Radical radiotherapy for carcinoma of the oesophagus: an effective alternative to surgery

Transcription factor NFE2L3 promotes the proliferation of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cells and causes radiotherapy resistance by regulating IL-6

OBJECTIVE

To scrutinize the impact of overexpression and interference of NFE2L3 on radiosensitivity of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cells (ESCC) and its downstream mechanism and to assess whether NFE2L3 expression alters in vivo radiosensitivity of ESCC by developing a subcutaneous tumor model in mice.

METHODS

Through RNA-Seq, we compared the differentially expressed genes between the ECA-109R cell line and its parent ECA-109 cell line. The differentially expressed genes were selected and verified by qRT-PCR. Transfection of ESCC cell lines with NFE2L3 inhibitor or mimic lentivirus constructs was done to study the activity of NFE2L3. To assess the effect of NFE2L3 on cellular growth and proliferation, clonogenic survival assay, EdU incorporation assay, and CCK-8 assay were done after irradiation. To probe how many irradiated DNA double-strand breaks were produced, the corresponding intensity of γ-H2AX foci were detected by immunofluorescence. Apoptotic cells were assayed by flow cytometry assay after irradiation; To investigate the downstream genes of NFE2L3, we knocked NFE2L3, and RNA-Seq was used to find out the downstream genes. qRT-PCR and western blot ensued to score associated protein profiles. The in vivo ESCC cell radiosensitivity was scrutinized by nude mouse xenograft models.

RESULTS

The differential genes between ECA-109R cells and its parent ECA-109 cells were compared by qRT-PCR to unveil a significant increase in NFE2L3 expression. Functional analysis indicated that NFE2L3 increased radioresistance in ESCC cells. Then, through high-throughput sequencing and bioinformatics analysis, IL-6 was found to be a hub gene that played a role downstream of NFE2L3 and was verified by qRT-PCR, western blot, and double luciferase reporter gene experiment. NFE2L3 could regulate ESCC cell radiosensitivity via the IL-6-STAT3 signaling pathway, and downregulation of IL-6 expression could reverse the effects of highly expressed NFE2L3. In vivo tumor xenograft experiments confirmed that NFE2L3 affects the sensitivity to radiation therapy.

CONCLUSION

NFE2L3 can affect the radiosensitivity of ESCC cells through IL-6 transcription and IL-6/STAT3 signaling pathway. This makes NFE2L3 a putative target to regulate ESCC cell radiosensitivity.

Association of 3D-CRT and IMRT accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy with local control rate and 5-year survival in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective study examined the relevance and prognostic factors of whole-course conformal radiotherapy (CRT) and late-course accelerated hyperfractionation radiotherapy (LCAFRT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

A total of 110 patients with ESCC received whole-course CRT and LCAFRT between May 2004 and January 2015. All patients received conventional CRT of 2 Gy per day, up to 30-40 Gy, followed by LCAFRT using reduced fields at 1.5 Gy/fraction twice a day, up to 24-39 Gy, for a total dose of 60-69 Gy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 85 months. The whole groups 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 81.8%, 46.4%, and 41.8%, respectively. The local control rates for the whole group at 1, 3, and 5 years were 82.7%, 70.0%, and 68.2%, respectively. There were no significant differences among survival rates and local control rates between the 3D-CRT and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) groups. The main reactions to acute radiotherapy were acute radiation tracheitis, esophagitis, and pneumonia. The tumor location and TNM stage were independent prognostic factors for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that whole-course CRT and LCAFRT for ESCC can improve survival and local control with a tolerable acute reaction compared to previous studies. Local recurrence and distant metastasis are the main failure modes of treatment.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Whole-course CRT and LCAFRT for ESCC can improve the survival and local control rate compared with previous studies from the 2DRT era. It might provide another treatment for patients with inoperable ESCC or refusing surgery.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the era of intensity modulated radiotherapy: a propensity score-matched analysis

Background

To investigate the survival benefit of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) during the years of intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Methods

Medical records of 1089 patients with ESCC who received IMRT from January 2005 to December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 617 patients received CCRT, 472 patients received radiotherapy (RT) alone. Propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to eliminate baseline differences between the two groups. Survival and toxicity profile were evaluated afterward.

Results

After a median follow‐up time of 47.9 months (3.2–149.8 months), both overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS) of the CCRT group were better than those of the RT alone group, either before or after PSM. After PSM, the 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year OS of RT alone and CCRT groups were 59.0% versus 70.2%, 27.7% versus 40.5% and 20.3% versus 33.1%, respectively (p < 0.001). The 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year PFS were 39.4% versus 49.0%, 18.3% versus 30.4% and 10.5% versus 25.0%, respectively (p < 0.001). The rates of ≥ grade 3 leukopenia and radiation esophagitis in the CCRT group were higher than that of RT alone group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the probability of radiation pneumonitis between the two groups (p = 0.167). Multivariate Cox analysis indicated that female, EQD2 ≥60 Gy and concurrent chemotherapy were favorable prognostic factors for both OS and PFS.

Conclusions

Concurrent chemotherapy can bring survival benefits to patients with locally advanced ESCC receiving IMRT. For patients who cannot tolerate concurrent chemotherapy, RT alone is an effective alternative with promising results.

Single modality radical radiotherapy is an acceptable alternative for the older patient with squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer remains a common cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Increasingly, oncology centres are treating an older population and comorbidities may preclude multimodality treatment with chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We review outcomes of radical radiotherapy (RT) in an older population treating squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) oesophagus.

METHODS

Patients over 65 years receiving RT for SCC oesophagus between 2013 and 2016 in the West of Scotland were identified. Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression analysis were used to compare overall survival (OS) between patients treated with radical RT and radical CRT.

