Stent insertion or endoluminal brachytherapy as palliation of patients with advanced cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Results of a randomized, controlled clinical trial

German, Austrian, and Swiss guidelines for systemic treatment of gastric cancer

The updated edition of the German, Austrian and Swiss Guidelines for Systemic Treatment of Gastric Cancer was completed in August 2023, incorporating new evidence that emerged after publication of the previous edition. It consists of a text-based "Diagnosis" part and a "Therapy" part including recommendations and treatment algorithms. The treatment part includes a comprehensive description regarding perioperative and palliative systemic therapy for gastric cancer and summarizes recommended standard of care for surgery and endoscopic resection. The guidelines are based on a literature search and evaluation by a multidisciplinary panel of experts nominated by the hematology and oncology scientific societies of the three involved countries.

Endoscopic Palliative Therapies for Esophageal Cancer

Endoscopic palliation of dysphagia for patients with inoperable esophageal cancer is complex, highly dependent on local expertise, and best done in a multidisciplinary fashion. Systemic therapy is the standard of care because it has been shown to improve survival. Esophageal stenting has traditionally been the most used endoscopic modality. Some modalities such as laser and photodynamic therapy are rarely used. There has been an increasing amount of data on cryotherapy, especially for patients with mild-to-moderate dysphagia on systemic chemotherapy. This article will discuss the latest evidence guiding the palliation of esophageal cancer.

Optimizing the Continuum of Care in Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) still ranks as the fifth most common malignancy and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Despite the recent progress in the therapeutic algorithm of the advanced disease with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and next-generation HER2-directed therapies, survival rates remain poor, with a median survival hardly exceeding 12 months. Furthermore, only 40% of patients remain eligible for second- and later-line treatments due to the aggressiveness of the disease and the rapid deterioration of performance status (PS). Thus, current research is focusing either on the identification of novel treatment options or the development of personalized strategies to optimize the continuum of care and ultimately improve patients' outcome. In this article, we provide an overview of the current treatment landscape for advanced GC with a particular emphasis on later-line treatments and outline novel perspectives on the horizon.

Conformal 3D computed tomography planned endoluminal brachytherapy for the local control of esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To outline the toxicity, tolerability, and efficacy of a 3D conformal computed tomography planned endoluminal brachytherapy (ELBT) treatment for esophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) or squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective single-center analysis of toxicity, tolerability, and outcomes for 65 consecutive patients with OAC/OSCC who received 6-8Gy in one fraction or 12-16Gy in two fractions of high-dose-rate ELBT as salvage postchemoradiotherapy (n = 7 and n = 14 respectively), or as a boost to external beam radiotherapy (n = 14 and n = 30, respectively).

RESULTS

Median overall survival from the first brachytherapy application was 7.4 (IQR 5.0-14.7) months for the boost cohort and 9.2 (IQR 5.8-20.1) months for the salvage cohort. In a univariate analysis, use of a higher, fractionated dose of radiotherapy was associated with longer overall survival. At least one-third (33%; n = 7) of the salvage cohort and 28% (n = 12) of the boost cohort exhibited a local recurrence prior to death. Overall, 66.7% of the salvage and 56.8% of the boost cohort experienced odynophagia. Swallow function stabilized or improved early after treatment, with only 11.6% of the boost and 14.3% of the salvage cohort demonstrating a long-term decline in dysphagia score.

CONCLUSIONS

3D conformal planned ELBT is safe and tolerable. Most patients exhibit an early and sustained stabilization or improvement in their swallow function and greater survival is seen with higher brachytherapy doses. Further research is required to determine the place of brachytherapy in the management of esophageal cancer, particularly when planned using contemporary conformal approaches.

Radiotherapy for Advanced Esophageal Cancer: from Palliation to Curation

OPINION STATEMENT

Esophageal cancer is a global health problem, which is 7th most common and 6th most deadly cancer. It has been the era of immuno-oncology for esophageal cancer management. Radiation therapy has been one of the key local therapeutic approaches for esophageal cancer treatment, while its role in advanced disease is challenging and debatable. There have been emerging clinical and translational studies of radiation therapy in recurrent or metastatic esophageal cancer. Immunotherapy has been established the standard care of 1st and 2nd line systemic therapies of advanced esophageal cancer, and the development of tumor immunity has opened a new chapter for the esophageal cancer radiation therapy. The current review will summarize the classic radiation therapy research in advanced esophageal cancer, as well as the most recent key findings. The subtitles will cover palliative radiotherapy for dysphagia, re-radiation for recurrent disease, oligo-focal disease management and stereotactic radiation therapy, and radiotherapy with immunotherapy. Radiotherapy plays vital role in multidisciplinary management of advanced EC. External or intratumoral irradiation has been used for palliation of dysphagia and improving QOL in esophageal cancer patients traditionally, while recent clinical and technical advance enables radiotherapy to be considered in recurrent or metastatic disease for curation attention. Novel clinical and translational investigation is opening a new chapter of radiotherapy with immunotherapy for benefiting advanced EC patients.

Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is an area of endoscopy that has witnessed noteworthy advancements over the last decade, resulting in evolving clinical practices among gastroenterologists around the world. Indications for endoscopic stenting have progressively expanded, becoming a frequent part of the management algorithm for various benign and malignant conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, from esophagus to rectum. In addition to expanded indications, continuous technological enhancements and development of novel endoscopic stents have resulted in an increased success of these approaches and, in some cases, allowed new applications. This review aimed to summarize best practices in esophageal, gastroduodenal, and colonic stenting.

Advanced Endoscopy for Thoracic Surgeons

The thoracic surgeon, well versed in advanced endoscopy, has an array of therapeutic options for foregut pathologic conditions. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) offers a less-invasive means to treat achalasia, and the authors' preferred approach is described in this article. They also describe variations of POEM, such as G-POEM, Z-POEM, and D-POEM. In addition, endoscopic stenting, endoluminal vacuum therapy, endoscopic internal drainage, and endoscopic suturing/clipping are discussed and can be valuable tools for esophageal leaks and perforations. Endoscopic procedures are advancing rapidly, and thoracic surgeons must maintain at the forefront of these technologies.

