ICORG 10-14: NEOadjuvant trial in Adenocarcinoma of the oEsophagus and oesophagoGastric junction International Study (Neo-AEGIS)

Radiomics in esophagogastric junction cancer: A scoping review of current status and advances

PURPOSE

This scoping review aimed to understand the advances in radiomics in esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer and assess the current status of radiomics in EGJ cancer.

METHODS

We conducted systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from January 18, 2012, to January 15, 2023, to identify radiomics articles related to EGJ cancer. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the studies using the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) and the METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS) tool, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 120 articles were retrieved from the three databases, and after screening, only six papers met the inclusion criteria. These studies investigated the role of radiomics in differentiating adenocarcinoma from squamous carcinoma, diagnosing T-stage, evaluating HER2 overexpression, predicting response to neoadjuvant therapy, and prognosis in EGJ cancer. The median score percentage of RQS was 34.7% (range from 22.2% to 38.9%). The median score percentage of METRICS was 71.2% (range from 58.2% to 84.9%).

CONCLUSION

Although there is a considerable difference between the RQS and METRICS scores of the included literature, we believe that the research value of radiomics in EGJ cancer has been revealed. In the future, while actively exploring more diagnostic, prognostic, and biological correlation studies in EGJ cancer, greater emphasis should be placed on the standardization and clinical application of radiomics.

Multimodal Therapy Versus Primary Surgery for Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Diffuse Type Carcinoma, with a Focus on Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma: A Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

Diffuse type adenocarcinoma and, more specifically, signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) have a poor prognosis and the value of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (nCRT) is unclear.

METHODS

All patients who underwent surgery for diffuse type gastric and GEJ carcinoma between 2004 and 2015 were retrospectively included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The primary outcome was overall survival after surgery. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted. Furthermore, multivariable Poisson and Cox regressions were performed, correcting for confounders. To comply with the Cox regression proportional hazard assumption, gastric cancer survival was split into two groups, i.e. <90 days and >90 days, postoperatively by adding an interaction variable.

RESULTS

Analyses included 2046 patients with diffuse type cancer: 1728 gastric cancers (50% SRCC) and 318 GEJ cancers (39% SRCC). In the gastric cancer group, 49% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and 51% received primary surgery (PS). All-cause mortality within 90 days postoperatively was lower after nCT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.44; p < 0.001). Also after 90 days, mortality was lower in the nCT group (HR for the interaction variable 2.84, 95% CI 1.87-4.30, p < 0.001; total HR 0.29*2.84 = 0.84). In the GEJ group, 38% received nCT, 22% received nCRT, and 39% received PS. All-cause mortality was lower after nCT (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.93; p = 0.020) compared with PS. The nCRT group was removed from the Cox regression analysis since the Kaplan-Meier curves of nCRT and PS intersected. The results for gastric and GEJ carcinomas were similar between the SRCC and non-SRCC subgroups.

CONCLUSION

For gastric and GEJ diffuse type cancer, including SRCC, nCT was associated with increased survival.

Promising preclinical patient-derived organoid (PDO) and xenograft (PDX) models in upper gastrointestinal cancers: progress and challenges

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers (gastric cancer, oesophageal cancer, liver cancer, colorectal cancer, etc.) are the most common cancers with the highest morbidity and mortality in the world. The therapy for most GI cancers is difficult and is associated with a poor prognosis. In China, upper GI cancers, mainly gastric cancer (GC) and oesophageal cancer (EC), are very common due to Chinese people's characteristics, and more than half of patients are diagnosed with distant metastatic or locally advanced disease. Compared to other solid cancers, such as lung cancer and breast cancer, personalized therapies, especially targeted therapy and immunotherapy, in GC and EC are relatively lacking, leading to poor prognosis. For a long time, most studies were carried out by using in vitro cancer cell lines or in vivo cell line-derived xenograft models, which are unable to reproduce the characteristics of tumours derived from patients, leading to the possible misguidance of subsequent clinical validation. The patient-derived models represented by patient-derived organoid (PDO) and xenograft (PDX) models, known for their high preservation of patient tumour features, have emerged as a very popular platform that has been widely used in numerous studies, especially in the research and development of antitumour drugs and personalized medicine. Herein, based on some of the available published literature, we review the research and application status of PDO and PDX models in GC and EC, as well as detail their future challenges and prospects, to promote their use in basic and translational studies or personalized therapy.

Treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma: A rapidly evolving landscape

Gastric adenocarcinoma (GC) and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma represent frequent and severe diseases whose management has radically changed over the last 10 years. With the advent of second- and third-line standard therapies for metastatic GC patients in the 2010s, the molecular dismemberment of the disease and positive trials with immunotherapy and targeted agents will mark the 2020s. New treatment options have emerged in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic setting. In addition to improved multimodal treatment in operable patients, new subgroups have emerged depending on molecular alterations (HER2, Microsatellite instability) or expression of specific proteins in the tumour (PDL1, Claudin 18.2) making immunohistochemistry central in profiling the tumour for an optimal individualised management. The aim of this review is to describe the current standards of management of early and late stage GC and the molecular markers needed today to optimally manage our patients together with future perspectives on this disease.

Trimodality therapy versus perioperative chemotherapy in the management of locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction (Neo-AEGIS): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The optimum curative approach to adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction is unknown. We aimed to compare trimodality therapy (preoperative radiotherapy with carboplatin plus paclitaxel [CROSS regimen]) with optimum contemporaneous perioperative chemotherapy regimens (epirubicin plus cisplatin or oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil or capecitabine [a modified MAGIC regimen] before 2018 and fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel [FLOT] subsequently).

