The role of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for lymph node-positive esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis

The effectiveness of adjuvant treatment approaches for resectable esophageal cancer: A single-center experience

AIMS AND BACKGROUND

In general, neoadjuvant treatment is the standard for clinical stage II/III esophageal cancer (EC), whereas the effect of adjuvant treatment on survival still remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant treatment modalities on the survival of EC patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 63 patients with stage II-IVA EC who had undergone curative surgery between the years 2002 and 2020 were included in the study. Patients' data were retrospectively collected from oncologic follow-up files. Various treatment regimens were administered during this period, including chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy.

RESULTS

The median age was 56 years (24-73), and the number of males was slightly higher than females (male/female: 33/30). While 32 (51%) patients received postoperative adjuvant treatment, the remaining 31 (49%) patients underwent surgery alone. The median overall survival (OS) was 45.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25.1-66.8) in patients receiving adjuvant therapy and 37.6 months (95% CI: 20.9-54.4) in patients not receiving adjuvant therapy. The 8.3-month survival difference was statistically insignificant (P = 0.54). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 87.5% versus 77.4%, 58.4% versus 51.6%, and 40.8% versus 27.6% for patients with and without adjuvant therapy, respectively. Pathological stage (P = 0.028) and lymph node status (P = 0.044) were significant prognostic factors for survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not support the benefit of adjuvant treatment compared with surgery alone in completely resected EC patients. The reason for this result may be related to the small sample size and different treatment regimens due to the change in treatment options over time.

Clinical predictors of early postoperative recurrence after radical esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has a high incidence rate of early postoperative recurrence and death. This study aimed to identify the clinical and pathological features in early recurrence cases and to confirm the usefulness of prediction using these factors for effective adjuvant therapy and postoperative surveillance.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty five patients who developed postoperative recurrence after undergoing radical esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer were classified into two groups as follows: those with early recurrence at ≤ 6 months and those with nonearly recurrence at > 6 months after surgery. After identifying related factors of early recurrence, usefulness of these factors for prediction were examined in all patients with and without recurrence.

RESULTS

The analysis cohort consisted of 43 and 82 patients in the early and nonearly recurrence groups, respectively. In multivariate analysis, factors associated with early recurrence were higher initial levels of tumor markers (squamous cell carcinoma [SCC] ≥ 1.5 ng/ml in tumors, except for adenocarcinoma, and carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA] ≥ 5.0 ng/ml in adenocarcinoma) and higher venous invasion (v), i.e., ≥ 2 (p = 0.040 and p = 0.004, respectively). The usefulness of these two factors for recurrence prediction was confirmed in 378 patients, including 253 patients without recurrence. Patients with at least one of the two factors had significantly higher early recurrence rates than those without any factors in pStages II and III (odds ratio [OR], 6.333; p = 0016 and OR, 4.346; p = 0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Early recurrence of thoracic esophageal cancer (i.e., during ≤ 6 months after esophagectomy) was associated with higher initial tumor marker levels and pathological findings of v ≥ 2. The combination of these two factors is useful as a simple and critical predictor of early postoperative recurrence.

Expression of Polyadenylate-binding Protein Cytoplasmic 1 (PABPC1) in Combination With RAD51 as Prognostic Biomarker in Patients Who Underwent Postoperative Chemotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Molecular markers in the prognosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients who received postoperative treatments are lacking. This research aims to evaluate the prognostic value of polyadenylate-binding protein cytoplasmic 1 (PABPC1) alone and in combination with RAD51 in ESCC patients who underwent postoperative chemotherapy (CT). A total of 103 ESCC patients who underwent postoperative CT and 103 matched ones who received surgery alone were analyzed in this study. PABPC1 and RAD51 expression was assessed in cancer samples by immunohistochemistry. PABPC1 high expression (PABPC1-HE) but not that of RAD51 was associated with poor patients' survival, regardless of the postoperative treatment or node status. Patients with PABPC1 low expression and RAD51 negative expression [RAD51- (PABPC1-LE/RAD51-)] tumor had good overall survival (OS) in both the CT treated and untreated groups. Patients with PABPC1-LE/RAD51+ and PABPC1-HE/RAD51+ tumors had longer OS in the CT treated group than in the untreated group. However, PABPC1-HE/RAD51- was associated with a poor outcome in both groups and the patients with PABPC1-HE/RAD51- tumor had hardly any benefit from CT in N+ status. PABPC1 alone and in combination with RAD51 was a prognostic biomarker for OS in ESCC patients who received postoperative CT.

Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival in patients with lymph node-positive esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Is oral chemotherapy promising?

BACKGROUND

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with pathological lymph node-positive (pN+) resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains unclear. We aimed to explore whether adjuvant chemotherapy could improve the overall survival (OS) of patients with pN+ ESCC and whether oral chemotherapy could be used as an alternative to intravenous chemotherapy.

METHODS

The patients were divided into two groups: a surgery plus chemotherapy group (S + CT group, 400 patients) and a surgery alone group (S group, 582 patients). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create patient groups that were balanced across several covariates (n = 331 in each group). The survival rates of patients receiving oral chemotherapy (69 patients with S-1 and 68 patients with tegafur tablets) and intravenous chemotherapy (263 patients) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

In the overall study cohort, the 3-year OS was significantly higher in the S + CT group than in the S group (66.3% vs. 49.9%, p < 0.001). These data were confirmed in the matched groups (3-year OS, 72.9% vs. 62.0%, p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis in the matched samples showed that adjuvant chemotherapy was an independent prognostic factor for ESCC (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.50-0.76, p < 0.001). Patients who received oral chemotherapy had a similar OS as patients who received intravenous chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant chemotherapy could significantly improve the OS of patients with pN+ ESCC, and oral chemotherapy drugs might be a better option because of their similar efficacy but fewer side effects than intravenous chemotherapy. This conclusion warrants further study in prospective, randomized controlled trials.

Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy for radically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A propensity score matching analysis.. [DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2443266/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with radically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods: Patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at our hospital from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Only patients with radically resected ESCC who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy or adjuvant radiotherapy were enrolled in this study. Propensity score matching (1:1) was used to balance the baseline. Results: A total of 1249patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study, and 263 patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. After matching, 260 pairs were analyzed. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 93.4%, 66.1% and 59.6%, respectively, for patients with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with 83.8%, 58.4% and 48.8%, respectively, for patients with surgery alone (P=0.003). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 82.3%, 58.8% and 51.3%, respectively, for patients with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with 68.0%, 48.3% and 40.8%, respectively, for patients with surgery alone (P = 0.002). In multivariateanalyses, adjuvant chemotherapy was found to be an independent prognostic factor. In subgroup analyses, only the patients in certain subgroups were found to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, such as patients who underwent right thoracotomy, pT3 diseases, pN1-pN3 diseases, or pTNM stage III and IVA diseases. Conclusions: Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy can improve the OS and DFS of ESCC patients after radical resection but may only work for patients in certain subgroups.

Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy for radically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with radically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

Patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at our hospital from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Only patients with radically resected ESCC who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy or adjuvant radiotherapy were enrolled in this study. Propensity score matching (1:1) was used to balance the baseline.

Results

A total of 1,249 patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study, and 263 patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. After matching, 260 pairs were analyzed. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 93.4%, 66.1% and 59.6%, respectively, for patients with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with 83.8%, 58.4% and 48.8%, respectively, for patients with surgery alone (P = 0.003). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 82.3%, 58.8% and 51.3%, respectively, for patients with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with 68.0%, 48.3% and 40.8%, respectively, for patients with surgery alone (P = 0.002). In multivariate analyses, adjuvant chemotherapy was found to be an independent prognostic factor. In subgroup analyses, only the patients in certain subgroups were found to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, such as patients who underwent right thoracotomy, pT3 diseases, pN1-pN3 diseases, or pTNM stage III and IVA diseases.

Conclusions

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy can improve the OS and DFS of ESCC patients after radical resection but may only work for patients in certain subgroups.

Clinical Trends in Management of Locally Advanced ESCC: Real-World Evidence from a Large Single-Center Cohort Study

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery (NCRT+S) has been widely applied to patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); however, treatment trends and their survival outcomes in a real-world clinical setting are poorly understood. This study aimed to analyze real-world evidence to understand treatment patterns and outcomes for patients with ESCC. We analyzed the treatment pattern and 5-year overall survival (5yOS) by synthesizing the individuals’ general characteristics, cancer information, and treatment records extracted from the Clinical Data Warehouse from 1994 to 2018. Of a total of 2151 patients, most patients received upfront surgery and 5yOS was 36.8% (31.4−43.1%). From 2003 to 2012, the use of NCRT increased, and 5yOS was improved to 42.2% (38.8−45.7%). Notably, after 2013, the proportion of NCRT+S markedly increased up to >50% of patients: 5yOS was much improved to 56.3% (53.2−59.6%). With regard to treatment, patients with NCRT+S had the most favorable 5yOS of 58.1% (53−63.7%), although that for patients with upfront surgery was 48.6% (45.9−51.5%, p < 0.001). Moreover, patients who received adjuvant therapy after surgery had better OS than those with surgery alone (58.4% (52.7−64.7%) vs. 47.3% (44.1−50.7%), p < 0.001). This analysis of real-world data demonstrated a significantly improved survival outcome for locally advanced ESCC over time since NCRT prior to surgery had been routinely applied. We revealed that NCRT+S was the most effective treatment for locally advanced ESCC and that adjuvant chemotherapy may be an encouraging therapeutic option for patients with positive nodes after upfront surgery.

