Increasing age is a predictor of short-term outcomes in esophagectomy: a propensity score adjusted analysis

A Novel Frailty Index Can Predict the Short-Term Outcomes of Esophagectomy in Older Patients with Esophageal Cancer

Background: Frailty, rather than age, is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. We sought to determine whether preoperative frailty as defined by a novel scoring system could predict the outcomes among older patients undergoing esophagectomy. Methods: We identified patients 65 years or older who underwent esophagectomy between 2011 and 2021 at our institution. Frailty was assessed using the MSK-FI, which consists of 1 component related to functional status and 10 medical comorbidities. We used a multivariable logistic regression model to test for the associations between frailty and short-term outcomes, with continuous frailty score as the predictor and additionally adjusted for age and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Results: In total, 447 patients were included in the analysis (median age of 71 years [interquartile range, 68-75]). Most of the patients underwent neoadjuvant treatment (81%), an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (86%), and minimally invasive surgery (55%). A total of 22 patients (4.9%) died within 90 days of surgery, 144 (32%) had a major complication, 81 (19%) were readmitted, and 31 (7.2%) were discharged to a facility. Of the patients who died within 90 days, 19 had a major complication, yielding a failure-to-rescue rate of 13%. The risk of 30-day major complications (OR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.09-1.41]; p = 0.001), readmissions (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.13-1.52]; p < 0.001), and discharge to a facility (OR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.49-2.37]; p < 0.001) increased with increasing frailty. Frailty and 90-day mortality were not associated. Conclusions: Frailty assessment during surgery decision-making can identify patients with a high risk of morbidity.

Esophagectomy in the Older Adult: A Systematic Review

Current management of esophageal carcinoma (EC) involves combining different modalities, offering the opportunity of personalized strategies. This is particularly enticing in the geriatric population, where tailoring treatment modalities remains key to achieve good outcomes in terms of both quality of life and survival. Primary outcomes of our review included (1) evidence on short-term outcomes following esophagectomy, and (2) evidence on long-term outcomes following esophagectomy. Secondary review questions compared outcomes of (1) neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery for locally advanced esophageal carcinoma, (2) endoscopic submucosal dissection versus esophagectomy for early esophageal carcinoma, and (3) definitive radiation with or without chemotherapy versus surgery. Twenty-six articles were included in the review for the main review questions. Our systematic review underscores the need for comprehensive geriatric evaluations to guide decision-making. Despite concerns about perioperative risks, well-selected older patients can derive survival benefits from surgical intervention.

Management of elderly patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer

This review focuses on the treatment about elderly esophageal cancer to clarify the current situation regarding our clinical question. Although there are several reviews about elderly esophageal cancer treatment, there are fundamental differences between Japan and the rest of the world. Two main differences are raised: histological differences and treatment strategies for resectable patients. We overview each status according to following clinical questions. First, there are no established evaluation criteria for frail. Second, selection criteria for surgery or non-surgery are not established. Third, few specific treatments for elderly patients (EPs) are investigated. In conclusion, there are many reports about treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma for EPs, although treatment strategy is still controversial. We have to consider well-designed prospective trial to confirm specific treatment strategy according to each stage.

Esophageal Cancer in Elderly Patients, Current Treatment Options and Outcomes; A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

Simple Summary

Any given treatment may provide improve survival for elderly patients with oesophageal cancer compared to best supportive care. Although surgery may be related to a higher rate of complications in these patients, it also offers the best chance for survival, especially when combined with perioperative chemo-or chemoradiation. Definitive chemoradiation remains also a valid and widely used curative approach in this population. Quality of life after oesophageal cancer treatment does not seem to be particularly compromised in elderly patients, although the risk of loss of autonomy after the disease is higher. Based on the available data, excluding a priori elderly patients from curative treatment based on age alone cannot be supported. A thorough general health status and geriatric assessment is necessary to offer the optimal treatment, tailored to the individual patient.

