Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for cancer of the esophagus or the gastroesophageal junction: A meta-analysis based on clinical trials

Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy vs Chemotherapy for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Network Meta-Analysis

Importance

The prognosis of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction (AEG) is poor. From current evidence, it remains unclear to what extent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy achieve better outcomes than surgery alone.

Objective

To assess the association of preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy in patients with AEG with overall survival and other outcomes.

Data Sources

Literature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform was performed from inception to April 21, 2023.

Study Selection

Two blinded reviewers screened for randomized clinical trials comparing preoperative CRT plus surgery with preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery, 1 intervention with surgery alone, or all 3 treatments. Only data from participants with AEG were included from trials that encompassed mixed histology or gastric cancer. Among 2768 initially identified studies, 17 (0.6%) met the selection criteria.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were followed for extracting data and assessing data quality by 2 independent extractors. A bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the 2-stage approach.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall and disease-free survival, postoperative morbidity, and mortality.

Results

The analyses included 2549 patients (2206 [86.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [9.4] years) from 17 trials (conducted from 1989-2016). Both preoperative CRT plus surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% credible interval (CrI), 0.62-0.90]; 3-year difference, 105 deaths per 1000 patients) and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery (HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.64-0.91]; 3-year difference, 90 deaths per 1000 patients) showed longer overall survival than surgery alone. Comparing the 2 modalities yielded similar overall survival (HR, 1.04 [95% CrI], 0.83-1.28]; 3-year difference, 15 deaths per 1000 patients fewer for CRT). Similarly, disease-free survival was longer for both modalities compared with surgery alone. Postoperative morbidity was more frequent after CRT plus surgery (odds ratio [OR], 2.94 [95% CrI, 1.01-8.59]) than surgery alone. Postoperative mortality was not significantly more frequent after CRT plus surgery than surgery alone (OR, 2.50 [95% CrI, 0.66-10.56]) or after chemotherapy plus surgery than CRT plus surgery (OR, 0.44 [95% CrI, 0.08-2.00]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this meta-analysis of patients with AEG, both preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy were associated with longer survival without relevant differences between the 2 modalities. Thus, either of the 2 treatments may be recommended to patients.

Real-world retrospective study of anti-PD-1 antibody in combination with chemotherapy as a neoadjuvant treatment strategy for locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy has become a mainstay of treatment for locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer. The objective of this research was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in treating surgically removable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

From January 1, 2016 to April 1, 2023, we conducted a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with resectable esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy at The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. The primary endpoints of this study were pathologic complete response (pCR), major pathologic response (MPR) and disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary endpoints of this study were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety.

Results

A total of 122 patients with ESCC receiving neoadjuvant immune-chemotherapy (nICT) were included. Fifty-four patients achieved partial response (PR) and two patients achieved complete response (CR), with an ORR of 45.9%. Of the 106 patients who underwent surgery, a total of 28 patients achieved pCR (26.4%) and a total of 37 patients achieved MPR (34.9%). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 26 patients (21.3%). The most common postoperative complication was pneumonitis (25.5%).

Conclusions

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy demonstrates satisfactory efficacy in the treatment of locally advanced ESCC, with manageable treatment-related adverse events and postoperative complications.

Application of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in curative surgery for esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal cancer (EC) treatment is still a subject of debate.

AIM

To compare the clinical efficacy and toxic side effects between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) for locally advanced EC (LAEC).

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted using multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Science Direct, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database Article. Studies up to December 2022 comparing nCRT and nCT in patients with EC were selected.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed significant differences between nCRT and nCT in terms of disease-free survival. The results indicated that nCRT provided better outcomes in terms of the 3-year overall survival rate (OSR) [odds ratio (OR) = 0.95], complete response rate (OR = 3.15), and R0 clearance rate (CR) (OR = 2.25). However, nCT demonstrated a better 5-year OSR (OR = 1.02) than nCRT. Moreover, when compared to nCRT, nCT showed reduced risks of cardiac complications (OR = 1.15) and pulmonary complications (OR = 1.30).

CONCLUSION

Overall, both nCRT and nCT were effective in terms of survival outcomes for LAEC. However, nCT exhibited better performance in terms of postoperative complications.

Neoadjuvant sintilimab plus chemotherapy for locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective, single-arm, phase II clinical trial (CY-NICE)

Background

Adding immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) to the chemotherapy has shown significant clinical benefits in neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Sintilimab is one such ICI used for treatment. Herein, we designed a trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sintilimab combined with paclitaxel and platinum for locally advanced resectable ESCC.

Methods

Patients with locally advanced resectable (stage II-III) ESCC were enrolled and received at least two cycles of neoadjuvant therapy with sintilimab (200 mg on day 1) plus platinum-based chemotherapy in each 3-week cycle followed by esophagectomy. The primary endpoint of the trial was the pathological complete response (pCR) rate. The secondary endpoints were the major pathological response (MPR) rate, the objective response rate (ORR), the treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), the immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and quality of life (QOL). Besides, relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) were exploratory endpoints. Forty-three cases were needed to be enrolled in this trial. It was assumed the regimen of the neoadjuvant sintilimab plus chemotherapy would achieve a pCR rate of 30.5%.

Results

Between March 2021 and January 2023, a total of 43 patients (41 men and 2 women) were enrolled, including 11 cases (25.6%) of clinical stage II and 32 cases (74.4%) of clinical stage III at baseline. All the 43 patients completed two cycles of neoadjuvant therapy, and 32 patients received McKeown radical resection for esophageal cancer. The pCR rate was 28.1% (9/32), which was below the 30.5% reference cutoff value, and the MPR rate was 37.5% (12/32). According to RECIST 1.1, four patients (4/43, 9.3%) had a complete response (CR), 21 patients (21/43, 48.8%) had a partial response (PR), ORR was 58.1% (25/43). The incidence of ≥ grade 3 TRAEs was 23.3% (10/43) and there were no ≥ grade 4 TRAEs.

