Increasing the interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery in esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies

Does the time interval from neoadjuvant camrelizumab combined with chemotherapy to surgery affect outcomes for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma?

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus on the optimal interval time between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, and whether prolonged time interval from neoadjuvant therapy to surgery results in bad outcomes for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). In this study, we aim to evaluate outcomes of time intervals ≤ 8 weeks and > 8 weeks in locally advanced ESCC.

METHODS

This retrospective study consecutively included ESCC patients who received esophagectomy after neoadjuvant camrelizumab combined with chemotherapy at the Department of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine. The primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), while the secondary endpoints were pathological response, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

From 2019 to 2021, a total of 80 patients were included in our study and were divided into two groups according to the time interval from neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy to surgery: ≤ 8 weeks group (n = 44) and > 8 weeks group (n = 36). The rate of MPR in the ≤ 8 weeks group was 25.0% and 27.8% in the > 8 weeks group (P = 0.779). The rate of pCR in the ≤ 8 weeks group was 11.4%, with 16.7% in the > 8 weeks group (P = 0.493). The incidence of postoperative complications in the ≤ 8 weeks group was 27.3% and 19.4% in the > 8 weeks group (P = 0.413). The median DFS in the two groups had not yet reached (hazard ratio [HR], 3.153; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.383 to 6.851; P = 0.004). The median OS of ≤ 8 weeks group was not achieved (HR, 3.703; 95% CI 1.584 to 8.657; P = 0.0012), with the > 8 weeks group 31.6 months (95% CI 21.1 to 42.1). In multivariable analysis, inferior DFS and OS were observed in patients with interval time > 8 weeks (HR, 2.992; 95% CI 1.306 to 6.851; and HR, 3.478; 95% CI 1.481 to 8.170, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Locally advanced ESCC patients with time interval from neoadjuvant camrelizumab combined with chemotherapy to surgery > 8 weeks were associated with worse long-term survival.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Evolving Perspectives on Esophagectomy Care: Clinical Update

Recent changes in perioperative care have led to new perspectives and important advances that have helped to improve outcomes among patients treated with esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Time to surgery does not affect oncologic outcomes in locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a meta-analysis

Aim: The authors conducted a meta-analysis to determine the association between time-to-surgery (TTS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and patient outcomes in locally advanced gastric cancer. Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify potential studies, in which the authors compared patient outcomes between those with TTS within 4 (and 6) weeks of completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those after 4 (and 6) weeks. Results: Six studies, including 1238 patients, were eligible for inclusion. Pooled data showed no significant differences in rates of pathological complete response, major pathological response, ypN0, complications, R0 resection and operative time between groups of longer TTS and shorter TTS. Conclusion: There was no statistically advantageous impact of prolonged TTS on pathological and surgical outcomes. Large, population-based studies are warranted.

Early versus delayed surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery, is the mainstay of managing locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, the optimal timing of surgery after neoadjuvant therapy is not defined clearly.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases was conducted. 6-8 weeks were used as a cut-off to define early and delayed surgery groups. Overall Survival (OS) was the primary outcome, whereas pathological complete resolution (pCR), R0 resection, anastomotic leak, perioperative mortality, pulmonary complications, and major complication (> Clavien-Dindo grade 2) rates were secondary outcomes. Cohort studies and national registry bases studies were analysed separately. Survival data were pooled as Hazard Ratio (HR) and the rest as Odds Ratio (OR). According to heterogeneity, fixed-effect or random-effect models were used.

