Prognostic value of the circumferential resection margin and its definitions in esophageal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

The Prognostic Value of Oligo-Recurrence Following Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Background

The concept of oligo-recurrence has not been generally applied in esophageal cancer. This study aimed to determine the prognostic significance of the number of recurrences in esophageal cancer.

Methods

Patients with squamous cell carcinoma who underwent curative esophagectomy with R0 or R1 resection and who experienced a confirmed recurrence were included. The study included 321 eligible participants from March 2001 to December 2019. The relationship between the number of recurrences and post-recurrence survival was investigated.

Results

The mean age was 63.8±8.1 years, and the majority of the participants (97.5%) were men. The median time to recurrence was 10.7 months, and the median survival time after recurrence was 8.8 months. Multiple recurrences with simultaneous local, regional, and distant locations were common (38%). In terms of the number of recurrences, single recurrences were the most common (38.3%) and had the best post-recurrence survival rate (median, 17.1 months; p<0.001). Patients with 2 or 3 recurrences showed equivalent survival to each other and longer survival than those with 4 or more (median, 9.4 months; p<0.001). In the multivariable analysis, the significant predictors of post-recurrence survival were body mass index, minimally invasive esophagectomy, N stage, R0 resection, post-recurrence treatment, and the number of recurrences (p<0.05).

Conclusion

After esophagectomy, the number of recurrences was the most significant risk factor influencing post-recurrence survival in patients with esophageal cancer. In esophageal cancer, oligo-recurrence can be defined as a recurrence with three or fewer metastases. More intensive treatment might be recommended if oligo-recurrence occurs.

Primary Surgery Not Inferior to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The current gold standard for treatment of locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma is neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery. The shift toward neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) was driven by the Chemoradiotherapy for Oesophageal Cancer Followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) trial. This study reassessed, in daily practice, the presumed advantage of nCRT followed by surgery on long-term survival compared with primary surgery, in a group of all adenocarcinomas treated through a transthoracic approach with extensive 2-field lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study with propensity score-matched analysis included all surgically treated patients between 2000 and 2018 with locally advanced adenocarcinoma (cT1/2 N+ or cT3/4 N0/+). For appropriate comparison, exclusion criteria of the CROSS trial were applied. Patients were matched on age, Charlson comorbidity score, clinical tumor length, and lymph node status. The primary end point was 5-year overall survival.

RESULTS

There were 473 eligible patients who underwent primary surgery (225 patients) or nCRT + surgery (248 patients). After propensity score-matched analysis, 149 matched cases were defined in each group for analysis. There was no significant difference after 5 years between the matched groups in median overall survival (32.5 and 35.0 months, P = .41) and median disease-free survival (14.3 and 13.5 months, P = .16). nCRT was associated with significantly more postoperative complications (mean Comprehensive Complication Index score: 21.0 vs 30.5, P < .0001) and longer mean stay in the hospital (14.0 vs 18.2 days, P = .05) and intensive care unit (11.7 vs 37.7 days, P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our propensity score-matched results indicate that primary surgery, performed through transthoracic approach with extensive 2-field lymphadenectomy, can offer a comparable overall and disease-free survival after 5 years, with potentially fewer postoperative complications and shorter hospital and intensive care unit stay compared with nCRT followed by surgery.

Prognostication and optimal criteria of circumferential margin involvement for esophageal cancer after chemoradiation and esophagectomy

Purpose

Circumferential radial margin (CRM) involvement by tumor after resection for esophageal cancer has been suggested as a significant prognostic factor. However, the prognostic value of CRM involvement after surgery with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of and survival outcomes in CRM involvement as defined by the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) for patients with esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant CCRT and esophagectomy.

Methods

A total of 299 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant CCRT followed by esophagectomy between 2006 and 2016 were enrolled in our study. The CRM status of the specimens obtained was determined pathologically according to both the CAP and RCP criteria. Survival analyses were performed and compared according to the two criteria.

Results

Positive CRM was found in 102 (34.1%) and 40 (13.3%) patients according to RCP and CAP criteria, respectively. The overall and progression-free survival rates were significantly lower in the CRM-positive group than in the CRM-negative group according to both the RCP and CAP criteria. However, under multivariate analysis, in addition to pathological T and N staging of the tumor, only CAP-defined CRM positivity was a significant prognostic factor with adjusted hazard ratios of 2.64 (1.56-4.46) and 2.25 (1.34-3.78) for overall and progression-free survival, respectively (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy, CAP-defined CRM positivity is an independent predictor of survival. Adjuvant therapy should be offered to patients with positive CRM.