Clinical Management of Gastric Cancer Treatment Regimens

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer-associated death in the world. Endoscopic resection can be the treatment in selected cases of very early gastric cancer. Surgery is recommended for tumors that do not meet the criteria for endoscopic resection or for tumors with lymph node invasion but without distant metastases. Gastrectomy should include D2 lymphadenectomy without splenectomy. Perioperative or adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival and is recommended in locally advanced gastric cancer (>T1 and/or with lymph nodes positive). In locally advanced cancer with microsatellite instability (MSI), immunotherapy should be considered. Advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric cancer has a poor prognosis. The basis of the treatment is cytotoxic chemotherapy, with platinum and fluoropyrimidine doublet in the first line. Targeted therapies can be combined with chemotherapy. Trastuzumab (anti-HER2) is recommended in the first line in HER2-positive cancer. Ramucirumab (anti-VEGFR2) is recommended in the second line, in addition to paclitaxel chemotherapy. Zolbetuximab (anti-Claudine 18.2) should also be considered in the first line in Claudine 18.2-positive cancer. Immunotherapy can also be associated with chemotherapy in the first line of PD-L1-positive cancer. In HER2-positive and PD-L1-positive cancer, adjunction of trastuzumab and immunotherapy should be considered. In advanced and metastatic cancer with microsatellite instability (MSI), immunotherapy should be the first choice depending on its availability. Important progress has been made in recent years in the treatment of gastric cancer, especially due to a better understanding of molecular characteristics and heterogeneity of this disease. New targets and therapeutic approaches are being developed, which will very likely lead to changes in the management of gastric cancer.

Optimal Management of Dysphagia in Patients with Inoperable Esophageal Cancer: Current Perspectives

The majority of patients with esophageal cancer are diagnosed at an advanced, incurable stage. Palliation of symptoms, specifically dysphagia, is a crucial component to improve quality of life and optimize nutritional status. Despite multiple available treatment modalities, there is not one accepted or recommended to be the preferred treatment option. Palliative management is often decided by a multidisciplinary team considering factors including local availability, preference, patient life expectancy, and symptom severity. Systemic therapies such as chemotherapy are the most commonly used palliative modalities. Oncologists are most familiar with radiation for dysphagia palliation, especially for advanced metastatic cancer patients with good performance status. One common approach used by endoscopist is self-expandable metal stents. This is preferred for patients with short-term survival and poor functional status as it provides rapid relief of dysphagia. Cryotherapy is a relatively new endoscopic ablative modality and appears to be a promising option for dysphagia palliation, but more data is needed for wider adoption. This review summarizes the current literature on endoscopic and non-endoscopic treatment options for malignant dysphagia.

Use and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Trials of Palliative Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Approximately 50% of all patients with cancer have an indication for radiotherapy, and approximately 50% of radiotherapy is delivered with palliative intent, with the aim of alleviating symptoms. Symptoms are best assessed by patient-reported outcomes (PROs), yet their reliable interpretation requires adequate reporting in publications.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the use and reporting of PROs in clinical trials of palliative radiotherapy.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This preregistered systematic review searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials for clinical trials of palliative radiotherapy published from 1990 to 2020. Key eligibility criteria were palliative setting, palliative radiotherapy as treatment modality, and clinical trial design (per National Institutes of Health definition). Two authors independently assessed eligibility. Trial characteristics were extracted and standard of PRO reporting was assessed in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) PRO extension. The association of the year of publication with the use of PROs was assessed by logistic regression. Factors associated with higher CONSORT-PRO adherence were analyzed by multiple regression. This study is reported following the PRISMA guidelines.

FINDINGS

Among 7377 records screened, 225 published clinical trials representing 24 281 patients were eligible. Of these, 45 trials (20%) used a PRO as a primary end point and 71 trials (31%) used a PRO as a secondary end point. The most prevalent PRO measures were the Numeric Rating Scale/Visual Analogue Scale (38 trials), European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (32 trials), and trial-specific unvalidated measures (25 trials). A more recent year of publication was significantly associated with a higher chance of PROs as a secondary end point (odds ratio [OR], 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.07]; P = .03) but not as primary end point. Adherence to CONSORT-PRO was poor or moderate for most items. Mean (SD) adherence to the extension adherence score was 46.2% (19.6%) for trials with PROs as primary end point and 31.8% (19.8%) for trials with PROs as a secondary end point. PROs as a primary end point (regression coefficient, 9.755 [95% CI, 2.270-17.240]; P = .01), brachytherapy as radiotherapy modality (regression coefficient, 16.795 [95% CI, 5.840-27.751]; P = .003), and larger sample size (regression coefficient, 0.028 [95% CI, 0.006-0.049]; P = .01) were significantly associated with better PRO reporting per extension adherence score.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review of palliative radiotherapy trials, the use and reporting of PROs had room for improvement for future trials, preferably with PROs as a primary end point.

Niti-S Esophageal Covered stent (double anti-reflux type). An observational patient registry|post-market clinical follow-up study

Background: Relieving dysphagia is the main goal of palliative care in advanced esophageal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the safety and clinical performance of the Niti-S esophageal double covered, anti-reflux stent (Taewoong Medical, Seoul, Korea) in inoperable carcinoma of the esophagus or gastric cardia. Methods: This was a retrospective patient registry/post-market clinical follow-up study of all patients with esophageal malignant strictures undergoing self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement with the Niti-S Esophageal covered stent, double antireflux in a community hospital (AZ St Maarten Mechelen, Belgium) between March 2013 and July 2021. Results: In twenty-nine patients, thirty self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) were placed. The median dysphagia score before stent placement was 3 and 0 after stent placement (p < 0.001). Stent migration did not occur. Two patients (7%) had new onset reflux symptoms. The most common adverse event was retrosternal pain (5 patients, 17%). One patient (3%) had recurrent dysphagia due to proximal tumoral overgrowth and two patients (7%) because of proximal benign tissue overgrowth. There were no perforations, fistula formations or episodes of food impaction. Conclusion: The Niti-S esophageal double covered, antireflux stent (Taewoong Medical, Seoul, Korea) is an effective and safe treatment option for malignant esophageal stenosis.