RESULTS

Twelve retrospective studies, one RCT, and six registry-based studies (13,600 participants) were included. Pooled analysis of cohort studies showed no difference in OS (HR 1.03, CI 0.91-1.16), pCR (OR 0.98, CI 0.80-1.20), R0 resection (OR 0.90, CI 0.55-I.45), mortality (OR 1.03, CI 0.59-1.77), pulmonary complications (OR 1.26, CI 0.97-1.64) or major complication rates (OR 1.29, CI 0.96-1.73). Delayed surgery led to increased leak (OR 1.48, CI 1.11-1.97). Analysis of registry studies showed that the delayed group had a better pCR rate (OR 1.12, CI 1.01-1.24), with no improvement in survival (HR 1.01, CI 0.92-1.10). Delayed surgery was associated with increased mortality (OR 1.35, CI 1.07-1.69) and major complication rate (OR 1.55, CI 1.20-2.01). Available RCT reported surgical outcomes only.

CONCLUSION

National registry-based studies' analysis shows that delay in surgery is riskier and leads to higher mortality and major complication rates. Further, well-designed RCTs are required.

The impact of lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment on clinical outcomes prior to the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cancer care, raising concerns regarding the impact of wait time, or 'lag time', on clinical outcomes. We aimed to contextualize pandemic-related lag times by mapping pre-pandemic evidence from systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses on the association between lag time to cancer diagnosis and treatment with mortality- and morbidity-related outcomes.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews for reviews published prior to the pandemic (1 January 2010-31 December 2019). We extracted data on methodological characteristics, lag time interval start and endpoints, qualitative findings from systematic reviews, and pooled risk estimates of mortality- (i.e., overall survival) and morbidity- (i.e., local regional control) related outcomes from meta-analyses. We categorized lag times according to milestones across the cancer care continuum and summarized outcomes by cancer site and lag time interval.

Results

We identified 9032 records through database searches, of which 29 were eligible. We classified 33 unique types of lag time intervals across 10 cancer sites, of which breast, colorectal, head and neck, and ovarian cancers were investigated most. Two systematic reviews investigating lag time to diagnosis reported different findings regarding survival outcomes among paediatric patients with Ewing's sarcomas or central nervous system tumours. Comparable risk estimates of mortality were found for lag time intervals from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy for breast, colorectal, and ovarian cancers. Risk estimates of pathologic complete response indicated an optimal time window of 7-8 weeks for neoadjuvant chemotherapy completion prior to surgery for rectal cancers. In comparing methods across meta-analyses on the same cancer sites, lag times, and outcomes, we identified critical variations in lag time research design.

Conclusions

Our review highlighted measured associations between lag time and cancer-related outcomes and identified the need for a standardized methodological approach in areas such as lag time definitions and accounting for the waiting-time paradox. Prioritization of lag time research is integral for revised cancer care guidelines under pandemic contingency and assessing the pandemic's long-term effect on patients with cancer.

Funding

The present work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR-COVID-19 Rapid Research Funding opportunity, VR5-172666 grant to Eduardo L. Franco). Parker Tope, Eliya Farah, and Rami Ali each received an MSc. stipend from the Gerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University.

Interval time between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in advanced gastric cancer doesn't affect outcome: A meta analysis

Background

The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer is not yet firmly confirmed, but the exciting results demonstrated in several clinical studies have led neoadjuvant chemotherapy as the important treatment methods in guidelines. The 4-6 weeks interval time is currently the most commonly used in clinical treatment, but there are insufficient studies to support this time and the optimal interval has not yet been identified. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the short-term life quality and long-term prognostic impact of the interval time between the end of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search in PUBMED, Embase and Cochrane Liabrary for studies published or reported in English from January 2006 to May 2022. We summarised relevant studies for the time to surgery (TTS), included as retrospective studies and prospective studies. The primary study outcome was the rate of pathological complete response (pCR), and the secondary outcomes included R0 resection rate, incidence of serious postoperative complications, 3-year progression free survival time (PFS) rate and overall survival time (OS) rate. TTS were classified in three groups: 4-6 weeks, <4 weeks and >6 weeks. The ratio ratios (ORs) were calculated and forest plots and funnel plots were made to analysis by using fixed-effect and random-effect models in Review Manager 5.2.