METHODS

Neo-AEGIS (CTRIAL-IE 10-14) was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 24 centres in Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with clinical tumour stage T2-3, nodal stage N0-3, and M0 adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction were randomly assigned to perioperative chemotherapy (three preoperative and three postoperative 3-week cycles of intravenous 50 mg/m2 epirubicin on day 1 plus intravenous 60 mg/m2 cisplatin or intravenous 130 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 plus continuous infusion of 200 mg/m2 fluorouracil daily or oral 625 mg/m2 capecitabine twice daily up to 2018, with four preoperative and four postoperative 2-week cycles of 2600 mg/m2 fluorouracil, 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m2 leucovorin, and 50 mg/m2 docetaxel intravenously on day 1 as an option from 2018) or trimodality therapy (41·4 Gy in 23 fractions on days 1-5, 8-12, 15-19, 22-26, and 29-31 with intravenous area under the curve 2 mg/mL per min carboplatin plus intravenous 50 mg/m2 paclitaxel on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29). The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug, regardless of which study drug they received, by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival, site of treatment failure, operative complications, toxicity, pathological response (complete [ypT0N0] and major [tumour regression grade 1 and 2]), margin-free resection (R0), and health-related quality of life. Toxicity and safety data were analysed in the safety population, defined as patients who took at least one dose of study drug, according to treatment actually received. The initial power calculation was based on superiority of trimodality therapy (n=366 patients); it was adjusted after FLOT became an option to a non-inferiority design with a margin of 5% for perioperative chemotherapy (n=540). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01726452.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 24, 2013, and Dec 23, 2020, 377 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 362 were included in the intention-to treat population (327 [90%] male and 360 [99%] White): 184 in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 178 in the trimodality therapy group. The trial closed prematurely in December, 2020, after the second interim futility analysis (143 deaths), on the basis of similar survival metrics and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. At a median follow-up of 38·8 months (IQR 16·3-55·1), median overall survival was 48·0 months (95% CI 33·6-64·8) in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 49·2 months (34·8-74·4) in the trimodality therapy group (3-year overall survival 55% [95% CI 47-62] vs 57% [49-64]; hazard ratio 1·03 [95% CI 0·77-1·38]; log-rank p=0·82). Median disease-free survival was 32·4 months (95% CI 22·8-64·8) in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 24·0 months (18·0-40·8) in the trimodality therapy group [hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·68-1·17]; log-rank p=0·41). The pattern of recurrence, locoregional or systemic, was not significantly different (odds ratio 1·35 [95% CI 0·63-2·91], p=0·44). Pathological complete response (odds ratio 0·33 [95% CI 0·14-0·81], p=0·012), major pathological response (0·21 [0·12-0·38], p<0·0001), and R0 rates (0·21 [0·08-0·53], p=0·0003) favoured trimodality therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (49 [27%] of 183 patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group vs 11 [6%] of 178 patients in the trimodality therapy group), followed by diarrhoea (20 [11%] vs none), and pulmonary embolism (ten [5%] vs nine [5%]). One (1%) patient in the perioperative chemotherapy group and three (2%) patients in the trimodality therapy group died from serious adverse events, two (one in each group) of which were possibly related to treatment. No differences were seen in operative mortality (five [3%] deaths in the perioperative chemotherapy group vs four [2%] in the trimodality therapy group), major morbidity, or in global health status at 1 and 3 years.

INTERPRETATION

Although underpowered and incomplete, Neo-AEGIS provides the largest comprehensive randomised dataset for patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction treated with perioperative chemotherapy (predominantly the modified MAGIC regimen), and CROSS trimodality therapy, and reports similar 3-year survival and no major differences in operative and health-related quality of life outcomes. We suggest that these data support continued clinical equipoise.

FUNDING

Health Research Board, Cancer Research UK, Irish Cancer Society, Oesophageal Cancer Fund, and French National Cancer Institute.

Long-Term Postsurgical Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation (CROSS) Versus Chemotherapy (FLOT) for Multimodal Treatment of Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus and the Esophagogastric Junction

BACKGROUND

The question of the ideal neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma has not been answered to date. Multimodal treatment has become a standard treatment for these adenocarcinomas. Currently, perioperative chemotherapy (FLOT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CROSS) is recommended.

METHODS

A monocentric retrospective analysis compared long-term survival after CROSS versus FLOT. The study enrolled patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (EAC) or the esophagogastric junction type I or II undergoing oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between January 2012 and December 2019. The primary objective was to determine the long-term outcome in terms of overall survival. The secondary objectives were to determine differences regarding the histopathologic categories after neoadjuvant treatment and the histomorphologic regression.

RESULTS

The findings showed no survival advantage for one or the other treatment in this highly standardized cohort. All the patients underwent open (CROSS: 9.4% vs. FLOT: 22%), hybrid (CROSS: 82% vs. FLOT: 72%), or minimally invasive (CROSS: 8.9% vs. FLOT: 5.6%) thoracoabdominal esophagectomy. The median post-surgical follow-up period was 57.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.2-109.7 months), and the median survival was longer for the CROSS patients (54 months) than for the FLOT patients (37.2 months) (p = 0.053). The overall 5-years survival was 47% for the entire cohort (48% for the CROSS and 43% for the FLOT patients). The CROSS patients showed a better pathologic response and fewer advanced tumor stages.

CONCLUSION

The improved pathologic response after CROSS cannot be translated into longer overall survival. To date, the choice of which neoadjuvant treatment to use can be made only on the basis of clinical parameters and the patient's performance status.

Independent Stage Classification for Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma

In gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma cases, a prognosis based on ypTNM staging could be affected by preoperative therapy. Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma and gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent preoperative therapy followed by surgical resection from 2006 through 2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database. To enable stage-by-stage OS comparisons, tumors were classified into four gross ypTNM groups: ypT1/2, N-negative; ypT1/2, N-positive; ypT3/4, N-negative; and ypT3/4, N-positive. Prognostic factors were examined, and an OS prediction nomogram was developed for patients with abdominal/lower esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma, representing GEJ cancers. We examined 25,463 patient records. When compared by gross ypTNM group, the abdominal/lower esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma groups had similar OS rates, differing from those of other esophageal or gastric cancers. Cox regression analysis of patients with GEJ cancers showed that preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with shorter OS than preoperative chemotherapy after adjustment for the ypTNM group (hazard ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.24-1.39, p < 0.001), likely owing to downstaging effects. The nomogram had a concordance index of 0.833 and a time-dependent area under the curve of 0.669. OS prediction in GEJ adenocarcinoma cases should include preoperative therapy regimens. Our OS prediction nomogram provided reasonable OS prediction for patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma, and future validation is needed.

Individual Participant Data Network Meta-Analysis of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Carcinoma

PURPOSE

The optimal neoadjuvant treatment for resectable carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (TE) or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains a matter of debate. We performed an individual participant data (IPD) network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to study the effect of chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, with a focus on tumor location and histology subgroups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All, published or unpublished, RCTs closed to accrual before December 31, 2015 and having compared at least two of the following strategies were eligible: upfront surgery (S), chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS), and chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRS). All analyses were conducted on IPD obtained from investigators. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The IPD-NMA was analyzed by a one-step mixed-effect Cox model adjusted for age, sex, tumor location, and histology. The NMA was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018107158).

