Prognostic Factors and Appropriate Lymph Node Dissection in Salvage Esophagectomy for Locally Advanced T4 Esophageal Cancer

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Provides Better Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Than Open Esophagectomy in Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been increasingly performed for locally advanced esophageal cancer in place of open transthoracic esophagectomy (OE). This study explored the significance of MIE for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), focusing mainly on the depth of primary esophageal tumors.

METHODS

This study retrospectively assessed short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy for ESCC from 2005 through 2021. The inverse probability of the treatment-weighting (IPTW) method was used to compare the outcomes between OE and MIE. The outcomes also were evaluated in the subgroups stratified by cT category.

RESULTS

Among 1117 patients, 447 (40%) underwent OE and 670 (60%) underwent MIE. After IPTW adjustment, the incidence of any postoperative complications was significantly higher in the OE group than in the MIE group (60.8% vs 53.7%; p = 0.032), whereas the R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the MIE group (98.6% vs 92.7%; p < 0.001). The MIE group showed better 3 year overall and cancer-specific survival than the OE group (p < 0.001). The incidence of locoregional recurrence within the surgical field was significantly more frequent in the OE group (p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis stratified by cT category, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher and the incidence of locoregional recurrence was lower in the MIE group among the patients with cT3-4 tumors. In the patients with cT1-2 tumors, MIE showed no significant benefit over OE.

CONCLUSIONS

For the patients with cT3-4 tumors, MIE showed fewer postoperative complications, better locoregional control, and better prognosis than OE. Compared with OE, MIE is beneficial, especially for locally advanced ESCC.

Treatment patterns and survival in T4b esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of various treatment approaches in stage T4b esophageal cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results databases, covering patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2020. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) across different treatment patterns.

RESULTS

The study included 482 patients: 222 (46.1%) received chemoradiotherapy, 58 (12.0%) underwent radiotherapy alone, 37 (7.7%) received chemotherapy alone, 50 (10.4%) underwent surgery, and 115 (23.8%) received no treatment. Median CSS were 12, 4, 6, 18, and 1 month for chemoradiotherapy, radiotherapy alone, chemotherapy alone, surgery, and non-treatment groups. Median OS for these groups were 11, 3, 6, 17, and 1 month, respectively. Multivariable proportional hazard regression analysis revealed that patients who underwent surgery experienced significantly improved CSS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.72; P = 0.002) and OS (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.28-0.74; P = 0.002) compared to those receiving chemoradiotherapy after propensity score matching.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophagectomy, with or without radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy, results in better survival outcomes than chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage T4b esophageal cancer.

Long-term survival and prognostic factors associated with curative conversion surgery for ct4b esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Analysis of 200 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy for cT4b esophageal cancer has not been established yet. Although curative surgery is sometimes performed after induction treatments, the prognostic factor of cT4b esophageal cancer cases who underwent R0 resection remains unknown.

METHODS

A total of 200 patients with cT4b esophageal cancer who underwent R0 resection after induction treatments between 2001 and 2020 in our institute were included in the present study. The relationship between clinicopathological factors and patient survival is evaluated to identify useful prognostic factors.

RESULTS

The median and 2-year overall survival were 40.1 months and 62.8%, respectively. Disease recurrence occurred in 98 (49%) patients after surgery. Compared to induction chemotherapy alone, chemoradiation-based induction treatments were associated with decreased locoregional recurrence (34.0% vs 60.8%, P = .0077) but increased pulmonary metastases (27.7% vs 9.8%, P = .0210) and dissemination (19.1% vs 3.9%, P = .0139) after surgery. Multivariate analysis of overall survival identified the preoperative C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (hazard ratio 1.7957, P = .0031), response to induction treatments (hazard ratio 2.9663, P = .0009), postoperative pneumonia (hazard ratio 2.3784, P = .0010), and pN (2-3) (hazard ratio 1.5693, P = .0355) as independent prognostic factors. Preoperative C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (hazard ratio 1.6760, P = .0068) and postoperative pneumonia (hazard ratio 1.8365, P = .0200) were also independent prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Curative surgery after induction therapy for cT4b esophageal cancer achieved favorable survival. Preoperative C-reactive protein/albumin ratio, postoperative pneumonia, response to induction treatments, and pN were useful prognostic factors.

Chemoradiotherapy versus triplet chemotherapy as initial therapy for T4b esophageal cancer: survival results from a multicenter randomized Phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

We report the long-term results as primary endpoint in a multicentre randomized prospective Phase 2 trial which compared chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and triplet chemotherapy (CT) as the initial therapy for conversion surgery (CS) in T4b esophageal cancer (EC).