Predictors of adverse events and early mortality after esophageal stent placement in a low resource setting: a series of 3823 patients in Kenya

Background and study aims  Dysphagia from esophageal cancer may be palliated with self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS). Controversy exists about the use of dilation before SEMS deployment. Patients and methods  We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who had SEMS placement without fluoroscopy for palliation at Tenwek Hospital in Bomet, Kenya between January 1999 and April 2019. The primary outcome was any serious adverse event (AE) (chest pain, stent migration, perforation, bleeding, or all-cause mortality) within 30 days of the procedure. Various demographic and clinical characteristics, and procedural details, were examined as risk factors. Technical success, defined as correct SEMS placement, and clinical success, defined as dysphagia score improvement without 30-day mortality, were examined. Results  A total of 3823 patients underwent SEMS placement, with 2844 (74.4 %) placed in the second decade of the study. Technical and clinical success were achieved in 97.2 % and 95.5 %, respectively, with mean dysphagia scores improving from 3.4 (SD 0.6) to 0.9 (SD 1.3) post-stent placement. AEs occurred in 169 patients (4.4 %). AEs, specifically perforations, were associated with dilation to greater than 36F in the first decade. Perforation rates decreased from the first (4.1 %) to the second decade (0.2 %). Only 30% had complete 30-day follow-up data. Conclusions  SEMS placement is a safe, effective method of palliating malignant dysphagia, with low rates of AEs and 30-day mortality and high rates of clinical and technical success. Dilation can facilitate placement of SEMS without fluoroscopy but should not be performed above 36F due to the risk of perforation.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Health-related quality of life one year after the diagnosis of oesophageal cancer: a population-based study from the Swedish National Registry for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Population-based patient reported outcome data in oesophageal cancer are rare. The main purpose of this study was to describe health-related quality of life (HRQOL) 1 year after the diagnosis of oesophageal cancer, comparing subgroups of curatively and palliatively managed patients.

METHODS

This is a nationwide population-based cohort study, based on the Swedish National Registry for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer (NREV) with prospectively registered data, including HRQOL instruments from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer including the core and disease specific questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25). Patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer between 2009 and 2016 and with complete HRQOL data at 1 year follow-up were included. HRQOL of included patients was compared to a reference population matched by age and gender to to a previous cohort of unselected Swedish oesophageal cancer patients. Linear regression was performed to calculate mean scores with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and adjusted linear regression analysis was used to calculate mean score differences (MD) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

A total of 1156 patients were included. Functions and global health/quality of life were lower in both the curative and palliative cohorts compared to the reference population. Both curatively and palliatively managed patients reported a severe symptom burden compared to the reference population. Patients who underwent surgery reported more problems with diarrhoea compared to those treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) (MD -14; 95% CI - 20 to - 8). Dysphagia was more common in patiens treated with dCRT compared to surgically treated patients (MD 11; 95% CI 4 to 18). Those with palliative intent due to advanced tumour stage reported more problems with dysphagia compared to those with palliative intent due to frailty (MD -18; 95% CI - 33 to - 3).

CONCLUSIONS

One year after diagnosis both curative and palliative intent patients reported low function scores and severe symptoms. Dysphagia, choking, and other eating related problems were more pronounced in palliatively managed patients and in the curative intent patients treated with dCRT.

Network meta-analysis of palliative treatments in patients with esophageal cancer

We aimed to compare available palliative treatments in terms of survival and to rank these treatments for esophageal cancer. Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched. The risk of bias was judged using Cochrane's tools. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi² test and was quantified by I². The results were summarized using the hazard ratio (HR). The rank probability for each treatment was calculated using the p-score. Nineteen RCTs met the eligibility criteria for this study. Treatments formed three networks including networks A, B, and C. The Ultraflex stent (p-score = 0.93), irradiation stent (p-score = 0.89), and thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.85) were the first ranking treatments in networks A, B, and C, respectively. Based on the results of this network meta-analysis, it appears that the ultraflex stent, the irradiation stent, and thermal ablative therapy are the better treatments among the networks.

Palliative brachytherapy to axilla and hypopharynx in elderly patient with hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma - case report

Brachytherapy (BT) is an important local treatment of tumor and it can be applied to different anatomical sites either in a curative or palliative setting. BT can deliver large dose of radiation to the tumor while sparing the surrounding normal tissue which translates into a better therapeutic ratio compared to external beam radiotherapy. However, the evidence for the use of brachytherapy in the palliative setting is lacking in the literature. In this case report, we describe the brachytherapy technique and outcome of a patient with squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharynx who underwent palliative brachytherapy to the hypopharynx and metastatic tumor at the right axilla.

