Does timing of esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiation affect outcomes? A meta-analysis

Does the time interval from neoadjuvant camrelizumab combined with chemotherapy to surgery affect outcomes for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma?

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus on the optimal interval time between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, and whether prolonged time interval from neoadjuvant therapy to surgery results in bad outcomes for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). In this study, we aim to evaluate outcomes of time intervals ≤ 8 weeks and > 8 weeks in locally advanced ESCC.

METHODS

This retrospective study consecutively included ESCC patients who received esophagectomy after neoadjuvant camrelizumab combined with chemotherapy at the Department of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine. The primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), while the secondary endpoints were pathological response, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

From 2019 to 2021, a total of 80 patients were included in our study and were divided into two groups according to the time interval from neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy to surgery: ≤ 8 weeks group (n = 44) and > 8 weeks group (n = 36). The rate of MPR in the ≤ 8 weeks group was 25.0% and 27.8% in the > 8 weeks group (P = 0.779). The rate of pCR in the ≤ 8 weeks group was 11.4%, with 16.7% in the > 8 weeks group (P = 0.493). The incidence of postoperative complications in the ≤ 8 weeks group was 27.3% and 19.4% in the > 8 weeks group (P = 0.413). The median DFS in the two groups had not yet reached (hazard ratio [HR], 3.153; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.383 to 6.851; P = 0.004). The median OS of ≤ 8 weeks group was not achieved (HR, 3.703; 95% CI 1.584 to 8.657; P = 0.0012), with the > 8 weeks group 31.6 months (95% CI 21.1 to 42.1). In multivariable analysis, inferior DFS and OS were observed in patients with interval time > 8 weeks (HR, 2.992; 95% CI 1.306 to 6.851; and HR, 3.478; 95% CI 1.481 to 8.170, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Locally advanced ESCC patients with time interval from neoadjuvant camrelizumab combined with chemotherapy to surgery > 8 weeks were associated with worse long-term survival.

Nomogram for predicting pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

A pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is seen in up to 40% of the patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). No nomogram has been constructed for the prediction of pCR for patients whose primary chemotherapy was a taxane-based regimen. The aim is to identify characteristics associated with a pCR through analyzing multiple pre- and post-nCRT variables and to develop a nomogram for the prediction of pCR for these patients by integrating clinicopathological characteristics and hematological biomarkers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed 293 patients with ESCC who underwent nCRT followed by esophagectomy. Clinicopathological factors, hematological parameters before nCRT, and hematotoxicity during nCRT were collected. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for pCR. A nomogram model was built and evaluated for both discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

After surgery, 37.88% of the study patients achieved pCR. Six variables were included in the nomogram: sex, cN stage, chemotherapy regimen, duration of nCRT, pre-nCRT neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and pre-nCRT platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). The nomogram indicated good accuracy and consistency in predicting pCR, with a C-index of 0.743 (95% confidence interval: 0.686, 0.800) and a p value of 0.600 (>0.05) in the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.

CONCLUSIONS

Female, earlier cN stage, duration of nCRT (< 62 days), chemotherapy regimen of taxane plus platinum, pre-nCRT NLR (≥2.199), and pre-nCRT PLR (≥99.302) were significantly associated with a higher pCR in ESCC patients whose primary chemotherapy was a taxane-based regimen for nCRT. A nomogram was developed and internally validated, showing good accuracy and consistency.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Total neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction represent a large burden of cancer death in the Western World with an increasing incidence. In the past two decades, the overall survival of patients on a potentially curative treatment pathway has more than doubled due to the addition of perioperative oncological therapies to surgery. However, patients often fail to respond to oncological treatment or struggle to complete their treatment after surgery. In this review, we discuss the current evidence for total neoadjuvant therapy and options for assessment of treatment response.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

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.

Effect of Time to Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil/capecitabine (DCF/DCX) followed by esophagectomy has been the recommended treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, the optimal interval from NAC to surgery has not yet been established. This study evaluated the impact of time to surgery (TTS) in the treatment of ESCC.

METHODS

Between August 2018 and September 2021, 97 patients who underwent radical esophagectomy following 3-6 cycles of NAC with DCF/DCX for ESCC at a single hospital were analyzed. TTS was categorized into three groups: 16-41 days (group 1; 33 patients), 42-55 days (group 2; 29 patients), and 56-135 days (group 3; 35 patients). Survival outcomes included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Mean age was 59.6 ± 6.8 years, and 95 patients were male. One patient had grade-III anemia, 12 had grade-II anemia, and four had grade-II neutropenia; all other NAC-related toxicities were as grade I. Regarding pathologic tumor response, 18.6% achieved complete response, 71.1% achieved partial response, and 10.3% had stable disease. Forty-eight patients (49.5%) had a postoperative complication, but only six (6.2%) with grade IIIa and two (2.1%) with grade IVa according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Median follow-up time was 24 months. Groups 1 and 3 had worse OS (HR [95% CI]: 3.36 [1.16-11.7] and 1.83 [0.55-6.10]) and worse PFS (HR [95% CI]: 3.27 [1.25-8.53] and 1.61 [0.58-4.45]) compared to group 2.

CONCLUSION

We suggest the optimal TTS after NAC is 6-8 weeks. However, this finding must be confirmed by prospective trials.

Factors affecting timing of surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer

Background

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with esophagectomy is standard management for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Studies have shown that surgical timing following chemoradiation is important for minimizing postoperative complications, however in practice timing is often variable and delayed. Although postoperative impact of surgical timing has been studied, less is known about factors associated with delays.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review was performed for 96 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent chemoradiation then esophagectomy between 2018 and 2020 at a single institution. Univariable and stepwise multivariable analyses were used to assess association between social (demographics, insurance) and clinical variables (pre-operative weight, comorbidities, prior cardiothoracic surgery, smoking history, disease staging) with time to surgery (≤8 weeks "on-time" vs. >8 weeks "delayed").

