Are endoscopic therapies appropriate for superficial submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma? An analysis of esophagectomy specimens. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:418-427. [PMID: 20347733 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.01.003]

Risk of lymph node metastasis in T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

Patients with early (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are increasingly having definitive local therapy endoscopically. Endoscopic resection is not able to pathologically stage or treat lymph node metastasis (LNM). Accurate identification of patients having nodal metastasis is critical to select endoscopic therapy over surgery. This study aimed to define the risk of LNM in T1 EAC. A meta-analysis of studies of patients who underwent surgery and lymphadenectomy with assessment of LNM was performed according to PRISMA. Main outcome was probability of LNM in T1a and T1b disease. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for LNM and rate of LNM in submucosal T1b (SM1, SM2, and SM3) disease. Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341794). Twenty cohort studies involving 2264 patients with T1 EAC met inclusion criteria: T1a (857 patients) with 36 (4.2%) node positive and T1b (1407 patients) with 327 (23.2%) node positive. Subgroup analysis of T1b lesions was available in 10 studies (405 patients). Node positivity for SM1, SM2, and SM3 was 16.3%, 16.2%, and 29.4%, respectively. T1 substage (odds ratio [OR] 7.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.45-13.38, P < 0.01), tumor differentiation (OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.06-3.87, P < 0.01), and lymphovascular invasion (OR 13.65, 95% CI 6.06-30.73, P < 0.01) were associated with LNM. T1a disease demonstrated a 4.2% nodal metastasis rate and T1b disease a rate of 23.2%. Endoscopic therapy should be reserved for T1a disease and perhaps select T1b disease, which has a moderately high rate of nodal metastasis. There were inadequate data to stratify T1b SM disease into 'low-risk' and 'high-risk' based on tumor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion.

Curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma has been increasing rapidly in the Western world. A well-known risk factor for developing this type of tumour is reflux disease, which can cause metaplasia from the squamous cell mucosa to columnar epithelium (Barrett's Oesophagus) which can progress to dysplasia and eventually adenocarcinoma. With the rise of the incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, research on the best way to manage this disease is of great importance and has changed treatment modalities over the last decades. The gold standard for superficial adenocarcinoma has shifted from surgical to endoscopic management when certain criteria are met. This review will discuss the different curative criteria for endoscopic treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Management of high risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma following endoscopic resection

High-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR-T1 EAC) is defined as T1 cancer, with one or more of the following histological criteria: submucosal invasion, poorly or undifferentiated cancer, and/or presence of lympho-vascular invasion. Esophagectomy has long been the only available treatment for these HR-T1 EACs and was considered necessary because of a presumed high risk of lymph node metastases up to 46%. However, endoscopic submucosal disscection have made it possible to radically remove HR-T1 EAC, irrespective of size, while leaving the esophageal anatomy intact. Parallel to this development, new publications demonstrated that the risk of lymph node metastases for HR-T1 EAC may be even <24%. Therefore, indications for endoscopic treatment of HR-T1 EAC are being reconsidered and current research aims at finding the optimal management strategy for this indication, where watchful waiting may proof to be an acceptable strategy in selected patients. In this review, we will discuss the latest developments in this field.

Optimizing management for early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma: longitudinal results from a multidisciplinary program

BACKGROUND

The management of early-stage esophageal cancer is nuanced. A multidisciplinary approach may optimize management through selection of candidates for surgical or endoscopic therapies. The objective of this research was to examine long-term outcomes of patients with early-stage esophageal cancer who undergo treatment with endoscopic resection or surgery.

METHODS

Data on patient demographics, co-morbidities, pathology results, OS and RFS were obtained for both the endoscopic resection group and esophagectomy group. Univariate analysis of OS and RFS were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method with calculation of the log-rank test. Multivariate cox-proportional hazards models were created for OS and RFS using a hypothesis-driven approach. A multivariate logistic regression model was created to identify predictors of esophagectomy among patients undergoing initial endoscopic resection.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients were included. The median OS for the surgery group was 67.0 months compared to 74.0 months in the endoscopic resection group (log-rank p = 0.93). The median RFS for the surgery group was 109.4 months compared to 63.3 months in the endoscopic resection group (log-rank p = 0.0127). On multivariable analysis, patients undergoing endoscopic resection had significantly worse RFS (HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.09-6.00; p = 0.032), but equivalent OS (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.46-2.32; p = 0.941), compared to patients undergoing esophagectomy. High-grade disease (OR 5.43, 95% CI 1.13-26.10; p = 0.035) and submucosal involvement (OR 7.75, 95% CI 1.90-31.40; p = 0.004) were identified as significant predictors of proceeding to esophagectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Through a multidisciplinary approach, patients with early-stage esophageal cancer achieve excellent RFS and OS. Submucosal involvement and high-grade disease place patients at increased risk for local disease recurrence; these patients may undergo endoscopic resection safely if treated with a multidisciplinary approach incorporating endoscopic surveillance and surgical consultation. Further risk-stratification models may enable better patient selection and optimization of long-term outcomes.

Comparison of LNM and survival in T1 stage esophageal cancer patients based on histological classification: A large population-based study

Limited evidence and contradictory results have been reported regarding the impact of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) classification on lymph node metastasis (LNM) and prognosis in esophageal cancer (EC). We aimed to compare 2 histology types in terms of LNM and prognosis using a comprehensive statistical analysis of a large population. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to extract patient information. Univariate and multivariate logistic or Cox regression, a multivariate competing risk model and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to explore the association between LNM or survival and the 2 histology types. Information for 4764 patients, including 1712 SCC and 3052 AC patients, was extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed a correlation between LNM and histology (odds ratio [OR] = 0.654, P = .037). We found that patients with AC had a better prognosis than SCC patients through both the multivariate Cox regression (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.866) and the multivariate competing risk model (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] = 0.704). However, no positive relation was found between LNM and histology type (P = .844) based on propensity score matching (PSM), and the prognosis remained poorer for the patients with SCC (P < .001). T1-stage EC with a histology of SCC may have a comparable risk of LNM as the AC type, while SCC has a poorer prognosis than the AC type.

The 8th Wonder of the Cancer World: Esophageal Cancer and Inflammation

Esophageal cancer is a devastating malignancy which can be detected at an early stage but is more often diagnosed as an advanced process. It affects both men and women and inflicts the young and the elderly. There are multiple underlying factors involved in the pathogenesis of this cancer including inflammation. The interplay of these factors promotes inflammation through various mechanisms including the recruitment of pro-inflammatory cells, mediators such as cytokines, reactive oxygen species, and interleukins, among others. The presentation can vary widely with one of the most notable symptoms being dysphagia. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptomatology, imaging and endoscopy with biopsy. Once the diagnosis has been established, treatment and prognosis are based on the stage of the disease. This review outlines esophageal cancer and its link to inflammation in relation to pathogenesis, along with clinical features, diagnosis and treatment.

