Predictors of Postoperative Complications After Trimodality Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

Proton Radiotherapy Significantly Reduces Pneumonia in Patients With Esophageal Cancer

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (RT) (nCRT) followed by surgical resection is the current standard of care for patients with esophageal cancer (EC). This treatment is associated with a variety of complications, with pneumonia being the most common. We hypothesized that proton RT (PRT) can significantly reduce the incidence of pneumonia compared with photon RT (PhRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed an analysis on a prospective cohort of patients with EC who completed nCRT with PRT or PhRT and underwent esophagectomy between October 2014 and June 2022. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of the RT technique on pneumonia while correcting for confounders. To access the dose-effect relationships, dose-volume histogram parameters of the lungs and the heart were analyzed using a principal component (PC) analysis.

RESULTS

We included 313 patients, of whom 28% developed pneumonia. The incidence was lower after PRT compared with PhRT (12% vs 32%, P < .01). PRT was associated with a significant reduction of the incidence of pneumonia (odds ratio [OR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14-0.72; P = .01), even when correcting for surgical approach and planning target volume size. Three PCs were identified: PC1: associated with the mean dose in the heart and lungs, PC2: associated with the distribution of dose between the lungs and the heart, and PC3: associated with the volume receiving a low dose (≤20 Gy). If the dose-related variables were replaced by the PCs, PC1 (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22) and PC3 (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06-1.53) were significantly associated with pneumonia. PRT had significantly lower values for both PC1 and PC3, compared with PhRT.

CONCLUSIONS

PRT significantly reduces the incidence of pneumonia compared with PhRT in patients with EC treated with nCRT followed by surgical resection. The reduction of pneumonia was associated with the lower mean dose and a reduction of the volume irradiated to low doses in the lungs and/or heart.

Predicting anastomotic leak in patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy using a nomogram based on CT radiomic and clinicopathologic factors

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common complication in patients with operable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) and radical esophagectomy. Therefore, this study aimed to establish and validate a nomogram to predict the occurrence of AL.

METHODS

Between March 2016 and December 2022, ESCC patients undergoing NCRT and radical esophagectomy were retrospectively collected in China. Clinicopathologic and radiomics characteristics were included in the univariate logistic regression analysis, and statistically significant factors were enrolled to develop the nomogram, which was evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

231 eligible patients were divided into training (n = 159) and validation cohorts (n = 72). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that dose at the anastomosis ≥ 24 Gy, gross tumor volume ≥ 60 cm3, postoperative albumin < 35 g/L, comorbidities, duration of surgery ≥ 270 min, and computed tomography-based radiomics characteristics were independent predictors of AL. The nomogram AUC in the training and validation cohorts was 0.845 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.770-0.920) and 0.839 (95% CI: 0.718-0.960), respectively, indicating good discriminatory ability. The calibration curves showed good agreement between the predicted and actual AL occurrence and the DCA demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a nomogram based on radiomics and clinicopathologic characteristics. This predictive model could be a powerful tool to predict AL occurrence in patients with ESCC treated with NCRT.

Radiotherapy quality assurance in the PROTECT trial - a European randomised phase III-trial comparing proton and photon therapy in the treatment of patients with oesophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To present results from the trial radiotherapy quality assurance (RTQA) programme of the centres involved in the randomised phase-III PROton versus photon Therapy for esophageal Cancer - a Trimodality strategy (PROTECT)-trial, investigating the clinical effect of proton therapy (PT) vs. photon therapy (XT) for patients with oesophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The pre-trial RTQA programme consists of benchmark target and organ at risk (OAR) delineations as well as treatment planning cases, a facility questionnaire and beam output audits. Continuous on-trial RTQA with individual case review (ICR) of the first two patients and every fifth patient at each participating site is performed. Patient-specific QA is mandatory for all patients. On-site visits are scheduled after the inclusion of the first two patients at two associated PT and XT sites. Workshops are arranged annually for all PROTECT participants.

RESULTS

Fifteen PT/XT sites are enrolled in the trial RTQA programme. Of these, eight PT/XT sites have completed the entire pre-trial RTQA programme. Three sites are actively including patients in the trial. On-trial ICR was performed for 22 patients. For the delineation of targets and OARs, six major and 11 minor variations were reported, and for six patients, there were no remarks. One major and four minor variations were reported for the treatment plans. Three site visits and two annual workshops were completed.

INTERPRETATION

A comprehensive RTQA programme was implemented for the PROTECT phase III trial. All centres adhered to guidelines for pre-trial QA. For on-trial QA, major variations were primarily seen for target delineations (< 30%), and no treatment plans required re-optimisation.

Cardiac CT reveals high prevalence of coronary artery disease in esophageal cancer eligible for radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Assessment of cardiac disease before cancer therapy is crucial, as advancements in cancer treatment have led to prolonged survival and an increase in cardiovascular complications. Specifically, esophageal cancer and heart disease share common risk factors, such as smoking and obesity. Radiation therapy (RT) for esophageal cancer is associated with elevated cardiac radiation exposure. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with esophageal cancer who were eligible for RT.

METHODS

We examined the prevalence of coronary artery stenosis, abnormal myocardial perfusion, and late enhancement using pre-RT cardiac computed tomography (CT) data of 41 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who were referred for RT between January 2017 and June 2023 and had no history of ischemic heart disease.

RESULTS

The median age of the 41 patients was 71 years, with 40 patients being male. Cardiac CT identified significant coronary stenosis (≥50% luminal narrowing) in 18 patients (44%), among whom 9 (50%) had severe stenosis, multivessel disease, or myocardial ischemia. Significant stenosis was most frequently observed in the left anterior descending artery (16/18). Late enhancement, indicating myocardial infarction, was observed in seven patients (17%).

INTERPRETATION

Patients with esophageal cancer without a history of ischemic heart disease had a high prevalence (44%) of CAD, with half of them having severe stenosis, multivessel disease, or myocardial ischemia. Given the high prevalence of coronary stenosis, pre-treatment cardiac evaluation is crucial for patients with esophageal cancer. Incorporating cardiac CT findings into radiotherapy planning is recommended to optimize patient care.

A simplified online adaptive workflow for long-course magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy in esophageal cancer

Background and Purpose

Online adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) enables high-precision radiotherapy for esophageal cancer patients but is less feasible due to long on-table times in combination with long-course treatment. In this study, we conducted an in-silico assessment of a simplified online adaptive workflow, Adapt-To-Shape-lite (ATS-lite), in which deformable propagated contours are not modified, and assessed its feasibility.

Materials and Methods

The ATS-lite workflow was simulated for all fractions of nine esophageal cancer patients who had previously received full online adaptive MRgRT with manual contour corrections if needed. The deformable propagated contours were not adjusted. A dose of 41.4 Gy in 23 fractions was prescribed. Intra- and interfraction dose accumulation were performed to evaluate target coverage per fraction and across the entire treatment. For individual fractions, coverage of the manually corrected clinical target volume (CTV) was considered adequate if V95% > 98 % and V90% > 99.5 %. Feasibility was assessed by recording treatment times in the first patients treated with ATS-lite.

