Outcomes for endoscopic submucosal dissection of pathologically staged T1b esophageal cancer: a multicenter study

Journey to complete remission of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia after ESD and EMR of Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia

Background and study aims

Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is associated with higher en-bloc and R0 resection rates than cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (cEMR), its comparative impact on achieving complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) and intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) in BE endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is not well defined. We aimed to compare the journey of patients from initial endoscopic resection (ER) with ESD and cEMR to achieving CRD and CRIM.

Patients and methods

Patients undergoing ESD or cEMR followed by ablation for BE neoplasia at two academic institutions in the United States were included. Primary outcomes included CRD and CRIM rates following ER in the two groups. Secondary outcomes included the number of resection/ablative procedures from initial ER to achieving CRD and CRIM. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance confounding variables between groups.

Results

A total of 801 patients (606 cEMR, 195 ESD) were included. ESD group patients had higher en-bloc resection rates (ESD 94.4%, cEMR 44.7%). Higher rates of CRD were observed in patients undergoing initial ESD (HR 1.53, P < 0.01). With time-to-event and IPTW analyses, rates of achieving CRD and CRIM were comparable between the groups. There were no significant differences in mean number of endoscopic resection or ablative procedures among patients undergoing initial cEMR resection compared with those treated with initial ESD.

Conclusions

Despite larger lesion sizes and more cancers in patients undergoing ESD, the EET journey to achieving CRD and CRIM was comparable to that in patients receiving cEMR. Prospective studies are required to further study differences between these two treatment approaches.

Evolution of Therapeutics for Locally Advanced Upper Gastrointestinal Adenocarcinoma

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, including esophageal, gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), and gastric adenocarcinomas, remain a major global health concern, with poor overall survival and high recurrence rate despite aggressive treatment. Patients with very early tumors (cT1a) can benefit from endoscopic therapy. However, patients with locally advanced disease require multimodal therapies that may combine surgery, radiation, and systemic therapies. This review provides a comprehensive overview of recent advancements in the treatment of locally advanced upper GI adenocarcinomas. Surgical resection remains the cornerstone of curative treatment, with perioperative chemotherapy emerging as the standard of care. While preoperative chemoradiation has demonstrated some benefits in esophageal and GEJ cancers, recent data suggest a more limited role for radiation going forward. Immunotherapy has shown some promise in both the adjuvant and perioperative settings but has yet to establish definitive survival benefit. The integration of HER2-targeted therapies into treatment regimens for HER2-positive locally advanced gastroesophageal cancers has not yielded significant improvements, underscoring the need for more effective strategies. Ongoing research focuses on better predictive biomarkers, personalized treatment approaches, and potential organ preservation strategies for patients achieving a clinical complete response. Continued advancements in treatment modalities and precision medicine are critical to improving survival for patients with locally advanced upper GI adenocarcinomas.

Diagnostic Endoscopic Ultrasound

The last two decades have seen the emergence of endoscopic technologies and techniques allowing for minimally invasive modalities for assessing and sampling lesions inside and outside of the gastrointestinal lumen, including the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. Incorporating these new endoscopic approaches has revolutionized the diagnosis and staging of intraluminal and extraluminal lesions and enabled more accessible and safer tissue acquisition.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for Barrett's-associated neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature

BACKGROUND

The role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of Barrett esophagus-associated neoplasia (BEN) has been evolving. We examined the efficacy and safety of ESD and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for BEN.

METHODS

A database search was performed for studies reporting efficacy and safety outcomes of ESD and EMR for BEN. Pooled proportional and comparative meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

47 studies (23 ESD, 19 EMR, 5 comparative) were included. The mean lesion sizes for ESD and EMR were 22.5 mm and 15.8 mm, respectively; most lesions were Paris type IIa. For ESD, pooled analysis showed rates of en bloc, R0, and curative resection, and local recurrence of 98%, 78%, 65%, and 2%, respectively. Complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia were achieved in 94% and 59% of cases, respectively. Pooled rates of perforation, intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, and stricture were 1%, 1%, 2%, and 10%, respectively. For EMR, pooled analysis showed rates of en bloc, R0, and curative resection, and local recurrence of 37%, 67%, 62%, and 6%, respectively. Complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia were achieved in 94% and 75% of cases. Pooled rates of perforation, intraprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, and stricture were 0.1%, 1%, 0.4%, and 8%, respectively. The mean procedure times for ESD and EMR were 113 and 22 minutes, respectively. Comparative analysis showed higher en bloc and R0 resection rates with ESD compared with EMR, with comparable adverse events.

