Comparable Cancer-Specific Mortality of Patients With Early Gastric Cancer Treated With Endoscopic Therapy vs Surgical Resection

Treatment for T1 colorectal cancers substratified by site and size: "horses for courses"

Background

Owing to advances in diagnostic technology, the diagnosis of T1 colorectal cancers (CRCs) continues to increase. However, the optimal management of T1 CRCs in the Western Hemisphere remains unclear due to limited population-based data directly comparing the efficacy of endoscopic therapy (ET) and surgical resection (SR). The purpose of this study was to report outcome data from a large Western cohort of patients who underwent ET or SR for early CRCs.

Methods

The SEER-18 database was used to identify patients with T1 CRCs diagnosed from 2004 to 2018 treated with ET or SR. Multivariable logistic regression models were employed to identify variables related to lymph node metastasis (LNM). Rates of ET and 1-year relative survival were calculated for each year. Effect of ET or SR on overall survival and cancer-specific survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier method stratified by tumor size and site.

Results

A total of 28,430 T1 CRCs patients were identified from 2004 to 2018 in US, with 22.7% undergoing ET and 77.3% undergoing SR. The incidence of T1 CRCs was 6.15 per 100,000 person-years, with male patients having a higher incidence. Left-sided colon was the most frequent location of tumors. The utilization of ET increased significantly from 2004 to 2018, with no significant change in 1-year relative survival rate. Predictors of LNM were age at diagnosis, sex, race, tumor size, histology, grade, and location. The 5-year relative survival rates were 91.4 and 95.4% for ET and SR, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that OS and CSS were similar between ET and SR in T1N0M0 left-sided colon cancers with tumors 2 cm or less and in rectal cancers with tumors 1 cm or less.

Conclusion

Our study showed that ET was feasible and safe for patients with left-sided T1N0M0 colon cancers and tumors of 2 cm or less, as well as T1N0M0 rectal cancers and tumors of 1 cm or less. Therefore, the over- and under-use of ET should be avoided by carefully selecting patients based on tumor size and site.

Comparison between Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Surgery in Patients with Early Gastric Cancer

Simple Summary

Conventional gastrectomy combined with regional lymph node dissection has been the standard treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC). This retrospective case–control study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and surgical resection for EGC in China. After propensity score-matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups for OS, RFS, and DSS. Additionally, with similar R0 resection and recurrence rates, the ESD group showed less blood loss, fewer adverse events, lower hospital cost, and a shorter operative time and hospital duration than the surgery group. Therefore, ESD can be a first-line treatment of EGC in addition to surgery.

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a preferred treatment option for early gastric cancer (EGC). This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of ESD and surgical resection for EGC. Methods: This was a retrospective case–control study. Patients with a diagnosis of EGC who underwent ESD or surgery in our hospital from 2011 to 2020 were enrolled. We compared the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of these two groups according to propensity score-matching. The primary outcome comparison was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and treatment-related events. Results: In the matched cohort, the ESD group showed comparable OS, RFS, and DSS with the surgery group. Statistical differences were shown in blood loss and adverse events. Furthermore, the ESD group showed lower hospital cost, as well as a shorter operative time and hospital duration than the surgery group. The R0 resection and recurrence rates were similar between the two groups. In Cox regression analysis, age, tumor size, poor differentiation, and lymphovascular invasion were regarded as independent factors of OS. Conclusions: With sufficient safety and advantages, ESD can be a first-line treatment of EGC. Preoperative evaluation is vital to the appropriate treatment and prognosis.

Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgery in the Treatment of Early Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aim

Endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred approach to treat early gastric cancer (EGC) in patients without suspected lymph node involvement and that meet the criteria for ER. Surgery is a more aggressive treatment, but it may be associated with less recurrence and the need for reintervention. Previous meta-analyses comparing ER with surgery for EGC did not incorporate the most recent studies, making accurate conclusions not possible.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine complete resection, length of hospital stay (LOHS), adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, recurrence, 5-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with EGC.

