Systematic review of the surgical strategies of adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction. Surg Oncol. 2014;23:222-228. [PMID: 25466852 DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2014.10.004]

Outcomes After Resection of Adenocarcinoma of the Gastric Cardia by Surgical Approach

BACKGROUND

Total gastrectomy and esophagectomy are commonly used surgical approaches for cardia gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) resection. However, the preferred approach remains unclear. The objectives of this study were to identify predictors of receipt of surgical approach type and compare surgical approach outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage IB-IIIC cardia GA from 2004 to 2017 were identified within the National Cancer Database. Patients were compared on the basis of receipt of total gastrectomy versus partial gastrectomy with esophagectomy. Predictors of receiving esophagectomy were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Predictors associated with overall survival (OS) were assessed using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

A total of 9841 patients were included. More patients underwent esophagectomy compared with total gastrectomy (77.2% vs. 22.8%). Surgical approach utilization did not vary significantly over time (p = 0.6). Patients who were non-white or female (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.9) were less likely to receive esophagectomy. The median number of lymph nodes resected was greater for total gastrectomy versus esophagectomy (18 vs. 15, p < 0.01). There was no difference in resection margins (93.6% vs. 94.5%, p = 0.3) or 30-day mortality (3.0% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.2). Total gastrectomy and esophagectomy had similar OS (40.2 vs. 40.1 months, p = 0.7). On multivariate analysis, there was no difference in survival for total gastrectomy versus esophagectomy (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.9-1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of total gastrectomy and esophagectomy has remained stable over time with esophagectomy being more utilized. These approaches exhibit similar oncologic outcomes for proximal GA. Surgeons should consider long-term outcomes, such as quality of life and nutritional status, when selecting an approach.

Health-related quality of life trajectories up to 15 years after curative treatment for esophageal cancer: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The differentiation of specific, long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL) trajectories among esophageal cancer survivors remains unclear. The authors aimed to identify potentially distinctly different HRQL-trajectories and uncover the underlying factors of such trajectories in patients having undergone surgery (esophagectomy) for esophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This nationwide, prospective, and longitudinal cohort study included 420 patients who underwent curative treatment for esophageal cancer, including esophageal cancer surgery, in Sweden from 2001to 2005. The main outcome was HRQL summary score trajectories, measured by the well-validated EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire at 6 months, 3, 5, 10, and 15 years after esophagectomy, and analyzed using growth mixture models. Potentially underlying factors for these trajectories (age, sex, education, proxy baseline HRQL, comorbidity, tumor histology, chemo(radio)therapy, pathological tumor stage, and postoperative complications) were analyzed using weighted logistic regression providing odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

Four distinct HRQL summary score trajectories were identified: Persistently good, improving, deteriorating, and persistently poor. The odds of belonging to a persistently poor trajectory were decreased by longer education (>12 years versus <9 years: OR 0.18, 95% CI: 0.05-0.66) and adenocarcinoma histology (adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell carcinoma: OR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16-0.85), and increased by more advanced pathological tumor stage (III-IV versus 0-I: OR 2.82, 95% CI: 1.08-7.41) and postoperative complications (OR 2.94, 95% CI: 1.36-6.36).

CONCLUSION

Distinct trajectories with persistently poor or deteriorating HRQL were identified after curative treatment for esophageal cancer. Education, tumor histology, pathological tumor stage, and postoperative complications might influence HRQL trajectories. The results may contribute to a more tailored follow-up with timely and targeted interventions. Future research remains to confirm these findings.

Cancer-related fatigue trajectories up to 5 years after curative treatment for oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Whether cancer-related fatigue develops differently after curative-intended oesophageal cancer treatment and the related modifiable factors are unclear.

METHODS

This population-based and longitudinal cohort included 409 oesophageal cancer patients who underwent curative oesophagectomy in 2013-2020 in Sweden. The main outcome was cancer-related fatigue trajectories with measurements at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4 and 5 years postoperatively by validated EORTC QLQ-FA12 questionnaire, and analysed using growth mixture models. Weighted logistic regressions provided odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for underlying sociodemographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcome factors in relation to the identified trajectories.

RESULTS

Two distinct overall cancer-related fatigue trajectories were identified: low level of persistent fatigue and high level of increasing fatigue, with 64% and 36% of patients, respectively. The odds of having high level of fatigue trajectory were increased by Charlson comorbidity index (≥ 2 versus 0: OR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.07-5.94), pathological tumour Stage (III-IV versus 0-I: OR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.33-4.77), anxiety (OR = 7.58, 95% CI 2.20-26.17), depression (OR = 15.90, 95% CI 4.44-56.93) and pain (continuous score: OR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term trajectories with high level of increasing cancer-related fatigue and the associated modifiable factors were identified after oesophageal cancer treatment. The results may facilitate early identification and targeted intervention for such high-risk patients.

The Multidisciplinary Approach and Surgical Management of GE Junction Adenocarcinoma

Gastroesophageal (GE) junction adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy of growing incidence and is associated with public health issues such as obesity and GERD. Management has evolved over the last two decades to incorporate a multidisciplinary approach, including endoscopic intervention, neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiation, and minimally invasive or more limited surgical approaches. Surgical approaches include esophagectomy, total gastrectomy, and, more recently, proximal gastrectomy. This review analyzes the evidence for and applicability of these varied approaches in management, as well as areas of continued controversy and investigation.

Systematic review of quality of life after esophagectomy and total gastrectomy in patients with gastro-esophageal junction cancer

The optimal management of cancer of the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) is an area of contention. GEJ tumors are typically resected via total gastrectomy or esophagectomy. Despite many studies aiming to determine the superiority of either procedure based on surgical or oncological outcomes, the evidence is equivocal. Data focusing specifically on quality of life (QoL), however, is limited. This systematic review was performed to determine if there is any difference in patient's QoL after total gastrectomy or esophagectomy. A systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane libraries was conducted for literature published between 1986 and 2023. Studies that used the internationally validated questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC-QLQ-OG25, to compare QoL after esophagectomy to gastrectomy for the management of GEJ cancer were included. Five studies involving 575 patients undergoing either esophagectomy (n = 365) or total gastrectomy (n = 210) for GEJ tumors were included. QoL was predominantly assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Although individual studies demonstrated significant differences in certain domains, these differences were not consistently demonstrated in more than one study. There is no evidence to suggest any significant differences in QoL after total gastrectomy compared to esophagectomy for management of gastro-esophageal junction cancer.

