Comparison between endoscopic and surgical resection of mucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus at two high-volume centers. Ann Surg. 2011;254:67-72. [PMID: 21532466 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e31821d4bf6]

Towards personalized management of early esophageal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to discuss recent advancements in the endoscopic management of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (T1 EAC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with high-risk EAC (defined by the presence of deep submucosal invasion, and/or lymphovascular invasion, and/or poor differentiation) have a higher risk of lymph node metastases than those with low-risk EAC. However, more recent, endoscopically-focused studies report a lower risk of lymph node metastases and distant metastases for high-risk EAC than previously assumed. Instead of referring all high-risk EAC patients for esophagectomy after a radical endoscopic resection, an alternative approach involving regular upper endoscopy with endoscopic ultrasound may allow for detection of intra-luminal recurrence and lymph node metastases at an early and potentially curable stage.

SUMMARY

Endoscopic resection of mucosal and submucosal EAC might prove to be safe and curative for selected cases in the future, when followed by a strict follow-up protocol. Despite the promising results of preliminary studies, there is an ongoing need for personalized strategies and new risk stratification methods to decide on the best management for individual patients with high-risk T1 EAC.

Expert assessment of infiltration depth and recommendation of endoscopic resection technique in early Barrett cancer

BACKGROUND

Early Barrett cancer can be curatively treated by endoscopic resection. The choice of the resection technique, however-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or submucosal dissection (ESD)-largely depends on the assumed infiltration depth as judged by the endoscopist. However, the accuracy of endoscopic diagnosis of the degree of cancer infiltration is not known.

METHODS

Three to four high-quality images (both in overview and close-up) from 202 of early Barrett esophagus cancer cases (82% men, mean age 66.9 years) were selected from our endoscopy database (73.3% stage T1a and 26.7% in stage T1b). Images were shown to 9 Barrett esophagus experts, with patients' clinical data (age, sex, Barrett esophagus length) and biopsy results. The experts were asked to predict infiltration depth (T1b vs. T1a), and to suggest the appropriate endoscopic resection technique (EMR or ESD, or surgery). Interobserver variability (kappa values) was also determined for these parameters.

RESULTS

Overall positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) to diagnose T1b versus T1a infiltration were 40.7% (95% CI: 36.7, 44.8) and 79.8% (95% CI: 77.5, 81.9), respectively; kappa value was 0.41. Paris classification (kappa 0.51) and suggested treatment also varied between experts. In a post hoc analysis, only the correlation between lesions classified as invisible or flat according to the Paris classification (IIB; 25% of all cases) and the suggested resection technique was better: In this subgroup, EMR was recommended in >80% of cases, with a high complete (basal R0) resection rate (mean of 88.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Precise endoscopic distinction between mucosal and submucosal involvement of Barrett esophagus cancer by experts as a basis for choosing the resection technique has limited predictive values and high interobserver variability. It seems that mainly invisible/flat lesions may result in good resection outcomes when treated by EMR, but this stratification strategy has to be assessed in further studies.

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Endoscopic Eradication Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on monitoring and management of Barrett's oesophagus and stage I oesophageal adenocarcinoma

Barrett's oesophagus is the only known precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, a cancer with very poor prognosis. The main risk factors for Barrett's oesophagus are a history of gastro-oesophageal acid reflux symptoms and obesity. Men, smokers and those with a family history are also at increased risk. Progression from Barrett's oesophagus to cancer occurs via an intermediate stage, known as dysplasia. However, dysplasia and early cancer usually develop without any clinical signs, often in individuals whose symptoms are well controlled by acid suppressant medications; therefore, endoscopic surveillance is recommended to allow for early diagnosis and timely clinical intervention. Individuals with Barrett's oesophagus need to be fully informed about the implications of this diagnosis and the benefits and risks of monitoring strategies. Pharmacological treatments are recommended for control of symptoms, but not for chemoprevention. Dysplasia and stage 1 oesophageal adenocarcinoma have excellent prognoses, since they can be cured with endoscopic or surgical therapies. Endoscopic resection is the most accurate staging technique for early Barrett's-related oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic ablation is effective and indicated to eradicate Barrett's oesophagus in patients with dysplasia. Future research should focus on improved accuracy for dysplasia detection via new technologies and providing more robust evidence to support pathways for follow-up and treatment.

Premature mortality for patients after completely resected early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or stomach

OBJECTIVE

To establish the life expectancy burden of esophago-gastric cancer by analyzing years of life lost (YLL) for a Western patient population after treatment of early esophageal (EAC) or early gastric (GAC) adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND

For patients with early EAC or GAC, the short-term prognosis after surgical resection is very good. Little data is available regarding long-term prognosis when compared to the general population.

METHODS

Two hundred and fourteen patients with pT1 EAC (n = 112) or GAC (n = 102) were included in the study. Patients with EAC underwent transthoracic en-bloc esophagectomy; those with GAC had total or subtotal gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy. Surviving patients had a median follow-up of approximately 14 years. YLL was calculated using average life expectancy data from Germany.

RESULTS

Patients with EAC were younger (median age 61 years) than those with GAC (66 years) (p = 0.031). The male:female ratio was 10:1 for EAC and 3:2 for GAC (p < 0.001). Multivariate survival analysis showed the age of the patients ≥60 years and the existence of lymph node metastasis was associated with poor prognosis. The median YLL for all patients who died over follow-up was 8.0 years. For patients under 60 years, it was approximately 20 years, and for older patients, approximately 5 years (p < 0.001) without difference in tumor stage between these age cohorts. YLL did not differ for GAC vs. EAC.

CONCLUSION

After surgical resection, the prognostic burden as measured by YLL is relevant for all patients with early esophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas and especially for younger patients. Reasons for YLL need further studies.

Vertical tumor-positive resection margins and the risk of residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection of Barrett's neoplasia: a nationwide cohort with pathology reassessment

BACKGROUND

 This study evaluated the proportion of patients with residual neoplasia after endoscopic resection (ER) for Barrett's neoplasia with confirmed tumor-positive vertical resection margin (R1v).

METHODS

 This retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing ER for Barrett's neoplasia with histologically documented R1v since 2008 in the Dutch Barrett Expert Centers. We defined R1v as cancer cells touching vertical resection margins and Rx as nonassessable margins. Reassessment of R1v specimens was performed by experienced pathologists until consensus was reached regarding vertical margins.

