Esophagectomy Following Endoscopic Resection of Submucosal Esophageal Cancer: a Highly Curative Procedure Even with Nodal Metastases

Outcomes after radical endoscopic resection of high risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma: an international multicenter retrospective cohort study

Post-endoscopic resection (ER) management of high risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is debated, with conflicting reports on lymph node metastasis (LNM). We aimed to assess outcomes following radical ER for high risk T1 EAC.We identified patients who underwent radical ER (tumor-negative deep margin) of high risk T1 EAC, followed by surgery or endoscopic surveillance, between 2008 and 2019 across 11 international centers.106 patients (86 men; mean [SD] age, 70 [11] years) were included. Of these, 26 (age, 64 [11] years) underwent additional surgery, with residual T1 EAC found in five patients (19%) and LNM in two (8%). After a median [IQR] follow-up of 47 [32-79] months, 2/26 patients (8%) developed LNM/distant metastasis, with one EAC-related death (4%), one unrelated death (4%), and four patients lost to follow-up (15%). Of the 80 patients (age, 71 [9] years) who entered endoscopic surveillance, 5/80 (6%) developed LNM/distant metastasis, with four EAC-related deaths (5%) over 46 (IQR 25-59) months follow-up; there were 15 unrelated deaths (19%), and 10 patients lost to follow-up (13%). The overall rates (95%CI) were: LNM, 6% (2%-12%); LNM/distant metastasis, 7% (3%-13%); EAC-related mortality, 5% (2%-11%); overall mortality, 20% (95%CI 13-29).Our findings present low rates of LNM after radical ER of high risk T1 EAC, consistent with other endoscopy-focused studies. Post-surgical patients are still at risk for metastasis and disease-specific mortality. These results suggest that endoscopic surveillance is suitable for selected cases, but further prospective studies are needed to refine patient selection and confirm optimal outcomes.

Reassessment reveals underestimation of infiltration depth in surgical resection specimens with lymph-node positive T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma

Background and study aims

Endoscopic resection (ER) has proven effective and safe for T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, uncertainty remains concerning risk-benefit return of esophagectomy for submucosal lesions (T1b). Surgical series in past decades have reported significant risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in T1b EAC, but these rates may be overestimated due to limitations in histological assessment of surgical specimens. We aimed to test this hypothesis by reassessing histological risk features in surgical specimens from T1b EAC cases with documented LNM.

Patients and methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study (1994-2005) was conducted. Patients who underwent direct esophagectomy without prior neoadjuvant therapy for suspected T1b EAC with LNM were included. Additional tissue sections were prepared from archival tumor blocks. A consensus diagnosis on tumor depth, differentiation grade, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was established by a panel of experienced pathologists.

Results

Specific depth of submucosal invasion (sm1 to sm3) was not specified in 10 of 11 archival case sign-out reports. LVI status was not reported in seven of 11 cases. Following reassessment, one patient was found to have deep tumor invasion into the muscularis propria (T2). The remaining 10 of 11 patients exhibited deep submucosal invasion (sm2-3), with five showing one or more additional risk features (poor differentiation and/or LVI).

Conclusions

Our findings highlight the potential for underestimating tumor depth of invasion and other high-risk features in surgical specimens. Despite the limited cohort size, our study confirmed a consistent high-risk histological profile across all cases. Caution is warranted when extrapolating LNM risk data from historic heterogeneous cross-sectional surgical cohorts to the modern ER era.

Predictors for lymph node metastasis and survival of patients with T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with surgery and endoscopic therapy: an analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Limited data exist regarding the long-term outcomes of endoscopic therapy (ET) with or without chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Our aim was to identify the risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) in T1b EAC and assess how the chosen treatment modality affects overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

METHODS

We analyzed patients with histologically confirmed T1b EAC diagnosed between 2004 and 2018 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Focusing on T1bN0M0 staging, the patients were divided into 2 groups (ET [n = 174] and surgery [n = 769]), and OS and CSS rates were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 1418 patients with T1b EAC, 228 cases (16.1%) exhibited LNM at diagnosis. Notable risk factors for LNM included poorly differentiated tumor and lesion size ≥20 mm. For T1bN0M0 cases, ET was commonly performed from 2009 to 2018 (odds ratio [OR], 4.3), especially for patients aged ≥65 years (OR, 3.1) with tumor size <20 mm (OR, 2.3). During the median 50 months of follow-up, age ≥65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.9), ET (HR, 1.5), and CRT (HR, 1.4) were associated with poorer OS. Factors linked to decreased CSS were age ≥65 years (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.6), poorly differentiated tumors (SHR, 1.5), and CRT (SHR, 1.5).