RESULTS

IPD were obtained for 26 of 35 RCTs (4,985 of 5,807 patients) corresponding to 12 comparisons for CS-S, 12 for CRS-S, and four for CRS-CS. CS and CRS led to increased OS when compared with S with hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86 (0.75 to 0.99), P = .03 and HR = 0.77 (0.68 to 0.87), P < .001 respectively. The NMA comparison of CRS versus CS for OS gave a HR of 0.90 (0.74 to 1.09), P = .27 (consistency P = .26, heterogeneity P = .0038). For CS versus S, a larger effect on OS was observed for GEJ versus TE tumors (P = .036). For the CRS versus S and CRS versus CS, a larger effect on OS was observed for women (P = .003, .012, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy were consistently better than S alone across histology, but with some variation in the magnitude of treatment effect by sex for CRS and tumor location for CS. A strong OS difference between CS and CRS was not identified.

Peri-operative chemotherapy versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy in treatment of gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinomas: A 10-year cohort study

BACKGROUND

Gastro-oesophageal junctional (GOJ) cancers have been, more latterly, considered a distinct tumor entity with characteristic genetic profiles. The optimal multimodal therapy of advanced GOJ cancers remains debatable. In this comparative study, we analyzed the outcomes of peri-operative chemotherapy (CT) versus pre-operative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in treatment of advanced GOJ adenocarcinomas.

METHODS

This study included patients with locally advanced but resectable GOJ adenocarcinomas who underwent surgical resection after oncological therapy between 2010 till 2019 at our institution. Follow up to May 2021 was completed. The outcomes between CT and CRT groups were retrospectively analyzed. The long-term follow up data was obtained via direct contact with the patients during oncological clinics, cross-checked with hospital/national patients' electronic databases.

RESULTS

107 patients had GOJ cancers; 90 (84%) patients met our inclusion criteria. Perioperative chemotherapy was administrated in 65 (72%) patients. Overall median survival rate was 2.2 years in CRT-group compared to 2.4 years in CT-group (p-value 0.29), with comparable recurrence rates (48% vs 36% respectively). R0-resections were higher in CRT-group (84%) compared to CT-group (71%), yet insignificant p-value 0.197. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy achieved higher complete pathological response (28% vs 6%, p-value 0.009) and negative lymph nodes rates (64% vs 37%, p-value 0.014) compared to CT-group. Short-term outcomes (postoperative complications, morbidity rates and length of hospital stay) were similar across both groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with higher complete pathological response and negative lymph nodes rates for GOJ adenocarcinomas compared to peri-operative chemotherapy, without an increase in postoperative complications or morbidity rates. However, it wasn't associated with improved overall or disease-free survival rates.

The Evolution of Neo-Adjuvant Therapy in the Treatment of Oesophageal and Gastro-Oesophageal Junction Adenocarcinomas

Historically, oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinomas were associated with a poor prognosis. The advent of neoadjuvant therapy has transformed the management of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinomas further and offers the possibility to reverse disease progression, eliminate micrometastasis, and offer potentially better outcomes for these patients. This review provides an overview of landmark clinical trials in this area, with different treatment regimens considered over the years as well as potential therapeutic agents on the horizon that may transform the management of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinomas further.

Current neoadjuvant therapy for operable locally advanced esophageal cancer

Locally advanced esophageal cancer has a poor prognosis, while an increasing number of patients are diagnosed with that. Neoadjuvant therapy has become a hot topic in treating locally advanced esophageal cancer to improve its survival benefit. The efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery has been confirmed by many studies, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy are included in the guidelines. In recent years, targeted therapy and immunotherapy have emerged, and more studies are evaluating the efficacy of combining them with neoadjuvant therapy for operable esophageal cancer patients. Even though the preliminary data is disappointing, many trials are still under investigation without improving survival benefits. New indexes used as surrogate endpoints (e.g., major pathologic response and pathological complete response) are emerging to accelerate the development and approval of neoadjuvant drugs. This review summarized the research progress in neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer and discussed which primary endpoint should be used in neoadjuvant therapy trials.

Preoperative chemoradiation-induced hematological toxicity and related vertebral dosimetry evaluations in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer: data from a phase III clinical trial

BACKGROUND

To explore the hematological toxicity (HT) induced by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and to identify the appropriate vertebral body (VB) dosimetric parameters for predicting HT in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (GC).

METHODS

In the phase III study, 302 patients with GC from an ongoing multi-center randomized clinical trial (NCT01815853) were included. Patients from two major centers were grouped into training and external validation cohorts. The nCT group received three cycles of XELOX chemotherapy, while the nCRT received the same dose-reduced chemotherapy plus 45 Gy radiotherapy. The complete blood counts at baseline, during neoadjuvant treatment, and in the preoperative period were compared between the nCT and nCRT groups. The VB was retrospectively contoured and the dose-volume parameters were extracted in the nCRT group. Patients' clinical characteristics, VB dosimetric parameters, and HTs were statistically analyzed. Instances of HT were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 (CTCAE v5.0). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to identify the optimal cut-off points for dosimetric variables and verify the prediction efficiency of the dosimetric index in both training and external validation cohorts.

RESULTS

In the training cohort, 27.4% Grade 3 + HTs were noted in the nCRT group and 16.2% in the nCT group (P = 0.042). A similar result was exhibited in the validation cohort, with 35.0% Grade 3 + HTs in the nCRT group and 13.2% in the nCT group (P = 0.025). The multivariate analysis of the training cohort revealed that V₅ was associated with Grade 3 + leukopenia (P = 0.000), Grade 3 + thrombocytopenia (P = 0.001), and Grade 3 + total HTs (P = 0.042). The Spearman correlation analysis identified a significant correlation of V₅ with the white blood cell nadir (P = 0.0001) and platelet nadir (P = 0.0002). The ROC curve identified the optimal cut-off points for V₅ and showed that V₅ < 88.75% could indicate a decreased risk of Grade 3 + leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and total HTs in the training as well as the external validation cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with nCT, nCRT could increase the risk of Grade 3 + HT in patients with locally advanced GC. Dose constraints of V₅ < 88.75% in irradiated VB could reduce the incidence of Grade 3 + HT.

Effects of resistance exercise in elderly cancer patients

Objective

To investigate the effects of resistance exercise (RE) in elderly cancer patients (ECPs).

Methods

Convenience sampling was used to select 240 ECPs, who received radiotherapy and chemotherapy at the Department of Oncology of a Level-A tertiary hospital in Shanghai from September 2019 to August 2020, and they were randomized to control (CON) and experimental (EXP). After a 12-week intervention, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC) and the Functional Independence Measure (FIMSM) were used to evaluate the effects of RE in two groups.