RESULTS

 101/110 included patients had macroscopically complete resections (17 T1a, 84 T1b), and 99/101 (98%) ER specimens were histologically reassessed, with R1v confirmed in 74 patients (75%), Rx in 16%, and R0 in 9%. Presence/absence of residual neoplasia could be assessed in 66/74 patients during endoscopic reassessment (52) and/or in the surgical resection specimen (14), and 33/66 (50%) had residual neoplasia. Residual neoplasia detected during endoscopy was always endoscopically visible and biopsies from a normal-appearing ER scar did not detect additional neoplasia. Of 25 patients who underwent endoscopic follow-up (median 37 months [interquartile range 12-50]), 4 developed local recurrence (16.0%), all detected as visible abnormalities.

CONCLUSIONS

 After ER with R1v, 50% of patients had no residual neoplasia. Histological evaluation of ER margins appears challenging, as in this study 75% of documented R1v cases were confirmed during reassessment. Endoscopic reassessment 8-12 weeks after ER seems to accurately detect residual neoplasia and can help to determine the most appropriate strategy for patients with R1v.

Updated German guideline on diagnosis and treatment of squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus

Diagnosis and therapy of esophageal carcinoma is challenging and requires a multidisciplinary approach. The purpose of the updated German guideline "Diagnosis and Treatment of Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus-version 3.1" is to provide practical and evidence-based advice for the management of patients with esophageal cancer. Recommendations were developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel based on an extensive and systematic evaluation of the published medical literature and the application of well-established methodologies (e.g. Oxford evidence grading scheme, grading of recommendations). Accurate diagnostic evaluation of the primary tumor as well as lymph node and distant metastases is required in order to guide patients to a stage-appropriate therapy after the initial diagnosis of esophageal cancer. In high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia or mucosal carcinoma endoscopic resection shall be performed. Whether endoscopic resection is the definitive therapeutic measure depends on the histopathological evaluation of the resection specimen. Esophagectomy should be performed minimally invasive or in combination with open procedures (hybrid technique). Because the prognosis in locally advanced esophageal carcinoma is poor with surgery alone, multimodality therapy is recommended. In locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction, perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative radiochemotherapy should be administered. In locally advanced squamous cell carcinomas of the esophagus, preoperative radiochemotherapy followed by complete resection or definitive radiochemotherapy without surgery should be performed. In the case of residual tumor in the resection specimen after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and R0 resection of squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma, adjuvant immunotherapy with nivolumab should be given. Systemic palliative treatment options (chemotherapy, chemotherapy plus immunotherapy, immunotherapy alone) in unresectable or metastastic esophageal cancer depend on histology and are stratified according to PD-L1 and/or Her2 expression.

The association between histological subtypes and lymph node metastasis and prognosis in early esophageal cancer: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

There is still a lack of high-level clinical evidence and uniform conclusions on whether there are differences in lymph node metastasis (LNM) and prognosis between early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

Patients with surgically resected, histologically diagnosed, pT1 EAC or ESCC in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries database from 2004 to 2015 were included. Multivariable logistic regression, Cox regression, multivariate competing risk model, and propensity score matching were used to analyze association the histology and LNM or prognosis.

RESULTS

A total of 570 early esophageal cancer patients were included. The LNM rates were 13.8% and 15.1% for EAC and ESCC ( P  = 0.757), respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant association between histological type and LNM (odds ratio [OR], 1.209; 95% CI, 0.538-2.715; P  = 0.646). Moreover, the prognosis of early EAC and ESCC was shown to be comparable in both multivariate Cox regression (hazard ratio [HR], 1.483; 95% CI, 0.699-3.150; P  = 0.305) and the multivariate competing risk model (subdistribution HR, 1.451; 95% CI, 0.628-3.354; P  = 0.383). After propensity score matching, there were no significant differences between early EAC and ESCC in terms of LNM (10.6% vs.18.2%, P  = 0.215), 5-year CSS (89.8% [95% CI, 81.0%-98.6%] vs. 79.1% [95% CI, 67.9%-90.3%], P  = 0.102) and 5-year cumulative incidence of CSS (10.2% [95% CI, 1.4%-19.0%] vs. 79.1% [95% CI, 9.7%-32.1%], P  = 0.124).

CONCLUSION

The risk of LNM and prognosis of early ESCC and EAC are comparable, so the treatment choice for early esophageal cancer does not depend on the histologic type.

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.

Safety and Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Management of Gastric Tube Cancers After Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review

Esophagectomy is the proposed standard of care for resectable primary esophageal cancers and recurrent lesions in the reconstructed gastric tube (GT); however, it carries significant morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has established its role in the management of primary esophageal cancers with growing evidence of its safety in resecting recurrent primary lesions in GT. Our study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ESD in the management of recurrent, localized primary esophageal cancers in GT. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Scopus, and clinical trial registries from inception to March 2023 for articles evaluating the safety and efficacy of ESD in the management of recurrent cancerous lesions in GT. Our primary outcome was the en bloc resection rate. Secondary outcomes were curative resection rate, complete resection rate, intra-procedural complication rate, post-procedure complication rate, and five-year survival rate. Seven studies with a total of 165 patients undergoing 192 ESDs were included in the review. The pooled en bloc resection rate was 92.5% (95% CI: 87.7-95.6), which was reported in all seven studies. Pooled complete resection rate was 78.9% (95% CI: 64.5-88.5) per three studies, pooled curative resection rate was 73.9% (95% CI: 63.5-82.2) per four studies, and pooled intra-procedural complication rate was 10.2% (95% CI: 1.5-46.3), which was reported in four studies. Only three studies reported a five-year survival rate that was 65.5% (95% CI: 56.0-73.9). ESD is safe and efficacious in the management of GT cancer after esophagectomy.

Clinical models to predict lymph nodes metastasis and distant metastasis in newly diagnosed early esophageal cancer patients: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

Patients with early esophageal cancer (EC) receive individualized therapy based on their lymph node metastasis (LNM) and distant metastasis (DM) status; however, deficiencies in current clinical staging techniques and the issue of cost-effectiveness mean LNM and DM often go undetected preoperatively. We aimed to develop three clinical models to predict the likelihood of LNM, DM, and prognosis in patients with early EC.