Research Progress on the Predicting Factors and Coping Strategies for Postoperative Recurrence of Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer is one of the malignant tumors with poor prognosis in China. Currently, the treatment of esophageal cancer is still based on surgery, especially in early and mid-stage patients, to achieve the goal of radical cure. However, esophageal cancer is a kind of tumor with a high risk of recurrence and metastasis, and locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis are the leading causes of death after surgery. Although multimodal comprehensive treatment has advanced in recent years, the prediction, prevention and treatment of postoperative recurrence and metastasis of esophageal cancer are still unsatisfactory. How to reduce recurrence and metastasis in patients after surgery remains an urgent problem to be solved. Given the clinical demand for early detection of postoperative recurrence of esophageal cancer, clinical and basic research aiming to meet this demand has been a hot topic, and progress has been observed in recent years. Therefore, this article reviews the research progress on the factors that influence and predict postoperative recurrence of esophageal cancer, hoping to provide new research directions and treatment strategies for clinical practice.

Positive circumferential resection margin in locally advanced esophageal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of positive circumferential resection margin on prognosis in esophageal cancer is under controversy. Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses had limitations. This updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the prognostic impact of positive circumferential resection margin in esophageal cancer.PubMed and Web of Science were searched for studies investigating the association between circumferential resection margin status and prognosis in esophageal cancer. Study population were focused on T3 and/or T4a patients. Study selection was based on availability of survival information (Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted analysis). Random-effects models were used to summarize hazard ratios for overall survival and disease-free survival.According to College of American Pathologists criteria, circumferential resection margin-positive patients had shorter median overall survival (P < 0.0001) and shorter median disease-free survival (P < 0.0001) compared with circumferential resection margin-negative patients. The pooled hazard ratios for overall survival and disease-free survival were 2.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.68-2.53; P < 0.0001) and 2.00 (95% confidence interval, 1.41-2.84; P < 0.0001), respectively. According to the Royal College of Pathologists criteria, circumferential resection margin-positive patients had shorter median overall survival (P < 0.0001) and shorter median disease-free survival (P < 0.0001) compared with circumferential resection margin-negative patients. The pooled hazard ratios for overall survival and disease-free survival were 1.31 (95% confidence interval, 1.16-1.48; P < 0.0001) and 1.31 (95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.57; P < 0.0001), respectively.ompared with negative circumferential resection margin, positive circumferential resection margin is associated with worse survival outcomes in esophageal cancer.

The "Real R0": A Resection Margin Smaller Than 0.1 cm is Associated with a Poor Prognosis After Oncologic Esophagectomy

Background

Although resection margin (R) status is a widely used prognostic factor after esophagectomy, the definition of positive margins (R1) is not universal. The Royal College of Pathologists considers R1 resection to be a distance less than 0.1 cm, whereas the College of American Pathologists considers it to be a distance of 0.0 cm. This study assessed the predictive value of R status after oncologic esophagectomy, comparing survival and recurrence among patients with R0 resection (> 0.1-cm clearance), R0+ resection (≤ 0.1-cm clearance), and R1 resection (0.0-cm clearance).

Methods

The study enrolled all eligible patients undergoing curative oncologic esophagectomy between 2012 and 2018. Clinicopathologic features, survival, and recurrence were compared for R0, R0+, and R1 patients. Categorical variables were compared with the chi-square or Fisher’s test, and continuous variables were compared with the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, whereas the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression were used for survival analysis.

Results

Among the 160 patients included in this study, 113 resections (70.6%) were R0, 34 (21.3%) were R0+, and 13 (8.1%) were R1. The R0 patients had a better overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) than the R0+ and R1 patients. The R0+ resection offered a lower long-term recurrence risk than the R1 resection, and the R status was independently associated with DFS, but not OS, in the multivariate analysis. Both the R0+ and R1 patients had significantly more adverse histologic features (lymphovascular and perineural invasion) than the R0 patients and experienced more distant and locoregional recurrence.

Conclusions

Although R status is an independent predictor of DFS after oncologic esophagectomy, the < 0.1-cm definition for R1 resection seems more appropriate than the 0.0-cm definition as an indicator of poor tumor biology, long-term recurrence, and survival.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10121-y.

Outcome of microscopically non-radical oesophagectomy for oesophageal and oesophagogastric junctional cancer: nationwide cohort study

Background

Microscopically non-radical (R1) oesophageal cancer resection has been associated with worse survival. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for R1 resection and to investigate how this affects long-term survival.

Methods

The Swedish National Register for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer was used to identify all patients who underwent oesophageal cancer resection with curative intent between 2006 and 2017. Risk factors for R1 resection were assessed by multivariable logistic regression analysis, and factors predicting 5-year survival identified by multivariable Cox regression.