A novel prognostic model: which group of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients could benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to establish a reliable model for predicting the overall survival (OS) of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients and identifying the potential beneficiaries of adjuvant chemotherapy after esophagectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 819 ESCC patients who underwent esophagectomy as the training cohort. We constructed a prognostic model named GTLN2. Both internal and external validation tests were performed. Potential beneficiaries were defined as ESCC patients who obtained a significantly longer OS after adjuvant chemotherapy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized in the subgroup analysis to screen ESCC beneficiaries of adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

We enrolled a total of 819 cT1b-3 patients in the training cohort. Multiple prognostic factors were associated with adjuvant chemotherapy. Using uni-/multivariate analysis, histological grade (G), tumor invasion depth (T), regional lymph node metastasis (N), and the number of cleared lymph nodes (NCLNs) were identified as independent prognostic factors. Then, we developed the GTLN2 model based on these predictors and validated it using internal calculations [the 1-, 3- and 5-year area under the curves (AUCs) were 0.692, 0.685 and 0.680, respectively; P<0.001] and external cohorts (the 1-, 3-, and 5-year AUCs were 0.651, 0.619 and 0.650, respectively; P<0.001). ESCC patients were categorized into high- and low-risk groups based on their assigned risk scores. After 1:1 patient pairing was performed by PSM in the high-risk group, better OS was noted in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (P=0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Differentiating high- and low-risk patient groups via a novel mathematical prediction model allows physicians to identify patients in need of adjuvant chemotherapy accurately.

Survival outcomes for patients with four treatments in stages I-III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a SEER analysis

Background

Esophageal cancer (EC) is globally acknowledged as one of the most common malignancies among all gastrointestinal cancers. Furthermore, in Eastern Asia, squamous cell carcinoma is the main pathological type of EC. There are different treatments for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but there is still a lack of large-sample analysis of prognosis among different treatments, especially for different tumor stages. The analysis of the prognosis of ESCC patients with different treatments may be helpful to choose the treatment methods for different stages ESCC.

Methods

A total of 3,346 patients with pathological ESCC between 1976 and 2016 were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. All clinical factors associated with prognosis were collected and analyzed to achieve the difference of prognosis among different treatments in ESCC patients, such as ages, sex, race, tumor grade, anatomic location and so on. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analysis were used to compare survival of different treatments in ESCC patients with stage I–III.

Results

The overall survival (OS) in all ESCC patients who had received surgery and surgery plus radiation therapy or/and chemotherapy are superior than that had not received any treatments and radiation therapy or/and chemotherapy. The OS in ESCC patients with stage I who had received surgery and surgery plus radiation therapy or/and chemotherapy are superior than that had not received any treatments and radiation therapy or/and chemotherapy. The OS in ESCC patients with stage II/III who had received surgery and surgery plus radiation therapy or/and chemotherapy are superior than that in other groups. Age, race and grade as an independent predictive factor for survival (P<0.05). A nomogram model was constructed to show surgery group had better 1-, 3- and 5-year OS than radiation therapy or/and chemotherapy group (OS: 78.5% vs. 59.2%, 37.9% vs. 18.4%, 16.9% vs. 6.1%).

Conclusions

Surgery is still the first choice for all ESCC patients with stage I–III. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy could improve the survival rate in ESCC patients with stage II–III who have received surgery.