METHOD

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for T1 EC patients from 2004 to 2015. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to recognize the risk factors of LNM and DM, predict overall survival (OS), and develop relevant nomograms. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC)/concordance index and calibration curves were used to evaluate the discrimination and accuracy of the three nomograms. Decision curve analyses (DCAs), clinical impact curves, and subgroups based on model scores were used to determine clinical practicability.

RESULTS

The area under the curve of the LNM and DM nomograms were 0.668 and 0.807, respectively. The corresponding C-index of OS nomogram was 0.752. Calibration curves and DCA showed an effective predictive accuracy and clinical applicability. In patients with T1N0M0 EC, surgery alone (p < 0.01) proved a survival advantage. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy indicated a better prognosis in the subgroup analysis for T1 EC patients with LNM or DM.

CONCLUSIONS

We created three nomograms to predict the likelihood of LNM, DM, and OS probability in patients with early EC using a generalizable dataset. These useful visual tools could help clinical physicians deliver appropriate perioperative care.

Artificial intelligence-assisted staging in Barrett's carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used to detect neoplasia and interpret endoscopic images. The T stage of Barrett's carcinoma is a major criterion for subsequent treatment decisions. Although endoscopic ultrasound is still the standard for preoperative staging, its value is debatable. Novel tools are required to assist with staging, to optimize results. This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of T stage of Barrett's carcinoma by an AI system based on endoscopic images.

METHODS

1020 images (minimum one per patient, maximum three) from 577 patients with Barrett's adenocarcinoma were used for training and internal validation of a convolutional neural network. In all, 821 images were selected to train the model and 199 images were used for validation.

RESULTS

AI recognized Barrett's mucosa without neoplasia with an accuracy of 85 % (95 %CI 82.7-87.1). Mucosal cancer was identified with a sensitivity of 72 % (95 %CI 67.5-76.4), specificity of 64 % (95 %CI 60.0-68.4), and accuracy of 68 % (95 %CI 64.6-70.7). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for early Barrett's neoplasia < T1b sm2 were 57 % (95 %CI 51.8-61.0), 77 % (95 %CI 72.3-80.2), and 67 % (95 %CI 63.4-69.5), respectively. More advanced stages (T3/T4) were diagnosed correctly with a sensitivity of 71 % (95 %CI 65.1-76.7) and specificity of 73 % (95 %CI 69.7-76.5). The overall accuracy was 73 % (95 %CI 69.6-75.5).

CONCLUSIONS

The AI system identified esophageal cancer with high accuracy, suggesting its potential to assist endoscopists in clinical decision making.

Management of Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus and Early Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

While patients with Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia may benefit from endoscopic surveillance, those with low-grade dysplasia may be managed with either endoscopic surveillance or endoscopic eradication. Patients with Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and/or intramucosal adenocarcinoma will generally require endoscopic eradication therapy. The management of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma is predominantly endoscopic, with multiple effective methods available for the resection of raised neoplasia and ablation of flat neoplasia. High-dose proton-pump inhibitor therapy is advised during the treatment of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. After the endoscopic eradication of Barrett's esophagus and associated neoplasia, surveillance is required for the diagnosis and retreatment of recurrence or progression.

Application of endoscopic ultrasonography for detecting esophageal lesions based on convolutional neural network

BACKGROUND

A convolutional neural network (CNN) is a deep learning algorithm based on the principle of human brain visual cortex processing and image recognition.

AIM

To automatically identify the invasion depth and origin of esophageal lesions based on a CNN.

METHODS

A total of 1670 white-light images were used to train and validate the CNN system. The method proposed in this paper included the following two parts: (1) Location module, an object detection network, locating the classified main image feature regions of the image for subsequent classification tasks; and (2) Classification module, a traditional classification CNN, classifying the images cut out by the object detection network.

RESULTS

The CNN system proposed in this study achieved an overall accuracy of 82.49%, sensitivity of 80.23%, and specificity of 90.56%. In this study, after follow-up pathology, 726 patients were compared for endoscopic pathology. The misdiagnosis rate of endoscopic diagnosis in the lesion invasion range was approximately 9.5%; 41 patients showed no lesion invasion to the muscularis propria, but 36 of them pathologically showed invasion to the superficial muscularis propria. The patients with invasion of the tunica adventitia were all treated by surgery with an accuracy rate of 100%. For the examination of submucosal lesions, the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) was approximately 99.3%. Results of this study showed that EUS had a high accuracy rate for the origin of submucosal lesions, whereas the misdiagnosis rate was slightly high in the evaluation of the invasion scope of lesions. Misdiagnosis could be due to different operating and diagnostic levels of endoscopists, unclear ultrasound probes, and unclear lesions.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to recognize esophageal EUS images through deep learning, which can automatically identify the invasion depth and lesion origin of submucosal tumors and classify such tumors, thereby achieving good accuracy. In future studies, this method can provide guidance and help to clinical endoscopists.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal lesions: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

ESGE recommends that the evaluation of superficial gastrointestinal (GI) lesions should be made by an experienced endoscopist, using high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based).ESGE does not recommend routine performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or positron emission tomography (PET)-CT prior to endoscopic resection.ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the treatment of choice for most superficial esophageal squamous cell and superficial gastric lesions.For Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated lesions, ESGE suggests the use of ESD for lesions suspicious of submucosal invasion (Paris type 0-Is, 0-IIc), for malignant lesions > 20 mm, and for lesions in scarred/fibrotic areas.ESGE does not recommend routine use of ESD for duodenal or small-bowel lesions.ESGE suggests that ESD should be considered for en bloc resection of colorectal (but particularly rectal) lesions with suspicion of limited submucosal invasion (demarcated depressed area with irregular surface pattern or a large protruding or bulky component, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm) or for lesions that otherwise cannot be completely removed by snare-based techniques.ESGE recommends that an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with histology no more advanced than intramucosal cancer (no more than m2 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma), well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion or ulceration, should be considered a very low risk (curative) resection, and no further staging procedure or treatment is generally recommended.ESGE recommends that the following should be considered to be a low risk (curative) resection and no further treatment is generally recommended: an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with superficial submucosal invasion (sm1), that is well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion, of size ≤ 20 mm for an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or ≤ 30 mm for a stomach lesion or of any size for a BE-related or colorectal lesion, and with no lymphovascular invasion, and no budding grade 2 or 3 for colorectal lesions.ESGE recommends that, after an endoscopically complete resection, if there is a positive horizontal margin or if resection is piecemeal, but there is no submucosal invasion and no other high risk criteria are met, this should be considered a local-risk resection and endoscopic surveillance or re-treatment is recommended rather than surgery or other additional treatment.ESGE recommends that when there is a diagnosis of lymphovascular invasion, or deeper infiltration than sm1, or positive vertical margins, or undifferentiated tumor, or, for colorectal lesions, budding grade 2 or 3, this should be considered a high risk (noncurative) resection, and complete staging and strong consideration for additional treatments should be considered on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.ESGE recommends scheduled endoscopic surveillance with high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based) with biopsies of only the suspicious areas after a curative ESD.