Conclusions

Sintilimab plus platinum-based chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy is safe, feasible and effective in locally advanced resectable ESCC, suggesting a supportive rationale for its further evaluation in randomized clinical trials.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier: ChiCTR2200056558.

Additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy does not increase the risk of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nICT) is a novel and promising therapy model for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.The objective of this study aimed to assessed the impact of additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy on patients' short-term outcomes, particularly the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) and pathological response.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT)/ nICT combination with radical esophagectomy were enrolled from three medical centers in China. The authors used propensity score matching (PSM, ration:1:1, caliper=0.01) and inverse probability processing weighting (IPTW) to balance the baseline characteristics and compare the outcomes. Conditional logistic regression and weighted logistic regression analysis were used to further evaluate whether additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy would increase the risk of postoperative AL.

RESULTS

A total of 331 patients getting partially advanced ESCC receiving nCT or nICT were enrolled from three medical centers in China. After PSM/IPTW, the baseline characteristics reached an equilibrium between the two groups. After matching, there were no significant difference in the AL incidence between the two groups ( P =0.68, after PSM; P =0.97 after IPTW), and the incidence of AL in the two groups was 15.85 versus 18.29%, and 14.79 versus 15.01%, respectively. After PSM/IPTW, both groups were similar in pleural effusion and pneumonia. After IPTW, the nICT group had a higher incidence of bleeding (3.36 vs. 0.30%, P =0.01), chylothorax (5.79 0.30%, P =0.001), and cardiac events (19.53 vs. 9.20%, P =0.04). recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (7.85 vs. 0.54%, P =0.003). After PSM, both groups were similar in palsy of the recurrent laryngeal nerve (1.22 vs. 3.66%, P =0.31) and cardiac events (19.51 vs. 14.63%, P =0.41). Weighted logistic regression analysis showed that additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy was not responsible for AL (OR=0.56, 95% CI: [0.17, 1.71], after PSM; 0.74, 95% CI: [0.34,1.56], after IPTW). The nICT group had dramatically higher pCR in primary tumor than the nCT group ( P =0.003, PSM; P =0.005, IPTW), 9.76 versus 28.05% and 7.72 versus 21.17%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy could benefit pathological reactions without increasing the risk of AL and pulmonary complications. The authors require further randomized controlled research to validate whether additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy would make a difference in other complications, and determine whether pathologic benefits could translate into prognostic benefits, which would require longer follow-up.

Postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A single institutional cohort study

Background

Complications after esophagectomy are common and the possible increase in postoperative complications associated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is of concern. The aim of our study was to analyze if the addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases the incidence and severity of postoperative complications, including evaluation of the relation between radiation doses to the heart and lungs and postoperative complications.

Methods

The study was based on an institutional surgical database for esophageal cancer. The study period was October 2008 to March 2020. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and dose/volume parameters for the lungs and heart considered. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative complications.

Results

During the study period, 274 patients underwent surgery for esophageal cancer, 93 patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 181 patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The median prescribed radiation dose to the planning target volume was 41.4 Gy, the median of the mean lung dose was 6.2 Gy, and the median of the mean heart dose was 20.3 Gy. The addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications. Neither were radiation doses to the lungs and heart associated with postoperative complications. Taxane-based chemotherapy regimens were however associated with an increased incidence of postoperative complications.

Conclusions

In our cohort, the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy to chemotherapy was not associated with postoperative complications. However, taxane-based chemotherapy regimens, with or without concomitant radiotherapy, were associated with postoperative complications.

Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy in Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to summarize the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

Literature focusing on the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy in resectable ESCC published before June 2022 was retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were further performed.

RESULTS

A total of 452 patients from 15 studies were included in this meta-analysis. All of the studies explored the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. The pooled major pathological response (MPR) rate and pathological complete response (PCR) rate were 58.3% and 32.9%, respectively. The pooled incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were 91.6% and 19.4%, respectively. The pooled R0 resection rate was 92.8%, and the resection rate was 81.1%. Incidence of anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, and postoperative hoarseness were 10.7%, 21.3%, and 13.0%, respectively. Compared with 2 cycles of neoadjuvant therapy, patients who received > 2 cycles of neoadjuvant therapy showed higher MPR rate (57.3% vs. 61.1%) and PCR rate (30.6% vs. 37.9%), and the incidence of TRAEs (89.2% vs. 98.9%) tended to be higher. However, no significant difference was found (P > 0.05). Two cycles of neoadjuvant therapy showed higher R0 resection rate and resection rate (R0 resection rate: 96.0% vs. 87.8%, P = 0.02; resection rate: 85.6% vs. 74.7%, P = 0.01). Pembrolizumab- and tislelizumab-based neoadjuvant therapy showed higher MPR rate (72.4% and 72.2%) and PCR rate (41.5 % and 50.0%). Compared with other ICIs, tislelizumab-based neoadjuvant therapy showed lower R0 resection rate (80.5%). The pooled incidence of SAEs for pembrolizumab-based neoadjuvant therapy (2.0%) was lower. Camrelizumab-based neoadjuvant therapy showed lower incidence of pulmonary infection (11.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy is effective and safe for resectable ESCC.

What has the past taught us about the future in esophageal cancer? Personal reflections

Since the first successful esophagectomy for cancer in 1913 spectacular advancements have been made in diagnosis, staging, and therapy. Refinement of imaging, surgery, perioperative management together with multidisciplinary collaboration are the cornerstones. Today therapy with curative option is offered to more patients than ever. Further innovations in imaging, molecular biology, genetics, artificial intelligence, machine learning, robotics, nanotechnology will have an increasing impact. The end result being a unique therapeutic plan shaped on each patient's individual profile.

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy in esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Significant progress has been made in the investigation of neoadjuvant immune-chemoradiotherapy (NICRT) and neoadjuvant immune-chemotherapy (NICT) on the outcomes of esophageal cancer patients. To summarize the current developments, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy.