Correlates of Long-Term Survival of Patients with pN+ Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma after Esophagectomy

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the most common pathological type of esophageal cancer in China. Patients with ESCC have poor long-term survival, especially those with lymphatic metastasis (pN + ESCC). In this retrospective study, we evaluated the correlates of long-term survival time of patients with pN + ESCC. A total of 453 patients with pN + ESCC who underwent surgical R0 resection between Jan 2008 and Sep 2011 were enrolled. The follow-up ended on December 2019. The clinical, pathological, inflammation-related factors and general survival data of these patients were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 73.7%, 34.6%, and 25.6%, respectively; the 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 45.0%, 26.3%, and 20.4%, respectively. The median OS and DFS were 23 and 14 months, respectively. On multivariate analyses, gender, site of lesion, number of dissected lymph nodes, stage pTNM, adjuvant therapy, and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio were independent predictors of OS. Site of lesion, stage pTNM, and adjuvant therapy were independent predictors of DFS. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) scores of each patient were calculated based on the independent predictors of OS, and the patients were divided into 3 classes: low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk. The OS, DFS, and local recurrence-free survival were significantly different among these three RPA classes (P < 0.001). Several factors showed an independent association with long-term postoperative survival of pN + ESCC patients after radical surgery. RPA scores can potentially be used to predict the prognosis of ESCC.

Postoperative Adjuvant Therapy for Patients with pN+ Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the most common pathological type of esophageal cancer in China. However, patient survival time after surgery remains unsatisfactory, especially in those who are pN+. This retrospective study determined the value of postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with pN+ ESCC. From Jan 2008 to Sep 2011, 453 pN+ ESCC patients who underwent R0 resection and survived for at least 1 month were retrospectively enrolled. All patients received surgery. Some patients received surgery alone (SA, n = 131), and others received postoperative chemotherapy (POCT, n = 222), radiotherapy (PORT, n = 57), or sequential chemoradiotherapy (POCRT, n = 43). The follow-up ended on 1 Dec 2019. The 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional recurrence (LR) were significantly worse in the SA group (15.2%, 13.1%, and 71.6%, all p < 0.05) than in the POCT group (28.0%, 20.8%, and 66.5%), the PORT group (27.4%, 24.4%, and 46.9%), and the POCRT group (42.8%, 35.5%, and 43.0%). Furthermore, compared with the SA group, the median OS and DFS were significantly longer in the POCT, PORT, and POCRT groups (all p < 0.05). PORT and POCRT (but not POCT) also significantly reduced the LR (p < 0.01). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that each type of postoperative therapy was independently associated with improvements in OS, DFS, and LR. Postoperative adjuvant therapy—either POCT, PORT, or POCRT—significantly improved OS and DFS in patients with pN+ ESCC after R0 surgery. PORT and PORCT significantly reduced LR in these patients.

Clinical Value of Tumor Marker Index Based on Preoperative CYFRA 21-1 and SCC-Ag in the Evaluation of Prognosis and Treatment Effectiveness in Patients with Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of tumor marker index (TMI) based on preoperative cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1) and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC-Ag) and the relationship between preoperative TMI and treatment effectiveness of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2009 and December 2014, a total of 267 patients with ESCC who underwent radical resection were retrospectively enrolled. The TMI was defined as the geometric mean of normalized CYFRA 21-1 and SCC-Ag levels. The clinical and prognostic values of TMI were determined using univariate and multivariate survival analyses.

RESULTS

Preoperative TMI level was associated with age, tumor size, pT stage, pN stage, and CYFRA 21-1, SCC-Ag, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) levels. The 5-year overall survival rate of patients with high TMI was significantly lower than that of patients with low TMI (P < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that TMI (P = 0.031) was an independent prognostic factor. Patients with ESCC with high TMI level who underwent surgery combined with postoperative chemotherapy had a significantly better prognosis than those who underwent surgery alone (P = 0.015). However, no significant difference was observed in patients with low TMI level (P = 0.682).

CONCLUSION

TMI as a prognostic indicator of ESCC is superior to CYFRA 21-1 and SCC-Ag. The TMI might be useful in predicting the therapeutic effectiveness of postoperative chemotherapy and selecting patients who may benefit from postoperative chemotherapy.

Difference in failure patterns of pT3-4N0-3M0 esophageal cancer treated by surgery vs surgery plus radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

There has been no study comparing the difference in the failure patterns between patients with or without postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) after esophagectomy for pT3-4N0-3M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

AIM

To investigate the difference in the failure patterns of stage pT3-4N0-3M0 ESCC patients with or without PORT.

METHODS

Patients with stage pT3-4N0-3M0 ESCC, who underwent surgery with or without PORT, were enrolled in this study. The primary endpoint was to investigate the difference in the failure patterns between patients with or without PORT after esophagectomy. The secondary endpoint was to estimate whether patients with stage pT3-4 ESCC could achieve a disease-free survival (DFS) advantage after receiving adjuvant PORT. Statistical analyses were performed by the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox regression model, and Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test.

