.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 16 months in all patients and 30 months in survivors. Radiotherapy was completed without interruptions >3 days in 90% of patients, and chemotherapy was carried out to >80% in 85% of patients. The 2‑year locoregional control rate was 60%, distant control rate 54% and overall survival rate 50%. Hematological toxicity grade 3/4 was observed in 34%/10% of patients and non-hematological toxicity grade 3/4 in 46%/2% of patients. Perioperative 30-day mortality was 4%. Subgroup analyses revealed that surgery significantly improved locoregional control (74% vs. 39%, p = 0.034), but not the 2‑year survival rate (54% vs. 43%, p = 0.246). In contrast, response based on FDG-PET/CT prior and after chemoradiation significantly predicted improved overall survival (2-year overall survival 61% vs. 40%, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of our cohort were comparable to other series using similar treatments. Surgery significantly improved locoregional control but not survival. Response based on FDG-PET/CT predicted survival and might be used for treatment stratification.

Chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy plus surgery for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Please see Appendix 4 for a glossary of terms.The outcome of patients with esophageal cancer is generally poor. Although multimodal therapy is standard, there is conflicting evidence regarding the addition of esophagectomy to chemoradiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of chemoradiotherapy plus surgery with that of chemoradiotherapy alone in people with nonmetastatic esophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a computerized search for relevant studies, up to Feburary 2017, on the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases using MeSH headings and keywords. We searched five online databases of clinical trials, handsearched conference proceedings, and screened reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chemoradiotherapy plus esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy alone for localized esophageal carcinoma. We excluded RCTs comparing chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone with esophagectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of the evidence, using standardized Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), estimated with Hazard Ratio (HR). Secondary outcomes, estimated with risk ratio (RR), were local and distant progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life (QoL), treatment-related mortality and morbidity, and use of salvage procedures for dysphagia. Data were analyzed using a random effects model in Review Manager 5.3 software.

MAIN RESULTS

From 2667 references, we identified two randomized studies, in six reports, that included 431 participants. All participants were clinically staged to have at least T3 and/or node positive thoracic esophageal carcinoma, 93% of which was squamous cell histology. The risk of methodological bias of the included studies was low to moderate.High-quality evidence found the addition of esophagectomy had little or no difference on overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.24; P = 0.92; I² = 0%; two trials). Neither study reported PFS, therefore, freedom from loco-regional relapse was used as a proxy. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that the addition of esophagectomy probably improved freedom from locoregional relapse (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.76; P = 0.0004; I² = 0%; two trials), but low-quality evidence suggested it may increase the risk of treatment-related mortality (RR 5.11, 95% CI 1.74 to 15.02; P = 0.003; I² = 2%; two trials).The other pre-specified outcomes (quality of life, treatment-related toxicity, and use of salvage procedures for dysphagia) were reported by only one study, which found very low-quality evidence that use of esophagectomy was associated with reduced short-term QoL (MD 0.93, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.62), and low-quality evidence that it reduced use of salvage procedures for dysphagia (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.75). Neither study compared treatment-related morbidity between treatment groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, the addition of esophagectomy to chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, provides little or no difference on overall survival, and may be associated with higher treatment-related mortality. The addition of esophagectomy probably delays locoregional relapse, however, this end point was not well defined in the included studies. It is undetermined whether these results can be applied to the treatment of adenocarcinomas, tumors involving the distal esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction, and to people with poor response to chemoradiation.

Current trends in multimodality treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer - Review article

PURPOSE

Multimodality treatment has now been widely introduced in the curatively intended treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. We aim to give an overview of the scientific evidence for the available treatment strategies and to describe which trends that are currently developing.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the scientific evidence for the different curatively intended treatment strategies that are available today. Relevant articles of randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and meta analyses were included.

RESULTS

After a systematic search of relevant papers we have included 64 articles in the review. The results show that adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction are two separate entities and should be analysed and studied as two different diseases. Neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgical resection is the gold standard of the curatively intended treatment today. There is no scientific evidence to support the use of chemoradiotherapy over chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting for esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. There is reasonable evidence to support definitive chemoradiotherapy as a treatment option for squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for curatively intended treatments of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer is not very strong. Several on-going trials have the potential to change the gold standard treatments of today.