Results

Fifty-one patients underwent esophagectomy within 8 weeks of chemoradiation; 45 had a delayed operation. Univariate analysis showed the following characteristics were significantly different between on-time and delayed groups: weight loss within 3 months of surgery (3.9 ± 5.1 kg vs. 1.5 ± 3.6 kg; P = 0.009), prior cardiovascular disease (29% vs. 49%; P = 0.05), prior cardiothoracic surgery (4% vs. 22%; P = 0.01), history of ever smoked (69% vs. 87%; P = 0.04), absent nodal metastasis on pathology (57% vs. 82%; P = 0.008). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that prior cardiothoracic surgery (OR 8.924, 95%CI 1.67-47.60; P = 0.01) and absent nodal metastasis (OR 4.186, 95%CI 1.50-11.72; P = 0.006) were associated with delayed surgery.

Conclusions

Delayed esophagectomy following chemoradiotherapy is associated with prior cardiothoracic surgery and absent nodal metastasis. Further investigations should focus on understanding how these factors contribute to delays to guide treatment planning and mitigate sources of outcome disparities.

Oncological outcomes of standard versus prolonged time to surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer in the multicentre, randomised, controlled NeoRes II trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal time to surgery (TTS) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for oesophageal cancer is unknown and has traditionally been 4-6 weeks in clinical practice. Observational studies have suggested better outcomes, especially in terms of histological response, after prolonged delay of up to 3 months after nCRT. The NeoRes II trial is the first randomised trial to compare standard to prolonged TTS after nCRT for oesophageal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with resectable, locally advanced oesophageal cancer were randomly assigned to standard delay of surgery of 4-6 weeks or prolonged delay of 10-12 weeks after nCRT. The primary endpoint was complete histological response of the primary tumour in patients with adenocarcinoma (AC). Secondary endpoints included histological tumour response, resection margins, overall and progression-free survival in all patients and stratified by histologic type.

RESULTS

Between February 2015 and March 2019, 249 patients from 10 participating centres in Sweden, Norway and Germany were randomised: 125 to standard and 124 to prolonged TTS. There was no significant difference in complete histological response between AC patients allocated to standard (21%) compared to prolonged (26%) TTS (P = 0.429). Tumour regression, resection margins and number of resected lymph nodes, total and metastatic, did not differ between the allocated interventions. The first quartile overall survival in patients allocated to standard TTS was 26.5 months compared to 14.2 months after prolonged TTS (P = 0.003) and the overall risk of death during follow-up was 35% higher after prolonged delay (hazard ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 0.94-1.95, P = 0.107).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged TTS did not improve histological complete response or other pathological endpoints, while there was a strong trend towards worse survival, suggesting caution in routinely delaying surgery for >6 weeks after nCRT.

The COVID-19 Era Is Associated With Delays in Esophageal Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has substantially affected the delivery of healthcare globally. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of this era with the timeline of care in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart-review of patients presenting to a single high-volume tertiary care center with the diagnosis of esophageal cancer. COVID era was defined as March 2020-December 2020 and compared with the year before (3/2019-12/2019).

RESULTS

In total, 117 patients presented in the COVID-era versus 190 in pre-COVID. Stage 3 + 4 disease was found in 77.8% of the patients in the COVID-era compared to 68.9% in the pre-COVID era (P = 0.34). Diagnoses through emergency department admission were 35.5% in the COVID versus 26.7% in the pre-COVID group (P = 0.15). In the COVID era it took a median of 78 d to visit primary care provider (versus 52 d, P = 0.12 in pre-COVID), 45 d to endoscopy (versus 18 d, P = 0.004) and 38 d to treatment initiation (versus 36 d, P = 0.48). Thirty-five percent of the patients underwent esophagectomy compared to 26% in the pre-COVID-era. Median days of intensive-care-unit (ICU) (2 versus 3, P = 0.16) and hospital stay (14 versus 15, P = 0.28) were similar in both groups as well as postoperative 30-day morbidities (63 versus 63%, P = 0.48). One-year follow-up showed 83.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.8%-90.1%) survival in the COVID-group compared to 76.4% (95% CI: 66.9%-83.5%) in the pre-COVID-group (P = 0.58). Only three patients had a positive COVID result.

CONCLUSIONS

Our institution treated fewer esophageal cancer patients during COVID-19 accompanied by a delay in endoscopic diagnosis. Postoperative outcomes and 1-year survival remained similar.

Longer interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery is associated with improved pathological response, but does not accurately estimate survival in patients with resectable esophageal cancer

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) has been shown to reduce tumor burden and achieve tumor regression in patients with esophageal cancer (ESC). However, the most beneficial time interval between the administration of nCRT and surgery remains unclear. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to explore the association of the duration of time between nCRT and surgery with the prognosis of patients with ESC. Patients with ESC who received nCRT following surgical resection (n=161) were reviewed and divided into the prolonged time interval group (time interval ≥66 days) and the short time interval group (time interval <66 days), according to the median value. Subsequent analysis revealed that the prolonged time interval group achieved a higher pathological complete response (pCR) rate compared with the short time interval group (49.4 vs. 26.3%; P=0.003). Furthermore, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that it was possible to independently estimate a higher pCR rate based on a prolonged time interval (odds ratio, 2.131; P=0.042). However, no association between a prolonged time interval and disease-free survival (DFS) was detected using Kaplan-Meier curves (P=0.252) or multivariate Cox regression (P=0.607) analyses. Similarly, no association was identified between a prolonged time interval and overall survival (OS; P=0.946) based on Kaplan-Meier curve analysis, and subsequent multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that the time interval also failed to independently estimate OS (P=0.581). Moreover, female sex (P=0.001) and a radiation dose ≥40 Gy (P=0.039) served as independent factors associated with a higher pCR rate, and the pCR rate was an independent predictor of favorable DFS (P=0.002) and OS (P=0.015) rates. In conclusion, the present study revealed that a prolonged time interval from nCRT to surgery was associated with a higher pCR rate, but it failed to estimate the survival profile of patients with ESC.

