Short-Course External Beam Radiotherapy Versus Brachytherapy for Palliation of Dysphagia in Esophageal Cancer: A Matched Comparison of Two Prospective Trials

Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is an area of endoscopy that has witnessed noteworthy advancements over the last decade, resulting in evolving clinical practices among gastroenterologists around the world. Indications for endoscopic stenting have progressively expanded, becoming a frequent part of the management algorithm for various benign and malignant conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, from esophagus to rectum. In addition to expanded indications, continuous technological enhancements and development of novel endoscopic stents have resulted in an increased success of these approaches and, in some cases, allowed new applications. This review aimed to summarize best practices in esophageal, gastroduodenal, and colonic stenting.

Long-term health-related quality of life in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer receiving first-line systemic therapy

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of systemic therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer in daily clinical practice. This study assessed the HRQoL of patients with esophagogastric cancer during first-line systemic therapy, at disease progression, and after progression in a real-world context.

METHODS

Patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer (2014-2021) receiving first-line systemic therapy registered in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Oesophageal-gastric cancer (POCOP) were included (n = 335). HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25. Outcomes of mixed-effects models were presented as adjusted mean changes.

RESULTS

Results of the mixed-effect models showed the largest significant improvements during systemic therapy for odynophagia (- 18.9, p < 0.001), anxiety (- 18.7, p < 0.001), and dysphagia (- 13.8, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. After progression, global health status (- 6.3, p = 0.002) and cognitive (- 6.2, p = 0.001) and social functioning (- 9.7, p < 0.001) significantly worsened. At and after progression, physical (- 9.0, p < 0.001 and - 8.8, p < 0.001) and role functioning (- 15.2, p = 0.003 and - 14.7, p < 0.001) worsened, respectively. Trouble with taste worsened during systemic therapy (11.5, p < 0.001), at progression (12.0, p = 0.004), and after progression (15.3, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In general, HRQoL outcomes in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer improved during first-line therapy. Deterioration in outcomes was mainly observed at and after progression.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Identification of HRQoL aspects is important in shared decision-making and to inform patients on the impact of systemic therapy on their HRQoL.

Comparison of the Therapeutic Effects of Iodine-125 Seed Implantation and Conventional Radiochemotherapy for Advanced Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility, safety and efficacy of iodine-125 seed implantation in the treatment of dysphagia of advanced esophageal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with advanced esophageal cancer who underwent EUS-guided iodine-125 seed implantation or conventional chemoradiotherapy in our hospital. The propensity score match was used to reduce the baseline differences.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients were enrolled, 17 patients received EUS-guided iodine 125 seed implantation (Group A), 31 patients received radiotherapy (Group B), 38 patients received chemotherapy (Group C) and 41 patients received chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy (Group D). At half month postoperatively, the dysphagia remission rate in Group A (100%) was better than that in Groups B (39.3%), C (20%), D (15.8%), respectively, in the original cohort (P < 0.01); At 1 month postoperatively, the dysphagia remission rate in Group A (86.7%) was better than that in Group B (57.1%) (P > 0.05), Group C (25.7%) (P < 0.05) and Group D (34.2%) (P < 0.05), respectively, in the original cohort. There was no statistically significant difference in median overall survival (OS) between Group A (16 months) and Group B (37 months) (P = 0.149), and between Group A (16months) and Group C (16 months) (P = 0.918) in the original cohort. The mean OS of Group D (54 months) was better than that of Group A (20 months) in the original cohort (P = 0.031). The incidences of grade ≥2 myelosuppression in Groups B, C, and D were 12.9%, 28.9%, and 43.9%, respectively; the incidence of grade ≥2 gastrointestinal adverse events in Groups B, C, and D were 12.9%, 15.8%, 12.2%, respectively. No serious adverse events were found in Group A. The radiation dose around the patient was reduced to a safe range after the distance from the implantation site was more than 1 m (4.2 ± 2.6 μSv/h) or with lead clothing (0.1 ± 0.07 μSv/h).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with conventional radiotherapy or chemotherapy alone, iodine-125 seed implantation might improve dysphagia more quickly and safely, further clinical data is needed to verify whether it could effectively prolong the OS of patients.

Best Supportive Care of the Patient with Oesophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer patients have poor survival, and most are unfit for curative or systemic palliative treatment. This article aims to review the best supportive care for oesophageal cancer, focusing on the management of its most frequent or distinctive symptoms and complications.

METHODS

Evidence-based review on palliative supportive care of oesophageal cancer, based on Pubmed search for relevant clinical practice guidelines, reviews and original articles, with additional records collected from related articles suggestions, references and societies recommendations.

RESULTS

We identified 1075 records, from which we screened 138 records that were related to oesophageal cancer supportive care, complemented with 48 additional records, finally including 60 records. This review summarizes the management of oesophageal cancer-related main problems, including dysphagia, malnutrition, pain, nausea and vomiting, fistula and bleeding. In recent years, several treatments have been developed, while optimal management is not yet standardized.

