Lasting symptoms and long-term health-related quality of life after totally minimally invasive, hybrid and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Patients with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer: A Markov decision analysis of esophagectomy versus active surveillance

OBJECTIVE

Chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy is a standard treatment option for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC). Esophagectomy is a high-risk procedure, and recent evidence suggests select patients may benefit from omitting or delaying surgery. This study aims to compare surgery versus active surveillance for LAEC patients with complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).

METHODS

Decision analysis with Markov modeling was used. The base case was a 60-year-old man with T3N0M0 esophageal cancer with cCR after nCRT. The decision was modeled for a 5-year time horizon. Primary outcomes were life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Probabilities and utilities were derived through the literature. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed using ranges from the literature with consideration for clinical plausibility.

RESULTS

Surgery was favored for survival with an expected life-years of 2.89 versus 2.64. After incorporating quality of life, active surveillance was favored, with an expected QALY of 1.70 versus 1.56. The model was sensitive to probability of recurrence on active surveillance (threshold value 0.598), probability of recurrence being resectable (0.318), and disutility of previous esophagectomy (-0.091). The model was not sensitive to perioperative morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study finds that surgery increases life expectancy but decreases QALY. Although the incremental change in QALY for either modality is insufficient to make broad clinical recommendations, our study demonstrates that either approach is acceptable. As probabilities of key factors are further defined in the literature, treatment decisions for patients with LAEC and a cCR after nCRT should consider histology, patient values, and quality of life.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: Current evidence and future perspectives

Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly indicated in the management of malignant disease. Although oesophagectomy is a difficult operation, with a long learning curve, there is actually a shift towards the laparoscopic/thoracoscopic/ robotic approach, due to the advantages of visualization, surgeon comfort (robotic surgery) and the possibility of the whole team to see the operation as well as and the operating surgeon. Although currently there are still many controversial topics, about the surgical treatment of patients with gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinoma, such as the type of open or minimally invasive surgical approach, the type of oesophago-gastric resection, the type of lymph node dissection and others, the minimally invasive approach has proven to be a way to reduce postoperative complications of resection, especially by decreasing pulmonary complications. The implementation of new technologies allowed the widening of the range of indications for this type of surgical approach. The short-term and long-term results, as well as the benefits for the patient - reduced surgical trauma, quick and easy recovery - offer this type of surgical treatment the premises for future development. This article reviews the updates and perspectives on the minimally invasive approach for GOJ adenocarcinoma.

Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Upper GI Malignancies

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) conditions vastly affect each individual's physical, social, and emotional status. The decision-making process by the medical personnel about these patients is currently based on a patient's life quality evaluation scale, HRQL scales. By utilizing HRQL scales, a better understanding of the various surgical and non-surgical treatment options, as well as their long-term consequences, can be achieved. In our study, an organ-based approach is used in an attempt to examine and characterized the effect of upper GI surgery on HRQL. Therefore, HRQL scales' function as a prognostic tool is useful, and the need for future research, the creation of valid training programs, and modern guidelines is highlighted.

Active surveillance of oesophageal cancer after response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: dysphagia is uncommon

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance is being investigated as an alternative to standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer. It is unknown whether dysphagia persists or develops when the oesophagus is preserved after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and severity of dysphagia during active surveillance in patients with an ongoing response.

METHODS

Patients who underwent active surveillance were identified from the Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer ('SANO') trial. Patients without evidence of residual oesophageal cancer until at least 6 months after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included. Study endpoints were assessed at time points that patients were cancer-free and remained cancer-free for the next 4 months. Dysphagia scores were evaluated at 6, 9, 12, and 16 months after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Scores were based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer oesophago-gastric quality-of-life questionnaire 25 (EORTC QLQ-OG25) (range 0-100; no to severe dysphagia). The rate of patients with a (non-)traversable stenosis was determined based on all available endoscopy reports.