Intraperitoneal perforation through lymph node metastases in a patient with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma during intensive chemotherapy: A case report with literature review

Introduction

Esophageal fistula after treatment is a critical and fatal complication of esophageal cancer. A fistula forming from lower thoracic esophageal cancer to the peritoneum through lymph node metastases following chemotherapy has not been reported. We report a case of peritonitis due to lymph node perforation through the tumor ulcer after induction of biweekly docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5FU combined chemotherapy (Bi-DCF) for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Presentation of case

A 48-year-old woman was referred to us with a diagnosis of lower thoracic ESCC and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed a circumferential type 3 tumor with stenosis in the lower thoracic esophagus. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) showed a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm and wall thickening of the lower thoracic esophagus that was suspicious of esophageal cancer. Lymph node metastases dumpling from around the tumor to abdominal cavity were also observed. The initial diagnosis was ESCC T3 N3 M1 (para-aortic lymph nodes and liver) Stage IVB. She was started on Bi-DCF (docetaxel 35 mg/m² days 1/15, cisplatin 40 mg/m² days 1/15, 5FU 400 mg/m² days 1–5, 15–19) as the first-line regimen. The third day after starting chemotherapy, she felt strong abdominal pain, and internal necrosis of lymph nodes around the primary lesion and free air in the abdominal cavity were found. Peritonitis was diagnosed due to a fistula formed from the lower thoracic ESCC to the peritoneum through lymph node metastases. She underwent emergency laparoscopic drainage, omental filling, and jejunostomy. Postoperatively, her general condition and inflammatory findings improved within 10 days, and she could continue intensive chemotherapy as scheduled.

Discussion

Because of the risk of perforation and fistula in regimens that are expected to cause tumor shrinkage, careful observation may be required after starting chemotherapy.

Conclusion

We report the first case of peritonitis caused by perforation through lymph node metastasis of thoracic esophageal cancer.

Barrett’s esophagus: Review of natural history and comparative efficacy of endoscopic and surgical therapies

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Progression to cancer typically occurs in a stepwise fashion through worsening dysplasia and ultimately, invasive neoplasia. Established EAC with deep involvement of the esophageal wall and/or metastatic disease is invariably associated with poor long-term survival rates. This guides the rationale of surveillance of Barrett’s in an attempt to treat lesions at an earlier, and potentially curative stage. The last two decades have seen a paradigm shift in management of Barrett’s with rapid expansion in the role of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for management of dysplastic and early neoplastic BE, and there have been substantial changes to international consensus guidelines for management of early BE based on evolving evidence. This review aims to assist the physician in the therapeutic decision-making process with patients by comprehensive review and summary of literature surrounding natural history of Barrett’s by histological stage, and the effectiveness of interventions in attenuating the risk posed by its natural history. Key findings were as follows. Non-dysplastic Barrett’s is associated with extremely low risk of progression, and interventions cannot be justified. The annual risk of cancer progression in low grade dysplasia is between 1%-3%; EET can be offered though evidence for its benefit remains confined to highly select settings. High-grade dysplasia progresses to cancer in 5%-10% per year; EET is similarly effective to and less morbid than surgery and should be routinely performed for this indication. Risk of nodal metastases in intramucosal cancer is 2%-4%, which is comparable to operative mortality rate, so EET is usually preferred. Submucosal cancer is associated with nodal metastases in 14%-41% hence surgery remains standard of care, except for select situations.

Individual risk calculator to predict lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lymph node metastasis (LNM) is possible after endoscopic resection of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). This study aimed to develop and internally validate a prediction model that estimates the individual risk of metastases in patients with pT1b EAC.

METHODS

A nationwide, retrospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted in patients with pT1b EAC treated with endoscopic resection and/or surgery between 1989 and 2016. The primary end point was presence of LNM in surgical resection specimens or detection of metastases during follow-up. All resection specimens were histologically reassessed by specialist gastrointestinal pathologists. Subdistribution hazard regression analysis was used to develop the prediction model. The discriminative ability of this model was assessed using the c-statistic.

RESULTS

248 patients with pT1b EAC were included. Metastases were seen in 78 patients, and the 5-year cumulative incidence was 30.9 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 25.1 %-36.8 %). The risk of metastases increased with submucosal invasion depth (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 1.08, 95 %CI 1.02-1.14, for every increase of 500 μm), lymphovascular invasion (SHR 2.95, 95 %CI 1.95-4.45), and for larger tumors (SHR 1.23, 95 %CI 1.10-1.37, for every increase of 10 mm). The model demonstrated good discriminative ability (c-statistic 0.81, 95 %CI 0.75-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

A third of patients with pT1b EAC experienced metastases within 5 years. The probability of developing post-resection metastases was estimated with a personalized predicted risk score incorporating tumor invasion depth, tumor size, and lymphovascular invasion. This model requires external validation before implementation into clinical practice.

Clinicopathologic correlations of superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma in endoscopic submucosal dissection specimens

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a novel endoscopic treatment for early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The western pathologists’ experience with ESD specimens remains limited. This study aimed to correlate histopathologic features of Barrett’s esophagus (BE)-associated adenocarcinoma in ESD resections with clinical outcomes to determine whether they aid future management decisions.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 49 consecutive ESD resection specimens from 42 patients with BE-associated adenocarcinoma (24 intramucosal and 18 submucosal EAC) at a single tertiary referral center. Pathologic evaluation included presence of dysplasia, invasive adenocarcinoma, peritumoral inflammation, desmoplasia, lymphovascular and perineural invasion; tumor differentiation, depth of invasion, morphology, and budding; and margin status for dysplasia or carcinoma. Follow up data included endoscopic biopsies in 35 patients and pathology reports of esophagectomies in 11 patients. Poor outcomes were defined as recurrence or residual invasive adenocarcinoma at esophagectomy, metastasis on imaging, or R1 resection in patients undergoing ESD for tumor debulking.

Results

Two patients (8%) with intramucosal adenocarcinoma and 9 patients (50%) with submucosal adenocarcinoma had poor outcomes. Histopathologic features associated with poor outcomes included poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion, submucosal invasion > 500 μm, tumor budding, and tubuloinfiltrative histologic pattern. Four patients had positive deep margin away from the deepest tumor invasion and did not show residual tumor on follow up.

Conclusions

Our results validated European Society of Gastroenterology (ESGE) guidelines of high-risk pathologic features for additional therapy in esophageal adenocarcinoma and identified tumor budding frequently in association with other high-risk features. Positive deep margin distant from deepest tumor invasion could be procedural and warrants endoscopic correlation for management.

Endoscopic therapies for Barrett's esophagus

The management of Barrett's esophagus (BE) has evolved as newer technologies and novel methods are developed. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) are the initial interventions of choice for nodular BE, with ESD reserved for endoscopists highly trained in the technique and for larger lesions that would warrant en bloc resection. Resection should then be followed by ablative therapy, which remains first line in the treatment of BE with dysplasia. Although there is a myriad of ablation techniques available to the endoscopist, this review has found that radiofrequency ablation (RFA) continues to have the most robust safety and efficacy data to support its use despite a relatively high rate of recurrence. Cryotherapy and Hybrid-APC appear to be safe and effective as RFA alternatives, but further trials are still needed to directly compare their outcomes to RFA and ultimately guide changes in treatment decisions.

