Utility of dysphagia grade in predicting endoscopic ultrasound T-stage of non-metastatic esophageal cancer

Characterization of Prevalent, Post-Endoscopy, and Incident Esophageal Cancer in the United States: A Large Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Efforts to assess and improve the effectiveness of Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening and surveillance are ongoing in the United States. Currently, there are limited population-based data in the United States to guide these efforts.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from large commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans in the United States from 2004 - 2019. We identified individuals with BE and analyzed the proportion who developed EAC. EACs were classified as prevalent EAC (diagnosed within 30 days of index endoscopy), post-endoscopy esophageal adenocarcinoma (PEEC, diagnosed 30 - 365 days after index endoscopy), and incident EAC (diagnosed 365 days or more after index endoscopy). Using this cohort, we performed a nested case-control study to identify factors associated with prevalent EAC at BE diagnosis and study healthcare utilization prior to BE diagnosis.

RESULTS

We identified 50,817 individuals with incident BE. Of the 366 who developed EAC, 67.2%, 13.7%, and 19.1% were diagnosed with prevalent EAC, PEEC, and incident EAC respectively. Factors positively associated with prevalent EAC versus BE without prevalent EAC included male sex, dysphagia, weight loss, and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score. In those with prevalent EAC, most patients with dysphagia or weight loss had their symptoms first recorded within three months of EAC diagnosis. Healthcare utilization rates were similar between those with and without prevalent EAC.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-thirds of EACs among individuals with BE are diagnosed at the time of BE diagnosis. Additionally, PEEC accounts for 14% of these EACs. These results may guide future research studies that investigate novel BE diagnostic strategies that reduce the morbidity and mortality of EAC.

Clinical Risk Prediction Model for Neoadjuvant Therapy in Resectable Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

GOALS AND BACKGROUND

Clinical staging with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and positron emission tomography (PET) is used to identify esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients with locally advanced disease and therefore, benefit from neoadjuvant therapy. However, EUS is operator dependent and subject to interobserver variability. Therefore, we aimed to identify clinical predictors of locally advanced EAC and build a predictive model that can be used as an adjunct to current staging methods.

STUDY

This was a cross-sectional study of patients with EAC who underwent preoperative staging with EUS and PET scan followed by definitive therapy at our institution from January 2011 to December 2017. Demographic data, symptoms, endoscopic findings, EUS, and PET scan findings were obtained.

RESULTS

Four hundred and twenty-six patients met the study criteria, of which 86 (20.2%) patients had limited stage EAC and 340 (79.8%) had locally advanced disease. The mean age was 65.4±10.3 years of which 356 (83.6%) were men and 393 (92.3%) were White. On multivariable analysis, age (above 75 or below 65 y), dysphagia [odds ratio (OR): 2.84], weight loss (OR: 2.06), protruding tumor (OR: 2.99), and tumor size >2 cm (OR: 3.3) were predictive of locally advanced disease, while gastrointestinal bleeding (OR: 0.36) and presence of visible Barrett's esophagus (OR: 0.4) were more likely to be associated with limited stage. A nomogram for predicting the risk of locally advanced EAC was constructed and internally validated.

CONCLUSIONS

We constructed a nomogram to facilitate an individualized prediction of the risk of locally advanced EAC. This model can aid in decision making for neoadjuvant therapy in EAC.

Clinical Predictors of Locally Advanced Pathology in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Background

In patients with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), the decision for neoadjuvant treatment depends on clinical staging with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and positron-emission tomography (PET) scan. Patients with locally advanced EAC pathology misclassified as early EAC by clinical staging are missing the opportunity to receive neoadjuvant therapy. We aim to identify predictors of locally advanced pathology in EAC to determine more accurately those who benefit from neoadjuvant therapy. 

Methods

Retrospective study of patients who underwent upfront endoscopic or surgical resection for EAC without neoadjuvant therapy from January 2011 to December 2017 was performed. Clinical characteristics, EUS, PET scan and histologic findings were analyzed. Multivariable analysis of predictors of locally advanced stage was performed and a risk prediction score was developed.

