Clinical significance and prognosis of supraclavicular lymph node metastasis in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer

Risk factors and prognosis for supraclavicular lymph node metastasis in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer. Distant or regional metastasis?

We aimed to determine the frequency and prognosis of supraclavicular (#104) lymph node (LN) metastasis compared with other LN stations in patients with advanced thoracic esophageal cancer and to identify risk factors for metastasis to delineate the indications for three-field lymphadenectomy (3FL). The study cohort of 567 eligible patients with esophageal cancer had undergone subtotal esophagectomy from 2003 to 2020. LN metastasis was defined as pathologically proven metastasis or positron emission tomography-positive LNs. The efficacy index (EI), calculated from the frequency of LN metastases and survival rates, was used as prognostic value of each LN station dissection for patient survival. Risk factors for #104 LN metastasis were determined by multivariable logistic regression. The frequency of #104 LN metastasis was 11.6% overall, 31.7% in upper and 8.3% in middle/lower third lesion. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 71% of patients and chemo-radiation to 11%. The 5-year overall survival was 45.8%. The EI for #104 LNs (5.3) was similar to that for #101 LNs. Risk factors were age < 65 years, upper third lesion, clinical N2-3, #101/106rec LN metastasis and poorly differentiated carcinoma. The 5-year overall survival of patients with middle/lower lesions was 38% (EI 3.1), similar to that for #101 and #8/9/11 LNs. The prognosis of patients with #104 LN metastases is similar to that of patients with metastases in other regional LN stations. Therefore, we recommend 3FL exclusively for patients at a high risk of #104 LN metastasis due to the overall metastatic rate not being high.

Supraclavicular lymph node metastasis should not be defined as regional lymph node metastasis in cervical and upper thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

The importance of supraclavicular lymph node (SCLN) metastasis in cervical and upper thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has not been determined. The aim of the present study was to provide a detailed definition of the range of SCLN regions and to explore whether SCLNs should be considered as a regional lymph nodes for patients with cervical and upper thoracic ESCC. A retrospective analysis was performed on 230 patients with locally advanced cervical or upper thoracic ESCC who underwent radical radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The range of SCLN regions was defined in detail on contrast enhanced computed tomography images of the neck. According to whether the patient had lymph node metastasis in the supraclavicular region, the included patients were divided into two groups, and the survival differences and reasons for treatment failure between the two groups were analyzed. Of the 230 patients with ESCC, 71 (30.87%) exhibited lymph node metastases in the supraclavicular region. The median overall survival time of ESCC patients with and without SCLN metastasis was 17 and 30 months, respectively (P<0.001). After propensity score matching (PSM), the median overall survival time of ESCC patients with and without SCLN metastasis was 17 and 28 months, respectively (P<0.001). During the follow-up period, there were a total of 101 cases of failure of treatment in the irradiation field, 6 cases had esophageal metastasis in the non-irradiated field and 27 cases had regional lymph node metastasis in the non-irradiated field. In addition, there were 33 cases of metastasis to the distant lymph nodes or organs. There was no significant difference in the local treatment failure rate between the groups with or without SCLN metastasis in both the irradiation field and the non-irradiation field, but the probability of distant metastasis in the SCLN metastasis group was significantly higher than that in the group without SCLN metastasis (P=0.025). In conclusion, patients with cervical and upper thoracic ESCC with SCLN metastasis have a poor prognosis and the median overall survival time is closer to that of metastatic ESCC than ESCC with regional lymph node metastasis; therefore, SCLNs should not be defined as regional lymph nodes in patients with cervical and upper thoracic ESCC.

Abdominal lymph node metastasis in non-surgical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: prognostic significance and a novel staging strategy

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a combination of abdominal lymph node (LN) metastasis and the number of LNs in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients to optimize its clinical nodal staging.

Methods

A retrospective study, including a total of 707 ESCC patients treated with definitive radiotherapy, was conducted at two participating institutes. Different combinations of LN variables, including abdominal LN metastasis (R1: no-abdominal LN metastasis; R2: abdominal LN metastasis), were further analyzed to propose a potential revised nodal (rN) staging.