The correlation between the margin of resection and prognosis in esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (AEG) has become increasingly common in Western and Asian populations. Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment for AEG; however, determining the distance from the upper edge of the tumor to the esophageal margin (PM) is essential for accurate prognosis. Despite the relevance of these studies, most have been retrospective and vary widely in their conclusions. The PM is now widely accepted to have an impact on patient outcomes but can be masked by TNM at later stages. Extended PM is associated with improved outcomes, but the optimal PM is uncertain. Academics continue to debate the surgical route, extent of lymphadenectomy, preoperative tumor size assessment, intraoperative cryosection, neoadjuvant therapy, and other aspects to further ensure a negative margin in patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. This review summarizes and evaluates the findings from these studies and suggests that the choice of approach for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction should take into account the extent of esophagectomy and lymphadenectomy. Although several guidelines and reviews recommend the routine use of intraoperative cryosections to evaluate surgical margins, its generalizability is limited. Furthermore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy are more likely to increase the R0 resection rate. In particular, intraoperative cryosections and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were found to be more effective for achieving negative resection margins in signet ring cell carcinoma.

Prevention and treatment of a positive proximal margin after gastrectomy for cardia cancer

A tumour-positive proximal margin (PPM) after extended gastrectomy for oesophagogastric junction (OGJ) adenocarcinoma is observed in approximately 2-20% of patients. Although a PPM is an unfavourable prognostic factor, the clinical relevance remains unclear as it may reflect poor tumour biology. This narrative review analyses the most relevant literature on PPM after gastrectomy for OGJ cancers. Awareness of the risk factors and possible measures that can be taken to reduce the risk of PPM are important. In patients with a PPM, surgical and non-surgical treatments are available but the effectiveness remains unclear.

Transthoracic esophagectomy compared to transhiatal extended gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

Optimal surgical treatment for Siewert type II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma is debated. The aim of this study was to compare transhiatal extended gastrectomy (TEG) and transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE). Patients with Siewert type II tumors who underwent a resection by TEG or TTE in two centers (Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, and University of Verona) between 2014 and 2019 were identified. To limit selection bias, patients were matched for baseline characteristics and compared with a multivariable logistic regression model. Some 159 patients treated by TEG (60 patients, 37.7%) or TTE (99 patients, 62.3%) were included. Patients in the TEG group were older, had less tumor invasion of the esophagus, and were more often excluded from neoadjuvant therapy. Post-operative morbidity was comparable (P = 0.88), while 90-day mortality was higher after TEG (90-day mortality 10.0% in TEG group vs. 2.0% in TTE group P = 0.01). R0 resection was achieved in 83.3% of patients after TEG and in 97.9% after TTE (P < 0.01), with the proximal resection margin involved in 16.6% of patients after TEG versus 0 in TTE group (P < 0.01). The 3-year overall survival was comparable (TEG: 36.5%, TTE: 48.4%, P = 0.12). At multivariable analysis, (y)pT category was an independent risk factor for 3-year recurrence. After matching, TEG was still associated with an increased risk of incomplete tumor resection (P = 0.03) and proximal margin involvement (P < 0.01), while there were no differences in post-operative morbidity (P = 0.56) and mortality (P = 0.31). Our data suggest that patients with Siewert type II tumors treated by TEG are exposed to a higher risk of positive proximal resection margin compared to TTE.

Esophagectomy vs Gastrectomy for Early Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Gastroesophageal Junction: What is the Optimal Oncologic Surgical Treatment?

Guidelines for the management of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma recommend esophagectomy as the preferred surgical treatment. Gastrectomy has been proposed as an equivalent procedure. This study aims to compare the oncologic outcomes of these operations. The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical T1N0M0 (all sizes) and T2N0M0 (≤2cm) GEJ adenocarcinoma from 2004-2017. Patients treated with surgery-only were included and were stratified by surgical treatment. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was used to create a balanced cohort. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate for factors predictive of treatment. Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare overall survival (OS). 2,446 patients were identified. 75.1% received esophagectomy, while 24.9% were treated with gastrectomy. Patients at high volume facilities were more likely to undergo esophagectomy (OR 1.750, P < 0.001). Factors associated with lower likelihood of undergoing esophagectomy included age ≥75 years (OR 0.588, P = 0.001), female sex (OR 0.706, P = 0.003), and non-White race (OR 0.430, P < 0.001), compared to age ≤50 years, male, and White race, respectively. In the unmatched cohort, gastrectomy was associated with a higher rate of positive margins (4.1% vs 2.3%, P = 0.022). PSM yielded 591 pairs. In the matched cohort, patients treated with esophagectomy had improved 5-year OS compared to gastrectomy (70.6% vs 66.5%, P = 0.030). Multivariable analysis showed improved OS in patients treated with esophagectomy compared to gastrectomy (HR 0.767, P = 0.010). Esophagectomy is associatedwith improved survival and a lower incidence of positive margins in patients with early-stage GEJ adenocarcinoma when compared to gastrectomy.

The abdominal-transhiatal surgical approach versus the thoracoabdominal surgical approach in Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: protocol for a multicenter prospective, open, parallel, and randomized controlled trial

Background

To date, Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (ST-II AEG) can be removed radically utilizing either the abdominal-transhiatal (TH) or the right thoracoabdominal (RTA) approaches. Because of a paucity of high-quality direct evidence, the appropriate surgical approach for ST-II AEG remains debatable. In the present, only several retrospective studies are available, representing ambiguous results. Thus, prospective randomized clinical trials are demanded to compare the survival, oncological outcomes, safety and efficiency and life quality between the TH and RTA approach in patients with resectable AEG of Siewert type II.

Methods

A prospective, multicenter, open, randomized, and parallel controlled study named S2AEG will be conducted. Three hundred and twelve patients who match the inclusion criteria but not the exclusion criteria will be participating in the trial and randomly divided into the TH (156) and RTA (156) cohorts. The primary efficacy endpoint is the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) following the operation. The rate of R0-resection, the number and site of lymph nodes infiltrated and dissected, postoperative complications, hospital days and life quality are the second endpoints.