CONCLUSIONS

In T1b EAC, tumor size ≥20 mm and poor differentiation are notable risk factors for LNM. ET exhibited comparable CSS outcomes to surgery for carefully selected T1bN0M0 lesions. CRT did not provide additional survival benefit for these lesions; however, large-scale studies are required to validate this finding.

Analyzing risk factors and constructing a predictive model for superficial esophageal carcinoma with submucosal infiltration exceeding 200 micrometers

OBJECTIVE

Submucosal infiltration of less than 200 μm is considered an indication for endoscopic surgery in cases of superficial esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions. This study aims to identify the risk factors associated with submucosal infiltration exceeding 200 micrometers in early esophageal cancer and precancerous lesions, as well as to establish and validate an accompanying predictive model.

METHODS

Risk factors were identified through least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariate logistic regression. Various machine learning (ML) classification models were tested to develop and evaluate the most effective predictive model, with Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) employed for model visualization.

RESULTS

Predictive factors for early esophageal invasion into the submucosa included endoscopic ultrasonography or magnifying endoscopy> SM1(P<0.001,OR = 3.972,95%CI 2.161-7.478), esophageal wall thickening(P<0.001,OR = 12.924,95%CI,5.299-33.96), intake of pickled foods(P=0.04,OR = 1.837,95%CI,1.03-3.307), platelet-lymphocyte ratio(P<0.001,OR = 0.284,95%CI,0.137-0.556), tumor size(P<0.027,OR = 2.369,95%CI,1.128-5.267), the percentage of circumferential mucosal defect(P<0.001,OR = 5.286,95%CI,2.671-10.723), and preoperative pathological type(P<0.001,OR = 4.079,95%CI,2.254-7.476). The logistic regression model constructed from the identified risk factors was found to be the optimal model, demonstrating high efficacy with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.922 in the training set, 0.899 in the validation set, and 0.850 in the test set.

CONCLUSION

A logistic regression model complemented by SHAP visualizations effectively identifies early esophageal cancer reaching 200 micrometers into the submucosa.

Impact of primary endoscopic resection on oncological outcomes after esophagectomy for cancer: a retrospective propensity score-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer posed significant global health challenges, particularly due to poor survival rates, especially in advanced stages. Primary endoscopic resection had emerged as an alternative treatment for early esophageal cancer, aiming to preserve organ function and reduce surgical morbidity.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter cohort study included 334 patients with early esophageal cancer (T1a-b, N0) from 30 French-speaking European centers between 2000 and 2010. Patients underwent either primary endoscopic resection followed by esophagectomy (E group, n = 36) or esophagectomy alone (S group, n = 298). Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for TNM stage and propensity score weighting were used to assess the impact of primary endoscopic resection on recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Primary endoscopic resection did not significantly influence RFS (adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.68, p = 0.88) or OS (adjusted HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.13, p = 0.92) compared to esophagectomy alone. Initial higher thromboembolic complications in the endoscopic resection group were not significant after adjustment (adjusted OR 4.73, 95% CI 0.34 to 64.27, p = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary endoscopic resection followed by esophagectomy for early esophageal cancer did not alter oncological outcomes or overall survival in this retrospective cohort. These findings supported the role of primary endoscopic resection as a safe initial treatment strategy, warranting validation in larger prospective studies.

REGISTRATION

Our study was registered retrospectively on the Clinicaltrials.com website under the identifier NCT01927016. We acknowledge the importance of prospective registration and regret that this was not done before the commencement of the study.

Risk of lymph node metastasis in T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