Results

The ATS-lite workflow provided adequate target coverage over the entire treatment for all patients, with sufficient coverage in 90% of the 177 fractions analyzed. Closer inspection revealed that inadequate target coverage in individual fractions was primarily attributed to enlargement of the manually corrected CTV, rather than poor contour propagation in the ATS-lite workflow. In seven patients, the ATS-lite workflow achieved a median time per fraction of 23 min.

Conclusions

The ATS-lite workflow provides adequate target coverage and is feasible for online adaptive MRgRT in long-course esophageal cancer treatments.

Cone Beam Computed Tomography-Based Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy of Esophageal Cancer: First Clinical Experience and Dosimetric Benefits

Purpose

Radiation therapy (RT) plays a key role in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). However, toxicities caused by proximity of organs at risk (OAR) and daily target coverage caused by interfractional anatomic changes are of concern. Daily online adaptive RT (oART) addresses these concerns and has the potential to increase OAR sparing and improve target coverage. We present the first clinical experience and dosimetric investigations of cone beam CT-based oART in EC using the ETHOS platform.

Methods and Materials

Treatment fractions of the first 10 EC patients undergoing cone beam CT-based oART at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The prescription dose was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. The same clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) margins as for nonadaptive treatments were used. For all sessions, the timestamp of each oART workflow step, PTV size, target volume doses, mean heart dose, and lung V20Gy of both the scheduled and the adapted treatment plan were analyzed.

Results

Following automatic propagation, the CTV was adapted by the physician in 164 (59%) fractions. The adapted treatment plan was selected in 276 (99%) sessions. The median time needed for an oART session was 28 minutes (range, 14.8-43.3). Compared to the scheduled plans, a significant relative reduction of 9.5% in mean heart dose (absolute, 1.6 Gy; P = .006) and 16.9% reduction in mean lung V20Gy (absolute, 2.3%; P < .001) was achieved with the adapted treatment plans. Simultaneously, we observed a significant relative improvement in D99%PTV and D99%CTV by 15.3% (P < .001) and 5.0% (P = .008), respectively, along with a significant increase in D95%PTV by 5.1% (P = .003).

Conclusions

Although being resource-intensive, oART for EC is feasible in a reasonable timeframe and results in increased OAR sparing and improved target coverage, even without a reduction of margins. Further studies are planned to evaluate the potential clinical benefits.

Outcomes of definitive carbon-ion radiotherapy for cT1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

A recent phase I/II study determined the optimal dose of definitive carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) for cT1bN0M0 esophageal cancer. This study aimed to further confirm the efficacy and feasibility of the recommended dose fractionation of CIRT with long-term follow-up results in a larger sample size.

METHODS

This single center retrospective study evaluated patients with cT1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with the recommended dose fractionation of 50.4 Gy relative biological effectiveness in 12 fractions, between 2012 and 2022.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients underwent CIRT at our hospital. Although eight (21.1%) patients were older than 80 years, 15 (39.5%) had high surgical risk, and seven (18.4%) were at high risk for chemotherapy, all patients underwent CIRT as scheduled. Grade 3 esophagitis occurred in eight (21.1%) patients and grade 3 pneumonia in one (2.6%) patient in this study, but no grade 4 adverse events occurred. The only grade 3 late adverse event was pneumonia in one patient (2.6%). The 5-year overall survival rate, local control rate, and disease-free survival rates were 76.6% (95% CI, 90.9-62.4), 74.9% (95% CI, 90.7-59.0), and 66.4% (95% CI, 83.3-49.5), respectively. Additionally, post CIRT recurrence was as follows: seven (18.4%) patients had recurrence in another part of the esophagus, three (7.9%) in the primary site, three (7.9%) in lymph nodes outside the irradiated area, and one (2.6%) patient had liver metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that CIRT using the recommended dose fractionation is feasible and effective for cT1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Autodelineation methods in a simulated fully automated proton therapy workflow for esophageal cancer

Background and purpose

Proton Online Adaptive RadioTherapy (ProtOnART) harnesses the dosimetric advantage of protons and immediately acts upon anatomical changes. Here, we simulate the clinical application of delineation and planning within a ProtOnART-workflow for esophageal cancer. We aim to identify the most appropriate technique for autodelineation and evaluate full automation by replanning on autodelineated contours.

Materials and methods

We evaluated 15 patients who started treatment between 11-2022 and 01-2024, undergoing baseline and three repeat computed tomography (CT) scans in treatment position. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations compared different autodelineation methods. For Organs-at-risk (OAR) deep learning segmentation (DLS), rigid and deformable propagation from baseline to repeat CT-scans were considered. For the clinical target volume (CTV), rigid and three deformable propagation methods (default, heart as controlling structure and with focus region) were evaluated. Adaptive treatment plans with 7 mm (ATP7mm) and 3 mm (ATP3mm) setup robustness were generated using best-performing autodelineated contours. Clinical acceptance of ATPs was evaluated using goals encompassing ground-truth CTV-coverage and OAR-dose.

Results

Deformation was preferred for autodelineation of heart, lungs and spinal cord. DLS was preferred for all other OARs. For CTV, deformation with focus region was the preferred method although the difference with other deformation methods was small. Nominal ATPs passed evaluation goals for 87 % of ATP7mm and 67 % of ATP3mm. This dropped to respectively 2 % and 29 % after robust evaluation. Insufficient CTV-coverage was the main reason for ATP-rejection.

Conclusion

Autodelineation aids a ProtOnART-workflow for esophageal cancer. Currently available tools regularly require manual annotations to generate clinically acceptable ATPs.

Robustness of intensity modulated proton treatment of esophageal cancer for anatomical changes and breathing motion

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In this study, we assessed the robustness of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in esophageal cancer for anatomical variations during treatment.

METHODS

The first sixty esophageal cancer patients, treated clinically with chemoradiotherapy were included. The treatment planning strategy was based on an internal target volume (ITV) approach, where the ITV was created from the clinical target volumes (CTVs) delineated on all phases of a 4DCT. For optimization, a 3 mm isotropic margin was added to the ITV, combined with robust optimization using 5 mm setup and 3 % range uncertainty. Each patient received weekly repeat CTs (reCTs). Robust plan re-evaluation on all reCTs, and a robust dose summation was performed. To assess the factors influencing ITV coverage, a multivariate linear regression analysis was performed. Additionally, clinical adaptations were evaluated.

RESULTS

The target coverage was adequate (ITV V94%>98 % on the robust voxel-wise minimum dose) on most reCTs (91 %), and on the summed dose in 92 % of patients. Significant predictors for ITV coverage in the multivariate analysis were diaphragm baseline shift and water equivalent depth (WED) of the ITV in the beam direction. Underdosage of the ITV mainly occurred in week 1 and 4, leading to treatment adaptation of eight patients, all on the first reCT.

CONCLUSION

Our IMPT treatment of esophageal cancer is robust for anatomical variations. Adaptation appears to be most effective in the first week of treatment. Diaphragm baseline shifts and WED are predictive factors for ITV underdosage, and should be incorporated in an adaptation protocol.