ENDOSCOPIC SUBMUCOSAL DISSECTION WITH CIRCUMFERENTIAL INCISION VERSUS TUNNELING METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF SUPERFICIAL ESOPHAGEAL CANCER

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of esophageal superficial neoplasm is associated with a high en bloc R0 resection rate and low recurrence.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to compare the performance and clinical outcomes of ESD via ESD after circumferential incision (ESD-C) versus submucosal tunneling (ESD-T).

METHODS

Single-center retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients who underwent ESD for superficial esophageal cancer, between 2009 and 2018. ESD-T was defined as the technique of making the mucosal incisions followed by submucosal tunneling in the oral to anal direction. ESD-C consisted of completing a circumferential incision followed by ESD. Main study outcomes included en bloc and R0 resection rates. Secondary outcomes included procedural characteristics, curative resection rate, local recurrence and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 65 procedures (23 ESD-T and 42 ESD-C) were performed for ESCC (40; 61.5%) and BE-neoplasia (25; 38.5%). There were no statistically significant differences between patients who underwent ESD-T versus ESD-C in en bloc (91.3% vs 100%, P=0.12), R0 (65.2% vs 78.6%, P=0.24), curative resection rates (65.2% vs 73.8%, P=0.47) and mean procedure time (118.7 min with vs 102.4 min, P=0.35). Adverse events for ESD-T and ESD-C were as follows: bleeding (0 versus 2.4%; P=0.53), perforation (4.3% vs 0; P=0.61), esophageal stricture (8.7% versus 9.5%; P=0.31). Local recurrence was encountered in 8.7% after ESD-T and 2.4% after ESD-C (P=0.28) at a mean follow-up of 8 and 2.75 years, respectively (P=0.001).

CONCLUSION

ESD-T and ESD-C appear to be equally effective with similar safety profiles for the management of superficial esophageal neoplasms.

Endoscopic resection of Barrett's adenocarcinoma: Intramucosal and low-risk tumours are not associated with lymph node metastases

Background

Superficial oesophageal adenocarcinoma can be resected endoscopically, but data to define a curative endoscopic resection are scarce.

Objective

Our study aimed to assess the risk of lymph node metastasis depending on the depth of invasion and histological features of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

We retrospectively included all patients undergoing an endoscopic resection for T1 oesophageal adenocarcinoma among seven expert centres in France in 2004–2016. Mural invasion was defined as either intramucosal or submucosal tumours; the latter were further divided into superficial submucosal (<1000 mm) and deep submucosal (>1000 mm). Absence or presence of lymphovascular invasion and/or poorly differentiated cancer (G3) defined a low‐risk or a high‐risk tumour, respectively. For submucosal tumours, invasion depth and histological features were systematically confirmed after a second dedicated histological assessment (new 2‐mm thick slices) performed by a second pathologist. Occurrence of lymph node metastasis was recorded during the follow‐up from histological or PET CT reports when an invasive procedure was not possible.

Results

In total, 188 superficial oesophageal adenocarcinomas were included with a median follow‐up of 34 months. No lymph node metastases occurred for intramucosal oesophageal adenocarcinomas (n = 135) even with high‐risk histological features. Among submucosal oesophageal adenocarcinomas, only tumours with lymphovascular invasion or poorly differentiated cancer or with a depth of invasion >1000 μm developed lymph node metastasis tumours (n = 10/53%; 18.9%; hazard ratio 12.04). No metastatic evolution occurred under a 1000‐mm threshold for all low‐risk tumours (0/25), nor under 1200 mm (0/1) and three over this threshold (3/13%, 23.1%).

Conclusion

Intramucosal and low‐risk tumours with shallow submucosal invasion up to 1200 mm were not associated with lymph node metastasis during follow‐up. In case of high‐risk features and/or deep submucosal invasion, endoscopic resections are not sufficient to eliminate the risk of lymph node metastasis, and surgical oesophagectomy should be carried out. These results must be confirmed by larger prospective series.

Superficial oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) can be resected endoscopically.

Data to define a curative endoscopic resection with a low lymph node metastasis (LNM) risk are scarce especially for tumours invading the submucosa.

Curative endoscopic resections have been reported in selected OAC invading the first 500 mm of the submucosa, but surgical series showed an LNM risk ranging from 0% to 50%, making endoscopic resection a questionable curative treatment.

High‐risk histological features were not associated with LNM in intramucosal tumours.

LNM occurred only for tumours invading the submucosa with a depth ≥1200 mm or with high‐risk histological features regardless of the depth of invasion.

Endoscopic resection may be a valid and curative therapeutic option for all intramucosal tumours and for submucosal oesophageal adenocarcinoma with an invasion depth ≤1000 mm and low‐risk histological features.

Esophageal Cancer: An Updated Review

The incidence of esophageal cancer (EC) is on the rise. With the distinct subtypes of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma comes specific risk factors, and as a result, people of certain regions of the world can be more prone to a subtype. For example, squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus has the highest incidence in eastern Africa and eastern Asia, with smoking being a major risk factor, whereas adenocarcinoma is more prevalent in North America and western Europe, with gastroesophageal reflux disease being a leading risk factor. With that being said, adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma have similar and unfortunately poor survival rates, partly because EC is prone to early metastasis given that the esophagus does not have a serosa, as well as the superficial nature of its lymphatics compared with the rest of the gastrointestinal tract. This makes early detection of the utmost importance, and certain patients have been shown to have the benefit of screening/surveillance endoscopies, including those with Barrett's esophagus, lye-induced/caustic strictures, tylosis, and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Until treatments significantly improve, identifying EC at the earliest stage will have the best success for patient outcomes, and further elucidation of its pathogenesis and risk factors may lead to identifying other high-risk groups that should be screened.

Surgical Management of Barrett's-Related Neoplasia

The management of Barrett's-related neoplasia has benefited from advances in endoscopic assessment, resection, and ablation, along with improved pathologic and radiographic staging. The development of specialized, high-volume esophageal multidisciplinary teams, with improvements in patient selection, preparation, perioperative care, minimally invasive operative approaches, and enhanced recovery after surgery programs, has contributed to improved outcomes for patients undergoing esophagectomy for Barrett's-related neoplasia.

The management and long-term outcomes of endoscopic and surgical treatment of early esophageal adenocarcinoma

Endoscopic resection (ER) for early (pT1) esophageal adenocarcinoma can be justified if the rate of coexisting lymph node (LN) metastasis is less than the mortality rate from esophagectomy. This study examines endoscopic and surgical outcomes, histological assessment of submucosal (sm) disease, factors influencing LN metastasis, and the safety of treating pT1b disease endoscopically. Histopathological reexamination recorded thickness, width and depth of sm invasion, grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), resection margin status and tumor stage. Multivariate analysis was employed to evaluate the factors influencing survival and LN metastasis. Rate of LN metastasis for pT1 low-risk (LR: sm invasion < 500 μm, G1-2, no LVI) or high-risk (HR: sm invasion >500 μm, G3-4 or LVI) disease were analyzed. Ninety three patients underwent ER and 96 underwent esophagectomy. We demonstrate conflicting histological methods of sm disease reporting, which may explain the difference in LN metastasis rate between reported surgical & endoscopic series. Multivariate analysis confirmed age, T stage, and presence of LN metastases were the independent factors predicting poor prognosis. Tumor thickness as well as grade, T stage, LVI were predictors of LN metastasis. Rates of LN metastasis are <2% in LR sm1 disease, and >15% in HR sm1 disease. Pathological reporting of sm invasion should be updated for uniform analysis of endoscopic and surgical specimens. Following rigorous histopathological examination and within a close endoscopic follow-up regimen, pT1a and pT1b LRsm1 disease may be treated with curative intent endoscopically, whereas pT1b HRsm1-sm3 disease should be offered surgery.

