Time trends in mortality of oesophageal cancer in Finland over 30 years

INTRODUCTION

Oesophageal cancer survival is reported by epidemiological studies, but knowledge on survival trends regarding different histologies and operative treatment status is lacking.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from all patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer in Finland in 1987-2016 was collected from national registries. 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were examined stratified by histology (adenocarcinoma (OAC) and squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)) and treatment strategy (surgery, no surgery). Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for death were provided by multivariable Cox regression, adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 9102 patients, 3140 had OAC (1074 [34%] oesophagectomies), and 3778 had OSCC (870 [23%] oesophagectomies). Men were overrepresented in both OAC (77%) and OSCC (55%). The proportion of oesophagectomies decreased in both histologies. From 1987 to 1991 to 2012-2016, 5-year survival increased from 11% to 22% in OAC and from 7% to 13% in OSCC. For patients undergoing oesophagectomy, the corresponding increases were from 20% to 49% in OAC and from 11% to 54% in OSCC, and non-operated patients from 5% to 8% and from 5% to 7%, respectively. Earlier calendar period, older age and comorbidity were associated with mortality in both histologies. Female sex was a protective factor for patients operated for OSCC (HR 1.56 (95% CI 1.33-1.83), men versus women).

CONCLUSIONS

The prognosis of oesophageal cancer has improved in Finland over the last 30 years in both main histological types. The survival of patients undergoing oesophagectomy has drastically improved, while the prognosis of patients not undergoing surgery is slowly improving but remains poor.

Five-year Survival after McKeown Compared to Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Population-based Nationwide Study in Finland

OBJECTIVE

The aim of study was to compare overall 5-year survival of esophageal cancer patients undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy with either neck or intrathoracic anastomosis, that is, McKeown and Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND

No national studies comparing long-term survival after McKeown and ivor-Lewis esophagectomies in the West exist.

METHODS

This population-based nationwide study included all curatively intended transthoracic esophagectomies for esophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma in Finland in 1987 to 2016, with follow-up until December 31, 2019. Cox proportional hazard models provided hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (ci) of all-cause 5-year mortality. The results were adjusted for age, sex, year of the operation, comorbidities, histology, stage, and neoadjuvant treatment. Adjusted model 2 included also tumor location and lymph node yield.

RESULTS

A total of 990 patients underwent McKeown (n = 278) or Ivor-Lewis (n = 712) esophagectomy The observed overall 5-year survival was 43.1% after McKeown, and 45.9% after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. McKeown esophagectomy was not associated with the overall 5-year mortality (adjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.89-1.38), compared to Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Additional adjustment for tumor location and lymphadenectomy further attenuated the point estimate (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.85-1.33). Surgical approach was not associated with 90-day mortality rate (adjusted HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.67-1.97).

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based nationwide study suggests that overall 5-year survival or 90-day survival with McKeown and Ivor-Lewis esopha-gectomy for esophageal cancer are comparable.

Global burden and temporal trends in incidence and mortality of oesophageal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Oesophageal cancer is a prevalent and deadly cancer around the world.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to present a comprehensive analysis of the global geographic patterns and temporal trends in the mortality and incidence of oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

The mortality and incidence data of oesophageal cancer in 2020 were obtained from the GLOBOCAN database. Based on World Health Organization (WHO) mortality database and the Cancer Incidence in Five Continents (CI5), we also retrieved the mortality and incidence age-standardized rates (ASRs) of oesophageal cancer. The average annual percentage changes (AAPCs) of mortality and incidence were calculated using the joinpoint regression analysis.

RESULTS

Globally, 0.54 million deaths and 0.6 million new cases were identified in 2020. In the majority of countries of South America and Asia, the mortality and incidence trends have substantially decreased, but trends in European countries have varied. The prevalence in European nations varied, but the incidence in most other continents decreased dramatically. In terms of mortality, the global average rate was 5.6 per 100000, ranging from 16.7 (Malawi) to 0.28 (Belize). European countries varied in mortality, such as Norway (AAPC, male: 0.68; female: 0.89) and Ireland (AAPC, male: -0.96; female: -1.52). Most non-European countries saw large decreases in mortality, such as Singapore (AAPC, male: -4.78; female: -6.89). The elderly had more noticeable trends in mortality and incidence in most countries.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified different trends in mortality and incidence among European countries, whereas declining trends were identified in most non-European countries. However, increasing trends were identified in specific subgroups of some countries, such as men in Thailand. For populations with rising mortality and incidence trends, more preventative efforts are required.