Patients with early (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are increasingly having definitive local therapy endoscopically. Endoscopic resection is not able to pathologically stage or treat lymph node metastasis (LNM). Accurate identification of patients having nodal metastasis is critical to select endoscopic therapy over surgery. This study aimed to define the risk of LNM in T1 EAC. A meta-analysis of studies of patients who underwent surgery and lymphadenectomy with assessment of LNM was performed according to PRISMA. Main outcome was probability of LNM in T1a and T1b disease. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for LNM and rate of LNM in submucosal T1b (SM1, SM2, and SM3) disease. Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341794). Twenty cohort studies involving 2264 patients with T1 EAC met inclusion criteria: T1a (857 patients) with 36 (4.2%) node positive and T1b (1407 patients) with 327 (23.2%) node positive. Subgroup analysis of T1b lesions was available in 10 studies (405 patients). Node positivity for SM1, SM2, and SM3 was 16.3%, 16.2%, and 29.4%, respectively. T1 substage (odds ratio [OR] 7.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.45-13.38, P < 0.01), tumor differentiation (OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.06-3.87, P < 0.01), and lymphovascular invasion (OR 13.65, 95% CI 6.06-30.73, P < 0.01) were associated with LNM. T1a disease demonstrated a 4.2% nodal metastasis rate and T1b disease a rate of 23.2%. Endoscopic therapy should be reserved for T1a disease and perhaps select T1b disease, which has a moderately high rate of nodal metastasis. There were inadequate data to stratify T1b SM disease into 'low-risk' and 'high-risk' based on tumor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion.

Multiple staging investigations may not change management in patients with high-grade dysplasia or early esophageal adenocarcinoma

The clinical value of multiple staging investigations for high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is unclear. A single-center prospective cohort of patients treated for early esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2019 was analyzed. This coincided with a transition period from esophagectomy to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the treatment of choice. Patients were staged with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography(PET)/CT. The aim of this study was to assess their accuracy and impact on clinical management. 297 patients with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma were included (endoscopic therapy/EMR n = 184; esophagectomy n = 113 [of which a 'combined' group had surgery preceded by endoscopic therapy n = 23]). Staging accuracy was low (accurate staging EMR: CT 40.1%, EUS 29.6%, FDG-PET/CT 11.0%; Esophagectomy: CT 43.3%, EUS 59.7%, FDG-PET/CT 29.6%; Combined: CT 28.6%, EUS46.2%, FDG-PET/CT 30.0%). Staging inaccuracies across all groups that could have changed management by missing T2 disease were CT 12%, EUS 12% and FDG-PET/CT 1.6%. The sensitivity of all techniques for detecting nodal disease was low (CT 12.5%, EUS 12.5%, FDG-PET/CT0.0%). Overall, FDG-PET/CT and EUS changed decision-making in only 3.2% of patients with an early cancer on CT and low-risk histology. The accuracy of staging with EUS, CT and FDG-PET/CT in patients with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is low. EUS and FDG-PET/CT added relevant staging information over standard CT in very few cases, and therefore, these investigations should be used selectively. Factors predicting the need for esophagectomy are predominantly obtained from EMR histology rather than staging investigations.

Endoscopic Management of Esophageal Cancer

Advances in technology and improved understanding of the pathobiology of esophageal cancer have allowed endoscopy to serve a growing role in the management of this disease. Precursor lesions can be detected using enhanced diagnostic modalities and eradicated with ablation therapy. Furthermore, evolution in endoscopic resection has provided larger specimens for improved diagnostic accuracy and offer potential for cure of early esophageal cancer. In patients with advanced esophageal cancer, endoluminal therapy can improve symptom burden and provide therapeutic options for complications such as leaks, perforations, and fistulas. The purpose of this review article is to highlight the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis, treatment, and palliation of esophageal cancer.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Safety Analysis of Superficial Esophageal Cancer Patients Treated with Definitive or Adjuvant Radiotherapy

(1) Background: The role of radiotherapy (RT) in superficial esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) remains unclear. The objective of our study was to perform a detailed outcome and safety analysis of RT as a definitive or adjuvant treatment for T1N0M0 staged ESCC patients. (2) Methods: A total of 55 patients treated with endoscopic resection (ER) + RT/concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or RT/CCRT from January 2011 to June 2021 were included in this study. Eighteen patients with risk factors received ER + RT/CCRT, and thirty-seven patients solely received RT/CCRT. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate the clinical outcomes, and toxicities were scored. (3) Results: The median follow-up time was 51.9 months. The estimated 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and overall survival (OS) were 88.9% and 94.4% in the ER + RT/CCRT group and 91.8% and 91.7% in the RT/CCRT group. The predominant failure pattern was in-field local failure (5.5%, 3/55), with one patient in the ER + RT/CCRT group and two patients in the RT/CCRT group. One patient (1.8%, 1/55) had lung metastasis in the RT/CCRT group. The most common toxicities were Grades 1-2 in all patients, including esophagitis (74.5%, 41/55), myelosuppression (49.1%, 27/55) and esophageal stricture after RT (27.3%, 15/55). Two patients (11.1%, 2/18) and four patients (10.8%, 4/37) had Grade 3 esophageal stricture after RT in the ER + RT/CCRT group and RT/CCRT group, respectively. No patients experienced a Grade 4 or higher toxicity, and there were no treatment-related deaths. (4) Conclusions: Definitive or adjuvant RT/CCRT is an effective treatment alternative for superficial ESCC patients with satisfactory clinical outcomes and acceptable toxicities.

