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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.