Long-Term Survival After Transhiatal Versus Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Population-Based Nationwide Study in Finland

BACKGROUND

No population-based studies comparing long-term survival after transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) and transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) exist. This study aimed to compare the 5-year survival of esophageal cancer patients undergoing THE or TTE in a population-based nationwide setting.

METHODS

This study included all curatively intended THE and TTE for esophageal cancer in Finland during 1987-2016, with follow-up evaluation until 31 December 2019. Cox proportional hazard models provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 5-year and 90-day mortality. The results were adjusted for age, sex, year of operation, comorbidities, histology, neoadjuvant treatment, and pathologic stage.

RESULTS

A total of 1338 patients underwent THE (n = 323) or TTE (n = 1015). The observed 5-year survival rate was 39.3% after THE and 45.0% after TTE (p = 0.072). In adjusted model 1, THE was not associated with greater 5-year mortality (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.82-1.20) than TTE. In adjusted model 2, including T stage instead of pathologic stage, the 5-year mortality hazard rates after THE (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.05) and TTE were comparable. The 90-day mortality rate for THE was higher than for TTE (adjusted HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.45-1.14). In subgroup analyses, no differences between THE and TTE were observed in Siewert II gastroesophageal junction cancers, esophageal cancers, or pN0 tumors, nor in the comparison of THE and TTE with two-field lymphadenectomy. The sensitivity analysis, including patients with missing patient records, who underwent surgery during 1996-2016 mirrored the main analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This Finnish population-based nationwide study suggests no difference in 5-year or 90-day mortality after THE and TTE for esophageal cancer.

Increasing Use of PET-CT, Neoadjuvant Treatment, Minimally Invasive Approach and Surgical Radicality in Esophageal Cancer Surgery are Associated with Improved Short- and Long-term Outcomes in Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND

Guideline adherence has improved outcomes in several cancers. Our aim was to evaluate whether the rate of PET-CT, neoadjuvant treatment, minimally invasive approach, and surgical radicality, suggested also by recent guidelines, would improve short- and long-term operative outcomes in esophageal cancer in real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective study in two Finnish Hospitals between 2010 and 2020 included 296 esophageal cancer patients. Grouping factors based on four factors with annual cut-offs by center were 90% rate in PET-CT-based staging, 70% in neoadjuvant therapy usage, 80% in minimally invasive approach, and 20 in annual mean lymph node yield. If none of factors were reached, all patients operated in that year were classified into group 1. With one to three cut-offs reached, grouping was into group 2. If all annual cut-offs were reached, patients were classified into group 3. Primary end points were major complication rate and overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival.

RESULTS

Major complication rate decreased significantly from 38.2% in group 1 (p < 0.001) and 34.2% in group 2 (p < 0.001) to 10.2% in group 3. Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates between groups 1-3 were 77.9% vs. 80.3% vs. 94.2% (p = 0.004), 51.5% vs. 51.1% vs. 67.3% (p = 0.022), and 44.1% vs. 47.4% vs. 55.5% (p = 0.065), respectively. Adjusted 5-year overall mortality was reduced significantly in group 3 compared to group 1 (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28-0.75).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that increasing rate of PET-CT, neoadjuvant treatment, minimally invasive surgery, and surgical radicality improves short- and long-term outcomes in operated esophageal cancer patients.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy learning curves with different types of background experience

Background

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex procedure with learning associated morbidity. The aim was to evaluate the learning curve for MIE focusing on short-term outcomes in two settings: (I) experienced MIE surgeon in new hospital (Hospital 1); (II) surgeons experienced with open esophagectomy and minimally invasive surrogate surgery (Hospital 2).

Methods

In Hospital 1 and Hospital 2, on intent-to-treat basis number of MIEs were 132 and 57, respectively. The primary outcomes were major complications and anastomosis leaks. Secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, lymph node yield, hospital stay and 1-year mortality. Length of learning curves were analyzed with risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) method.