CONCLUSION

ESD and EMR can both be employed to treat BEN depending on lesion type and size, and center expertise.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal adenocarcinoma in the Eastern population: a comprehensive analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a preferred method for early esophageal cancer, yet its application to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), especially in the Eastern population with its relative rarity, lacks sufficient literature. This study evaluated ESD's long-term outcomes for EAC, focusing on noncurative resections and diagnostic accuracy.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2022, a retrospective study included 68 patients undergoing ESD for early EAC at Jiangsu Province Hospital. Primary outcomes encompassed ESD efficacy, en bloc resection, R0 resection, curative resection rates, and follow-up. Secondary outcomes involved noncurative ESD, T1a/T1b stage comparison, and diagnostic consistency.

RESULTS

Postoperative staging revealed T1a (n = 53) and T1b tumors (n = 15). En bloc resection rate was 97.1%, R0 resection rate was 79.4%, and noncurative rate was 30.9%. T1a had significantly higher R0 rate and curative resection rate. Among noncurative ESDs, 33.3% underwent esophagectomy, 42.9% had surveillance endoscopies, 19.1% repeated curative ESD, and 4.7% were lost to follow-up. Average follow-up was 63.76 ± 28.47 months. Furthermore, 6 patients had recurrence, 3 had residual lesions, and 6 deaths occurred, unrelated to ESD. No significant difference in survival or recurrence rates between curative and noncurative ESD groups was observed. ESD led to a histologic diagnosis change in 70.6% of cases, all upstaged.

CONCLUSION

ESD is effective for EAC, with higher curative rates for T1a than T1b. Noncurative ESD cases may benefit from conservative approaches. Long-term follow-up underscores poor consistency between residual lesions and positive margins. ESD serves as a valuable diagnostic staging tool, particularly for T1b cases, considering the low accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound and preoperative biopsy.

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.

Predictors of residual neoplasia after noncurative (R1) endoscopic submucosal dissection of lesions in the gastrointestinal tract

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a minimally invasive resection technique that enables the en bloc resection of gastrointestinal lesions. Despite en bloc resection, pathological evaluation of lesions can reveal positive vertical or horizontal margins, which is referred to as R1 resection. Not all R1 lesions referred for surgical resection or endoscopic surveillance show evidence of residual tumor. We aimed to identify the predictors of residual neoplasia in patients with an R1 resection following ESD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All lesions resected via ESD between June 2016 and September 2021 at a tertiary referral center were retrospectively identified. Lesions with an R1 resection and adequate follow-up were eligible for inclusion. Patient, lesion, and procedural characteristics were analyzed to identify predictors of residual neoplasia.

RESULTS

Of 614 lesions, 163 (28%) had R1 resection. Of these, 56 lesions in 51 patients had complete follow-up and were included. Thirteen patients (25.5%) underwent surgical resection and the remainder underwent endoscopic surveillance. Seven (12.5%) patients had residual disease. All patients with residual disease had esophageal carcinoma. Positive deep and lateral margins, severe submucosal fibrosis, and moderate/poorly differentiated tumors were identified as significant predictors of residual neoplasia.

CONCLUSION

Most R1 lesions (87.5%) resected by ESD did not have residual disease on follow-up. Those without identified risk factors for residual disease, such as esophageal carcinoma, severe submucosal fibrosis, or both histological margin positivity, may benefit from a strategy of close endoscopic surveillance rather than referral for surgical resection.

Challenges in early detection and endoscopic resection of esophageal cancer: There is a long way to go

The publication by Qu et al provided a comprehensive discussion about the epidemiology, etiology, histopathology, early detection, and endoscopic treatment of esophageal carcinoma (EC) and summarized the progress in the advanced technologies for screening and endoscopic resection for EC. In this editorial, we will provide deeper insight into the challenges that hinder practical application of these advanced technologies along with the role of these technologies in upper endoscopy quality. More efforts need to be made to overcome the challenges and add the value of these technologies in upper endoscopy quality. Clinical outcomes of management strategies after noncurative endoscopic dissection for early EC patients need further investigation. The experiences with noncurative endoscopic resection of other organs may have certain implications for noncurative resection of early EC.