Workload, Recurrence, Quality of Life and Long-term Efficacy of Endoscopic Therapy for High-grade Dysplasia and Intramucosal Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To review the workload, type and frequency of recurrence, long-term quality of life (QOL), and late oncologic outcomes with endoscopic therapy.

BACKGROUND

The short-term oncologic efficacy of endoscopic resection (ER) and ablation for patients with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal adenocarcinoma (IMC) is well-established in the literature.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of the initial 40 patients who had endoscopic therapy from 2001 to 2010 at 1 center by 1 physician.

RESULTS

Initial pathology was HGD in 22 and IMC in 18 patients, but 9 patients (41%) with HGD progressed to invasive cancer during endotherapy. The median follow-up was 82 months. Four patients had an esophagectomy, and in the remaining 36 patients, 70 ERs and 111 ablations were performed. The median number of endoscopic sessions was 4 in patients with short segment compared with 7 in patients with long-segment Barrett's. Complete resolution of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) was achieved in 30 patients (83%) at a median of 21 months. In 18 patients (60%), CRIM was maintained, whereas 12 patients developed recurrence at a median of 14 months. Additional endotherapy (n = 11) led to CRIM again in 10 patients (83%). There were no cancer deaths when CRIM was achieved. Overall survival with endotherapy was 73% at 5 years and 67% at 10 years. Quality of life (QOL) was below population means in 4 of 8 areas, but alimentary satisfaction was good after endotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Endotherapy is successful in most patients, but multiple sessions are usually required and disease progression can occur. Once CRIM is achieved, recurrence is common and mandates continued endoscopic follow-up. QOL is impaired with endotherapy, but alimentary satisfaction and oncologic outcomes support esophageal preservation with endotherapy for patients with HGD or IMC.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines for esophageal cancer

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has developed endoscopic submucosal dissection/endoscopic mucosal resection guidelines. These guidelines present recommendations in response to 18 clinical questions concerning the preoperative diagnosis, indications, resection methods, curability assessment, and surveillance of patients undergoing endoscopic resection for esophageal cancers based on a systematic review of the scientific literature.

Risk of Recurrence and Metastasis for Patients with T1N0M0 Esophageal Carcinoma Who Achieve Completed Resection via Endoscopic Submucosal Resection: Evidence for the Appropriateness of the Watch and Wait Follow-Up Strategy

Purpose

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely performed procedure for esophageal carcinoma when the depth of invasion reaches the epithelium and lamina propria. However, ESD for esophageal carcinoma with depth of invasion exceeding the muscularis mucosa is controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of ESD for T1N0M0 (tumor invading the mucosa and submucosa [T1], no regional lymph node metastasis [N0], no distant metastasis [M0]) esophageal cancer.

Patients and Methods

Esophageal cancer was evaluated via pathology and computed tomography (CT) in consecutive patients with negative margin and without additional therapy. A total of 84 patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 42 (range, 9-99) months.

Results

No recurrence and metastasis were detected in the M1 and M2 group. The 5-year locoregional recurrence rate and distant metastasis rate were 4.2% and 5.6% for the M3 group and were 0% and 1.4% for the SM group, respectively. The 3- and 5-year overall survival were 94.4% (M1+M2 group, 95.0%; M3 group, 95.0%; SM group, 92.9%) and 80.9% (M1+M2 group, 95.0%; M3 group, 95.0%; SM group, 92.9%). Meanwhile, the 3- and 5-year disease-specific survival rates were 100% (M1+M2 group, 100%; M3 group, 100%; SM group, 100%) and 90.8% (M1+M2 group, 100%; M3 group, 90.0%; SM group, 85.7%). The major complications were postoperative strictures, most of which were grade 1-2. In total, two (4.8%) and one (1.2%) patient developed grade 3 and 5 late esophageal strictures, respectively.

Conclusion

ESD complete resection yields low recurrence and metastasis rates in early esophageal cancer (T1N0M0). Thus, additional treatment is not necessary, and a watch and wait strategy may be reasonable.

Relationship of lymphovascular invasion with lymph node metastasis and prognosis in superficial esophageal carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The development of tumor cells inside the lymphatics or blood vessels is known as lymphovascular invasion (LVI). The correlation between LVI, lymph node metastasis (LNM), and the diagnosis of superficial esophageal carcinoma (SEC) remains unclear.

Methods

We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for prospective articles to better understand the relationship between LVI, LNM, and SEC diagnosis.

Results

We included 23 articles containing data for 4749 patients (range: 54–598) in our meta-analysis. The hazard ratio between LVI and overall survival (OS) was 1.85 with 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.10–3.11, P = 0.02). LNM rate was higher in SEC patients with LVI than SEC patients without LVI (univariate: OR = 4.94, 95% CI: 3.74–6.53, P < 0.0001; multivariate: OR = 5.72, 95%CI: 4.38–7.4, P < 0.0001). No obvious publication was found.

Conclusions

The results indicate that LVI plays a dominant role in the prognosis of LNM in SEC and in the prognostic prediction for SEC.

Accuracy of the revised Vienna Classification for predicting postendoscopic resection outcomes for gastric and oesophageal neoplasms: a retrospective cohort study of patients from a UK tertiary referral centre

AIMS

To review the effectiveness of the revised Vienna classification (rVC) at predicting histological outcome and defining the postendoscopic resection (ER) clinical management plan of gastro-oesophageal dysplasia and early neoplasia in a UK tertiary-centre population.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study between November 2011 and May 2018. 157 patients from Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust in the UK were included. The primary outcome was the histological results of postsurgical resection (SR) specimens compared with their post-ER rVC. The secondary outcome was overall survival rates of patients with category 4.4 and 5 of the rVC.

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirteen patients were diagnosed with category ≥4 of the rVC. 23 patients (20.4%) were referred for additional surgery, whereas 69 patients (61.1%) were on endoscopic surveillance only. 60.9% of post-SR specimens (14/23) revealed no residual neoplasia. 78.6% of these cancer-free specimens were classed as category 5 rVC. The overall 7-year survival rate of 25 patients with category ≥4.4 was 68% with causes of mortality not linked to upper gastrointestinal neoplasia. The overall 7-year and 3-year survival rates of category 4.4 and 5 were 73.6% and 50%, respectively, although age and comorbid state played a role.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence of outcomes comparable to other reported cohorts for cases after ER in a single-centre UK population even at rVC 4.4/5. It suggests surgery may not be necessary in all cases due to the lack of residual disease and further refinement of the rVC category 5 may help guide management.