Preoperative DLco and FEV1 are correlated with postoperative pulmonary complications in patients after esophagectomy

Limited information is available regarding the association between preoperative lung function and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients with esophageal cancer who undergo esophagectomy. This is a retrospective cohort study. Patients were classified into low and high lung function groups by the cutoff of the lowest fifth quintile of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) %predicted (%pred) and diffusing capacity of the carbon monoxide (DLco) %pred. The PPCs compromised of atelectasis requiring bronchoscopic intervention, pneumonia, and acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome. Modified multivariable-adjusted Poisson regression model using robust error variances and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to assess the relative risk (RR) for the PPCs. A joint effect model considered FEV1%pred and DLco %pred together for the estimation of RR for the PPCs. Of 810 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy, 159 (19.6%) developed PPCs. The adjusted RR for PPCs in the low FEV1 group relative to high FEV1 group was 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-2.00) and 1.98 (95% CI = 1.46-2.68) in the low DLco group relative to the high DLco group. A joint effect model showed adjusted RR of PPCs was highest in patients with low DLco and low FEV1 followed by low DLco and high FEV1, high DLco and low FEV1, and high DLco and high FEV1 (Reference). Results were consistent with the IPTW. Reduced preoperative lung function (FEV1 and DLco) is associated with post-esophagectomy PPCs. The risk was further strengthened when both values decreased together.

External validation of a lung cancer-based prediction model for two-year mortality in esophageal cancer patient cohorts

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

Chemo-radiotherapy can improve the oncological outcome of esophageal cancer (EC) patients, but may cause long term radiation-induced toxicity, including an increased risk of non-cancer related death. For lung cancer patients, a model to predict 2-year total mortality using mean heart dose (MHD) and gross tumor volume (GTV) has previously been developed and validated. This project aimed to externally validate this model in EC patients.

METHODS

Five EC patient cohorts from 3 different Dutch centres were used for model validation. External validity of the model was assessed separately in definitive (n = 170) and neo-adjuvant (n = 568) chemoradiotherapy (dCRT and nCRT) patients. External validity was assessed in terms of calibration by calibration plots, calibration-in-the-large (CITL) and calibration slope (CS), and discrimination by assessment of the c-statistic. If suboptimal model performance was observed, the model was further updated accordingly.

RESULTS

For the dCRT patients, good calibration was found after adjustment of the intercept (CITL 0.00; CS 1.08). The c-statistic of the adjusted model was 0.67 (95%CI: 0.58 to 0.75). For nCRT patients the model needed adjustment of both the slope and the intercept because of initial miscalibration in the validation population (CITL 0.00; CS 1.72). After recalibration, the model showed perfect calibration (i.e., CITL 0, CS 1), as is common after recalibration. The c-statistic of the recalibrated model equaled 0.62 (95%CI: 0.57 to 0.67).

CONCLUSION

The existing model for 2-year mortality prediction in lung cancer patients, based on the predictive factors MHD and GTV, showed good performance in EC patients after updating the intercept and/or slope of the original model.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy using proton beams can reduce cardiopulmonary morbidity in esophageal cancer patients: a systematic review

This systematic review was performed to investigate the superiority of proton beam therapy (PBT) to photon-based radiotherapy (RT) in treating esophageal cancer patients, especially those with poor cardiopulmonary function. The MEDLINE (PubMed) and ICHUSHI (Japana Centra Revuo Medicina) databases were searched from January 2000 to August 2020 for studies evaluating one end point at least as follows; overall survival, progression-free survival, grade ≥ 3 cardiopulmonary toxicities, dose-volume histograms, or lymphopenia or absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs) in esophageal cancer patients treated with PBT or photon-based RT. Of 286 selected studies, 23 including 1 randomized control study, 2 propensity matched analyses, and 20 cohort studies were eligible for qualitative review. Overall survival and progression-free survival were better after PBT than after photon-based RT, but the difference was significant in only one of seven studies. The rate of grade 3 cardiopulmonary toxicities was lower after PBT (0-13%) than after photon-based RT (7.1-30.3%). Dose-volume histograms revealed better results for PBT than photon-based RT. Three of four reports evaluating the ALC demonstrated a significantly higher ALC after PBT than after photon-based RT. Our review found that PBT resulted in a favorable trend in the survival rate and had an excellent dose distribution, contributing to reduced cardiopulmonary toxicities and a maintained number of lymphocytes. These results warrant novel prospective trials to validate the clinical evidence.

Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy Facility Type Affects Anastomotic Complications After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is a complex oncologic surgery that results in lower perioperative morbidity and mortality when performed in high-volume hospitals by experienced surgeons; however, limited data exists evaluating the importance of neoadjuvant radiotherapy delivery at high- versus low-volume centers. We sought to compare postoperative toxicity among patients treated with preoperative radiotherapy delivered at an academic medical center (AMC) versus community medical centers (CMC).

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer at an academic medical center between 2008 and 2018 were reviewed. Associations between patient factors and treatment-related toxicities were calculated in univariate (UVA) and multivariable analyses (MVA).

RESULTS

One hundred forty-seven consecutive patients were identified: 89 CMC and 58 AMC. Median follow-up was 30 months (0.33-124 months). Most patients were male (86%) with adenocarcinoma (90%) located in the distal esophagus or GEJ (95%). Median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy between groups. Radiotherapy at CMCs resulted in higher rates of re-operation after esophagectomy (18% vs 7%, p = 0.055) and increased rates of anastomotic leak (38% vs 17%, p < 0.01). On MVA, radiation at a CMC remained predictive of anastomotic leak (OR 6.13, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Esophageal cancer patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy had higher rates of anastomotic leaks when radiotherapy was completed at a community medical center versus academic medical center. Explanations for these differences are uncertain but further exploratory analyses regarding dosimetry and radiation field size are warranted.

A Review of Advances in Radiotherapy in the Setting of Esophageal Cancers

Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer worldwide and is the sixth most common cause of cancer-related mortality. The paradigm has shifted to include a multimodality approach with surgery, chemotherapy, targeted therapy (including immunotherapy), and radiation therapy. Advances in radiotherapy through techniques such as intensity modulated radiotherapy and proton beam therapy have allowed for the more dose homogeneity and improved organ sparing. In addition, recent studies of targeted therapies and predictive approaches in patients with locally advanced disease provide clinicians with new approaches to modify multimodality treatment to improve clinical outcomes.

Chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer: the choice of treatment modality

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced oesophageal cancer can be treated with definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) or with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery (nCRT + S), but treatment modality choice is not always clear. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors associated with the choice of treatment modality in locally advanced oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 149 patients treated with dCRT(n = 85) or nCRT + S (n = 64) for oesophageal cancer in Helsinki University Hospital in 2008-2018. Logistic regression was used to analyse factors associated with choice of treatment modality and to compare dosimetric factors with postoperative complications. Multivariate analyses identified factors associated with survival.

