Does Esophagectomy Provide a Survival Advantage to Patients Aged 80 Years or Older? Analyzing 5,066 Patients in the National Database of Hospital-Based Cancer Registries in Japan

Analysis of the incidence and mortality trends of esophageal cancer in cancer registry areas of China and Japan

This study aims to analyze the prevalence trend of esophageal cancer in Japan and China to provide suggestions for the prevention and treatment of esophageal cancer. The results showed that the incidence rate for the years 2010-2018 significantly decreased with an APC of 5.66%, and the mortality rate from 2010 to 2015 had an APC of -5.87% in China. However, the incidence rate of Japanese women showed an upward trend, with an APC of 4.09% from 2010 to 2019. The mortality rate of esophageal cancer in Japan showed a downward trend, with an APC of -2.96% from 2010 to 2021. From 2010 to 2018, Chinese esophageal squamous cell carcinoma accounted for the highest proportion, accounting for 85.96%, with the largest distribution in the middle, accounting for 47.25%. Patients are mostly diagnosed at stage III, and the relative survival rate from 2012 to 2015 was 30.3%. Japan also has the highest proportion of squamous cell carcinoma, and the lesions are also mostly located in the middle segment. While Japanese esophageal cancer patients are mostly diagnosed at stage I, and the relative survival rate was 41.5% in Japan from 2009 to 2011. The results of this article indicate that the current prevalence of esophageal cancer in China and Japan is generally declining, and the quality of life of patients is gradually improving, but effective screening and prevention strategies are still needed to reduce the burden of this disease.

Treatment strategies for elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery remains a standard of care for resectable esophageal cancer (EC), and definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is an alternative for unresectable diseases. However, it is controversial for the use of the two aggressive regimens in elderly patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched multiple databases for studies comparing overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) between dCRT and surgery (nCRT + surgery or surgery alone) or between dCRT and radiotherapy (RT) alone in elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years) until March 28, 2024. Statistical analysis was performed using random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fourty-five studies with 33,729 patients were included. dCRT significantly prolonged OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-0.70) and PFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.60-0.76) compared to RT alone for unresectable EC, and resulted in a worse OS compared to surgery for resectable cases (HR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.23-1.45). Similar results of OS were also observed when the multivariate-adjusted HRs were used as the measure of effect (dCRT vs. RT alone: HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.58-0.73; dCRT vs. surgery: HR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.28-1.74). Subgroup analyses according to age group (≥ 70, ≥ 75, or ≥ 80 years), study design, study region, histological type, radiation field, chemotherapy regimen revealed comparable results.

CONCLUSIONS

nCRT + surgery is likely a preferred strategy for elderly patients with good physiological conditions; and dCRT is a better alternative for unresectable cases. Advanced age alone does not appear to be a key predictor for the tolerability of the two aggressive treatments.

Survival outcome of esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in patients >75 years of age

BACKGROUND

The gold standard for resectable, locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is surgery-based treatment; however, it is unclear whether esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy is suitable for older patients. This retrospective study aimed to identify the treatment outcomes of surgery-based therapy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) as an initial treatment for older patients with resectable, locally advanced ESCC.

METHODS

Data from 434 patients who received radical treatment for resectable, locally advanced ESCC were collected from January 2011 to December 2020. Of the patients >75 years of age, 49 underwent radical esophagectomy and 26 received dCRT. Survival was compared between the surgery and dCRT groups.

RESULTS

The mean ages of the surgery and chemoradiotherapy groups were 77.3 and 78.8 years, respectively. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the two groups were not statistically significant (3-year OS: surgery 66.2%, dCRT 55.7%, p = 0.236). Multivariate analysis for OS showed a hazard ratio of 1.229 for dCRT versus surgery (90% confidence interval 0.681-2.217). OS did not differ between the groups in any of the performance statuses. For patients who were able to receive chemotherapy using fluorouracil and cisplatin, OS tended to be better in the surgery group, but the difference was not statistically significant (3-year OS: surgery 68.1%, dCRT 51.8%, p = 0.117).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no clear difference in survival outcome between surgery-based therapy and dCRT as an initial treatment for esophageal cancer in older patients. Either treatment may be an option for older patients.