Results

A total of 97 patients were included; 68 patients were staged as early EAC (pT1 or pT2 and pN0) and 29 patients were staged as locally advanced EAC (pT1 or pT2 with pN1 and pT3 or pT4 irrespective of N status). In a predictive model of EAC, patients presenting with dysphagia, tumor size >2 cm, exophytic mass appearance on endoscopy and absence of hiatal hernia were more likely to be have locally advanced pathology with a probability of 70% (C-statistic 0.766).

Conclusions

A risk prediction model based on the presence of dysphagia, tumor size >2 cm, exophytic mass appearance and absence of hiatal hernia can be used to identify locally advanced pathology in EAC patients.

Esophageal Cancer: An Updated Review

The incidence of esophageal cancer (EC) is on the rise. With the distinct subtypes of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma comes specific risk factors, and as a result, people of certain regions of the world can be more prone to a subtype. For example, squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus has the highest incidence in eastern Africa and eastern Asia, with smoking being a major risk factor, whereas adenocarcinoma is more prevalent in North America and western Europe, with gastroesophageal reflux disease being a leading risk factor. With that being said, adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma have similar and unfortunately poor survival rates, partly because EC is prone to early metastasis given that the esophagus does not have a serosa, as well as the superficial nature of its lymphatics compared with the rest of the gastrointestinal tract. This makes early detection of the utmost importance, and certain patients have been shown to have the benefit of screening/surveillance endoscopies, including those with Barrett's esophagus, lye-induced/caustic strictures, tylosis, and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Until treatments significantly improve, identifying EC at the earliest stage will have the best success for patient outcomes, and further elucidation of its pathogenesis and risk factors may lead to identifying other high-risk groups that should be screened.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Operable Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines

PURPOSE

Limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options for nonmetastatic, operable patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). In this systematic review, the American Radium Society (ARS) gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) evaluating how neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment regimens compared with each other, surgery alone, or definitive chemoradiation in terms of response to therapy, quality of life, and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was used to develop an extensive analysis of peer-reviewed phase 2R and phase 3 randomized controlled trials as well as meta-analyses found within the Ovid Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase databases between 2009 to 2019. These studies were used to inform the expert panel, which then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 4 broadly representative clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi).

RESULTS

For a medically operable nonmetastatic patient with a cT3 and/or cN+ adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or GEJ (Siewert I-II), the panel most strongly recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation. For a cT2N0M0 patient with high-risk features, the panel recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. For patients found to have pathologically involved nodes (pN+) who did not receive any neoadjuvant therapy, the panel recommends adjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. These guidelines assess the appropriateness of various dose-fractionating schemes and target volumes.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens for esophageal cancer are still evolving with many areas of active investigation. These guidelines are intended for the use of practitioners and patients who desire information about the management of operable esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Management of Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

Management of locally advanced esophageal cancer is evolving. Trimodality therapy with chemoradiation followed by surgical resection has become the standard of care. However, the value of planned surgery after response to therapy is in question. In this article, we discuss the current practice principles and evidence for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Topics will include various neoadjuvant therapies, trimodality versus bimodality therapy, and outcomes for salvage esophagectomies. In addition, emerging novel therapies, such as HER2 inhibitors and immunotherapy, are available for unresectable or metastatic disease, enabling a greater armamentarium of tumor biology-specific treatments.

Health-related quality of life measure distinguishes between low and high clinical T stages in esophageal cancer

Background

Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophagus (FACT-E) is a health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument validated in patients with esophageal cancer. It is made up of both a general component and an esophageal cancer subscale (ECS). Our objective was to explore the relationship between baseline FACT-E, ECS and clinically determined T-stage in patients with stage II-IV cancer of the gastroesophageal junction or thoracic esophagus.