RESULTS

There were 83 patients over 65 years treated with either RT (n=21) or CRT (n=62). There was no significant difference in median OS between CRT versus RT (26.8 months vs 28.5 months, p=0.92). All patients receiving RT completed their treatment whereas 11% of CRT patients did not complete treatment.

CONCLUSION

Survival in this non-trial older patient group managed with CRT is comparable to that reported in previous trials. RT shows better than expected outcomes which may reflect developments in RT technique. This review supports RT as an alternative in older patients, unfit for concurrent treatment.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Oesophageal Cancer for Patients Unfit for Systemic Therapy: A Retrospective Single-Centre Analysis

AIMS

Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is established as a superior treatment option to definitive radiotherapy in the non-surgical management of oesophageal cancer. For patients precluded from CRT through choice or comorbidity there is little evidence to guide delivery of single-modality radiotherapy. In this study we outline outcomes for patients unfit for CRT who received a hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) regimen.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective UK single-centre analysis of 61 consecutive patients with lower- or middle-third adenocarcinoma (OAC; 61%) or squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus managed using HRT with radical intent between April 2009 and 2014. Treatment consisted of 50 Gy in 16 fractions (n = 49, 80.3%) or 50-52.5 Gy in 20 fractions (n = 12, 19.7%). Outcomes were referenced against a contemporaneous comparator cohort of 80 (54% OAC) consecutive patients managed with conventionally fractionated CRT within the same centre.

RESULTS

Three-year and median overall survival were, respectively, 56.9% and 29 months with HRT compared with 55.5% and 26 months for CRT; adjusted hazard ratio 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.48-1.28). Grade 3 and 4 toxicity rates were low at 16.4% (n = 10) for those receiving HRT and 40.2% (n = 32) for the CRT group. In patients with OAC, CRT delivered superior overall survival (hazard ratio 0.46; 95% confidence interval 0.25-0.85) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.88) when compared with HRT.

CONCLUSIONS

The HRT regimen described here was safe and tolerable in patients unable to receive CRT, and delivered promising survival outcomes. The use of HRT for the treatment of oesophageal cancer, both alone and as a sequential or concurrent treatment with chemotherapy, requires further study. New precision radiotherapy technologies may provide additional scope for improving outcomes in oesophageal cancer using HRT-based approaches and should be evaluated.

Clinical Evaluation of Javanica Oil Emulsion Injection Combined with the Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of Javanica oil emulsion injection (JOEI) combined with the radiotherapy (RT) for treating esophageal cancer (EC).

Design: A literature search was conducted for collecting the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on EC treated by JOEI in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (SinoMed), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, the China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and the Wanfang Database from inception to February 4, 2017. The quality of the RCTs was evaluated by the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool, and objective remission rate, performance status, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), 1-year survival rate, and 2-year survival rate were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 13.0 software.

Results: A total of 11 RCTs with 909 participants were involved in this meta-analysis. The results showed that in comparison with RT alone, the JOEI combined with RT was associated with the better effects on improving objective remission rate (relative risk [RR] = 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI 1.17–1.52], Z = 4.44, p < 0.00001), performance status (RR = 1.52, 95% CI [1.25–1.85], Z = 4.24, p < 0.00001), 1-year survival rate (RR = 1.37, 95% CI [1.17–1.60], Z = 3.86, p < 0.0001), and 2-year survival rate (RR = 1.36, 95% CI [1.09–1.70], Z = 2.68, p = 0.007). The differences between the two groups in objective remission rate, performance status, 1-year survival rate, and 2-year survival rate were statistically significant. Besides, the JOEI combined with RT could reduce the incidence of ADRs. Specifically, the statistically significant difference was detected between these two groups about leukopenia (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.25–0.61], Z = 4.19, p < 0.0001), radiation esophagitis (RR = 0.68, 95% CI [0.50–0.93], Z = 2.42, p = 0.02), thrombocytopenia (RR = 0.92, 95% CI [0.12–0.66], Z = 2.95, p = 0.003), and hemoglobin reduction (RR = 0.53, 95% CI [0.35–0.79], Z = 3.14, p = 0.002); however, there was no statistically significant difference for the outcome of nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.61, 95% CI [0.36–1.03], Z = 1.85, p = 0.06) between two groups.

Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicated that the combination of JOEI and RT was associated with the more beneficial treatment for patients with EC compared with only receiving RT. However, more well-designed and multicenter RCTs should be carried out to confirm this finding because of the limitations of enrolled 11 RCTs.

Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy alone for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: 10-year survival outcomes

Background

Concurrent chemoradiation is the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). We conducted a phase II study to explore the effect of three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3‐DCRT) alone for patients with locally advanced esophageal SCC. This study aimed to analyze the long‐term survival outcomes.

Methods

Between November 2004 and April 2007, 30 patients with thoracic esophageal SCC underwent late‐course sequential boost 3‐DCRT at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center. The planning target volume (PTV1) comprised a 1.2–1.5 cm lateral margin around the gross tumor volume and a 3.0 cm margin, superior and inferior to the gross tumor volume. PTV2 encompassed the gross tumor volume with a margin of 0.5–0.7 cm. The PTV1 dose delivered was 50 Gy, and the PTV2 dose was a boost dose of 16 Gy, resulting in a total dose of 66 Gy. No chemotherapy was administered.

Results

The median follow‐up time was 30 months for all patients, and 132 months for patients who were alive. The median overall survival was 27 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 18.9–35.0). The 2‐, 5‐, and 10‐year overall survival rates were 56.6%, 33.3%, and 26.6%, respectively. The median progression‐free survival was 14 months (95% CI 7.7–20.2 months), and the 2‐, 5‐, and 10‐year progression‐free survival rates were 33.3%, 30.0%, and 26.6%, respectively. No severe late toxicity was observed in long‐term survivors.