Esophagectomy in the Older Adult: A Systematic Review

Current management of esophageal carcinoma (EC) involves combining different modalities, offering the opportunity of personalized strategies. This is particularly enticing in the geriatric population, where tailoring treatment modalities remains key to achieve good outcomes in terms of both quality of life and survival. Primary outcomes of our review included (1) evidence on short-term outcomes following esophagectomy, and (2) evidence on long-term outcomes following esophagectomy. Secondary review questions compared outcomes of (1) neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery for locally advanced esophageal carcinoma, (2) endoscopic submucosal dissection versus esophagectomy for early esophageal carcinoma, and (3) definitive radiation with or without chemotherapy versus surgery. Twenty-six articles were included in the review for the main review questions. Our systematic review underscores the need for comprehensive geriatric evaluations to guide decision-making. Despite concerns about perioperative risks, well-selected older patients can derive survival benefits from surgical intervention.

Surgical vs nonsurgical treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in patients older than 70 years: a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

With the rising life expectancy and an aging population, it has become increasingly important to investigate treatments suitable for older adult patients with esophageal cancer. This study investigated whether older adult patients who underwent esophagectomy had better clinical outcomes than those who were nonsurgically treated.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) who were 70 years or older and underwent esophagectomy, radiotherapy (RT), and/or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) between January 2018 and December 2019. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the surgery group (S group) and the nonsurgery group (NS group). We then compared the clinical outcomes of the 2 groups.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up duration of 36.6 months, the S group showed better overall survival (OS). The 3-year OS was 59% in the S group and 27% in the NS group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.397; 95% CI, 0.278-0.549; P < .0001). In the S group, the median progression-free survival was 38.3 months (95% CI, 30.6-46.1) compared with 12.3 months in the NS group (HR, 0.511; 95% CI, 0.376-0.695; P < .0001). In addition, the number of adverse events in the NS group was higher than that in the S group (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Overall, patients with ESCC at the age of ≥70 years who underwent esophagectomy had significantly better clinical outcomes than those who underwent nonsurgical treatment with RT and/or CRT.

Esophageal cancer in octogenarians: Should esophagectomy be done?

INTRODUCTION

Esophagectomy is the treatment of choice for esophageal cancer. In octogenarians data is conflicting. We evaluated postoperative outcomes and long-term survival of octogenarians and their younger counterparts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database including consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at a large referral, academic center between 2012 and 2021. Subgroups were designed according to age (<70, 70-79, and ≥ 80).

RESULTS

A total of 359 patients underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, 223 (62%) aged <70, 107 (30%) aged 70-79 and 29 (8%) aged ≥80. Octogenarians had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] scores (p = 0.001), and fewer received neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.04). Octogenarians experienced more major complications (P < 0.001) with significantly higher 30-day mortality rate (P = 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, major complications were associated with higher risk of being discharged to a rehabilitation center (odds ratio [OR] 14.839, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.921-44.747, p < 0.001) while age was not. Overall survival was reduced in octogenarians, with a 50th percentile survival of 10 months compared to 32 and 26 months in patients age < 70 and 70-79, respectively (p = 0.014). In a multivariable analysis, age ≥ 80 (hazard ratio [HR] 4.478 95% CI 2.151-9.322, p < 0.001), cancer stage (HR 1.545, 95% CI 1.095-2.179, p = 0.013), and postoperative major complications (HR 2.705 95% CI 1.913-3.823, p < 0.001) were independently associated with reduced survival.

DISCUSSION

Our study showed that octogenarians had significantly higher postoperative major complications compared to younger age groups. Overall survival was significantly reduced in these patients, probably due to an increased rate of perioperative mortality. Better patient selection and preparation may improve postoperative outcomes and increase long-term survival.

Development and Validation of a Nomogram Model for the Risk of Cardiac Death in Patients Treated with Chemotherapy for Esophageal Cancer

The primary cause of mortality in esophageal cancer survivors is cardiac death. Early identification of cardiac mortality risk during chemotherapy for esophageal cancer is crucial for improving the prognosis. We developed and validated a nomogram model to identify patients with high cardiac mortality risk after chemotherapy for esophageal cancer for early screening and clinical decision-making. We randomly allocated 37,994 patients with chemotherapy-treated esophageal cancer into two groups using a 7:3 split ratio: model training (n = 26,598) and validation (n = 11,396). 5- and 10-year survival rates were used as endpoints for model training and validation. Decision curve analysis and the consistency index (C-index) were used to evaluate the model's net clinical advantage. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curves and computing the area under the curve (AUC). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis based on the prognostic index was performed. Patient risk was stratified according to the death probability. Age, surgery, sex, and year were most closely related to cardiac death and used to plot the nomograms. The C-index for the training and validation datasets were 0.669 and 0.698, respectively, indicating the nomogram's net clinical advantage in predicting cardiac death risk at 5 and 10 years. The 5- and 10-year AUCs were 0.753 and 0.772 for the training dataset and 0.778 and 0.789 for the validation dataset, respectively. The accuracy of the model in predicting cardiac death risk was moderate. This nomogram can identify patients at risk of cardiac death after chemotherapy for esophageal cancer at an early stage.