Results

A total of five studies included 1,171 patients: 411 patients in shorter TTS group (<4 weeks), 507 patients in medium TTS group (4-6 weeks) and 253 patients in longer TTS groups (>6 weeks). And The results of our meta-analysis indicate that there are no significant difference between the three groups. The pCR, R0 resection rate, incidence of serious postoperative complications, 3-year PFS and OS were similar between three groups.

Conclusions

Although there many studies exploring the suitable TTS in advanced gastric cancer, but we have not find the evidence to prove the TTS is the risk factor influencing the outcome.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022369009.

Benefit of a flash dose of corticosteroids in digestive surgical oncology: a multicenter, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial (CORTIFRENCH)

Background

The modulation of perioperative inflammation seems crucial to improve postoperative morbidity and cancer-related outcomes in patients undergoing oncological surgery. Data from the literature suggest that perioperative corticosteroids decrease inflammatory markers and might be associated with fewer complications in esophageal, liver, pancreatic and colorectal surgery. Their benefit on cancer-related outcomes has not been assessed.

Methods

The CORTIFRENCH trial is a phase III multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to assess the impact of a flash dose of preoperative corticosteroids versus placebo on postoperative morbidity and cancer-related outcomes after elective curative-intent surgery for digestive cancer. The primary endpoint is the frequency of patients with postoperative major complications occurring within 30 days after surgery (defined as all complications with Clavien-Dindo grade > 2). The secondary endpoints are the overall survival at 3 years, the disease-free survival at 3 years, the frequency of patients with intraabdominal infections and postoperative infections within 30 days after surgery and the hospital length of stay. We hypothesize a reduced risk of major complications and a better disease-survival at 3 years in the experimental group. Allowing for 5% of drop-out, 1 200 patients (600 per arm) should be included.

Discussion

This will be the first trial focusing on the impact of perioperative corticosteroids on cancer related outcomes. If significant, it might be a strong improvement on oncological outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for digestive cancers.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03875690, Registered on March 15, 2019, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03875690.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09998-z.

Impact of interval timing to surgery on tumor response after neoadjuvant treatment for gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by radical surgery is the optimal approach for locally advanced gastric cancer (GC). Interval timing to surgery after NACT in GC is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of NACT interval time on tumor response and overall survival.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

a retrospective analysis from a prospective database was performed at a single referral tertiary hospital, from January 2010 to October 2018. Patients were assigned to three groups according to the surgical interval time after NACT: < 4 weeks, 4-6 weeks and > 6 weeks. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed in order to clarify the impact of NACT on post-neoadjuvant pathological complete response rate (ypCR), downstaging (DS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

of the 60 patients analyzed, 18 patients (30 %) had an interval time to surgery < 4 weeks, 26 (43.3 %) between 4-6 weeks and 16 (26.7 %) > 6 weeks. Two patients (3 %) had achieved ypCR and 37 patients (62 %) had achieved DS. There were no differences in DS rates among the interval time groups (p: 0.66). According to the multivariate analysis, only poorly differentiated carcinoma was significantly related to lower DS rates (p: 0.04). Cox regression analysis showed that the NACT interval time had no impact on OS. According to the multivariate analysis, > 25 lymph node harvested (HR: 0.35) and female sex (HR: 5.67) were OS independent predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

the NACT interval time prior gastrectomy for locally advanced GC is not associated with ypCR or DS and has no impact on overall survival.

Current status and future perspectives on neoadjuvant therapy in gastric cancer

Gastric cancer, with high morbidity and mortality rates, is one of the most heterogeneous tumors. Radical gastrectomy and postoperative chemotherapy are the standard treatments. However, the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) need to be confirmed by many trials before implementation, creating a bottleneck in development. Although clinical benefits of NAT have been observed, a series of problems remain to be solved. Before therapy, more contributing factors should be offered for choice in the intended population and ideal regimens. Enhanced computed tomography (CT) scanning is usually applied to evaluate effectiveness according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), yet CT scanning results sometimes differ from pathological responses. After NAT, the appropriate time for surgery is still empirically defined. Our review aims to discuss the abovementioned issues regarding NAT for GC, including indications, selection of regimens, lesion assessment and NAT-surgery interval time.