Methods

A search strategy of prospective studies on esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant immunotherapy was predefined to scan PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and additional major conferences for prospective studies. Efficacy was assessed by pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (MPR), and R0 resection rates. Safety was evaluated based on the incidence of grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), neoadjuvant therapy completion rate, surgical resection rate, and surgical delay rate. Differences between the NICRT and NICT groups were also analyzed.

Results

A total of 38 studies qualified for the analysis. The pooled pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rates were 30, 58, and 99%, respectively. The pCR and MPR in the NICRT vs. NICT group were 38% vs. 28% (p=0.078) and 67% vs. 57% (p=0.181), respectively. The pooled incidence of grade ≥ 3 TRAEs was 24% (NICRT,58%, I² = 61% vs. NICT,18%, I² = 79%; p<0.001). In addition, the pooled neoadjuvant therapy completion and surgical resection rates were 92% and 85%, respectively; the difference was not statistically significant between the NICRT and NICT groups.

Conclusions

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy is effective and safe in the short term for locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm which combined model is more favorable.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021284266, identifier CRD42021284266.

The application of radiomics in esophageal cancer: Predicting the response after neoadjuvant therapy

Esophageal cancer (EC) is one of the fatal malignant neoplasms worldwide. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) combined with surgery has become the standard treatment for locally advanced EC. However, the treatment efficacy for patients with EC who received NAT varies from patient to patient. Currently, the evaluation of efficacy after NAT for EC lacks accurate and uniform criteria. Radiomics is a multi-parameter quantitative approach for developing medical imaging in the era of precision medicine and has provided a novel view of medical images. As a non-invasive image analysis method, radiomics is an inevitable trend in NAT efficacy prediction and prognosis classification of EC by analyzing the high-throughput imaging features of lesions extracted from medical images. In this literature review, we discuss the definition and workflow of radiomics, the advances in efficacy prediction after NAT, and the current application of radiomics for predicting efficacy after NAT.

Nomogram constructed by immunological and inflammatory indicators for predicting prognosis of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery

OBJECTIVES

At present, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients accepting neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery lack corresponding prognostic indicators. This study aimed to construct a prognostic prediction model for ESCC patients undergoing nCRT and surgery based on immune and inflammation-related indicators.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the levels of serum immune- and inflammation-related indicators of ESCC patients before receiving nCRT plus surgery in the training cohort (99 patients) and validation cohort (67 patients), which were collected from 2007 to 2020. Univariate and multivariate Cox survival analyses were conducted to evaluate the indicators to set up a nomogram associated with the patients' overall survival (OS). The prediction accuracy and discriminative ability of the nomogram were measured by the concordance index (C-index), decision curve, calibration curve, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and net reclassification improvement (NRI).

RESULTS

Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses demonstrated that immune globin A (IgA) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were independent risk factors. A nomogram based on IgA, CRP, and cTNM stage was established for predicted OS in the training cohort and validated in the validation cohort. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.820 (95% CI: 0.705-0.934), which was higher than that of the cTNM stage (0.655 (95% CI: 0.546-0.764), p < 0.05) in the training cohort, and similar results were observed in the validation cohort (0.832 (95% CI: 0.760-0.903 vs 0.635 (95% CI: 0.509-0.757), p < 0.001). Furthermore, the prediction accuracy and net benefit of the nomogram verified by the calibration curve, decision curve, NRI, and IDI were satisfactory in the training and validation cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The newly constructed nomogram concluding serum IgA, CRP, and cTNM stage might be helpful in the prognosis prediction for ESCC patients receiving nCRT plus surgery.

A Comparison Between Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Treating Esophageal Carcinoma: A Study at a Tertiary Care Cancer Center in Suburban India

Background and objective

Esophageal carcinoma remains a disease associated with high mortality rates among patients even after receiving treatment. Management with surgery alone offers a five-year survival of only 20%. Hence adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies were instituted to treat this condition along with surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) followed by surgery is currently the standard of care. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is also recommended by some authors as a method of adequate care. There is a scarcity of studies in the literature comparing NACRT with NACT. In light of this, we employed the criteria of pathological response as a primary endpoint to compare the effectiveness of NACT and NACRT in treating esophageal carcinoma.

Materials and methods

A total of 50 patients with esophageal cancer having Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores 0-2 with cancer stages cT2-T4a, cN0-N1, and cM0 were enrolled. The patients were further classified into two groups of 25 each. While one group received chemotherapy using inj. paclitaxel and carboplatin (NACT group), the other was managed with inj paclitaxel and carboplatin as well as 42 Gy of fractionated irradiation (NACRT group). Six weeks after the last dose of radiation or three weeks after chemotherapy, they were evaluated and offered transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE).

Results

Squamous cell carcinoma was found in 39 (78%) cases and 11 (22%) cases had adenocarcinoma. Pathologically complete or near-complete responses were seen in 42% of patients in the NACRT group and 22% in the NACT group.

Conclusion

While NACT and NACRT are both effective therapies for esophageal cancers, NACRT offers better tumor regression compared to NACT. Given the higher rates of complete or near-complete response in the NACRT group, NACRT is likely to offer higher overall survival rates than NACT.

Surgical Treatment of Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Distal Esophageal Portion and Gastroesophageal Junction Performed After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Combined Chemoradiation

Esophageal carcinoma is an extremely aggressive cancer with an early distant spread, high rate of local recurrence, and low overall survival. Herewith we present 3 patients with advanced moderately and low differentiated adenocarcinomas, who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) (two patients) and combined nCT with neoadjuvant radiation therapy (nRT) (one patient), followed by radical surgery. Subtotal esophageal resection, proximal gastric resection, and intrathoracic right gastroesophagoplasty a modo Ivor-Lewis were performed in the first two patients, while total gastrectomy, distal third esophageal resection, splenectomy and left intrathoracic esophagojejunoplasty a modo Roux were performed in the third one. A literature review of the role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) as part of a trimodality therapy for advanced esophageal carcinoma is presented.

Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategies for Resectable Proximal Gastric, Gastroesophageal Junction and Distal Esophageal Cancer

Neoadjuvant treatment strategies for resectable proximal gastric, gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), and distal esophageal cancer have evolved over several decades. Treatment recommendations differ based on histologic type-squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) versus adenocarcinoma (AC)-as well as the exact location of the tumor. Recent and older clinical trials in this area were critically reviewed. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with concurrent taxane- or fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has an established role for both AC and SCC of the distal esophagus and GEJ. The use of perioperative chemotherapy for gastric AC is based on the FLOT4 and MAGIC trials; however, the utility of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in this setting requires further evaluation. Additional clinical trials evaluating chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and radiation that are currently in process are highlighted, given the need for further disease control.

Surgery for Liver Metastasis of Non-Colorectal and Non-Neuroendocrine Tumors

Surgery has become well established for patients with colorectal and neuroendocrine liver metastases. However, the value of this procedure in non-colorectal and non-neuroendocrine metastases (NCRNNELMs) remains unclear. We analyzed the outcomes of patients that underwent liver surgery for NCRNNELMs and for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) between 2012 and 2017 at our institution. Prognostic factors of overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed, and a comparison of survival between two groups was performed. Seventy-three patients (30 NCRNNELM and 43 CRLM) were included in this study. Although the mean age, extrahepatic metastases, and rate of reoperation were significantly different between the groups, recurrence-free survival was comparable. The 5-year overall survival rates were 38% for NCRNNELM and 55% for CRLM. In univariate analysis, a patient age of ≥60 years, endodermal origin of the primary tumor, and major complications were negative prognostic factors. Resection for NCRNNELM showed comparable results to resection for CRLM. Age, the embryological origin of the primary tumor, and the number of metastases might be the criteria for patient selection.

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) results from the AGITG DOCTOR trial: a randomised phase 2 trial of tailored neoadjuvant therapy for resectable oesophageal adenocarcinoma

Background

AGITG DOCTOR was a randomised phase 2 trial of pre-operative cisplatin, 5 fluorouracil (CF) followed by docetaxel (D) with or without radiotherapy (RT) based on poor early response to CF, detected via PET, for resectable oesophageal adenocarcinoma. This study describes PROs over 2 years.

Methods

Participants (N = 116) completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and oesophageal module (QLQ-OES18) before chemotherapy (baseline), before surgery, six and 12 weeks post-surgery and three-monthly until 2 years. We plotted PROs over time and calculated the percentage of participants per treatment group whose post-surgery score was within 10 points (threshold for clinically relevant change) of their baseline score, for each PRO scale. We examined the relationship between Grade 3+ adverse events (AEs) and PROs. This analysis included four groups: CF responders, non-responders randomised to DCF, non-responders randomised to DCF + RT, and “others” who were not randomised.

Results

Global QOL was clinically similar between groups from 6 weeks post-surgery. All groups had poorer functional and higher symptom scores during active treatment and shortly after surgery, particularly the DCF and DCF + RT groups. DCF + RT reported a clinically significant difference (−13points) in mean overall health/QOL between baseline and pre-surgery. Similar proportions of patients across groups scored +/− 10 points of baseline scores within 2 years for most PRO domains. Instance of grade 3+ AEs were not related to PROs at baseline or 2 years.

Conclusions

By 2 years, similar proportions of patients scored within 10 points of baseline for most PRO domains, with the exception of pain and insomnia for the DCF + RT group. Non-responders randomised to DCF or DCF + RT experienced additional short-term burden compared to CF responders, reflecting the longer duration of neoadjuvant treatment and additional toxicity. This should be weighed against clinical benefits reported in AGITG DOCTOR. This data will inform communication of the trajectory of treatment options for early CF non-responders.

Trial registration

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12609000665235. Registered 31 July 2009.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09270-4.

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.

Trimodality treatment in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers: Current approach and future perspectives

Gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers represent an aggressive group of malignancies with poor prognosis even when diagnosed in relatively early stage, with an increasing incidence both in Asia and in Western countries. These cancers are characterized by heterogeneity as a result of different pathogenetic mechanisms as shown in recent molecular analyses. Accordingly, the understanding of phenotypic and genotypic correlations/classifications has been improved. Current therapeutic strategies have also advanced and moved beyond surgical extirpation alone, with the incorporation of other treatment modalities, such as radiation and chemotherapy (including biologics). Chemoradiotherapy has been used as postoperative treatment after suboptimal gastrectomy to ensure local disease control but also improvement in survival. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy/chemotherapy has been employed to increase the chance of a successful R0 resection and pathologic complete response rate, which is associated with improved long-term outcomes. Several studies have defined various chemotherapy regimens to accompany radiation (before and after surgery). Recently, addition of immunotherapy after trimodality of gastroesophageal cancer has produced an advantage in disease-free interval. Targeted agents used in the metastatic setting are being investigated in the early setting with mixed results. The aim of this review is to summarize the existing data on trimodality approaches for gastric and GEJ cancers, highlight the remaining questions and present the current research effort addressing them.

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.

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

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

Patterns and timing of recurrence in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus esophagectomy

Background

Tumor regression grade (TRG) after neoadjuvant therapy is reportedly predictive of prognosis in esophageal cancer patients, as lack of a response to neoadjuvant therapy is associated with a poor prognosis. However, there is little information available on the timing and pattern of recurrence after esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC) that takes into consideration TRG after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT). Here, in an effort to gain insight into a treatment strategy that improves the prognosis of NACRT non-responders, we evaluated the patterns and timing of recurrence in TESCC patients, taking into consideration TRG after NACRT.

Methods

A total of 127 TESCC patients treated with NACRT and esophagectomy between 2009 and 2017 were enrolled in this observational cohort study. TRGs were assigned based on the proportion of residual tumor cells in the area (TRG1, ≥1/3 viable cancer cells; 2, < 1/3 viable cancer cells; 3, no viable cancer cells). We retrospectively investigated the timing and patterns of recurrence and the prognoses in TESCC patients, taking into consideration TRG after NACRT.