Results

After 12-week intervention, the total FIMSM score and the scores of self-care, transfers, locomotion, communication, and social cognition of EXP was higher than before, and compared with CON (P<0.05). However, the intervention did not effectively improve the sphincter control (P>0.05). The SF-36 and CD-RISC scores of EXP were higher than those of CON, and FACIT-F score was lower than that of CON with statistically significant differences (P<0.05).

Conclusion

RE effectively relieved the cancer-related fatigue (CRF) in ECPs, improved their mental state, quality of life and mobility.

Management of Esophago-Gastric Junction Carcinoma: A Narrative Multidisciplinary Review

Esophagogastric junction (EGJ) carcinoma represents a specific site of disease, given the opportunities for multimodal clinical care and management and the possibilities of combined treatments. It encompasses various clinical subgroups of disease that are heterogeneous and deserve different treatments; therefore, the guidelines have progressively evolved over time, considering the evidence provided by clinical trials. The aim of this narrative review was to summarize the main evidence, which orientates the current guidelines, and to collect the main ongoing studies to address existing gray areas.

Trends in Distal Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer Care: The Dutch Nationwide Ivory Study

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the nationwide trends in care and accompanied postoperative outcomes for patients with distal esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The introduction of transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive surgery, and neo-adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy changed care for patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Patients after elective transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma in the Netherlands between 2007-2016 were included. The primary aim was to evaluate trends in both care and postoperative outcomes for the included patients. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after transthoracic and tran-shiatal esophagectomy were compared, stratified by time periods.

RESULTS

Among 4712 patients included, 74% had distal esophageal tumors and 87% had adenocarcinomas. Between 2007 and 2016, the proportion of transthoracic esophagectomy increased from 41% to 81%, and neo-adjuvant treatment and minimally invasive esophagectomy increased from 31% to 96%, and from 7% to 80%, respectively. Over this 10-year period, postoperative outcomes improved: postoperative morbidity decreased from 66.6% to 61.8% ( P = 0.001), R0 resection rate increased from 90.0% to 96.5% (P <0.001), median lymph node harvest increased from 15 to 19 ( P <0.001), and median survival increased from 35 to 41 months ( P = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide cohort, a transition towards more neo-adju-vant treatment, transthoracic esophagectomy and minimally invasive surgery was observed over a 10-year period, accompanied by decreased postoperative morbidity, improved surgical radicality and lymph node harvest, and improved survival.

Distinct Differences in Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Adenocarcinoma in 2194 Patients: In Memory of Rebecca A. Carr, February 24, 1988-January 19, 2021

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer and gastric cancer (GC) and identify clinicopathological and oncological differences.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

GEJ cancer and GC are frequently studied together. Although the treatment approach for each often differs, clinico-pathological and oncological differences between the 2 have not been fully evaluated.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with GEJ cancer or GC who underwent R0 resection at our center between January 2000 and December 2016. Clinicopathological characteristics, disease-specific survival (DSS), and site of first recurrence were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 2194 patients were analyzed: 1060 (48.3%) with GEJ cancer and 1134 (51.7%) with GC. Patients with GEJ cancer were younger (64 vs 66 years; P < 0.001), more often received neoadjuvant treatment (70.9% vs 30.2%; P < 0.001), and had lower pathological T and N status. Five-year DSS was 62.2% in patients with GEJ cancer and 74.6% in patients with GC ( P < 0.001). After adjustment for clinicopathological factors, DSS remained worse in patients with GEJ cancer (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.26; P < 0.001). The cumulative incidence of recurrence was approximately 10% higher in patients with GEJ cancer ( P < 0.001). The site of first recurrence was more likely to be hematogenous in patients with GEJ cancer (60.1% vs 31.4%; P < 0.001) and peritoneal in patients with GC (52.9% vs 12.5%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

GEJ adenocarcinoma is more aggressive, with a higher incidence of recurrence and worse DSS, compared with gastric adenocarcinoma. Distinct differences between GEJ cancer and GC, especially in patterns of recurrence, may affect evaluation of optimal treatment strategies.

Single-center experience in implementation of endoscopic surveillance protocol after esophagectomy

Esophageal cancer has a notably high recurrence rate with a paucity of robust evidence in defining the optimal surveillance strategy. The surveillance protocol at our institution comprises of annual esophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) from years 1 to 5 postoperatively. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the endoscopic surveillance at our center and ascertain the value of endoscopy in detecting local recurrence after esophagectomy. A retrospective cohort review of all patients (320 patients) who underwent esophagectomy between 2013 and 2018 was conducted. The local esophageal cancer database and corresponding OGD reports were accessed to obtain data on demographics, operation details, local recurrence, and endoscopy performed. 1086 OGDs were performed between 2014 and 2020, broadly categorized to surveillance and symptomatic OGDs; 555 and 531, respectively. Surveillance OGDs detected four asymptomatic local recurrences, of which only one was treated with curative intent. Symptomatic OGDs resulted in a higher yield for the detection of local recurrence compared with surveillance endoscopy; 5% versus 0.7%, with overall median time-to-recurrence of 11.5 months (95% confidence interval 9-17). Of local recurrences, 85.7% occurred within the first 2 years postoperatively. The proportion of endoscopic findings differed between intensive and ad hoc surveillance cohorts for strictures, esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and sloughing. Thirteen patients were diagnosed with histologically confirmed Barrett's with no subsequent local recurrences. Surveillance endoscopy had a low positive yield rate with subsequent minimal survival benefits. Therefore, it is prudent to consider an alternative protocol that focuses on the period with the highest risk of recurrence and symptom presentation.

The Perioperative and Operative Management of Esophageal and Gastric Cancer

Optimal management of esophageal and gastric cancer during the perioperative period requires a coordinated multidisciplinary treatment effort. Accurate staging guides treatment strategy. Advances in minimally invasive surgery and endoscopy have reduced risks associated with resection while maintaining oncological standards. Although the standard perioperative chemo-and radiotherapy regimens have not yet been established, randomized control trials exploring this subject show promising results.

Esophageal Cancer: Whether and What Before or After Surgery?

Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer and the sixth most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Surgery has been the mainstay of the treatment of esophageal cancer. However, given the dismal survival with surgery alone, other modalities, e.g., chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT), have been used for the management of these cancers. This review aims to look at the evolution of multi-modality management of esophageal cancer and tries to answer certain questions pertaining to the management of these cancers.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy versus Chemotherapy for Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma; Which Is the Optimal Treatment Option?