Comparison of Long-Term Survival Between cT1N0 Stage Esophageal Cancer Patients Receiving Endoscopic Dissection and Esophagectomy: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Endoscopic dissection (ED) shows relatively high clinical value in early esophageal cancer (cT1N0) such as lower incidence of postoperative complications and hospitalization costs and enhanced recovery. However, whether ED still has certain advantages over esophagectomy in terms of long-term survival remains unclear.

Purpose

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term outcomes of ED and surgery in the treatment of cT1N0 esophageal cancer.

Methods

Several electronic databases including the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to April 7, 2022 for studies which compared the overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) of cT1N0 esophageal cancer patients receiving the ED or esophagectomy. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined and all statistical analysis was conducted through STATA 15.0 software.

Results

A total of 12 studies involving 3,732 patients were enrolled. No significant difference in the OS between ED and surgery groups was observed (HR = 0.78, 95% CI, 0.59–1.04, p = 0.089). However, the DSS of the ED group was significantly longer than that of the surgery group (HR = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.39–0.82, p = 0.003).

Conclusion

In overall, the current evidence manifested that the long-term survival of cT1N0 esophageal cancer patients undergoing ED was not worse than that of patients undergoing esophagectomy. ED may be considered as the primary treatment for cT1N0 esophageal carcinoma patients.

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.

Transition from esophagectomy to endoscopic therapy for early esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

To assess the outcomes of patients with early esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia comparing esophagectomy, the historical treatment of choice, to endoscopic eradication therapy (EET).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with early esophageal cancer/high-grade dysplasia, treated between 2000 and 2018 at a tertiary center. Primary outcomes were all-cause and disease-specific mortality assessed by multivariable Cox regression and a propensity score matching sub analysis, providing hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for age, tumor grade (G1/2 vs. G3), tumor stage, and lymphovascular invasion. Secondary outcomes included complications, hospital stay, and overall costs.

RESULTS

Among 269 patients, 133 underwent esophagectomy and 136 received EET. Adjusted survival analysis showed no difference between groups regarding all-cause mortality (HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.73, 4.72) and disease-specific mortality (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.26, 4.65). In-hospital and 30-day mortality was 0% in both groups. The surgical group had a significantly higher rate of complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3 26.3% vs. endoscopic therapy 0.74%), longer in-patient stay (median 14 vs. 0 days endoscopic therapy) and higher hospital costs(£16 360 vs. £8786 per patient).

CONCLUSION

This series of patients treated during a transition period from surgery to EET, demonstrates a primary endoscopic approach does not compromise oncological outcomes with the benefit of fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower costs compared to surgery. It should be available as the gold standard treatment for patients with early esophageal cancer. Those with adverse prognostic features may still benefit from esophagectomy.

Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for early esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for early-stage esophageal cancer but is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Thus, endoscopic resection is increasingly used as an alternative option. However, the literature is inconsistent regarding the efficacy of these treatments. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of these two treatments.

Methods

A systematic electronic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies comparing endoscopic resection and surgery for early-stage esophageal cancer. The overall survival, tumor recurrence, major adverse events, procedure-related mortality, and R0 resection rates were investigated. Forest plots were constructed based on the random-effects model.

Results

We found 15 studies involving 2,467 and 2,264 patients who underwent endoscopic resection and surgery, respectively. The meta-analysis showed that patients undergoing endoscopic resection had significantly fewer major adverse events (relative risk, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.33–0.64) and a lower procedure-related mortality rate (relative risk, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.10–0.73) than those undergoing surgery. The number of postprocedural stricture events did not significantly differ between the two treatments (relative risk, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.53–1.49). Endoscopic resection was associated with higher recurrence rates (relative risk, 1.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.99–2.89) and lower R0 resection rates (relative risk, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.86–0.98) than surgery. There may be some advantage conferred by esophagectomy in the long-term survival outcomes (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–1.43).

Discussion

Endoscopic resection is a minimally invasive and safe treatment for early-stage esophageal cancer. However, esophagectomy may be associated with better long-term survival.

Gastrointestinal and Pancratohepatobiliary Cancers: A Comprehensive Review on Epidemiology and Risk Factors Worldwide

A significant number of cancer cases are afflicted by gastrointestinal cancers annually. Lifestyle and nutrition have a huge effect on gastrointestinal function, and unhealthy habits have become quite widespread in recent decades, culminating in the rapid growth of gastrointestinal cancers. The most prevalent cancers are lip and mouth cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, liver and bile duct cancer, pancreatic cancer, and colorectal cancer. Risk factors such as red meat consumption, alcohol consumption, tea, rice, viruses such as Helicobacter pylori and Ebstein Bar Virus (EBV), along with reduced physical activity, predispose the gastrointestinal tract to damage and cause cancer. According to the rapid increase of cancer incidence and late diagnosis of gastrointestinal malignancies, further epidemiological researches remain necessary in order to make appropriate population-based preventive policies. In this study, we reviewed clinical symptoms, risk factors, preventative measures, as well as incidence and mortality rates of gastrointestinal malignancies worldwide with focus on Iranian population.

Benefit of radiofrequency ablation after widespread endoscopic resection of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus in daily practice

Background

High-grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal carcinoma (IMC) in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) are now well-established indications for endoscopic resection (ER). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can be combined with ER in case of flat or long-segment BE ablation. We report here our experience of complementary RFA after widespread ER of neoplastic BE in daily practice.

Method

We retrospectively reviewed data of 89 patients, treated between 2006 and 2013 by ER alone (group 1) or by ER combined with RFA (group 2).