METHODS

Patients with T4b EC were randomly assigned to the CRT group or CT group as initial treatment. CS was performed if resectable after initial or secondary treatment. The primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival, analysed by intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 43.8 months. The 2-year survival rate was higher in the CRT group (55.1%; 95% CI: 41.1-68.3%) compared to the CT group (34.7%; 95% CI: 22.8-48.9%), although the difference was not significant (P = 0.11). Local and regional lymph node recurrence in patients undergoing R0 resection was significantly higher in the CT group compared to the CRT group (local: 30% versus 8%, respectively, P = 0.03; regional: 37% versus 8%, respectively, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront CT was not superior to upfront CRT as induction therapy for T4b EC in terms of 2-year survival and was significantly inferior to upfront CRT in terms of local and regional control.

REGISTRATION

The Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (s051180164).

A retrospective study comparing definitive chemoradiotherapy vs. chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in T4 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who were downstaged after neochemoradiotherapy

Background

The outcome of patients with T4 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is extremely poor. Two distinct therapeutic options are currently available for T4 esophageal cancers: neochemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRT-S) and definitive chemoradiotherapy (D-CRT). This study aimed to investigate the clinicopathologic characteristics of T4 ESCC in Chinese patients and compare the survival between the two therapeutic options.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 125 patients with clinically unresectable T4 ESCC in Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2010 to December 2020. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and associated factors were analyzed.

Results

A total of 106 of 125 T4 ESCC patients were downstaged of the tumor by neoadjuvant CRT. Among 106 patients, 32 patients underwent CRT-S, and 74 patients underwent D-CRT. Patients in the CRT-S group had a higher OS (20.4 months vs. un-reached median OS, p = 0.037) and PFS (8.6 months vs. 21.0 months, p = 0.008) than those in the D-CRT group. In multivariate analysis, treatment was an independent predictor of PFS. After propensity score matching (PSM), 50 patients (CRT-S = 25; D-CRT = 25) were matched. Among these 50 patients, patients in the CRT-S group had a higher OS (15.6 months vs. un-reached median OS, p = 0.025) and PFS (7.2 months vs. 18.8 months, p = 0.026) than those in the D-CRT group. In multivariate analysis, treatment was an independent predictor for PFS.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that CRT-S was superior to D-CRT for T4 ESCC patients who were downstaged by neo-CRT with respect to longer OS and PFS. Randomized controlled trials involving large population samples are needed to define the standard treatment for T4 ESCC.

Survival rates and safety associated with chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and chemoradiotherapy alone for patients with T4 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment approach for T4 esophageal cancer is not well established. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the survival rates and safety of chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRT-S) and chemoradiotherapy alone (CRT) in patients with T4 N_any M0 esophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched databases for eligible prospective or retrospective studies. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) at 1, 3 and 5 years, treatment-related fistula formation and mortality rates. Meta-analyses were performed using the random effects models separately for studies evaluating CRT-S and CRT. Subgroup analyses were performed based on histology, radiation dose, chemotherapy regimen and duration of the interval between CRT and surgery.

RESULTS

We identified 23 studies including 1,119 patients with predominantly squamous cell carcinoma (93%) and adenocarcinoma (3%) histology. The OS rates of patients receiving CRT-S were 65%, 36% and 20% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. The OS rates of patients receiving CRT were 30%, 11% and 10% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related fistula formation rates were 4% for CRT-S and 9% for CRT. Treatment-related mortality rates were 3% for both groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the interval of >2 months between CRT and surgery was associated with significantly improved OS rates at 1, 3 and 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Chemoradiotherapy is an efficacious treatment approach for T4 esophageal cancer, with clinically acceptable rates of treatment-related fistula formation and mortality. Tri-modality approach with surgery can be considered in carefully selected patients. Our study findings should be interpreted with caution due to the lack of high-quality evidence. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Selective Lymphadenectomy for Salvage Esophagectomy in Patients with Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Extensive lymph node dissection increases the risk of postoperative complications, especially in salvage surgery, after definitive chemoradiotherapy (≥ 50 Gy) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The purpose of this retrospective study is to compare the outcomes of salvage esophagectomy with selective lymphadenectomy of only clinically positive lymph nodes.