Background: Locally advanced gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJ) is treated with either perioperative chemotherapy (CT) or preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) followed by surgery. The aim of this study was to compare pathologic response and long-term outcomes in junction adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant RCT versus CT. Methods: All patients with locally advanced GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) followed by surgery between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Results: A total of 94 patients were included, 67 (71.2%) RCT and 27 (28.8%) CT. Complete pathologic response was more frequent in RCT patients (13.4% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.009) with a trend to better lymph node control (ypN0) (55.2% vs. 33.3%; p = 0.057). RCT offered no benefit in R0 resection (66.7% vs. 72.1% CT, p = 0.628) and was related to higher postoperative cardiovascular complications (35.8% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.017). Long-term overall and disease-free survival were similar (5-year OS 61.1% RCT vs. 75.7% CT, p = 0.259; 5-year DFS 33.5% RCT vs. 22.8% CT; p = 0.763). NAT type was neither independently associated with pathologic response nor long-term survival. Discussion: Patients with locally advanced GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with RCT had more postoperative cardiovascular complications but higher rates of complete pathologic response and a trend to superior locoregional lymph node control. This did not translate in a survival or recurrence benefit.

The Role of Surgery in the Management of Gastric Cancer: State of the Art

Surgery still represents the mainstay of treatment of all stages of gastric cancer (GC). Surgical resections represent potentially curative options in the case of early GC with a low risk of node metastasis. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and indocyanine green fluorescence are novel techniques which may improve the employment of stomach-sparing procedures, ameliorating quality of life without compromising oncological radicality. Nonetheless, the diffusion of these techniques is limited in Western countries. Conversely, radical gastrectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodal treatment represents a valid option in the case of advanced GC. Differences between Eastern and Western recommendations still exist, and the optimal multimodal strategy is still a matter of investigation. Recent chemotherapy protocols have made surgery available for patients with oligometastatic disease. In this context, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy via HIPEC or PIPAC has emerged as an alternative weapon for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In conclusion, the surgical management of GC is still evolving together with the multimodal strategy. It is mandatory for surgeons to be conscious of the current evolution of the surgical management of GC in the era of multidisciplinary and tailored medicine.

Current landscape of radiation oncology in esophageal cancer: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Esophageal cancer is an aggressive disease that is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. The overall treatment paradigm for esophageal cancer has changed considerably over the past decade. This narrative review aims to summarize the current landscape of radiation oncology for esophageal cancer.

Methods

A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed database and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed, focusing on studies published within the last 10 years. Our search queried "esophageal cancer [AND] neoadjuvant radiation" as well as "locally advanced esophageal cancer [AND] definitive radiation". Our search resulted in 298 total references. These were manually reviewed, and only 58 references were within our scope of interest ranging from 2012-2022.

Key Content and Findings

For resectable esophageal cancer, neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery has been defined as the standard of care over the past decade. In patients with incomplete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation, the benefit of immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting has recently been established. Ongoing studies are examining whether perioperative chemotherapy may be equivalent to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. For locally advanced esophageal cancer, recent studies have failed to show a benefit with radiation dose escalation in an unselected population, although the use of early positron emission tomography (PET) response to guide dose escalation is currently being studied. Other ongoing studies aiming to improve outcomes in locally advanced esophageal cancer involve using proton beam therapy to reduce toxicity and combining immunotherapy or targeted therapies with chemoradiation to amplify response.

Conclusions

Recent advances in radiation oncology may continue to improve outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer.

Treatments for resectable esophageal cancer: from traditional systemic therapy to immunotherapy

ABSTRACT

Esophageal cancer (EC) has a high incidence and poor prognosis. The two major histological types, squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma, differ in their epidemiology and treatment options. Patients with locally advanced EC benefit from multimodal therapy concepts including neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and perioperative chemotherapy. Currently, immunotherapy for the solid tumor is a hot spot. Treatment with adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is the first immunotherapy for resectable EC listed in the latest National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for the Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers. Recent clinical trials have established ICIs for three treatment models of resectable EC. Their short-term results demonstrated ideal efficacy and tolerable toxicity, though some concerns remain. This review summarizes the novel data on the ICIs for resectable EC and lists the registered related clinical trials. Hopefully, this review can provide a reference for ongoing research on the treatment options for resectable EC.

Does Loosening the Inclusion Criteria of the CROSS Trial Impact Outcomes in the Curative-Intent Trimodality Treatment of Oesophageal and Gastroesophageal Cancer Patients?

AIM

To determine the efficacy of preoperative chemoradiotherapy as per the CROSS protocol for oesophageal/gastroesophageal junction cancer (OEGEJC), when expanded to patients outside of the inclusion/exclusion criteria defined in the original clinical trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively on 229 OEGEJC patients referred for curative-intent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Outcomes including pathological complete response (pCR), overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients who met CROSS inclusion criteria (MIC) versus those who failed to meet criteria (FMIC) were determined.

RESULTS

In total, 42.8% of patients MIC, whereas 57.2% FMIC; 16.6% of patients did not complete definitive surgery. The MIC cohort had higher rates of pCR, when compared with the FMIC cohort (33.3% versus 20.6%, P = 0.039). The MIC cohort had a better RFS, cancer-specific survival and OS compared with the FMIC cohort (P = 0.006, P = 0.004 and P = 0.009, respectively). Age >75 years and pretreatment weight loss >10% were not associated with a poorer RFS (P = 0.541 and 0.458, respectively). Compared with stage I-III patients, stage IVa was associated with a poorer RFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.158; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.339-3.480, P = 0.001). Tumours >8 cm in length or >5 cm in width had a trend towards worse RFS (HR = 2.060; 95% CI = 0.993-4.274, P = 0.052).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that the robust requirements of the CROSS trial may limit treatment for patients with potentially curable OEGEJC and can be adapted to include patients with a good performance status who are older than 75 years or have >10% pretreatment weight loss. However, the inclusion of patients with celiac nodal metastases or tumours >8 cm in length or >5 cm in width may be associated with poor outcomes.

Advances in the curative management of oesophageal cancer

The incidence of oesophageal cancer, in particular adenocarcinoma, has markedly increased over the last four decades with adenocarcinoma becoming the dominant subtype in the West, and mortality rates are high. Nevertheless, overall survival of patients with oesophageal cancer has doubled in the past 20 years, with earlier diagnosis and improved treatments benefiting those patients who can be treated with curative intent. Advances in endotherapy, surgical approaches, and multimodal and other combination therapies have been reported. New vistas have emerged in targeted therapies and immunotherapy, informed by new knowledge in genomics and molecular biology, which present opportunities for personalised cancer therapy and novel clinical trials. This review focuses exclusively on the curative intent treatment pathway, and highlights emerging advances.