RESULTS

In total, 131 patients were included, of whom 93 (71.0 per cent) had adenocarcinoma, 93 (71.0 per cent) had a cT3-4a tumour, and 33 (25.2 per cent) had a tumour circumference of greater than 75 per cent at endoscopy; 60.8 to 71.0 per cent of patients completed questionnaires per time point after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. At all time points after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, median dysphagia scores were 0 (interquartile range 0-0). Two patients (1.5 per cent) underwent an intervention for a stenosis: one underwent successful endoscopic dilatation; and the other patient required temporary tube feeding. Notably, these patients did not participate in questionnaires.

CONCLUSION

Dysphagia and clinically relevant stenosis are uncommon during active surveillance.

Long-term health-related quality of life in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer receiving first-line systemic therapy

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of systemic therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer in daily clinical practice. This study assessed the HRQoL of patients with esophagogastric cancer during first-line systemic therapy, at disease progression, and after progression in a real-world context.

METHODS

Patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer (2014-2021) receiving first-line systemic therapy registered in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Oesophageal-gastric cancer (POCOP) were included (n = 335). HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25. Outcomes of mixed-effects models were presented as adjusted mean changes.

RESULTS

Results of the mixed-effect models showed the largest significant improvements during systemic therapy for odynophagia (- 18.9, p < 0.001), anxiety (- 18.7, p < 0.001), and dysphagia (- 13.8, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. After progression, global health status (- 6.3, p = 0.002) and cognitive (- 6.2, p = 0.001) and social functioning (- 9.7, p < 0.001) significantly worsened. At and after progression, physical (- 9.0, p < 0.001 and - 8.8, p < 0.001) and role functioning (- 15.2, p = 0.003 and - 14.7, p < 0.001) worsened, respectively. Trouble with taste worsened during systemic therapy (11.5, p < 0.001), at progression (12.0, p = 0.004), and after progression (15.3, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In general, HRQoL outcomes in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer improved during first-line therapy. Deterioration in outcomes was mainly observed at and after progression.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Identification of HRQoL aspects is important in shared decision-making and to inform patients on the impact of systemic therapy on their HRQoL.

Comparison of thoracoabdominal versus abdominal-transhiatal surgical approaches in Siewert type II adenocarcinoma at the esophagogastric junction: Protocol for a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial

Background

Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (Siewert II AEG) can be resected by the right thoracoabdominal surgical approach (RTA) or abdominal-transhiatal surgical approach (TH) under minimally invasive conditions. Although both surgical methods achieve complete tumor resection, there is a debate as to whether the former method is superior to or at least noninferior to the latter in terms of surgical safety. Currently, a small number of retrospective studies have compared the two surgical approaches, with inconclusive results. As such, a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial is necessary to validate the value of RTA (Ivor-Lewis) compared to TH.

Methods

The planned study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Patients (n=212) with Siewert II AEG that could be resected by either of the above two surgical approaches will be included in this trial and randomized to the RTA group (n=106) or the TH group (n=106). The primary outcome will be 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes will include 5-year overall survival (OS), incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, local recurrence rate, number and location of removed lymph nodes, quality of life (QOL), surgical Apgar score, and duration of the operation. Follow-ups are scheduled every three months for the first 3 years after the surgery and every six months for the next 2 years.

Discussion

Among Siewert II AEG patients with resectable tumors, this is the first prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing the surgical safety of minimally invasive RTA and TH. RTA is hypothesized to provide better digestive tract reconstruction and dissection of mediastinal lymph nodes while maintaining a high quality of life and good postoperative outcome. Moreover, this trial will provide a high level of evidence for the choice of surgical procedures for Siewert II AEG.

Clinical trial registration

Chinese Ethics Committee of Registering Clinical Trials, identifier (ChiECRCT20210635); Clinical Trial.gov, identifier (NCT05356520).

The Implementation of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: A Step Toward Better Outcomes?

Esophagectomy is considered the cornerstone of the radical treatment of esophageal cancer. In the past decades, minimally invasive techniques including robot-assisted approaches have become popular. The aim of minimally invasive surgery is to reduce the surgical trauma, resulting in faster recovery, reduction in complications, and better quality of life after surgery. Secondly, a more precise dissection may lead to better oncological outcomes. As such, minimally invasive esophagectomy is now seen by many as the standard surgical approach. However, evidence supporting this viewpoint is limited. This narrative review summarizes recent prospectively designed studies on minimally invasive esophagectomy.