The 8th Wonder of the Cancer World: Esophageal Cancer and Inflammation

Esophageal cancer is a devastating malignancy which can be detected at an early stage but is more often diagnosed as an advanced process. It affects both men and women and inflicts the young and the elderly. There are multiple underlying factors involved in the pathogenesis of this cancer including inflammation. The interplay of these factors promotes inflammation through various mechanisms including the recruitment of pro-inflammatory cells, mediators such as cytokines, reactive oxygen species, and interleukins, among others. The presentation can vary widely with one of the most notable symptoms being dysphagia. Diagnosis is based on clinical symptomatology, imaging and endoscopy with biopsy. Once the diagnosis has been established, treatment and prognosis are based on the stage of the disease. This review outlines esophageal cancer and its link to inflammation in relation to pathogenesis, along with clinical features, diagnosis and treatment.

The effect of surgery plus chemoradiotherapy on survival of elderly patients with stage Ⅱ-Ⅲ esophageal cancer: a SEER-based demographic analysis

Background

The optimal treatment for elderly patients with esophageal cancer (EC) remains controversial. In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether elderly patients with stage II–III EC could benefit from trimodal therapy.

Methods

The selected elderly patients with stage II–III EC between 2004 and 2015 were included in a retrospective cohort study from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not they underwent surgery. The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was used to balance the confounding factors between the two groups. The Cox regression analysis, the log‐rank test, and the Kaplan–Meier curves were conducted to identify the survival benefits of different treatment regimes.

Results

A total of 1596 patients were included in this cohort study, in which 278 patients underwent surgery. In the combination of chemoradiotherapy and surgery group, there were more male patients, more patients aged between 75 and 79 years, and more married patients in the surgery group. Moreover, there were more patients with adenomatous carcinoma, more patients with a tumor size of less than 5 cm, and more patients with a T3 stage in the combination group. In the survival analysis, patients in the combination group had a longer overall survival (OS) and EC‐specific survival (ECSS). After IPTW analysis, the survival analysis generated similar results. The competitive risk model found that our results were stable. There was still a significant difference in OS and ECSS between the combination group and chemoradiotherapy alone group for esophageal adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Elderly patients with stage II–III EC, especially those with adenocarcinoma, could benefit from the combination of surgery and chemoradiotherapy.

Additional Esophagectomy Following Noncurative Endoscopic Resection for Early Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is recommended after endoscopic resection (ER) for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) when histopathological factors indicate a risk of nodal metastasis and incomplete resection. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of surgery management in this clinical setting and evaluate risk factors for residual disease after ER.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of cT1N0M0 ESCC patients with noncurative ER and additional esophagectomy (2009-2019, eight centers). Noncurative ER was defined as positive resected margins on pathology, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), poor differentiation, or submucosal invasion. The pathology after ER and esophagectomy was analyzed to identify predictors of nodal metastasis and residual tumor.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 128 patients. Primary residual tumor and nodal metastasis were confirmed in 25 (19.5%) and 15 (11.7%) patients, respectively. On multivariate analysis, nodal metastasis was independently associated with submucosal invasion [odds ratio (OR), 9.9; 95% CI, 1.1-96.1], LVI (OR, 20.9; 95% CI, 2.9-150.5), and tumor size ≥ 2 cm (OR, 8.1; 95% CI, 1.4-48.2) (all P < 0.05), but not with poor differentiation (P = 0.613). Regarding residual primary tumor, only positive vertical margin was significant factor (OR, 147; 95% CI, 18 to > 999; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional esophagectomy after noncurative ER allowed the resection of residual tumor and nodal metastasis, with favorable outcomes. Close follow-up may be feasible for a positive horizontal margin alone or poor differentiation alone, whereas intensive treatment should be considered for patients with submucosal invasion, LVI, and a positive vertical margin, especially when combined with tumor size ≥ 2 cm. Prospective research is needed to confirm the optimal management after ER.