Esophageal stenting for benign and malignant disease: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021

MALIGNANT DISEASE

1: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for palliation of malignant dysphagia over laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, and esophageal bypass.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends brachytherapy as a valid alternative, alone or in addition to stenting, in esophageal cancer patients with malignant dysphagia and expected longer life expectancy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends esophageal SEMS placement for sealing malignant tracheoesophageal or bronchoesophageal fistulas. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE does not recommend SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery or before preoperative chemoradiotherapy because it is associated with a high incidence of adverse events. Other options such as feeding tube placement are preferable. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

BENIGN DISEASE

5: ESGE recommends against the use of SEMSs as first-line therapy for the management of benign esophageal strictures because of the potential for adverse events, the availability of alternative therapies, and their cost. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE suggests consideration of temporary placement of self-expandable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests that fully covered SEMSs be preferred over partially covered SEMSs for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures because of their very low risk of embedment and ease of removability. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the stent-in-stent technique to remove partially covered SEMSs that are embedded in the esophageal wall. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends that temporary stent placement can be considered for the treatment of leaks, fistulas, and perforations. No specific type of stent can be recommended, and the duration of stenting should be individualized. Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends considering placement of a fully covered large-diameter SEMS for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to medical, endoscopic, and/or radiological therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with massive bleeding. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

Palliative brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy for dysphagia from esophageal cancer: a nationwide survey in Japan

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend brachytherapy for patients with dysphagia from esophageal cancer, whereas brachytherapy is infrequently used to palliate dysphagia in some countries. To clarify the availability of palliative treatment for dysphagia from esophageal cancer and explain why brachytherapy is not routinely performed are unknown, this study investigated the use of brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy for dysphagia from esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Japanese Radiation Oncology Study Group members completed a survey and selected the treatment that they would recommend for hypothetical cases of dysphagia from esophageal cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 136 invited facilities, 61 completed the survey (44.9%). Four (6.6%) facilities performed brachytherapy of the esophagus, whereas brachytherapy represented the first-line treatment at three (4.9%) facilities. Conversely, external beam radiotherapy alone and chemoradiotherapy were first-line treatments at 61 and 58 (95.1%) facilities, respectively. In facilities that performed brachytherapy, the main reason why brachytherapy of the esophagus was not performed was high invasiveness (30.2%). Definitive-dose chemoradiotherapy with (≥50 Gy) tended to be used in patients with expected long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Few facilities routinely considered brachytherapy for the treatment of dysphagia from esophageal cancer in Japan. Conversely, most facilities routinely considered external beam radiotherapy. In the future, it will be necessary to optimize external beam radiotherapy.

A Phase II Study of Biodegradable Stents Plus Palliative Radiotherapy in Oesophageal Cancer

AIMS

Self-expanding metal stents provide rapid improvement of dysphagia in oesophageal cancer but are associated with complications. The aim of the present study was to test the effectiveness of an alternative treatment of combining biodegradable stents with radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Simon two-stage single-arm prospective phase II trial design was used to determine the efficacy of biodegradable stents plus radiotherapy in patients with dysphagia caused by oesophagus cancer who were unsuitable for radical treatment. Fourteen patients were recruited and data from 12 were included in the final analyses.

RESULTS

Five of 12 patients met the primary end point: one stent-related patient death; four further interventions for dysphagia within 16 weeks of stenting (41.7%, 95% confidence interval 15.2-72.3%). The median time to a 10-point deterioration of quality of life was 2.7 weeks. Nine patients died within 52 weeks of registration. The median time to death from any cause was 15.0 weeks (95% confidence interval 9.6-not reached).

CONCLUSION

The high re-intervention observed, which met the pre-defined early stopping criteria, meant that the suggested alternative treatment was not sufficiently effective to be considered for a larger scale trial design. Further work is needed to define the place of biodegradable stents in the management of malignant oesophageal strictures.

Palliative radiotherapy combined with stent insertion to reduce recurrent dysphagia in oesophageal cancer patients: the ROCS RCT

BACKGROUND

Most patients with oesophageal cancer present with incurable disease. For those with advanced disease, the mean survival is 3-5 months. Treatment emphasis is therefore on effective palliation, with the majority of patients requiring intervention for dysphagia. Insertion of a self-expanding metal stent provides rapid relief but dysphagia may recur within 3 months owing to tumour progression. Evidence reviews have called for trials of interventions combined with stenting to better maintain the ability to swallow.

OBJECTIVES

The Radiotherapy after Oesophageal Cancer Stenting (ROCS) study examined the effectiveness of palliative radiotherapy, combined with insertion of a stent, in maintaining the ability to swallow. The trial also examined the impact that the ability to swallow had on quality of life, bleeding events, survival and cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with follow-up every 4 weeks for 12 months. An embedded qualitative study examined trial experiences in a participant subgroup.

SETTING

Participants were recruited in secondary care, with all planned follow-up at home.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who were referred for stent insertion as the primary management of dysphagia related to incurable oesophageal cancer.

INTERVENTIONS

Following stent insertion, the external beam radiotherapy arm received palliative oesophageal radiotherapy at a dose of 20 Gy in five fractions or 30 Gy in 10 fractions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of participants with recurrent dysphagia, or death, at 12 weeks. Recurrent dysphagia was defined as deterioration of ≥ 11 points on the dysphagia scale of the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire oesophago-gastric module questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, bleeding risk and survival.

RESULTS

The study recruited 220 patients: 112 were randomised to the usual-care arm and 108 were randomised to the external beam radiotherapy arm. There was no evidence that radiotherapy reduced recurrence of dysphagia at 12 weeks (48.6% in the usual-care arm compared with 45.3% in the external beam radiotherapy arm; adjusted odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 1.68; p = 0.587) and it was less cost-effective than stent insertion alone. There was no difference in median survival or key quality-of-life outcomes. There were fewer bleeding events in the external beam radiotherapy arm. Exploration of patient experience prompted changes to trial processes. Participants in both trial arms experienced difficulty in managing the physical and psychosocial aspects of eating restriction and uncertainties of living with advanced oesophageal cancer.

LIMITATIONS

Change in timing of the primary outcome to 12 weeks may affect the ability to detect a true intervention effect. However, consistency of results across sensitivity analyses is robust, including secondary analysis of dysphagia deterioration-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Widely accessible palliative external beam radiotherapy in combination with stent insertion does not reduce the risk of dysphagia recurrence at 12 weeks, does not have an impact on survival and is less cost-effective than inserting a stent alone. Reductions in bleeding events should be considered in the context of patient-described trade-offs of fatigue and burdens of attending hospital. Trial design elements including at-home data capture, regular multicentre nurse meetings and qualitative enquiry improved recruitment/data capture, and should be considered for future studies.