Methods

Data from four prospective studies in Canadian academic hospitals were combined. These were consecutive and eligible patients treated between 1996 and 2014 with clinical stage II-IV cancer of the gastroesophageal junction or thoracic esophagus. All patients completed pre-treatment FACT-E. Parametric (ANOVA) and non-parametric (Kruskal-Wallis) analyses were performed.

Results

Of the 135 patients that were deemed eligible, the T-stage distribution determined clinically was: 10 (7.4%) T1, 33 (24.4%) T2, 79 (58.5%) T3 and 13 (9.6%) T4. Parametric analysis showed no significant association between FACT-E & T-stage, although there was a trend towards significance (P=0.08). Non-parametric analysis showed a significant association between FACT-E and T-stage (P=0.05). Post-hoc tests identified that the most significant differences in FACT-E scores were between T1 and T3 patients. Both parametric (P=0.002) and non-parametric (P=0.003) analyses showed an association between ECS & T-stage. Post-hoc analyses showed significant differences in ECS scores between T1 and higher T-stages (P<0.01).

Conclusions

Patient-reported HRQOL scores appear to be significantly different in patients with clinical T1 esophageal cancer as compared to those with higher clinical T stages. Since distinguishing T1 from T2/T3 lesions is important in guiding the most appropriate treatment modality and since EUS appears to have difficulties reliably making such T-stage distinctions, FACT-E and ECS scores may be helpful as an adjunct to guide decision-making.

Comparative effectiveness of upfront esophagectomy versus induction chemoradiation in clinical stage T2N0 esophageal cancer: A decision analysis

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effectiveness of upfront esophagectomy versus induction chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy for overall survival in patients with clinical T2N0 (cT2N0) esophageal cancer. We also assessed the influence of the diagnostic uncertainty of endoscopic ultrasound on the expected benefit of chemoradiation.

METHODS

We created a decision analysis model representing 2 treatment strategies for cT2N0 esophageal cancer: upfront esophagectomy that may be followed by adjuvant therapy for upstaged patients and induction chemoradiation for all patients with cT2N0 esophageal cancer followed by esophagectomy. Parameter values within the model were obtained from published data, and median survival for pathologic subgroups was derived from the National Cancer Database. In sensitivity analyses, staging uncertainty of endoscopic ultrasound was introduced by varying the probability of pathologic upstaging.

RESULTS

The baseline model showed comparable median survival for both strategies: 48.3 months for upfront esophagectomy versus 45.9 months for induction chemoradiation and surgery. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated induction chemoradiation was beneficial, with probability of upstaging > 48.1%, which is within the published range of 32% to 65% probability of pathologic upstaging after cT2N0 diagnosis. The presence of any of 3 key variables (size larger than 3 cm, high grade, or lymphovascular invasion) was associated with > 48.1% risk of upstaging, thus conferring a survival advantage to induction chemoradiation.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal treatment strategy for cT2N0 esophageal cancer depends on the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound staging. High-risk features that confer increased probability of upstaging can inform clinical decision making to recommend induction chemoradiation for select cT2N0 patients.

Routine staging with endoscopic ultrasound in patients with obstructing esophageal cancer and dysphagia rarely impacts treatment decisions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been routinely utilized for the locoregional staging of esophageal cancer. One important aspect of clinical staging has been to stratify patients to treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or primary surgical therapy. We hypothesized that EUS may have a limited impact on clinical decision making in patients with dysphagia and obstructing esophageal masses.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing esophageal EUS between July 2008 and September 2013. Dysplastic Barrett's esophagus without invasive adenocarcinoma or incomplete staging was excluded. Patient demographics, endoscopic tumor characteristics, the presence of dysphagia, sonographic staging, and post-EUS therapy were recorded. Pathologic staging for patients who underwent primary surgical therapy was also recorded. Locally advanced disease was defined as at least T3 or N1, as these patients are typically treated with neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixteen patients underwent EUS for esophageal adenocarcinoma, with 147 (68.1%) patients having symptoms of dysphagia on initial presentation. Patients with dysphagia were significantly more likely to have locally advanced disease on EUS than patients without dysphagia (p < 0.0001). Additionally, 145 (67.1%) patients had a partially or completely obstructing mass on initial endoscopy, of which 136 (93.8%) were locally advanced (p < 0.0001 vs. non-obstructing lesions).