Discussion

This study is the first prospectively randomized controlled trial aiming to compare the surgical outcomes between TH and RTA approaches in patients with resectable ST-II AEG. It is hypothesized that patients in the TH cohort would harvest equivalent oncological results and survival while maintaining acceptable life quality when compared to patients in the RTA cohort. Our findings will provide high-level clinical evidence for clinical decision-making on the appropriate surgical approach for patients with ST-II AEG. Embarked in November 2019, this research will be completed 3 years after the final participant’s enrolment date.

Trial registration

Clinical Trial.gov ID: NCT04910789 May 29, 2021. Name: S2AEG.

Endoscopic Versus Surgical Therapy for Early Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma Based on Lymph Node Metastasis Risk: A Population-Based Analysis

Background

In this study, we aimed to compare the prognosis and lymph node metastasis (LNM) risk in patients with early-stage esophagogastric junction (EGJ) adenocarcinoma after endoscopic treatment (ET) or radical surgery.

Methods

We collected data from eligible patients based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2004 and 2016. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent predictors of LNM (examination of at least 16 lymph nodes). Cox regression analysis and propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis were subsequently utilized to compare the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of patients treated with ET or radical surgery.

Results

In total, 3708 patients were identified. Among them, 856 patients had greater than or equal to 16 examined lymph nodes (LNs) (LNE≥16). The LNM rates were 18.8% in all patients 8.3% in T1a patients and 24.6% in T1b patients. Independent predictors of LNM were submucosal invasion, tumor size ≥3cm and decreasing differentiation (P<0.05). The LNM rate decreased to approximately 5.3% in T1b tumors with well differentiation and tumor size <3cm. However, the LNM incidence increased to 17.9% or 33.3% in T1a tumors with poor differentiation or with both tumor size≥3cm and poor differentiation. Cox regression analysis demonstrated CSS was not significantly different in early-stage EGJ adenocarcinoma patients undergoing ET and those treated with radical surgery (HR= 1.004, P=0.974), which were robustly validated after PSM analysis. Moreover, subgroup analysis stratified by T1a and T1b showed similar results.

Conclusions

The findings of this study indicated ET as an alternative to radical surgery in early EGJ adenocarcinoma.

Cancer-Related Fatigue After Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Impact of Postoperative Complications

Background

The impact of postoperative complications on cancer-related fatigue is unknown. This nationwide prospective cohort study aimed to assess the trajectory of cancer-related fatigue and the influence of predefined postoperative complications on cancer-related fatigue up to 2 years after esophageal cancer surgery.

Methods

The patients in this study underwent esophagectomy between 2013 and 2019 in Sweden. The exposure was predefined postoperative complications. The outcome was cancer-related fatigue measured by the fatigue scale of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the EORTC QLQ-Fatigue 12 (QLQ-FA12) questionnaire. Linear mixed-effects models provided adjusted fatigue scores and mean score differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between patients with and without predefined complications.

Results

The study enrolled 331 patients. The QLQ-C30 fatigue score increased with clinical relevance among patients with any complications (MD, 5.8; 95% CI, 2.6–9.0) who had a higher Clavien-Dindo classification (grades 2 to 3a: MD, 7.3; 95% CI, 3.1–11.5), a medical complication (MD, 6.9; 95% CI, 3.0–10.7), or a pulmonary complication (MD, 6.9; 95% CI, 2.1–11.6) for 1–1.5 years and remained stable until 2 years after esophagectomy. Similar patterns were found in the QLQ-FA12 fatigue and QLQ-FA12 physical and emotional subscales, but not in the cognitive subscales.

Conclusions

Complications in general and medical and pulmonary complications in particular might be associated with increased cancer-related fatigue after esophagectomy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-11049-z.

Surgical Therapy of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma-Current Standards and Future Perspectives

Transthoracic esophagectomy is currently the predominant curative treatment option for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. The majority of carcinomas present as locally advanced tumors requiring multimodal strategies with either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy alone. Minimally invasive, including robotic, techniques are increasingly applied with a broad spectrum of technical variations existing for the oncological resection as well as gastric reconstruction. At the present, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is the preferred technique of reconstruction (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). With standardized surgical procedures, a complete resection of the primary tumor can be achieved in almost 95% of patients. Even in expert centers, postoperative morbidity remains high, with an overall complication rate of 50-60%, whereas 30- and 90-day mortality are reported to be <2% and <6%, respectively. Due to the complexity of transthoracic esophagetomy and its associated morbidity, esophageal surgery is recommended to be performed in specialized centers with an appropriate caseload yet to be defined. In order to reduce postoperative morbidity, the selection of patients, preoperative rehabilitation and postoperative fast-track concepts are feasible strategies of perioperative management. Future directives aim to further centralize esophageal services, to individualize surgical treatment for high-risk patients and to implement intraoperative imaging modalities modifying the oncological extent of resection and facilitating surgical reconstruction.

Esophagectomy or Total Gastrectomy for Siewert 2 Gastroesophageal Junction (GEJ) Adenocarcinoma? A Registry-Based Analysis

Backgrounds

Due to a lack of randomized and large studies, the optimal surgical approach for Siewert 2 gastroesophageal junctional (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains unknown. This population-based cohort study aimed to compare survival between esophagectomy and total gastrectomy for the treatment of Siewert 2 GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2010 to 2016 was used to identify patients with non-metastatic Siewert 2 GEJ adenocarcinoma who received either esophagectomy (n = 999) or total gastrectomy (n = 8595). Propensity score-matching (PSM) and multivariable analyses were used to account for treatment selection bias.

Results

Comparison of the unmatched cohort’s baseline demographics showed that the patients who received esophagectomy were younger, had a lower burden of medical comorbidities, and had fewer clinical positive lymph nodes. The patients in the unmatched cohort who received gastrectomy had a significantly shorter overall survival than those who received esophagectomy (median, 47 vs. 68 months [p < 0.001]; 5-year survival, 45 % vs. 53 %). After matching, gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced survival compared with esophagectomy (median, 51 vs. 68 months [p < 0.001]; 5-year survival, 47 % vs. 53 %), which remained in the adjusted analyses (hazard ratio [HR], 1.22; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.09–1.35; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

In this large-scale population study with propensity-matching to adjust for confounders, esophagectomy was prognostically superior to gastrectomy for the treatment of Siewert 2 GEJ adenocarcinoma despite comparable lymph node harvest, length of stay, and 90-day mortality. Adequately powered randomized controlled trials with robust surgical quality assurance are the next step in evaluating the prognostic outcomes of these surgical strategies for GEJ cancer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10346-x.