METHODS

Clinically positive lymph nodes, diagnosed as metastases using computed and positron emission tomography performed before chemoradiotherapy or salvage surgery, were targeted for dissection in selective lymphadenectomy. We compared postoperative complications between 52 patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy with selective lymphadenectomy and 207 controls who underwent nonsalvage esophagectomy with 3-field lymphadenectomy. We also analyzed postoperative recurrence pattern and survival in salvage group.

RESULTS

The mean number of dissected lymph nodes was 12.9 in the salvage esophagectomy group compared with 48.1 in the 3-field lymphadenectomy group (p < 0.001). Differences in the number of postoperative complications, comparing Clavien-Dindo all-grade and ≥ grade 3, were not significant between the groups. Both 30- and 90-day mortality were 0% (0/52) in the salvage group. Five cases had recurrence only in the locoregional area without distant metastasis. Of these five cases, only one had recurrence in the subcarinal lymph node without prophylactic mediastinal lymphadenectomy. A 3-year recurrence-free survival and 3-year overall survival from salvage esophagectomy were 43.3% and 46.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

It may contribute to obtaining good short- and long-term outcomes by dissecting only clinically positive lymph nodes in salvage esophagectomy.

Surgical strategies for treatment of clinical T4 esophageal cancer in Japan

Definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) is the mainstay treatment for cStage IVa esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) with good performance status (PS), according to standard practice guidelines. Salvage surgery may incur operation complications and risk of mortality. According to the esophageal cancer practice guidelines outlined by the Japan Esophageal Society, when a tumor is residual and recurrent, chemotherapy and palliative symptomatic treatment is continued. However, salvage operation has been selected as a therapeutic option for recurrent or residual tumors after dCRT. There is weak evidence for not recommending surgery for cStage IVa ESCC exhibiting residual disease following dCRT. It has been reported that during salvage surgery the only prognostic factor that is thought to be performed is complete resection (R0), but at the same time, salvage esophagectomy increases the incidence of postoperative complications and mortality. The phase II chemoselection study by Yokota T et al. in Japan showed that multidisciplinary treatment initiated by induction therapy, in which docetaxel is added to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil, resulted in a good prognosis in the short term. In this review, we discuss the surgical strategy and future of unresectable clinical T4 (cT4) ESCC.

Long-term survival after esophagectomy with distal pancreatectomy for locally advanced esophageal cancer with pancreatic invasion: a case report

Background

The treatment for the locally advanced esophageal cancer invading adjacent organs is controversial. We performed a radical surgery for a patient suffering from lower esophageal cancer with pancreatic invasion, and led to long-term survival.

Case presentation

A 62-year-old man with dysphagia, was endoscopically diagnosed lower esophageal cancer. Abdominal computed tomography shows that the tumor formed a mass with the solitary metastatic abdominal lymph node, which invaded pancreas body and gastric body. He was diagnosed locally advanced esophageal cancer cStage IIIC. As chemoradiotherapy was difficult because of the high risk of gastric mucosal damage, radical esophagectomy with distal pancreatectomy and reconstruction of gastric conduit were performed. The postoperative course was uneventful and the patient was discharged 16 days after operation. At present, 7 years after surgery, he is still alive with disease-free condition.

Conclusion

Esophagectomy with distal pancreatectomy may be feasible for locally advanced esophageal cancer with pancreatic invasion in terms of curability and long-term survival.

Salvage Robotic-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy after Definitive Chemoradiotherapy for Clinical T4b Esophageal Cancer: A Case Report

The advantages of salvage esophagectomy through robotic-assisted surgery for patients with clinically diagnosed tumor invasion of adjacent vital organs (cT4b) or patients with scar tissue from definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) are still only rarely reported. A man in his 60s with middle thoracic esophageal cancer (cT4b [left main bronchus] N1 M0 cStage IIIC) received dCRT (60 Gy). After the chemoradiotherapy, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed a residual primary tumor, and we performed robotic-assisted thoracoscopic subtotal esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction via a retrosternal route with three-field lymphadenectomy. Although it was difficult to dissect the tumor from adjacent organs, especially the left main bronchus and left inferior pulmonary vein, due to loss of the dissecting layer and scarring, R0 surgery was achieved. With robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, the high-magnification, high-resolution, and three-dimensional images; the stable surgical field with full countertraction made with the robotic arm forceps, which were readily adjusted; and the stable motion of the robotic arm without physiological tremor are considerable advantages for salvage esophagectomy for cT4b tumors. It goes without saying that sufficient experience with robot-assisted surgery and sufficient understanding and surgical skill in esophageal cancer surgery under suitable surgical indications and timing are required to make use of these advantages.