CONCLUSIONS

An overwhelming majority of patients presenting with dysphagia and/or the presence of at least partially obstructing esophageal mass at the time of esophageal cancer diagnosis had an EUS that demonstrated at least locally advanced disease. The present study supports the hypothesis that EUS may be of limited benefit for management of esophageal cancer in patients with an obstructing mass and dysphagia.

Self-Expanding Metal Stents Improve Swallowing and Maintain Nutrition During Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer can have significant dysphagia. Nutritional support during neoadjuvant therapy is often delivered via nasoenteric or percutaneous feeding tubes. These approaches do not allow for per-oral feeding.

AIMS

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of fully covered self-expanding metal esophageal stents for nutritional support during neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

This was a pilot, prospective study at a single tertiary center. From March 2012 to May 2013, consecutive patients with esophageal cancer eligible for neoadjuvant therapy were enrolled. Metal stents were placed prior to starting neoadjuvant therapy. Data were collected at baseline and predetermined intervals until an endpoint (surgery or disease progression). Outcomes included dysphagia grade, satisfaction of swallowing score, nutritional status (weight, serum albumin), impact on surgery, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Fourteen stents were placed in 12 patients (59.1 ± 9.5 years, 11 men, 1 woman). Dysphagia grade (pre 3.4 ± 0.5 vs post 0.2 ± 0.4, p < 0.0001) and swallowing scores (20.2 ± 5.9 vs 6.3 ± 4.7, p < 0.0001) significantly improved after stent placement. Improvements were sustained throughout neoadjuvant therapy. Body weight and serum albumin levels remained stable. Adverse events included severe chest pain (2), food impaction (1), and delayed stent migration (2). Five patients underwent surgical resection. No significant chemoradiation or operative adverse events occurred due to the presence of a stent.

CONCLUSIONS

During neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer, self-expanding metal stents are safe and effective in relieving dysphagia and maintaining nutrition. They allow patients to eat orally, thereby improving patient satisfaction. The presence of an in situ stent did not interfere with surgery.

Is endoscopic ultrasound examination necessary in the management of esophageal cancer?

Despite substantial efforts at early diagnosis, accurate staging and advanced treatments, esophageal cancer (EC) continues to be an ominous disease worldwide. Risk factors for esophageal carcinomas include obesity, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hard-alcohol use and tobacco smoking. Five-year survival rates have improved from 5% to 20% since the 1970s, the result of advances in diagnostic staging and treatment. As the most sensitive test for locoregional staging of EC, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) influences the development of an optimal oncologic treatment plan for a significant minority of patients with early cancers, which appropriately balances the risks and benefits of surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. EUS is costly, and may not be available at all centers. Thus, the yield of EUS needs to be thoughtfully considered for each patient. Localized intramucosal cancers occasionally require endoscopic resection (ER) for histologic staging or treatment; EUS evaluation may detect suspicious lymph nodes prior to exposing the patient to the risks of ER. Although positron emission tomography (PET) has been increasingly utilized in staging EC, it may be unnecessary for clinical staging of early, localized EC and carries the risk of false-positive metastasis (over staging). In EC patients with evidence of advanced disease, EUS or PET may be used to define the radiotherapy field. Multimodality staging with EUS, cross-sectional imaging and histopathologic analysis of ER, remains the standard-of-care in the evaluation of early esophageal cancers. Herein, published data regarding use of EUS for intramucosal, local, regional and metastatic esophageal cancers are reviewed. An algorithm to illustrate the current use of EUS at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center is presented.