Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy is safe and feasible for treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Does neoadjuvant therapy contribute to increased risk in anastomotic leakage of esophageal cancer? A network meta-analysis

AIM

Conflicting results have been reported about the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on anastomotic leakage (AL) after esophagectomy. We aimed to unravel the potential effect of neoadjuvant therapy on AL after esophagectomy through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed by retrieving relevant literature from PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science Core Collection. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies (RS) comparing the following treatment modalities were included: neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT), neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nR), neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT), and surgery alone (SA). Subgroup analyses by radiation dose, examined lymph nodes (ELN), route of reconstruction, site of anastomosis, and surgical approach were also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 62 studies with 12,746 patients were included for the present study, among which 17 were RCTs. There were no significantly statistical differences observed among the five treatment modalities in AL for both RCTs (nCRT-nICT: risk ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 0.52-4.4; nCT-nICT: 1.71, 0.56-5.08; nICT-nR: 0.79, 0.12-8.02; nICT-SA: 0.59, 0.2-1.84) and RS (nCRT-nICT: odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 0.84-2.84; nCT-nICT: 1.56, 0.87-2.88; nICT-SA: 0.6, 0.31-1.12; nICT-nR: 1.08, 0.09-36.02). Subgroup analysis revealed that no significant difference in AL was observed among the five treatment modalities except for the impact of nCRT versus nCT (0.21, 0.05-0.73) on AL with a radiation dose ≥41.4 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant therapy do not significantly increase the incidence of AL after esophagectomy. Administration of irradiation with a moderate dose is not associated with elevated risk in AL. Clinicians can be less apprehensive about prescribing nCRT.

Risk Factors Associated With Anastomotic Stricture in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Experience From a High-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is a prevalent cancer, with a high incidence in low socioeconomic category countries. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is increasingly being used to treat this malignant condition. However, anastomotic stricture is a serious complication post esophagectomy. The study aims to enhance diagnostic consistency, improve treatment methods, guide patient management, stratify outcomes, and offer evidence-based preventive interventions.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 550 patients who had minimally invasive esophagus surgery was carried out at Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre in Lahore between 2015 and 2020. All patients were treated with radical resection. For tumors of the lower esophagus and gastroesophageal junction, transhiatal esophagectomy was used; for tumors of the middle and upper thoracic esophagus, right video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) was used in a three-stage procedure. Patients were routinely followed up two weeks after discharge, then every three, six, and 12 months.

RESULTS

The mean age and BMI were 46.7 years and 19.4 kg/m2, respectively. Anastomotic leaks were rare, with only 13 patients experiencing them. The grade of tumor differentiation was poor, moderate, and well-differentiated. The study found that older age, high Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and malignancies located in the upper and middle one-third of the esophagus had significant associations with anastomotic stricture. However, some variables, like sex, did not show significant associations in either analysis.

CONCLUSION

The study reveals that factors such as older patient age, high ECOG performance status, single comorbidity, and malignancies located in the upper and middle one-third of the esophagus significantly influence anastomotic stricture. The study suggests that measures against anastomotic stricture such as endoscopic procedures and minimally invasive esophagectomy should be implemented to minimize the complications.

Impact of treatment interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery in lung squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The optimal timing for surgery following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy for lung squamous cell carcinoma appears to be a topic of limited data. Many clinical studies lack stringent guidelines regarding this timing. The objective of this study is to explore the effect of the interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery on survival outcomes in patients with lung squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS

This study conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with lung squamous cell carcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy between January 2019 and October 2022 at The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine. Patients were divided into two groups based on the treatment interval: ≤33 days and > 33 days. The primary observational endpoints of the study were Disease-Free Survival (DFS) and Overall Survival (OS). Secondary observational endpoints included Objective response rate (ORR), Major Pathological Response (MPR), and Pathological Complete Remission (pCR).

RESULTS

Using the Kaplan-Meier methods, the ≤ 33d group demonstrated a superior DFS curve compared to the > 33d group (p = 0.0015). The median DFS for the two groups was 952 days and 590 days, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the OS curves between the groups (p = 0.66), and the median OS was not reached for either group. The treatment interval did not influence the pathologic response of the tumor or lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

The study observed that shorter treatment intervals were associated with improved DFS, without influencing OS, pathologic response, or surgical safety. Patients should avoid having a prolonged treatment interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery.

Comparisons of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted, video-assisted, and open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment: a retrospective study

Background

Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment.

Methods

Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications.

Results

No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.

Feasibility research of enhanced recovery after surgery implemented in esophageal cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a perioperative management protocol to accelerate patient recovery. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of ERAS protocols implemented in patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) before minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy.

Methods

This retrospective study compared the short-term clinical outcomes in esophagectomy patients from June 2018 to June 2021. Subjects were divided into two categories: those who underwent NACT (NACT group) and the non-NACT group.

