Neoadjuvant versus definitive chemoradiation in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus

"Find Your Y": histological differences in early stage (pT) and post-treatment (ypT) oesophageal adenocarcinoma with implications for salvage endoscopic resection

AIMS

Current guidelines offer limited strategies for managing recurrent/persistent oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Salvage endoscopic mucosal/submucosal resection (ER) shows promise in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, however its success in EAC is limited. We aimed to elucidate histological characteristics influencing salvage ER success in patients with low-stage, pretreated EAC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 272 EAC tumours postoesophagectomy from five US centres and collected clinicopathological data including discontinuous growth (DG), defined as separate tumour foci ≥2 mm from the main tumour. We selected 101 patients with low-stage disease and divided them into treatment-naïve (n=70) and neoadjuvant therapy (n=31) groups. We compared the two groups and differences in clinical, histological and outcome characteristics were identified.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort (n=272), DGs were identified in 22% of cases. Multivariate analysis revealed DGs as an independent prognostic factor for recurrence and positive oesophagectomy margins. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and background intestinal metaplasia predicted DG presence and absence, respectively. Compared with the treatment-naïve low T-stage subgroup, the pretreated subgroup exhibited higher incidence of poorly differentiated carcinoma (16% vs 46%, p=0.007), larger tumours (14 vs 30 mm, p<0.001), higher tumour, node, metastases stage (7% vs 30%, p=0.004), more nodal disease (7% vs 36%, p<0.001) and frequent DGs (1% vs 13%, p=0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

In treated low T-stage EACs, DGs may contribute to suboptimal outcomes following salvage ER. Presence of LVI (as a surrogate for DGs) and poor differentiation in the absence of intestinal metaplasia in biopsy samples may serve as histological poor prognosticators in treated patients with EAC being considered for salvage ER.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy in esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is an aggressive malignancy that carries a high mortality rate. The treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer requires a multimodal approach involving chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgical resection. Optimal treatment combinations and sequences for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) versus adenocarcinoma (AC) histological subtypes are still being determined. For very early stage esophageal cancers, endoscopic therapies or surgical resection without chemotherapy and radiation are preferred. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgical resection has been the standard in locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer based on the landmark CROSS trial. Definitive chemoradiation is recommended for patients who are not surgical candidates or decline surgery. Perioperative chemotherapy without radiation can be considered for lower esophageal AC and gastroesophageal (GE)-junction AC based on landmark MAGIC and FLOT4 trials. Additional trials are underway to compare preoperative chemoradiation to perioperative chemotherapy in esophageal and GE-junction ACs. Thus far, targeted therapies against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) have not been successful in the neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting. The roll of immunotherapy in perioperative/adjuvant setting is promising. Based on the CheckMate 577 trial, adjuvant nivolumab should be considered for all patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and R0 resection with residual pathologic disease. Additional trials involving various immunotherapy agents are underway.

Prognostic values of the gross volume of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy

Purpose

We aim to explore whether the gross volume of metastatic lymph nodes (GTVnd) and the gross volume of primary tumor (GTVp) could be prognostic factors for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (dCCRT).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 252 ESCC patients treated with dCCRT in the era of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) at our institution. The cut-off value for the GTVnd derived from the restricted cubic splines (RCS) was determined. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed to determine the association between GTVnd and prognosis. we performed recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) method using GTVnd to develop a new risk stratification (TGTVndM). Moreover, the linear trend χ2, likelihood ratio χ2, and akaike information criterion (AIC) were used to determine the prognostic value between the TNM and TGTVndM staging systems.

Results

The five-year overall survival (OS) rate was 30.6%, with a median follow-up of 38 months. The cut-off value of GTVnd determined by the RCS was 4.35 cm3. GTVnd≥4.35 cm3 was an independent and significant negative prognostic factor for OS (HR=1.949, P&lt;0.001), progression free survival (PFS) (HR=1.425, P=0.048), and distance metastasis free survival (DMFS) (HR=2.548, P=0.001). In multivariable analysis, gender, clinical T stage, and GTVnd were independently associated with OS. RPA segregated patients into 3 prognostic groups: high risk (T1-4 GTVnd≥4.35, n=126, III stage), intermediate risk (T4 GTVnd&lt;4.35,n=38,II stage), and low risk(T1-3GTVnd&lt;4.35, n=88, I stage). The 5-year OS(P&lt;0.001), PFS (P=0.002), and DMFS (P=0.001) were significantly worse in high-risk group in comparison with the intermediate and low risk groups. Compared with the TNM staging system, the clinical T stage combined with GTVnd (TGTVndM) had a higher linear trend χ2 (26.38 versus 25.77), higher likelihood ratio χ2 (24.39 versus 20.69), and lower AIC (1255.07 versus 1260.06).