Abstract

Esophageal cancer, despite its tendency to increase among younger patients, remains a disease of the elderly, with the peak incidence between 70–79 years. In spite of that, elderly patients are still excluded from major clinical trials and they are frequently offered suboptimal treatment even for curable stages of the disease. In this review, a clear survival benefit is demonstrated for elderly patients treated with neoadjuvant treatment, surgery, and even definitive chemoradiation compared to palliative or no treatment. Surgery in elderly patients is often associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to younger patients and may put older frail patients at increased risk of autonomy loss. Definitive chemoradiation is the predominant modality offered to elderly patients, with very promising results especially for squamous cell cancer, although higher rates of acute toxicity might be encountered. Based on the all the above, and although the best available evidence comes from retrospective studies, it is not justified to refrain from curative treatment for elderly patients based on their age alone. Thorough assessment and an adapted treatment plan as well as inclusion of elderly patients in ongoing clinical trials will allow better understanding and management of esophageal cancer in this heterogeneous and often frail population.

Factors associated with the costs of hospitalization after esophagectomy: a retrospective observational study at a three-tertiary cancer hospital in China

Background

Esophageal cancer represents a major health threat in China. Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for respectable esophageal cancer. This study aimed to investigate the costs of hospitalization in esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy, and to analyze the factors influencing these costs.

Methods

A retrospective observational study which enrolled 196 patients who underwent esophagectomy from September, 2018, to April, 2019, in the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University were conducted

Results

The median inpatient cost was ￥72,772 (range, ￥49,796–128,771). Materials accounted for 39.7% of the direct medical costs, which was the highest proportion for any of the cost components. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE, OR: 0.031; 95% CI: 0.005–0.209), cardiopathy comorbidity (OR: 0.344; 95% CI: 0.136–0.872), and anastomotic leak (OR: 0.012; 95% CI: 0.001–0.131) were risk factors for higher cost, while early oral feeding (OR: 3.979; 95% CI: 1.430–11.067) was a protective factor.

Conclusions

Understanding the factors associated with high hospitalization costs will help to reduce healthcare expenditure. By controlling complications and promoting early oral feeding, the economic burden on esophagectomy patients can be relieved. Further research based on a longitudinal design is needed to investigate the full costs of hospitalization associated with esophageal cancer.

Clinical outcomes of oesophagectomy in elderly versus relatively younger patients: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The surgical efficacy of oesophagectomy for elderly patients (>80 years old) is still unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of oesophagectomy between elderly and relatively younger patients.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies comparing the clinical outcomes of oesophagectomy for elderly and relatively younger patients. Odds ratios were extracted to obtain pooled estimates of the perioperative effect, and hazard ratios were extracted to compare survival outcomes between the 2 cohorts.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 4946 patients were included in this meta-analysis. For patients older than 80 years of age, in-hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR) 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28-3.13; P = 0.002] and the incidence rates of cardiac (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.10-2.20; P = 0.01) and pulmonary (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.11-2.22; P = 0.01) complications were higher than those of relatively younger patients. The overall postoperative complication rate (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.82-2.40; P = 0.22) and the incidence of anastomotic leak (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.58-1.47; P = 0.73) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Elderly patients had a worse overall 5-year survival rate (HR 2.66, 95% CI 1.65-4.28; P < 0.001) than that of relatively younger patients. The cancer-related 5-year survival rate of elderly patients was also lower than that of relatively younger patients (HR 3.37, 95% CI 2.36-4.82; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with relatively younger patients, elderly patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing oesophagectomy are at higher risk of in-hospital mortality and have lower survival rates. However, there is no conclusive evidence that the overall rate of complications is elevated in elderly patients.

Surgical vs Endoscopic Management of T1 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Modeling Decision Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although treatment of T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is shifting from esophagectomy to endoscopic therapy, T1b EACs are considered too high risk to be treated endoscopically. We investigated the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of esophagectomy vs endoscopic therapy for T1a and T1b EACs, and the effects of age and comorbidities, using a decision analytic Markov model.