From the completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery for colorectal cancer liver metastasis: What is the optimal timing?

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been widely performed in the treatment of colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) patients, but the optimal timing of surgery after NAC is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the optimal timing of surgery.

METHODS

From December 2010 to May 2018, 101 consecutive patients who received NAC followed by liver resection for CRLM were included in this study. The main outcome parameters were pathological response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The effect of time to surgery (TTS) on patient outcomes, defined as a high TTS and a low TTS according to an X-tile analysis, was investigated. To adjust for potential selection bias, propensity score matching at 1:2 was performed with two high TTS patients matched to one low TTS patient. Kaplan-Meier curves, logistic regression analyses, and Cox regression models were used for the data analysis.

RESULTS

The optimal cut-off value for the TTS was 5 weeks by X-tile analysis. The patients in this study were divided into low (≤5 weeks, n = 27) and high (>5 weeks, n = 74) TTS groups. Patients with a high TTS were more likely to have an unfavorable pathological response (75.7% vs 48.1%, P = .008). In multivariate analysis, a low TTS significantly predicted a better pathological response (OR = 3.397, 95% CI: 1.116-10.344, P = .031). Compared to patients with a high TTS, patients with a low TTS had significantly better PFS (P < .001, mPFS: 16 months vs 7 months) and better OS (P = .037, mOS: not reached vs 36 months). Multivariate analysis revealed that a TTS > 5 weeks was an independent predictor of decreased PFS (HR = 2.041, 95% CI: 1.152-3.616, P = .014) but not OS. After propensity matching, the patients with a low TTS had significantly better PFS (P < .001, mPFS: 18.2 months vs 10 months) and an equivalent OS (P = .115, mOS: not reached vs 41 months). Multivariate analysis revealed that a TTS > 5 weeks was an independent predictor of decreased PFS (HR = 3.031, 95% CI: 1.494-6.149, P = .002) but not OS.

CONCLUSION

The longer TTS after the completion of NAC may be disadvantageous for a favorable pathological response and long-term PFS. These results should be validated prospectively in a randomized trial.

Timing of Adjuvant Chemoradiation in pT1-3N1-2 or pT4aN1 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma After R0 Esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and chemotherapy (aCRT) have been supposed to improve prognosis and outcomes in patients with node-positive thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC). Our aim was to analyze the impacts of interval between surgery and aCRT on prognosis, determining the optimal time interval.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 520 patients with TESCC between 2007 and 2015 treated with aCRT following radical esophagectomy without neoadjuvant chemotherapy and RT. These patients underwent RT (50-60 Gy) combined with 2-6 cycles chemotherapy after surgery. The time intervals were from 17 days to 145 days and divided into three groups: short interval group (≤28 days, S-Int group), medial interval group (≥29 and ≤ 56 days, M-Int group) and long interval group (≥57 days, L-Int group).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 35.6 months and the 3-, 5-year survival rates and median survival were 49.5%, 36.6% and 35.9 months. The duration of postoperative interval was a predictor of survival outcomes. The median survival and 5-year survival rates in S-Int, M-Int and L-Int groups were 23.6 (32.1%), 44.2 (43.3%) and 32.0 (31.5%) months (P=0.007). The difference was statistically significant between the M-Int and S-Int or L-Int group but was not between the S-Int and L-Int group. Besides, toxic reactions including early, late and adverse events (grade ≥3) in M-Int group were significantly less than S-Int and show no significant differences with L-Int group.

CONCLUSION

The optimal time interval was from 29 days to 56 days (5-8 weeks) both in terms of survival outcomes and toxic reactions.

Timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy affects oncologic outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and esophagectomy in esophageal cancer has not been defined.