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Endoscopic Eradication Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection with versus without traction for pathologically staged T1B esophageal cancer: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Positive vertical margins (VMs) are common after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of T1b esophageal cancer (EC) and are associated with an increased risk of recurrence. Traction during ESD provides better exposure of the submucosa and may allow deeper dissection, potentially reducing the risk of positive VMs. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study to compare the proportion of resections with positive VMs in ESD performed with versus without traction in pathologically staged T1b EC.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ESD revealing T1b EC (squamous or adenocarcinoma) at 10 academic tertiary referral centers in the United States (n = 9) and Brazil (n = 1) were included. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted. ESD using either traction techniques (tunneling, pocket) or traction devices (clip line, traction wire) were classified as ESD with traction (Tr-ESD) and those without were classified as conventional ESD without traction. The primary outcome was a negative VM. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations with negative VMs.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients with pathologically staged T1b EC underwent Tr-ESD (n = 63; 38%) or conventional ESD without traction (n = 103; 62%). Baseline factors were comparable between both groups. On multivariable analysis, Tr-ESD was found to be independently associated with negative VMs (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-4.91; P = .037) and R0 resection (odds ratio, 2.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-6.23; P = .008).

CONCLUSION

Tr-ESD seems to be associated with higher odds of negative VMs than ESD without traction for pathologically staged T1b EC, and future well-conducted prospective studies are warranted to establish the findings of the current study.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) outcomes in T1B esophageal cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of submucosal endoscopic dissection (ESD) in management of invasive esophageal cancer (EC) remains unclear. In this case series, we evaluate the clinical and technical outcomes of patients who underwent ESD with pathologically staged T1b EC.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who underwent ESD between December 2016 and April 2023 with pathologically staged T1b EC. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and ESD technical outcomes were analyzed. Patients were followed to determine disease-free survival and tumor recurrence rates.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients with a total of 17 pathologically staged T1b ECs were included in this case series with a median follow-up time of 28 months [range 3-75]. ESD had high en-bloc (100%) and R0 (82.3%) resection rates. 16/17 patients (94.1%) were discharged the same day, and there were no immediate perioperative complications. 4/17 patients (23.5%) had curative ESD resections with no tumor recurrence. Among those with non-curative resections (n = 13), 5 patients had ESD only, 6 had ESD + surgery, and 2 underwent ESD + chemoradiation. In the ESD only group, 2/5 patients (40%) had tumor recurrence. In the ESD + surgery group, one patient died from a surgical complication, and 1/5 (20%) had tumor recurrence at follow-up. There was no tumor recurrence among patients who had ESD + chemoradiation.

CONCLUSION

ESD is safe with high en-bloc and R0 resection rates in T1b EC. Recurrence rates are low but patients need close monitoring. Larger-scale studies are needed to determine the long-term clinical efficacy of ESD in T1b EC.

Esophageal cancer screening, early detection and treatment: Current insights and future directions

Esophageal cancer ranks among the most prevalent malignant tumors globally, primarily due to its highly aggressive nature and poor survival rates. According to the 2020 global cancer statistics, there were approximately 604000 new cases of esophageal cancer, resulting in 544000 deaths. The 5-year survival rate hovers around a mere 15%-25%. Notably, distinct variations exist in the risk factors associated with the two primary histological types, influencing their worldwide incidence and distribution. Squamous cell carcinoma displays a high incidence in specific regions, such as certain areas in China, where it meets the cost-effectiveness criteria for widespread endoscopy-based early diagnosis within the local population. Conversely, adenocarcinoma (EAC) represents the most common histological subtype of esophageal cancer in Europe and the United States. The role of early diagnosis in cases of EAC originating from Barrett's esophagus (BE) remains a subject of controversy. The effectiveness of early detection for EAC, particularly those arising from BE, continues to be a debated topic. The variations in how early-stage esophageal carcinoma is treated in different regions are largely due to the differing rates of early-stage cancer diagnoses. In areas with higher incidences, such as China and Japan, early diagnosis is more common, which has led to the advancement of endoscopic methods as definitive treatments. These techniques have demonstrated remarkable efficacy with minimal complications while preserving esophageal functionality. Early screening, prompt diagnosis, and timely treatment are key strategies that can significantly lower both the occurrence and death rates associated with esophageal cancer.