Conclusion

Late‐course sequential boost 3‐DCRT is safe and feasible with promising long‐term outcomes for esophageal SCC.

Concomitant Chemotherapy and External Radiotherapy plus Brachytherapy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer Results of a Retrospective Multicenter Study

Aims and Background

In October 1995, the Piedmont AIRO (Italian Society of Radiation Oncology) Group started a multi-institutional study of radiochemotherapy on locally advanced esophageal cancer, characterized by external radiotherapy followed by an intraluminal high dose-rate brachytherapy boost. Most patients were re-evaluated for surgery at the end of the program. The primary aim of the study was to assess efficacy of curative radiochemotherapy regarding overall survival and local control rates. The secondary aim was to evaluate the ability of radiochemotherapy to make resectable lesions previously considered inoperable.

Methods and Study Design

Between January 1996 and March 2000, 75 patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer were enrolled. All were treated with definitive radiotherapy; due to age or high expected toxicity, chemotherapy was employed only in 53 of them. Treatment schedule consisted of 60 Gy external radiotherapy (180 cGy/d, 5 days/week for 7 weeks) concomitant with two 5-day cycles of chemotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil (weeks 1 and 5). One or two sessions of 5-7 Gy intraluminal high dose-rate brachytherapy were carried out on patients whose restaging showed a major tumor response. Surgery was performed in 14 patients.

Results

At the end of radiotherapy, dysphagia disappeared in 46/75 cases (61%), and in 20/75 (27%) a significant symptom reduction was recorded. Complete objective response at restaging after radiotherapy was obtained in 33% of patients and a partial response in 53%. At the end of the multimodal treatment program, including esophagectomy, complete responses were 34 (45%); 4 of 14 (28.5%) cases proved to be disease free (pTO) at pathological examination. No G3-G4 toxicity was recorded. Two- and 5-year overall survival rates of all patients were, respectively, 38% and 28%; 2- and 5-year local control rates were, respectively, 35% and 33%. In a subgroup of 20 nonsurgical patients in complete response after radiochemotherapy, the overall survival rate at 3 and 5 years was 65% and the local control rate at 3 and 5 years was 75%. According to multivariate analysis, prognostic factors for survival were Karnofsky index and esophagectomy.

Conclusions

For patients with locally advanced disease, radiochemotherapy showed improved clinical and pathologic tumor response and survival compared to surgery or radiotherapy alone. Intraluminal brachytherapy with a small fraction size allows an increased dose to the tumor without higher toxicity. Esophagectomy following radiochemotherapy could improve survival rates compared to definitive radiochemotherapy, but it is necessary to optimize selection criteria for surgery at the re-evaluation phase.

Survival benefit of surgery with radiotherapy vs surgery alone to patients with T2-3N0M0 stage esophageal adenocarcinoma

Background & Aims

This study is designed to analyze survival benefit of (neo-) adjuvant radiotherapy to patients with T2-3N0M0 stage esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).

Methods

T2-3N0M0 stage EAC patients from 2004 to 2012 were searched from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data. Clinical factors including age, sex, race were summarized. Univariate, multivariate analysis, and stratified cox analysis based on different T stages were performed to explore the survival effect of (neo-)adjuvant radiotherapy to T2-3N0M0 stage EAC.

Results

T2-3N0M0 stage EAC patients with surgery were more likely to be white race, T3 stage. Univariate analysis showed sex, age, and T stage were the prognostic factors of survival (P<0.05). Multivariate analysis proved (neo-)adjuvant radiotherapy can prolong survival time of T2-3N0M0 stage EAC (P<0.05). Further analysis based on different T stages showed that both neoadjuvant radiotherapy (HR 0.615; 95% CI 0.475-0.797) and adjuvant radiotherapy (HR 0.597; 95% 0.387-0.921) significantly reduced the risk of death of T3N0M0 stage EAC, but neither of which significantly reduced death risk of T2N0M0 stage EAC (P>0.05).

Conclusions

sex, age are the independent prognostic factors of T2-3N0M0 EAC. Significant survival benefit of (neo-)adjuvant radiotherapy is only observed in patients with T3N0M0 stage EAC, but not in those with T2N0M0 stage.

High-dose radiation therapy alone by moderate hypofractionation for patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

We conducted retrospective analyses to investigate the clinical outcome of thoracic esophageal cancer patients who were treated with high-dose radiation therapy (RT) alone by moderate hypofractionation due to medical unfitness or refusal to receive either surgery or chemo-radiotherapy.Between May 2003 and April 2013, 70 patients were treated with high-dose RT alone with curative aim. The planned total RT dose was 60 Gy in daily 3.0 Gy per fraction. We evaluated the survival outcome, toxicities, and prognostic factors affecting patients' survival.At the time of analysis, 32 patients experienced disease progression. The 2-year overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and local control (LC) rates were 52.1%, 57.8%, and 68.2%, respectively. Among them, 25 patients had superficial (cT1a-b) esophageal cancers, and the 2-year OS, CSS, and LC rates were 80.0%, 87.3%, and 81.6%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that cT disease (P < 0.001) and tumor location (P = 0.022) were the significant factors for OS. The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicities were 9.9%, including grade 3 esophagitis (2 patients, 2.8%) and grade 4 or 5 trachea-esophageal fistula (5 patients, 7.1%).High-dose RT alone by moderate hypofractionation had led to reasonable clinical outcomes at acceptable toxicity risk in thoracic esophageal cancer patients who are medically unfit or refuse surgery or chemotherapy, especially for the patients having superficial lesion.