FUTURE WORK

Further studies are required to identify interventions that improve stent efficacy and to address the multidimensional challenges of eating and nutrition in this patient population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12376468 and Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01915693.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 31. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Palliative radiotherapy after oesophageal cancer stenting (ROCS): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced oesophageal cancer have a median survival of 3-6 months, and most require intervention for dysphagia. Self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) insertion is the most typical form of palliation in these patients, but dysphagia deterioration and re-intervention are common. This study examined the efficacy of adjuvant external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) compared with usual care alone in preventing dysphagia deterioration and reducing service use after SEMS insertion.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial based at cancer centres and acute care hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales. Patients (aged ≥16 years) with incurable oesophageal carcinoma receiving stent insertion for primary management of dysphagia were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive usual care alone or EBRT (20 Gy in five fractions or 30 Gy in ten fractions) plus usual care after stent insertion. Usual care was implemented according to need as identified by the local multidisciplinary team (MDT). Randomisation was via the method of minimisation stratified by treating centre, stage at diagnosis (I-III vs IV), histology (squamous or non-squamous), and MDT intent to give chemotherapy (yes vs no). The primary outcome was difference in proportions of participants with dysphagia deterioration (>11 point decrease on patient-reported European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire-oesophagogastric module [QLQ-OG25], or a dysphagia-related event consistent with such a deterioration) or death by 12 weeks in a modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population, which excluded patients who did not have a stent inserted and those without a baseline QLQ-OG25 assessment. Secondary outcomes included survival, quality of life (QoL), morbidities (including time to first bleeding event or hospital admission for bleeding event and first dysphagia-related stent complications or re-intervention), and cost-effectiveness. Safety analysis was undertaken in the modified ITT population. The study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN12376468, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01915693, and is completed.

FINDINGS

220 patients were randomly assigned between Dec 16, 2013, and Aug 24, 2018, from 23 UK centres. The modified ITT population (n=199) comprised 102 patients in the usual care group and 97 patients in the EBRT group. Radiotherapy did not reduce dysphagia deterioration, which was reported in 36 (49%) of 74 patients receiving usual care versus 34 (45%) of 75 receiving EBRT (adjusted odds ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·40-1·68], p=0·59) in those with complete data for the primary endpoint. No significant difference was observed in overall survival: median overall survival was 19·7 weeks (95% CI 14·4-27·7) with usual care and 18·9 weeks (14·7-25·6) with EBRT (adjusted hazard ratio 1·06 [95% CI 0·78-1·45], p=0·70; n=199). Median time to first bleeding event or hospital admission for a bleeding event was 49·0 weeks (95% CI 33·3-not reached) with usual care versus 65·9 weeks (52·7-not reached) with EBRT (adjusted subhazard ratio 0·52 [95% CI 0·28-0·97], p=0·038; n=199). No time versus treatment interaction was observed for prespecified QoL outcomes. We found no evidence of differences between trial group in time to first stent complication or re-intervention event. The most common (grade 3-4) adverse event was fatigue, reported in 19 (19%) of 102 patients receiving usual care alone and 22 (23%) of 97 receiving EBRT. On cost-utility analysis, EBRT was more expensive and less efficacious than usual care.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with advanced oesophageal cancer having SEMS insertion for the primary management of their dysphagia did not gain additional benefit from concurrent palliative radiotherapy and it should not be routinely offered. For a minority of patients clinically considered to be at high risk of tumour bleeding, concurrent palliative radiotherapy might reduce bleeding risk and the need for associated interventions.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Review of brachytherapy complications - Upper gastrointestinal tract

While brachytherapy applications are not widely used for cancer diagnoses in the upper GI tract (including the esophagus, liver, stomach, and pancreas), they have a clear role in palliation and symptom management and occasionally definitive locoregional treatment. With the increasing use of image-guided techniques, the incidence of side effects and complications has shown to be lower than many other alternative treatment modalities, making brachytherapy approaches a preferred treatment option. This review examines procedural complications and acute and chronic adverse effects from radiation associated with esophageal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic brachytherapy and their management.

Practical brachytherapy solutions to an age-old quandary

•

Age should not be a limiting factor for brachytherapy in patients with localised cancer or for palliation in metastatic disease.

•

In tumour streams where brachytherapy forms part of the curative management, it should not be omitted in elderly patients who are medically fit for treatment.

•

Treatment decisions should factor in patient preferences, the relative merits of different therapeutic approaches and maintaining minimal impact on quality of life.

Cancer is predominantly a disease of the elderly and as population life expectancy increases, so will the incidence of malignant disease. Elderly patients often have other comorbidities and social complexities, increasing the support required to safely deliver all treatment modalities. Brachytherapy is a relatively simple technique by which radiation therapy can be delivered. It offers dosimetric advantages through a highly conformal dose distribution thereby limiting radiation exposure to normal tissues reducing toxicity. Requiring fewer hospital visits, it also offers practical and logistical advantages to the elderly population and in many cases can be performed without the need for general anaesthesia. In tumour streams where brachytherapy forms part of the curative management, it should not be omitted in elderly patients who are medically fit for treatment. In the palliative setting, brachytherapy often offers an excellent means for achieving either local tumour and/or symptom control and should be actively considered in the therapeutic armamentarium of the oncologist in this context.

Patient-reported outcomes after external beam radiotherapy versus brachytherapy for palliation of dysphagia in esophageal cancer: A matched comparison of two prospective trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A matched comparison of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) versus brachytherapy recently demonstrated that EBRT appears at least as effective for palliating dysphagia in patients with incurable esophageal cancer. The aim of this analysis was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after EBRT versus brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a multicenter prospective cohort study, patients with incurable esophageal cancer requiring palliation of dysphagia were included to undergo EBRT (20 Gy in 5 fractions). This EBRT cohort was compared to the single-dose 12 Gy brachytherapy cohort of the previously reported SIREC-trial. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust for baseline imbalances. The primary endpoint of dysphagia improvement was reported previously. PROs were secondary outcomes and assessed at baseline and 3 months after treatment using EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18 questionnaires.