What is the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radiation, and adjuvant treatment in resectable esophageal cancer?

The majority of patients with operable esophageal cancers present with locally advanced disease, for which surgical resection as a sole treatment modality has been historically associated with poor survival. Even following radical resection, most of these patients will eventually succumb to their disease due to distant metastasis. For this reason, there has been intense interest in the role of neoadjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy primarily consists of either chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or a combination of the two. Multiple studies of variable scope, design, and patient characteristics have been conducted to determine whether neoadjuvant therapy is warranted, and-if so-what is the best modality of treatment. Despite nearly three decades of study, decisions regarding neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer remain controversial. Regardless, the available evidence provided by large, prospective studies supports preoperative chemotherapy as opposed to surgery alone. Therefore, in our opinion, there is no longer any question as to whether induction therapy is appropriate for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Less clear, however, is the evidence that the addition of radiation to chemotherapy in the preoperative setting is superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. Our group generally advocates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone followed by radical esophageal resection. The data for adjuvant therapy are soft, and particularly troubling is the high rate of treatment drop out in trials studying adjuvant therapy. Therefore, we strongly prefer neoadjuvant chemotherapy and reserve adjuvant chemotherapy for those rare, highly selected patients-patients with T1 tumors, for example-who do not receive neoadjuvant treatment and are found to have occult nodal disease at the time of surgery.

Dose-Response Relationship between Radiation Dose and Loco-regional Control in Patients with Stage II-III Esophageal Cancer Treated with Definitive Chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

The correlation between radiation dose and loco-regional control (LRC) was evaluated in patients with stage II-III esophageal cancer treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records of 236 stage II-III esophageal cancer patients treated with definitive CRT at Yonsei Cancer Center between 1994 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Among these, 120 received a radiation dose of < 60 Gy (standard-dose group), while 116 received ≥ 60 Gy (high-dose group). The median doses of radiation in the standard- and high-dose groups were 50.4 and 63 Gy, respectively. Concurrent 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin chemotherapy was administered to most patients.

RESULTS

There were no differences in patient characteristics between the two groups except for high Karnofsky performance status and lower-thoracic lesions being more prevalent in the standard-dose group. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were 13.2 months and 26.2 months, respectively. Patients in the high-dose group had significantly better 2-year LRC (69.1% vs. 50.3%, p=0.002), median PFS (16.7 months vs. 11.7 months, p=0.029), and median OS (35.1 months vs. 22.3 months, p=0.043). Additionally, LRC exhibited a dose-response relationship and the complete response rate was significantly higher in the high-dose group (p=0.006). There were no significant differences in treatment-related toxicities between the groups.

CONCLUSION

A higher radiation dose (> 60 Gy) is associated with increased LRC, PFS, and OS in patients with stage II-III esophageal cancer treated with definitive CRT.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for treatment response assessment in patients with oesophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

To explore and evaluate the potential value of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in oesophageal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-six patients underwent DCE-MRI before, during (week 2-3) and after nCRT, but before surgery (pre/per/post, respectively). Histopathologic tumour regression grade (TRG) was assessed after oesophagectomy. Tumour area-under-the-concentration time curve (AUC), time-to-peak (TTP) and slope were calculated. The ability of these DCE-parameters to distinguish good responders (GR, TRG 1-2) from poor responders (noGR, TRG⩾3), and pathologic complete responders (pCR) from no-pCR was assessed.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (48%) showed GR of which 8 patients (32%) pCR. Analysis of AUC change throughout treatment, AUCper-pre, was most predictive for GR, at a threshold of 22.7% resulting in a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 77%, PPV of 79%, and a NPV of 91%. AUCpost-pre was most predictive for pCR, at a threshold of -24.6% resulting in a sensitivity of 83%, specificity of 88%, PPV of 71%, and a NPV of 93%. TTP and slope were not associated with pathologic response.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that changes in AUC throughout treatment are promising for prediction of histopathologic response to nCRT for oesophageal cancer.