Results

A total of 29 cohorts studies involving 20559 patients were included. The ER (n = 7709) group was associated with a lower incidence of AEs (RD = -0.07, 95%CI = -0.1, -0.04, p < 0.0001) and shorter LOHS (95% CI -5.89, -5.32; p < 0,00001) compared to surgery (n = 12850). However, ER was associated with lower complete resection rates (RD = -0.1, 95%CI = -0.15, -0.06; p < 0.00001) and higher rates of recurrence (RD = 0.07, 95%CI = 0.06; p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences between surgery and ER in 5-year OS (RD = -0.01, 95%CI = -0.04, 0.02; p = 0.38), 5-year CSS (RD = 0.01, 95%CI = 0.00, 0.02; p < 0.17), and incidence of serious AEs (RD = -0.03, 95%CI = -0.08, 0.01; p = 0.13).

Conclusions

ER and surgery are safe and effective treatments for EGC. ER provides lower rates of AEs and shorter LOHS compared to surgery. Although ER is associated with lower complete resection rates and a higher risk of recurrence, the OS and CSS were similar between both approaches.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42021255328.

Comparable long-term survival of patients with colorectal or gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors treated with endoscopic vs. surgical resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

With the development of endoscopic technology, endoscopic treatment has been widely used in Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). However, population-based studies comparing the long-term results of patients who received endoscopic treatment vs. Surgery are lacking. We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to analyze the long-term survival of colorectal or gastric GISTs who underwent primary tumor resection (endoscopic therapy or surgery) in the USA.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal or gastric GISTs were selected from the SEER database between 2010 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank tests were used to evaluate the difference in the long-term survival between the endoscopic therapy group and the surgery group. We examined the association between different treatments and survival after using the multivariate cox proportional hazards model to adjust the relevant covariates. Besides, we used Propensity score matching (PSM) to overcome the different distributions of covariates between the two groups and then further compare the survival difference.

RESULTS

In total, 2355 patients were enrolled in our study, of which 1999 (84.9%) received surgical treatment and 356 (15.1%) received endoscopic treatment. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups before PSM. The median OS (73.5 months vs. 72.2 months) and 5-year OS rate (85.7% vs. 81.5%) of endoscopic therapy were similar to surgical patients (P = 0.34). The median Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and 5-year CSS rate in the endoscopic treatment group were higher than the surgical group before PSM, with 81.3 months, 97.1% versus 78.8 months, 92.7% (P = 0.011). After adjusting for other clinical factors and PSM, the long-term OS and CSS did not significantly differ between those treated surgically and treated endoscopically.

CONCLUSION

Based on the American population, we preliminarily found that the long-term OS and CSS did not differ between patients undergoing endoscopic therapy and surgery.

Effect of Charlson Comorbidity Index and Treatment Strategy on Survival of Elderly Patients After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Background: The optimal treatment strategy for elderly patients with early gastric adenocarcinoma (EGAC) after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains unclear. The purpose of this research was to explore the effectiveness of additional treatments after ESD and the factors affecting survival in elderly patients (≥60 years of age) with EGAC.

Methods: A total of 639 elderly patients (≥60 years) treated with ESD for EGAC from 2006 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Positive lymphatic infiltration, submucosal infiltration, and positive/indeterminate vertical resection margins are considered high risk factors in histology. According to the risk of lymph node metastasis in patients with EAGC and the treatment strategies adopted after ESD, patients were divided into three groups: there were 484 patients in group A with low risk, 121 patients in group B with high risk, without additional treatment, and 36 patients in group C with high risk, with additional treatment. The 5- and 8-year survival rate, as well as the prognostic factors of survival rate after ESD was studied.

Results: The median follow-up time was 38, 40, and 49 months, respectively. There were 3, 4, and 3 deaths related to gastric adenocarcinoma in groups A, B, and C, while deaths from other diseases were 20, 5, and 3, respectively. There were significant differences in overall survival rates between groups (94.3; 86.4; 81.2%, p = 0.110), but there was no significant difference in disease-specific survival rates (98.4; 92.7; 92.4%, p = 0.016). In the multivariate analysis, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) ≥ 2 was an independent risk factor for death after ESD (hazard ratio 2.39; 95% confidence interval 1.20–4.77; p = 0.014).

Conclusions: The strategy of ESD with no subsequent additional treatment for EGAC may be a suitable option for elderly patients at high risk, especially for CCI ≥ 2.

Misclassification of nodal stage in gastric cancer: 16 lymph nodes is not enough

Background

In gastric cancer, nodal stage plays an important role. Insufficient lymph node harvesting or incomplete examination may lead to misclassification and affect postoperative strategy and group survival. This study’s objective was to determine the minimum number of examined lymph nodes needed in gastric cancer and compare this to the minimum lymph node count according to the current Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) classification using real world data.