Results

Fifty-five patients in group 1 (7F/48M, mean age 68 years) underwent widespread ER with eradication of residual non-dysplastic BE. Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and intestinal metaplasia (IM) was achieved in 32/32 (100%) and 48/55 (87.3%) patients, respectively. Thirty-four patients in group 2 (3F/31M, mean age 67 years) had a multimodal treatment strategy, with widespread ER followed by RFA. Mean Prague classification of BE in this group was significantly longer (C4.4M6.6 vs. C2.7M4.5, P<0.001). Complete eradication of HGD/IMC and non-dysplastic BE was confirmed in 26/27 (96.3%) and 20/34 (58.8%) patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups concerning adverse events (16.4% vs. 23.5%, P=0.58) or recurrence rate of HGD/IMC (9.1% vs. 14.7%, P=0.42). The mismatch rate between preoperative and final histological diagnosis was high in both groups, at 45.5% and 26.5%.

Conclusions

A combination of ER and RFA can treat significantly longer neoplastic BE than ER alone, with the same efficiency and safety. Widespread ER, in contrast, is the only method of obtaining a reliable histological diagnosis.

Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma in older adults: A comprehensive narrative review of management by the Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology

Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is a disease of older adults with very poor survival rates. Its incidence has risen dramatically across the world in recent decades. Current treatment approaches for older adults are based largely on extrapolated evidence from clinical trials conducted in younger and fitter participants than those more commonly encountered in clinical practice. Understanding how to apply available evidence to our patients in the clinic setting is essential given the high morbidity of both curative and palliative treatment. This review aims to use available data to inform the management of an older adult with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Gastrointestinal Cancers and Liver Cirrhosis: Implications on Treatments and Prognosis

Liver cirrhosis tends to increase the risk in the management of gastrointestinal tumors. Patients with gastrointestinal cancers and liver cirrhosis often have serious postoperative complications and poor prognosis after surgery. Multiple studies have shown that the stage of gastrointestinal cancers and the grade of cirrhosis can influence surgical options and postoperative complications. The higher the stage of cancer and the poorer the degree of cirrhosis, the less the surgical options and the higher the risk of postoperative complications. Therefore, in the treatment of patients with gastrointestinal cancer and liver cirrhosis, clinicians should comprehensively consider the cancer stage, cirrhosis grade, and possible postoperative complications. This review summarizes the treatment methods of patients with different gastrointestinal cancer complicated with liver cirrhosis.

[Treatment recommendations for early esophageal cancer : Endoscopic and surgical options]

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer represents a complex tumor entity with an increasing proportion of adenocarcinomas. Early esophageal cancer is staged as m1-m3 depending on the depth of infiltration into the mucosa and as sm1-sm3 depending on invasion into the submucosa. The risk of lymph node metastasis is strongly correlated with the depth of invasion and increases by leaps and bounds with submucosal infiltration.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective database search (MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number, ISRCTN, registry) on the current management of early esophageal cancer.

RESULTS

The endoscopic diagnostics and evaluation of the dignity of superficial esophageal cancer by traditional staining techniques have been expanded by virtual chromoendoscopy. Endoscopic resection is the diagnostic and therapeutic procedure of choice for mucosal low risk adenocarcinomas (grade 1 or 2, no blood or lymph vessel invasion). Under certain prerequisites adenocarcinomas of the upper submucosa (sm1) can also be endoscopically removed. All other stages necessitate surgical treatment. In squamous cell carcinoma without risk factors a surgical oncological esophageal resection is indicated after infiltration of the third mucosal layer (m3). Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) shows high rates of en bloc and R0 (curative) resections even with large lesions.

CONCLUSION

Borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical treatment of early esophageal cancer necessitate an interdisciplinary approach and individually adapted management, which in the locally advanced stage are always embedded in a multimodal concept.

CT Body Composition of Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic Obesity: Predictors of Postoperative Complications and Survival in Patients with Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

To assess the impact of body composition imaging biomarkers in computed tomography (CT) on the perioperative morbidity and survival after surgery of patients with esophageal cancer (EC).

METHODS

Eighty-five patients who underwent esophagectomy for locally advanced EC after neoadjuvant therapy between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. Pre- and postoperative CT scans were used to assess the body composition imaging biomarkers (visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) areas, psoas muscle area (PMA) and volume (PMV), total abdominal muscle area (TAMA)). Sarcopenia was defined as lumbar skeletal muscle index (LSMI) ≤38.5 cm²/m² in women and ≤52.4 cm²/m² in men. Patients with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 were considered obese. These imaging biomarkers were correlated with major complications, anastomotic leakage, postoperative pneumonia, duration of postoperative hospitalization, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Preoperatively, sarcopenia was identified in 58 patients (68.2%), and sarcopenic obesity was present in 7 patients (8.2%). Sarcopenic patients were found to have an elevated risk for the occurrence of major complications (OR: 2.587, p = 0.048) and prolonged hospitalization (32 d vs. 19 d, p = 0.040). Patients with sarcopenic obesity had a significantly higher risk for postoperative pneumonia (OR: 6.364 p = 0.018) and a longer postoperative hospital stay (71 d vs. 24 d, p = 0.021). Neither sarcopenia nor sarcopenic obesity was an independent risk factor for the occurrence of anastomotic leakage (p > 0.05). Low preoperative muscle biomarkers (PMA and PMV) and their decrease (ΔPMV and ΔTAMA) during the follow-up period significantly correlated with shorter DFS and OS (p = 0.005 to 0.048).

CONCLUSION

CT body composition imaging biomarkers can identify high-risk patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer undergoing surgery. Sarcopenic patients have a higher risk of major complications, and patients with sarcopenic obesity are more prone to postoperative pneumonia. Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity are both subsequently associated with a prolonged hospitalization. Low preoperative muscle mass and its decrease during the postoperative follow-up are associated with lower DFS and OS.

Surveillance Following Treatment of Esophageal Cancer

We describe the surveillance strategies after esophageal cancer treatment, whether local therapy, induction chemoradiation, or other definitive treatment such as trimodality therapy. We discuss the shortcomings of the different invasive and imaging studies, and the recommended stage-specific surveillance after local and organ-sparing approaches to esophageal cancer treatment.

Endoscopic resection with adjuvant treatment versus esophagectomy for early-stage esophageal cancer

Objective

To evaluate the outcome following the strategy of endoscopic R0 resection (ER) plus adjuvant treatment (AT) versus esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell cancer in T1a invading muscularis mucosa (M3)-T1b stage.

Methods

We evaluated the outcomes of 46 esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) patients with T1aM3-T1b stage who underwent ER + AT from the Esophageal Cancer Endoscopic Therapy Consortium (ECETC) and compared these outcomes to 92 patients who underwent esophagectomy. Propensity score matching (1:2) was used, with overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) being compared between the two groups.