Minimally invasive total adventitial resection of the cardia for tumours of the oesophagogastric junction

PURPOSE

A cohort study analysing phases and outcomes of the learning curve required to master minimally invasive total adventitial resection of the cardia.

METHODS

Data from 198 consecutive oesophagectomies performed by a single surgeon was collected prospectively. Patients' stratification reflected chronologically and technically the four main phases of the learning curve: open surgery (open total adventitial resection of the cardia (TARC), n = 45), hybrid Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy (HILO, n = 50), laparoscopic-thoracoscopic assisted (LTA, n = 56) and totally minimally invasive TARC (TMI TARC, n = 47). Operating time, hospital stay, specimen lymph nodes and resection margins were analysed. Five-year survival was the main long-term outcome measured.

RESULTS

Overall 5-year survival was 45%. Perioperative mortality was 1.5% (n = 3). Hospital stay was 22 ± 23 days. Specimen lymph node median was 20 (range: 15-26). Resection margins were negative (R = 0, American College of Pathologists) in 193 cases (97.4%). Five-year survival in the four phases was 37.8%, 44.9%, 42.9% and 55.3%, showing a positive trend towards the end of the learning curve (p = 0.024). Median specimen lymph nodes was 20 (range: 15-22) for open TARC, 18.5 (13-25) for HILO, 19.5 (15-25) for LTA and 23 (18-30) for TMI TARC (p = 0.006). TMI TARC, adenocarcinoma, R >0, T >2, N >0 and LyRa (ratio positive/total specimen nodes) were associated with survival on univariate analysis. T >2 and LyRa independently predicted worse survival on multivariate analysis. CUSUM analysis showed surgical proficiency gain since laparoscopy was introduced.

CONCLUSION

Mastering minimally invasive TARC requires a long learning curve. TMI TARC is safe and oncologically appropriate and may benefit long-term survival: it should be validated by randomised trials as a standardised anatomical resection for tumours of the oesophagogastric junction.

Advances in the surgical management of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer

Since Theodore Billroth and Cesar Roux perfected the methods of post-gastrectomy reconstruction in the late 19^th century, surgical management of gastric and gastroesophageal cancer has made incremental progress. The majority of patients with localized disease are treated with perioperative combination chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Staging laparoscopy before initiation of treatment or before surgical resection has improved staging accuracy and can drastically inform treatment decisions. The longstanding and contentious debate on the optimal extent of lymph node dissection for gastric cancer appears to have settled in favor of D2 dissection with the recently published 15-year follow-up of the Dutch randomized trial. Minimally invasive gastric and gastroesophageal resections are performed routinely in most centers affording faster recovery and equivalent oncologic outcomes. Pylorus-preserving distal (central) gastrectomy has emerged as a less invasive, function-preserving option for T1N0 middle-third gastric cancers, while randomized data on its oncologic adequacy are pending. Multi-visceral resections and cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy has been utilized selectively for patients with locally advanced tumors who have demonstrated disease control on preoperative chemotherapy. This review summarizes the current standard of surgical care for gastroesophageal junction and gastric cancer as well as highlights recent and upcoming advances to the field.

Transhiatal versus transthoracic surgical approach for Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With the increasing prevalence of Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), the optimal surgical treatment is not universally agreed. This meta-analysis compares the safety and efficacy between the transhiahtal (TH) approach and the transthoracic (TT) approach.

METHODS

A systematic and electronic search of several databases was performed up to June 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate article quality and funnel plots were created to identify potential publication bias. The random-effects model was used when significant heterogeneity was identified.

RESULTS

In total, nine retrospective studies and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2331 patients were included. Decreased intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stay, lower incidence of pulmonary complications, and longer 3-year overall survival were observed in the TH group. There were no significant differences concerning duration of surgery, R0 resection rate, number of dissected lymph nodes, perioperative mortality and morbidity rate, abdominal complication rate, or anastomotic leak rate. With regard to 5-year overall survival, a potential benefit may be achieved with the TH approach, which requires further confirmation.

CONCLUSION

In terms of surgery-related and long-term outcomes, the TH approach may be more appropriate for Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of EGJ, especially for esophagus invasion ≤4 cm.

Risk factors and a predictive nomogram for lymph node metastasis of superficial esophagogastric junction cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

No predictive model for lymph node metastasis (LNM) of superficial esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer exists. This study aimed to evaluate incidence, identify risk factors, and develop a predictive nomogram for LNM in patients with superficial EGJ cancers.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for model development and internal validation. Another data set was obtained from two hospitals for external validation. A nomogram was developed based on independent risk factors that resulted from a multivariate logistic regression analysis. Internal and external validations were performed to assess the performance of nomogram model by receiver operating characteristic and calibration plot.

RESULTS

Prevalence of LNM was 11.41% for intramucosal cancer and increased to 26.50% for submucosal cancer. On the multivariate analysis, large tumor size (odds ratio [OR] = 1.42; P < 0.001), moderately and poorly/un-differentiated pathological type (OR = 5.62 and 7.67; P = 0.024 and 0.008, respectively), and submucosal invasion (OR = 2.73; P = 0.004) were independent risk factors of LNM. The nomogram incorporating these three predictors demonstrated good discrimination (area under the estimated receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.68, 0.80) and calibration (mean absolute error was 0.012). Moreover, the discrimination in the internal and external validation sets was good (AUC: 0.73 [95%CI: 0.66, 0.81] and 0.74 [95%CI: 0.60, 0.89], respectively). Nomogram provided better clinical usefulness as assessed by a decision curve analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of LNM in superficial EGJ cancer was high. The first risk-predictive nomogram model for LNM of superficial EGJ cancer may help clinicians to decide optimal treatment option preoperatively.

The CARDIA-trial protocol: a multinational, prospective, randomized, clinical trial comparing transthoracic esophagectomy with transhiatal extended gastrectomy in adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) type II

Background

Adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) Siewert type II can be resected by transthoracic esophagectomy or transhiatal extended gastrectomy. Both allow for a complete tumor resection, yet there is an ongoing controversy about which surgical approach is superior with regards to quality of life, oncological outcomes and survival. While some studies suggest a better oncological outcome after transthoracic esophagectomy, others favor transhiatal extended gastrectomy for a better postoperative quality of life. To date, only retrospective studies are available, showing ambiguous results.