Conclusions

GTVnd may serve as a good prognostic factor in predicting distant metastasis and death for ESCC patients treated with dCCRT. The TGTVndM staging system demonstrated superior accuracy for predicting OS and could serve as a more effective prognostic guidance for unresectable ESCC patients.

Trimodality Therapy vs Definitive Chemoradiation in Older Adults With Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The comparative effectiveness of trimodality therapy vs definitive chemoradiation for treating locally advanced esophageal cancer in older adults is uncertain. Existing trials lack generalizability to older adults, a population with heightened frailty. We sought to emulate a hypothetical trial comparing these treatments using real-world data.

METHODS

A cohort of adults aged 66-79 years diagnosed with locally advanced esophageal cancer between 2004 and 2017 was identified in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database. The clone-censor-weight method was leveraged to eliminate time-related biases when comparing outcomes between treatments. Outcomes included overall mortality, esophageal cancer-specific mortality, functional adverse events, and healthy days at home.

RESULTS

A total of 1240 individuals with adenocarcinomas and 661 with squamous cell carcinomas were identified. For adenocarcinomas, the standardized 5-year risk of mortality was 73.4% for trimodality therapy and 83.8% for definitive chemoradiation (relative risk [RR] = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82 to 0.95). Trimodality therapy was associated with mortality risk reduction for squamous cell carcinomas (RR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.01). The 1-year incidence of functional adverse events was higher in the trimodality group (adenocarcinomas RR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.22 to 1.65; squamous cell carcinomas RR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.49). Over 5 years, trimodality therapy was associated with 160 (95% CI = 67 to 229) and 177 (95% CI = 51 to 313) additional home days in individuals with adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with definitive chemoradiation, trimodality therapy was associated with reduced mortality but increased risk of function-related adverse events. Discussing these tradeoffs may help optimize care plans.

Geriatric assessment and treatment outcomes in a Dutch cohort of older patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer can be treated with neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery or definitive chemoradiotherapy with curative intent. For frail older patients choosing the appropriate oncological treatment can be difficult, and data on geriatric deficits as determinants of treatment outcomes are not yet available.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the prevalence of geriatric deficits and to study their association with treatment discontinuation and mortality in older patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cohort study was conducted in a Dutch tertiary care hospital including patients aged ≥70 years with primary stage I-IVA esophageal cancer. Geriatric screening and assessment data were collected. Outcomes were treatment discontinuation and one year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 138 patients with curable esophageal cancer were included. Mean age was 76.1 years (standard deviation 4.7), 54% had clinical stage III and 24% stage IVA disease. Most patients received neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery (41%), 32% definitive chemoradiotherapy and 22% palliative radiotherapy. Overall, one year all-cause mortality was 36%. Geriatric screening and assessment was performed in 94 out of 138 patients, of which 60% was malnourished, 20% dependent in Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) and 52% was frail. Malnutrition was associated with higher mortality risk (Hazard Ratio, 3.2; 95% Confidence Interval, 1.3-7.7)) independent of age, sex and tumor stage. Seventy-six out of 94 patients were treated with chemoradiotherapy, of which 23% discontinued treatment. Patients with IADL dependency and Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥1 discontinued treatment more often.

CONCLUSION

All-cause mortality within one year was high, irrespective of treatment modality. Treatment discontinuation rate was high, especially in patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Geriatric assessment associates with outcomes in older patients with esophageal cancer and may inform treatment decisions and optimization in future patients, but more research is needed to establish its predictive value. Trial registration: The study is retrospectively registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), trial number NL8107. Date of registration: 22-10-2019.

Salvage endoscopic resection after definitive chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer: a Western experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is increasingly used as a nonsurgical treatment for esophageal cancer. In Japanese studies, salvage endoscopic resection (ER) has emerged as a promising strategy for local failure after definitive CRT. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of salvage ER in a Western setting.

METHODS

Gastroenterologists from Europe and the United States were invited to submit their experience with salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) after definitive CRT. Participating gastroenterologists completed an anonymized database, including patient demographics, clinicopathologic variables, and follow-up on survival and recurrence.

