Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: competition between Barrett and gastric cancer

The Postoperative outcomes of thoracoscopic-laparoscopic Ivor-Lewis surgery plus D2 celiac lymphadenectomy for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction

OBJECTIVES

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) is one of the most aggressive and poor prognosis cancers. To date, no standard procedures have been established for the surgical treatment of Siewert type II. In this study, we proposed the approach of thoracoscopic-laparoscopic Ivor-Lewis surgery plus D2 celiac lymphadenectomy (TLILD2) and aimed to investigate the patterns of lymph node metastasis and long-term survival.

METHODS

From June 2015 to June 2018, 72 patients accepted TLILD2 and enrolled in this study. Relevant patient characteristics and postoperative variables were collected and evaluated. The disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were determined by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank tests.

RESULTS

There was no case of postoperative death in this study, and the most common complication was anastomotic mediastinal fistula (5/72, 6.9%). A total of 2811 lymph nodes were retrieved, and the positivity rate was 11.9% (334/2811). The positivity rate of celiac and mediastinal lymph nodes was 14.4% (314/2186) and 3.2% (20/625), respectively. The percentage of patients who had positive celiac and mediastinal lymph nodes reached up to 58.3% (42/72) and 8.3% (6/72), respectively. The DFS and DSS of these 72 patients were 94% and 93.4% at 1 year after surgery and 59.8% and 62% at 3 years after surgery, respectively. The pTNM stage showed a significant difference between DFS and DSS.

CONCLUSIONS

TLILD2 could be a potential way to promote long-term survival of AEG patients. On the basis of the patterns of lymph nodes metastasis, we suggest that lower mediastinal and D2 celiac lymphadenectomy is necessary to improve the oncological outcome.

Results of the different surgical options for the treatment of cancer of the esophagogastric junction: Review of the evidence

There is significant controversy in the management of cardiac cancer. It seems unanimous that Siewert type I tumors be operated on as cancer of the esophagus and Siewert type III as gastric cancer. However, for "true" cancer of the gastric cardia or Siewert II, the authors do not agree. There is the obvious need for free proximal and distal margins, as well as correct lymphadenectomy. For some, esophagectomy is necessary to perform correct radical oncological surgery, but other authors defend that an abdominal approach is sufficient to perform total gastrectomy and distal esophagectomy. Recent and older papers published do not clarify this issue, and their results are contradictory. Chemotherapy prior to surgery can reduce the size of the tumor and the presence of lymphadenopathies.

Mediastinal lymph node dissection and distal esophagectomy is not essential in early esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Optimal extent of surgery remains controversial in types 2 and 3 adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG). We aimed to determine whether the extended procedure including mediastinal lymphadenectomy is essential in all patients with AEG by comparing prognosis and recurrence of proximal gastric adenocarcinoma based on total gastrectomy with intra-abdominal lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic characteristics of 672 patients (type 2: 90, type 3: 211, upper third of the stomach: 371 cases) who underwent curative total gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy between 2003 and 2009 were reviewed.

RESULTS

Recurrence was observed in 36.7, 16.1, and 16.1% of cases of type 2 AEG, type 3 AEG, and cancer of the upper third of the stomach, respectively. The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 62.6, 82.5, and 84.6%, respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed that in early cancers, there was no difference in survival between the groups (93.2 vs. 96.7 vs. 98.7%) but in advanced cancers, there was a difference (47.9 vs. 75.4 vs. 71.8%, P < 0.001). There was no survival difference in stage 1 (97.5 vs. 98.7 vs. 98.3%), but, in stage 2, type 2 AEG had a worse prognosis (41.9 vs. 92.1 vs. 83.0%). Types 2 and 3 advanced AEG had higher rates of locoregional recurrence, especially in the vicinity of the esophagojejunostomy and mediastinal lymph nodes compared to proximal gastric cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Total gastrectomy without mediastinal lymphadenectomy might produce favorable outcomes in early AEG and acquisition of a greater length of proximal margin, and removal of mediastinal lymph nodes might be helpful in advanced cancers.

EUS versus CT for preoperative TN staging of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction

AIM: To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) versus computed tomography (CT) in TN staging of the adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric Junction (AEG).

METHODS: Ninety-one patients with pathologically proven AEG who received preoperative EUS and helical CT and surgical resection from February 2007 to December 2012 and had complete clinical data were included in this study. The accuracy of EUS versus CT in TN staging of AEG was compared.

RESULTS: The overall accuracy rates of preoperative T staging and N staging by EUS were 81.3% and 86.8%, respectively, significantly higher than those by helical CT (58.2% and 58.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSION: Compared with helical CT, EUS is associated with a higher accuracy in preoperative TN staging of AEG.