Methods

This study is a multinational, multicenter, randomized, clinical superiority trial. Patients (n = 262) with a GEJ type II tumor resectable by both transthoracic esophagectomy and transhiatal extended gastrectomy will be enrolled in the trial. Type II tumors are defined as tumors with their midpoint between ≤1 cm proximal and ≤ 2 cm distal of the top of gastric folds on preoperative endoscopy. Patients will be included in one of the participating European sites and are randomized to either transthoracic esophagectomy or transhiatal extended gastrectomy. The trial is powered to show superiority for esophagectomy with regards to the primary efficacy endpoint overall survival. Key secondary endpoints are complete resection (R0), number and localization of tumor infiltrated lymph nodes at dissection, post-operative complications, disease-free survival, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Postoperative survival and quality of life will be followed-up for 24 months after discharge. Further survival follow-up will be conducted as quarterly phone calls up to 60 months.

Discussion

To date, as level 1 evidence is lacking, there is no consensus on which surgery is superior and both surgeries are used to treat GEJ type II carcinoma worldwide. The CARDIA trial is the first randomized trial to compare transthoracic esophagectomy versus transhiatal extended gastrectomy in patients with GEJ type II tumors. Several quality control measures were implemented in the protocol to ensure data reliability and increase the trial’s significance. It is hypothesized that esophagectomy allows for a higher rate of radical resections and a more complete mediastinal lymph node dissection, resulting in a longer overall survival, while still providing an acceptable quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

Trial registration

The trial was registered on August 2nd 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register under the trial-ID DRKS00016923.

Dealing with the gray zones in the management of gastric cancer: The consensus statement of the İstanbul Group

The geographical location and differences in tumor biology significantly change the management of gastric cancer. The prevalence of gastric cancer ranks fifth and sixth among men and women, respectively, in Turkey. The international guidelines from the Eastern and Western countries fail to manage a considerable amount of inconclusive issues in the management of gastric cancer. The uncertainties lead to significant heterogeneities in clinical practice, lack of homogeneous data collection, and subsequently, diverse outcomes. The physicians who are professionally involved in the management of gastric cancer at two institutions in Istanbul, Turkey, organized a consensus meeting to address current problems and plan feasible, logical, measurable, and collective solutions in their clinical practice for this challenging disease. The evidence-based data and current guidelines were reviewed. The gray zones in the management of gastric cancer were determined in the first session of this consensus meeting. The second session was constructed to discuss, vote, and ratify the ultimate decisions. The identification of the T stage, the esophagogastric area, imaging algorithm for proper staging and follow-up, timing and patient selection for neoadjuvant treatment, and management of advanced and metastatic disease have been accepted as the major issues in the management of gastric cancer. The recommendations are presented with the percentage of supporting votes in the results section with related data.

Surgical principles for optimal treatment of esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma

The incidence of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) adenocarcinoma is increasing worldwide. Management of these tumors remains controversial given their unique location between the esophagus and the stomach. Debate surrounding the optimal therapy for EGJ adenocarcinoma has often centered around the tumor origin as defined by the Siewert classification system. However, the optimal surgical management should focus on adhering to important surgical principles that will allow for the best outcomes and prognosis regardless of tumor location including resection with appropriate and negative histological margins, adequate lymphadenectomy, minimization of morbidity and mortality, and preservation of quality-of-life. In this article, we provide a discussion of the controversy surrounding EGJ adenocarcinoma within the framework of these concepts.

Results of the different surgical options for the treatment of cancer of the esophagogastric junction: Review of the evidence

There is significant controversy in the management of cardiac cancer. It seems unanimous that Siewert type I tumors be operated on as cancer of the esophagus and Siewert type III as gastric cancer. However, for "true" cancer of the gastric cardia or Siewert II, the authors do not agree. There is the obvious need for free proximal and distal margins, as well as correct lymphadenectomy. For some, esophagectomy is necessary to perform correct radical oncological surgery, but other authors defend that an abdominal approach is sufficient to perform total gastrectomy and distal esophagectomy. Recent and older papers published do not clarify this issue, and their results are contradictory. Chemotherapy prior to surgery can reduce the size of the tumor and the presence of lymphadenopathies.

What Is the Best Operation for Proximal Gastric Cancer and Distal Esophageal Cancer?

Cancer of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) is increasing in incidence, likely as a result of rising obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease rates. The tumors that arise here share features of esophageal and gastric cancer, and are classified based on their location in relationship to the GEJ. The definition of the GEJ itself, as well as optimal resection strategy, extent of lymph node dissection, resection margin length, and reconstruction methods are still very much a subject of debate. This article summarizes the available evidence on this topic, and highlights specific areas for further research.

Cancer of the gastroesophageal junction: a diagnosis, classification, and management review

Management of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is a controversial topic. The rising incidence of this cancer requires a clear consensus to ensure proper management. Application of oncological principles for tumors of the esophagus or stomach is not possible because of comparative differences in the biology of GEJ adenocarcinoma, leading to different therapeutic options. Staging work-up with endoscopy, endosonography, and PET is essential to inform the choice of neoadjuvant treatment and surgical approach to GEJ adenocarcinoma. Surgery remains the only curative treatment and should be undertaken in specialized centers.

Prognostic significance of circumferential resection margin involvement in patients receiving potentially curative treatment for oesophageal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The utility of Circumferential Resection Margin (CRM) status in predicting prognosis in oesophageal cancer is controversial, with different definitions used by the College of American Pathologists and the Royal College of Pathologists. We aimed to determine prognostic significance of CRM involvement and evaluate which system is the best predictor of prognosis.

METHODS

A cohort of 390 patients who had potentially curative oesophagectomy (- + neoadjuvant chemotherapy) were analysed. Associations between CRM involvement and patient outcome were assessed for the whole cohort, and for pre-specified subgroups of T3 tumours and those who received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

CRM-involvement was associated with higher T and N stage, tumour differentiation, increased tumour length and both lymphovascular and perineural invasion. Overall Survival (OS) and Recurrence Free Survival (RFS) significantly worsened with CRM-involvement (p = 0.001, p < 0.001). R1a (<1 mm but no macroscopic involvement) resulted in significantly improved OS (p = 0.037) and RFS (P = 0.026) compared to R1b (macroscopic involvement), but did not differ significantly from R0 (≥1 mm). The association between CRM-involvement and both OS and RFS remained significant regardless of whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy was given. However, CRM-involvement was not a significant prognostic marker in T3 patients (p = 0.148). Multivariable analysis found N stage, lymphovascular invasion, patient age and neoadjuvant chemotherapy to be significantly predictive of patient outcome. CRM-involvement was not a significant independent prognostic marker.