State of the scientific evidence and recommendations for the management of older patients with gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most frequent and deadly tumours worldwide. However, the evidence that currently exists for the treatment of older adults is limited and is derived mainly from clinical trials in which older patients are poorly represented. In this article, a group of experts selected from the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the Spanish Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (TTD), and the Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Digestive Cancer (GEMCAD) reviews the existing scientific evidence for older patients (≥65 years old) with gastric cancer and establishes a series of recommendations that allow optimization of management during all phases of the disease. Geriatric assessment (GA) and a multidisciplinary approach should be fundamental parts of the process. In early stages, endoscopic submucosal resection or laparoscopic gastrectomy is recommended depending on the stage. In locally advanced stage, the tolerability of triplet regimens has been established; however, as in the metastatic stage, platinum- and fluoropyrimidine-based regimens with the possibility of lower dose intensity are recommended resulting in similar efficacy. Likewise, the administration of trastuzumab, ramucirumab and immunotherapy for unresectable metastatic or locally advanced disease is safe. Supportive treatment acquires special importance in a population with different life expectancies than at a younger age. It is essential to consider the general state of the patient and the psychosocial dimension.

Clinical Outcomes After Endoscopic Management of Low-Risk and High-Risk T1a Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is standard of care for T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, data on outcomes in high-risk T1a EAC are limited. We assessed and compared outcomes after EET of low-risk and high-risk T1a EAC, including intraluminal EAC recurrence, extraesophageal metastases, and overall survival.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EET for T1a EAC at 3 referral Barrett's esophagus endotherapy units between 1996 and 2022 were included. Patients with submucosal invasion, positive deep margins, or metastases at initial diagnosis were excluded. High-risk T1a EAC was defined as T1a EAC with poor differentiation and/or lymphovascular invasion, with low-risk disease being defined without these features. All pathology was systematically assessed by expert gastrointestinal pathologists. Baseline and follow-up endoscopy and pathology data were abstracted. Time-to-event analyses were performed to compare outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-eight patients with T1a EAC were included (high risk, n = 45; low risk, n = 143) with a median age of 70 years, and 84% were men. Groups were comparable for age, sex, Barrett's esophagus length, lesion size, and EET technique. Rates of delayed extraesophageal metastases (11.1% vs 1.4%) were significantly higher in the high-risk group ( P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the rates of intraluminal EAC recurrence ( P = 0.79) and overall survival ( P = 0.73) between the 2 groups.

DISCUSSION

Patients with high-risk T1a EAC undergoing successful EET had a substantially higher rate of extraesophageal metastases compared with those with low-risk T1a EAC on long-term follow-up. These data should be factored into discussions with patients while selecting treatment approaches. Additional prospective data in this area are critical.

Esophagectomy versus observation following endoscopic submucosal dissection of pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Management following endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) remains controversial. This study compared pathological and survival outcomes of patients after endoscopic resection (ER) of pT1b EAC followed by either en bloc esophagectomy or observation.

METHODS

From 1/12 to 12/22, all patients with pT1b EAC treated with ER were identified from a prospectively maintained departmental database. ESD was curative (all of: Submucosal invasion < 500 μm; G1/2, LVI/PNI-; deep margin-) or non-curative (one or more of Submucosal invasion ≥ 500 μm; G3; LVI/PNI+; deep margin+). Patients were allocated to observation (OBS) or esophagectomy (SURG) based on patient factors/preference and pathological variables.

RESULTS

56/171 ERs met the inclusion criteria. ER was curative in 8/56 (14%) and non-curative in 48/56 (86%). OBS was undertaken after 8/27 (30%) curative and 19/27 (70%) non-curative resections. All 29 SURG patients had non-curative ERs and were younger, had lower Charlson comorbidity scores and had more deep margin + lesions than OBS patients. Post-esophagectomy, 15/29 (52%) had no residual disease within the surgical specimen while pT+N-/pT-N+/pT+N+ occurred in 5/3/6 (17%/10%/21%) patients. Of those with residual disease in the surgical specimen, 12/14 (86%) had deep margin + ERs; however, only ESD instead of EMR was independently associated with a lower risk of residual disease (OR 0.431, 95% CI - 0.016 to 1.234, p = 0.045). OBS and SURG patients had equivalent overall survival outcomes and recurrence was low in both groups even following non-curative ER. Follow-up was 28 months (0-102) and 30 months (0-97), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In select patients, including some of those with a non-curative ESD resection of pT1B EAC, surveillance alone may be appropriate. Alternatives beyond traditional pathological features is needed to direct patient care more accurately.