CONCLUSION

This review contributes toward improving supportive care and decision making for oesophageal cancer patients, presenting updated summary recommendations for each of their main symptoms. A robust body of evidence is still lacking, and the best supportive care decisions should be individualized and shared.

Optimal Management of Dysphagia in Patients with Inoperable Esophageal Cancer: Current Perspectives

The majority of patients with esophageal cancer are diagnosed at an advanced, incurable stage. Palliation of symptoms, specifically dysphagia, is a crucial component to improve quality of life and optimize nutritional status. Despite multiple available treatment modalities, there is not one accepted or recommended to be the preferred treatment option. Palliative management is often decided by a multidisciplinary team considering factors including local availability, preference, patient life expectancy, and symptom severity. Systemic therapies such as chemotherapy are the most commonly used palliative modalities. Oncologists are most familiar with radiation for dysphagia palliation, especially for advanced metastatic cancer patients with good performance status. One common approach used by endoscopist is self-expandable metal stents. This is preferred for patients with short-term survival and poor functional status as it provides rapid relief of dysphagia. Cryotherapy is a relatively new endoscopic ablative modality and appears to be a promising option for dysphagia palliation, but more data is needed for wider adoption. This review summarizes the current literature on endoscopic and non-endoscopic treatment options for malignant dysphagia.

Improving survival prediction of oesophageal cancer patients treated with external beam radiotherapy for dysphagia

INTRODUCTION

The recent POLDER trial investigated the effects of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) on dysphagia caused by incurable oesophageal cancer. An estimated life expectancy of minimally three months was required for inclusion. However, nearly one-third of the included patients died within three months. The aim of this study was to investigate if the use of prediction models could have improved the physician's estimation of the patient's survival.

METHODS

Data from the POLDER trial (N = 110) were linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry to retrieve patient, tumour, and treatment characteristics. Two published prediction models (the SOURCE model and Steyerberg model) were used to predict three-month survival for all patients included in the POLDER trial. Predicted survival probabilities were dichotomised and the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the predictive performance.

RESULTS

The SOURCE and Steyerberg model had an accuracy of 79% and 64%, and an AUC of 0.76 and 0.60 (p = .017), respectively. The SOURCE model had higher specificity across survival cut-off probabilities, the Steyerberg model had a higher sensitivity beyond the survival probability cut-off of 0.7. Using optimal cut-off probabilities, SOURCE would have wrongfully included 16/110 patients into the POLDER and Steyerberg 34/110.

CONCLUSION

The SOURCE model was found to be a more useful decision aid than the Steyerberg model. Results showed that the SOURCE model could be used for three-month survival predictions for patients that are considered for palliative treatment of dysphagia caused by oesophageal cancer in addition to clinicians' judgement.

Chemoradiotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The Role of Definitive Radiotherapy for Primary Tumor in the Metastatic Setting

Introduction

The role of definitive radiotherapy in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), especially in the metastatic setting, remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) versus chemotherapy (CT) alone in these selected patients.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 194 newly diagnosed advanced ESCC who underwent definitive CRT or CT alone, including 97 patients with locally advanced and 97 patients with distant metastatic disease. Cumulative overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated with a log-rank test. Propensity score matching was used to simulate random allocation. In addition, we performed subgroup analysis in the locally advanced and metastatic disease.

Results

After matching, 63 well-paired patients were selected. The adjusted median OS (12.5 vs. 7.6 months, p = 0.002) and PFS (9.0 vs. 4.8 months, p = 0.0025) in the CRT group were superior to that in the CT-alone group. Further subgroup analysis revealed that CRT conferred survival benefits to both locally advanced and metastatic cohorts. For patients with distant metastasis, median OS (12.9 vs. 9.3 months, p = 0.029) and PFS (9.9 vs. 4.0 months, p =0.0032) in the CRT group were superior to that in the CT-alone group. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis of the entire cohort, additional definitive radiotherapy was independently associated with better OS (p = 0.041) and PFS (p = 0.007).

Conclusions

In both locally advanced and metastatic ESCC, additional definitive-dose radiotherapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes. Therefore, more consideration should be given to its application in the metastatic setting.

Palliative radiotherapy and quality of life in patients with locally advanced thoracic esophageal cancer: a single centre experience from Central India

Background

Patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LAESCC ) have decreased quality of life (QoL) and, thus, require palliative external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). The present study was performed to evaluate the QoL in patients with LAESCC undergoing palliative EBRT.

Materials and methods

This was a prospective, observational study performed over a period of 18 months (from December 2018 to May 2020) in the Department of Radiation Oncology. Seventy patients with LAESCC received EBRT (30 Gy in 10 fractions, at 3 Gy per fraction over 2 weeks). Patients were followed-up at monthly intervals for 3 months. The dysphagia and odynophagia scores were calculated at baseline and follow-up visits. The QoL was assessed with 18-item EORTC QLQ-OES questionnaire at baseline and 3 months.