Single centre outcomes from definitive chemo-radiotherapy and single modality radiotherapy for locally advanced oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Definitive chemo-radiotherapy (dCRT) has been advocated as an alternative to surgical resection for the treatment of locally advanced oesophageal cancer (OC). We have retrospectively reviewed 4 years' experience of patients (pts) who underwent contemporary staging and were treated with concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (dCRT) or single modality radical radiotherapy (RT) with curative intent.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis permitted identification of consecutive patients who underwent contemporary staging prior to non-surgical treatment for locally advanced oesophageal carcinoma. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), adjusted for baseline differences in age, tumour staging and histological cell type. All patients were treated with either dCRT or single modality RT within a single centre between 2009 and 2012.

RESULTS

We identified 235 patients in total [median age 69.8 years, male =130 pts, female =105 pts, adenocarcinoma (ACA) =85 pts, squamous =150 pts]. A total of 190 pts received dCRT and 45 patients were treated with RT. All patients were staged with CT of chest, abdomen and pelvis, 226 patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and 183 patients had PET-CT. Patients treated with dCRT demonstrated longer OS (27 vs. 25 months respectively, P=0.02) and DFS (31 vs. 16 months respectively, P=0.01) compared to those treated with RT. More advanced tumour stage (stage 3 vs. stage 1/2) at presentation conferred poorer OS (32 vs. 38.2 months, P=0.02) and DFS (11 vs. 28 months, P=0.013). We demonstrated an acceptable toxicity profile with only 77 patients (32.8%) suffering grade 3 toxicity and 9 patients (4.2%) experiencing grade 4 toxicity by CTC criteria. The NG/PEG feeding rates were 4% across all treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis is in keeping with current treatment paradigms emphasising the importance and safety of concurrent CRT in maximising curative potential for patients undergoing non-surgical treatment of OC. Although retrospective, in comparison to similar retrospective series from both our centre and historical literature, this data suggest improvements in OS and DFS, possibly due to improved patient selection through the use of more effective tumour staging.

Curative treatment of esophageal cancer; an evidenced based review

BACKGROUND

In 2013, roughly 18,000 cases of esophageal cancer will be diagnosed in the United States with more than 15,000 people dying from the disease. Worldwide, an estimated 482,300 new esophageal cancer cases were diagnosed with 406,800 deaths in 2008. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) account for >90% of all esophageal cancer cases.

METHODS

The authors will examine the role of radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and surgery in the curative management of esophageal cancer by examining randomized control data, single arm phase II trials, several recently published meta-analyses, as well as retrospective data where there is no clinical trial data available. The role of positron emission tomography (PET) will be reviewed as well.

RESULTS

Current data support the role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with 3-year overall survival ranging from 30% to 60%. The benefit of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy is limited to margin positive and/or node positive patients. There is emerging data questioning the survival benefit of surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy. External beam radiation therapy alone results in very few long-term survivors and is considered palliative at best. Radiation dose-escalation has failed to improve local control or survival. PET scanning is vital in staging and has become a strong predictor of response and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative or definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the established standard of care for locally advanced cancers of the esophagus. While preoperative chemotherapy is supported by level 1 evidence, the true benefit of induction chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy has not been established in a prospective randomized control trial. The role of surgery in the management of SCC is still a hotly debated subject, however, it is still recommended for AC. There is no data to support adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy seems to be limited AC. Radiation without chemotherapy is palliative and never curative. PET continues to be integrated into treatment decisions and predicts for response and survival after therapy.

Intraluminal brachytherapy in oesophageal cancer: defining its role and introducing the technique

Intraluminal brachytherapy plays an important role in the treatment of oesophageal tumours. This article aims to define this role in the curative as well as in the palliative treatment settings drawing on data from the literature, and also emphasizing its potential for harm when used inexpertly. It also provides a short introduction to practical aspects of the treatment procedure and treatment planning.

The role of induction therapy

The incidence of esophageal cancer has been steadily increasing. The 5-year survival of esophageal cancer has minimally improved over the past 30 years. In this article, we review the management of esophageal cancer, focusing on the literature investigating the role of induction chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

Multimodality therapy for cancers of the esophagus and gastric cardia

The role of multimodal treatment in the management of esophageal cancer is controversial. There are conflicting results from studies on the effect of neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment on long-term survival. Following a search of the Medline database, the authors examine the results of randomized studies on the various treatment protocols available and discuss future therapeutic improvements.

Endoscopic ultrasound in staging esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy--results of a multicenter cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is considered a gold standard in the initial staging of esophageal cancer. There is an ongoing debate whether EUS is useful for tumor staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).

METHODS

Ninety-five patients with esophageal cancer were retrospectively analyzed. In 45 patients, EUS was performed prior to and after NAC, while 50 patients had no induction therapy. Histological correlation through surgery was available. uT/uN classifications were compared to pT/pN stages. Statistical analysis included calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates. Agreement between endosonography and T staging was assessed with Cohen's kappa statistics.

RESULTS

For those patients with prior NAC, overall accuracy of yuT and yuN classification was 29 and 62%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates for local tumor extension after NAC were as follows (%): T1: -/97/84, T2: 13/76/53, T3:86/29/46, T4:20/100/91, T1/2: 27/83/56, T3/4: 89/31/56. Cohen's kappa indicated poor agreement (kappa = 0.129) between yuT classification and ypT stage. Relative to positive lymph node detection, sensitivity and specificity were 100 and 6%, respectively (kappa = 0.06). T stage was overstaged in 23 (51%) and understaged in seven (16%) patients.