Results

The study included 1460 patients. Surgical margins were involved microscopically in 142 patients (9.7 per cent). The circumferential resection margin was involved in 114 (7.8 per cent), the proximal margin in 53 (3.6 per cent), and the distal margin in 29 (2.0 per cent). In 30 specimens (2.1 per cent), two or all three margins were involved. Independent risk factors for R1 resection were male sex, low BMI, absence of neoadjuvant treatments, and clinical T4 disease. The 5-year survival rate for the entire cohort was 42.2 per cent, but only 18.0 per cent for those who had an R1 resection. Independent risk factors for death within 5 years of resection were male sex, age above 60 years, normal BMI, ASA fitness grade III, intermediate-level education, R1 resection (hazard ratio 1.80, 95 per cent c.i. 1.40 to 2.32), clinical T3 disease, and clinical lymph node metastasis.

Conclusion

R1 resection is common and predicts poor 5-year survival. Absence of neoadjuvant treatment is a risk factor for R1 resection.

Development and validation of an MRI-based radiomic nomogram to distinguish between good and poor responders in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

In the clinical management of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), the early identification of poor and good responders after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (N-CRT) is essential. Therefore, we developed and validated predictive models including MRI findings from the structured report template, clinical and radiomics parameters to differentiate between poor and good responders in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Preoperative multiparametric MRI from 183 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (122 in the training cohort, 61 in the validation cohort) was included in this retrospective study. After preprocessing, radiomic features were extracted and two methods of feature selection was applied to reduce the number of radiomics features. Logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF) machine learning classifiers were trained to identify good responders from poor responders. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to incorporate the radiomic signature and clinical risk factors into a nomogram. Classifier performance was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).

RESULTS

For the differentiation of poor and good responders, the radiomics model with an LR classifier achieved AUCs of 0.869 and 0.842 for the training and validation cohorts, respectively. The nomogram showed the highest reproducibility and prognostic ability in the training and validation cohorts, with AUCs of 0.923 (95% confidence interval, 0.872-0.975) and 0.898 (0.819-0.978), respectively. Additionally, the nomogram achieved significant risk stratification of patients in respect to progression free survival (PFS).

CONCLUSIONS

The nomogram accurately differentiated good and poor responders in patients with LARC undergoing N-CRT, and showed significant performance for predicting PFS.

Prognostic impact of circumferential resection margin in esophageal cancer with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

The prognostic impact of circumferential resection margin (CRM) in surgically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has been controversial. This investigation assessed the prognostic impact of CRM in surgically resected pathologic T3 ESCC patients with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). We reviewed consecutive p/yp T3 ESCC patients undergoing esophagectomy from two medical centers between January 2009 and December 2016. The cohort was divided into two groups: upfront esophagectomy (upfront surgery) and nCRT followed by esophagectomy (nCRT + surgery). CRM status was assessed and divided into CRM > 1 mm, 0 < CRM < 1 mm, and tumor at CRM. A total of 217 p/yp T3 ESCC patients undergoing esophagectomy (138 patients in the upfront surgery group and 79 in the nCRT + surgery group) were enrolled. In the upfront surgery group, patients with 0 < CRM < 1 mm showed equivalent overall survival to those with CRM > 1 mm (log-rank P = 0.817) and significantly outlived those with tumor at CRM (log-rank P < 0.001). However, in the nCRT + surgery group, CRM > 1 mm failed to show survival superiority to CRM between 0 and 1 mm or involved by cancer (log-rank P = 0.390). In conclusion, a negative CRM, even though being <1 mm, is adequate for pT3 ESCC patients undergoing upfront esophagectomy. In contrast, the CRM status is less prognostic in ypT3 ESCC patients undergoing nCRT followed by esophagectomy.

Prediction of a positive circumferential resection margin at surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus

Background

A positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been associated with higher rates of locoregional recurrence and worse survival in oesophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to establish if clinicopathological and radiological variables might predict CRM positivity in patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery for oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Multivariable analysis of clinicopathological and CT imaging characteristics considered potentially predictive of CRM was performed at initial staging and following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Prediction models were constructed. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (c.i.) from 1000 bootstrapping was assessed.

Results

A total of 223 patients were included in the study. Poor differentiation (odds ratio (OR) 2·84, 95 per cent c.i. 1·39 to 6·01) and advanced clinical tumour status (T3-4) (OR 2·93, 1·03 to 9·48) were independently associated with an increased CRM risk at diagnosis. CT-assessed lack of response (stable or progressive disease) following chemotherapy independently corresponded with an increased risk of CRM positivity (OR 3·38, 1·43 to 8·50). Additional CT evidence of local invasion and higher CT tumour volume (14 cm3) improved the performance of a prediction model, including all the above parameters, with an AUC (c-index) of 0·76 (0·67 to 0·83). Variables associated with significantly higher rates of locoregional recurrence were pN status (P = 0·020), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0·007) and poor response to chemotherapy (Mandard score 4-5) (P = 0·006). CRM positivity was associated with a higher locoregional recurrence rate, but this was not statistically significant (P = 0·092).