METHODS

We developed a model to simulate a hypothetical cohort of men 75 years old with Charlson comorbidity index scores of 0 and either T1aN0M0 or T1bN0M0 EAC, as a base case. We used the model to compare the effects of esophagectomy vs serial endoscopic therapy. We performed sensitivity analyses based on age at diagnosis of 60-85 years, comorbidity indices of 0-2, and utilities. Post-procedure cancer-specific mortality was derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare database.

RESULTS

In the T1a base case, esophagectomy yielded more unadjusted life years than endoscopic therapy (6.97 vs 6.81), but fewer quality-adjusted life years (QALYs, 4.95 for esophagectomy vs 5.22 for endoscopic therapy). In the T1b base case, esophagectomy yielded more unadjusted life years than endoscopic therapy (5.73 vs 5.01) and QALYs (4.07 vs 3.85 for endoscopic therapy), but was not cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $156,981). Sensitivity analyses showed endoscopic therapy optimized QALYs for patients more than 80 years old with a comorbidity index of 1 or 2, or if the ratio of post-esophagectomy to post-endoscopic therapy utilities was below 0.875.

CONCLUSION

In a Markov model, we showed that endoscopic therapy of T1a EAC yields more QALYs and is more cost effective than esophagectomy for patients of all ages and comorbidity indices tested. In contrast, selection of therapy for T1b EAC depends on age and comorbidities, due to surgical mortality and the competing risk of non-cancer death.

Changes in treatment and outcome of oesophageal cancer in Denmark between 2004 and 2013

Background

Since 2003, care for patients with oesophageal cancer has been centralized in a few dedicated centres in Denmark. The aim of this study was to assess changes in the treatment and outcome of patients registered in a nationwide database.

Methods

All patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer or cancer of the gastro-oesophageal junction who underwent oesophagectomy in Denmark between 2004 and 2013, and who were registered in the Danish clinical database of carcinomas in the oesophagus, gastro-oesophageal junction and stomach (DECV database) were included. Quality-of-care indicators, including number of lymph nodes removed, anastomotic leak rate, 30- and 90-day mortality, and 2- and 5-year overall survival, were assessed. To compare quality-of-care indicators over time, the relative risk (RR) was calculated using a multivariable log binomial regression model.

Results

Some 6178 patients were included, of whom 1728 underwent oesophagectomy. The overall number of patients with 15 or more lymph nodes in the resection specimen increased from 38·1 per cent in 2004 to 88·7 per cent in 2013. The anastomotic leak rate decreased from 14·8 to 7·6 per cent (RR 0·66, 95 per cent c.i. 0·43 to 1·01). The 30-day mortality rate decreased from 4·5 to 1·7 per cent (RR 0·51, 0·22 to 1·15) and the 90-day mortality rate from 11·0 to 2·9 per cent (RR 0·46, 0·26 to 0·82). There were no statistically significant changes in 2- or 5-year survival rates over time.

Conclusion

Indicators of quality of care have improved since the centralization of oesophageal cancer treatment in Denmark.

Transthoracic versus transhiatal resection for esophageal adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus: A value-based comparison

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes, costs, and resource use based on operative approach, transthoracic (TT) or transhiatal (TH), for resection of esophageal cancer.

METHODS

This cohort analysis utilized the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results--Medicare linked data from 2002 to 2009. Only adenocarcinomas of the lower esophagus were examined to minimize confounding. Medicare data was used to determine episode of care costs and resource use. Propensity score matching was used to control for identified confounders. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-proportional hazard modeling were used to compare long-term survival.

RESULTS

537 TT and 405 TH resections were identified. TT and TH esophagectomy had similar complication rates (46.7% vs. 50.8%), operative mortality (7.9% vs 7.1%), and 90 days readmission rates (30.5% vs. 32.5%). However, TH was associated with shorter length of stay (11.5 vs. 13.0 days, P = 0.006) and nearly $1,000 lower cost of initial hospitalization (P = 0.03). No difference in 5-year survival was identified (33.5% vs. 36%, P = 0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

TH esophagectomy was associated with lower costs and shorter length of stay in an elderly Medicare population, with similar clinical outcomes to TT. The TH approach to esophagectomy for distal esophageal adenocarcinoma may, therefore, provide greater value (quality/cost).