RESULTS

In total, 230 patients with stage pT3-4N0-3M0 ESCC were included in this study. Fifty-six patients who received PORT were screened from a prospective cohort (S + R arm). And 174 patients involving surgery alone were retrospectively selected from July 2006 to October 2014 (S arm). There were no significant differences in the clinical or pathological characteristics of patients between the two arms, except for tumor location (P = 0.031). The failure patterns between the two arms were significantly different (P < 0.001). Patients in the S arm had a significantly higher proportion of locoregional recurrence and a lower proportion of distant metastasis than those in the S + R arm (92.0% vs 35.7%, P < 0.001 and 19.0% vs 75.0%, P < 0.001, respectively). The difference in the median DFS between the two arms was statistically significant (12.7 vs 8 mo, P = 0.048). Univariate analysis and multivariate analysis both demonstrated that the number of lymph node metastases ≥ 3 (HR = 0.572, 95%CI: 0.430-0.762, P < 0.001) was an independent poor prognostic factor for DFS in patients with stage pT3-4N0-3M0 ESCC.

CONCLUSION

PORT could improve DFS and local control of patients with stage pT3-4N0-3M0 ESCC. However, further studies need to be conducted to control hematogenous metastasis after PORT.

Predicting the Value of Adjuvant Therapy in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma by Combining the Total Number of Examined Lymph Nodes with the Positive Lymph Node Ratio

BACKGROUND

The value of adjuvant therapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has been controversial, at least partially due to the lack of efficient criteria for selecting suitable patients. This study aimed to explore the existence of parameters related to lymph node (LN) status that can predict the value of adjuvant therapy in ESCC.

METHODS

The study included 298 patients with ESCC who had undergone radical esophagectomy with lymphadenectomy. Adjuvant therapy was defined as reception of adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy. For the study, LN ratio (LNR), total number of resected LNs (TLNs), and pN stage were selected for Cox regression analyses, including their correlations and prognostic values for survival. Log-rank tests were used to compare the survival rates of the patients with and without adjuvant therapy stratified by pN stage, TLNs, LNR, or their combinations.

RESULTS

The independent prognostic factors for survival were TLNs, LNR, and pN stage. Whereas pN stage was significantly related to TLNs and LNR, TLNs were not correlated with LNR. The survival rates between the patients with and those without adjuvant therapy stratified by pN stage, TLNs, or LNR did not differ significantly. We used the median values of TLNs and LNR to group the patients into four groups. The patients in the group with fewer TLNs and higher LNR who had undergone adjuvant therapy showed a significantly better survival than those without adjuvant therapy (p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to TLNs, LNR, and pN stage as single factors, the combination of TLNs and LNR can predict the value of adjuvant therapy.

Post-esophagectomy Adjuvant Chemotherapy Benefits Esophageal Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND/AIM

Postoperative chemotherapy is an absolutely imperative treatment for advanced esophageal cancer patients, while preoperative chemotherapy is the standard therapy for clinical stage II/III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Japan. The aim of this study was to report the effect of postoperative chemotherapy on survival after esophagectomy due to thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred thirteen consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy were included. Several regiments were performed at various times.

RESULTS

Adjuvant chemotherapy brought a significantly superior overall survival (p=0.002), although there was no significant difference in cancer-specific survival (p=0.054) for clinical stage II or stage III esophageal cancer patients. Depth of invasion (p=0.003), number of lymph node metastases (p=0.048), and venous invasion (p<0.001) were risk factors for recurrence in the adjuvant-chemotherapy group with positive lymph nodes. Additionally, a not well-differentiated type, lymphatic and venous invasions were risk factors for recurrence in the surgery-alone group without positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy contributes to the prognosis of clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer patients.

Histone deacetylase 6 expression in metastatic lymph nodes is a valuable prognostic marker for resected node-positive esophageal squamous cell cancer

Background

Histone deacetylase 6 (HDAC6) exerts enzymatic deacetylation activity on histones and on non-histone substrates and plays a key role in microtubule dynamics and chaperone activities. In addition, previous studies have demonstrated its role in cancer progression. However, its clinical significance in esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) has not been elucidated. We investigated the correlation of HDAC6 expression and clinical outcome in a group of T3N1–3M0 surgically resected ESCCs.

Methods

Tissue microarrays were conducted on 209 surgically resected T3N1–3M0 ESCC tumors, including 163 pairs of primary tumors (PTs) and their corresponding metastatic lymph nodes (MLNs). Immunohistochemistry was utilized to evaluate HDAC6 protein levels. The relationship between patient outcomes and HDAC6 expression was analyzed statistically.