CONCLUSION

EUS is an unreliable tool for staging esophageal cancer after NAC. Overstaging of the T stage is common after NAC.

Late course accelerated hyperfractionation radiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Late course accelerated hyperfractionation radiotherapy (LCAHR) is used as a standard treatment option for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LAESCC) in China, but concerns remain regarding its efficacy and safety. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LCAHR. The comparisons examined were as follows: LCAHR versus conventional fractionation radiotherapy (CFR) and LCAHR plus chemotherapy (CT) versus LCAHR alone.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CBMdisc, and CNKI, as well as employing manual searches. The primary end points were survival and local control. The second end point was toxicities.

RESULTS

Based on search criteria, we found 29 trials involving 3187 patients. Our results showed that LCAHR, compared with CFR, improved the survival and local control, and was, thus, more therapeutically beneficial. Further analysis revealed that LCAHR plus CT proved to be better for patients' survival and local control compared to LCAHR alone. Acute toxicities were increased rather than late toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant survival and local control benefit of LCAHR over CFR, as well as LCAHR plus CT over LCAHR alone. Considering the strength of the evidence, the results of this study indicate that this regimen would be a new promising modality worth further investigation.

Radiation Therapy and Esophageal Cancer

Background

Squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma account for more than 90% of all esophageal cancer cases. Although the incidence of squamous cell carcinoma has declined, the incidence of adenocarcinoma has risen due to increases in obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Methods

The authors examine the role of radiation therapy alone (external beam and brachytherapy) for the management of esophageal cancer or combined with other modalities. The impact on staging and appropriate stratification of patients referred for curative vs palliative intent with modalities is reviewed. The authors also explore the role of emerging radiation technologies.

Results

Current data show that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection is the accepted standard of care, with 3-year overall survival rates ranging from 30% to 60%. The benefit of adjuvant radiation therapy is limited to patients with node-positive cancer. The survival benefit of surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy remains controversial. External beam radiation therapy alone results in few long-term survivors and is considered palliative at best. Radiation dose-escalation has failed to improve local control or survival. Brachytherapy can provide better long-term palliation of dysphagia than metal stent placement. Although three-dimensional conformal treatment planning is the accepted standard, the roles of IMRT and proton therapy are evolving and potentially reduce adverse events due to better sparing of normal tissue.

Conclusions

Future directions will evaluate the benefit of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy, the role of surgery in locally advanced disease, and the identification of responders prior to treatment based on microarray analysis.

Miniprobe endoscopic ultrasound accurately stages esophageal cancer and guides therapeutic decisions in the era of neoadjuvant therapy: results of a multicenter cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite recent advances in imaging techniques, adequate classification of esophageal lesions is still challenging. Accurate staging of tumors of the esophagus is a precondition for targeted therapy. In this retrospective, multicenter study, we report the role of high-frequency endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) catheter probes in pretherapeutic staging of esophageal neoplasms and thus guiding treatment decisions.

METHODS

A total of 143 patients (mean age of 63.8 ± 10.7 years) with esophageal carcinoma were recruited from five German centers (Münster, Oldenburg, Hannover, Wiesbaden, and Lüneburg). Tumor type was adenocarcinoma in 112 (78 %) cases and squamous cell carcinoma in 31 (22 %). Tumor localization was as follows: proximal 3, mid esophagus 7, and distal third 133. Histological correlation either through EMR or surgery was available. In all patients, pretherapeutic uT and uN classifications were compared to pT/pN classification obtained from surgically (esophagectomy, n = 93) or endoscopically (EMR, n = 50) resected tissue.

RESULTS

Overall, accuracy of uT classification was 60 % and of uN classification was 74 %. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates for local tumor extension were as follows (%): T1: 68/97/83; T2: 39/84/75; T3: 72/81/79; T4: 13/97/93; T1/2: 73/81/75; T3/4: 78/82/81. Relating to positive lymph node detection, sensitivity and specificity were 76 and 71 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Miniprobe EUS is an established method for the staging of esophageal tumors. Our large multicenter cohort shows a solid accuracy of miniprobe EUS with respect to differentiating locally advanced from limited cancer and assisting to determine the treatment regimen in the era of neoadjuvant therapy; consequently, 78 % of patients would have been assigned to the adequate therapeutic regimen, whereas 11 % of patients would have been overtreated and 11 % undertreated.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma

Radiation therapy plays an important role in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Radiation therapy may be combined with chemotherapy, used as a component of induction therapy, used in the adjuvant setting, or used for palliation of advanced disease. Chemotherapy is also occasionally used as a solitary treatment modality for patients with esophageal cancer. Current treatment protocols include multiple agents, and agents directed against specific molecular targets have been investigated in clinical trials. This article discusses future directions related to the selection of radiation treatment protocols, novel targeted chemotherapeutic agents, and the selection of patients for surgery.

Multimodality approach for locally advanced esophageal cancer

Carcinoma of the esophagus is an aggressive and lethal malignancy with an increasing incidence worldwide. Incidence rates vary internationally, with the highest rates found in Southern and Eastern Africa and Eastern Asia, and the lowest in Western and Middle Africa and Central America. Patients with locally advanced disease face a poor prognosis, with 5-year survival rates ranging from 15%-34%. Recent clinical trials have evaluated different strategies for management of locoregional cancer; however, because of stage migration and changes in disease epidemiology, applying these trials to clinical practice has become a daunting task. We searched Medline and conference abstracts for randomized studies published in the last 3 decades. We restricted our search to articles published in English. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection is an accepted standard of care in the United States. Esophagectomy remains an essential component of treatment and can lead to improved overall survival, especially when performed at high volume institutions. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection is still unclear. External beam radiation therapy alone is considered palliative and is typically reserved for patients with a poor performance status.