Recommendations for Surveillance and Management of Recurrent Esophageal Cancer Following Endoscopic Therapies

With advancing endoscopic technology and screening protocols for Barrett disease, more patients are being diagnosed with early-stage esophageal cancer. These early-stage patients may be amendable to endoscopic therapies, such as endomucosal resection and ablation. These therapies may minimize morbidity, but the elevated risk of recurrence cannot be overlooked. This article reports outcomes and recommendations for surveillance and management of recurrent esophageal cancer following endoscopic therapies.

Clinical Outcome of Additional Esophagectomy After Endoscopic Treatment for Superficial Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment is one of the options for superficial esophageal cancer, but additional therapy such as esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is sometimes needed due to noncurative resection. However, the outcome of additional therapy after endoscopic treatment has not been fully evaluated.

METHODS

In 160 patients with superficial esophageal cancer, including 37 patients who underwent esophagectomy and 123 patients who underwent CRT after noncurative endoscopic resection, outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

The CRT group included more elderly patients than the surgery group, although there were no significant differences in tumor depth or lymphovascular invasion between the two groups. Overall survival was significantly better in the surgery group than in the CRT group (5-year overall survival: 94.3% vs. 79.9%; p = 0.039). Two (5.4%) patients in the surgery group who developed lymph node recurrence achieved complete response by chemotherapy or CRT, and 9 of 16 patients (13.0%) in the CRT group who developed recurrence underwent salvage esophagectomy or lymphadenectomy. As a result, the 5-year cause-specific survival was 100% in the surgery group and 92.8% in the CRT group. SM2 invasion (≥ SM2) was significantly associated with recurrence after CRT, while lymphatic invasion was associated with lymph node metastasis in the surgery group.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic treatment combined with esophagectomy or CRT can be a curative treatment option in patients with superficial esophageal cancer. However, esophagectomy rather than CRT should be recommended for patients with massive submucosal tumor invasion due to the risk of recurrence after CRT.

Organ Preservation after Endoscopic Resection of Early Esophageal Cancer with a High Risk of Lymph Node Involvement

Simple Summary

Virtually all early (T1) esophageal cancers can be resected endoscopically. However, the presence of histologic criteria on the resection specimen (deep submucosal invasion, lymphovascular involvement, poor tumor differentiation) are believed to be associated with a high risk (> 10%) of lymph node involvement. Therefore, the presence of such histoprognostic criteria currently require an esophagectomy. However, some patients are unfit for surgery or decline surgery, and undergo close follow-up or chemoradiotherapy. We analyzed the outcomes of these patients. We included 41 patients, of which thirteen (32%) were closely monitored, and 28 (68%) were treated by chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone. After a mean follow-up of 19 and 28 months, cancer specific survival was 100% and 96%, respectively. Our study shows that close follow-up may be an alternative to esophagectomy after endoscopic resection of an early esophageal cancer with a predicted high risk of lymph node involvement.

Abstract

Background: Esophagectomy is recommended after endoscopic resection of an early esophageal cancer when pejorative histoprognostic criteria indicate a high risk of lymph node involvement. Our aim was to analyze the clinical outcomes of a non-surgical, organ preserving management in this clinical setting. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was performed in two tertiary centers from 2015 to 2020. Patients were included if they had histologically complete resection of an early esophageal cancer, with poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion or deep submucosal invasion. Endoscopic resection was followed by chemoradiotherapy or follow-up in case of surgical contraindications or patient refusal. Outcome measures were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and toxicity of chemoradiotherapy. Results: Forty-one patients (36 with squamous cell carcinoma and 5 with adenocarcinomas) were included. The estimated high risk of lymph node involvement was based on poor differentiation (10/41; 24%), lympho-vascular invasion (11/41; 27%), muscularis mucosa invasion or deep sub-mucosal invasion (38/41; 93%). Thirteen patients (13/41; 32%) were closely monitored, and 28 (28/41; 68%) were treated by chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone. In the close follow-up group, DFS, OS and CSS were 92%, 92% and 100%, respectively vs. 75%, 79% and 96%, respectively in the chemoradiotherapy group at the end of the follow-up. Serious adverse events related to chemoradiotherapy occurred in 10% of the patients. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Our study shows that close follow-up may be an alternative to systematic esophagectomy after endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer with a predicted high risk of lymph node involvement.

Multi-institutional Evaluation of Curative Intent Chemoradiotherapy for Patients With Clinical T1N0 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Purpose

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for patients with clinical T1N0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods and Materials

This was a retrospective study of patients with clinical T1N0 adenocarcinoma of the esophagus treated with curative-intent CRT between 2004 and 2017 at 2 tertiary care centers. Patients received CRT instead of esophagectomy owing to medical comorbidities or patient preference. Toxicities were evaluated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall, progression-free, and disease-specific survivals.