The overall metastatic rate in early esophageal adenocarcinoma: long-time follow-up of surgically treated patients

The overall metastatic potential of surgically treated early esophageal adenocarcinoma has not been studied in detail. This paper therefore assessed lymph node metastases at surgery, loco regional and distant metastases, in order to assess the metastatic potential of early esophageal adenocarcinoma. Two hundred and seventeen patients (53 T1a, 164 T1b; median follow-ups 87 and 75 months, 187 males) diagnosed with early esophageal adenocarcinoma and treated with esophagectomy in our tertiary center's database between July 2000 and December 2015 were included. All metastatic events were retrospectively analyzed, their topographic distribution was assessed, and the overall metastatic rate was calculated. Lymph node metastases occurred in 39 patients (18%) and 29 (13.4%) developed recurrences. Lymph node metastases were absent in m1 and m2 tumors and rare in m3 (1/18), m4 (5/21), and sm1 (4/42), but more frequent in sm2 (11/44) and sm3 tumors (18/78). Locoregional recurrences were exceedingly rare in m3 (2/18), m4 (1/21), sm1 (1/42), and sm2 (2/44), but frequent in sm3 (12/78). In contrast, distant metastases were more frequent with 2/18 in m3, 1/21 in m4, 4/42 in sm1, 4/44 in sm2, and 13/78 in sm3. Overall metastatic rates of 11.9% in sm1 (submucosal layer divided into equal thirds), 27.3% in sm2, and 32.1% in sm3 tumors were calculated. This first report of the metastatic potential of early esophageal adenocarcinoma provides a meticulous assessment of the overall metastatic risk. Metastatic events pose a relevant risk in surgically treated patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma with distant metastases being more frequent than locoregional recurrences.

Early Esophageal Cancer: A Gastroenterologist's Disease

Traditionally, early esophageal cancer (i.e., cancer limited to the mucosa or superficial submucosa) was managed surgically; the gastroenterologist's role was primarily to diagnose the tumor. Over the last decade, advances in endoscopic imaging, ablation, and resection techniques have resulted in a paradigm shift-diagnosis, staging, treatment, and surveillance are within the endoscopist's domain. Yet, there are few reviews that provide a focused, evidence-based approach to early esophageal cancer, and highlight areas of controversy for practicing gastroenterologists. In this manuscript, we will discuss the following: (1) utility of novel endoscopic technologies to identify high-grade dysplasia and early esophageal cancer, (2) role of endoscopic resection and imaging to stage early esophageal cancer, (3) endoscopic therapies for early esophageal cancer, and (4) indications for surgical and multidisciplinary management.

A Primary Barrett's Adenocarcinoma with a Squamous Cell Carcinoma Component

The present report describes an extremely rare case of Barrett's adenocarcinoma (BAC) with a squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) component. A 55-year-old man was diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma on Barrett's esophagus. The patient underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection, but the pathology revealed deep submucosal invasive, moderately differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma and focal SCC with vascular invasion. In addition, morphological transition between adenocarcinoma and SCC components was confirmed. The patient underwent additional surgery, which revealed lymph node metastasis, and then received S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy. Based on the pathological findings, the transdifferentiation process may have a role in the histogenesis of this tumor.

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma: introduction of Japan Esophageal Society classification of Barrett's esophagus

Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus has become a foundation of the management of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Surveillance for Barrett's esophagus commonly involves periodic upper endoscopy with biopsies of suspicious areas and random four-quadrant biopsies. However, targeted biopsies using narrow-band imaging can detect more dysplastic areas and thus reduce the number of biopsies required. Several specific mucosal and vascular patterns characteristic of Barrett's esophagus have been described, but the proposed criteria are complex and diverse. Simpler classifications have recently been developed focusing on the differentiation between dysplasia and non-dysplasia. These include the Japan Esophageal Society classification, which defines regular and irregular patterns in terms of mucosal and vascular shapes. Cancer invasion depth is diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS); however, a meta-analysis of EUS staging of superficial EAC showed favorable pooled values for mucosal cancer staging, but unsatisfactory diagnostic results for EAC at the esophagogastric junction. Endoscopic resection has recently been suggested as a more accurate staging modality for superficial gastrointestinal cancers than EUS. Following endoscopic resection for gastrointestinal cancers, the risk of metastasis can be evaluated based on the histology of the resected specimen. European guidelines describe endoscopic resection as curative for well- or moderately differentiated mucosal cancers without lymphovascular invasion, and these criteria might be extended to lesions invading the submucosa (≤ 500 μm), i.e., to low-risk, well- or moderately differentiated tumors without lymphovascular involvement, and < 3 cm. These criteria were confirmed by a recent study in Japan.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection vs Esophagectomy for T1 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in a Real-World Cohort

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for early-stage esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (EESCC), but patients who undergo this procedure have high morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a less-invasive procedure for treatment of EESCC, but is considered risky because this tumor frequently metastasizes to the lymph nodes. We aimed to directly compare outcomes of patients with EESCC treated with ESD vs esophagectomy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with T1a-m2/m3, or T1b EESCCs who underwent ESD (n = 322) or esophagectomy (n = 274) from October 1, 2011 through September 31, 2016 at Zhongshan Hospital in Shanghai, China. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the end of follow up (minimum of 6 months). Secondary outcomes included operation time, hospital stay, cost, perioperative mortalities/severe non-fatal adverse events, requirement for adjuvant therapies, and disease-specific mortality and cancer recurrence or metastasis at the end of the follow up period.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent ESD were older (mean 63.5 years vs 62.3 years for patients receiving esophagectomy; P = .006) and a greater proportion was male (80.1% vs 70.4%; P = .006) and had a T1a tumor (74.5% vs 27%; P = .001). A lower proportion of patients who underwent ESD had perioperative mortality (0.3% vs 1.5% of patients receiving esophagectomy; P = .186) and non-fatal severe adverse events (15.2% vs 27.7%; P = .001)-specifically lower proportions of esophageal fistula (0.3% of patients receiving ESD vs 16.4% for patients receiving esophagectomy; P = .001) and pulmonary complications (0.3% vs 3.6%; P = .004). After a median follow-up time of 21 months (range, 6-73 months), there were no significant differences between treatments in all-cause mortality (7.4% for ESD vs 10.9%; P = .209) or rate of cancer recurrence or metastasis (9.1% for ESD vs 8.9%; P = .948). Disease-specific mortality was lower among patients who received ESD (3.4%) vs patients who patients who received esophagectomy (7.4%) (P = .049). In Cox regression analysis, depth of tumor invasion was the only factor associated with all-cause mortality (T1a-m3 or deeper vs T1a-m2: hazard ration, 3.54; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

In a retrospective study of patients with T1am2/m3 or T1b EESCCs treated with ESD (n = 322) or esophagectomy (n = 274), we found lower proportions of patients receiving ESD to have perioperative adverse events or disease specific mortality after a median follow up time of 21 months. We found no difference in overall survival or cancer recurrence or metastasis in patients with T1a or T1b ESCCs treated with ESD vs esophagectomy.

Do pathologists agree with each other on the histological assessment of pT1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma?

Background

In early (T1) oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), the histological profile of an endoscopic resection specimen plays a pivotal role in the prediction of lymph node metastasis and the potential need for oesophagectomy with lymphadenectomy.

Objective

To evaluate the inter-observer agreement of the histological assessment of submucosal (pT1b) OAC.