Results

The 127 participating TESCC patients were categorized as TRG1 (42 patients, 33%), TRG2 (56 patients, 44%) or TRG3 (29 patients, 23%). The locoregional recurrence rate was higher in TRG1 (36.4%) patients than combined TRG2–3 (7.4%) patients. Patients with TRG3 had better prognoses, though a few TRG3 patients experienced distant recurrence. There were no significant differences in median time to first recurrence or OS among patients with locoregional or distant recurrence. There was a trend toward better OS in TRG2–3 patients with recurrence than TRG1 patients with recurrence, but the difference was not significant.

Conclusions

NACRT non-responders (TRG1 patients) experienced higher locoregional recurrence rates and earlier recurrence with distant or locoregional metastasis. TRG appears to be useful for establishing a strategy for perioperative treatments to improve TESCC patient survival, especially among TRG1 patients. (303 words).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08918-x.

Risk Prediction Model of 90-Day Mortality After Esophagectomy for Cancer

Importance

Ninety-day mortality rates after esophagectomy are an indicator of the quality of surgical oncologic management. Accurate risk prediction based on large data sets may aid patients and surgeons in making informed decisions.

Objective

To develop and validate a risk prediction model of death within 90 days after esophagectomy for cancer using the International Esodata Study Group (IESG) database, the largest existing prospective, multicenter cohort reporting standardized postoperative outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this diagnostic/prognostic study, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients from 39 institutions in 19 countries between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. Patients with esophageal cancer were randomly assigned to development and validation cohorts. A scoring system that predicted death within 90 days based on logistic regression β coefficients was conducted. A final prognostic score was determined and categorized into homogeneous risk groups that predicted death within 90 days. Calibration and discrimination tests were assessed between cohorts.

Exposures

Esophageal resection for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Main Outcomes and Measures

All-cause postoperative 90-day mortality.

Results

A total of 8403 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [9.0] years; 6641 [79.0%] male) were included. The 30-day mortality rate was 2.0% (n = 164), and the 90-day mortality rate was 4.2% (n = 353). Development (n = 4172) and validation (n = 4231) cohorts were randomly assigned. The multiple logistic regression model identified 10 weighted point variables factored into the prognostic score: age, sex, body mass index, performance status, myocardial infarction, connective tissue disease, peripheral vascular disease, liver disease, neoadjuvant treatment, and hospital volume. The prognostic scores were categorized into 5 risk groups: very low risk (score, ≥1; 90-day mortality, 1.8%), low risk (score, 0; 90-day mortality, 3.0%), medium risk (score, -1 to -2; 90-day mortality, 5.8%), high risk (score, -3 to -4: 90-day mortality, 8.9%), and very high risk (score, ≤-5; 90-day mortality, 18.2%). The model was supported by nonsignificance in the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. The discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.64-0.72) in the development cohort and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60-0.69) in the validation cohort.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, on the basis of preoperative variables, the IESG risk prediction model allowed stratification of an individual patient's risk of death within 90 days after esophagectomy. These data suggest that this model can help in the decision-making process when esophageal cancer surgery is being considered and in informed consent.

PET-Uptake Reduction into Lymph Nodes After Neoadjuvant Therapy is Highly Predictive of Prognosis for Patients Who have Thoracic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated with Chemoradiotherapy Plus Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Patients with ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)-positive lymph nodes before treatment have a poor prognosis after esophagectomy. This study investigated whether FDG uptake into lymph nodes on FDG-PET (PET-N) during the pre- or posttreatment stage is more predictive of survival for thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC) patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) followed by esophagectomy.

METHODS

Of 129 TESCC patients with clinical lymphatic metastasis who underwent curative-intent esophagectomy after NACRT between 2010 and 2018, 97 who received PET before and after NACRT were enrolled in the study. The study defined lymph nodes with a maximum standardized uptake value (SUV_max) greater than 2.5 on FDG-PET before NACRT as cPET-N(+) and after NACRT as CRT-cPET-N(+). Both the cPET-N(+) and CRT-cPET-N(-) patients were defined as PET-N responders. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

No significant difference in survival was detected between the cPET-N(+) and cPET-N(-) patients. However, the CRT-cPET-N(-) patients had significantly better 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) than the CRT-cPET-N (+) patients. The PET-N responders had significantly better 5-year OS and DSS than the PET-N non-responders, and PET-N response was an independent prognostic factor for 5-year DSS.

CONCLUSION

The PET-N response is a highly predictive prognostic marker for TESCC patients who undergo NACRT followed by esophagectomy. The PET-N response may help clinicians to establish a strategy for perioperative treatments that improves survival for patients with lymph node metastasis in TESCC.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched study from the National Cancer Center in China

PURPOSE

The optimal mode of neoadjuvant treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has not been well characterized. Our study compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) for patients with ESCC.

METHODS

Data from ESCC patients receiving NCRT or NCT combined with esophagectomy between 2010 and 2018 from the National Cancer Center in China were retrospectively collected. Long-term survival, pathological response, and perioperative mortality and morbidity were compared between the NCRT and NCT groups. A Cox proportional hazards model and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to minimize bias due to potential confounding.

RESULTS

Out of 327 eligible patients with ESCC in our study, 90 patients were identified in each group by PSM. The complete pathologic response (pCR) rate in the NCRT group was markedly higher than that in the NCT group (before PSM: 35.1% vs. 6.0%; after PSM: 38.9% vs. 5.6%; both P < 0.001). The rates of 30-day or 90-day mortality were comparable between the two groups, but the NCRT group had a longer postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.001 before PSM and P = 0.012 after PSM) and more postoperative complications (P < 0.001 before PSM and P = 0.014 after PSM), especially, anastomotic leaks (P = 0.001 before PSM and P = 0.013 after PSM). No significant differences in 5-year overall survival (OS) (P = 0.439) or 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) (P = 0.611) were noted between unmatched groups, but the trend favored NCRT in the propensity score-matched group (77.3% vs. 61.3%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-2.87; P = 0.141 for OS, and 77.8% vs. 60.5%; HR 1.72; 95% CI 0.95-3.11; P = 0.073 for RFS). Multivariate analysis showed that only ypT and ypN stages were independent predictors of OS before and after PSM (both P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in survival between the NCT and NCRT groups, although a trend favored NCRT related to the significantly higher pCR rates. Prospective head-to-head clinical trials to compare these two types of neoadjuvant therapies in ESCC are warranted.