Results

There was no significant difference in total postoperative complication morbidity between the NACT and non-NACT groups (21.2% vs. 20.7%, P=0.936). In addition, the hospital length of stay post-surgery (7.90 vs. 7.71 days, P=0.424) was not significantly longer when compared to the non-NACT group. The time to chest tube removal (5.37 vs. 5.13 days, P=0.238) and first bowel movement (2.92 vs. 3.01 days, P=0.560) was also similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in postoperative complications rate, postoperative hospital length of stay, and readmission rate between the two group. This study proved that ERAS protocols seemed to be safe and feasible for patients who received NACT before esophagectomy.

Implementation of the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group definitions: the benefits of speaking the same language

In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) reported consensus definitions for complications after esophagectomy. This aimed to reduce variation in complication reporting, attributed to heterogeneous definitions. This systematic review aimed to describe the implementation of this definition set, including the effect on complication frequency and variation. A systematic literature review was performed, identifying all observational and randomized studies reporting complication frequencies after esophagectomy since the ECCG publication. Recruitment periods before and subsequent to the index ECCG publication date were included. Coefficients of variance were calculated to assess outcome heterogeneity. Of 144 studies which met inclusion criteria, 70 (48.6%) used ECCG definitions. The median number of separately reported complication types was five per study; only one study reported all ECCG complications. The coefficients of variance of the reported frequencies of eight of the 10 most common complications were reduced in studies which used the ECCG definitions compared with those that did not (P = 0.036). Among ECCG studies, the frequencies of postoperative pneumothorax, reintubation, and pulmonary emboli were significantly reduced in 2020-2021, compared with 2015-2019 (P = 0.006, 0.034, and 0.037 respectively). The ECCG definition set has reduced variation in esophagectomy morbidity reporting. This adds greater confidence to the observed gradual improvement in outcomes with time, and its ongoing use and wider dissemination should be encouraged. However, only a handful of outcomes are widely reported, and only rarely is it used in its entirety.

Impact of the interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery on surgical–pathological outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer

Introduction

The interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been well characterized. This study investigated the association between the time-to-surgery (TTS) interval and surgical–pathological outcomes.

Method

Clinical data of patients who received neoadjuvant immun-ochemotherapy followed by surgery for NSCLC between January 2019 and September 2021 were collected. The patients were divided into three groups based on TTS interval: the early-surgery group (ESG), the standard-surgery group (SSG), and the delayed-surgery group (DSG). The primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), major pathological response (MPR), and pathological complete response (pCR). The secondary endpoint was surgical outcome.

Results

Of the 171 patients, 16 (9.4%) received surgery in ≤28 days, 49 (28.7%) received surgery within 29–42 days, and 106 (61.9%) received surgery in ≥43 days after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy, with a median TTS of 46 days. The postoperative drainage of the ESG group (455.1 ml) was significantly less than that of the SSG group (680.7 ml) and the DSG group (846.5 ml; p = 0.037). However, the TTS interval did not influence the duration of the operation (P = 0.54), the extent of intraoperative bleeding (P = 0.60), or the length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.17). The ORR was observed in 69%, 51%, and 56% of patients in the ESG, the SSG, and the DSG, respectively (P = 0.46), and MPR occurred in 50%, 47%, and 58% (P = 0.38) of patients in the ESG, the SSG, and the DSG, respectively. Similarly, no statistically significant difference was found for pCR (ESG: 31%; SSG: 27%; DSG: 42%; P = 0.14).

Conclusion

This retrospective study indicated that TTS exerts no significant effect on the feasibility and safety of surgery in the neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy setting of NSCLC. Analysis of the TTS interval revealed a tendency for delayed surgery to be associated with a pathological response in NSCLC, although this association was not statistically significant.

Chemokine-targeted therapies: An opportunity to remodel immune profiles in gastro-oesophageal tumours

Immunotherapies are transforming outcomes for many cancer patients and are quickly becoming the fourth pillar of cancer therapy. However, their efficacy of only ∼25% in gastro-oesophageal cancer has been disappointing. This is attributed to factors such as insufficient patient stratification and the pro-tumourigenic immune landscape of gastro-oesophageal tumours. The chemokine profiles of solid tumours and the availability of effector immune cells greatly influence the immune infiltrate, producing 'cold' or 'immune-excluded' tumours in which immunotherapies are unable to reinvigorate the immune response. Other biological functions for chemokines have emerged, such as promoting cell survival, polarising T cell responses, and supporting several hallmarks of cancer. Therefore, chemokine networks may be exploited with therapeutic intent to mobilise and polarise anti-tumour immune cells, with further utility as combination treatments to augment the efficacy of current cancer immunotherapies. Few studies have demonstrated the clinical benefit of chemokine-targeted therapies as monotherapies, and this review proposes their consideration as combination treatments. Herein, we explore the anti-tumour and pro-tumour implications of chemokine signalling in gastro-oesophageal cancer and discuss their value as prognostic and predictive biomarkers in response to treatment.