Salvage treatment after definitive chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for the esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is performed for patients with cT4 disease without distant metastasis and also for those with cStage I-III who are unable to tolerate or who refuse surgery. The rates of clinical complete response (cCR) after dCRT differ depending on the cStage, and patients who once achieved cCR frequently experience tumor recurrence. For those with residual tumor or with recurrence, salvage treatment is performed to achieve a cure. Several procedures have been reported as salvage treatments. Salvage esophagectomy is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality, but can offer long-term survival. With R0 resection, with cCR to dCRT, pulmonary complications appear to be important prognostic factors affecting overall survival (OS). Lymphadenectomy is performed for the patients with lymph node metastasis without recurrence of primary lesions or distant metastasis, but the contribution to long-term OS is unclear. Metastasectomy is performed when distant metastasis is limited to the lung and there are few lesions, possibly contributing to long-term OS. Endoscopic resection and photodynamic therapy are indicated for cT1a and cT1-2 residual or recurrent tumors, respectively, and can yield favorable outcomes. Re-CRT and re-radiotherapy are performed for the patients with contraindications for surgery, but neither appears to contribute to long-term OS despite high incidences of esophageal fistula and perforation.

Advantageous factors of R0 curative conversion esophagectomy and the optimal extent of lymphadenectomy after induction therapy for cT4b thoracic esophageal cancer

AIM

This study aimed to clarify the prognostic factors, the advantageous factors of R0 curative resection, and optimal extents of lymph node dissection for conversion esophagectomy after induction therapy.

METHODS

Among 1903 patients with esophageal cancer at Toranomon Hospital between January 2006 to May 2020, 151 patients with locally advanced T4b thoracic esophageal cancer were divided into two groups according to treatment: conversion surgery group (n = 54) and non-surgical treatment group (n = 97) for comparison.

RESULTS

The patients who underwent R0 curative resection showed preferable survival comparable to the survival rate of patients with cCR in the non-surgical treatment group (1-, 3- and 5-year survival: 96.9%, 82.1% and 76.7% vs 94.1%, 86.3%, and 86.3%; P = 0.770). Multivariate analysis revealed that the T4b tumor invasion by primary site (odds ratio (OR) = 6.100; 95% CI, 1.439-25.865: P = 0.014) and time to conversion surgery from start of induction therapy within four months (OR = 5.229; 95% CI, 1.296-21.102: P = 0.020) were all independent advantageous factors of R0 curative resection. Actuarial 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates in patients who underwent conversion surgery with D2-3 lymphadenectomy were 90.9%, 48.6%, and 40.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

R0 resection led to improved prognosis in conversion esophagectomy for cT4b esophageal cancer. The T4b tumor invasion by primary site and time to conversion surgery from start of induction therapy within 4 months were independent advantageous factors of R0 curative resection. In addition, standard radical esophagectomy including prophylactic D2-/3- lymphadenectomy should be performed if it is possible, while taking adequate care regarding the increased risk after induction therapy.

Patient selection for salvage surgery after definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

With the widespread use of definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), salvage surgery for recurrence/residual patients became prevalent. However, survival impact of salvage surgery remains obscure at present.

METHODS

The updated clinical outcomes of salvage surgery were investigated to know its survival impact. Of the 155 ESCC patients who underwent dCRT between 2009 and 2016, we included 85 patients with recurrence or residual disease. The median follow-up was 65 months.

RESULTS

Of the 85 patients with progression disease, there were 42 and 43 patients of recurrence and residual disease, respectively. Salvage surgery was performed in 27 patients after dCRT, including 15 patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy. The 5-year overall survival (OS) of salvage surgery and otherwise patients was 66.1% and 14.5%, and the patients with salvage surgery had a significantly better prognosis (p < 0.0001). In the 15 patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy, residual disease, lymph node metastasis-positive (ycN+) after dCRT, and pathological lymph node metastasis-positive (ypN+) were significantly associated with poor prognosis (p = 0.0492, p = 0.0006, p = 0.0276), and the 5-year OS rates for the ycN/ypN combinations were 90%, 33.3%, and 0% in ycN-/ypN-, ycN+/ypN-, and ycN+/ypN+ patients, respectively (p = 0.0026). In a multivariate analysis, ycN+ was an independent poor prognostic factor (HR 13.6, 95% CI 1.65-286.8, p = 0.0154).

CONCLUSIONS

Survival impact of salvage surgery after dCRT is robust, and lymph node metastasis after dCRT may help determine the indication for salvage esophagectomy.