Clinical Effectiveness of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Gastric Carcinoma and Exploration of Perioperative Imaging Assessment Parameters

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Due to the difficulty in clinical staging, a simple and feasible perioperative assessment approach for guiding personalized neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is lacking. We investigated the clinical value of NAC in advanced gastric carcinoma (GC) and the concordance between perioperative imaging and postoperative pathological assessments.

METHODS

This study included 62 patients with advanced GC who received NAC between January 2012 and December 2018. The preoperative and postoperative T stages, postoperative pathological tumor regression grade (TRG), and changes in computed tomography (CT) values after NAC were assessed. Follow-ups were conducted to obtain the median survival time (MST), and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted.

RESULTS

The T stages significantly differed between before and after NAC (p = 0.001). The MST of patients in the TRG0 group was significantly different from that of patients in the TRG1+2 and TRG3 groups (p = 0.223). The percentages of positive lymph nodes were 0%, 24.17%, and 27.64% in the TRG0, TRG1+2, and TRG3 groups, respectively. TRG was correlated with changes in CT values before and after NAC, and the extent of change was associated with patient prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative imaging can be used to assess the short-term effectiveness of NAC for patients with GC.

Survival and complications after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis

Objectives: To identify the effective approach between neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) and chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) by comparing patient survival and complications. Methods: A systematic literature search of articles published between January 1980 and October 2020 was conducted. Data were extracted and analyzed with STATA 12.0. Results: Five randomized trials and 15 retrospective studies, including 4529 patients (NCT: 2035; NCRT: 2494), were enrolled. Compared with NCT, NCRT provided a higher 3-year survival benefit, higher R0 resection and pathological complete response rates and lower local recurrence and distant metastasis rates, but no increase in 5-year survival. Perioperative mortality and cardiovascular complications were more common in patients with adenocarcinoma. Conclusions: Further studies should concentrate on identifying the optimal neoadjuvant approach and suitable beneficiaries.

Locally advanced gastroesophageal junction cancer with pathological complete response to neoadjuvant therapy: a case report and literature review

Most gastric cancer and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma (GEJ) patients are already in the advanced stage at the time of diagnosis. Thus, the probability of radical gastrectomy is low, and surgical treatment alone has a poor prognosis due to the high recurrence rate. In order to reduce the recurrence and distant metastasis after surgery, there have been many attempts made to improve the perioperative treatment of advanced localized gastric cancer, but no uniform criteria exist. Over recent years, immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer treatment, and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown excellent efficacy across various types of tumors, becoming a potential treatment after surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy. However, the efficacy of single-agent ICIs for gastric cancer is still unsatisfactory. As comprehensive, chemotherapy-based treatment has become the standard care for locally advanced gastric cancer, exploring combination treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may be valuable to improving survival outcomes. Here, we report a 66-year-old male with dysphagia diagnosed with GEJ and was defined as clinical stage (cT4N2M0) and Siewert type II, characterized as mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) negative; surprisingly, with anti-PD-1 antibody plus SOX (S-1: a combination of tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil+ oxaliplatin) as perioperative therapy, the patient achieved pathological complete remission (pCR), which indicates that the addition of ICIs to chemotherapy as a perioperative comprehensive treatment might provide a promising strategy option for GEJ. In addition, we review the current status of perioperative comprehensive treatment, in hope that this may provide some reference value for clinical decision-making.

Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Staging and Multimodal Therapy of Esophageal and Gastric Tumors

Gastric and esophageal tumors are diverse neoplasms that involve mucosal and submucosal tissue layers and include squamous cell carcinomas, adenocarcinomas, spindle cell neoplasms, neuroendocrine tumors, marginal B cell lymphomas, along with less common tumors. The worldwide burden of esophageal and gastric malignancies is significant, with esophageal and gastric cancer representing the ninth and fifth most common cancers, respectively. The approach to diagnosis and staging of these lesions is multimodal and includes a combination of gastrointestinal endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, and cross-sectional imaging. Likewise, therapy is multidisciplinary and combines therapeutic endoscopy, surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic chemotherapeutic tools. Future directions for diagnosis of esophageal and gastric malignancies are evolving rapidly and will involve advances in endoscopic and endosonographic techniques including tethered capsules, optical coherence tomography, along with targeted cytologic and serological analyses.

The Impact of Pretreatment PET/CT Nodal Status on Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

For advanced esophageal cancer, the clinical significance of pretreatment nodal status (cN) as determined by different examinations remains unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery were analyzed in this study. Pretreatment cN status assessed by CT, EUS, and PET/CT and clinicopathological features were used to evaluate tumor recurrence and long-term survival.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-two patients were identified in this study. Pretreatment PET/CT cN0 [odds ratio (OR) cN0 versus cN+, 5.316, p < 0.001] and pretreatment CT cN0 (OR 1.957, p = 0.032) both independently predicted ypN0. Pretreatment PET/CT cN0 was also associated with a lower recurrence rate and longer survival across the entire study group. Among patients with ypN0, pretreatment PET/CT cN+ indicated poor disease-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 2.777, p = 0.001] and overall survival (HR 2.211, p = 0.034) compared with pretreatment PET/CT cN0, which predicted a favorable prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from the current study suggest that pretreatment lymph node status as assessed by PET/CT is strongly correlated with survival outcomes after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. ypN0 patients can achieve better survival outcomes when pretreatment cN0 is assessed by PET/CT.