RESULTS

Surgery was performed after chemoradiation as planned on 64/91 patients (70%). 28/64 had pathological complete response (44%). Probability of nCRT + S was higher in stages I-III versus IV (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.53-8.53; P = .003), ECOG 0-1 versus 2 (OR 6.99, 95% CI 1.81-26.96; P = .005) or in the middle/lower vs upper oesophageal tumours (OR 5.61, 95% CI 1.83-17.16, P = .003). Probability for surgery was lower, if patient had lost > 10% of body weight (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.21-0.98, P = 0.043). Patients in the nCRT + S group had significantly better median overall survival (mOS) and local control than the dCRT group (60 vs. 10 months, P < .001 and 53 vs. 6 months, P < 0.0001, respectively). 10/85 (12%) patients died within three months after dCRT. In multivariate analysis, nCRT + S was associated with improved mOS (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17-0.44, P < .001). Current smokers had worse mOS (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.04-3.92, P = .037) compared to never-smokers. No significant dosimetric factor associated with postoperative complications was found.

CONCLUSION

The overall clinical status of the patients and the stage of the cancer guide the choice of treatment modalities, leading to overtreatment. Patients with better prognoses were more likely operated after chemoradiation, although there is no evidence of OS benefit in previous randomized trials. On the other hand, the prognosis was poor for patients with poor general health and advanced cancers, despite the chemoradiation. Thus, there are signs of overtreatment. MDT practice should be recommended to optimise the choice of treatment modalities. Smoking status is an independent factor associated with survival.

Postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A single institutional cohort study

Background

Complications after esophagectomy are common and the possible increase in postoperative complications associated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is of concern. The aim of our study was to analyze if the addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases the incidence and severity of postoperative complications, including evaluation of the relation between radiation doses to the heart and lungs and postoperative complications.

Methods

The study was based on an institutional surgical database for esophageal cancer. The study period was October 2008 to March 2020. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were compared to patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and dose/volume parameters for the lungs and heart considered. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative complications.

Results

During the study period, 274 patients underwent surgery for esophageal cancer, 93 patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 181 patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The median prescribed radiation dose to the planning target volume was 41.4 Gy, the median of the mean lung dose was 6.2 Gy, and the median of the mean heart dose was 20.3 Gy. The addition of radiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications. Neither were radiation doses to the lungs and heart associated with postoperative complications. Taxane-based chemotherapy regimens were however associated with an increased incidence of postoperative complications.

Conclusions

In our cohort, the addition of neoadjuvant radiotherapy to chemotherapy was not associated with postoperative complications. However, taxane-based chemotherapy regimens, with or without concomitant radiotherapy, were associated with postoperative complications.

Improving outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer

The care of patients with oesophageal cancer or of individuals who have an elevated risk of oesophageal cancer has changed dramatically. The epidemiology of squamous cell and adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus has diverged over the past several decades, with a marked increase in incidence only for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Only in the past decade, however, have molecular features that distinguish these two forms of the disease been identified. This advance has the potential to improve screening for oesophageal cancers through the development of novel minimally invasive diagnostic technologies predicated on cancer-specific genomic or epigenetic alterations. Surgical techniques have also evolved towards less invasive approaches associated with less morbidity, without compromising oncological outcomes. With improvements in multidisciplinary care, advances in radiotherapy and new tools to detect minimal residual disease, certain patients may no longer even require surgical tumour resection. However, perhaps the most anticipated advance in the treatment of patients with oesophageal cancer is the advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors, which harness and enhance the host immune response against cancer. In this Review, we discuss all these advances in the management of oesophageal cancer, representing only the beginning of a transformation in our quest to improve patient outcomes.

Proton versus photon radiation therapy: A clinical review

While proton radiation therapy offers substantially better dose distribution characteristics than photon radiation therapy in certain clinical applications, data demonstrating a quantifiable clinical advantage is still needed for many treatment sites. Unfortunately, the number of patients treated with proton radiation therapy is still comparatively small, in some part due to the lack of evidence of clear benefits over lower-cost photon-based treatments. This review is designed to present the comparative clinical outcomes between proton and photon therapies, and to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of proton radiation therapy.

Clinical and Dosimetric Predictors for Postoperative Cardiopulmonary Complications in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This study explored correlations of clinical factors and dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters with postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and predicted their risk by establishing a nomogram model.

METHODS

Clinical and DVH parameters of ESCC patients who underwent trimodality treatment from 2002 to 2020 were collected. Postoperative cardiopulmonary complications were recorded. Logistic regression analysis was applied, and a nomogram model was constructed. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve, calibration curve, and decision curve analyses were performed to evaluate the performance of the nomogram.

RESULTS

Of the 307 ESCC patients enrolled in this study, 65 (21.2%) experienced pulmonary complications and 57 (18.6%) experienced cardiac complications. The following six risk factors were identified as independent risk factors for pulmonary complications by multivariate logistic regression analyses in the integrated model: male sex (odds ratio [OR], 3.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-9.70; P = 0.021), post-radiation therapy (RT) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (OR, 0.51; 95% CI 0.28-0.90; P = 0.023), mean lung dose (MLD) (OR, 1.13; 95% CI 1.01-1.28; P = 0.041), and pre-RT monocyte (OR, 8.36; 95% CI 1.23-11.7; P = 0.03). The AUC of this integrated model was 0.705 (95% CI 0.64-0.77). The paclitaxel and cisplatin (TP) concurrent chemotherapy regimen was the independent predictor of cardiac complication (OR, 2.50; 95% CI 1.22-5.55; P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

For ESCC patients who underwent trimodality treatment, male sex, post-RT FEV1, MLD, and pre-RT monocyte were confirmed as significant predictors of postoperative pulmonary complications. A nomogram model including six risk factors was further established. The independent predictor of cardiac complication was TP concurrent chemotherapy.

The effect of gastric fundus radiation dose on postoperative anastomotic leakage in esophageal cancer

Introduction

Standard-of-care treatment for locally advanced esophageal carcinoma (LAEC) includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy. A potentially catastrophic surgical complication is the development of a postoperative anastomotic leak. To date, the association with radiation dose exposure had been inconclusive. We examined the correlation between radiation exposure to the gastric fundus and risk of postoperative leakage using contemporary radiation doses and fractionation.

Methods

A total of 69 consecutive patients with LAEC who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy in our tertiary center were prospectively followed (median, 27 months). Neoadjuvant regimen included 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin and 41.4 Gy in 23 fractions with carboplatin and paclitaxel. The gastric fundus was contoured and dosimetric and radiation technique parameters were retrospectively evaluated.

Results

Of the total number of patients, 71% and 29% had esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) tumors, respectively. Fourteen patients (20.3%) experienced anastomotic leaks within a median of 2 days postoperatively, 78.6% of whom had lower third esophagus or GEJ primaries. Mean and minimum fundus dose did not significantly differ between those with and those without leakage (p = 0.42, p = 0.51). Mean fundus V25, V30, and V35 doses were numerically but not statistically higher in those with anastomotic leak (p = 0.58, p = 0.39, and p = 0.30, respectively). No correlation with incidence of leakage was seen between 3D and IMRT treatment modalities.

Conclusions

In our comparatively large prospectively collected series of patients treated for LAEC, radiation dose to the gastric fundus during neoadjuvant combination therapy prior to surgery did not correlate with the risk of postoperative anastomotic leak.