Evaluation of International Contemporary Operative Outcomes and Management Trends Associated With Esophagectomy: A 4-Year Study of >6000 Patients Using ECCG Definitions and the Online Esodata Database

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to verify the utility of international online datasets to benchmark and monitor treatment and outcomes in major oncologic procedures.

BACKGROUND

The Esophageal Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) has standardized the reporting of complications after esophagectomy within the web-based Esodata.org database. This study will utilize the Esodata dataset to update contemporary outcomes and to monitor trends in practice in an era of rapid technical change.

METHODS

This observational study, based on a prospectively developed specific database, updates esophagectomy outcomes collected between 2015 and 2018. Evolution in patient and operative demographics, treatment, complications, and quality outcome measures were compared between patients undergoing surgery in 2015 to 2016 and 2017 to 2018.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, 6022 esophagectomies from 39 centers were entered into Esodata. Most patients were male (78.3%) with median age 63. Patients having minimally invasive esophagectomy constituted 3177 (52.8%), a chest anastomosis 3838 (63.7%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy 2834 (48.7%), and R0 resections 5441 (93.5%). For quality measures, 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.0% and 4.5%, readmissions 9.7%, transfusions 12%, escalation in care 22.1%, and discharge home 89.4%. Trends in quality measures between 2015 and 2016 (2407 patients) and 2017 and 2018 (3318 patients) demonstrated significant (P < 0.05) improvements in readmissions 11.1% to 8.5%, blood transfusions 14.3% to 10.2%, and escalation in care from 24.5% to 20% A significantly (P < 0.05) reduced incidence in pneumonia (15.3%-12.8%) and renal failure (1.0%-0.4%) was observed. Anastomotic leak rates increased from 11.7% to 13.1%, whereas leaks requiring surgery decreased 3.3% and 3.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Esodata database provides a valuable resource for assessing contemporary international outcomes. This study highlights an increased application of minimally invasive approaches, a high percentage of complications, improvements in pneumonia and key quality metrics, but with anastomotic leak rates still >10%.

Exercise prehabilitation during neoadjuvant chemotherapy may enhance tumour regression in oesophageal cancer: results from a prospective non-randomised trial

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence for the use of exercise in cancer patients and data supporting enhanced tumour volume reduction following chemotherapy in animal models. To date, there is no reported histopathological evidence of a similar oncological benefit in oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

A prospective non-randomised trial compared a structured prehabilitation exercise intervention during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery versus conventional best-practice for oesophageal cancer patients. Biochemical and body composition analyses were performed at multiple time points. Outcome measures included radiological and pathological markers of disease regression. Logistic regression calculated ORs with 95% CI for the likelihood of pathological response adjusting for chemotherapy regimen and chemotherapy delivery.

RESULTS

Comparison of the Intervention (n=21) and Control (n=19) groups indicated the Intervention group had higher rates of tumour regression (Mandard TRG 1-3 Intervention n=15/20 (75%) vs Control n=7/19 (36.8%) p=0.025) including adjusted analyses (OR 6.57; 95% CI 1.52 to 28.30). Combined tumour and node downstaging (Intervention n=9 (42.9%) vs Control n=3 (15.8%) p=0.089) and Fat Free Mass index were also improved (Intervention 17.8 vs 18.7 kg/m²; Control 16.3 vs 14.7 kg/m², p=0.026). Differences in markers of immunity (CD-3 and CD-8) and inflammation (IL-6, VEGF, INF-y, TNFa, MCP-1 and EGF) were observed.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest improved tumour regression and downstaging in the exercise intervention group and should prompt larger studies on this topic.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03626610.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Effectiveness of the Tailored, Early Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program (t-ECRP) based on ERAS in improving the physical function recovery for patients following minimally invasive esophagectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Perioperative rehabilitation management is essential to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Limited reports, however, have focused on quantitative, detailed early activity plans for patients receiving minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). The purpose of this research was to estimate the effectiveness of the Tailored, Early Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program (t-ECRP) based on ERAS in the recovery of bowel and physical functions for patients undergoing MIE.

METHODS

In this single-blind, 2-arm, parallel-group, randomized pilot clinical trial, patients admitted to the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University from June 2019 to February 2020 were selected and randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG). The participants in the IG received medical care based on the t-ECRP strategy during perioperative period, and participants in the CG received routine care. The recovery of bowel and physical functions, readiness for hospital discharge (RHD), and postoperative hospital stay were evaluated on the day of discharge.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifteen cases with esophageal cancer (EC) were enrolled and randomized to the IG (n = 107) or CG (n = 108). The mean age was 62.58 years (SD 9.07) and 71.16% were male. For EC, 53.49% were mid-location cancers and 79.07% were classified as pathological stage II and III cancers. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics and baseline physical functions. Participants in the IG group presented significantly shorter lengths of time to first flatus (P < 0.001), first postoperative bowel movement (P = 0.024), and for up and go test (P < 0.001), and lower scores of frailty (P < 0.001). The analysis also showed that participants in the IG had higher scores of RHD and shorter lengths of postoperative stay than in the CG (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The t-ECRP appears to improve bowel and physical function recovery, ameliorate RHD, and shorten postoperative hospital stay for patients undergoing MIE. Clinicians should consider prescribing quantitative, detailed, and individualized early activity plans for these patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01998230).

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on nodal regression and survival in oesophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of lymph node regression (LNR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) for oesophageal and gastro-oeosphageal adenocarcinoma remains unclear. This study aimed to characterise the long-term survival outcomes of LNR in patients having resectional surgery after nCT.

METHODS

This study included patients undergoing oesophagectomy or extended total gastrectomy for oesophageal and junctional tumours (Siewert types 1,2,3) at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham from 2012 to 2018. Lymph nodes retrieved at surgery were examined for evidence of a response to chemotherapy. Patients were classified as lymph node-negative (either negative nodes with no evidence of previous tumour involvement or negative with evidence of complete regression) or positive with either partial or no response.

RESULTS

This study identified 183 patients who received nCT, of which 71% (130/183) had positive lymph nodes. Of these 130 patients, 44% (57/130) had a lymph node response and 56% (73/130) did not. The remaining 53 patients (29.0%) had negative lymph nodes with no evidence of tumour. Lymph node responders had a significant survival benefit compared to patients without lymph node response, but shorter than those with negative lymph nodes (median: 27 vs 18 vs NR months, p < 0·001). On multivariable analysis, lymph node responders had an improved overall (Hazard ratio (HR): 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.92, p < 0.001) and recurrence-free (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82-0.98, p = 0.030) survival.

CONCLUSION

Lymph node regression is an important prognostic factor, warranting closer evaluation over primary tumour response to help with planning further adjuvant therapy in these patients.

Predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is often used prior to surgical resection for oesophageal adenocarcinoma but remains ineffective in a high proportion of patients. The histological Mandard tumour regression grade is used to determine chemoresponse but is not available at the time of treatment decision-making. The aim of this cohort study was to identify factors that predict chemotherapy response prior to surgery.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of patients undergoing surgical resection for oesophageal adenocarcinoma from a high-volume UK institution was used. Patients were subcategorised using pathological tumour response into 'responders' (Mandard grade 1-3) and 'non-responders' (Mandard grade 4 and 5). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to calculate crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for responder status adjusting for a variety of parameters. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 315 patients included, 102 (32%) were responders and 213 (68%) non-responders. A decrease in radiological tumour volume (OR 1.92 95%CI 1.02-3.62; p = 0.05), a 'partial response' RECIST score (OR 7.16 95%CI 1.49-34.36; p = 0.01), a clinically improved dysphagia score (OR 2.79 95%CI 1.05-7.04; p = 0.04) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 0.06 95%CI 0.02-0.13; p = 0.000) influenced responder status. ROC curve analysis for responder status utilising all available parameters had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86.

CONCLUSION

This study has highlighted the potential for using pre-defined factors to identify those patients who have responded to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, prior to surgical resection, potentially facilitating a more individualised therapeutic approach.

Comparison of outcomes between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) followed by surgery are two standard strategies in treating locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC). We aim to compare NCRT and NCT in the management of locally advanced EC patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and conferences were systematically searched for clinical trials published up to September 2021. Pairwise comparisons and Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) by reporting the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020170619).

FINDINGS

25 trials with 4563 EC patients met inclusion criteria. NCRT improved OS (HR: 0·72, 95%CrI: 0·63-0·82) and DFS (HR: 0·72, 95%CrI: 0·63-0·81) compared to surgery alone. NCRT improved OS (HR: 0·83, 95%CrI: 0·69-0·99) and DFS (HR: 0·83, 95%CI: 0·69-0·99) compared to NCT. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that both NCRT (HR: 0·77, 95%CrI: 0·65-0·90) and NCT (HR: 0·81, 95%CrI: 0·67-0·99) improved OS than surgery in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients. No significant differences were observed between NCRT and NCT regarding OS (HR: 0·95, 95%CrI: 0·75-1·19) and DFS (HR: 0·90, 95%CrI: 0·50-1·62) in ESCC. The short-term outcomes were similar between NCRT and NCT. The three treatment strategies were comparable in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) subpopulations.

INTERPRETATION

The study corroborated current guidelines in addressing the importance of analysing EC according to histopathological types. The analysis suggested that in locally advanced ESCC patients, both NCRT and NCT improved OS as compared to surgery alone, whereas no clear evidence supported the optimal strategies between NCRT and NCT. More RCTs comparing different therapeutic strategies in EAC patients are warranted.

FUNDING

Köln Fortune Program, University of Cologne.

Surgical Therapy of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma-Current Standards and Future Perspectives

Simple Summary

Subtotal resection of the esophagus with resection of local lymph nodes is the oncological procedure of choice for advanced esophageal cancer. Reconstruction of the intestinal tract is predominantly performed with a gastric tube. Even in specialized centers, this surgical procedure is associated with a high complication but low mortality rate. Therefore, clinical research aims to develop peri- and intra-operative strategies to improve the patient related outcome.

Abstract

Transthoracic esophagectomy is currently the predominant curative treatment option for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. The majority of carcinomas present as locally advanced tumors requiring multimodal strategies with either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy alone. Minimally invasive, including robotic, techniques are increasingly applied with a broad spectrum of technical variations existing for the oncological resection as well as gastric reconstruction. At the present, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is the preferred technique of reconstruction (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). With standardized surgical procedures, a complete resection of the primary tumor can be achieved in almost 95% of patients. Even in expert centers, postoperative morbidity remains high, with an overall complication rate of 50–60%, whereas 30- and 90-day mortality are reported to be <2% and <6%, respectively. Due to the complexity of transthoracic esophagetomy and its associated morbidity, esophageal surgery is recommended to be performed in specialized centers with an appropriate caseload yet to be defined. In order to reduce postoperative morbidity, the selection of patients, preoperative rehabilitation and postoperative fast-track concepts are feasible strategies of perioperative management. Future directives aim to further centralize esophageal services, to individualize surgical treatment for high-risk patients and to implement intraoperative imaging modalities modifying the oncological extent of resection and facilitating surgical reconstruction.

Prognosis after neoadjuvant chemoradiation or chemotherapy for locally advanced gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Trials typically group cancers of the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) with oesophageal or gastric cancer when studying neoadjuvant chemoradiation and perioperative chemotherapy, so the results may not be fully applicable to GOJ cancer. Because optimal neoadjuvant treatment for GOJ cancer remains controversial, outcomes with neoadjuvant chemoradiation versus chemotherapy for locally advanced GOJ adenocarcinoma were compared retrospectively.

METHODS

Data were collected from all patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery for adenocarcinoma located at the GOJ at a single high-volume institution between 2002 and 2017. Postoperative major complications and mortality were compared between groups using Fisher's exact test. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed by log rank test and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Cumulative incidence functions were used to estimate recurrence, and groups were compared using Gray's test.

RESULTS

Of 775 patients, 650 had neoadjuvant chemoradiation and 125 had chemotherapy. These groups were comparable in terms of clinical tumour and lymph node categories, although the chemoradiation group had greater proportions of white men, complete pathological response to chemotherapy, and smaller proportions of diffuse cancer, poor differentiation, and neurovascular invasion. Postoperative major complications (20.0 versus 17.6 per cent) and 30-day mortality (1.7 versus 1.6 per cent) were not significantly different between the chemoradiation and chemotherapy groups. After adjustment, type of therapy (chemoradiation versus chemotherapy) was not significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio (HR) 1.26, 95 per cent c.i. 0.96 to 1.67) or DFS (HR 1.27, 0.98 to 1.64). Type of recurrence (local, regional, or distant) did not differ after neoadjuvant chemoradiation versus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing surgical resection for locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the GOJ, OS and DFS did not differ significantly between patients who had neoadjuvant chemoradiation compared with chemotherapy.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus upfront surgery for carcinoma of the oesophagus or the gastro-oesophageal junction

INTRODUCTION

Which neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced thoracic oesophagus (TE) or gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma is best remains an open question. Randomised controlled trials variously accrued patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, making strong conclusions hard to obtain. The primary objective of this individual participant data meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible trials should have closed to accrual before 2016 and compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery (CS) to surgery alone. All relevant published and unpublished trials were identified via searches of electronic databases, conference proceedings and clinical trial registers. The main end-point was OS. Investigators were contacted to obtain the individual patient data, which was recorded, harmonised and checked. A random-effects Cox model, stratified by trial, was used for meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were preplanned.