Time to surgery does not affect oncologic outcomes in locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a meta-analysis

Aim: The authors conducted a meta-analysis to determine the association between time-to-surgery (TTS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and patient outcomes in locally advanced gastric cancer. Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify potential studies, in which the authors compared patient outcomes between those with TTS within 4 (and 6) weeks of completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those after 4 (and 6) weeks. Results: Six studies, including 1238 patients, were eligible for inclusion. Pooled data showed no significant differences in rates of pathological complete response, major pathological response, ypN0, complications, R0 resection and operative time between groups of longer TTS and shorter TTS. Conclusion: There was no statistically advantageous impact of prolonged TTS on pathological and surgical outcomes. Large, population-based studies are warranted.

An Association Between Comorbidities and Postsurgical Complications in Adults Who Underwent Esophagectomy

Background Esophagectomy is the surgical excision of part or all of the esophagus and is associated with both common and serious complications. Various comorbidities, such as diabetes mellitus, smoking, and congestive heart failure (CHF), have been detected in individuals who have undergone esophagectomy. This study investigates the association of baseline characteristics and comorbidities with postoperative complications. Methods A retrospective cohort study based on data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was conducted, evaluating 2,544 patients who underwent esophagectomy between January 2016 and December 2018. Data included baseline characteristics, established comorbidities, and postoperative complications within 30 days of the procedure. Risk-adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions were used to assess the odds of postoperative complications against baseline characteristics. Results The majority of our population were white males (80.8% male; 78.2% white), with a mean age of 63.5 years. More than half of the patients were overweight or obese. A minority of our patients had a smoking history, weight loss, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or CHF. The most frequent postoperative complications were as follows: return to the operating room (15.7%), anastomotic leak (12.9%), pneumonia (12.7%), bleeding/transfusions (11.8%), readmissions (11.4%), and unplanned intubation (10.5%). Adjusted associations for odds of experiencing a postoperative complication were found to be statistically significant for age (odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.03, and P < 0.001), operation time (OR 1.002, 95% CI 1.001-1.003, and P < 0.001), race (not white) (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.26-2.47, and P = 0.001), BMI (underweight) (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.36-3.50, and P = 0.001), smoking (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.14-1.76, and P = 0.001), and chemotherapy and/or radiation (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99, P = 0.038). Conclusions Our study found that age, operation time, nonwhite race, underweight BMI, and smoking were independently associated with an increased risk of developing a postoperative complication following esophagectomy. Additionally, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation are associated with a decreased risk. Understanding how baseline characteristics and comorbidities can affect rates of postoperative complications may help to adjust care for patients in both pre- and postoperative settings.

Early versus delayed surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery, is the mainstay of managing locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, the optimal timing of surgery after neoadjuvant therapy is not defined clearly.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases was conducted. 6-8 weeks were used as a cut-off to define early and delayed surgery groups. Overall Survival (OS) was the primary outcome, whereas pathological complete resolution (pCR), R0 resection, anastomotic leak, perioperative mortality, pulmonary complications, and major complication (> Clavien-Dindo grade 2) rates were secondary outcomes. Cohort studies and national registry bases studies were analysed separately. Survival data were pooled as Hazard Ratio (HR) and the rest as Odds Ratio (OR). According to heterogeneity, fixed-effect or random-effect models were used.

RESULTS

Twelve retrospective studies, one RCT, and six registry-based studies (13,600 participants) were included. Pooled analysis of cohort studies showed no difference in OS (HR 1.03, CI 0.91-1.16), pCR (OR 0.98, CI 0.80-1.20), R0 resection (OR 0.90, CI 0.55-I.45), mortality (OR 1.03, CI 0.59-1.77), pulmonary complications (OR 1.26, CI 0.97-1.64) or major complication rates (OR 1.29, CI 0.96-1.73). Delayed surgery led to increased leak (OR 1.48, CI 1.11-1.97). Analysis of registry studies showed that the delayed group had a better pCR rate (OR 1.12, CI 1.01-1.24), with no improvement in survival (HR 1.01, CI 0.92-1.10). Delayed surgery was associated with increased mortality (OR 1.35, CI 1.07-1.69) and major complication rate (OR 1.55, CI 1.20-2.01). Available RCT reported surgical outcomes only.

CONCLUSION

National registry-based studies' analysis shows that delay in surgery is riskier and leads to higher mortality and major complication rates. Further, well-designed RCTs are required.

Interval time between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in advanced gastric cancer doesn't affect outcome: A meta analysis

Background

The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer is not yet firmly confirmed, but the exciting results demonstrated in several clinical studies have led neoadjuvant chemotherapy as the important treatment methods in guidelines. The 4-6 weeks interval time is currently the most commonly used in clinical treatment, but there are insufficient studies to support this time and the optimal interval has not yet been identified. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the short-term life quality and long-term prognostic impact of the interval time between the end of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search in PUBMED, Embase and Cochrane Liabrary for studies published or reported in English from January 2006 to May 2022. We summarised relevant studies for the time to surgery (TTS), included as retrospective studies and prospective studies. The primary study outcome was the rate of pathological complete response (pCR), and the secondary outcomes included R0 resection rate, incidence of serious postoperative complications, 3-year progression free survival time (PFS) rate and overall survival time (OS) rate. TTS were classified in three groups: 4-6 weeks, <4 weeks and >6 weeks. The ratio ratios (ORs) were calculated and forest plots and funnel plots were made to analysis by using fixed-effect and random-effect models in Review Manager 5.2.

Results

A total of five studies included 1,171 patients: 411 patients in shorter TTS group (<4 weeks), 507 patients in medium TTS group (4-6 weeks) and 253 patients in longer TTS groups (>6 weeks). And The results of our meta-analysis indicate that there are no significant difference between the three groups. The pCR, R0 resection rate, incidence of serious postoperative complications, 3-year PFS and OS were similar between three groups.