Defining Pathologic Upstaging in cT1b Esophageal Cancer: Should We Consider Neoadjuvant Therapy?

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NCRT) for cT1b esophageal cancer is not recommended despite the risk of pathologic upstaging with increased depth of penetration. We aimed to (1) define the rate of and factors associated with pathologic upstaging, (2) describe current trends in treatments, and (3) compare overall survival (OS) with and without NCRT for surgically resected cT1b lesions.

METHODS

We used the 2020 National Cancer Database to identify patients with cT1b N0 esophageal cancer with or without pathologic upstaging who underwent removal of their tumor. We built multivariable logistic regression models to assess factors associated with pathologic upstaging. Survival was compared using log-rank analysis and modeled using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regressions.

RESULTS

Out of 1106 patients with cT1b esophageal cancer, 17.3% (N = 191) had pathologic upstaging. A higher tumor grade (P = 0.002), greater tumor size (P < 0.001), and presence of lympho-vascular invasion (P < 0.001) were associated with pathologic upstaging. 8.0% (N = 114) of patients were treated with NCRT. Five-y OS was 49.4% for patients who received NCRT compared to 67.2% for upfront esophagectomy (P < 0.05). Pathologic upstaging was associated with decreased OS (pathologic upstaging 43.7% versus no pathologic upstaging 67.7%) (hazard ratio 2.12 [95% confidence interval, 1.70-2.65; P < 0.001]). Compared to esophagectomy, endoscopic local tumor excision was associated with a decreased OS (hazard ratio 1.50 [95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.89; P = 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologic upstaging of cT1b lesions is associated with decreased OS. Esophagectomy is associated with a survival benefit over endoscopic local tumor excision for these lesions. NCRT is not associated with an increase in OS in cT1b lesions compared to upfront esophagectomy.

The 2022 top 10 list of endoscopy topics in medical publishing: an annual review by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Editorial Board

Using a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2022 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals, the 10-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy composed a list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy during the study year. Each Editorial Board member was directed to consider 3 criteria in generating candidate lists-significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice-and subject matter consensus was facilitated by the Chair through electronic voting. The 10 identified areas collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic spheres: artificial intelligence, endoscopic submucosal dissection, Barrett's esophagus, interventional EUS, endoscopic resection techniques, pancreaticobiliary endoscopy, management of acute pancreatitis, endoscopic environmental sustainability, the NordICC trial, and spiral enteroscopy. Each board member was assigned a consensus topic area around which to summarize relevant important articles, thereby generating this précis of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2022.

Outcomes of Primary Esophagectomy and Esophagectomy after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis

Even though the conventional treatment for T1 esophageal cancer is surgery, ESD is becoming the primary treatment. Currently, it is unknown whether secondary esophagectomy after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is comparable to primary esophagectomy when considering outcomes in patients with T1 esophageal cancer. We compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups. Primary surgery (esophagectomy) was performed in 191 patients between 2003 and 2014, and 62 patients underwent secondary surgery (esophagectomy) after ESD for T1 esophageal cancer between 2007 and 2019. Propensity matching was performed for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), location, pathology, degree of differentiation, tumor size, and invasion depth. Lymph node metastasis (LNM), overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and post-operative complications were compared between groups. Sixty-eight patients were included after propensity score matching; LNM, OS, DSS, and RFS were comparable between the two groups. Comparing primary and secondary surgery, the respective LNM rates were 23.5% and 26.5%, 6-year OS 78.0% and 89.7%, p = 0.15; DSS were 80.4% and 96.8%, p = 0.057; and RFS were 80.8% and 89.7%, p = 0.069. Comparing the adverse events between the two groups, there was no significant difference in the overall adverse events. However, more early complications were observed in the primary surgery group than in the secondary surgery group (50% vs. 20.6%, p = 0.021). Secondary surgery did not increase the risk of LNM. The long-term outcomes were comparable. Therefore, attempts to perform upfront ESD for superficial esophageal squamous cell cancers are justified.

Radiotherapy Improves Survival of Patients With Lymphovascular Invasion in pT1b Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

INTRODUCTION

Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended for pT1b esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, it is unclear whether additional radiotherapy can improve patient survival. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy after ESD for pT1b ESCC.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study involving 11 hospitals in China. Between January 2010 and December 2019, patients with T1bN0M0 ESCC treated with or without adjuvant radiotherapy after ESD were included. Survival between groups was compared.