RESULTS

16 trials were identified as eligible. Individual patient data were obtained from 12 trial and 2478 patients. CS was associated with an improved OS versus surgery, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83 [0.72-0.96], p < 0.0001, translating to an absolute benefit of 5.7% at 5-years from 16.8% to 22.5%. Treatment effects did not vary substantially between adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.73 [0.62-0.87]) and squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.91 [0.76-1.08], interaction p = 0.26). A somewhat more pronounced effect was observed in gastro-oesophageal junction (HR = 0.68 [0.50-0.93]) versus TE (HR = 0.87 [0.75-1.00], interaction p = 0.07). CS was also associated with a greater disease-free survival (HR = 0.74 [0.64-0.85], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy conferred a better OS than surgery alone and should be considered in all anatomical location and histological subtypes.

A multicenter single-arm trial of sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy for neoadjuvant treatment of resectable esophageal cancer (SIN-ICE study)

Background

Preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer (EC); however, it is associated with increased postoperative complications and mortality. Recently, Immune Checkpoint inhibitors have been incorporated in the treatment of advanced EC. Its role in the preoperative setting has not been established yet. In this multicenter, single-arm study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy with sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy in treating EC.

Methods

Patients received neoadjuvant therapy with 3 cycles of sintilimab 200 mg Q3W in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy. Surgery was performed within 4–6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy. The primary endpoints of the trial were pathological complete response (pCR) and safety.

Results

A total of 23 patients (21 men and 2 women) were enrolled. Surgery was completed in 17 participants, with 16 achieving R0 resection and 1 had R1 resection, 5 participants refused surgery. One patient progressed prior to surgery. Twenty one patients (91%) had significant improvement in their dysphagia following treatment as assessed by Stooler’s criteria. The majority of patients who underwent resection have a good pathological response and downstaging rate was 76.5% (13/17). A pCR was achieved in 6 cases (6/17, 35.3%) and major pathological response (MPR) in 9 cases (9/17, 52.9%). The main preoperative adverse events (AEs) were vomiting (13/23, 56.5%), leukopenia (12/23, 52.2%), neutropenia (9/23, 39.1%), and malaise (8/23, 34.8%). Immune-related AEs were mild and included hypothyroidism (2/23, 8.7%) and rash (4/23, 17.4%). The incidence of ≥ grade 3 treatment related AEs was 30.4% (7/23). There were no ≥ grade 4 AEs.

Conclusions

Sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant treatment of EC is safe and lead to a high pCR. Therefore, further testing is warranted.

Recent Progress in the Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

Neoadjuvant therapies, primarily chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, are able to improve the overall survival (OS) in patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer (EC) based on the results of several randomized clinical trials. The advantage of neoadjuvant therapy is chiefly attributed to the decreased risk of local-regional recurrence and distant metastasis. Thus, it has been recommended as standard treatment for patients with resectable EC. However, several fundamental problems remain. First, the combination of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), and surgery for EC patients with different histological types remain controversial. Furthermore, to reduce the toxicity of preoperative chemotherapy and the risk of complications caused by preoperative radiation therapy, the treatment protocols of nCT and nCRT still need to be investigated and optimized by prospective trials. Moreover, for patients with complete clinical response following neoadjuvant therapy, it is worth ascertaining whether a "watch and wait" surveillance plus surgery-as-needed policy is more favorable, as well as, in addition to preoperative chemoradiotherapy, whether immunotherapy, especially when combined with the traditional neoadjuvant therapy regimens, brings new prospects for EC treatment. In this review, we summarize the recent insights into the research progress and existing problems of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced resectable EC.

Neoadjuvant versus Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy is Associated with Improved Survival for Patients with Resectable Gastric and Gastroesophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for patients with localized gastric cancer remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes between neoadjuvant and postoperative CRT for patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 152 patients with gastric (42%) or GEJ (58%) adenocarcinoma who underwent definitive surgical resection and received either neoadjuvant or postoperative CRT between 2005 and 2017 at the authors' institution. The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 37.5 months. Neoadjuvant CRT was performed for 102 patients (67%) and postoperative CRT for 50 patients (33%). The patients who received neoadjuvant CRT were more likely to be male and to have a GEJ tumor, positive lymph nodes, and a higher clinical stage. The median radiotherapy (RT) dose was 50.4 Gy for neoadjuvant RT and 45.0 Gy for postoperative RT (p < 0.001). The neoadjuvant CRT group had a pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of 26% and a greater rate of R0 resection than the postoperative CRT group (95% vs. 76%; p = 0.002). Neoadjuvant versus postoperative CRT was associated with a lower rate of any grade 3+ toxicity (10% vs. 54%; p < 0.001). The multivariable analysis of OS showed lower hazards of death to be independently associated neoadjuvant versus postoperative CRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-0.91; p = 0.020) and R0 resection (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.27-0.90; p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant CRT was associated with a longer OS, a higher rate of R0 resection, and a lower treatment-related toxicity than postoperative CRT. The findings suggest that neoadjuvant CRT is superior to postoperative CRT in the treatment of gastric and GEJ cancer.

Impact of curative treatment on the physical fitness of patients with esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer and curative treatment have a significant impact on the physical fitness of patients. Knowledge about the course of physical fitness during neoadjuvant therapy and esophagectomy is helpful to determine the needs for interventions during and after curative treatment. This study aims to review the current evidence on the impact of curative treatment on the physical fitness of patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cinahl and the Cochrane Library was conducted up to March 29, 2021. We included observational studies investigating the change of physical fitness (including exercise capacity, muscle strength, physical activity and activities of daily living) from pre-to post-neoadjuvant therapy and/or from pre-to post-esophagectomy. Quality of the studies was assessed and a meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean differences.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles were included. After neoadjuvant therapy, physical fitness decreased significantly. In the first three months after surgery, physical fitness was also significantly decreased compared to preoperative values. Subgroup analysis showed a restore in exercise capacity three months after surgery in patients who followed an exercise program. Six months after surgery, there was limited evidence that exercise capacity restored to preoperative values.

CONCLUSION

Curative treatment seems to result in a decrease of physical fitness in patients with esophageal cancer, up to three months postoperatively. Six months postoperatively, results were conflicting. In patients who followed a pre- or postoperative exercise program, the postoperative impact of curative treatment seems to be less.