Results

The level of HDAC6 expression in ESCC MLNs was found to be significantly lower than that in PTs (P<0.001). Patients with lower MLN HDAC6 expression demonstrated improved overall survival (P=0.011) and disease-free survival (P=0.012) than those with higher HDAC6 expression. HDAC6 expression levels in PTs revealed no prognostic significance. Multivariate analysis showed that the MLN HDAC6 expression level was an independent prognostic factor for both overall survival (HR 1.456, P=0.029) and disease-free survival (HR 1.432, P=0.033).

Conclusion

High expression of HDAC6 in MLNs but not in PTs suggests a poor prognosis for patients with resected T3N1–3M0 ESCC. We should take into account the protein expression of MLNs when assessing prognosis in patients with lymph-node involvement.

Efficacy of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Background

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the predominant type of esophageal cancer and most clinically curable patients are diagnosed with locally advanced disease. While the efficacy of preoperative treatment is relatively clear and well characterized, the effect of postoperative treatment, especially postoperative chemotherapy, remains controversial, and its role in the treatment strategy is obscure. We conducted an updated meta‐analysis to include recent developments.

Methods

A comprehensive search in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies published from the inception of each database to February 2018. The overall survival (OS) and disease‐free survival (DFS) rates of patients treated with and without postoperative chemotherapy were analyzed and compared. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the associations between postoperative chemotherapy and patient survival. Potential publication bias was assessed using Egger's line regression test.

Results

A total of nine studies, including three randomized controlled trials and six retrospective studies, were retrieved from the databases, comprising a total of 1684 cases. The results showed that postoperative chemotherapy could improve OS (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66–0.91; P = 0.002) and DFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.6–0.86; P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The current meta‐analysis supports postoperative chemotherapy as an independent favorable prognostic factor for ESCC, which could improve both OS and DFS.

Current Status and Future Prospects for Esophageal Cancer Treatment

The local control effect of esophagectomy with three-field lymph node dissection (3FLD) is reaching its limit pending technical advancement. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) by thoracotomy is slowly gaining acceptance due to advantages in short-term outcomes. Although the evidence is slowly increasing, MIE is still controversial. Also, the results of treatment by surgery alone are limiting, and multimodality therapy, which includes surgical and non-surgical treatment options including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and endoscopic treatment, has become the mainstream therapy. Esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is the standard treatment for clinical stages II/III (except for T4) esophageal cancer, whereas chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is regarded as the standard treatment for patients who wish to preserve their esophagus, those who refuse surgery, and those with inoperable disease. CRT is also usually selected for clinical stage IV esophageal cancer. On the other hand, with the spread of CRT, salvage esophagectomy has traditionally been recognized as a feasible option; however, many clinicians oppose the use of surgery due to the associated unfavorable morbidity and mortality profile. In the future, the improvement of each treatment result and the establishment of individual strategies are important although esophageal cancer has many treatment options.

Postoperative radiation in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and target volume delineation

Esophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer death worldwide, and patients who are treated with surgery alone, without neoadjuvant therapies, experience frequent relapses. Whether postoperative therapies could reduce the recurrence or improve overall survival is still controversial for these patients. The purpose of our review is to figure out the value of postoperative adjuvant therapy and address the disputes about target volume delineation according to published data. Based on the evidence of increased morbidity and disadvantages on patient survival caused by postoperative chemotherapy or radiotherapy (RT) alone provided by studies in the early 1990s, the use of postoperative adjuvant therapies in cases of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma has diminished substantially and has been replaced gradually by neoadjuvant chemoradiation. With advances in surgery and RT, accumulating evidence has recently rekindled interest in the delivery of postoperative RT or chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage T3/T4 or N1 (lymph node positive) carcinomas after radical surgery. However, due to complications with the standard radiation field, a nonconforming modified field has been adopted in most studies. Therefore, we analyze different field applications and provide suggestions on the optimization of the radiation field based on the major sites of relapse and the surgical non-clearance area. For upper and middle thoracic esophageal carcinomas, the bilateral supraclavicular and superior mediastinal areas remain common sites of recurrence and should be encompassed within the clinical target volume. In contrast, a consensus has yet to be reached regarding lower thoracic esophageal carcinomas; the “standard” clinical target volume is still recommended. Further studies of larger sample sizes should focus on different recurrence patterns, categorized by tumor locations, refined classifications, and differing molecular biology, to provide more information on the delineation of target volumes.