CONCLUSIONS

CRM-involvement was not found to be independently predictive of prognosis, after accounting for other prognostic markers. As such, CRM should not be considered a major prognostic factor in patients with oesophageal cancer.

Outcomes of the Surgical Treatment for Adenocarcinoma of the Cardia - Single Institution Experience

Background

Adenocarcinomas at the cardia are biologically aggressive tumors with poor long-term survival following curative resection. For resectable adenocarcinoma of the cardia, mostly esophagus extended total gastrectomy or esophagus extended proximal gastric resection is performed; however, the surgical approach, transhiatal or transthoracic, is still under discussion. Postoperative morbidity, mortality and long-term survival were analyzed to evaluate the potential differences in clinically relevant outcomes.

Patients and methods

Of altogether 844 gastrectomies performed between January 2000 and December 2016, 166 were done for the adenocarcinoma of the gastric cardia, which we analyzed with using the Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

136 were esophagus extended total gastrectomy and 125 esophagus extended proximal gastric resection. A D2 lymphadenectomy was performed in 88.2%, splenectomy in 47.2%, and multivisceral resections in 12.4% of patients. R0 resection rate was 95.7%. The mean proximal resection margin on the esophagus was 42.45 mm. It was less than 21 mm in 9 patients. Overall morbidity regarding Clavien-Dindo classification (> 1) was altogether 28.6%. 15.5% were noted as surgical and 21.1% as medical complications. The 30-day mortality was 2.2%. The 5-year survival for R0 resections was 33.4%. Multivisceral resection, depth of tumor infiltration, nodal stage, and curability of the resection were identified as independent prognostic factors.

Conclusions

Transhiatal approach for resection of adenocarcinoma of the cardia is a safe procedure for patients with Siewert II and III regarding the postoperative morbidity and mortality; moreover, long-term survival is comparable to transthoracic approach. The complications associated with thoracoabdominal approach can therefore be avoided with no impact on the rate of local recurrence.

Surgical strategies in true adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG II): thoracoabdominal or abdominal approach?

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical approach for adenocarcinoma directly at the esophagogastric junction (AEG II) is still under debate. This study aims to evaluate the differences between right thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (TAE) (Ivor-Lewis operation) and transhiatal extended gastrectomy (THG) for AEG II.

METHODS

From a prospective database, 242 patients with AEG II (TAE, n = 56; THG, n = 186) were included and analyzed according to characteristics and perioperative morbidity and mortality and overall survival (chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, log-rank, Cox regression).

RESULTS

Groups were comparable at baseline with exception of age. Patients older than 70 years were more frequently resected by THG (p = 0.003). No differences in perioperative morbidity (p = 0.197) and mortality (p = 0.711) were observed, including anastomotic leakages (p = 0.625) and pulmonary complications (p = 0.494). There was no significant difference in R0 resection (p = 0.719) and number of resected lymph nodes (p = 0.202). Overall median survival was 38.4 months. Survival after TAE was significantly longer than after THG (median OS not reached versus 33.6 months, p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed pN-category (p < 0.001) and type of surgery (p = 0.017) as independent prognostic factors. The type of surgery was confirmed as prognostic factor in locally advanced AEG II (cT 3/4 or cN1), but not in cT1/2 and cN0 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our single-center experience suggests that patients with (locally advanced) AEG II tumors may benefit from TAE compared to THG. For further evaluation, a randomized trial would be necessary.

Health-related quality of life after open transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy for cancer

Background

Transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer have similar survival rates. Whether these approaches differ in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is uncertain and was examined in this study.

Methods

Patients undergoing transhiatal or transthoracic surgery for lower-third oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer between 2011 and 2015 were selected from an institutional database. HRQoL outcomes were measured at 6 and 12 months after surgery using validated written questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25). Linear mixed models provided mean score differences (MSDs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals, adjusted for preoperative HRQoL, age, physical status (ASA fitness grade), tumour location, tumour stage, neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy and postoperative complications. MSD values of 10 or more were regarded as clinically relevant.

Results

Some 146 patients underwent transhiatal (86, 58·9 per cent) or transthoracic (60, 41·1 per cent) oesophagectomy. The HRQoL questionnaires were returned by 111 patients at 6 months and 74 at 12 months. At 6 months, transthoracic oesophagectomy was associated with worse role function (MSD –12, 95 per cent c.i. –23 to 0; P = 0·046). At 12 months, patients in the transthoracic group had more nausea and vomiting (MSD 11, 0 to 22; P = 0·045), dyspnoea (MSD 13, 1 to 25; P = 0·029) and constipation (MSD 20, 7 to 33; P = 0·003) than those in the transhiatal group.

Conclusion

Transhiatal oesophagectomy seems to offer better HRQoL than transthoracic oesophagectomy 6 and 12 months after surgery.

Health-related quality of life after gastrectomy, esophagectomy, and combined esophagogastrectomy for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes in patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma after gastrectomy and esophagectomy are unclear. The aim was to evaluate HRQOL outcomes 6 months after extended total gastrectomy, subtotal esophagectomy, and combined esophagogastrectomy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for GEJ adenocarcinoma of Siewert type 2 or 3 in 2001-2005 were identified from a nationwide Swedish prospective and population-based cohort. Three surgical strategies, i.e., gastrectomy, esophagectomy, or esophagogastrectomy, were analyzed in relationship to HRQOL measured at 6 months after surgery (main outcome). HRQOL was assessed using well-validated questionnaires for general (EORTC QLQ-C30) and esophageal cancer-specific (EORTC QLQ-OES18) symptoms. Mean score differences (MSD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were analyzed using ANCOVA and adjusted for age, sex, tumor stage, comorbidity, education level, hospital volume, and postoperative complications. MSDs > 10 were regarded as clinically relevant.