AIM

To evaluate whether a prolonged time interval between the end of nCRT and surgery has an effect on survival outcome in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Wanfang and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for relevant articles published before November 16, 2019, to identify potential studies that evaluated the prognostic role of different time intervals between nCRT and surgery in esophageal cancer. The hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were merged to estimate the correlation between the time intervals and survival outcomes in esophageal cancer, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma using fixed- and random-effect models.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 12621 patients from 16 studies. The results demonstrated that esophageal cancer patients with a prolonged time interval between the end of nCRT and surgery had significantly worse overall survival (OS) [hazard ratio (HR): 1.107, 95%CI: 1.014-1.208, P = 0.023] than those with a shorter time interval. Subgroup analysis showed that poor OS with a prolonged interval was observed based on both the sample size and HRs. There was also significant association between a prolonged time interval and decreased OS in Asian, but not Caucasian patients. In addition, a longer wait time indicated worse OS (HR: 1.385, 95%CI: 1.186-1.616, P < 0.001) in patients with adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSION

A prolonged time interval from the completion of nCRT to surgery is associated with a significant decrease in OS. Thus, esophagectomy should be performed within 7-8 wk after nCRT.

Impact of the Time Interval from Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy to Surgery in Primary Ovarian, Tubal, and Peritoneal Cancer Patients

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) plays an important role in ovarian cancer. The appropriate time interval from the completion of NACT to interval debulking surgery (TTS) in ovarian cancer is still unknown. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of the time interval between the end of NACT and surgery (TTS ≤ 4 weeks vs TTS > 4 weeks) on the survival outcomes among patients with advanced-stage ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancers. 152 patients with stage III or IV ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancers were included in this retrospective cohort study: 115 in the TTS ≤4 weeks and 37 in the TTS >4 weeks groups. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the progression-free survival in the TTS ≤4 weeks group was longer than that in the TTS >4 weeks group (26 vs 14 months, P=0.04). However, the overall survival was not different between the two groups (66 vs 36 months, P=0.105). The multivariate analysis presented that delay in surgery after NACT (TTS >4 weeks) was associated with a shorter progression-free (P=0.002) but not overall survival (P=0.231). Our findings demonstrated no relationship between the NACT to surgery interval and OS, while a detrimental effect of TTS >4 weeks on PFS was observed.

CT scan and magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer

Value of computed tomography (CT) scan and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer was investigated. Seventy-eight patients with esophageal cancer treated in Jinan Central Hospital (Jinan, China) from January 2013 to June 2014 were selected. All patients underwent CT scan and DWI examination, and their clinical history data were analyzed. DWI was conducted. The short-term curative effect and the 3-year survival rate of patients in the high apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value group and the low ADC value group were compared; ADC values in the complete remission (CR) group and the partial remission (PR) group were compared. The difference in value between the length of esophageal lesions and the length of pathological specimens measured by CT scan was significantly different from that detected via DWI examination with b=600, 800 and 1,000 sec/mm², respectively (P<0.05). The diagnostic rate of esophageal cancer via CT scan was significantly lower than that via DWI examination (P<0.05). After radiotherapy, the clinical control rate in the high ADC value group was significantly higher than that in the low ADC value group, and the 3-year survival rate in the former was significantly higher than that in the latter (P<0.05). In the 2nd week during radiotherapy and at the end of radiotherapy, the ADC values in the CR group were significantly higher than those in the PR group (P<0.05). In the 2nd week during radiotherapy and at the end of radiotherapy, ADC values were used to predict the CR rate of radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, and the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were 0.776 and 0.935, respectively. Compared with CT scan, DWI has higher diagnostic rate and higher sensitivity. The length of esophageal tumor measured by DWI is close to that of pathological entity, which can guide the delineation of the target area of esophageal cancer.