Methods

Surgical and endoscopic resection specimens with pT1b OAC were independently reviewed by three gastrointestinal pathologists. Agreement was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient for continuous variables, and Fleiss' kappa (κ) for categorical variables. Bland–Altman plots of the submucosal invasion depth were made.

Results

Eighty-five resection specimens with pT1b OAC were evaluated. The agreement was good for differentiation grade (κ=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68–0.87), excellent for lymphovascular invasion (κ=0.88, 95% CI 0.76–1.00) and moderate for submucosal invasion depth using the Paris and Pragmatic classifications (κ=0.60, 95% CI 0.49–0.72 and κ=0.42, 95% CI 0.33–0.51, respectively). Systematic mean differences between pathologists were detected for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth, ranging from 297 µm to 602 µm.

Conclusions

A substantial discordance was found between pathologists for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth in pT1b OAC. Differences may lead to an over- or underestimation of the lymph node metastasis risk, with grave implications for the treatment strategy. Review by a second gastrointestinal pathologist is recommended to improve differentiating between a favourable and an unfavourable histological profile.

Histopathology of Barrett’s Esophagus and Early-Stage Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: An Updated Review

Esophageal adenocarcinoma carries a very poor prognosis. For this reason, it is critical to have cost-effective surveillance and prevention strategies and early and accurate diagnosis, as well as evidence-based treatment guidelines. Barrett’s esophagus is the most important precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma, which follows a defined metaplasia–dysplasia–carcinoma sequence. Accurate recognition of dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus is crucial due to its pivotal prognostic value. For early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, depth of submucosal invasion is a key prognostic factor. Our systematic review of all published data demonstrates a “rule of doubling” for the frequency of lymph node metastases: tumor invasion into each progressively deeper third of submucosal layer corresponds with a twofold increase in the risk of nodal metastases (9.9% in the superficial third of submucosa (sm1) group, 22.0% in the middle third of submucosa (sm2) group, and 40.7% in deep third of submucosa (sm3) group). Other important risk factors include lymphovascular invasion, tumor differentiation, and the recently reported tumor budding. In this review, we provide a concise update on the histopathological features, ancillary studies, molecular signatures, and surveillance/management guidelines along the natural history from Barrett’s esophagus to early stage invasive adenocarcinoma for practicing pathologists.

Early esophageal cancer: the significance of surgery, endoscopy, and chemoradiation

Early carcinomas of the esophagus are histologically classified as adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and microscopically subdivided into mucosal and submucosal carcinomas depending on infiltration depth. The prevalence of lymph node metastasis in mucosal carcinoma remains low. However, lymph node metastases arise frequently from tumors with submucosal infiltration, with increasing prevalence in the deeper submucosal sublayers. According to current German guidelines, endoscopic resection is the recommended treatment in mucosal adenocarcinoma without histologic risk factors (lymphatic invasion 1, vascular invasion 1, >grade 2, R1-margin). In superficial submucosal infiltration without histologic risk factors, endoscopic resection can be considered. In squamous cell carcinoma, endoscopic resection is indicated up to middle layer mucosal carcinoma. Beyond these criteria, surgical resection should be considered. The gold standard is a subtotal transthoracic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Total esophagectomy is performed in cervical esophageal carcinoma and transhiatal extended gastrectomy in carcinoma of the cardia. Minimally invasive procedures show good oncologic results and reduce the morbidity of radical esophagectomy. Reduced morbidity might be an argument for surgical resection in borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection. In early squamous cell cancer, the combination of endoscopic resection and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a therapeutic option with promising results.

Outcomes after endoscopic mucosal resection or esophagectomy for submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a diagnostic and potentially therapeutic option for patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, there are significant concerns regarding the risk of lymph node metastasis. Our purpose was to construct a comparative effectiveness analysis comparing recurrence patterns after therapeutic EMR or esophagectomy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent therapeutic EMR or esophagectomy from 2007 to 2015 with pathologically staged submucosal adenocarcinoma were identified from a departmental database. Cancer-related outcomes were compared among an unmatched as well as a propensity matched cohort. Risk stratification was also used to compare results among those with a low, medium, or high risk of nodal metastasis.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients met criteria for analysis, among whom 23 underwent therapeutic EMR with esophageal preservation and 49 underwent esophagectomy. Median follow-up was 43 months. Patients who underwent esophagectomy had larger, deeper tumors. Esophageal preservation was associated with an increased risk of local recurrence (P = .01), but not distant recurrence (P = .44). After propensity matching, there continued to be no difference in distant recurrence rate (P = .66). In a risk-stratified analysis, low-risk patients showed no recurrences or cancer-related deaths, however, high-risk patients showed a trend toward increased distant recurrence after therapeutic EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal preservation after therapeutic EMR was associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. Among low-risk patients, either strategy resulted in excellent cancer control. However, among high-risk patients, esophageal preservation showed a trend toward increased distant failure. These findings should prompt further investigation to determine optimal treatment for patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma.

[Surgical strategy for early stage carcinoma of the esophagus]

Early stage carcinomas of the esophagus are histologically differentiated into adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas and subdivided into mucosal (m1-3) and submucosal (sm1-3) carcinomas depending on the infiltration depth. While the prevalence of lymph node metastases in mucosal carcinomas is very low, the probability of lymph node metastases increases from submucosal infiltration with increasing depth. According to the current German S3 guidelines endoscopic resection is the recommended treatment strategy for mucosal adenocarcinoma without histological risk factors (lymphatic invasion [L1], venous invasion [V1], poorly differentiated [>G2], microscopic residual disease [R1] at the deep resection margin). For superficial submucosal infiltration (sm1) without histological risk factors endoscopic resection can also be carried out, whereby in this case the guidelines make a stronger recommendation for esophagectomy. For squamous cell carcinoma endoscopic resection is indicated for an infiltration depth up to middle layer mucosal carcinoma (m2) without histological risk factors. Outside of these criteria an esophageal resection should always be carried out. The surgical gold standard is a subtotal abdominothoracic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Alternative procedures are total esophagectomy in proximal esophageal carcinoma and transhiatal extended gastrectomy for carcinoma of the cardia. Limited proximal or distal esophageal resections can be performed in proximal or distal mucosal carcinoma without the possibility of endoscopic resection; however, partial resections are not superior in terms of functional results and are not oncologically equivalent due to limited lymphadenectomy. Minimally invasive procedures show good oncological results and reduce the morbidity of radical esophagectomy. Reduced morbidity might be an argument for surgical resection in borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection.

Surgical Treatment of High-Grade Dysplasia and Early Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The treatment of early-stage esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia of the esophagus has changed significantly in recent years. Many early tumors that were traditionally treated with esophagectomy can now be resected with endoscopic therapy alone. These new endoscopic modalities can offer similar survival outcomes without the associated morbidity of a major operation. However, a number of these cases may still require surgical intervention as the best treatment option.

METHODS

The current scientific literature, national and international guidelines were reviewed for recommendations regarding optimal treatment of early esophageal malignancy.