The Role of Age and Comorbidities in Esophagogastric Cancer Chemoradiation of the Frail Elderly (>70 Years): An Analysis from a Tertiary High Volume-Center

Elderly patients > 70 years of age with esophageal cancer (EC) represent a challenging group as frailty and comorbidities need to be considered. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and side effects of curative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with regard to basic geriatric screening in elderly patients in order to elucidate prognostic factors. Thirty-four elderly patients > 70 years with EC treated at our cancer center between May 2014 and October 2018 fulfilled the selection criteria for this retrospective analysis. Treatment consisted of intravenous infusion of carboplatin/paclitaxel or fluorouracil (5-FU)/cisplatin with the intention of neoadjuvant or definite chemoradiation. Clinicopathological data including performance status (ECOG), (age-adjusted) Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), Frailty-scale by Fried, Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form, body mass index, C-reactive protein to albumin ratio, and treatment-related toxicity (CTCAE) were assessed. Data were analyzed as predictors of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). All patients (ten female, 24 male) received combined CRT (22 patients in neoadjuvant, 12 patients in definite intent). Median age was 75 years and the ECOG index between 0 and 1 (52.9% vs. 35.3%); four patients were rated as ECOG 3 (11.8%). Median follow-up was 24 months. Tumors were mainly located in the lower esophagus or esophagogastric-junction with an T3 stage (n = 25; 75.8%) and N1 stage (n = 28; 90.3%). 15 patients (44.1%) had SCC, 19 patients (55.9%) AC. 26 of the patients (76.5%) were scored as prefrail and 50% were in risk for malnutrition (n = 17). In relation to the BMI, ten patients (29.4%) were ranked as overweight, and 15 patients were presented in a healthy state of weight (44.1%). Grade 3 acute toxicity (or higher) occured in nine cases (26.5%). Most of the patients did not show any late toxicities (66.7%). Trimodal therapy provides a significant prolonged OS (p = 0.049) regardless of age, but without impact on PFS. Our analysis suggests that chemoradiation therapy is feasible for elderly patients (>70 years) with tolerable toxicity. Trimodal therapy of EC shows a positive effect on OS and PFS. Further studies are needed to elucidate benefitting subgroups within the elderly. In addition to age, treatment decisions should be based on performance status, nutritional condition and multidisciplinary validated geriatric screening tools.

Proton Therapy With Concurrent Chemotherapy for Thoracic Esophageal Cancer: Toxicity, Disease Control, and Survival Outcomes

Purpose

When treating esophageal cancer with radiation therapy, it is critical to limit the dose to surrounding structures, such as the lung and/or heart, as much as possible. Proton radiation therapy allows a reduced radiation dose to both the heart and lungs, potentially reducing the risk of cardiopulmonary toxicity. Here, we report disease control, survival, and toxicity outcomes among patients with esophageal cancer treated with proton radiation therapy and concurrent chemotherapy (chemoradiation therapy; CRT) with or without surgery.

Materials and Methods

We enrolled 17 patients with thoracic esophageal carcinoma on a prospective registry between 2010 and 2021. Patients received proton therapy to a median dose of 50.4-GyRBE (range, 50.4-64.8) in 1.8-Gy fractions.Acute and late toxicities were graded per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0 (US National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland). In addition, disease control, patterns of failure, and survival outcomes were collected.

Results

Nine patients received preoperative CRT, and 8 received definitive CRT. Overall, 88% of patients had adenocarcinoma, and 12% had squamous cell carcinoma. With a median follow-up of 2.1 years (range, 0.5-9.4), the 3-year local progression-free, disease-free, and overall survival rates were 85%, 66%, and 55%, respectively. Two patients (1 with adenocarcinoma and 1 with squamous cell carcinoma) recurred at the primary site after refusing surgery after a complete clinical response to CRT. The most common acute nonhematologic and hematologic toxicities, respectively, were grades 1 to 3 esophagitis and grades 1 to 4 leukopenia, both affecting 82% of patients. No acute cardiopulmonary toxicities were observed in the absence of surgical resection. Reagarding surgical complications, 3 postoperative cardiopulmonary complications occurred as follows: 1 grade 1 pleural effusion, 1 grade 3 pleural effusion, and 1 grade 2 anastomotic leak. Two severe late CRT toxicities occurred: 1 grade 5 tracheoesophageal fistula and 1 grade 3 esophageal stenosis requiring a feeding tube.

Conclusion

Proton radiation therapy is a safe, effective treatment for esophageal cancer with increasing evidence supporting its role in reducing cardiopulmonary toxicity.

Robustness assessment of clinical adaptive proton and photon radiotherapy for oesophageal cancer in the model-based approach

PURPOSE

In the Netherlands, oesophageal cancer (EC) patients are selected for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using the expected normal tissue complication probability reduction (ΔNTCP) when treating with IMPT compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). In this study, we evaluate the robustness of the first EC patients treated with IMPT in our clinic in terms of target and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose with corresponding NTCP, as compared to VMAT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For 20 consecutive EC patients, clinical IMPT and VMAT plans were created on the average planning 4DCT. Both plans were robustly evaluated on weekly repeated 4DCTs and if target coverage degraded, replanning was performed. Target coverage was evaluated for complete treatment trajectories with and without replanning. The planned and accumulated mean lung dose (MLD) and mean heart dose (MHD) were additionally evaluated and translated into NTCP.

RESULTS

Replanning in the clinic was performed more often for IMPT (15x) than would have been needed for VMAT (8x) (p = 0.11). Both adaptive treatments would have resulted in adequate accumulated target dose coverage. Replanning in the first week of treatment had most clinical impact, as anatomical changes resulting in insufficient accumulated target coverage were already observed at this stage. No differences were found in MLD between the planned dose and the accumulated dose. Accumulated MHD differed from the planned dose (p < 0.001), but since these differences were similar for VMAT and IMPT (1.0 and 1.5 Gy, respectively), the ΔNTCP remained unchanged.

CONCLUSION

Following an adaptive clinical workflow, adequate target dose coverage and stable OAR doses with corresponding NTCPs was assured for both IMPT and VMAT.

Chemoradiation for elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with esophageal cancer: a retrospective single-center analysis

Background

Present studies on the efficacy and safety of curative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with esophageal cancer reflect heterogenous results especially in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of CRT in patients ≥ 65 years. In a cohort, the focus centered around treatment-related toxicity (CTCAE Grade > 3), overall survival as well as progression free survival, comparing these rates in-between patients older than 70 years to those younger than 70 years.

Methods

A total of 67 patients older than 65 years (34 (50.7%) were older than 70 years) met the inclusion criteria for retrospective analysis (period from January 2013 to October 2017). Treatment consisted of radiotherapy and chemotherapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel or fluorouracil (5-FU)/cisplatin with the intention of neoadjuvant or definite chemoradiation. A sum of 67 patients received CRT (44 (65.6%) patients in neoadjuvant, 23 (34.4%) in definite intent). Of these, 22 and 12 patients were older than 70 years (50% and 52.2% in both treatment groups, respectively). Median age was 71 years and patients had a good physical performance status (ECOG 0: 57.6%, ECOG 1: 27.3%). Median follow-up was 24 months. Most patients had advanced tumour stages (T3 stage: n = 51, 79.7%) and nodal metastasis (N1 stage: n = 54, 88.5%). A subgroup comparison was conducted between patients aged ≤ 70 years and > 70 years.