Results

The multivariate analyses showed that the number of metastatic LN and abdominal LN metastasis were independent prognostic factors for the overall survival (OS). The results showed no significant differences in the OS between the N2 patients with abdominal LN metastasis and N3 patients. The OS of the stage III patients with abdominal LN metastasis was not significantly different from those with stage IVa. The N3R1 and N1-2R2 had similar hazard ratios (HRs). The N1R1 subset was defined as rN1, the N2R1 subset was defined as rN2, and the N3R1-2 and N1-2R2 subsets were defined as rN3. The HRs of OS of the rN2 and rN3 groups increased subsequently. The rN stage could identify the differences in the OS times of each subgroup based on the 8th AJCC cN staging or the 11th JES N staging.

Conclusions

The rN staging, including the number of metastatic LNs and abdominal LN metastasis, might serve as a potential prognostic predictor for non-surgical patients with ESCC.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy may be the optimal treatment option for lower thoracic oesophageal cancer with supraclavicular lymph node metastasis: An inverse probability of treatment-weighted analysis of SEER database

INTRODUCTION

Whether supraclavicular lymph node (SCLN) metastasis in patients with oesophageal cancer belongs to regional disease is controversial, leading to heterogeneity in clinical treatment decisions. This study aimed to determine the optimal treatment for lower thoracic oesophageal cancer (LTOC) with SCLN metastasis.

METHODS

Patients with LTOC registered in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database during 2010-2015 were identified. Selected patients were grouped according to disease spread as those with locoregional disease, with SCLN metastasis or with distant metastasis, as well as according to treatment modality (neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (nCRT+S group), upfront surgery ± adjuvant therapy (upfront S group) and definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT group)). The Cox regression analysis and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to identify the optimal treatment modality for different groups.

RESULTS

Of 11,767 LTOC patients identified from the database, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates for patients with the locoregional disease (n = 7,541), SCLN metastasis (n = 120) and distant metastasis (n = 4,106) were 28.3%, 10.0% and 3.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). Among patients with SCLN metastasis, median OS in the nCRT+S, upfront S and dCRT groups were 25, 14 and 8 months, respectively (P < 0.001). After IPTW, the nCRT+S group was still associated with better median OS compared with other groups. The multivariate analysis identified treatment modality as an independent prognostic factor for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy may be the optimal treatment modality for LTOC with SCLN metastasis. The findings of this study need to be validated in large prospective studies.

Lymph node metastasis and tumor-educated immune tolerance: Potential therapeutic targets against distant metastasis

Lymph node metastasis has been shown to positively associated with the prognosis of many cancers. However, in clinical treatment, lymphadenectomy is not always successful, suggesting that immune cells in the tumor and sentinel lymph nodes still play a pivotal role in tumor immunosuppression. Recent studies had shown that tumors can tolerate immune cells through multiple strategies, including tumor-induced macrophage reprogramming, T cells inactivation, production of B cells pathogenic antibodies and activation of regulatory T cells to promote tumor colonization, growth, and metastasis in lymph nodes. We reviewed the bidirectional effect of immune cells on anti-tumor or promotion of cancer cell metastasis during lymph node metastasis, and the mechanisms by which malignant cancer cells modify immune cells to create a more favorable environment for the growth and survival of cancer cells. Research and treatment strategies focusing on the immune system in lymph nodes and potential immune targets in lymph node metastasis were also be discussed.