RESULTS

A total of 115 enrolled EBRT patients and 93 brachytherapy patients were eligible. After matching, 69 well-balanced pairs remained. At follow-up, significant deteriorations in functioning (i.e. physical, role, social), pain, appetite loss, and trouble with taste were observed after brachytherapy. In the EBRT group, such deterioration was observed only for role functioning, while significant improvements in trouble with eating and pain were found. Between-group comparison showed mostly comparable PRO changes, but significantly favored EBRT with regard to nausea, vomiting, pain, and appetite loss.

CONCLUSION

Short course EBRT results in similar or better PROs at 3 months after treatment compared to single-dose brachytherapy for the palliation of malignant dysphagia. These findings further support its use and inclusion in clinical practice guidelines.

Palliation of dysphagia in metastatic oesogastric cancers: An international multidisciplinary position

Malignant dysphagia is the most common symptom in advanced oesogastric cancers patients. Relief of dysphagia allows quality of life improvement, nutritional replenishment and potentially improves prognosis. Chemotherapy alone is effective and should be prioritised in patients with metastatic disease a good performance status, and its impact on dysphagia should be determined before further interventions are planned. Regarding local treatments, the insertion of a covered self-expandable metallic stent is the most commonly used alternative, as it allows for the rapid relief of severe dysphagia. Although several randomised trials have highlighted the role of oesophageal brachytherapy, this technique is often not easily accessible. Contemporary trials are ongoing to better define the role of external radiation therapy. While awaiting these results, external radiation therapy can be considered as a second-best option for patients with a life-expectancy > 3 months. It is important to offer nutritional support and to integrate quality of life measures in the palliative management of dysphagia. This multidisciplinary international position paper aims to propose a decision-making process and highlight randomised trials for the management of malignant dysphagia in metastatic oesogastric cancer patients.

The role of home visits by a nurse to improve palliation in patients treated with self-expandable metallic stents due to incurable esophageal cancer

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) is a preferred option to relieve dysphagia and to palliate patients with incurable esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Health Related Quality of Life (QoL) represents a clinically relevant outcome measure in research focused on palliation of patients with advanced GI cancer. In this context, home visits by a nurse carry the potential to offer important advantages. Eighty patients with incurable esophageal or GEJ cancer were randomized to either standard follow up or to an intervention containing regular home visits by a nurse. The primary outcome variable QoL was assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 and OES-18 before insertion of SEMS, and at 2, 7 and 12 weeks thereafter. Secondary outcomes were; need for re-interventions, number of patients receiving palliative oncological therapy and overall survival. Sixty-six males and 13 females, with a median age of 71, were included. Self-reported overall QoL was significantly higher in the intervention group (P = 0.03). The organ specific module OES-18 revealed a significant reduction in dysphagia by the intervention (P = 0.03) as well as fewer eating disabilities (P = 0.04). No differences were observed in secondary outcomes except for overall survival, where the median survival was increased from 114 to 183 days by the active intervention (P = 0.02). Home visits by a nurse seem to play an important palliative role after placement of SEMS in patients with incurable esophageal or GEJ cancer by improving QoL and may carry the potential to increase overall survival.

Palliative Radiotherapy Versus Esophageal Stent Placement in the Management of Patients With Metastatic Esophageal Cancer

Background:Patients with advanced esophageal cancer often experience pain and dysphagia, yet the optimal palliative management remains unclear. This retrospective study evaluated outcomes and adverse effects of palliative radiotherapy (RT) compared with esophageal stenting among a cohort of U.S. veterans with metastatic esophageal cancer.Patients and Methods:We identified 1,957 veterans in the United States with metastatic esophageal cancer who received palliative RT to the esophagus or esophageal stenting, and assessed the risks of severe adverse effects, including esophageal fistula formation, perforation, obstruction, hemorrhage, and esophagitis. We determined palliative efficacy by evaluating pain and dysphagia scores before and after intervention. Multivariable analyses were used to control for potential confounding factors.Results:In our cohort, 1,593 patients underwent RT and 364 underwent esophageal stenting. The cumulative incidence of any severe adverse effect at 6 months was higher among patients who received stents compared with those who received RT (21.7% vs 12.4%;P<.0010). In multivariable analysis, patients who received stents had an increased risk of any severe adverse effect, including fistula, perforation, and hemorrhage (allP<.0500). Multivariable analysis also showed that, compared with stenting, RT was associated with more rapid and durable pain relief (P<.0010) with no difference in relief of dysphagia over time when accounting for pretreatment dysphagia scores (P=.1029).Conclusions:Compared with esophageal stenting, RT was associated with a decreased risk of adverse effects, greater pain relief, and equivalent relief of moderate to severe dysphagia over time. Unmeasured patient- or tumor-related factors could have influenced the choice of intervention, thereby impacting our study outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date analyzing the comparative risks and benefits of palliative RT and esophageal stenting among patients with metastatic esophageal cancer.