Results

In Hospital 1, major complication and anastomosis leak rates were 9.8% and 4.5%, 22.8% and 12.3% in Hospital 2, respectively. In Hospital 1, complication and leak rates remained stable. In Hospital 2, improvement occurred after 34 cases in major complications and 29 cases in leaks. Of secondary outcomes, improvements were seen in Hospital 1 in operative time after 61, blood loss after 86, lymph node yield after 52, hospital stay after 19 and 1-year mortality after 24 cases. In Hospital 2, improvement occurred in operative time after 30, blood loss after 15, lymph node yield after 45, hospital stay after 50 and 1-year mortality after 15 cases.

Conclusions

According to this study, learning phase of the individual surgeon determines the outcomes of MIE, not the institutional learning phase.

Thirty years of esophageal cancer surgery in Oulu University Hospital

Background

Esophagectomy is the mainstay of surgical treatment of esophageal cancer, but involves high operative risk. The aim of this study was to review the evolution surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in Northern Finland, with introduction of minimally invasive techniques.

Methods

All elective esophagectomies performed in Oulu University Hospital between years 1987 and 2020 were included. Treatment strategies were compared to current guidelines including staging and use of neoadjuvant therapy, and benchmark values including postoperative morbidity, hospital stay, readmissions and 90-day mortality. Long-term survival was compared to previous national studies.

Results

Between years 1987 and 2020 a total of 341 underwent an esophagectomy. Transhiatal resection was performed to 167 (49.3%), Ivor Lewis to 129 (38.1%) and McKeown to 42 (12.4%) patients. MIE was performed to 49 (14.5%) patients. During the past four years 83.7% of locally advanced diseases received neoadjuvant treatment. Since 1987, gradual improvements have occurred especially in incidence of pleural effusion requiring additional drainage procedure (highest in 2011–2013 and in last four years 14.0%), recurrent nerve injuries (highest in 2008–2010 29.4% and lowest in 2017–2020 1.8%) and in 1-year survival rate (1987–1998 68.4% vs. 2017–2020 82.1%). No major changes in comorbidity, complication rate, anastomosis leaks, hospital stay or postoperative mortality were seen.

Conclusions

Esophageal cancer surgery has gone through major changes over three decades. Current guideline-based treatment has resulted with progressive improvement in mid- and long-term survival. However, despite modern protocol, no major improvement has occurred for example in major complications, anastomosis leak rates or hospital stay.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy alone for oesophageal cancer: population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and chemotherapy (nCT) are used as neoadjuvant treatment for oesophageal cancer, it is unknown whether one provides a survival advantage over the other, particularly with respect to histological subtype. This study aimed to compare prognosis after nCRT and nCT in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) or squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).

METHODS

Data from the National Cancer Database (2006-2015) were used to identify patients with OAC and OSCC. Propensity score matching and Cox multivariable analyses were used to account for treatment selection biases.

RESULTS

The study included 11 167 patients with OAC (nCRT 9972, 89.3 per cent; nCT 1195, 10.7 per cent) and 2367 with OSCC (nCRT 2155, 91.0 per cent; nCT 212, 9.0 per cent). In the matched OAC cohort, nCRT provided higher rates of complete pathological response (35.1 versus 21.0 per cent; P < 0.001) and margin-negative resections (90.1 versus 85.9 per cent; P < 0.001). However, patients who had nCRT had similar survival to those who received nCT (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95 per cent c.i. 0.95 to 1.14). Five-year survival rates for patients who had nCRT and nCT were 36 and 37 per cent respectively (P = 0.123). For OSCC, nCRT had higher rates of complete pathological response (50.9 versus 30.4 per cent; P < 0.001) and margin-negative resections (92.8 versus 82.4 per cent; P < 0.001). A statistically significant overall survival benefit was evident for nCRT (HR 0.78, 0.62 to 0.97). Five-year survival rates for patients who had nCRT and nCT were 45.0 and 38.0 per cent respectively (P = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Despite pathological benefits, including primary tumour response to nCRT, there was no prognostic benefit of nCRT compared with nCT for OAC suggesting that these two modalities are equally acceptable. However, for OSCC, nCRT followed by surgery appears to remain the optimal treatment approach.