Results

Twenty-eight patients were included for analysis. Median age was 76 years (range 55-90). The majority of patients were male (93%) and had a history of Barrett’s esophagus (71%). Tumor characteristics included distal esophagus location (93%), clinical stage T1b (86%), and median length of 2 cm (range, 1-9). Prior endoscopic resection was performed in 57%.

The median follow-up was 44 months (range, 4-146). The acute grade 3 adverse events were observed in 7 patients (25%). One patient died of complications potentially related to chemoradiation. Eight patients (29%) had disease progression at a median of 7.6 months after CRT. First site of progression was local only (14%), local and regional (11%), or distant (4%). Salvage locally directed treatment was performed in 3 of 4 patients with local-only recurrence. The 3-year overall survival, progression-free, and disease-specific rates were 78%, 62%, and 81%, respectively.

Conclusion

CRT is a safe and effective curative treatment strategy for select patients with clinical T1N0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma.

The management and long-term outcomes of endoscopic and surgical treatment of early esophageal adenocarcinoma

Endoscopic resection (ER) for early (pT1) esophageal adenocarcinoma can be justified if the rate of coexisting lymph node (LN) metastasis is less than the mortality rate from esophagectomy. This study examines endoscopic and surgical outcomes, histological assessment of submucosal (sm) disease, factors influencing LN metastasis, and the safety of treating pT1b disease endoscopically. Histopathological reexamination recorded thickness, width and depth of sm invasion, grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), resection margin status and tumor stage. Multivariate analysis was employed to evaluate the factors influencing survival and LN metastasis. Rate of LN metastasis for pT1 low-risk (LR: sm invasion < 500 μm, G1-2, no LVI) or high-risk (HR: sm invasion >500 μm, G3-4 or LVI) disease were analyzed. Ninety three patients underwent ER and 96 underwent esophagectomy. We demonstrate conflicting histological methods of sm disease reporting, which may explain the difference in LN metastasis rate between reported surgical & endoscopic series. Multivariate analysis confirmed age, T stage, and presence of LN metastases were the independent factors predicting poor prognosis. Tumor thickness as well as grade, T stage, LVI were predictors of LN metastasis. Rates of LN metastasis are <2% in LR sm1 disease, and >15% in HR sm1 disease. Pathological reporting of sm invasion should be updated for uniform analysis of endoscopic and surgical specimens. Following rigorous histopathological examination and within a close endoscopic follow-up regimen, pT1a and pT1b LRsm1 disease may be treated with curative intent endoscopically, whereas pT1b HRsm1-sm3 disease should be offered surgery.

The role of esophagectomy in the management of Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia

Barrett's esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) has previously been a routine indication for esophagectomy. Recent advances in endoscopic therapy have resulted in a shift away from surgery. Current international guidelines recommend endoscopic therapy for BE with HGD irrespective of recurrence or progression of dysplasia. Current guidelines do not address the ongoing role of esophagectomy as an adjunct in the setting of failed endoscopic therapy. This review examines the role of esophagectomy as an adjunct to endoscopy in the management of patients with BE and HGD, with a specific focus on patients with persistent, progressive, or recurrent disease, disease resistant to endoscopic therapy, in patients with concomitant esophageal pathology, and in those patients in whom lifelong surveillance may not be possible or desired.

Workload, Recurrence, Quality of Life and Long-term Efficacy of Endoscopic Therapy for High-grade Dysplasia and Intramucosal Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To review the workload, type and frequency of recurrence, long-term quality of life (QOL), and late oncologic outcomes with endoscopic therapy.

BACKGROUND

The short-term oncologic efficacy of endoscopic resection (ER) and ablation for patients with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal adenocarcinoma (IMC) is well-established in the literature.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of the initial 40 patients who had endoscopic therapy from 2001 to 2010 at 1 center by 1 physician.