Results

During a median follow-up of 32 months, there were no statistical differences (P = 0.226) in OS between the two groups. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival in the esophagectomy group was 95%, 91%, and 84%, respectively. There were no mortalities within three years in the ER + AT group. The RFS between the two groups was also not significantly different (P = 0.938). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year RFS of patients in the esophagectomy group was 90%, 90%, and 83%, respectively, while it was 97%, 94%, and 74% in the ER + AT group, respectively. The local recurrence rates between the two groups were not significantly different (P = 0.277).

Conclusions

This first multicenter analysis showed similar outcomes were found regarding OS and RFS between the two groups in T1aM3-T1b stage patients. ER + AT may be considered in high-risk patients or for those who refuse esophagectomy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08466-2.

[Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer-Indicators for quality in diagnostics and treatment]

BACKGROUND

Within the framework of the quality initiative of the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery (DGAV) a review article was compiled based on a systematic literature search. Recommendations for the current diagnostics and treatment of esophageal cancer were also elaborated.

METHODS

The systematic literature search was carried out in March 2019 according to the PRISMA criteria using the MEDLINE databank. The recommendations were formulated based on a consensus in the DGAV.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Operations below the currently valid minimum quantity threshold should no longer be carried out. There are many indications that the minimum quantity in Germany should be raised to ≥20 resections/year/hospital in order to comprehensively improve the quality. Prehabilitation programs with endurance, strength and intensive breathing training as well as nutritional therapy improve patient outcome. The current treatment of esophageal cancer is stage-dependent and incorporates endoscopic resection of (sub)mucosal low-risk tumors (T1m1-3 or T1sm1 low risk), primary esophagectomy of submucosal high-risk tumors (T1a), submucosal cancer (T1sm2-3) and T2N0 tumors, multimodal treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy and operations for advanced stages. Esophagectomy is nowadays carried out in one stage as a so-called hybrid procedure (laparoscopy and muscle-preserving thoracotomy) or as a total minimally invasive operation (laparoscopy and thoracoscopy).

Optimizing Outcomes with Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus: Candidates, Efficacy and Durability

The treatment of early Barrett's esophagus (BE) has undergone a paradigm shift from surgical subtotal esophagectomy to organ-saving endoluminal treatment. Over the past 15 years, several high-quality studies were conducted to assess safe oncological outcome of endoscopic resection of mucosal adenocarcinoma and high-grade dysplasia. It became clear that add-on ablative therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) significantly reduces recurrence risk of neoplasia after resection. In this review, we highlight the most essential elements to optimize outcomes of RFA of BE, addressing the correct indication and patient selection in combination with the most efficient and safest treatment protocols to obtain long-term durability.

The modern management of Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia: role of pathology

Modern management of Barrett's oesophagus and related neoplasia essentially focuses upon surveillance to detect early low-risk neoplastic lesions and offering organ-preserving advanced endoscopic therapies, while traditional surgical treatments of oesophagectomy and lymph node clearance with or without chemoradiation are preserved only for high-risk and advanced carcinomas. With this evolution towards figless invasive therapy, the choice of therapy hinges upon the pathological assessment for risk stratifying patients into those with low risk for nodal metastasis who can continue with less invasive endoscopic therapies and others with high risk for nodal metastasis for which surgery or other forms of treatment are indicated. Detection and confirmation of neoplasia in the first instance depends upon endoscopic and pathological assessment. Endoscopic examination and biopsy sampling should be performed according to the recommended protocols, and endoscopic biopsy interpretation should be performed applying standard criteria using appropriate ancillary studies by histopathologists experienced in the pathology of Barrett's disease. Endoscopic resections (ERs) are both diagnostic and curative and should be performed by clinicians who are skilled with advanced endoscopic techniques. Proper preparation and handling of ERs are essential to assess histological parameters that dictate the curative nature of the procedure. Those parameters are adequacy of resection and risk of lymph node metastasis. The risk of lymph node metastasis is determined by depth invasion and presence of poor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion. Those adenocarcinomas with invasion up to muscularis mucosae (pT1a) and those with superficial submucosal invasion (pT1b) up to 500 µ with no poor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion and negative margins may be considered cured by endoscopic resections.

To Investigate Outcomes In Endoscopic Management Of Early Oesophageal Adenocarcinoma In Barrett's Oesophagus: Experience At Three Australian Tertiary Centres

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus (BO) is known precursor of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Early EAC includes T1a (invasion into mucosa) and T1b (invasion into submucosa but not muscularis propria). Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) provides accurate histological staging and definitive treatment for early EAC. Post EMR, the remaining Barrett's is eradicated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). However, there is a paucity of long-term Australian data.

AIMS

To investigate the efficacy and long-term outcomes of EMR and RFA in management of early EAC.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients early EAC treated endoscopically at three Western Australian tertiary centres, with at least 12-months follow-up, over last 10-years.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients with early EAC (61 T1a and 6 T1b) were treated with EMR. Complete Barrett's eradication was done by EMR in 31/67 patients whereas 36/67 patients underwent RFA for residual Barrett's. EMR changed pinch biopsy histology from HGD (n=33), HGD suspicious for IMC (n=5) and LGD (n=1) to early EAC in 58.2% (n=39) patients. During a mean follow-up of 37.2 months (IQR 20, 56), complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) and intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) was seen in 97% (n=65) and 89.5% (n=60) patients. One patient with T1b EAC underwent oesophagectomy. No cases developed metachronous EAC, progression to invasive adenocarcinoma or development of nodal/distant metastasis. Complications were endoscopically treated haematemesis (n=1) and strictures (n=16) requiring dilatations. 3 patients died due to causes unrelated to IMC.

CONCLUSION

EMR in conjunction with RFA is an effective and safe management for early EAC. EMR provides accurate staging and has low complication rates. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The role of esophagectomy in the management of Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia

Barrett's esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) has previously been a routine indication for esophagectomy. Recent advances in endoscopic therapy have resulted in a shift away from surgery. Current international guidelines recommend endoscopic therapy for BE with HGD irrespective of recurrence or progression of dysplasia. Current guidelines do not address the ongoing role of esophagectomy as an adjunct in the setting of failed endoscopic therapy. This review examines the role of esophagectomy as an adjunct to endoscopy in the management of patients with BE and HGD, with a specific focus on patients with persistent, progressive, or recurrent disease, disease resistant to endoscopic therapy, in patients with concomitant esophageal pathology, and in those patients in whom lifelong surveillance may not be possible or desired.