Conclusions

Although there many studies exploring the suitable TTS in advanced gastric cancer, but we have not find the evidence to prove the TTS is the risk factor influencing the outcome.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022369009.

Does time to esophagectomy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma affect outcomes?

Objectives

Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) is a novel pattern for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and the time to surgery (TTS) is recommended as 4-6 weeks. However, there were some patients with prolonged TTS(&gt; 6 weeks). This study aimed to explore whether prolonged TTS (&gt; 6 weeks) would affect the outcomes.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with locally advanced ESCC between January 2020 and March 2022 and undergoing esophagectomy following nICT were identified based on a prospectively collected database. Primary outcome measures were pathological complete response (pCR) and disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary outcomes were 30-day postoperative mortality and morbidity, surgical time, postoperative hospital stay, and hospital expense.

Results

Total of 95 patients were included for analysis, with 52 patients in the standard TTS group and 43 patients in the prolonged TTS group. The clinical and demographic characteristics of the two groups were comparable. The prolonged group had a median 18 days longer TTS(P&lt;0.001). The pCR rate was 23.08% (12/52) in the standard group and 16.28% (7/43) in the prolonged group (P=0.41). Multivariate regression analysis further indicated that TTS wasn’t an independent factor in predicting pCR (P=0.41). The median follow-up time was 10.5 months in the standard TTS group and 11.2 months in the prolonged TTS group. A total of five recurrences occurred with two events in the standard TTS group and three events in the prolonged TTS group, and no significant difference was observed in DFS(P=0.60). Both groups were comparable in postoperative hospital stays, total hospital stay, hospital expenses, and comprehensive complications index (CCI). The complications and major complications were also similar in both groups. Spearman test further indicated that there was no linear correlation among TTS with hospital expenses, postoperative hospital stays, hospital stay, CCI index, lymph nodes moved number, or surgical time, with a p-value of 0.48, 0.63, 0.80, 0.92, 0.09, 0.38 respectively.

Conclusions

Based on present evidence, TTS after completion of nICT is not of major importance concerning pathological response, disease-free survival, and short-term postoperative outcomes.

Recent advances in multidisciplinary therapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (EGJA) have long been associated with poor prognosis. With changes in the spectrum of the disease caused by economic development and demographic changes, the incidence of EAC and EGJA continues to increase, making them worthy of more attention from clinicians. For a long time, surgery has been the mainstay treatment for EAC and EGJA. With advanced techniques, endoscopic therapy, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and other treatment methods have been developed, providing additional treatment options for patients with EAC and EGJA. In recent decades, the emergence of multidisciplinary therapy (MDT) has enabled the comprehensive treatment of tumors and made the treatment more flexible and diversified, which is conducive to achieving standardized and individualized treatment of EAC and EGJA to obtain a better prognosis. This review discusses recent advances in EAC and EGJA treatment in the surgical-centered MDT mode in recent years.

Considerations for the Surgical Management of Thoracic Cancers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Rational Strategies for Thoracic Surgeons

Objective

The novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a global health crisis since first case was identified in December 2019. As the pandemic continues to strain global public health systems, elective surgeries for thoracic cancer, such as early-stage lung cancer and esophageal cancer (EC), have been postponed due to a shortage of medical resources and the risk of nosocomial transmission. This review is aimed to discuss the influence of COVID-19 on thoracic surgical practice, prevention of nosocomial transmission during the pandemic, and propose modifications to the standard practices in the surgical management of different thoracic cancer.

Methods

A literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar was performed for articles focusing on COVID-19, early-stage lung cancer, and EC prior to 1 July 2021. The evidence from articles was combined with our data and experience.

Results

We review the challenges in the management of different thoracic cancer from the perspectives of thoracic surgeons and propose rational strategies for the diagnosis and treatment of early-stage lung cancer and EC during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the optimization of hospital systems and medical resources is to fight against COVID-19. Indolent early lung cancers, such as pure ground-glass nodules/opacities (GGOs), can be postponed with a lower risk of progression, while selective surgeries of more biologically aggressive tumors should be prioritized. As for EC, we recommend immediate or prioritized surgeries for patients with stage Ib or more advanced stage and patients after neoadjuvant therapy. Routine COVID-19 screening should be performed preoperatively before thoracic surgeries. Prevention of nosocomial transmission by providing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as N-95 respirator masks with eye protection to healthcare workers, is necessary.

Surgical Treatment of Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Distal Esophageal Portion and Gastroesophageal Junction Performed After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Combined Chemoradiation

Esophageal carcinoma is an extremely aggressive cancer with an early distant spread, high rate of local recurrence, and low overall survival. Herewith we present 3 patients with advanced moderately and low differentiated adenocarcinomas, who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) (two patients) and combined nCT with neoadjuvant radiation therapy (nRT) (one patient), followed by radical surgery. Subtotal esophageal resection, proximal gastric resection, and intrathoracic right gastroesophagoplasty a modo Ivor-Lewis were performed in the first two patients, while total gastrectomy, distal third esophageal resection, splenectomy and left intrathoracic esophagojejunoplasty a modo Roux were performed in the third one. A literature review of the role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) as part of a trimodality therapy for advanced esophageal carcinoma is presented.

(Neo)adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy is Beneficial to the Long-term Survival of Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To determine the most effective and safest treatment mode for locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma through a network meta-analysis.