Results

Over the study period, significant decrease in mean dysphagia and odynophagia score was observed (p-value < 0.0001). On post-hoc analysis, significant decrease in both dysphagia and odynophagia score was observed between baseline and at the end of study and between various follow-up visits (p-value < 0.0001). Moreover, there was a significant increase in mean body weight (p-value < 0.0001). At 3 months, there was a significant decrease in dysphagia (p-value < 0.0001), eating (p-value < 0.0001), reflux (p-value = 0.005), pain (p-value < 0.0001), and saliva (p-value = 0.01) domains of EORTC QLQ-OES18 questionnaire.

Conclusion

In patients with LAESCC, EBRT leads to significant decrease in dysphagia and odynophagia, and increase in body weight. These changes indirectly lead to improved QoL.

Risk factors associated with suicide among esophageal carcinoma patients from 1975 to 2016

Throughout the world, esophageal cancer patients had a greater suicidal risk compared with ordinary people. Thus, we aimed to affirm suicide rates, standardized mortality rates, and underlying suicide-related risk factors of esophageal cancer patients. Patients suffering esophageal cancer were chosen from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results repository in 1975–2016. Suicide rates as well as standardized mortality rates in the patients were measured. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression had been adopted for establishing the latent suicide risk factors among patients suffering esophageal cancer. On multivariable Cox regression, gender (male vs. female, HR: 6.37), age of diagnosis (70–105 vs. 0–55, HR: 2.69), marital status, race (white race vs. black race, HR: 6.64; American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander vs. black race, HR: 8.60), histologic Grade (Grade III vs. Grade I, HR: 2.36), no surgery performed (no/unknown vs. yes, HR: 2.01), no chemotherapy performed were independent risk factors related to suicide in patients suffering esophageal cancer. Male sex, the older age, unmarried state, non-black race, histologic Grade III, no surgery performed, no chemotherapy performed were strongly related to suicide in patients suffering esophageal cancer.

Esophageal stenting for benign and malignant disease: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021

MALIGNANT DISEASE

1: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for palliation of malignant dysphagia over laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, and esophageal bypass.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends brachytherapy as a valid alternative, alone or in addition to stenting, in esophageal cancer patients with malignant dysphagia and expected longer life expectancy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends esophageal SEMS placement for sealing malignant tracheoesophageal or bronchoesophageal fistulas. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE does not recommend SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery or before preoperative chemoradiotherapy because it is associated with a high incidence of adverse events. Other options such as feeding tube placement are preferable. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

BENIGN DISEASE

5: ESGE recommends against the use of SEMSs as first-line therapy for the management of benign esophageal strictures because of the potential for adverse events, the availability of alternative therapies, and their cost. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE suggests consideration of temporary placement of self-expandable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests that fully covered SEMSs be preferred over partially covered SEMSs for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures because of their very low risk of embedment and ease of removability. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the stent-in-stent technique to remove partially covered SEMSs that are embedded in the esophageal wall. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends that temporary stent placement can be considered for the treatment of leaks, fistulas, and perforations. No specific type of stent can be recommended, and the duration of stenting should be individualized. Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends considering placement of a fully covered large-diameter SEMS for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to medical, endoscopic, and/or radiological therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with massive bleeding. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

Patient-reported outcomes after external beam radiotherapy versus brachytherapy for palliation of dysphagia in esophageal cancer: A matched comparison of two prospective trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A matched comparison of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) versus brachytherapy recently demonstrated that EBRT appears at least as effective for palliating dysphagia in patients with incurable esophageal cancer. The aim of this analysis was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after EBRT versus brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a multicenter prospective cohort study, patients with incurable esophageal cancer requiring palliation of dysphagia were included to undergo EBRT (20 Gy in 5 fractions). This EBRT cohort was compared to the single-dose 12 Gy brachytherapy cohort of the previously reported SIREC-trial. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust for baseline imbalances. The primary endpoint of dysphagia improvement was reported previously. PROs were secondary outcomes and assessed at baseline and 3 months after treatment using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18 questionnaires.

RESULTS

A total of 115 enrolled EBRT patients and 93 brachytherapy patients were eligible. After matching, 69 well-balanced pairs remained. At follow-up, significant deteriorations in functioning (i.e. physical, role, social), pain, appetite loss, and trouble with taste were observed after brachytherapy. In the EBRT group, such deterioration was observed only for role functioning, while significant improvements in trouble with eating and pain were found. Between-group comparison showed mostly comparable PRO changes, but significantly favored EBRT with regard to nausea, vomiting, pain, and appetite loss.

CONCLUSION

Short course EBRT results in similar or better PROs at 3 months after treatment compared to single-dose brachytherapy for the palliation of malignant dysphagia. These findings further support its use and inclusion in clinical practice guidelines.