A retrospective cohort study of endoscopic therapy and esophagectomy for stage 1 esophageal cancer: less is more

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current guidelines recommend consideration of endoscopic therapy (ET) when treating select stage I esophageal cancers. The proportion of esophageal cancers treated with ET compared with esophagectomy has increased over time. Overall and cancer-specific survival have not been shown to be superior with ET in prior population-based studies. We thus evaluated cancer-specific survival comparing patients treated with ET and esophagectomy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2015 of patients with node-negative, superficial (T1a/T1b), esophageal cancer treated with ET or esophagectomy. Competing-risks models were used to compare cancer-specific survival. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess overall survival. Subgroup analysis was performed comparing time periods 2004 to 2009 and 2010 to 2015.

RESULTS

Of 2133 included individuals, 772 (36.2%) underwent ET and 1361 (63.8%) underwent esophagectomy. Unadjusted 5-year survival for cancer-specific death was 87.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.2-90.5) for ET and 82.4% (95% CI, 80.0- 84.5) for esophagectomy (P = .002). Within the adjusted competing-risk model, cancer-specific survival was superior in patients treated with ET compared with esophagectomy (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.35-2.74; P < .001). From 2004 to 2009, the SHR for esophagectomy was 1.68 (95% CI, 1.07-2.66; P = .024); whereas from 2010 to 2015, the SHR for esophagectomy was 2.02 (95% CI, 1.08-3.76; P = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

ET was associated with improved cancer-specific survival compared with esophagectomy in stage I esophageal cancer. This advantage was more pronounced for patients treated after 2009, potentially because of increasing clinician expertise in performing ET and patient selection.

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.

Pathological assessment of endoscopic resections of the gastrointestinal tract: a comprehensive clinicopathologic review

Endoscopic resection (ER) allows optimal staging with potential cure of early-stage luminal malignancies while maintaining organ preservation. ER and surgery are non-competing but complementary therapeutic options. In addition, histological examination of ER specimens can either confirm or refine the pre-procedure diagnosis. ER is used for the treatment of Barrett's related early carcinomas and dysplasias, early-esophageal squamous cell carcinomas and dysplasias, early gastric carcinomas and dysplasia, as well as low-risk submucosal invasive carcinomas (LR-SMIC) and, large laterally spreading adenomas of the colon. For invasive lesions, histological risk factors predict risk of lymph node metastasis and residual disease at the ER site. Important pathological risk factors predictive of lymph node metastasis are depth of tumor invasion, poor differentiation, and lymphovascular invasion. Complete resection with negative margins is critical to avoid local recurrences. For non-invasive lesions, complete resection is curative. Therefore, a systematic approach for handling and assessing ER specimens is recommended to evaluate all above key prognostic features appropriately. Correct handling starts with pinning the specimen before fixation, meticulous macroscopic assessment with orientation of appropriate margins, systematic sectioning, and microscopic assessment of the entire specimen. Microscopic examination should be thorough for accurate assessment of all pathological risk factors and margin assessment. Site-specific issues such as duplication of muscularis mucosa of the esophagus, challenges of assessing ampullectomy specimens and site-specific differences of staging of early carcinomas throughout the gastrointestinal tract (GI) tract should be given special consideration. Finally, a standard, comprehensive pathology report that allows optimal staging with potential cure of early-stage malignancies or better stratification and guidance for additional treatment should be provided.

Surveillance of neo-squamous epithelium after ablation of Barrett's esophagus: is it better to use jumbo over standard biopsy forceps?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

As obtaining adequate tissue on biopsy is critical for the detection of residual and recurrent intestinal metaplasia/dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients undergone Barrett's endoscopic eradication therapy (BET), we decided to compare the adequacy of biopsy specimens using jumbo versus standard biopsy forceps.

METHODS

This is a two-center study of patients' post-radiofrequency ablation of dysplastic BE. After BET, jumbo (Boston Scientific©, Radial Jaw 4, opening diameter 2.8 mm) or standard (Boston Scientific©, Radial Jaw 4, opening diameter 2.2 mm) biopsy forceps were utilized to obtain surveillance biopsies from the neo-squamous epithelium. Presence of lamina propria and proportion of squamous epithelium with partial or full thickness lamina propria was recorded by two experienced gastrointestinal pathologists who were blinded. Squamous epithelial biopsies that contained at least two-thirds of lamina propria were considered 'adequate'.

RESULTS

In a total of 211 biopsies from 55 BE patients, 145 biopsies (29 patients, 18 males, mean age 61 years, interquartile range [IQR] 33-83) were obtained using jumbo forceps and 66 biopsies (26 patients, all males, mean age 65 years, IQR 56-76) using standard forceps biopsies. Comparing jumbo versus standard forceps, the proportion of specimens with any subepithelial lamina propria was 51.7% versus 53%, P = 0.860 and the presence of adequate subepithelial lamina propria was 17.9% versus 9.1%, P = 0.096 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of jumbo forceps does not appear to have added advantage over standard forceps to obtain adequate biopsy specimens from the neo-squamous mucosa post-ablation.

Surgery versus radical endotherapies for early cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus is one of the most common pre-malignant lesions in the world. Currently the mainstay of therapy is surgical management of advanced cancer but this has improved the five-year survival very little since the 1980s. As a consequence, improved survival relies on early detection through endoscopic surveillance programmes. Success of this strategy relies on the fact that late-stage pre-malignant lesions or very early cancers can be cured by intervention. Currently there is considerable controversy over which method is best: that is conventional open surgery or endotherapy (techniques involving endoscopy).

OBJECTIVES

We used data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the effectiveness of endotherapies compared with surgery in people with Barrett's oesophagus, those with early neoplasias (defined as high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and those with early cancer (defined as carcinoma in-situ, superficially invasive, early cancer or superficial cancer T-1m (T1-a) and T-1sm (T1-b)).