Lack of National Adoption of Evidence-Based Treatment for Resectable Gastric Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Level 1 evidence for multimodal treatment of resectable gastric adenocarcinoma from the Intergroup 0116 (2001) and MAGIC (2006) trials demonstrated survival benefit of adjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) and perioperative chemotherapy, respectively. We evaluated the adoption of evidence-based treatment in the post-MAGIC era and its impact on survival.

METHODS

A total of 7058 patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma undergoing definitive surgical resection between 2004 and 2015 were analyzed using the National Cancer Database.

RESULTS

Over the study period, the proportion of patients receiving adjuvant CRT decreased from 19.1% to 9.1%, while perioperative chemotherapy increased from 1.9% to 28.6%. Utilization of perioperative chemotherapy surpassed adjuvant CRT in 2011. Evidence-based treatment (either perioperative chemotherapy or adjuvant CRT) had better overall survival (OS) than other treatments for clinical stage II-III patients (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis of the whole study period, evidence-based treatments were associated with better OS (HR 0.67 [0.60-0.74], p < 0.05). Only 360/1262 (28.5%) patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group completed postoperative therapy, which was associated with improved OS (p < 0.05). For clinical stage III patients (n = 2402), only 806 (33.6%) received evidence-based treatment, while 487 (22.2%) underwent surgery alone. On multivariate analysis of these patients between 2010 and 2015, both perioperative chemotherapy (HR 0.49 [0.35-0.68]) and adjuvant CRT (HR 0.31 [0.21-0.44]) were associated with better OS than surgery alone (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Since the INT-0116 and MAGIC trials, utilization of evidence-based treatments for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma has increased, with perioperative chemotherapy surpassing adjuvant CRT as the preferred practice. However, overall utilization of these regimens remains quite low nationally despite association with improved OS.

Targeted Molecular Therapies in the Treatment of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma, Are We There Yet?

Esophageal adenocarcinoma is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma has increased at an alarming rate in the Western world and long-term survival remains poor. Current treatment approaches involve a combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Unfortunately, standard first-line approaches are met with high rates of recurrence and metastasis. More recent investigations into the distinct molecular composition of these tumors have uncovered key genetic and epigenetic alterations involved in tumorigenesis and progression. These discoveries have driven the development of targeted therapeutic agents in esophageal adenocarcinoma. While many agents have been studied, therapeutics targeting the human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathways have demonstrated improved survival. More recent advances in immunotherapies have also demonstrated survival advantages with monoclonal antibodies targeting the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). In this review we highlight recent advances of targeted therapies, specifically agents targeting receptor tyrosine kinases, small molecule kinase inhibitors, and immune checkpoint inhibitors. While targeted therapeutics and immunotherapies have significantly improved survival, the benefits are limited to patients whose tumors express biomarkers such as PD-L1 and HER2. Survival remains poor for the remainder of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma, underscoring the critical need for development of novel treatment strategies.

IDO1 Expression Increased After Neoadjuvant Therapy Predicts Poor Pathologic Response and Prognosis in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO1) plays an important role in tumor immune evasion. In this study, we investigated the changes of tumor IDO1 expression and CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) status in tumor microenvironment (TME) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), respectively. Moreover, the potential predictive value of the changes of tumor IDO1 expression and CD8+TILs status on pathologic response and clinical outcome was further evaluated. By matching propensity scores in 295 patients, a total of 85 ESCC patients with neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery were recruited, including 17 patients with NCRT and 68 patients with NCT. Tumor IDO1 expression and CD8+TILs within TME in paired specimens were evaluated by immunohistochemistry, and the changes of tumor IDO1 expression and CD8+TILs between the paired specimens were estimated. Tumor IDO1 expression significantly increased from baseline to postoperative tumor tissue after NCT (p = 0.002), whereas no significant difference was detected after NCRT (p = 0.44). The density of CD8+TILs in the tumor-invasive margin increased significantly after neoadjuvant therapy, and there was no significant difference in density changes of CD8+TILs between the NCRT and NCT groups (p = 0.118). Upregulation of tumor IDO1 expression after neoadjuvant therapy was associated with poor pathologic response (p = 0.002). Lastly, multivariate Cox analysis showed that IDO1-rise patients after neoadjuvant therapy were related to poor prognosis (p = 0.047). These results indicated that chemotherapy could promote tumor IDO1 expression, and the increased tumor IDO1 expression after neoadjuvant therapy predicted poor pathologic response and prognosis in ESCC.

Patterns of recurrence in adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a retrospective study

Background

The prognosis of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) is poor. Understanding the postoperative recurrence pattern of AEG is helpful to verify the effectiveness of treatment and optimize subsequent treatment, so as to improve prognosis.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included patients with stage III AEG who underwent surgical treatment between January 2009 and December 2016. According to the different postoperative treatment arm, patients were divided into surgery and surgery plus chemotherapy groups. Recurrence-free survival was used as the outcome to compare the recurrence site and pattern between the groups.

Results

In total, were 306 patients enrolled, 123 in the surgery group and 183 in the surgery plus chemotherapy group. During follow-up (median 17.1 months) of 24 months after surgery, 62.0% of patients had tumor recurrence. The overall recurrence rates in the surgery and surgery plus chemotherapy groups were 86.9% and 77.0%, respectively. The recurrence patterns of both groups were mainly distant metastasis. Postoperative chemotherapy reduced the incidence of hematogenous dissemination from 51.2 to 42.0%. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that the pN stage increased the risk of recurrence, while surgery plus chemotherapy reduced the risk.

Conclusions

Patients with AEG have a risk of hematogenous dissemination after surgery. Postoperative treatment arm and pN stage were independent risk factors in patients with AEG. Surgery plus chemotherapy can improve recurrence-free survival and reduce distant metastasis, but they do not have a beneficial role in controlling local recurrence.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a single-Centre, open-label, randomized, controlled, clinical trial (HCHTOG1903)

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy plus oesophagectomy has been accepted as the standard treatment for patients with potentially curable locally advanced oesophageal cancer. No completed randomized controlled trial (RCT) has directly compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The aim of the current RCT is to investigate the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery on overall survival for patients with resectable locally advanced ESCC.