Salvage radiotherapy in patients with recurrent esophageal carcinoma

PURPOSE

The feasibility and effectiveness of radiotherapy in the management of recurrent esophageal carcinoma (REC) is reported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A consecutive cohort of 54 patients with rcT1-4, rcN0-1, or cM0 recurrent esophageal carcinoma (69% squamous cell carcinoma, 31% adenocarcinoma) was treated between 1988 and 2010. The initial treatment for these patients was definitive radiochemotherapy, surgery alone, or neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy + surgical resection in 8 (15%), 33 (61%), and 13 (24%) patients, respectively. The median time to recurrence from initial treatment was 19 months (range 4-79 months). The site of the recurrence was anastomotic or local, nodal, or both in 63%, 30%, and 7% of patients, respectively. Salvage radio(chemo)therapy was carried out with a median dose of 45 Gy (range 30-68 Gy).

RESULTS

Median follow-up time for surviving patients from the start of R(C)T was 38 months (range 10-105 months). Relief of symptoms was achieved in 19 of 28 symptomatic patients (68%). The median survival time was 12 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 7-17 months) and the median recurrence-free interval was 8 months (95% CI 4-12 months). The survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 55 ± 7%, 29 ± 6%, and 19 ± 5%, respectively. The recurrence-free survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 44 ± 7%, 22 ± 6%, and 15 ± 5%, respectively. A radiation dose ≥ 45 Gy and conformal RT were associated with a better prognosis.

CONCLUSION

RT is feasible and effective in the management of recurrent esophageal carcinoma, especially for relief of symptoms. Toxicity is in an acceptable range. The outcome of REC is poor; however, long-term survival of patients with recurrent esophageal carcinoma after radiochemotherapy might be possible, even with a previous history of radiotherapy in the initial treatment. If re-irradiation of esophageal carcinoma is contemplated, three-dimensional conformal techniques and a minimum total dose of 45 Gy are recommended.

Optimal therapeutic strategies for resectable oesophageal or oesophagogastric junction cancer

Oesophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer diagnosed worldwide, with almost half a million new cases diagnosed each year. Despite improvements in surgical and radiotherapy techniques and refinements of chemotherapeutic regimens, long-term survival, even from localized oesophageal cancer, remains poor. Surgical resection alone remains the standard approach for very early stage disease (stage I), but whilst surgery remains fundamental to the treatment of stage II-III resectable adenocarcinoma, multimodality therapy with chemotherapy or chemoradiation (CRT) is internationally accepted as the standard of care. Data from two large, randomized phase III trials support the use of perioperative combination chemotherapy in lower oesophageal and oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinomas, but the contribution of the adjuvant therapy is uncertain. There are conflicting data from randomized studies of a purely neoadjuvant approach; however, recent meta-analyses have demonstrated that chemotherapy or CRT given prior to radical surgery improves survival in patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus. Neoadjuvant CRT but not chemotherapy alone is also beneficial for patients with squamous cell carcinoma. Definitive CRT has emerged as a useful option for the treatment of resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus, avoiding potential surgical morbidity and mortality for most patients, with salvage surgery reserved for those with persistent disease. In this review, we focus on the pharmacotherapy of resectable oesophageal and oesophagogastric junction cancers and how clinical trials and meta-analyses inform current clinical practice.

Optimal therapeutic strategies for resectable oesophageal or oesophagogastric junction cancer

Oesophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer diagnosed worldwide, with almost half a million new cases diagnosed each year. Despite improvements in surgical and radiotherapy techniques and refinements of chemotherapeutic regimens, long-term survival, even from localized oesophageal cancer, remains poor. Surgical resection alone remains the standard approach for very early stage disease (stage I), but whilst surgery remains fundamental to the treatment of stage II-III resectable adenocarcinoma, multimodality therapy with chemotherapy or chemoradiation (CRT) is internationally accepted as the standard of care. Data from two large, randomized phase III trials support the use of perioperative combination chemotherapy in lower oesophageal and oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinomas, but the contribution of the adjuvant therapy is uncertain. There are conflicting data from randomized studies of a purely neoadjuvant approach; however, recent meta-analyses have demonstrated that chemotherapy or CRT given prior to radical surgery improves survival in patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus. Neoadjuvant CRT but not chemotherapy alone is also beneficial for patients with squamous cell carcinoma. Definitive CRT has emerged as a useful option for the treatment of resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus, avoiding potential surgical morbidity and mortality for most patients, with salvage surgery reserved for those with persistent disease. In this review, we focus on the pharmacotherapy of resectable oesophageal and oesophagogastric junction cancers and how clinical trials and meta-analyses inform current clinical practice.

Neoadjuvant treatment of esophageal cancer

The management of esophageal cancer has been evolving over the past 30 years. In the United States, multimodality treatment combining chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) prior to surgical resection has come to be accepted by many as the standard of care, although debate about its overall effect on survival still exists, and rightfully so. Despite recent improvements in detection and treatment, the overall survival of patients with esophageal cancer remains lower than most solid tumors, which highlights why further advances are so desperately needed. The aim of this article is to provide a complete review of the history of esophageal cancer treatment with the addition of chemotherapy, RT, and more recently, targeted agents to the surgical management of resectable disease.

Radical treatment for oesophageal cancer patients unfit for surgery and chemotherapy. A 10-year experience from the Norwegian Radium Hospital

BACKGROUND

Over a 10-year period from 1990, 445 patients with carcinoma of the oesophagus were admitted to the Norwegian Radium Hospital and 184 of these patients received treatment with curative intent. Even though surgery is the treatment of choice for these patients, many of them suffer from medical conditions that increase the risk for postoperative mortality and morbidity. In a retrospective study, the effect of the curative treatment offered to patients was explored with a particular focus on patients unfit for surgery.