METHOD

A Bayesian model was used for a network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of surgery alone, neoadjuvant therapy, and adjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Thirty clinical studies, including thirty-one articles, 4866 patients, were analyzed. Overall survival rate: Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were significantly advantageous over surgery alone [hazard ratio (HR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-0.93; HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.65-0.86]. There was no statistically significant difference between adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy [HR 0.97, 95%CI 0.75-1.28]. Disease-free survival rate: Compared with surgery alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy had significant benefits [HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.53-0.78]; adjuvant chemoradiotherapy had similar, but not significant benefits [HR 0.7, 0.95%CI 0.45-1.06]. The difference between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was also not statistically significant [HR 0.94, 0.95%CI 0.61-1.43]. Surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: The R0 resection rate was significantly improved [relative risk (RR) 0.25, 95%CI 0.07-0.86], but the overall postoperative morbidity rate and 30-day postoperative mortality rate tended to increase [RR 1.27, 95%CI 0.8-2.01; RR 1.59, 95%CI 0.7-3.22]. Neither neoadjuvant chemotherapy nor neoadjuvant radiotherapy significantly altered the surgical safety or R0 resection rate.

CONCLUSION

Both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy appear to be the best supplements to surgery for locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Risk Prediction Model of 90-Day Mortality After Esophagectomy for Cancer

Importance

Ninety-day mortality rates after esophagectomy are an indicator of the quality of surgical oncologic management. Accurate risk prediction based on large data sets may aid patients and surgeons in making informed decisions.

Objective

To develop and validate a risk prediction model of death within 90 days after esophagectomy for cancer using the International Esodata Study Group (IESG) database, the largest existing prospective, multicenter cohort reporting standardized postoperative outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this diagnostic/prognostic study, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients from 39 institutions in 19 countries between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. Patients with esophageal cancer were randomly assigned to development and validation cohorts. A scoring system that predicted death within 90 days based on logistic regression β coefficients was conducted. A final prognostic score was determined and categorized into homogeneous risk groups that predicted death within 90 days. Calibration and discrimination tests were assessed between cohorts.

Exposures

Esophageal resection for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Main Outcomes and Measures

All-cause postoperative 90-day mortality.

Results

A total of 8403 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [9.0] years; 6641 [79.0%] male) were included. The 30-day mortality rate was 2.0% (n = 164), and the 90-day mortality rate was 4.2% (n = 353). Development (n = 4172) and validation (n = 4231) cohorts were randomly assigned. The multiple logistic regression model identified 10 weighted point variables factored into the prognostic score: age, sex, body mass index, performance status, myocardial infarction, connective tissue disease, peripheral vascular disease, liver disease, neoadjuvant treatment, and hospital volume. The prognostic scores were categorized into 5 risk groups: very low risk (score, ≥1; 90-day mortality, 1.8%), low risk (score, 0; 90-day mortality, 3.0%), medium risk (score, -1 to -2; 90-day mortality, 5.8%), high risk (score, -3 to -4: 90-day mortality, 8.9%), and very high risk (score, ≤-5; 90-day mortality, 18.2%). The model was supported by nonsignificance in the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. The discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.64-0.72) in the development cohort and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60-0.69) in the validation cohort.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, on the basis of preoperative variables, the IESG risk prediction model allowed stratification of an individual patient's risk of death within 90 days after esophagectomy. These data suggest that this model can help in the decision-making process when esophageal cancer surgery is being considered and in informed consent.

[Impact of COVID-19 on oncological surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract]

BACKGROUND

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed limitations for elective surgery, impacting the associated hospital standards worldwide. As certain treatment windows must be adhered to in oncological surgery, the limited intensive care unit (ICU) capacity had to be critically distributed in order to do justice to both acutely ill and oncology patients. This manuscript summarizes the impact of COVID-19 on the management of oncological surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract and particularly esophageal surgery in German medical centers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A survey of German centers for esophageal surgery was performed on the impact of COVID-19 on operative management for esophageal surgery during the first lockdown. After inspection, assessment, critical analysis and interpretation, the results were compared to the international literature.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Initial recommendations of international societies warned for caution and restraint regarding interventions of the upper gastrointestinal tract that were not absolutely necessary. Oncological surgery should be performed under strict restrictions, especially only after negative testing for COVID-19 and only with sufficiently available personal protective equipment for the personnel. Furthermore, minimally invasive procedures were preferably not recommended. In diseases with alternative treatment options, such as definitive chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, these should be given priority when possible. In the further development of the pandemic, it was shown that due to a high standardization of preoperative management, postoperative results comparable to pre-pandemic times could be achieved particularly with respect to the diagnostics of infections.

Socioeconomic factors in timing of esophagectomy and association with outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Disparities in esophageal cancer are well-established. The standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer is chemoradiation followed by surgery. We sought to evaluate the association between socioeconomic factors, time to surgery, and patient outcomes.

METHODS

All patients ≥18 years old diagnosed with T2/3/4 or node-positive esophageal cancer between 2004 and 2016 and who underwent chemoradiation and esophagectomy in the National Cancer Database were included. Multivariable regression was used to assess the association between socioeconomic variables and time to surgery (grouped into <56, 56-84, and 85-112 days).

RESULTS

A total of 12 157 patients were included. Five-year overall survival was 39%, 35%, and 35% for the three groups examined. Postoperative 30- and 90-day mortality was increased in both the 56-84 days to surgery group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.30 and 1.20, respectively) and the 85-112 days group (OR: 1.37 and 1.56, respectively) when compared to <56 days. Patients of a minority race, public insurance, or lower income were more likely to have a longer time to surgery.

CONCLUSION

Longer time to surgery is associated with increased postoperative mortality and is more common in patients with lower socioeconomic status. Further research exploring reasons for delays to esophagectomy among disadvantaged patients could help target interventions to reduce disparities.

Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Performed During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Delay in time to esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has been shown to have worse peri-operative and long-term outcomes. We hypothesized that COVID-19 would cause a delay to surgery, with worse perioperative outcomes, compared to standard operations. All esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at a single institution from March-June 2020, COVID-19 group, and from 2019 were reviewed and peri-operative details were compared between groups. Ninety-six esophagectomies were performed in 2019 vs 37 during March-June 2020 (COVID-19 group). No differences between groups were found for preoperative comorbidities. Wait-time to surgery from final neoadjuvant treatment was similar, median 50 days in 2019 vs 53 days during COVID-19 p = 0.601. There was no increased upstaging, from clinical stage to pathologic stage, 9.4% in 2019 vs 7.5% in COVID-19 p = 0.841. Fewer overall complications occurred during COVID-19 vs 2019, 43.2% vs 64.6% p = 0.031, but complications were similar by specific grades. Readmission rates were not statistically different during COVID-19 than 2019, 16.2% vs 10.4% p = 0.38. No peri-operative mortalities or COVID-19 infections were seen in the COVID-19 group. Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer was not associated with worse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic with minimal risk of infection when careful COVID-19 guidelines are followed. Prioritization is recommended to ensure no delays to surgery.

Could diagnostic and therapeutic delay affect the prognosis of gastrointestinal primary malignancies in the COVID-19 pandemic era? A literature review

BACKGROUND

Emergency situations, as the Covid-19 pandemic that is striking the world nowadays, stress the national health systems which are forced to rapidly reorganizing their sources. Therefore, many elective diagnostic and surgical procedures are being suspended or significantly delayed. Moreover, patients might find it difficult to refer to physicians and delay the diagnostic and even the therapeutic procedures because of emotional or logistic problems. The effect of diagnostic and therapeutic delay on survival in patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies is still unclear.

METHODS

We carried out a review of the available literature, in order to determine whether the delay in performing diagnosis and curative-intent surgical procedures affects the oncological outcomes in patients with oesophageal, gastric, colorectal cancers, and colorectal liver metastasis.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that for oesophageal, gastric and colon cancers delaying surgery up to 2 months after the end of the staging process does not worsen the oncological outcomes. Oesophageal cancer should undergo surgery within 7-8 weeks after the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Rectal cancers should undergo surgery within 31 days after the diagnostic process and within 12 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy should start within 4 weeks after surgery, especially in gastric cancer; a delay up to 42 days may be allowed for oesophageal cancer undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal malignancies can be safely managed taking into account that reasonable delays of planned treatments appear a generally safe approach, not having a significant impact on long-term oncological outcome.

Impact of pathological tumor response after CROSS neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery on long-term outcome of esophageal cancer: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

With increasing interest in organ-preserving strategies for potentially curable esophageal cancer, real-world data is needed to understand the impact of pathological tumor response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on patient outcome. The objective of this study is to assess the association between pathological tumor response following CROSS neoadjuvant CRT and long-term overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients diagnosed in the Netherlands with potentially curable esophageal cancer between 2009 and 2017, and treated with neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy were included. Through record linkage with the nationwide Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA), pathological data were obtained. The primary outcome was pathological tumor response based on ypTNM, classified into pathological complete response (ypT0N0) and incomplete responders (ypT0N+, ypT+N0, and ypT+N+). Multivariable logistic and Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of pathological complete response (pCR) and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 4946 patients were included. Overall, 24% achieved pCR, with 19% in adenocarcinoma and 42% in squamous cell carcinoma. Patients with pCR had a better estimated 5-year OS compared to incomplete responders (62% vs. 38%, p< .001). Of the patients with incomplete response, ypT+N+ patients (32% of total population) had the lowest estimated 5-year OS rate, followed by ypT0N+ and ypT+ N0 (22%, 47%, and 49%, respectively, p< .001). Adenocarcinoma, well to moderate differentiation, cT3-4, cN+, signet ring cell differentiation and lymph node yield (≥15) were associated with lower likelihood of pCR.

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study, pathological tumor response based on the ypTNM-stage was associated with different prognostic subgroups. A quarter of patients achieved ypT0N0 with favorable long-term survival, while one-third had an ypT+N+ response with very poor survival. The association between pathological tumor response and long-term survival could help in more accurate assessments of individual prognosis and treatment decisions.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on esophageal cancer surgery in Northern Italy: lessons learned from a multicentric snapshot

Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak has significantly burdened healthcare systems worldwide, leading to reorganization of healthcare services and reallocation of resources. The Italian Society for Study of Esophageal Diseases (SISME) conducted a national survey to evaluate changes in esophageal cancer management in a region severely struck by COVID-19 pandemic. A web-based questionnaire (26 items) was sent to 12 SISME units. Short-term outcomes of esophageal resections performed during the lockdown were compared with those achieved in the same period of 2019. Six (50%) centers had significant restrictions in their activity. However, overall number of resections did not decrease compared to 2019, while a higher rate of open esophageal resections was observed (40 vs. 21.7%; P = 0.034). Surgery was delayed in 24 (36.9%) patients in 6 (50%) centers, mostly due to shortage of anesthesiologists, and occupation of intensive care unit beds from intubated COVID-19 patients. Indications for neoadjuvant chemo (radio) therapy were extended in 14% of patients. Separate COVID-19 hospital pathways were active in 11 (91.7%) units. COVID-19 screening protocols included nasopharyngeal swab in 91.7%, chest computed tomography scan in 8.3% and selective use of lung ultrasound in 75% of units. Postoperative interstitial pneumonia occurred in 1 (1.5%) patient. Recovery from COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by screening of patients in all units, and follow-up outpatient visits in only 33% of units. This survey shows that clinical strategies differed considerably among the 12 SISME centers. Evidence-based guidelines are needed to support the surgical esophageal community and to standardize clinical practice in case of further pandemics.

Time to surgery in thoracic cancers and prioritization during COVID-19: a systematic review

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has overwhelmed hospital resources worldwide, requiring widespread cancellation of non-emergency operations, including lung and esophageal cancer operations. In the United States, while hospitals begin to increase surgical volume and tackle the backlog of cases, the specter of a “second wave,” with a potential vaccine months to years away, highlights the ongoing need to triage cases based upon the risk of surgical delay. We synthesize the available literature on time to surgery and its impact on outcomes along with a critical appraisal of the released triage guidelines in the United States.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines evaluating relevant literature from the past 15 years.