Role of Lower Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Margin Location on Abdominal Lymph Node Metastasis Risk

Background: Different sites of esophageal cancer are accompanied by different regional lymph node metastasis (LNM) risks. We aimed to investigate the impact of a lower tumor margin on abdominal LNM risk. Methods: We enrolled patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal squamous carcinoma (ESCC) from 2014 to 2017 in West China Hospital. Overall survival (OS) analysis was performed. We measured the distance between the lower tumor margin and esophagogastric junction (LED) with upper gastrointestinal contrast-enhanced X-ray (UGCXR). Multivariate logistic regression analysis and propensity score matching (PSM) were performed to explore the relationship between LED and the risk of abdominal LNM. Abdominal LNM risk in ESCC was stratified based on the location of the lower tumor margin. A model predicting abdominal LNM risk was constructed and presented with a nomogram. Results: The included patients had an abdominal LNM rate of 48.29%. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, LED was identified as a risk factor for abdominal LNM. Subgroup analysis of middle ESCC showed that patients with an LED less than 10 cm had a significantly higher rate of abdominal LNM than those with an LED greater than 10 cm. The abdominal LNM rate in middle ESCC patients with an LED less than 10 cm was 32.2%, while it was 35.1% in lower ESCC patients whose lower tumor margin did not invade the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), which was comparable after PSM. Conclusions: LED could help surgeons evaluate the risk of abdominal LNM preoperatively and better guide dissection of abdominal lymph nodes according to risk level.

Reprogramming of sentinel lymph node microenvironment during tumor metastasis

Metastasis is a major cause of death in patients with cancer. The two main routes for cancer cell dissemination are the blood and lymphatic systems. The underlying mechanism of hematogenous metastasis has been well characterized in the past few decades. However, our understanding of the molecular basis of lymphatic metastasis remains at a premature stage. Conceptually, cancer cells invade into lymphatic capillary, passively move to collecting lymphatic vessels, migrate into sentinel lymph node (SLN;, the first lymph node to which cancer cells spread from the primary tumor), and enter the blood circulatory system via the subclavian vein. Before arriving, cancer cells release specific soluble factors to modulate the microenvironment in SLN to establish a beachhead for successful colonization. After colonization, cancer cells inhibit anti-tumor immunity by inducing the recruitment of regulatory T cell and myeloid-derived suppressor cells, suppressing the function of dendritic cell and CD8⁺ T cell, and promoting the release of immunosuppressive cytokines. The development of novel strategies to reverse cancer cell-triggered SLN remodeling may re-activate immunity to reduce beachhead buildup and distant metastasis. In addition to being a microanatomic location for metastasis, the SLN is also an important site for immune modulation. Nanotechnology-based approaches to deliver lymph node-tropic antibodies or drug-conjugated nanoparticles to kill cancer cells on site are a new direction for cancer treatment. Conversely, the induction of stronger immunity by promoting antigen presentation in lymph nodes provides an alternate way to enhance the efficacy of immune checkpoint therapy and cancer vaccine. In this review article, we summarize recent findings on the reprogramming of SLN during lymphatic invasion and discuss the possibility of inhibiting tumor metastasis and eliciting anti-tumor immunity by targeting SLN.

Prognostic Significance of the Number and Extent of Metastatic Lymph Nodes in Patients with Esophageal Cancer: Comparison of the Union for International Cancer Control 8th Edition and Japan Esophageal Society Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer 11th Edition Classifications for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The tumor, node, metastasis staging system of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) has been used worldwide for esophageal cancer, and, in Japan, the Japan Esophageal Society Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer (JES) has also been used; however, there is a big difference between the two classifications with regard to node staging. We hypothesized that these two node staging systems may lead to different outcome predictions in terms of tumor location.

METHODS

This study enrolled 409 patients who underwent esophagectomy at Keio University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, between January 2005 and December 2017. We included those who underwent R0 or R1 resection or esophagectomy with additional organ excision, and excluded those who underwent salvage surgery. Thereafter, we investigated how the number or spread of metastatic lymph nodes affected the prognosis.

RESULTS

For all 409 patients, the 5-year overall survival rate was 64.1% and the 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was 58.4%. The concordance indices were 0.756 for UICC 8th edition pathological node staging and 0.732 for JES 11th edition pathological node staging (p = 0.06). Based on tumor location, the difference in the concordance indices between these two classifications was greatest for lower thoracic esophageal tumors (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

For all patients, the UICC 8th edition node staging system tended to reflect survival more precisely than that of the JES 11th edition. For lower thoracic esophageal tumors in particular, the former node staging system could be more useful.