METHODS

Medical data of the 184 patients treated with curative intent were reviewed and additional clinical information was retrieved from local hospitals and general practitioners. Preoperative radiotherapy followed by surgery was the standard curative treatment for operable patients. Medically inoperable patients were offered radical split-course hyperfractionated radiotherapy followed by a brachytherapy boost.

RESULTS

More than 50% (103/184) received non-surgical treatment only. Patients who received radical surgery (n = 81) were younger, had better performance status, less weight loss and dysphagia compared to patients treated with radical radiotherapy (n = 102). One patient received only photodynamic therapy. The 3-year survival was 29% for patients treated with radical surgery, and 8% for patients who received radical radiotherapy. The overall median crude survival for the two groups of patients were 20 months and seven months respectively.

CONCLUSION

The hyperfractionated radiotherapy provided symptom relief without extensive toxicity and with a possibility for cure for patients with oesophageal cancer who are unfit for surgery and chemoradiotherapy. The literature supports the curative potential of high dose accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy even though the optimal radiotherapy regimen still needs to be explored.

Stage-for-stage comparison of definitive chemoradiotherapy, surgery alone and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for oesophageal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) has been proposed as an alternative therapy for selected patients with oesophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of dCRT, surgery alone, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS) in patients with oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

Consecutive patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer and managed by a multidisciplinary team were staged by computed tomography and endoluminal ultrasonography. Those deemed unsuitable for surgery on the grounds of performance status, bulky local disease or personal choice received dCRT. The primary outcome measure was overall survival measured from date of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of 417 patients, 173 received dCRT, 126 underwent surgery alone and 118 received CS. The incidence of grade III/IV toxicity after dCRT and CS was 39.3 and 60.2 per cent respectively. Operative morbidity rates were 42.9 and 44.4 per cent after surgery alone and CS respectively. Thirty-day mortality rates were zero, 7.9 and 0.8 per cent after dCRT, surgery alone and CS respectively. Overall 2-year survival rates were 44.3, 56.2 and 42.4 per cent (P = 0.422).

CONCLUSION

These findings support the need for a randomized trial of dCRT versus CS for resectable oesophageal cancer.

Multidisciplinary approach to esophageal and gastric cancer

The incidence of esophageal and gastric malignancies has increased over the last decade. Historically, surgery has been considered the best treatment for these cancers. However, long-term survival after surgery is fair at best, because of the tendency of disease to recur locally and distantly. Presently, the management of these cancers involves surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. This article discusses various treatment strategies that employ these modalities either alone or in combination, in an attempt to improve survival rates for patients who have gastroesophageal malignancies.

Evidence-based radiation oncology: oesophagus

Oesophageal cancer remains to be a therapeutic and diagnostic challenge in multidisciplinary oncology. Radiotherapy is a crucial component of most curative and palliative approaches for oesophageal cancer. Aim of this educational review is to summarize the available evidence and to define the role of radiation-based treatment options for oesophageal cancer.

Esophageal cancer: current and emerging therapy modalities

During the last few years, there has been a gradual increase in treatment options for patients with esophageal malignancies. Several clinical studies have been performed, covering not only radiation and chemotherapy, but also the introduction of novel biological agents into the treatment arsenal. Patients with esophageal carcinoma are now offered second-line and sometimes even third-line treatments, and the number of research protocols is increasing. Despite the newly awakened interest in this malignancy, the overall 5-year survival rate has remained at approximately 10% since the 1980s. This review contains a compilation of available studies of esophageal malignancies and discusses current treatment options as well as newly developed therapies targeted at growth factor receptors.

Cancer of the esophagus and stomach

Upper gastrointestinal tumors involving the esophagus and the stomach are a serious public health problem worldwide. The West has seen a dramatic increase in the incidence of gastroesophageal cancers in the past 2 decades. Although Barrett esophagus has been well characterized, the exact pathway to developing frank malignancy remains undefined. Current treatments for locoregional disease include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or some combination thereof. Clinical trials are currently investigating biologic agents that target signaling pathways in carcinogenesis. Whether this research translates into an improved therapeutic index remains to be seen. This review provides a comprehensive update to physicians and residents who contribute to the care of these patients. Studies in the English language were identified searching PubMed (January 1, 1980, through February 29, 2008) using the terms esophagus, gastric, carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, squamous cell, radiation, chemotherapy, surgery, esophagectomy, and targeted therapy.

A prospective comparison of multidisciplinary treatment of oesophageal cancer with curative intent in a UK cancer network

AIMS

Combined modality therapy (with chemotherapy+/-radiotherapy) has become a standard treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. However, there appears to be no compelling evidence for one treatment type or combination to suit all and at this time the clinical multi-disciplinary team (MDT) forms an important role in selecting optimal therapies for the individual. This prospective comparison in one cancer network, looks at the outcomes of this decision making process.

METHODS

Over a five year period 1998-2003, data were prospectively collected on all 330 consecutive patients, referred to a tertiary specialised MDT for whom curative treatment was the planned intent. Patients were managed according to an agreed local protocol and allocated to receive one of 5 treatments: surgery alone (S), pre-operative chemotherapy (C+S), pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy (CRT+S), definitive chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) and radiotherapy alone (RT).