Results

Out of 679 screened abstracts, 12 studies investigating time to surgery in lung cancer were included. In stage I–II lung cancer, delayed resection beyond 6 to 8 weeks is consistently associated with lower survival. No identified evidence justifies a 2 cm cutoff for immediate versus delayed surgery. For stage IIIa lung cancer, time to surgery greater than 6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy is similarly associated with worse survival. For esophageal cancer, 254 abstracts were screened and 23 studies were included. Minimal literature addresses primary esophagectomy, but time to surgery over 8 weeks is associated with lower survival. In the neoadjuvant setting, longer time to surgery is associated with increased pathologic complete response, but also decreased survival. The optimal window for esophagectomy following neoadjuvant therapy is 6 to 8 weeks.

Conclusions

In the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, timely resection of lung and esophageal cancer should be prioritized whenever possible based upon local resources and disease-burden.

Optimal preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide, especially in East Asia. ESCC accounts for more than 90% of esophageal cancer. Currently, neoadjuvant therapy in combination with surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment. However, the overall survival rate of patients with locally advanced ESCC is not satisfactory even when treated following the standard treatment guidelines. With neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy, or emerging immunotherapy, continuous exploration of efficacy in relation to ESCC is expected to improve overall survival further. Here, we review and summarize current evidence for efficacy of preoperative therapy for locally advanced ESCC.

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.

The Effect of Timing of Adjuvant Therapy on Survival After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) after esophagectomy improves survival in esophageal cancer when induction therapy is not given; however, the optimal timing for initiation of AC is poorly characterized. We aimed to determine the impact of timing of AC on survival after esophagectomy.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with pT1-4aNxM0 esophageal cancer receiving AC with or without radiation from 2004 to 2015. The median and interquartile range of time to AC were determined. Patients were stratified by initiation of AC into 4 cohorts based on quartiles. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated and factors associated with survival were identified by Cox proportional hazards modeling. A separate analysis was performed with time to AC as a continuous variable.

RESULTS

A total of 1634 patients received AC after esophagectomy. Median time to receipt of AC was 59 (interquartile range, 45-78) days. There was no significant difference in overall survival at 5 years (P = .86) between groups. Median survival was 29 months in those receiving AC within 45 days and was 28 months in those receiving AC at other time points. On multivariable analysis, delay in receipt of AC beyond 45 days was not associated with inferior survival. This was preserved when time to AC was analyzed as a continuous variable (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of initiation of AC after esophagectomy does not appear to impact survival. Given the highly variable postoperative course after esophagectomy, the decision to start AC should involve multidisciplinary discussion and be made on a patient-by-patient basis.

Challenges for cancer patients returning home during SARS-COV-19 pandemic after medical tourism - a consensus report by the emirates oncology task force

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health crisis. Numerous cancer patients from non-Western countries, including the United Arab Emirates (UAE), seek cancer care outside their home countries and many are sponsored by their governments for treatment. Many patients interrupted their cancer treatment abruptly and so returned to their home countries with unique challenges. In this review we will discuss practical challenges and recommendations for all cancer patients returning to their home countries from treatment abroad.

METHOD

Experts from medical, surgical and other cancer subspecialties in the UAE were invited to form a taskforce to address challenges and propose recommendations for patients returning home from abroad after medical tourism during the SARS-COV-19 Pandemic.

RESULTS

The taskforce which consisted of experts from medical oncology, hematology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, radiology and palliative care summarized the current challenges and suggested a practical approaches to address these specific challenges to improve the returning cancer patients care. Lack of medical documentation, pathology specimens and radiology images are one of the major limitations on the continuation of the cancer care for returning patients. Difference in approaches and treatment recommendations between the existing treating oncologists abroad and receiving oncologists in the UAE regarding the optimal management which can be addressed by early and empathic communications with patients and by engaging the previous treating oncologists in treatment planning based on the available resources and expertise in the UAE. Interruption of curative radiotherapy (RT) schedules which can potentially increase risk of treatment failure has been a major challenge, RT dose-compensation calculation should be considered in these circumstances.

CONCLUSION

The importance of a thorough clinical handover cannot be overstated and regulatory bodies are needed to prevent what can be considered unethical procedure towards returning cancer patients with lack of an effective handover. Clear communication is paramount to gain the trust of returning patients and their families. This pandemic may also serve as an opportunity to encourage patients to receive treatment locally in their home country. Future studies will be needed to address the steps to retain cancer patients in the UAE rather than seeking cancer treatment abroad.

Timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy affects oncologic outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and esophagectomy in esophageal cancer has not been defined.

AIM

To evaluate whether a prolonged time interval between the end of nCRT and surgery has an effect on survival outcome in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Wanfang and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for relevant articles published before November 16, 2019, to identify potential studies that evaluated the prognostic role of different time intervals between nCRT and surgery in esophageal cancer. The hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were merged to estimate the correlation between the time intervals and survival outcomes in esophageal cancer, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma using fixed- and random-effect models.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 12621 patients from 16 studies. The results demonstrated that esophageal cancer patients with a prolonged time interval between the end of nCRT and surgery had significantly worse overall survival (OS) [hazard ratio (HR): 1.107, 95%CI: 1.014-1.208, P = 0.023] than those with a shorter time interval. Subgroup analysis showed that poor OS with a prolonged interval was observed based on both the sample size and HRs. There was also significant association between a prolonged time interval and decreased OS in Asian, but not Caucasian patients. In addition, a longer wait time indicated worse OS (HR: 1.385, 95%CI: 1.186-1.616, P < 0.001) in patients with adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSION

A prolonged time interval from the completion of nCRT to surgery is associated with a significant decrease in OS. Thus, esophagectomy should be performed within 7-8 wk after nCRT.