RESULTS

The primary advantage of surgery over endoscopic treatment lies in the reduced risk of recurrence as well as the ability to assess harvested lymph nodes for regional disease. We recommend that esophageal tumors that have invaded into the submucosa (T1b) or beyond should be treated with an esophagectomy. In addition, dysplastic lesions and cancers that demonstrate poorly differentiated pathology or lymphovascular or perineural invasion should be surgically resected. Finally, large tumors, multifocal lesions, tumors within a long segment of Barrett's esophagus, tumors adjacent to a hiatal hernia, tumors that cannot be resected enbloc with endoscopic techniques should also be treated with an esophagectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

When performed at high-volume centers in experienced hands, esophagectomy can have consistently good outcomes for high-grade dysplasia and early esophageal cancers, and should be considered as a treatment option.

Endoscopic management and follow-up of patients with a submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma

Introduction

The risk of lymph node metastases (LNM) in submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients is subject to debate. These patients might be treated endoscopically if the risk of LNM appears to be low.

Objective

The objective of this article is to evaluate the outcome of patients who underwent an endoscopic resection (ER) and subsequent endoscopic follow-up for a submucosal EAC.

Methods

All patients who underwent ER for submucosal EAC between January 2012 and August 2016 and were subsequently managed with endoscopic follow-up were retrospectively identified. Primary outcome was the number of patients diagnosed with LNM; secondary outcomes included intraluminal recurrences.

Results

Thirty-five patients (median age 68 years) were included: 17 low-risk (submucosal invasion <500 microns, G1–G2, no lymphovascular invasion (LVI)), and 18 high-risk (submucosal invasion >500 microns, and/or G3–G4, and/or LVI, and/or a tumor-positive deep resection margin (R1)) EACs. After a median follow-up of 23 (IQR 15–43) months, in which patients underwent a median of six (IQR 4–8) endoscopies and a median of four (IQR 2–8) endoscopic ultrasound procedures, none of the included patients were diagnosed with LNM. Five (14%) patients developed a local intraluminal recurrence a median of 18 (IQR 11–21) months after baseline ER that were treated endoscopically.

Conclusions

In 35 patients with a submucosal EAC, no LNM were found during a median follow-up of 23 months. Endoscopic therapy may be an alternative for surgery in selected patients with a submucosal EAC.

Endoscopic Resection for Early-Stage Esophageal Cancer, Are We There for Squamous As Well?

Superficial esophageal squamous cell cancer (SESCC) is often managed with esophagectomy with or without chemoradiotherapy. Esophagectomy has a significant complication rate and is not an option for many patients. In the current issue, a retrospective single center study evaluated 66 patients with SESCC. With endoscopic resection followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the reported 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 98%, 87% and 75% respectively, comparable to survival rates after esophagectomy or definitive chemoradiotherapy. This study suggests a key role for endoscopic management in SESCC, and provides important data on the combination of endoscopic management plus adjuvant chemoradiation.

A prediction model for lymph node metastasis in T1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection is widely used for the treatment of T1 esophageal cancer, but it cannot be used to treat lymph node metastasis (LNM). This study aimed to develop a prediction model for LNM in patients with T1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent surgery for esophageal cancer between January 2002 and June 2010 was retrospectively reviewed, and patients with T1 squamous cell carcinoma were included in this study. Correlations between LNM and clinicopathological variables were evaluated using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. The penalized maximum likelihood method was used to estimate regression coefficients. A prediction model was developed and internally validated using a bootstrap resampling method. Model performance was evaluated in terms of calibration, discrimination, and clinical usefulness.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients (197 male, 43 female) with a mean age of 57.9 years (standard deviation ± 8.3 years) were included in the analysis. The incidence of LNM was 16.3%. The prediction model consisted of four variables: grade, T1 stage, tumor location and tumor length. The model showed good calibration and good discrimination with a C-index of 0.787 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.711-0.863). After internal validation, the optimism-corrected C-index was 0.762 (95% CI, 0.686-0.838). Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the prediction model was clinically useful.

CONCLUSIONS

Our prediction model can facilitate individualized prediction of LNM in patients with T1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. This model can aid surgical decision making in patients who have undergone endoscopic resection.

Developments in optical imaging for gastrointestinal surgery

To improve outcomes for patients with cancer, in terms of both survival and a reduction in the morbidity and mortality that results from surgical resection and treatment, there are two main areas that require improvement. Accurate early diagnosis of the cancer, at a stage where curative and, ideally, minimally invasive treatment is achievable, is desired as well as identification of tumor margins, lymphatic and distant disease, enabling complete, but not unnecessarily extensive, resection. Optical imaging is making progress in achieving these aims. This review discusses the principles of optical imaging, focusing on fluorescence and spectroscopy, and the current research that is underway in GI tract carcinomas.

Pilot-study on the feasibility of sentinel node navigation surgery in combination with thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without esophagectomy in early esophageal adenocarcinoma patients

High-risk submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma's might be treated curatively by means of radical endoscopic resection, followed by thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without concomitant esophagectomy. A preclinical study has shown the feasibility and safety of this approach; however, no studies are performed in a clinical setting. In addition, sentinel node navigation surgery could be valuable in tailoring the extent of the lymphadenectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without esophagectomy (phase I) and sentinel node navigation surgery (phase II) in patients with early esophageal adenocarcinoma. Patients with T1N0M0 early esophageal adenocarcinoma scheduled for esophagectomy without neoadjuvant therapy were included. Phase I: Two-field, esophagus preserving, thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy was performed, followed by esophagectomy in the same session. Primary outcome parameters were the number of lymph nodes resected, and number of retained lymph nodes in the esophagectomy specimen. Phase II: A radioactive tracer was injected endoscopically the day before surgery. Static imaging was performed 15 and 120 minutes after injection. The day of surgery, sentinel node navigation surgery followed by esophagectomy was performed. Primary outcome parameters were the percentage of patients with a detectable sentinel node, and the concordance between static imaging and probe-based detection of sentinel node. Phase I: Five patients were included, and a median of 30 (IQR: 25-46) lymph nodes was resected. A median of 6 (IQR: 2-9) retained lymph nodes was found in the esophagectomy specimen. No acute adverse events occurred, but near the end of lymphadenectomy esophageal discoloration was observed, possibly indicating ischemia. Phase II: In all five included patients sentinel nodes could be visualized and resected, at a median of 3 (IQR: 2-5) locations. There was a high concordance between imaging and probe-based detection of sentinel nodes. In conclusion, sentinel node navigation surgery followed by lymphadenectomy without concomitant esophagectomy seems feasible in patients with high-risk submucosal early esophageal adenocarcinoma. More evidence is however needed before applying this technique in clinical practice.