Survival Impacts of Impaired Lung Functions and Comorbidities on Elderly Esophageal Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Preoperative physiological assessments are crucial for optimizing clinical outcomes, especially those of elderly esophageal cancer (EC) patients who are generally frail and at the high risk of mortality.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for EC between 2004 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized into elderly (>70 years) or non-elderly (≤70 years) groups. Various physiological parameters including the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), immunonutritional parameters and pulmonary functions were studied. Pulmonary functions included %vital capacity (VC) and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1.0) and FEV1.0%. The thresholds were set as the lowest quartile (100% for %VC and 2L for FEV1.0) in this cohort. Multivariate Cox hazards models were applied to determine independent predictors of non-EC-related deaths.

RESULTS

In total, 824 patients were included (elderly; n = 306, non-elderly; n = 518). Elderly patients had a significantly lower 5-year OS rate than non-elderly patients (53.3% vs. 57.2%, P = 0.03), mainly due to increased risk of death from non-EC related causes. In the elderly group, multivariate Cox hazards analysis identified 3 independent predictors of non-EC-related deaths; high CCI (HR 1.98, P=0.006), low %VC (HR 2.01, P = 0.004) and low FEV1.0 (HR 1.6, P=0.048). Elderly patients without risk factors had a significantly better 5-year OS rate (63.5%) than those with 1 (50.0%) or 2-3 (36.3%) risk factors (P <0.01). Deaths due to pulmonary disease rose significantly as the number of risk factors increased (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of comorbidities and pulmonary function impairments are useful for predicting long-term outcomes, especially non-EC-related deaths, in elderly EC patients.

Survival and perioperative outcomes of octo- and nonagenarians with resectable esophageal carcinoma

The outcomes of different treatment modalities for patients aged 80 and above with locally advanced and resectable esophageal carcinoma are not well described. The aim of this study was to explore survival and perioperative outcomes among this specific group of patients. A retrospective, cohort analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained esophageal cancer database from the McGill regional upper gastroinestinal cancer network. Between 2010 and 2020, all patients ≥80 years with cT2-4a, Nany, M0 esophageal carcinoma were identified and stratified according to the treatment modality: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) or chemoradiotherapy (nCRT); definitive CRT (dCRT); upfront surgery; palliative CT/RT; or best supportive care (BSC). Of the 162 patients identified, 79 were included in this study. The median age was 83 years (80-97), most were cT3 (73%), cN- (56%), and had adenocarcinoma (62%). Treatment included: nCT/nCRT (16/79, 20%); surgery alone (19/79, 24%); dCRT (12/29, 15%); palliative RT/CT (27/79, 34%); and BSC (5/79, 6%). Neoadjuvant treatment was completed in 10/16 (63%). Of the 35/79 who underwent surgery, major complications occurred in 13/35 (37%) and 90-day mortality in 3/35 (9%). Overall survival (OS) for the cohort at 1- and 3-years was 58% and 19%. Among patients treated with nCT/nCRT, this was 94% and 46% respectively. Curative intent treatment (nCT/nCRT/upfront surgery/dCRT) had significantly increased 1- and 3- year OS compared with non-curative treatment (76%/31% vs. 34%/3.3%). Multimodal standard of care treatment is feasible and safe in select octo/nonagenarians, and may be associated with improved OS. Age alone should not bias against treatment with curative intent.

Management of elderly patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer

This review focuses on the treatment about elderly esophageal cancer to clarify the current situation regarding our clinical question. Although there are several reviews about elderly esophageal cancer treatment, there are fundamental differences between Japan and the rest of the world. Two main differences are raised: histological differences and treatment strategies for resectable patients. We overview each status according to following clinical questions. First, there are no established evaluation criteria for frail. Second, selection criteria for surgery or non-surgery are not established. Third, few specific treatments for elderly patients (EPs) are investigated. In conclusion, there are many reports about treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma for EPs, although treatment strategy is still controversial. We have to consider well-designed prospective trial to confirm specific treatment strategy according to each stage.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy has comparable survival outcomes to esophagectomy in patients with clinical T1N0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: real-world data

BACKGROUND

Recently, the JCOG0502 has shown a comparable efficacy of chemoradiotherapy and esophagectomy in patients with clinical T1N0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, few studies have compared the clinical outcomes of these treatments in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients (including elderly patients) based on real-world data.