Conclusion

The presence of advanced cT status, poor tumour differentiation, and CT-assessed lack of response to chemotherapy, higher tumour volume and local invasion can be used to identify patients at risk of a positive CRM following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Meta-analysis of the influence of a positive circumferential resection margin in oesophageal cancer

Background

The evidence regarding the prognostic impact of a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) in oesophageal cancer is conflicting, and there is global variability in the definition of a positive CRM. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a positive CRM on survival in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer.

Methods

A systematic review and meta‐analysis was performed. PubMed and Embase databases were searched for articles to May 2018 examining the effect of a positive CRM on survival. Cohort studies written in English were included. Meta‐analyses of univariable and multivariable hazard ratios (HRs) were performed using both Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) and College of American Pathologists (CAP) criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Egger regression, and Duval and Tweedie trim‐and‐fill statistics were used to assess publication bias.

Results

Of 133 studies screened, 29 incorporating 6142 patients were finally included for analysis. Pooled univariable HRs for overall survival in patients with a positive CRM were 1·68 (95 per cent c.i. 1·48 to 1·91; P < 0·001) and 2·18 (1·84 to 2·60; P < 0·001) using RCP and CAP criteria respectively. Subgroup analyses demonstrated similar results for patients by T category, neoadjuvant therapy and tumour type. Pooled HRs from multivariable analyses suggested that a positive CRM was independently predictive of a worse overall survival (RCP: 1·41, 1·21 to 1·64, P < 0·001; CAP: 2·37, 1·60 to 3·51, P < 0·001).

Conclusion

A positive CRM is associated with a worse prognosis regardless of classification system, T category, tumour type or neoadjuvant therapy.

Prognostic value of circumferential resection margin in T3N0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

The prognostic value of positive circumferential resection margins (CRM) in resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is unclear. The Royal College of Pathologists criteria and the College of American Pathologists criteria are the two commonly used definitions of CRM involvement. The aim of this report was to compare the prognostic performance of the two criteria and to propose a modified stratification in patients who underwent radical esophagectomy for ESCC.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 112 patients with pathologically confirmed T3N0M0 ESCC and without neoadjuvant therapy from June 2009 and July 2011. The optimal cutoff point was obtained by the X-tile. The prognostic performance of different classifications of CRM was assessed in terms of homogeneity, discriminatory ability, and monotonicity.

Results

According to the Royal College of Pathologists criteria, a positive CRM was detected in 87 patients (77.7%); and 24 patients (21.4%) were found with positive CRM according to the College of American Pathologists criteria. Non-significant associations between overall survival and CRM were observed according to either of the two criteria. The analysis of reclassifying the CRM criteria demonstrated that the optimal cutoff CRM value for best prognostic power was 600 µm. Patients with CRM more than 600 µm showed better overall survival (P<0.05) than the cases with CRM less than 600 µm. Furthermore, the improved homogeneity, discriminatory ability, and monotonicity gradients were also found in this modified criteria, as compared with the two existing criteria.

Conclusions

Our study highlighted that CRM was an independent prognostic factor for survival in esophageal cancer patients, and the modified CRM criteria had better prognostic power than the traditional criteria in patients with ESCC.

Clinical implication of the innovations of the 8th edition of the TNM classification for esophageal and esophago-gastric cancer

Epidemiology of esophageal cancer and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) has deeply changed for the past two decades with a dramatically increase of adenocarcinoma whereas squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) has slowly decreased. Moreover, the two histological types differ in a number of features including risks factors, tumor location, tumor biology and outcomes. In acknowledgement of these differences, the newest 8^th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor, node and metastasis (TNM) staging classification of epithelial cancers of the esophagus and EGJ has refined this histology-specific disease stage with incorporation of new anatomic and non-anatomic categories. Based on data-driven of patients collected through the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration (WECC) group, the 8^th edition database encompasses a six-continent cohort of 22,654 patients among 33 institutions including patients treated with surgery alone and, for the first time, patients treated after neoadjuvant treatment. Anatomic categories include T descriptors (tumor invasion), N descriptors (regional lymph node invasion) and M descriptors (distant site). Non anatomic categories include grade differentiation (G descriptors) and tumor location (L descriptors). Category descriptors are currently assessed by endoscopy with biopsy, by endoscopy ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), by thoracic-abdominal-pelvic computed tomography (CT) and whole body flurodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) fused with CT. The new 8^th edition considers separate and temporally related cancer classification based on the treatment strategy: clinical cTNM (before any treatment), pathologic pTNM (after surgery alone) and postneoadjuvant pathologic ypTNM (after neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery). The 8th edition permits a more robust and reliable random forest-based machine learning analysis. Refinement of each T, N, M categories and subcategories makes the 8^th edition more accurate and more adaptable to the current practice including neoadjuvant regimen. The main objective of this review is to examine the current staging of esophageal cancer and the new aspects of the 8^th edition with its applications to clinical practice.