Palliative short-course hypofractionated radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy in esophageal adenocarcinoma: the phase II PALAESTRA trial

Background: The majority of patients with incurable esophageal adenocarcinoma suffer from dysphagia. We assessed a novel treatment strategy with initial short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy with the primary aim to achieve long-term relief of dysphagia.Methods: This phase II trial included treatment-naîve patients with dysphagia due to esophageal adenocarcinoma not eligible for curative treatment. External beam radiotherapy with 20 Gy in five fractions to the primary tumor was followed by four cycles of chemotherapy (FOLFOX regimen). Dysphagia was assessed using a five-grade scale.Results: From October 2014 to May 2018 a total of 29 patients were enrolled. The rate of dysphagia improvement was 79%, median duration of improvement 6.7 months (12.2 months for responders) and median overall survival 9.9 months. In the pre-specified per protocol analysis (23 patients) the rate of dysphagia improvement was 91%, median duration of improvement 12.2 months (14.0 months for responders) and median overall survival 16.0 months. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (29%), infection (25%), anorexia (11%), esophagitis (11%) and fatigue (11%).Conclusion: Initial palliative short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy is a promising treatment strategy that can provide long-lasting relief of dysphagia in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Validation of instruments for the assessment of dysphagia due to malignancy of the esophagus

The aim of the study was to validate the Watson scale, the Ogilvie scale, and the Goldschmid scale for assessment of dysphagia due to malignancy of the esophagus. After translation of the scales to Swedish, 35 patients with dysphagia due to esophageal malignancy were asked to participate. On day 1, patients were asked to fill in the questionnaires. The patients also kept a food diary for 4 consecutive days, for assessment of actual swallowing ability. On day 10, the patients were asked to fill in the scales again, to control for individual variability. As an external control group, 29 healthy volunteers were asked to fill in the questionnaires once. External validation was done against actual swallowing ability, and against the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scales QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25, which are already validated quality of life scales for malignancy. Reliability in the categorical variables (Ogilvie and Goldschmid) showed weighted kappa values of 0.52 and 0.54, respectively. For the Watson scale and the Dysphagia module of QLQ-OG25, the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.68 and 0.80, respectively. Correlations between all scales were good to excellent with values of correlation coefficients (rs) between 0.69 and 0.88, with the strongest correlations between the Ogilvie score and the dysphagia module in QLQ-OG25. These latter two scales had the strongest correlation to the food diary (rs = 0.72). Although the Ogilvie scale was superior, all the three scales showed good reliability and are thus judged to have good validity for assessment of dysphagia due to esophageal malignancy.

The role of palliative interventional radiotherapy (brachytherapy) in esophageal cancer: An AIRO (Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology) systematic review focused on dysphagia-free survival

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to examine efficacy of palliative interventional radiotherapy (IRT) in esophageal cancer compared with other treatment in terms of dysphagia-free survival (DyFS) and safety.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

A systematic research using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane library was performed to identify full articles evaluating the efficacy of IRT as palliation in patients with esophageal cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for ongoing or recently completed trials, and PROSPERO was searched for ongoing or recently completed systematic reviews. We analyzed only clinical study as full text of patients with symptomatic esophageal cancer treated with IRT alone or in combination with other treatment. Conference paper, survey, letter, editorial, book chapter, and review were excluded. Time restriction (1990-2018) as concerns the years of the publication was considered. The primary outcome was the duration of dysphagia relief (DyFS) after brachytherapy vs. other treatment (external-beam radiotherapy, photodynamic therapy, argon plasma coagulation, stent, and laser) during followup. Secondary outcomes included overall survival and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

The literature search resulted in 554 articles. Sixty-six articles were assessed via full text for eligibility. Of these, 59 articles were excluded for various reasons, leaving seven randomized studies. The number of evaluated patients was 905 patients, and median age was 70.5 years. In the IRT group, the median DyFS was 99 days, the most relevant G3-G4 toxicity were fistula development and stenosis reported, respectively, in 8.3% and 12.2%; the overall median survival was 175.5 days.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we provided evidence-based support that IRT is an effective and safe treatment option; therefore, its underuse is no longer justified.

Palliation of dysphagia

Palliation of dysphagia is the cornerstone of palliative treatment in patients with incurable oesophageal cancer. Available palliative options for dysphagia are oesophageal stent placement and radiotherapy. In general, oesophageal stent placement is the preferred therapeutic option in patients with a relatively poor prognosis because of its rapid relief of dysphagia. Regardless of ongoing technical developments, recurrence of dysphagia and stent-related complications are still occurring. For patients with a relatively good prognosis, intra-luminal brachytherapy is advised because of its sustained palliation of dysphagia. Due to limited availability of intra-luminal brachytherapy in clinical practice, fractionated external beam radiation therapy is commonly applied as an alternative. Selection of the optimal palliative approach for patients remains however challenging as conclusive high-quality evidence is limited. Moreover, with the introduction of new palliative treatment options (e.g. palliative chemotherapeutic and radiotherapeutic options) and the concurrent change of patient characteristics, supporting evidence from large randomised studies is warranted.

Safety and efficacy of airway stenting in patients with malignant oesophago-airway fistula

Background

Close anatomical relationships between the oesophagus and the bronchial tree can lead to the formation of oesophageal fistula particularly in patients with advanced lung or oesophageal carcinoma. Stenting is a most often used treatment in such patients, but data regarding the relative value of unilateral (US) vs. double stenting (DS) are scarce.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of hospital records of patients with oesophageal fistula who underwent stenting between 2008 and 2016. In those in whom airway stenosis was >30%, double stenting (oesophagus and bronchial tree) was performed, whereas in those with lesser airway stenosis unilateral stenting (i.e., oesophagus only) was performed. In all patients, the degree of dysphagia, the degree of dyspnoea and the quality of life were assessed before and after the stenting.

Results

There were 46 patients, analysed, including 26 who underwent DS and 20 patients who underwent US. Both, DS and US resulted in significant improvement of dysphagia (2.72 vs. 1.2, P=0.0001 and 2.65 vs. 1.0, P=0.0001), dyspnoea (2.89 vs. 0.34, P=0.0001 and 1.71 vs. 0.09, P=0.0001) and performance score (53.2 vs. 66.3, P=0.0001 and 54.3 vs. 62.38, P=0.0001). Neither fistula type, nor stenting method, weight loss and gain, and BMI, had an effect on survival (P=0.34). Disease progression and recurrence of fistula requiring re-intervention occurred in 9 patients (19.5%).

Conclusions

Double and unilateral stenting is an effective measure to alleviate dysphagia and dyspnoea in patients treated with malignant oesophageal fistula. In those with airway stenosis of ≤30%, stenting of the oesophagus only, instead of DS, is a safe method of treatment.