Outcome with Primary En-bloc Esophagectomy for Submucosal Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Intramucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma can be reliably treated endoscopically. Controversy exists about the use of endotherapy versus esophagectomy for submucosal tumors. Increasingly endotherapy is considered for submucosal tumors in part because of the presumed high mortality with esophagectomy and the perceived poor prognosis in patients with nodal disease. This study was designed to assess survival following primary en bloc esophagectomy (EBE) in patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of all patients who underwent EBE for submucosal EAC between 1998 and 2015. No patient had neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients (28M/4F; median age 64 years). The median tumor size was 1.5 cm (0.4-8.0), and the median number of resected nodes was 48 (23-85). There was one perioperative death. Lymph node metastases were present in 7 patients (22%). There was one involved node in four patients and 2, 3, and 31 nodes in one patient each. The one N3 patient received adjuvant therapy. The median follow-up was 87 months. Overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 84 and 70% respectively. Disease-specific survival at 10 years was 90%. Eight patients died, but only three deaths (9%) were related to EAC. Disease-specific survival at 10 years in node-positive patients was 71%.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival after primary en bloc esophagectomy for submucosal adenocarcinoma was excellent even in node-positive patients. Mortality with esophagectomy was low and far less than the 22% risk of node metastases in patients with submucosal tumor invasion. Esophagectomy should remain the preferred treatment for T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Role of EUS in patients with suspected Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia or early esophageal adenocarcinoma: impact on endoscopic therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic therapy is the standard treatment for high-grade dysplasia and some cases of T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), but it is not appropriate for deeply invasive disease. Data on the value of EUS for patient selection for endoscopic or surgical resection are conflicting. We investigated the outcome of esophageal EUS for the staging and treatment selection of patients with treatment-naive, premalignant Barrett's esophagus (BE) and suspected superficial EAC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS for staging of treatment-naive, suspected premalignant BE and superficial EAC from January 2006 to June 2014. All patients referred for endoscopic therapy routinely underwent EUS. Patients with esophageal masses, squamous cell cancers, previous neoadjuvant therapy, or unrelated pathologies were excluded. Each patient's final diagnosis was verified by EMR, esophagectomy, or forceps biopsy sampling. Test characteristics of EUS were calculated.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-five patients (mean age, 68 years; 86% male) with BE, a Prague C mean of 2.8 cm, and a Prague M mean of 4.5 cm were staged (pT0, 78% [6% nondysplastic, 24% low-grade dysplasia, 42% high-grade dysplasia]; pT1a, 14%; pT1b, 7%; and pT2, 1%). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy for patient selection to endoscopic (T1aN0 or less) or surgical therapy with EUS TN staging were 50%, 93%, 40%, 95%, and 90%, respectively. Comparable rates were achieved for patients with nodular BE. Overstaging occurred in 7% of patients, and EUS selected 11% for incorrect treatment modalities compared with pathologic staging.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the limited value of EUS suggested in the latest American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for BE management.

Current Concepts in Treatment of Barrett's Esophagus With and Without Dysplasia

BACKGROUND

Around 10-15% of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease will develop Barrett's esophagus (BE). The development of novel endoscopic modalities has changed the management of BE in the last decade.

AIM

The aim of this study was to review the current evidence for the treatment of BE with and without dysplasia.

RESULTS

In patients with BE without dysplasia, antireflux surgery should not be suggested as a modality to prevent the malignant transformation of BE, but its indications should be the same as for other patients with gastroesophageal reflux. Endoscopic surveillance at intervals of 3-5 years is recommended for these patients. For patients with BE with low-grade dysplasia, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the preferred treatment modality, while endoscopic surveillance every 12 months is an acceptable alternative in patients with life-limiting comorbidities. For most patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia, RFA is the preferred treatment strategy. Patients with intramucosal adenocarcinoma (T1a), should be treated with EMR followed by ablative therapy, in order to eradicate the remaining intestinal metaplasia. Endoscopic resection may be suitable for low-risk T1b tumors (well-differentiated, without lymphovascular invasion, and with superficial submucosal invasion); however, further data are necessary to better risk stratify this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BE without dysplasia should undergo endoscopic surveillance every 3-5 years. Endoscopic ablative therapy (RFA) is the preferred treatment modality for dysplastic BE. Patients with T1a adenocarcinoma should be treated with EMR followed by ablative therapy. Low-risk T1b tumors may be suitable for endoscopic resection.

Using the National Cancer Database to create a scoring system that identifies patients with early-stage esophageal cancer at risk for nodal metastases

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic resection is gaining popularity as a treatment for early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, particularly for T1a tumors. The goal of this study was to create a scoring system to reflect the risk of nodal metastases in early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma to be used after endoscopic resection to better individualize treatment.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy. We identified variables affecting nodal metastases using multivariable logistic regression, which we then used to create a scoring system. We stratified the model for T1a or T1b tumors, tested model discrimination, and validated the models by refitting in 1000 bootstrap samples. C-statistics greater than 0.7 were considered relevant.

RESULTS

We identified 1283 patients with T1a or T1b tumors; 146 had nodal metastases (11.4%). Tumor category (pT1a vs pT1b), grade, and size and the presence of angiolymphatic invasion significantly affected the risk of nodal metastases. We assigned points to each variable and added them to get a risk score. In patients with T1a tumors, less than 3% of patients with a risk score of 3 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 16.1% of patients with a risk score of 5 or greater had nodal metastases. In patients with T1b tumors, less than 5% of patients with a risk score of 2 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 41% of patients with a score of 6 or greater had nodal metastases (c-statistic = 0.805).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed scoring system seems to be useful in discriminating risk of nodal metastases in patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma and may be useful in directing patients who received endoscopic resection to esophagectomy or careful follow-up.

Esophagectomy for Superficial Esophageal Neoplasia

Endoscopic therapies have become the standard of care for most cases of Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Despite a rapid and dramatic evolution in treatment paradigms, esophagectomy continues to occupy a place in the therapeutic armamentarium for superficial esophageal neoplasia. The managing physician must remain cognizant of the limitations of endoscopic approaches and consider surgical resection when they are exceeded. Esophagectomy, performed at experienced centers for appropriately selected patients with early-stage disease can be undertaken with the expectation of cure as well as low mortality, acceptable morbidity, and good long-term quality of life.

Risk of metastasis in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus: a multicenter retrospective study in a Japanese population

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the specific risks of metastasis in esophageal adenocarcinoma in relation to invasion depth or other pathologic factors.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study in 13 high-volume centers in Japan from January 2000 to October 2014 to elucidate the risk of metastasis of esophageal adenocarcinoma. A total of 458 patients (217 surgically resected and 241 endoscopically resected) with esophageal adenocarcinoma or esophagogastric adenocarcinoma involving the esophagus were included. Metastasis was considered positive if there was histologically confirmed metastasis in the surgical specimen or clinically confirmed metastasis during follow-up. Metastasis was considered negative if no metastasis was identified in resected specimens and during follow-up in patients treated surgically or no metastasis during follow-up for >5 years in patients treated by endoscopic resection.

RESULTS

Metastasis was identified in 72 patients. Multivariate analysis confirmed lymphovascular involvement [odds ratio (OR) 6.20; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.12-12.32; p < 0.001], a poorly differentiated component (OR 3.69; 95 % CI 1.92-7.10; p < 0.001), and lesion size >30 mm (OR 3.12; 95 % CI 1.63-5.97; p = 0.001) as independent risk factors for metastasis. No metastasis was detected in patients with mucosal cancer without lymphovascular involvement and a poorly differentiated component (0/186 lesions) or in patients with cancer invading the submucosa (1-500 µm) without lymphovascular involvement, a poorly differentiated component, and ≤30 mm (0/32 lesions).

CONCLUSIONS

Mucosal and submucosal cancers (1-500 µm invasion) without risk factors have a low incidence of metastasis and may thus be good candidates for endoscopic resection.