The influence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on esophagogastric cancer services: an international survey of esophagogastric surgeons

BACKGROUND

Several guidelines to guide clinical practice among esophagogastric surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic were produced. However, none provide reflection of current service provision. This international survey aimed to clarify the changes observed in esophageal and gastric cancer management and surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An online survey covering key areas for esophagogastric cancer services, including staging investigations and oncological and surgical therapy before and during (at two separate time-points-24th March 2020 and 18th April 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic were developed.

RESULTS

A total of 234 respondents from 225 centers and 49 countries spanning six continents completed the first round of the online survey, of which 79% (n = 184) completed round 2. There was variation in the availability of staging investigations ranging from 26.5% for endoscopic ultrasound to 62.8% for spiral computed tomography scan. Definitive chemoradiotherapy was offered in 14.8% (adenocarcinoma) and 47.0% (squamous cell carcinoma) of respondents and significantly increased by almost three-fold and two-fold, respectively, in both round 1 and 2. There were uncertainty and heterogeneity surrounding prioritization of patients undergoing cancer resections. Of the surgeons symptomatic with COVID-19, only 40.2% (33/82) had routine access to COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction testing for staff. Of those who had testing available (n = 33), only 12.1% (4/33) had tested positive.

CONCLUSIONS

These data highlight management challenges and several practice variations in caring for patients with esophagogastric cancers. Therefore, there is a need for clear consistent guidelines to be in place in the event of a further pandemic to ensure a standardized level of oncological care for patients with esophagogastric cancers.

Does Timing Matter? Surgical Outcomes in High-Grade Sarcomas after Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

The impact of time to surgical resection after neoadjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in the high-grade soft tissue and retroperitoneal sarcomas has not been well established. We aimed to evaluate how surgical timing from EBRT affects oncologic and perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a single institution retrospective cohort study of patients with biopsy-proven, high-grade sarcoma who completed neoadjuvant EBRT and resection from January 1, 1999 to September 1, 2018. We collected demographic and clinicopathologic variables, stratifying patients by time interval between EBRT and surgery: <6, 6-8, 8-10, and >10 wk. Primary outcomes collected were as follows: disease-free survival, overall survival, and perioperative complications.

RESULTS

Of the 269 patients identified, 146 met inclusion criteria. The median follow-up was 24 mo. Overall and local recurrence were 37% (n = 54) and 14.4% (n = 21), respectively. Time to surgery did not affect recurrence (P = 0.82) or survival (P = 0.88). Positive margins (odds ratio 2.7, confidence interval 1.14, 6.51, P < 0.05) were predictive of recurrence. Primary tumor location, surgical timing, histology, and intraoperative radiation therapy were not associated with differences in recurrence. The overall complication rate was 28%, with 63% from wound infections. Fewer postoperative complications occurred in the < 6-wk cohort versus > 6-wk cohort (15% versus 38%, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference in oncologic outcomes associated with the timing of surgical resection after EBRT. Patients undergoing resection >6 wk were at higher risk for all complications without impacting wound complication rates. Future studies may include preoperative optimization of patients requiring delays in surgical planning to decrease perioperative complication rates.

Impact of the interval between neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy and esophagectomy in the modern era: a population-based propensity-score-matched retrospective cohort study in Asia

Background

Neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (nCCRT) is one of the standard-of-care options for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESqCC). The optimal interval between nCCRT and esophagectomy is unknown.

Methods

We constructed a propensity-score-matched [1:1 for long (8–12 weeks) vs short (4–7 weeks) intervals] cohort of LA-ESqCC patients who were diagnosed from 2011 to 2015 and treated with nCCRT via the Taiwan Cancer Registry and related databases. We compared the hazard ratios (HRs) of death using a robust variance estimator. We also evaluated alternative covariables, outcomes, and interval definitions.

Results

Our study population included 80 patients for each group; groups were balanced with respect to the observed covariables. There was no significant difference for the HR of death [1.22; 95% confidence interval 0.78–1.91, P = 0.39] when the long interval group was compared to the short interval group. There were also no significant differences when alternative covariables, outcomes, or interval definitions were evaluated.

Conclusions

In this population-based study in modern Asia, we found that for LA-ESqCC patients treated with nCCRT and esophagectomy, overall survival was similar for either long or short intervals between nCCRT and esophagectomy. Randomized controlled trials are needed to verify this finding.

Intensified Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with Potentially Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant treatment consisting of five cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Gy), followed by esophagectomy, is the standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer in The Netherlands. It remains unclear whether intensification of neoadjuvant therapy leads to better outcomes. This study analyzed the outcomes of intensified chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

We included patients who were deemed eligible for esophagectomy between January 2008 and December 2014. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of six cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 2 mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m² of body surface area) and concurrent radiotherapy (50.4 Gy administered in 28 fractions of 1.8 Gy each, 5 days per week), followed by esophagectomy.

RESULTS

Of the 176 patients included in this study, 73% underwent a resection. At a median follow-up of 29.3 months for the total cohort, median disease-free survival (DFS) was 22.5 months. DFS at 3 and 5 years was 42% and 36%, respectively, while the overall survival (OS) rates were 47% and 38%, respectively. In addition, the 5-year DFS and OS rates of our resection group were 44% and 48%, respectively. In 102 patients (58%), grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed, mainly hematological. The postoperative mortality rate within 30 days was 4%, and pathological complete response was achieved in 35% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensification of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer is well tolerated, yielding high pathological complete response rates, but adverse events occurred frequently, and survival compared with conventional neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy seems similar. Therefore, intensification of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy should not be routinely used.

Management of clinical T2N0 esophageal cancer: a review

While management of locally advanced esophageal cancer has mostly involved multimodality therapy, management of clinical T2N0 patients has been more controversial, primarily as a result of inaccurate clinical staging with existing modalities. This review article examines current literature on this topic and provides recommendations for management of individual patients.