Does timing of esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiation affect outcomes? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment (nCRT) remains unclear. Here, a meta-analysis was conducted to determine whether prolonged interval between nCRT and surgery can affect the outcomes in esophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane were systematically searched for studies reporting the outcomes in esophageal cancer according to the length of interval between nCRT and surgery. The primary outcome was rate of pathologic complete response (pCR), and the secondary outcomes included R0 resection rate, incidence of anastomotic leak, postoperative mortality, and two or five-year overall survival (OS). The intervals were classified into dichotomous (≤7-8 weeks and >7-8 weeks) for the pooled analysis, and a combined relative risk (RR) was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies involving 15,086 patients were analyzed. The overall results indicated that an interval longer than 7-8 weeks between the end of nCRT and the surgery was significantly associated with an improved pCR rate (RR, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.21; P = 0.001). However, it was related to a higher 30-day surgical mortality (RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.19-1.92; P = 0.0006). The subgroup analyses only detected a significant association of the extended interval with pCR and the surgical mortality rate in adenocarcinoma patients. Moreover, an increased time interval resulted in a lower 2-year (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.98; P = 0.002) and 5-year OS (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.95; P = 0.0009). No association with R0 resection rate or anastomotic complication resulting from delayed resection was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Although increasing the time interval from nCRT to esophagectomy was associated with significantly higher pathologic complete response rates in esophageal cancer, delaying the surgery might be disadvantageous for the long-term survival.

Cardiopulmonary fitness before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with oesophagogastric cancer

Background

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may have a detrimental impact on cardiorespiratory reserve. Determination of oxygen uptake at the anaerobic threshold by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) provides an objective measure of cardiorespiratory reserve. Anaerobic threshold can be used to predict perioperative risk. A low anaerobic threshold is associated with increased morbidity after oesophagogastrectomy. The aim of this study was to establish whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy has an adverse effect on fitness, and whether there is recovery of fitness before surgery for oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma.

Methods

CPET was completed before, immediately after (week 0), and at 2 and 4 weeks after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The ventilatory anaerobic threshold and peak oxygen uptake (Vo2 peak) were used as objective, reproducible measures of cardiorespiratory reserve. Anaerobic threshold and Vo2 peak were compared before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and at the three time intervals.

Results

Some 31 patients were recruited. The mean anaerobic threshold was lower following neoadjuvant treatment: 15·3 ml per kg per min before chemotherapy versus 11·8, 12·1 and 12·6 ml per kg per min at week 0, 2 and 4 respectively (P &lt; 0·010). Measurements were also significantly different at each time point (P &lt; 0·010). The same pattern was noted for Vo2 peak between values before chemotherapy (21·7 ml per kg per min) and at weeks 0, 2 and 4 (17·5, 18·6 and 19·3 ml per kg per min respectively) (P &lt; 0·010). The reduction in anaerobic threshold and Vo2 peak did not improve during the time between completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery.

Conclusion

There was a decrease in cardiorespiratory reserve immediately after neoadjuvant chemotherapy that was sustained up to the point of surgery at 4 weeks after chemotherapy.

Surveillance or resection after chemoradiation in esophageal cancer

The treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer continues to evolve. Previously, surgery was considered the foundation of treatment, but chemoradiation (CRT) has taken on a larger role both in the neoadjuvant setting and as definitive treatment. It has become clear that although some patients benefit from esophagectomy after CRT, a large subset of patients likely derive no benefit, and may be harmed by surgery. Some patients are cured from CRT alone and therefore do not need surgery. Another group of patients likely have metastatic disease at the time of local therapy that is just undetected on imaging and also do not benefit from surgery. A third group of patients will have persistent locoregional disease only after CRT. This last group is the subset who will actually benefit from surgery, but this likely comprises only a minority of patients with locally advanced disease. A strategy to maximize survival while minimizing unnecessary surgery is a reasonable goal, but present technology does not allow us to do this with certainty. Thus, the decision of whether to pursue resection or surveillance after CRT can be difficult as clinicians and patients try to balance the goal of maximizing the likelihood of cure against the risk of surgery and its impact on quality of life.