Results

In severe (CTCAE Grade 3–5) toxicities (acute and late), no significant differences were observed between both patient groups (< 70 years vs. > 70 years). 21% had acute grade 3 events, 4 patients (4%) had grade 4 events, and two patients (3%) had one grade 5 event. Late toxicity after CRT was grade 1 in 13 patients (22%), grade 2 in two (3%), grade 3 in two (3%), grade 4 in four (7%), and grade 5 in one (2%). Median overall survival (OS) of all patients was 30 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 16 months. No significant differences were seen for OS (32 months vs. 25 months; p = 0.632) and PFS (16 months vs. 12 months; p = 0.696) between older patients treated with curative intent and younger ones. Trimodal therapy significantly prolonged both OS and PFS (p = 0.005; p = 0.018), regardless of age.

Conclusion

CRT in elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with esophageal cancer is feasible and effective. Numbers for acute and late toxicities can be compared to cohorts of younger patients (< 65 years) with EC who received the same therapies. Age at treatment initiation alone should not be the determining factor. Instead, functional status, risk of treatment-related morbidities, life expectancy and patient´s preferences should factor into the choice of therapy.

Automated clinical decision support system with deep learning dose prediction and NTCP models to evaluate treatment complications in patients with esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study aims to investigate how accurate our deep learning (DL) dose prediction models for intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and pencil beam scanning (PBS) treatments, when chained with normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models, are at identifying esophageal cancer patients who are at high risk of toxicity and should be switched to proton therapy (PT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two U-Net were created, for photon (XT) and proton (PT) plans, respectively. To estimate the dose distribution for each patient, they were trained on a database of 40 uniformly planned patients using cross validation and a circulating test set. These models were combined with a NTCP model for postoperative pulmonary complications. The NTCP model used the mean lung dose, age, histology type, and body mass index as predicting variables. The treatment choice is then done by using a ΔNTCP threshold between XT and PT plans. Patients with ΔNTCP ≥ 10% were referred to PT.

RESULTS

Our DL models succeed in predicting dose distributions with a mean error on the mean dose to the lungs (MLD) of 1.14 ± 0.93% for XT and 0.66 ± 0.48% for PT. The complete automated workflow (DL chained with NTCP) achieved 100% accuracy in patient referral. The average residual (ΔNTCP ground truth - ΔNTCP predicted) is 1.43 ± 1.49%.

CONCLUSION

This study evaluates our DL dose prediction models in a broader patient referral context and demonstrates their ability to support clinical decisions.

Health Care Resource Utilization for Esophageal Cancer Using Proton versus Photon Radiation Therapy

Purpose

In patients treated with chemoradiation for esophageal cancer (EC), randomized trial data demonstrate that proton beam therapy (PBT) reduces toxicities and postoperative complications (POCs) compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). However, whether radiation therapy modality affects postoperative health care resource utilization remains unknown.

Materials and Methods

We examined 287 patients with EC who received chemoradiation (prescribed 50.4 Gy/GyE) followed by esophagectomy, including a real-world observational cohort of 237 consecutive patients treated from 2007 to 2013 with PBT (n = 81) versus IMRT (n = 156); and an independent, contemporary comparison cohort of 50 patients from a randomized trial treated from 2012 to 2019 with PBT (n = 21) versus IMRT (n = 29). Postoperative complications were abstracted from medical records. Health care charges were obtained from institutional claims and adjusted for inflation (2021 dollars). Charge differences (Δ = $PBT - $IMRT) were compared by treatment using adjusted generalized linear models with the gamma distribution.

Results

Baseline PBT versus IMRT characteristics were not significantly different. In the observational cohort, during the neoadjuvant chemoradiation phase, health care charges were higher for PBT versus IMRT (Δ = +$71,959; 95% confidence interval [CI], $62,274-$82,138; P < .001). There was no difference in surgical charges (Δ = -$2234; 95% CI, -$6003 to $1695; P = .26). However, during postoperative hospitalization following esophagectomy, health care charges were lower for PBT versus IMRT (Δ = -$25,115; 95% CI, -$37,625 to -$9776; P = .003). In the comparison cohort, findings were analogous: Charges were higher for PBT versus IMRT during chemoradiation (Δ = +$61,818; 95% CI, $49,435-$75,069; P < .001), not different for surgery (Δ = -$4784; 95% CI, -$6439 to $3487; P = .25), and lower for PBT postoperatively (Δ = -$27,048; 95% CI, -$41,974 to -$5300; P = .02). Lower postoperative charges for PBT were especially seen among patients with any POCs in the contemporary comparison (Δ = -$176,448; 95% CI, -$209,782 to -$78,813; P = .02).

Conclusion

Higher up-front chemoradiation resource utilization for PBT in patients with EC was partially offset postoperatively, moderated by reduction in POC risks. Results extend existing clinical evidence of toxicity reduction with PBT.

Bone versus soft-tissue setup in proton therapy for patients with oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of patient positioning based on either bone or soft-tissue matching for PT in oesophageal cancer and its impact on plan adaptation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two retrospective patient cohorts treated with radiotherapy were included in the study. Cohort A consisted of 26 consecutive patients with a planning 4DCT scan (CT1) and a surveillance 4DCT scan (CT2) at fraction ten. Cohort B consisted of 17 patients selected based on large anatomical changes identified during treatment resulting in a rescan (CT2). Mean dose to the iCTV (sum of the CTVs in all respiratory phases) was 50.4 Gy (RBE) in 28 fractions or 41.4 Gy (RBE) in 23 fractions. A nominal pencil beam scanning plan was created using two posterior beams and robust optimization (5 mm setup, 3.5% range). For each patient, two rigid registrations were made between average (avg) CT1 and CT2: a match on the vertebral column (bone match) and a match on the iCTV (soft-tissue match). Robustness towards setup (5 mm) and range (3.5%) errors was evaluated at CT2. Robustness towards respiration was evaluated by recalculation of the plan on all phases of the CT2 scan. Dose coverage <96% would trigger adaptation. The statistical significance (p-value <0.05) between dose coverage for the two registration methods was assessed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

All plans fulfilled V95%_iCTV>99% for the nominal plan and V95%_iCTV>97% for all respiratory phases and robustness scenarios at CT1. In two (8%) and three (18%) patients, V95%_iCTV<96% on CT2 for Cohort A and B, respectively when bone match was used. For soft-tissue match, V95%iCTV >96% for all patients. V95%_iCTV was significantly higher (p-value = 0.0001) for soft-tissue match than bone match.

CONCLUSION

Anatomical changes during the treatment course led to target dose deterioration and a need for plan adaptation when using a bone match.

Proton Therapy in the Management of Luminal Gastrointestinal Cancers: Esophagus, Stomach, and Anorectum

While the role of proton therapy in gastric cancer is marginal, its role in esophageal and anorectal cancers is expanding. In esophageal cancer, protons are superior in sparing the organs at risk, as shown by multiple dosimetric studies. Literature is conflicting regarding clinical significance, but the preponderance of evidence suggests that protons yield similar or improved oncologic outcomes to photons at a decreased toxicity cost. Similarly, protons have improved sparing of the organs at risk in anorectal cancers, but clinical data is much more limited to date, and toxicity benefits have not yet been shown clinically. Large, randomized trials are currently underway for both disease sites.