Methods

Based on anatomical data, expected mean lymph node counts and their 95% confidence intervals for complete D2 lymphadenectomy were calculated. Using stochastic analysis, a threshold for correct classification in 95% of cases was determined. Survival data of nodal negative gastric cancer patients was extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Database for 2010–2017. Patients reaching at least the calculated theoretical threshold were compared to the minimum threshold according to the current UICC classification.

Results

The expected lymph node count was 30 (95% CI: 28–32; range 17–52), corresponding to a 27 lymph nodes. In nodal negative patients with exactly 16 and at least 27 examined lymph nodes, relative 5 year survival was 79 and 89% in T1/T2 and 39 and 64% T3/T4 gastric cancer, respectively. Theoretically, when only 16 lymph nodes are analyzed, nodal negative staging may be incorrect in up to 47% of cases.

Conclusions

A minimum threshold of 16 examined lymph nodes cannot be justified. Retrospective analysis confirmed systematic misclassification of patients with insufficient lymphadenectomy in nodal negative gastric cancer patients. Correct lymphadenectomy and thorough examination of the surgical specimen is mandatory.

Comparable long-term outcomes after endoscopic therapy and gastrectomy of early adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: a population-based study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current guidelines recommend consideration of endoscopic therapy (ET) when treating selected early gastric cancers. However, clinical decision-making on ET versus gastrectomy for early adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEGJ) remains challenging because of uncertain long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2017 of early AEGJ patients underwent ET or gastrectomy. Multivariate models were used to compare cancer-specific survival (CSS).

RESULTS

Of 881 included early AEGJ patients, 227 (36.2%) patients underwent ET and 654 (63.8%) patients underwent gastrectomy. Early AEGJ patients who underwent ET experienced a similar hazard of cancer-specific death compared with those underwent gastrectomy in both multivariate Cox regression (HR [hazard ratio], 0.93; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.55-1.56; P = 0.78) and the multivariate competing risk model (subdistribution HR [SHR], 0.86; 95% CI 0.50-1.45; P = 0.56). Propensity score matching was used, 210 patients underwent ET were matched with 210 patients underwent gastrectomy. Patients underwent ET experienced a similar hazard of cancer-specific death compared with those underwent gastrectomy in both multivariate Cox regression (HR, 0.97; 95% CI 0.53-1.77; P = 0.92) and the multivariate competing risk model (SHR, 0.96; 95% CI 0.52-1.77; P = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

Early AEGJ patients who received ET or gastrectomy had comparable long-term outcomes, which lend support to the role of ET in the treatment of these patients.

Patterns of Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients With T1/T2 Gastroduodenal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Implications for Endoscopic Treatment

Guidelines have differed in their opinion regarding the indications for endoscopic resection of gastric-neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) and duodenal-NENs (d-NENs). We examined the association between size and lymph node metastasis (LNM) to identify candidates most suitable for endoscopic resection. We identified 706 patients with T1/T2 g-NENs and 621 patients with T1/T2 d-NENs from the SEER database. The prevalence of LNM and risk factors associated with LNM were analyzed. LNM was present in 8.1% of patients with gastroduodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and 31.6% of patients with neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Multivariate logistic regression indicated that tumor size >10mm, greater invasion depth, and poor differentiation were independently associated with LNM. In addition, the percentage of g-NETs invading submucosa with LNM increased with tumor size (≤10 mm,3.9%;11-20 mm,8.6%;>20 mm,16.1%). However, in contrast to the low LNM risk in patients with small g-NETs (≤10 mm), we found that LNM rate exceeded 5% even for patients with small submucosal-infiltrating d-NETs. Among patients with nodal-negative g-NETs, the cause specific survival (CSS) was similar for those who received surgical resection and endoscopic resection. Among patients with d-NETs, the CSS was better for those who received endoscopic resection. In conclusion, patients with d-NETs had a higher probability of LNM than those with g-NETs. Endoscopic resection can be utilized for curative treatment of submucosa-infiltrating g-NETs and intramucosal d-NETs when the size is 10 mm or less. These results reinforce the need to search for LNM in lesions that are larger than 10 mm.