RESULTS

The 2 and 5 year survival for all patients receiving potentially curative treatment were 49% and 26% respectively. With 2 and 5 year survival for S, CRT+S, C+S, CRT and RT being 53,21; 57,40; 37,27; 50,27; 23,0 months respectively. Of the surgical therapies, mortality was highest in the CRT+S group, versus C+S and S; 12.5%, 1.6%, 4.5% respectively (p=0.025). Non-surgical based therapies had more than double the incidence of local relapses compared to surgical based therapies; however the CRT group had an overall survival comparable with S alone. The commonest sites of distant relapse were liver (56%), lung (38%), bone (32%) and non-regional lymph nodes (24%).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that in patients who are deemed unfit for surgical intervention, definitive chemoradiotherapy remains a viable alternative; they also lend further support to selected case triple modality therapy. These areas should be further examined in the context of randomised controlled phase III trials.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer

AIM: To evaluate the dosimetry, efficacy and toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and concurrent chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 7 patients who were definitively treated with IMRT and concurrent chemotherapy. Patients who did not receive IMRT radiation and concurrent chemotherapy were not included in this analysis. IMRT plans were evaluated to assess the tumor coverage and normal tissue avoidance. Treatment response was evaluated and toxicities were assessed.

RESULTS: Five- to nine-beam IMRT were used to deliver a total dose of 59.4-66 Gy (median: 64.8 Gy) to the primary tumor with 6-MV photons. The minimum dose received by the planning tumor volume (PTV) of the gross tumor volume boost was 91.2%-98.2% of the prescription dose (standard deviation [SD]: 3.7%-5.7%). The minimum dose received by the PTV of the clinical tumor volume was 93.8%-104.8% (SD: 4.3%-11.1%) of the prescribed dose. With a median follow-up of 15 mo (range: 3-21 mo), all 6 evaluable patients achieved complete response. Of them, 2 developed local recurrences and 2 had distant metastases, 3 survived with no evidence of disease. After treatment, 2 patients developed esophageal stricture requiring frequent dilation and 1 patient developed tracheal-esophageal fistula.

CONCLUSION: Concurrent IMRT and chemotherapy resulted in an excellent early response in patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer. However, local and distant recurrence and toxicity remain to be a problem. Innovative approaches are needed to improve the outcome.

Radiation therapy for gastrointestinal cancer

This article has reviewed the current role of radiation in the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies and discussed the data supporting its use. Radiation treatment in this setting continues to evolve with the increasing implementation of more conformal delivery techniques. Further scientific investigation is needed to establish the optimal role of radiation and to better define its integration with novel systemic and biologic modalities.

The Role of Radiation Therapy in Thoracic Tumors

Radiation plays an important role in the treatment of thoracic tumors. During the last 10 years there have been several major advances in thoracic RT including the incorporation of concurrent chemotherapy and the application of con-formal radiation-delivery techniques (eg, stereotactic RT, three-dimensional conformal RT, and intensity-modulated RT) that allow radiation dose escalation. Radiation as a local measure remains the definitive treatment of medically inoperable or surgically unresectable disease in NSCLC and part of a multimodality regimen for locally advanced NSCLC, limited stage SCLC, esophageal cancer, thymoma, and mesothelioma.

Prospective trial of radiotherapy for patients 80 years of age or older with squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and efficacy of external beam radiotherapy for elderly patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A trial testing external beam radiotherapy (66 Gy within 6.5 weeks) as a single-modality treatment was performed for biopsy-proven squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus clinically staged as Stage I and IIA (T1-T3N0M0, International Union Against Cancer, 1987) in patients aged > or =80 years.

RESULTS

From January 1999 through December 2002, 51 evaluable patients (35 men and 16 women) with a median age of 83 years (range, 80-91 years) were enrolled from 22 institutions. Of the 51 patients, 18 (35%) had Stage T1 and 33 (65%) had Stage T2-T3 disease. Radiotherapy could be completed in 47 patients (92%) within 43-58 days (median, 49). The actuarial incidence of Grade 3 or worse cardiopulmonary complications at 3 years was 26%, with 3 early deaths, and correlated significantly with the size of the anteroposterior radiotherapy portals. The median survival time and overall survival rate at 3 years was 30 months and 39% (95% confidence interval, 25-52%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results of high-dose radiotherapy in octogenarians are comparable to those in younger patients, but meticulous treatment planning and quality control is required.

Quantification and reduction of cardiac dose in radical radiotherapy for oesophageal cancer

Chemoradiation is increasingly used in the management of localized oesophageal cancer and has been shown in randomized controlled trials to improve overall survival. Although early toxicity of radiotherapy is well documented, this is not the case for late toxicity. As patients with oesophageal cancer have a high incidence of co-morbidities including cardiac problems, the aim of this paper was to quantify the extent of cardiac radiation and discuss the influence of beam arrangement to reduce this. Eight patients with localized oesophageal cancer treated with radical chemoradiation were selected. The mean cardiac dose and the volumes of heart receiving 30 Gy, 40 Gy and 45 Gy from the conventional two-phase technique were compared with those of single-phase 3-field and 4-field conformal beam arrangements. The 4-field arrangement reduced the mean cardiac dose by at least 3.3 Gy compared with the other two beam arrangements (p=0.01). The mean volume of heart receiving high doses between the three techniques widened as the dose increased in the range 30-45 Gy. There is no statistically significant difference in volumes receiving more than 30 Gy and 40 Gy. 65% of the cardiac volume received more than 45 Gy using a two-phase technique, compared with 57% using three fields and 26% using four fields (p<0.01). With a 4-field beam arrangement, therefore, there is a significant reduction in cardiac dose compared with the other two techniques. Cardiac toxicity and a 4-field beam arrangement should be considered when planning radical radiotherapy for localized oesophageal cancer.