RESULTS

Gastroenterologists from 10 endoscopic units in 6 European countries submitted information on 25 patients. A total of 35 salvage ER procedures were performed, of which 69% were ESD and 31% EMR. Most patients had squamous cell carcinoma (64%) of the middle or lower esophagus (68%) staged as cT2-3 (68%) and cN+ (52%) before definitive CRT. The median time from end of definitive CRT to ER was 22 months (interquartile range, 6-47). The en-bloc resection rate was 92% for ESD and 46% for EMR. During a median of 24 months (interquartile range, 12-59) of follow-up after salvage ER, 52% developed a recurrence (11 locoregional, 2 distant). The 5-year recurrence-free survival, overall survival, and disease-specific survival were 36%, 52%, and 79%, respectively. No major intra- or postprocedural adverse events, such as bleeding or perforation, were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In carefully selected esophageal cancer patients, salvage ER is technically feasible after definitive CRT. Further prospective research is recommended to validate the safety and effectivity of salvage ER for the management of local failure.

Factors Affecting Survival in Operated Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is an extremely fatal and relatively rare gastrointestinal system malignancy. This study aimed to investigate the factors affecting survival in operated patients with ESCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included 110 patients (38 [34.5%] male; 72 [65.5%] female) aged ≥ 18 (median age, 54 [26-77]) years who were operated without any signs of metastases and followed up at Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Dursun Odabaşı Medical Center between 2004 and 2019.

RESULTS

Initially, 39 (35.5%) patients were clinical lymph node-positive and 71 (64.5%) patients were negative. Thirty-five (31.8%) patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), and 75 (%68.2) patients underwent direct surgery without nCRT. Five-year overall survival (OS) was 84.4% and 59.2% in patients who underwent surgery after nCRT and in those who underwent direct surgery, respectively. Median OS was significantly longer in patients who underwent surgery after nCRT (p = 0.003). There was a statistically significant difference in OS in patients who underwent surgery after nCRT depending on tumor response (p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis, advanced pathologic stage (p = 0.002) adversely affected survival, whereas nCRT administration (p = 0.031) positively affected OS.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that nCRT should be administrated before surgery, especially in locally advanced ESCCs. In addition, we believe that nCRT response can be used as a good parameter for survival. These results, however, should be supported by prospective studies.

Post-Neoadjuvant Surveillance and Surgery as Needed Compared with Post-Neoadjuvant Surgery on Principle in Multimodal Treatment for Esophageal Cancer: A Scoping Review

Simple Summary

A substantial fraction of patients with esophageal cancer show post-neoadjuvant pathological complete response (pCR). Principal esophagectomy after neoadjuvant treatment is the standard of care for all patients, including those with pCR. Surveillance and surgery as needed may be a treatment alternative for these patients. We performed a scoping review and described all relevant clinical studies addressing these two treatment approaches. We identified three completed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 468 participants, three planned/ongoing RCTs with a planned sample size of 752 participants, one non-randomized controlled study with 53 participants, ten retrospective cohort studies (2228 participants) and one survey on patients’ preferences (100 participants). The current scoping review reveals that although surveillance and surgery as needed has been investigated within different study designs, the available study pool show methodological limitations and clinical results are heterogeneous. A thoroughly planned RCT considering these limitations will be of great importance to provide these patients with the best treatment.

Abstract

Background: A substantial fraction of patients with esophageal cancer show post-neoadjuvant pathological complete response (pCR). Principal esophagectomy after neoadjuvant treatment is the standard of care for all patients, although surveillance and surgery as needed in case of local recurrence may be a treatment alternative for patients with complete response (CR). Methods: We performed a scoping review to describe key characteristics of relevant clinical studies including adults with non-metastatic esophageal cancer receiving multimodal treatment. Until September 2020, relevant studies were identified through systematic searches in the bibliographic databases Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, ClinicalTrials, the German study register, and the WHO registry platform. Results: In total, three completed randomized controlled trials (RCTs, with 468 participants), three planned/ongoing RCTs (with a planned sample size of 752 participants), one non-randomized controlled study (NRS, with 53 participants), ten retrospective cohort studies (with 2228 participants), and one survey on patients’ preferences (with 100 participants) were identified. All studies applied neoadjuvant chemoradiation protocols. None of the studies examined neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic protocols. Studies investigated patient populations with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, and mixed cohorts. Important outcomes reported were overall, disease-free and local recurrence-free survival. Limitations of the currently available study pool include heterogeneous chemoradiation protocols, a lack of modern neoadjuvant treatment protocols in RCTs, short follow-up times, the use of heterogeneous diagnostic methods, and different definitions of clinical CR. Conclusion: Although post-neoadjuvant surveillance and surgery as needed compared with post-neoadjuvant surgery on principle has been investigated within different study designs, the currently available results are based on a wide variation of diagnostic tools to identify patients with pCR, short follow-up times, small sample sizes, and variations in therapeutic procedures. A thoroughly planned RCT considering the limitations in the currently available literature will be of great importance to provide patients with CR with the best and less harmful treatment.