RESULTS

Among 176 patients with complete information on HRQOL and covariates, none of the MSDs for HRQOL among the three surgery groups were clinically and statistically significant. MSDs comparing esophagectomy and gastrectomy showed no major differences in global quality of life (MSD, +8, 95% CI, 0 to +16), physical function (MSD, +2, 95% CI, -5 to +9), pain (MSD, -3, 95% CI, -12 to +7), or reflux (MSD, +5, 95% CI, -4 to +14). Also, complication rates and 5-year survival rates were similar comparing esophagectomy and gastrectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended total gastrectomy, subtotal esophagectomy, and combined esophagogastrectomy seemed to yield similar 6-month postoperative HRQOL outcomes for patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Prognostic value of resected lymph nodes numbers for Siewert II gastroesophageal junction cancer

We aim to evaluate whether resected lymph nodes (RLNs) numbers have prognostic value in patients with gastroesophageal junction cancers (GEJ, Siewert type II). Patients with gastroesophageal junction cancers were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry between 1988 to 2013. Multivariate Cox regression analyses and Kaplan–Meier method were performed to analyze risk factors for overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival(CSS). A total of 8396 patients who underwent surgeries and had reginal lymph nodes examined were identified. Kaplan–Meier analysis indicated that more numbers of resected lymph nodes (RLNs) were associated with better survival. The five-year OS rates for 1–20 and 21–90 RLNs were 26.8% and 32.4%, with a median survival time of 62 and 72 months, respectively (P < 0.001). The five-year CSS rates were 32.2% and 37.2% in each group, with median survival time of 90 and 101 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Cox regression multivariate analysis showed that year of diagnosis, age, sex, marital status, grade, seer histology, tumor histology, lymph node ratio (LNR) and RLNs as a categorical variable were all significant prognostic factors for both OS and CSS. RLN count is an independent prognostic factor for Siewert type II GEJ cancer patients and patients can achieve better overall and cancer-specific survival with more than 20 RLNs dissected.

Gastrectomy compared to oesophagectomy for Siewert II and III gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer in relation to resection margins, lymphadenectomy and survival

It is unclear whether gastrectomy or oesophagectomy offer better outcomes for gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) cancer. A total of 240 patients undergoing total gastrectomy (n = 85) or oesophagectomy (n = 155) for Siewert II-III GOJ adenocarcinoma were identified from a Swedish prospective population-based nationwide cohort. The surgical approaches were compared in relation to non-radical resection margins (main outcome) using multivariable logistic regression, providing odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), mean number of removed lymph nodes with standard deviation (SD) using ANCOVA, assessing mean differences and 95% CIs, and 5-year mortality using Cox regression estimating hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. The models were adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity, tumour stage, and surgeon volume. The non-radical resection rate was 15% for gastrectomy and 14% for oesophagectomy, and the adjusted OR was 1.61 (95% CI 0.68-3.83). The mean number of lymph nodes removed was 14.2 (SD ± 9.6) for gastrectomy and 14.2 (SD ± 10.4) for oesophagectomy, with adjusted mean difference of 2.4 (95% CI-0.2-5.0). The 5-year mortality was 76% following gastrectomy and 75% following oesophagectomy, with adjusted HR = 1.07 (95% CI 0.78-1.47). Gastrectomy and oesophagectomy for Siewert II or III GOJ cancer seem comparable regarding tumour-free resection margins, lymph nodes removal, and 5-year survival.

[Differentiated surgical approach for adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction]

For adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) the classification of Siewert with its three subtypes is well established as a practical approach to surgical treatment. Transthoracic esophagectomy with gastric tube formation is generally accepted as the surgical standard for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus (GEJ type I). Intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy has become the most frequently used anastomotic technique (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). Both the abdominal and thoracic part can be safely performed with a minimally invasive access. For subcardiac gastric cancer (GEJ type III) transhiatal extended gastrectomy is the resection of choice. For true cardiac carcinomas (GEJ type II) it has not yet been decided which of the abovementioned surgical procedures offers the best long-term survival. If technically possible in terms of a complete resection, transhiatal extended gastrectomy should be preferred because of a better postoperative quality of life. For GEJ type II tumors a minimally invasive approach is not recommended if the extent of resection cannot be safely determined preoperatively.

Laparoscopic-assisted versus open total gastrectomy for Siewert type II and III esophagogastric junction carcinoma: a propensity score-matched case-control study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated the outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) for Siewert type II and III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Thus, aim of this study was to investigate the surgical outcomes of LATG for Siewert type II and III AEG.

METHODS

Clinical data for 700 Siewert type II and III AEG patients were analyzed retrospectively. The short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the matched groups using a propensity score matching method.

RESULTS

Before matching, the comorbidities, Siewert classifications and tumor invasion depths significantly differed between the LATG and open total gastrectomy (OTG) groups. After matching, the clinicopathologic characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. In addition, after matching, decreases in the operative time, amount of blood loss, time to resumption of a semifluid diet, and length of hospital stay and an increased number of lymph nodes (LNs) retrieved were observed in the LATG group compared with the OTG group. Further, a significantly higher 3-year overall survival rate (81.3 vs 66.4%; P = 0.011) and disease-free survival rate (77.5 vs 63.8%; P = 0.040) were observed for the Siewert type II AEG patients in the LATG group compared with those in the OTG group; however, the survival rates were similar for the Siewert type III AEG patients in the two groups (P = 0.853 and P = 0.844, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

LATG is associated with better short-term outcomes for Siewert type II and III AEG. In addition, it may result in an increased number of retrieved LNs and better long-term survival for Siewert type II AEG patients in particular.

Oesophageal cancer

Oesophageal cancer is the sixth most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide and is therefore a major global health challenge. The two major subtypes of oesophageal cancer are oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), which are epidemiologically and biologically distinct. OSCC accounts for 90% of all cases of oesophageal cancer globally and is highly prevalent in the East, East Africa and South America. OAC is more common in developed countries than in developing countries. Preneoplastic lesions are identifiable for both OSCC and OAC; these are frequently amenable to endoscopic ablative therapies. Most patients with oesophageal cancer require extensive treatment, including chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy and/or surgical resection. Patients with advanced or metastatic oesophageal cancer are treated with palliative chemotherapy; those who are human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive may also benefit from trastuzumab treatment. Immuno-oncology therapies have also shown promising early results in OSCC and OAC. In this Primer, we review state-of-the-art knowledge on the biology and treatment of oesophageal cancer, including screening, endoscopic ablative therapies and emerging molecular targets, and we discuss best practices in chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, surgery and the maintenance of patient quality of life.