The quality of life in neoadjuvant versus adjuvant therapy of esophageal cancer treatment trial (QUINTETT): Randomized parallel clinical superiority trial

Background

We compared the health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients undergoing trimodality therapy for resectable stage I‐III esophageal cancer.

Methods

A total of 96 patients were randomized to standard neoadjuvant cisplatin and 5‐fluorouracil chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (neoadjuvant) followed by surgical resection or adjuvant cisplatin, 5‐fluorouracil, and epirubicin chemotherapy with concurrent extended volume radiotherapy (adjuvant) following surgical resection.

Results

There was no significant difference in the functional assessment of cancer therapy‐esophageal (FACT‐E) total scores between arms at 1 year (p = 0.759) with 36% versus 41% (neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant), respectively, showing an increase of ≥15 points compared to pre‐treatment (p = 0.638). The HRQOL was significantly inferior at 2 months in the neoadjuvant arm for FACT‐E, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ‐OG25), and EuroQol 5‐D‐3 L in the dysphagia, reflux, pain, taste, and coughing domains (p < 0.05). Half of patients were able to complete the prescribed neoadjuvant arm chemotherapy without modification compared to only 14% in the adjuvant arm (p < 0.001). Chemotherapy related adverse events of grade ≥2 occurred significantly more frequently in the neoadjuvant arm (100% vs. 69%, p < 0.001). Surgery related adverse events of grade ≥2 were similar in both arms (72% vs. 86%, p = 0.107). There were no 30‐day mortalities and 2% vs. 10% 90‐day mortalities (p = 0.204). There were no significant differences in either overall survival (OS) (5‐year: 35% vs. 32%, p = 0.409) or disease‐free survival (DFS) (5‐year: 31% vs. 30%, p = 0.710).

Conclusion

Trimodality therapy is challenging for patients with resectable esophageal cancer regardless of whether it is given before or after surgery. Newer and less toxic protocols are needed.

Treatment planning comparison in the PROTECT-trial randomising proton versus photon beam therapy in oesophageal cancer: results from eight european centres

PURPOSE

To compare dose distributions and robustness in treatment plans from eight European centres in preparation for the European randomized phase-III PROTECT-trial investigating the effect of proton therapy (PT) versus photon therapy (XT) for oesophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All centres optimized one PT and one XT nominal plan using delineated 4DCT scans for four patients receiving 50.4Gy(RBE) in 28 fractions. Target volume receiving 95% of prescribed dose (V95%_iCTVtotal) should be >99%. Robustness towards setup, range, and respiration was evaluated. The plans were recalculated on a surveillance 4DCT (sCT) acquired at fraction ten and robustness evaluation was performed to evaluate the effect of respiration and inter-fractional anatomical changes.

RESULTS

All PT and XT plans complied with V95%_iCTVtotal>99% for the nominal plan and V95%_iCTVtotal>97% for all respiratory and robustness scenarios. Lung and heart dose varied considerably between centres for both modalities. The difference in mean lung dose and mean heart dose between each pair of XT and PT plans was in median [range] 4.8Gy [1.1;7.6] and 8.4Gy [1.9;24.5], respectively. Patients B and C showed large inter-fractional anatomical changes on sCT. For patient B, the minimum V95%_iCTVtotal in the worst-case robustness scenario was 45% and 94% for XT and PT, respectively. For patient C, the minimum V95%_iCTVtotal was 57% and 72% for XT and PT, respectively. Patient A and D showed minor inter-fractional changes and the minimum V95%_iCTVtotal was >85%.

CONCLUSION

Large variability in dose to the lungs and heart was observed for both modalities. Inter-fractional anatomical changes led to larger target dose deterioration for XT than PT plans.

A Comparative Analysis of Photon versus Proton Beam Therapy in Neoadjuvant Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Intrathoracic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus at a Single Institute

BACKGROUND

Proton beam therapy (PBT), as a neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) modality, is expected to result in better outcomes than photon-based radiotherapy (RT) for esophageal cancer, particularly adenocarcinoma. This study reports the results of nCRT for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) using both modalities.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients who underwent nCRT for ESCC between 2001 and 2020. A median of 41.4 Gy or cobalt gray equivalents of radiation was delivered using either photons or protons, with concurrent chemotherapy. Dosimetric and clinical parameters were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 31 patients, the lungs and heart of the proton group (n = 15) were exposed to significantly less radiation compared to the photon group (n = 16). No significant differences in short-term postoperative outcomes or lymphocyte count were observed between the groups, and there were no significant differences between the photon and proton groups in 2-year overall survival (67.8% vs. 68.6%, p = 0.867) or 2-year disease-free survival (33.3% vs. 34.5%, p = 0.749), with a median follow-up of 17 months.

CONCLUSIONS

PBT provided a significant dosimetric benefit over photon-based RT during nCRT for ESCC; however, it did not improve clinical outcomes.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Impairment of Lung Function Increases the Risk of Postoperative Respiratory Failure for Esophageal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To study lung function impairment by meta-analysis to increase the risk of postoperative respiratory failure in patients with esophageal carcinoma.

Methods

We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and CNKI and other databases, and the search time was set to the time the database was established. We screened the relevant literature to study the relationship between lung function damage and postoperative respiratory failure in patients with esophageal cancer, determined to include the literature and extracted relevant data, and then, applied NOS. The scale evaluates the quality of the literature, and the ReviewManager software was used to perform meta-analysis on the extracted data.

Results

Finally, 9 related articles and 2822 research subjects were included, and the average score of literature quality was 5.78 points, the heterogeneity of the literature was large (I² = 84%), the random effects model was used for analysis, and the correlation between the two showed SMD = 0.09, 95%CI[−0.09, 0.31], Z = 1.10, P = 0.27, which is consistent with the results of the subgroup analysis.

Conclusion

The results of the study show that lung function impairment has a positive relationship with postoperative respiratory failure in patients with esophageal cancer. Pulmonary function impairment in cases with different case characteristics can also aggravate the severity of respiratory failure.

[The role of proton therapy in esophageal cancer]

Because of the physical properties of proton beam radiation therapy (PT), which allows energy to be deposited at a specific depth with a rapid energy fall-off beyond that depth, PT has several theoretical advantages over photon radiation therapy for esophageal cancer (EC). Protons have the potential to reduce the dose to healthy tissue and to more safely allow treatment of tumors near critical organs, dose escalation, trimodal treatment, and re-irradiation. In recent years, larger multicenter retrospective studies have been published showing excellent survival rates, lower than expected toxicities and even better outcomes with PT than with photon radiotherapy even using IMRT or VMAT techniques. Although PT was associated with reduced toxicities, postoperative complications, and hospital stays compared to photon radiation therapy, these studies all had inherent biases in relation with patient selection for PT. These observations were recently confirmed by a randomized phase II study in locally advanced EC that showed significantly reduced toxicities with protons compared with IMRT. Currently, two randomized phase III trials (NRG-GI006 in the US and PROTECT in Europe) are being conducted to confirm whether protons could become the standard of care in locally advanced and resectable esophageal cancers.