RESULTS

Initial pathology was HGD in 22 and IMC in 18 patients, but 9 patients (41%) with HGD progressed to invasive cancer during endotherapy. The median follow-up was 82 months. Four patients had an esophagectomy, and in the remaining 36 patients, 70 ERs and 111 ablations were performed. The median number of endoscopic sessions was 4 in patients with short segment compared with 7 in patients with long-segment Barrett's. Complete resolution of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) was achieved in 30 patients (83%) at a median of 21 months. In 18 patients (60%), CRIM was maintained, whereas 12 patients developed recurrence at a median of 14 months. Additional endotherapy (n = 11) led to CRIM again in 10 patients (83%). There were no cancer deaths when CRIM was achieved. Overall survival with endotherapy was 73% at 5 years and 67% at 10 years. Quality of life (QOL) was below population means in 4 of 8 areas, but alimentary satisfaction was good after endotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Endotherapy is successful in most patients, but multiple sessions are usually required and disease progression can occur. Once CRIM is achieved, recurrence is common and mandates continued endoscopic follow-up. QOL is impaired with endotherapy, but alimentary satisfaction and oncologic outcomes support esophageal preservation with endotherapy for patients with HGD or IMC.

Outcomes of esophagectomy after noncurative endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend performing esophagectomy after endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer when the risk of lymph node metastasis or residual cancer is found to be significant and endoscopic treatment is therefore noncurative. Our aim was to assess the safety and oncological outcomes of esophagogastric resection in this specific clinical setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review from 2012 to 2018 was performed at four tertiary referral centers. All patients had a noncurative endoscopic resection of a clinical T1 esophageal cancer, followed by esophagectomy. Outcome measures were the rates of T0N0 specimens, overall survival, disease-free and cancer-specific survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 30 patients (13 with squamous cell carcinoma and 17 with adenocarcinoma) were included. The reasons for noncurative endoscopic resection were: positive vertical margins (n = 12), squamous cell carcinoma with muscularis mucosae or submucosal layer invasion (n = 3 and 9), adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (n = 11), poorly differentiated tumor (n = 6) and lymphovascular invasion (n = 6). Overall, 63% of the esophagi were T0N0: most residual lesions were T1a metachronous lesions, and four (13%) patients had advanced pT status (n = 3) or lymph node metastases (n = 2). Overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival were 83%, 75%, and 90% respectively. A total of 43% of patients had severe postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality was 7%.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort, esophagectomy allowed the resection of residual advanced cancer or lymph node metastases in 13% of cases, at the cost of 43% severe morbidity and 7% mortality. Therefore, the possibility of close follow up needs to be balanced with a highly morbid surgical management in these patients.

Early esophageal cancer: the significance of surgery, endoscopy, and chemoradiation

Early carcinomas of the esophagus are histologically classified as adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and microscopically subdivided into mucosal and submucosal carcinomas depending on infiltration depth. The prevalence of lymph node metastasis in mucosal carcinoma remains low. However, lymph node metastases arise frequently from tumors with submucosal infiltration, with increasing prevalence in the deeper submucosal sublayers. According to current German guidelines, endoscopic resection is the recommended treatment in mucosal adenocarcinoma without histologic risk factors (lymphatic invasion 1, vascular invasion 1, >grade 2, R1-margin). In superficial submucosal infiltration without histologic risk factors, endoscopic resection can be considered. In squamous cell carcinoma, endoscopic resection is indicated up to middle layer mucosal carcinoma. Beyond these criteria, surgical resection should be considered. The gold standard is a subtotal transthoracic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Total esophagectomy is performed in cervical esophageal carcinoma and transhiatal extended gastrectomy in carcinoma of the cardia. Minimally invasive procedures show good oncologic results and reduce the morbidity of radical esophagectomy. Reduced morbidity might be an argument for surgical resection in borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection. In early squamous cell cancer, the combination of endoscopic resection and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a therapeutic option with promising results.

Long-Term Survival and Tumor Recurrence in Patients with Superficial Esophageal Cancer after Complete Non-Curative Endoscopic Resection: A Single-Center Case Series

Background/Aims

To report the long-term survival and tumor recurrence outcomes in patients with superficial esophageal cancer (SEC) after complete non-curative endoscopic resection (ER).

Methods

We retrieved ER data for 24 patients with non-curatively resected SEC. Non-curative resection was defined as the presence of submucosal and/or lymphovascular invasion on ER pathology. Relevant clinical and tumor-specific parameters were reviewed.

Results

The mean age of the 24 study patients was 66.3±8.3 years. Ten patients were closely followed up without treatment, while 14 received additional treatment. During a mean follow-up of 59.0±33.2 months, the 3- and 5-year survival rates of all cases were 90.7% and 77.6%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates were 72.9% in the close observation group and 82.1% in the additional treatment group (p=0.958). The 5-year cumulative incidences of all cases of recurrence (25.0% vs. 43.3%, p=0.388), primary EC recurrence (10.0% vs. 16.4%, p=0.558), and metachronous EC recurrence (16.7% vs. 26.7%, p=0.667) were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Patients with non-curatively resected SEC showed good long-term survival outcomes. Given the similar oncologic outcomes, close observation may be an option with appropriate caution taken for patients who are medically unfit to receive additional therapy.