The surgical management of esophago-gastric junctional cancer

The best available surgical strategy in the treatment of resectable esophago-gastric junctional (EGJ) cancer is a controversial topic. In this review we evaluate the current literature and scientific evidence examining the surgical treatment of locally advanced EGJ cancer by comparing esophagectomy with gastrectomy, transhiatal with transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive with open esophagectomy, and less extensive with more extensive lymphadenectomy. We also assess endoscopic procedures increasingly used for early EGJ cancer. The current evidence does not favor any of the techniques over the others in terms of oncological outcomes. Health-related quality of life may be better following gastrectomy compared to esophagectomy. Minimally invasive procedures might be less prone to surgical complications. Endoscopic techniques are safe and effective alternatives for early-stage EGJ cancer in the short term, but surgical treatment is the mainstay in fit patients due to the risk of lymph node metastasis. Any benefit of lymphadenectomy extending beyond local or regional nodes is uncertain. This review demonstrates the great need for well-designed clinical studies to improve the knowledge in how to optimize and standardize the surgical treatment of EGJ cancer.

Differences in prognosis of Siewert II and III oesophagogastric junction cancers are determined by the baseline tumour staging but not its anatomical location

BACKGROUND

The anatomical Siewert classification for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction (OGJ) was dictated by the potential differences in tumour epidemiology and pathology. However, there are some uncertainties whether the distinction of true carcinoma of the cardia (type II) and subcardial gastric cancer (type III) is of clinical value.

METHODS

Using a multicentre data set, we studied 243 patients with OGJ adenocarcinomas who underwent gastric resections between 1998 and 2008. Postoperative complications and long-term survival were compared to evaluate the potential differences in clinically relevant outcomes.

RESULTS

A group of 109 patients with Siewert type II and 134 with Siewert type III OGJ adenocarcinoma was identified. Both groups showed similar baseline characteristics, including clinical symptoms and duration of diagnostic delay. However, the prevalence of node-negative cancers and superficial (T1-T2) lesions was significantly higher among type II tumours, i.e. 42% vs 21% (P = 0.003) and 43% vs 20% (P = 0.045), respectively. Morbidity and mortality rates were 25% and 3.7%, respectively, but types and incidence of postoperative complications were not affected by the anatomical location of the tumour. The overall median survival was significantly longer for Siewert type II tumours (42 vs 16 months; P < 0.001). However, only patients' age >70 years, depth of tumour infiltration, lymph node metastases, distant metastases, and radical resection were identified as independent prognostic factors using the Cox proportional hazards model.

CONCLUSION

The topographic-anatomic sub-classification of OGJ adenocarcinomas does not correspond to relevant differences in clinical parameters of safety and efficacy of surgical treatment.

Perioperative Treatment, Not Surgical Approach, Influences Overall Survival in Patients with Gastroesophageal Junction Tumors: A Nationwide, Population-Based Study in The Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Resectable gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) tumors are treated either with an esophageal-cardia resection or with gastrectomy. The difference in outcome between these two treatment modalities is unknown; Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate population-based treatment strategies for patients with resectable adenocarcinomas of the GEJ and to compare the oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with potentially resectable GEJ tumors diagnosed between 2005 and 2012 were selected from the nationwide, population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Differences between patients were compared using the χ (2) test, and survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Overall multivariate survival was assessed using Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Patients treated with esophagectomy (n = 939) were significantly younger than patients treated with gastrectomy (n = 257; 64 vs. 66 years; p < 0.001), and no differences were noted regarding lymph node yield, lymph node ratio, and radicality. Patients treated with an esophagectomy or gastrectomy exhibited comparable overall 5-year survival rates (36 vs. 33 %, respectively; p = 0.250). Multivariate analysis showed that patients receiving perioperative treatment and gastrectomy exhibited similar overall survival rates compared with patients receiving perioperative treatment and esophagectomy [hazard ratio (HR) 1.9, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.7-1.3; p = 0.908]; however, patients receiving esophagectomy alone (HR 1.3, 95 % CI 1.3-1.8; p = 0.002) or gastrectomy alone (HR 1.8, 95 % CI 1.4-2.4; p < 0.001) exhibited a significantly worse overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The chosen type of surgery (esophagectomy or gastrectomy) did not influence the overall survival in our cohort of patients with GEJ tumors. The administration of perioperative chemo(radio)therapy improved survival regardless of the surgical approach.

Quality of life: A critical outcome for all surgical treatments of gastric cancer

Surgery represents the main curative therapeutic modality for gastric cancer, and it is occasionally considered for palliation as well as prophylaxis. Most frequently, surgical outcomes are conveyed in terms of oncological outcomes such as recurrence and survival. However, quality of life (QoL) is also important and should be considered when making treatment decisions - including the extent of and approach to surgery. Measurement of QoL usually involves the application of questionnaires. While there are multiple QoL questionnaires validated for use in oncology patients, there are very few that have been validated for use in those with gastric cancer. In this review, we discuss and compare the current status of QoL questionnaires in gastric cancer. More importantly, the impact of surgery for treatment, palliation and prophylaxis of gastric cancer on QoL will be described. These data should inform the surgeon on the optimal approach to treating gastric cancer, taking into account oncological outcomes. Knowledge gaps are also identified, providing a roadmap for future studies.

Staging of adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction

BACKGROUND

Clinical staging of adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) determines the curative treatment regimen containing either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy followed by either gastrectomy or esophagectomy. The value of current diagnostic tools is a matter of debate.

METHODS

A prospective database (2003-2013) was used to identify 266 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of the GEJ in order to evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) regarding tumor localization according to Siewert, nodal status and its consequences on treatment strategy.

RESULTS

Overall accuracy in determining tumor localization was 73% for endoscopy/EUS and 61% for CT (p = 0.018). With endoscopy/EUS, the accuracy was 97%, 66% and 75% respectively for type I, II and III. With CT this was respectively 69%, 57% and 80%. The overall accuracy for determining N-status (N0/N+) per patient was 75% for EUS and 71% for CT. Accuracy for determining a positive nodal station in patients without neoadjuvant therapy was 77% for EUS and 71% for CT (p = 0.001). Accuracy for detecting positive upper mediastinal nodes was 80-92%, whereas for peritumoral and abdominal nodes this was 50-80% in both EUS and CT. In 8/266 patients (3%) the type of surgery changed due to intraoperative findings. A radical resection was performed in 233 patients (88%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the suboptimal accuracy of determining tumor localization with EUS and CT, in only a small number of patients an intraoperative change of surgical treatment was needed. EUS is superior to CT in determining nodal status and tumor localization in GEJ tumors.