Risk factors associated with early recurrence of adenocarcinoma of gastroesophageal junction after curative resection

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the important clinicopathological factors affecting the early recurrence of adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 147 AEG patients who underwent R0 resection during the period from December 1995 to December 2007. Risk factors asssociated with the early recurrence were analyzed by χ(2) test and logistic regression test.

RESULTS

The mean time to tumor recurrence was 16.3 months after R0 resection, and the 1-year recurrence rate was 48.3%. Univariate analysis showed that the histological grade (poorly and moderately differentiated), number of positive lymph nodes, and vascular invasion were significantly related with the early recurrence (P<0.05). Logistic multivariate regression analysis showed that only histological grade and vascular invasion were independently related with early tumor recurrence (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Histological grade and vascular invasion are independent factors for predicting the early tumor recurrence after R0 resection for AEG.

Surgical management of gastroesophageal junction tumors

Surgical resection remains the mainstay of potentially curative therapy for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) tumors. However, because of the location of the tumor at the boundary between the esophagus and stomach, GEJ tumors have been a source of controversy in regard to their definition, classification, staging and surgical management. The definition of GEJ tumors was addressed with the development of the three-tiered Siewert's classification scheme. There remain many controversies regarding the appropriate surgical approach and the extent of the lymphadenectomies for these tumors. For locally advanced, resectable GEJ tumors, an aggressive surgical resection should be considered and the approach predicated by tumor location as defined by the Siewert's classification. Limited resections for earlier stage tumors have also been evaluated.

Staging and outcome depending on surgical treatment in adenocarcinomas of the oesophagogastric junction

BACKGROUND

Owing to controversial staging and classification of adenocarcinoma of the oesophago-gastric junction (AOG) before surgery, the choice of appropriate surgical approach remains problematic. In a retrospective study, preoperative staging of AOG and the impact of preoperative misclassification on outcome were analysed.

METHODS

Data from patients with AOG were analysed from a prospectively collected database with regard to surgical treatment, preoperative and postoperative staging, and outcome.

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirty patients with Siewert types I and II AOG who did not have neoadjuvant treatment were included in the study: 41 patients with an AOG type I who underwent oesophagectomy, 51 patients with an AOG staged before surgery as type I who underwent oesophagectomy but in whom the final histology showed a type II tumour, and 38 patients whose tumours were staged as AOG type II before and after operation who underwent gastrectomy. Among patients who had an oesophagectomy, lymph node metastases (P = 0.022), tumour relapse (P = 0.009) and recurrent distant metastases (P = 0.028) were significantly more frequent in patients with AOG type II; those with AOG type II had shorter overall survival than those with type I tumours (P = 0.024). Among those with AOG type II, recurrence-free survival was significantly shorter after oesophagectomy compared with extended gastrectomy (P = 0.019). Thoracoabdominal oesophagectomy had a favourable influence on outcome compared with the transhiatal approach.

CONCLUSION

Accurate preoperative staging of AOG and appropriate surgical therapy are crucial for outcome. AOG type II is a more aggressive tumour with higher recurrence rates than AOG type I. These patients therefore benefit from more radical surgical treatment.

Should adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction be classified as esophageal cancer? A comparative analysis according to the seventh AJCC TNM classification

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the adequacy of esophageal classification for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEJ) of the seventh American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM classification.

BACKGROUND

The seventh AJCC TNM classification proposed the new classification for AEJ as a part of esophageal cancer depending on the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) involvement. However, there are still many controversies over the classification system for AEJ.

METHODS

A review of pathologic reports and photographic findings at Seoul National University Hospital from 2003 to 2009 identified 4524 patients with single, primary adenocarcinoma of the EGJ (n = 497) and other regions of the stomach (GC, n = 4027) who underwent an operation with curative intent. We analyzed the clinicopathologic features and postoperative prognosis of AEJ using the Siewert classification and the seventh AJCC TNM classification.

RESULTS

There was no Siewert type I (AEJ I) in this study. The prognosis of AEJ was similar to that of GC. There was no difference in clinicopathologic features between AEJ II and AEJ III. Even though AEJ extending into the EGJ (AEJe) showed more advanced pathologic features than AEJ not extending into the EGJ (AEJg), the prognosis of AEJe and AEJg was not significantly different when stratified by T stage. Compared with the classification of gastric cancer applied for AEJ, esophageal classification for AEJ from the seventh AJCC TNM classification showed a loss of distinctiveness at each TNM stage.

CONCLUSIONS

To evaluate the postoperative prognosis of AEJ within the stomach, AEJ II and AEJ III should be considered a part of gastric cancer irrespective of EGJ involvement.

Barrett's esophagus: treatments of adenocarcinomas II

The following topics are explored in this collection of commentaries on treatments of adenocarcinomas related to Barrett's esophagus: the importance of intraoperative frozen sections of the margins for the detection of high dysplasia; the preferable way for sentinel node dissection; the current role of robotic surgery and of video-endoscopic approach; the value of the Siewert's classification of adenocarcinomas; the indications of two-step esophagectomy; the evaluation of pathological complete response; the role of PET scan in staging and response assessment; the role of p53 in the selection of adenocarcinomas patients; chemotherapy regimens for adenocarcinomas; the use of monoclonal antibodies in the control of cell proliferation; he attempt to define a stage-specific strategy, and the possible indications of selective therapy; and changes in mortality rates from esophageal cancer.