METHODS

This retrospective study determined real-world outcomes in patients who underwent chemoradiotherapy or esophagectomy, including those with clinical T1N0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, between 2009 and 2017 at the National Cancer Center Hospital East.

RESULTS

Among a total of 156 patients, 120 and 36 patients underwent esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy, respectively; 138, 12 and 6 patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0, 1, and 2, respectively; and 33 and 123 patients had clinical tumor depth MM-SM1 and SM2-SM3, respectively. In a median follow-up of 72 months, 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival were respectively 77.0% and 81.5% in the esophagectomy group and 74.4% and 82.6% in the chemoradiotherapy group (P = 0.48 and, P = 0.89). Moreover, no treatment-related death was detected in both groups. In elderly patients (75 years or older), 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy groups (5-year progression-free survival: 72.3% vs. 81.8%, P = 0.38; 5-year overall survival: 76.9% vs. 81.8%, P = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study confirms the results of a previous clinical trial, and the present findings support chemoradiotherapy as one of the standard treatment options in patients of all ages with clinical T1N0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Distinguishing optimal esophagectomy candidates in elderly patients: A nomogram based on propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

A survival benefit from esophagectomy was observed in elderly patients. But it's unclear how to identify specific patients who can benefit. Thus, we aimed to establish a predictive model to identify optimal candidates for esophagectomy.

METHODS

Patients (age ≥75 years) with esophageal cancer in Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database were used to establish the predictive model. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to eliminate the imbalance between esophagectomy group and non-esophagectomy group. We hypothesized that elderly patients could benefit from esophagectomy with longer cancer specific survival (CSS) time than those who did not receive esophagectomy. Patients received surgery were divided into beneficial group and non-beneficial group according to the median CSS time of non-esophagectomy group. Prognostic factors affecting patients' long-term survival were identified. Among esophagectomy group, a logistic regression model based on these factors was established to build a nomogram.

RESULTS

A total of 7,025 eligible patients were extracted from the SEER database, with 831 patients received esophagectomy. Surgery was independently associated with better long-term survival (median CSS time in the matched population: 35 vs. 8 months, p < 0.001). As a result, 361 (68.6%) patients were divided into beneficial group (CSS >8 months). Factors including age, tumor site, histology, differentiation grade, TNM stage, and tumor size were used to formulate the nomogram, which was named as esophagectomy candidates screening score (ECSS). The validation from two aspects showed the model a useful and stable one.

CONCLUSION

A predictive model was established to distinguish optimal candidates for esophagectomy among elderly patients with EC.

Differences in treatment and survival between elderly patients with thoracic esophageal cancer in metropolitan areas and other areas

To address the major issue of regional disparity in the treatment for elderly cancer patients in an aging society, we compared the treatment strategies used for elderly patients with thoracic esophageal cancer and their survival outcomes in metropolitan areas and other regions. Using the national database of hospital‐based cancer registries in 2008‐2011, patients aged 75 years or older who had been diagnosed with thoracic esophageal cancer were enrolled. We divided the patients into two groups: those treated in metropolitan areas (Tokyo, Kanagawa, Osaka, Aichi, Saitama, and Chiba prefectures) with populations of 6 million or more and those treated in other areas (the other 41 prefectures). Compared were patient backgrounds, treatment strategies, and survival curves at each cancer stage. In total, 1236 (24%) patients from metropolitan areas and 3830 (76%) patients from nonmetropolitan areas were enrolled. Patients in metropolitan areas were treated at more advanced stages. There was also a difference in treatment strategy. The 3‐year survival rate among cStage I patients was better in metropolitan areas (71.6% vs. 63.7%), and this finding mainly reflected the survival difference between patients treated with radiotherapy alone. For cStage II‐IV patients, there were no differences. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis including interaction terms between treatment areas, cStage, and the first‐line treatments revealed that treatments in the metropolitan areas were significantly associated with better survival among patients treated with radiotherapy alone for cStage I cancer. Treatment strategies for elderly patients with thoracic esophageal cancer and its survival outcomes differed between metropolitan areas and other regions.