Optimal preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide, especially in East Asia. ESCC accounts for more than 90% of esophageal cancer. Currently, neoadjuvant therapy in combination with surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment. However, the overall survival rate of patients with locally advanced ESCC is not satisfactory even when treated following the standard treatment guidelines. With neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy, or emerging immunotherapy, continuous exploration of efficacy in relation to ESCC is expected to improve overall survival further. Here, we review and summarize current evidence for efficacy of preoperative therapy for locally advanced ESCC.

The treatments and postoperative complications of esophageal cancer: a review

Abstract

Esophageal cancer is still one of the most common cancers in the world. We review the appropriate treatments at different stages of esophageal cancer and also analyze the advantages and disadvantages of these treatments. The prognosis and recovery of different treatment regimens are further discussed. In particular, post-operative complications are the major causes of high mortality derived from the esophageal cancer. Therefore, we particularly discuss the main complications resulting in high mortality after surgery of esophageal cancer, and summarize their risk factors and treatment options.

Background

As the common cancer, the complications of esophageal cancer after surgery have been not obtained systematic treatment strategy, focusing on treatment regimens based on the different stages of esophageal cancers.

Methods and overview

This paper systematically summarizes the appropriate treatment strategies for different stages of esophageal cancers, and their advantages and disadvantages. We particularly focus on the postoperative survival rate of patients and postoperative complications, and discuss the causes of high mortality risk factors after surgery. The risk factors of death and corresponding treatment methods are further summarized in this study.

Conclusion

Postoperative complications is the main cause responsible for the hard cure of esophageal cancers. The existing literatures indicate that postoperative anastomotic fistula is one of the most important complications leading to death, while it has not received much attention yet. We suggest that anastomotic fistula should be detected and dealt with early by summarizing these literatures. It is, therefore, necessary to develop a set of methods to predict or check anastomotic fistula in advance.

Comparison of the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive, video-assisted minimally invasive, and open esophagectomy

Background

The development of minimally invasive surgery has initiated many changes in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer (EC) patients. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE).

Methods

Our study included patients who had undergone McKeown esophagectomy at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 2016 and December 2018. We analyzed clinical baseline data, as well as perioperative and pathological outcomes.

Results

A total of 312 cases met the inclusion criteria (OE: 77, VAMIE: 144, RAMIE: 91). The OE group had a greater number of late-stage patients as well as those who received the neo-adjuvant therapy, compared with the other two groups (P=0.001). The procedure time in the OE group was also shorter by approximately 20 minutes (P=0.021). Total blood loss was significantly lower in the two MIE groups (P=0.004) than in the OE group. There were no differences in the total number of dissected lymph nodes between the three groups (OE: 24.09±10.77, VAMIE: 23.07±10.18, RAMIE: 22.84±8.37, P=0.680). Both the lymph node number (P=0.155) and achievement rate (P=0.190) in the right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) area were comparable between the three groups. However, in the left RLN area, minimally invasive approaches resulted in a higher number of harvested lymph nodes (P=0.032) and greater achievement rate (P=0.018). Neither MIE procedure increased the incidence of postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive surgery could guarantee the quality of bilateral RLN lymphadenectomy without increasing postoperative complications, especially in RAMIE patients. The rational choice of different surgical approaches would improve both safety and oncological outcomes for patients.

Clinical significance and prognosis of supraclavicular lymph node metastasis in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer

Background

Although most studies proved that thoracic esophageal cancer surgery with supraclavicular lymph nodes (SCLNs) metastasis could benefit, less than 30% of the 5-year survival rate remained controversy on its surgical treatment. In this study, we aimed to analyze the prognosis of SCLNs on the different segments of thoracic esophageal cancer, which will supply a reference for the treatment of this disease.

Methods

Retrospectively collected the clinical data of 163 patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cancer (ESCC) and compared the effects of SCLNs on prognosis in different segments.

Results

Patients with SCLNs metastasis had a worse prognosis than the negative group (P<0.001). In the upper thoracic group, there was no significant difference in OS between SCLNs positive group and negative group (P=0.077); however, in the middle and lower thoracic group, SCLNs positive group had a worse prognosis than the negative group (P<0.001) and lymph nodes positive in other sites (except for SCLNs) (P=0.039). Multivariate analysis found that SCLNs metastasis was an independent risk factor affecting the prognosis of ESCC in the middle and lower thoracic segments (P=0.007).

Conclusions

For patients with upper thoracic ESCC, SCLNs appear to be regional nodes. For the middle and lower thoracic ESCC, SCLNs should be defined as distant metastasis, and neoadjuvant therapy first may be an available therapy.