Appropriate Candidates for Salvage Esophagectomy of Initially Unresectable Locally Advanced T4 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Standard treatment for unresectable locally advanced esophageal cancer is definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT). Although salvage esophagectomy is the only curative treatment available following dCRT failure, the appropriate candidates for salvage esophagectomy remain unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three hundred seventeen patients who underwent dCRT from April 2004 to December 2016 were stratified into three study groups-a complete response (CR) group, chemotherapy or best supportive care (BSC) group, and salvage esophagectomy group-and compared. We also investigated the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of salvage esophagectomy.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients (22.4%) achieved CR after dCRT, 18 patients (5.7%) underwent salvage esophagectomy, and 228 patients (71.9%) underwent palliative chemotherapy or BSC. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of the CR group, salvage esophagectomy group, and chemotherapy or BSC group were 83.0%, 51.6%, and 1.3%, respectively. Salvage esophagectomy recipients had a worse OS rate than CR patients (p < 0.001) but a better OS rate than those in the chemotherapy or BSC group (p < 0.001). Incomplete resection was the only significant variable associated with poor OS on univariate Cox proportional-hazards analysis (hazard ratio: 7.633, 95% confidence interval: 1.692-34.482; p = 0.008). Patients with tumors in the upper thoracic esophagus were more likely to undergo incomplete resection (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who achieve R0 resection are good candidates for salvage esophagectomy regardless of their response to dCRT. Those with upper thoracic esophageal tumors are at risk of incomplete resection; careful attention is required when considering these patients for salvage esophagectomy.

Salvage esophagectomy for initially unresectable locally advanced T4 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is a potentially curative treatment modality, even for patients with unresectable T4 tumors. For patients who fail dCRT, salvage esophagectomy is known to be a high-risk procedure. However, the efficacy and safety of salvage surgery for these patients remain unclear.

METHODS

A total of 35 patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy after dCRT for initially unresectable locally advanced T4 ESCC were assessed, and both outcomes and prognostic factors after surgery were investigated.

RESULTS

Among the study population, R0 resection was achieved in 19 patients (54.3%). Postoperatively, 8 patients (22.9%) experienced Clavien-Dindo grade IIIb or higher complications, and 3 patients (8.6%) registered surgery-related mortality. Overall survival rates were 45.7%, 28.6%, and 5.7% at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. In Cox regression analysis, residual or relapsed tumor limited to T2 or less was an independent prognostic factor for better survival (P = 0.010). On the other hand, postoperative pneumonia and incomplete resection were negative prognostic factors (P < 0.001 and P = 0.019, respectively). Nodal involvement and extent of lymph node dissection did not impact patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Although salvage esophagectomy for initially unresectable T4 ESCC is considered a high-risk surgery with poor prognosis, long-term survival may be achieved in patients with ≤ T2 residual tumors. In addition, R0 resection and postoperative pneumonia prevention are crucial to improve patient survival.

Long-term outcomes of multimodal therapy combining definitive chemoradiotherapy and salvage surgery for T4 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Survival outcomes of patients with cT4 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remain extremely poor. We aimed to investigate long-term outcomes and identify prognostic factors in patients treated by definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) alone or with dCRT plus salvage surgery (SALV) for cT4 ESCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In total, 73 patients completing dCRT were analyzed. Patients achieving clinical complete response (CR) received follow-up evaluations thereafter. For patients diagnosed with clinical partial response (PR), potentially curative SALV was generally performed. Possible prognostic factors included demographic data, tumor staging, blood chemistry profiles, and esophageal stenosis.

RESULTS

The 1- and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates of the 73 patients were 67.1% and 40.8%, respectively. Twenty-one patients (29%) achieved clinical CR with dCRT alone. Among 35 patients (48%) with clinical PR, 31 underwent SALV and 4 opted for non-surgical treatments. In the dCRT-alone group (n = 42), patients with clinical CR-PR (n = 25) showed significantly better 3-year OS than those who responded poorly to dCRT (stable or progressive) (n = 17) (67.5% vs. 0%, P < 0.001). In the SALV group (n = 31), curative SALV (n = 22, 73%) provided significantly better 3-year OS than non-curative SALV (58.7% vs. 0%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed stenosis before dCRT (P = 0.02) and pretreatment elevated CRP (P = 0.02) to be independently associated with poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The multimodal treatment strategy combining dCRT and SALV is rational for treating cT4 ESCC patients. When curative resection is feasible, SALV can provide good long-term survival outcome for patients who responded to dCRT but did not achieve clinical CR with dCRT alone.