Time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for oesophageal or junctional cancer: A nationwide study

INTRODUCTION

The optimal time between end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and oesophagectomy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the association between this interval and pathologic complete response rate (pCR), morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

Patients with oesophageal cancer treated with nCRT and surgery between 2011 and 2016 were selected from a national database: the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA). The interval between end of nCRT and surgery was divided into six periods: 0-5 weeks (n = 157;A), 6-7 weeks (n = 878;B), 8-9 weeks (n = 972;C), 10-12 weeks (n = 720;D), 13-14 weeks (n = 195;E) and 15 or more weeks (n = 180;F). The association between these interval groups and outcomes was investigated using univariable and multivariable analysis with group C (8-9 weeks) as reference.

RESULTS

In total, 3102 patients were included. The pCR rate for the groups A to F was 31%, 28%, 26%, 31%, 40% and 37%, respectively. A longer interval was associated with a higher probability of pCR (≥10 weeks for adenocarcinoma: odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.35 [1.00-1.83], 1.95 [1.24-3.07], 1.64 [0.99-2.71] and ≥13 weeks for squamous cell carcinoma: 2.86 [1.23-6.65], 2.67 [1.29-5.55]. Patients operated ≥10 weeks after nCRT had the same probability for intraoperative/postoperative complications. Patients from groups D and F had a higher 30-day/in-hospital mortality (1.80 [1.08-3.00], 3.19 [1.66-6.14]).

CONCLUSION

An interval of ≥10 weeks for adenocarcinoma and ≥13 weeks for squamous cell carcinoma between nCRT and oesophagectomy was associated with a higher probability of having a pCR. Longer intervals were not associated with intraoperative/postoperative complications. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with extended intervals (10-12 and ≥15 weeks); however, this might have been due to residual confounding.

Timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: Impact on outcomes

AIM

To evaluate whether the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)-surgery interval time significantly impacts the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and long-term survival.

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-six patients with gastric cancer undergoing NACT and a planned gastrectomy at the Chinese PLA General Hospital were selected from January 2011 to January 2017. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to investigate the impact of NACT-surgery interval time (< 4 wk, 4-6 wk, and > 6 wk) on pCR rate and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The NACT-surgery interval time and clinician T stage were independent predictors of pCR. The interval time > 6 wk was associated with a 74% higher odds of pCR as compared with an interval time of 4-6 wk (P = 0.044), while the odds ratio (OR) of clinical T₃vs clinical T₄ stage for pCR was 2.90 (95%CI: 1.04-8.01, P = 0.041). In Cox regression analysis of long-term survival, post-neoadjuvant therapy pathological N (ypN) stage significantly impacted OS (N₀vs N₃: HR = 0.16, 95%CI: 0.37-0.70, P = 0.015; N₁vs N₃: HR = 0.14, 95%CI: 0.02-0.81, P = 0.029) and disease-free survival (DFS) (N₀vs N₃: HR = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.24-0.52, P = 0.005; N₁vs N₃: HR = 0.17, 95%CI: 0.02-0.71, P = 0.020). The surgical procedure also had a positive impact on OS and DFS. The hazard ratio of distal gastrectomy vs total gastrectomy was 0.12 (95%CI: 0.33-0.42, P = 0.001) for OS, and 0.13 (95%CI: 0.36-0.44, P = 0.001) for DFS.

CONCLUSION

The NACT-surgery interval time is associated with pCR but has no impact on survival, and an interval time > 6 wk has a relatively high odds of pCR.

The effect of time interval on esophagectomy after neoadjuvant treatment

"Esophagectomy timing after neoadjuvant therapy for distal esophageal adenocarcinoma" published in the Annals of Thoracic Surgery (doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.09.044) states that 30- and 90-day mortality after esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma in patients with neoadjuvant chemoradiation, is significantly higher in patients with a postradiation interval of 9 weeks or more. The authors suggest that a "wait and see" approach after neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma may not be safe.