RESULTS

Overall, 774 patients were screened, and 161 patients were included. Forty-seven patients (29.2%) received adjuvant radiotherapy after ESD (RT group) and 114 (70.8%) underwent ESD alone (non-RT group). There were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the RT and non-RT groups. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was the only prognostic factor. In the LVI+ group, adjuvant radiotherapy significantly improved survival (5-year OS: 91.7% vs 59.5%, P = 0.050; 5-year DFS: 92.9% vs 42.6%, P = 0.010). In the LVI- group, adjuvant radiotherapy did not improve survival (5-year OS: 83.5% vs 93.9%, P = 0.148; 5-year DFS: 84.2% vs 84.7%, P = 0.907). The standardized mortality ratios were 1.52 (95% confidence interval 0.04-8.45) in the LVI+ group with radiotherapy and 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.15-1.42) in the LVI- group without radiotherapy.

DISCUSSION

Adjuvant radiotherapy could improve survival in pT1b ESCC with LVI+ other than LVI- after ESD. Selective adjuvant radiotherapy based on LVI status achieved survival rates similar to those of the general population.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus esophagectomy for t1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been a preferred treatment option for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcomes of ESD and esophagectomy in the treatment of SESCC, especially for lesions invading muscularis mucosa or submucosa (pT1a-MM/T1b).

DESIGN

We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with SESCC who underwent ESD or esophagectomy between 2015 and 2021.

METHODS

After propensity score matching, overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and treatment-related events were compared between the ESD and esophagectomy groups. Furthermore, we performed a Cox regression analysis to identify factors associated with survival.

RESULTS

OS and DSS were significantly higher in the ESD group (n = 508) than that in the esophagectomy group (n = 466). After matching, 404 patients (202 per group) were included in the study. No significant differences were found between the ESD and esophagectomy groups in OS (p = 0.566), RFS (p = 0.586), and DSS (p = 0.912). The ESD group showed less blood loss, shorter procedure duration and hospital stay, lower hospital cost, and fewer adverse events. However, a lower R0 resection rate was observed in the ESD group compared to the esophagectomy group. Subgroup analysis showed comparable survival outcomes between the two groups. In Cox regression analysis, age was the independent factor associated with OS.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of SESCC, ESD showed sufficient safety and advantages. Even for pT1a-MM/pT1b SESCC, ESD may be an alternative treatment to esophagectomy.

Prediction model for selection of adjuvant therapy population after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment is the first choice for early esophageal lesions without obvious metastasis or infiltration, especially endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, the occurrence of non-curative resection, recurrence, or metastasis after ESD is inevitable, which may require adjuvant therapy such as additional surgery or chemora-diotherapy.

AIM

To analyze the risk factors for additional surgery or chemora-diotherapy after ESD for early esophageal lesions, and explore the effect of curative resection on additional adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ESD for stage T1 esophageal cancer (EC) and precancerous lesions were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative recurrence, metastasis, and adjuvant treatment were followed, and a prediction model for adjuvant treatment population selection was established.

RESULTS

Non-curative resection was correlated with patient age, proportion of lesions, and microscopic size(P < 0.05), among which the proportion of lesions > 2/3 (odds ratio [OR] = 7.958, P = 0.007) was an independent risk factor. Two of curative and ten of non-curative resection cases received additional treatment, indicating that further treatment after ESD might be required regardless of whether curative resection was performed. Patient age, proportion of lesions, lesion lifting, differentiation, vascular invasion, and tumor invasion depth were correlated with the need for further treatment (P < 0.05). Age ≥ 70 years (OR = 4.210, P = 0.049), poor lifting (OR = 18.171, P = 0.047), and depth of tumor up to SM2 (OR = 38.781, P = 0.012) were independent risk factors. The AUC of the nomogram model was 0.864 (95%CI: 0.766-0.962); the specificity and sensitivity were 95.8% and 75.0%, respectively. Calibration curve analysis, decision curve analysis, and Hosmer and Lemeshow test (χ² = 1.5954, P = 0.991) showed that the predictive value of the model was acceptable.

CONCLUSION

For patients with stage T1 EC and precancerous lesions, whether further surgery or chemoradiotherapy is needed after ESD should be comprehensively considered.