Dosimetry and Acute Toxicity Profile of Patients With Esophageal Cancer Treated With Proton Beam Radiation Therapy: Outcomes From the Proton Collaborative Group REG001-09 Trial

PURPOSE

Concurrent chemoradiation plays an integral role in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Proton beam radiation therapy has the potential to spare adjacent critical organs, improving toxicity profiles and potentially improving clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We evaluated the REG001-09 registry for patients undergoing proton radiation therapy for esophageal cancer. Demographic, clinicopathologic, toxicity, and dosimetry information were compiled.

RESULTS

We identified 155 patients treated at 10 institutions between 2010 and 2019. One hundred twenty (77%) had adenocarcinoma and 34 (22%) had squamous cell carcinoma. One hundred thirty-seven (88%) received concurrent chemotherapy. The median delivered dose was 50.51 Gy-equivalent (GyE; range, 41.4-70.1). Grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 22 (14%) of patients and were most commonly dysphagia (6%), esophagitis (4%), anorexia (4%), and nausea (2%). There were no episodes of grade ≥4 lymphopenia and no grade 5 toxicities. The average mean heart, lung, and liver doses and average maximum spinal cord dose were 10.0 GyE, 4.8 GyE, 3.8 GyE, and 34.2 GyE, respectively. For gastroesophageal junction tumors, 8% of patients developed acute grade ≥3 toxicity and the mean heart, liver, right kidney, and left kidney doses were 10.5 GyE, 3.9 GyE, 0.4 GyE, and 4.9 GyE, respectively. Gastroesophageal junction location was protective against development of grade ≥3 toxicity on univariate (P = .0009) and multivariate (P = .004) analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Proton beam radiation therapy affords excellent dosimetric parameters and low toxicity in patients with esophageal cancer treated with curative intent. Prospective trials are underway investigating the comparative benefit of proton-based therapy.

A Critical Review of Radiation Therapy: From Particle Beam Therapy (Proton, Carbon, and BNCT) to Beyond

In this paper, we discuss the role of particle therapy—a novel radiation therapy (RT) that has shown rapid progress and widespread use in recent years—in multidisciplinary treatment. Three types of particle therapies are currently used for cancer treatment: proton beam therapy (PBT), carbon-ion beam therapy (CIBT), and boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT). PBT and CIBT have been reported to have excellent therapeutic results owing to the physical characteristics of their Bragg peaks. Variable drug therapies, such as chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and immunotherapy, are combined in various treatment strategies, and treatment effects have been improved. BNCT has a high dose concentration for cancer in terms of nuclear reactions with boron. BNCT is a next-generation RT that can achieve cancer cell-selective therapeutic effects, and its effectiveness strongly depends on the selective ¹⁰B accumulation in cancer cells by concomitant boron preparation. Therefore, drug delivery research, including nanoparticles, is highly desirable. In this review, we introduce both clinical and basic aspects of particle beam therapy from the perspective of multidisciplinary treatment, which is expected to expand further in the future.

An in-silico assessment of the dosimetric benefits of MR-guided radiotherapy for esophageal cancer patients

PURPOSE

To assess the dosimetric benefits of online MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) for esophageal cancer patients and to assess how these benefits could be translated into a local boosting strategy to improve future outcomes.

METHODS

Twenty-nine patients were in-silico treated with both a MRgRT regimen and a conventional image guided radiotherapy (IGRT) regimen using dose warping techniques. Here, the inter and intrafractional changes that occur over the course of treatment (as derived from 5 MRI scans that were acquired weekly during treatment) were incorporated to assess the total accumulated dose for each regimen.

RESULTS

A significant reduction in dose to the organs-at-risk (OARs) was observed for all dose-volume-histogram (DVH) parameters for the MRgRT regimen without concessions to target coverage compared to the IGRT regimen. The mean lung dose was reduced by 28%, from 7.9 to 5.7 Gy respectively and V20Gy of the lungs was reduced by 55% (6.3-2.8%). A reduction of 24% was seen in mean heart dose (14.8-11.2 Gy), while the V25Gy of the heart was decreased by 53% (14.3-6.7%) and the V40Gy of the heart was decreased by 69% (3.9-1.2%). In addition, MRgRT dose escalation regimens with a boost up to 66% of the prescription dose to the primary tumor yielded approximately the same dose levels to the OARs as from the conventional IGRT regimen.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that MRgRT for esophageal cancer has the potential to significantly reduce the dose to heart and lungs. In addition, online high precision targeting of the primary tumor opens new perspectives for local boosting strategies to improve outcome of the local management of this disease.

Proton therapy for patients with esophageal cancer: History, characteristics, clinical outcome and future direction of proton beam therapy

After the second war, Wilson who participated in development of the atomic bomb in Los Alamos studied peaceful use of atomic energy and proposed a property of proton beam that has potential to treat cancer. According to his proposal, the first patient was treated with proton beam therapy at the University of California Berkley in 1954. The first series of proton beam therapy for patients with esophageal cancer was reported from Japan in 1993. After that many proton facilities in Japan reported the clinical outcome of patients with esophageal cancer. Many dosimetric and clinical studies showed proton beam therapy for esophageal cancer was less toxic than photon beam therapy, however there is a paucity of randomized trials and evidence that proton beam therapy has clearly superior survival compared to photon therapy. Only one randomized trial has been conducted to study less toxicity for proton beam compared with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), which was stopped early because toxicities of IMRT were higher. A phase III study comparing overall survival between proton beam therapy and IMRT is now activated. A cost reduction for proton therapy is necessary to facilitate patient care and establishment of clinical evidence.

Photon Versus Proton Beam Therapy for T1-3 Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Thoracic Esophagus Without Lymph Node Metastasis

Background and Purpose

We compared treatment outcomes and toxicities of photon radiotherapy versus proton beam therapy (PBT) and evaluated radiation field effects for T1–3 squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (EC) without lymph node metastasis.

Methods

Medical records of 77 patients with T1–3N0M0 thoracic EC treated with radiotherapy between 2011 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Among these patients, 61 (79.2%) individuals had T1 EC. The initial clinical target volume encompassed the whole esophagus with or without supraclavicular and/or abdominal lymph nodes (extended-field radiotherapy; 67 patients, 87.0%) or the area 3–5 cm craniocaudally and 1–2 cm radially from the gross tumor volume (involved-field radiotherapy; 10 patients, 13.0%). The final clinical target volume included margins of at least 1 cm from the gross tumor volume, with total radiation doses of 50–66 (median, 66) cobalt gray equivalent. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and PBT were used in twenty-four, five, and forty-eight patients, respectively. Concurrent chemotherapy was administered to 17 (22.0%) patients overall and only five (8.0%) T1 patients.

Results

PBT showed significantly lower lung and heart radiation exposure in mean dose, V5, V10, V20, and V30 than photon radiotherapy. The median follow-up for all patients was 46 (interquartile range, 22–72) months. The 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 56.5 and 64.9%, respectively, with no significant survival difference between photon radiotherapy and PBT. In patients with T1 EC, 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 62.6 and 73.5%, respectively.

Conclusions

Extended-field radiotherapy using modern radiotherapy techniques without chemotherapy showed satisfactory clinical outcomes for lymph node-negative T1 EC.