SEARCH METHODS

We used the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy to identify RCTs in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ISI Web of Science, EBMR, Controlled Trials mRCT and ISRCTN, and LILACS, in July and August 2008. The searches were updated in 2009 and again in April 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: RCTs comparing endotherapies with surgery in the treatment of high-grade dysplasia or early cancer. All cellular types of cancer were included (i.e. adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and more unusual types) but will be discussed separately.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

patients of any age and either gender with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of early neoplasia (HGD and early cancer) in Barrett's or squamous lined oesophagus. Types of interventions; endotherapies (the intervention) compared with surgery (the control), all with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reports of studies that meet the inclusion criteria for this review would have been analysed using the methods detailed in Appendix 9.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies that met the inclusion criteria. In total we excluded 13 studies that were not RCTs but that compared surgery and endotherapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review has indicated that there are no RCTs to compare management options in this vital area, therefore trials should be undertaken as a matter of urgency. The problems with such randomised methods are standardising surgery and endotherapies in all sites, standardising histopathology in all centres, assessing which patients are fit or unfit for surgery and making sure there are relevant outcomes for the study (i.e. long-term survival (over five or more years)) and no progression of HGD.

Esophageal brachytherapy: Institut Gustave Roussy's experience

PURPOSE

Esophageal cancer is characterized by its propension to local evolution, which conditions prognosis and quality of life. Brachytherapy may be a therapeutic option for all stages of esophageal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective unicentric study included all consecutive patients treated for an esophageal high-dose-rate brachytherapy in our institution from 1992 to 2018.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were included. They were treated in four distinct indications: exclusive (7 patients), boost after external beam radiotherapy (41), reirradiation (36), or palliative aim (6). Most frequently prescribed schemes were 3 × 5 Gy (boost) or 6 × 5 Gy (exclusive treatment and reirradiation) at applicator's surface or at 5 mm. At the end of follow-up, 50% of patients had presented with local recurrence. Seventeen percent of patients had a metastatic relapse. Median overall survival was 15 months in the whole cohort: 22 months in the boost setting, 25 months for exclusive brachytherapy, 15 months for reirradiation, and only 2 months for palliative treatment. Tumor length at brachytherapy, brachytherapy dose, and interfraction response were significantly associated to overall survival. 40% of patients presented with grade 2+ toxicity, mostly esophagitis, including three toxic deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local control outcomes are still poor, one must remember that patients are unfit for any curative therapeutic option and that palliative chemotherapy offers mediocre results. The most promising setting probably is reirradiation because brachytherapy offers a remarkable dose gradient allowing best organ at risk sparing, with an encouraging rate of long survivors (19% at 2 years). Esophageal brachytherapy deserves to be further investigated because some patients, even unfit, may benefit from it, with acceptable toxicity.

Esophagus and Gastrointestinal Junction Tumors

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma account for 95% of all esophageal malignancies. The rates of esophageal adenocarcinoma have increased in Western countries, making it the predominant type of esophageal cancer. Treatment of both types of cancer has transformed to a more minimally invasive approach, with endoscopic methods being used for superficial cancers and more frequent use of video-assisted and laparoscopic modalities for locally advanced tumors. The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines advocate a trimodal approach to treatment, with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery for locally advanced cancers.

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.

Should endoscopic mucosal resection be attempted for cT2N0 esophageal cancer?

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) can be an effective therapy for superficial esophageal cancer. Many patients with cT2 invasion by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) receive surgery but are subsequently found to have superficial disease. The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety profile and the added value of attempting EMR for EUS-staged cT2N0 esophageal cancer. A retrospective review was performed at a single institution from 2008 to 2017. Patients who were staged cT2N0 by EUS were identified from a prospectively maintained surgical database. Among 75 patients identified for analysis, 30 underwent an attempt at EMR. No perforations or other immediate complications occurred. EMR was more likely to be attempted among older patients (P = 0.001) with smaller tumor size (P < 0.001) and diminished SUVmax (P = 0.001). At the time of treatment, EMR was successful in clearing all known disease among 17/30 patients, with 12 representing pT1a or less and 5 representing pT1b with negative margins. Among the 17 patients for whom EMR was able to clear all known disease, there were no recurrences or cancer-related deaths. Although all the patients were staged as cT2N0 by EUS, many patients were identified by EMR to have superficial disease. There were no perforations or other adverse events related to EMR. Furthermore, EMR cleared all known disease among 17 patients with no known recurrences or cancer-related deaths. The results indicate that EMR for cT2N0 esophageal cancer is a safe diagnostic option that is therapeutic for some.

Resection of early esophageal neoplasms: The pendulum swings from surgical to endoscopic management

Esophageal cancer is a highly lethal disease and is the sixth leading cause of cancer related mortality in the world. The standard treatment is esophagectomy which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This led to development of minimally invasive, organ sparing endoscopic therapies which have comparable outcomes to esophagectomy in early cancer. These include endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. In early squamous cell cancer, endoscopic submucosal dissection is preferred as it is associated with cause specific 5-year survival rates of 100% for M1 and M2 tumors and 85% for M3 and SM1 tumors and low recurrence rates. In early adenocarcinoma, endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities is followed by ablation of the remaining flat Barrett’s mucosa to prevent recurrences. Radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used ablation modality with others being cryotherapy and argon plasma coagulation. Focal endoscopic mucosal resection followed by radiofrequency ablation leads to eradication of neoplasia in 93.4% of patients and eradication of intestinal metaplasia in 73.1% of patients. Innovative techniques such as submucosal tunneling with endoscopic resection are developed for management of submucosal tumors of the esophagus. This review includes a discussion of various endoscopic techniques and their clinical outcomes in early squamous cell cancer, adenocarcinoma and submucosal tumors. An overview of comparison between esophagectomy and endoscopic therapy are also presented.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment for superficial esophageal cancer. However, it has limitations in case of large superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs), in which submucosal injection cannot attain satisfactory lifting effects. Thus, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) was introduced as a new treatment for SESCNs presenting satisfying results. Many studies have tried to verify the efficacy of ESTD, yet no meta-analysis has been published until now.

Methods

We searched the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang, and CNKI dating up to February 1, 2019. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of ESTD and ESD for superficial esophageal cancers were enrolled. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to evaluate the quality of these studies. Eight articles were included that involved a total of 625 superficial esophageal cancer patients.

Results

Our analysis revealed that ESTD is superior to ESD as it has higher en bloc resection rate, shorter operation time, and lower recurrence rate 1 year after operation. The R0 resection rate and postoperative adverse event rate of ESTD group is comparable with ESD group.

Conclusions

Our study implicates that ESTD is a potentially superior treatment to ESD for superficial esophageal cancer.