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.

[Surgical strategy for early stage carcinoma of the esophagus]

Early stage carcinomas of the esophagus are histologically differentiated into adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas and subdivided into mucosal (m1-3) and submucosal (sm1-3) carcinomas depending on the infiltration depth. While the prevalence of lymph node metastases in mucosal carcinomas is very low, the probability of lymph node metastases increases from submucosal infiltration with increasing depth. According to the current German S3 guidelines endoscopic resection is the recommended treatment strategy for mucosal adenocarcinoma without histological risk factors (lymphatic invasion [L1], venous invasion [V1], poorly differentiated [>G2], microscopic residual disease [R1] at the deep resection margin). For superficial submucosal infiltration (sm1) without histological risk factors endoscopic resection can also be carried out, whereby in this case the guidelines make a stronger recommendation for esophagectomy. For squamous cell carcinoma endoscopic resection is indicated for an infiltration depth up to middle layer mucosal carcinoma (m2) without histological risk factors. Outside of these criteria an esophageal resection should always be carried out. The surgical gold standard is a subtotal abdominothoracic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Alternative procedures are total esophagectomy in proximal esophageal carcinoma and transhiatal extended gastrectomy for carcinoma of the cardia. Limited proximal or distal esophageal resections can be performed in proximal or distal mucosal carcinoma without the possibility of endoscopic resection; however, partial resections are not superior in terms of functional results and are not oncologically equivalent due to limited lymphadenectomy. Minimally invasive procedures show good oncological results and reduce the morbidity of radical esophagectomy. Reduced morbidity might be an argument for surgical resection in borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection.

Current Concepts in Treatment of Barrett's Esophagus With and Without Dysplasia

BACKGROUND

Around 10-15% of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease will develop Barrett's esophagus (BE). The development of novel endoscopic modalities has changed the management of BE in the last decade.

AIM

The aim of this study was to review the current evidence for the treatment of BE with and without dysplasia.

RESULTS

In patients with BE without dysplasia, antireflux surgery should not be suggested as a modality to prevent the malignant transformation of BE, but its indications should be the same as for other patients with gastroesophageal reflux. Endoscopic surveillance at intervals of 3-5 years is recommended for these patients. For patients with BE with low-grade dysplasia, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the preferred treatment modality, while endoscopic surveillance every 12 months is an acceptable alternative in patients with life-limiting comorbidities. For most patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia, RFA is the preferred treatment strategy. Patients with intramucosal adenocarcinoma (T1a), should be treated with EMR followed by ablative therapy, in order to eradicate the remaining intestinal metaplasia. Endoscopic resection may be suitable for low-risk T1b tumors (well-differentiated, without lymphovascular invasion, and with superficial submucosal invasion); however, further data are necessary to better risk stratify this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BE without dysplasia should undergo endoscopic surveillance every 3-5 years. Endoscopic ablative therapy (RFA) is the preferred treatment modality for dysplastic BE. Patients with T1a adenocarcinoma should be treated with EMR followed by ablative therapy. Low-risk T1b tumors may be suitable for endoscopic resection.

Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Barrett's Esophagus and Early Esophageal Cancer; Summary of the Kelly and Carlos Pellegrini SSAT/SAGES Luncheon Symposium

BACKGROUND

Patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) are at increased risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The incidence of EAC is rising faster than any other cancer.

DISCUSSION

Patients with BE have a 30- to 40-fold increased risk of EAC. In the past 20 years, there have been dramatic advances in our understanding of the incidence and natural history of BE. Endoscopic treatment of BE is evolving. Even early EAC has been treated without esophagectomy and good oncologic results in the modern era.

Esophagectomy for Superficial Esophageal Neoplasia

Endoscopic therapies have become the standard of care for most cases of Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Despite a rapid and dramatic evolution in treatment paradigms, esophagectomy continues to occupy a place in the therapeutic armamentarium for superficial esophageal neoplasia. The managing physician must remain cognizant of the limitations of endoscopic approaches and consider surgical resection when they are exceeded. Esophagectomy, performed at experienced centers for appropriately selected patients with early-stage disease can be undertaken with the expectation of cure as well as low mortality, acceptable morbidity, and good long-term quality of life.