Methods

This open label, single-centre, phase III RCT randomized patients (cT2-T4aN + M0 and cT3-4aN0M0) in a 1:1 fashion to receive either the CROSS regimen (paclitaxel 50 mg/m²; carboplatin (area under the curve = 2), q1w, 5 cycles; and concurrent radiotherapy, 41.4 Gy/23 F, over 5 weeks) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (paclitaxel 175 mg/m²; and cisplatin 75 mg/m², q21d, 2 cycles). Assuming a 12% 5-year overall survival difference in favour of the CROSS regimen, 80% power with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05 and a 5% dropout each year for an estimated 3 years enrolment, the power calculation requires 456 patients to be recruited (228 in each group). The primary endpoint is 5-year overall survival, with a minimum 5-year follow-up. The secondary endpoints include 5-year disease-free survival, toxicity, pathological complete response rate, postoperative complications, postoperative mortality and quality of life. A biobank of pre-treatment and resected tumour tissue will be built for translational research in the future.

Discussion

This RCT directly compares a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen with a standard CROSS regimen in terms of overall survival for patients with locally advanced ESCC. The results of this RCT will provide an answer for the controversy regarding the survival benefits between the two treatment strategies.

Trial registration

NCT04138212, date of registration: October 24, 2019.

Mean cardiopulmonary dose and vertebral marrow dose differentially predict lineage-specific leukopenia kinetics during radiotherapy for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Lymphopenia is associated with poor outcomes in esophageal cancer (EC) patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We hypothesized that radiation dose to marrow (central) vs. circulating (peripheral) leukocytes (WBCs) may have unique effects on WBC counts and clinical outcomes in EC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Weekly and 90-day post-CRT blood cell counts were evaluated for 46 patients with stage II-III EC treated with CRT. Thoracic vertebral volume spared (TVS) radiation was extracted from dose volume histograms (DVH). Mean cardiopulmonary dose (mCPD) was calculated as mean dose to the volumetric sum of heart, lungs, and great vessels as a surrogate for circulating blood pool. Linear and logistic regression identified associations between dosimetric variables and hematologic toxicities (HT). Repeated measures ANOVA tested associations between cell count trends and clinical predictors.

RESULTS

WBCs and platelets reached nadir at week 6 of CRT. On multivariate analysis, mCPD was associated with lower WBC and neutrophil nadirs (p < 0.05). TVS5-40 Gy were associated with higher lymphocyte nadirs (all p < 0.05). Repeated measures ANOVA revealed an interaction effect of sex on absolute lymphocyte trend as well as age (<67 vs. >67) and diabetes on normalized lymphocyte trend (all p < 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

mCPD and volume of thoracic marrow spared radiation differentially predict lineage-specific leukopenias during CRT for EC. mCPD is significantly associated with lower total WBC and neutrophil nadirs. In contrast, greater thoracic marrow spared radiation is associated with mitigation of lymphopenia during CRT. Clinical factors such as sex, age, and diabetes may be associated with a more rapid decline in hematologic counts during treatment.

Survival after neoadjuvant approaches to gastroesophageal junction cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers can be treated with equipoise using neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT) or chemotherapy alone (NAC), but the comparative outcomes are unclear.

METHODS

Patients with non-metastatic T2-4 or N1-3 GEJ adenocarcinoma who underwent definitive surgery and NAC or NACRT were selected from the National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Multivariable regression and propensity score analysis were used to adjust for age, comorbidity, and other characteristics.

RESULTS

We identified 2435 patients treated with NACRT and 648 patients treated with NAC. OS was not significantly different between NACRT and NAC (51% versus 54% at 3 years, respectively, P = 0.11). Extent of pathological downstaging (complete, partial/mixed, none) after NACRT or NAC was highly prognostic of survival. Patients with no response did equally poorly after either preoperative regimen, and NAC was significantly less likely than NACRT to produce any response (adjusted odds ratio 0.62, P < 0.0001). Rate of adjuvant chemotherapy usage was significantly lower after NACRT than after NAC (12% versus 34%, P < 0.0001). In patients with residual tumor and nodal disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher OS after NACRT (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81, P = 0.05), but not after NAC. These results were further validated by propensity score analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

NACRT had similar survival to NAC despite superior pathological downstaging. Adjuvant chemotherapy is relatively underused after NACRT and warrants further study as a risk-adapted means to improve survival, especially in patients with larger burden of residual disease.

Accelerated Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy versus Conventional Fractionation Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

The benefits of accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy (HART) and conventional fractionation radiotherapy (CFRT) in the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC) remain controversial. In this study, we analyzed the therapeutic effects of these two treatment regimens to explore whether HART can improve the overall survival (OS) rate and locoregional control (LRC) rate in patients with HNC.

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for eligible studies. The OS rate and LRC rate were considered as the efficacy outcomes. I² was used to test the heterogeneity among studies with a cutoff value of 50%. Potential publication bias was assessed by funnel plots and Egger's test. We also performed a sensitivity analysis to assess the stability of the results. In this meta-analysis, all analyses were performed using R 3.5.3 software.

Results

Twelve qualified articles including a total of 2,935 patients were identified. HART had a significant beneficial effect on OS rate (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65–0.98). Compared with CFRT, HART demonstrated a significantly higher LRC rate (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71–0.96).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis showed that HART can significantly improve OS and LRC compared with CFRT in patients with HNC.

Comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis

Aim: To compare the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) for esophageal cancer. Methods: Randomized controlled trials reporting on the comparison of nCRT and nCT for esophageal cancer were identified. Results: Three eligible randomized controlled trials were identified and included with a total of 375 patients (189 nCRT, 186 nCT). Outcomes showed that compared with nCT group, R0 resection and pathologic complete response (pCR) rates were significantly increased in nCRT group. However, no significant difference was seen in 3- and 5-year progression-free survival or 3- and 5-year overall survival. Conclusion: The addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy results in higher R0 resection rate and pCR rate, without significantly impacting survival.