Two distinct types of cancer of different origin may be mixed in gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas in Japan: evidence from direct evaluation of gastric acid secretion

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Barrett's esophageal cancer is usually included in gastroesophageal (GE) junction adenocarcinoma in Japanese people. No study on the pathogenesis of Barrett's esophageal cancer in comparison with GE junction adenocarcinoma other than Barrett's esophageal cancer has been reported in Japan. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and pathological characteristics and gastric acid secretion of Barrett's esophageal cancer and GE junction adenocarcinoma other than Barrett's esophageal cancer in Japanese subjects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-three patients with Barrett's esophageal cancer and 23 patients with GE junction adenocarcinoma other than Barrett's esophageal cancer were enrolled in this study. We evaluated and compared them by assessing the Helicobactor pylori (HP) infection status and gastric acid secretion using the endoscopic gastrin test (EGT).

RESULTS

In the patients with Barrett's esophageal cancer, no significant difference was found in the mean EGT value between HP-positive and -negative patients, but in the patients with GE junction adenocarcinoma other than Barrett's esophageal cancer, the mean EGT value in HP-positive patients was significantly lower than that in HP-negative patients.

CONCLUSION

Two distinct types of cancer of different origin may be mixed in GE junction adenocarcinomas. One is Barrett's esophageal cancer associated with high gastric acid secretion and reflux of gastric acid into the esophagus, the other is cancer resembling distal gastric cancer associated with gastric atrophy and low gastric acid secretion.

Differential pathologic variables and outcomes across the spectrum of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction

BACKGROUND

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) as described by Siewert et al. is classified as one entity in the latest (7th Edition) American Joint Cancer Committee/International Union Against Cancer (AJCC/UICC) manual, compared with the previous mix of esophageal and gastric staging systems. The origin of AEG tumors, esophageal or gastric, and their biology remain controversial, particularly for AEG type II (cardia) tumors.

METHODS

We adapted a large prospective database (n = 520: 180 type I, 182 type II, 158 type III) to compare AEG tumors under the new TNM system Pathological variables associated with prognosis were compared (pT, pN, stage, differentiation, R status, lymphovascular invasion, perineural involvement, number of positive nodes, percent of positive nodes, and tumor length), as well as overall survival.

RESULTS

Compared with AEG type I tumors, type II and type III tumors had significantly (p < 0.05) more advanced pN stages, greater number and percentage of positive nodes, poorer differentiation, more radial margin involvement, and more perineural invasion. In AEG type I, 14/180 patients (8%) had >6 involved nodes (pN3), compared with 16 and 30% of patients classified type II and III, respectively. Median survival was significantly (p = 0.03) improved for type I patients (38 months) compared with those with tumors classified as type II (28 months) and type III (24 months). In multivariate analysis node positivity and pN staging but not AEG site had an impact on survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series AEG type I is associated with more favorable pathologic features and improved outcomes compared with AEG type II and III. This may reflect earlier diagnosis, but an alternative possibility, that type I may be a unique paradigm with more favorable biology, requires further study.

Gastric cardiac carcinomas involving the esophagus are more adequately staged as gastric cancers by the 7th edition of the American Joint Commission on Cancer Staging System

The aim of this study was to compare the 7th with the 6th edition of the American Joint Commission on Cancer Staging System for prognostic stratification of gastric cardiac carcinomas involving the esophagus. We retrospectively compared differences in pathological stages with patient survival between the 7th and the 6th staging systems in 142 consecutive resection cases of this cancer. Patient median age was 65 years. The male-female ratio was 3.3. The epicenter of all tumors was within 5 cm below the gastroesophageal junction. The median tumor size was 5.0 cm. Most tumors (79%) were typical adenocarcinomas and the rest showed uncommon histology types. Using the guidelines for gastric cancer, this group of cancer was better stratified by the 7th than the 6th edition of the staging system, especially for pathological nodal (pN) and overall stage pIIIC. Patients with celiac axis nodal disease had the 5-year survival rate worse than those staged at pN3A and pIIIA. Patients staged at pT3 and pN3B had the 5-year survival rate worse than those at pM1 and pIV. We showed that the overall stage of gastric cardiac carcinomas was better stratified by gastric than by esophageal cancer grouping. We conclude that these tumors are better stratified with the 7th than the 6th edition of the gastric staging system, especially for pIII cancers, and better staged by the new gastric than esophageal cancer staging system. We propose that the staging of these tumors be reverted to gastric grouping and combine pT3 and pN3B into the overall stage pIV.