Treatment for unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer: current evidence and trends

Approximately half of the patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer present with unresectable or metastatic disease. Treatment for these patients aims to control dysphagia and other cancer-related symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival. In the past 25 years, modestly improved outcomes have been achieved in the treatment of patients with inoperable non-metastatic cancer who are medically not fit for surgery or have unresectable, locally advanced disease. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy offers the best outcomes in these patients. In distant metastatic oesophageal cancer, several double-agent or triple-agent chemotherapy regimens have been established as first-line treatment options. In addition, long-term results of multiple large randomized phase III trials using additional targeted therapies have been published in the past few years, affecting contemporary clinical practice and future research directions. For the local treatment of malignant dysphagia, various treatment options have emerged, and self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is currently the most widely applied method. Besides the continuous search for improved SEMS designs to minimize the risk of associated complications, efforts have been made to develop and evaluate the efficacy of antireflux stents and irradiation stents. This Review outlines the current evidence and ongoing trends in the different modern-day, multidisciplinary interventions for patients with unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer with an emphasis on key randomized trials.

Role of Esophageal Metal Stents Placement and Combination Therapy in Inoperable Esophageal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

More than 50% of patients with esophageal cancer already have inoperable disease at the time of diagnosis. Controversy surrounds the outcomes of patients with advanced esophageal cancer who receive palliative care by either stent alone or stent plus an additional modality. We set out to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing the use of metal stents as treatment options for symptomatic improvement, survival, and adverse events.

METHODS

We searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception until January 14, 2016, as well as other databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing esophageal stent versus either esophageal stent plus brachytherapy, radiotherapy, or chemotherapy. For quality assurance purposes throughout the systematic review, multiple independent extractions were performed, and the process was executed as per the standards of the Cochrane collaboration. Primary outcomes were mean change in dysphagia score, overall survival, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were adverse events including fever, severe pain, aspiration, fistula, stent migration, perforation, and restenosis.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs enrolling 732 patients were included with three distinct comparisons: stents combination therapy vs stents alone (5 studies, n = 417), stents alone versus brachytherapy alone (2 studies, n = 274), and stents + brachytherapy vs brachytherapy alone (1 study, n = 41). Stents combination therapy was defined as stents plus radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both. Mean change in dysphagia scores favored stents combination therapy versus stents alone, and the effect was seen in patients surviving longer than 3 months. Stents combination therapy was also associated with a more favorable overall survival. The risks of stent migration, aspiration pneumonia, and restenosis were lower in the stents combination group compared to stents alone, while the risks of severe pain, hemorrhage, and fistula formation were higher. Changes in dysphagia scores and overall survival did not differ significantly in the brachytherapy-alone vs stents-alone comparison. The risk of fistula formation and hemorrhage were higher in the stents-alone group, while the risk of perforation was lower, compared to brachytherapy alone. Quality of life improvements were seen in all treatment groups, but were not pooled in analysis due to differing methods of measurement.

DISCUSSION

While there appears to be no immediate short-term differences, those who live longer than 3 months experience a significant improvement in dysphagia score using a stents combination therapy approach vs stents alone. The combination therapy significantly improves the overall survival as well as showed improvements in quality of life scores. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to assess improvements in dysphagia score, overall survival, quality of life, and adverse events.

The Glasgow Prognostic Score at the Time of Palliative Esophageal Stent Insertion is a Predictive Factor of 30-Day Mortality and Overall Survival

BACKGROUND

Optimizing the timing of esophageal stent insertion is a challenge, partly due to difficulty predicting survival in advanced malignancy. The Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) is a validated tool for predicting survival in a number of cancers.

GOALS

To assess the utility of the GPS in predicting 30-day mortality and overall survival postesophageal stent insertion.

STUDY

Patients at a tertiary referral center who had received an esophageal stent for palliation of dysphagia were included if they had a measurement of albumin and C-reactive protein (CRP) in the week preceding the procedure (n=209). Patients with both an elevated CRP (>10 mg/L) and hypoalbuminemia (<35 g/L) were given a GPS score of 2 (GPS2). Patients with only one of these abnormalities were assigned as GPS1 and those with normal CRP and albumin were assigned as GPS0. Clinical and pathologic parameters were also collected to assess for potential confounding factors in the survival analysis.

RESULTS

Increasing GPS was associated with 30-day mortality; for patients with GPS0, 30-day mortality was 5% (2/43), for GPS1 it was 23% (26/114), and for GPS2 it was 33% (17/52). The adjusted hazard ratio for overall poststent mortality was 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.4; P=0.02) for GPS1 and 2.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.8; P<0.001) for GPS2 patients compared with GPS0.

CONCLUSIONS

GPS is an independent prognostic factor of 30-day mortality and overall survival after esophageal stent insertion. It is a potential adjunct to clinical assessment in identifying those patients at high-risk of short-term mortality poststent.

Esophageal Cancer: Recent advances

Esophageal carcinoma has, over the past decade, undergone a sea of change, not only in its pathological distribution, but also in the diagnosis, staging and subsequent management. Although the advent of better imaging techniques has helped in diagnosing patients at an earlier period, the majority of them have unresectable disease at the time of presentation. Despite aggressive treatment protocols involving either one or a combination of the options of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, the five-year survival remains dismal in the order of 10 to 15%. The two most commonly used surgical techniques for resecting the esophagus, the Ivor Lewis and the trans-hiatal esophagectomy, have similar results in terms of morbidity, mortality and, more importantly, five-year survival following resection. There has been an increasing interest in the surgical treatment of carcinoma esophagus by a minimally invasive approach, as meta-analysis of clinical series have shown that a faster recovery time without any statistically significant difference in the in-hospital mortality or morbidity when compared to conventional surgery. Nonrandomized studies suggest that patients receiving neoadjuvant chemo-radiation have a five year survival advantage compared with those treated with surgery alone, especially if they had a complete histological response to the preoperative regimen. Lastly, palliative procedures, form the mainstay of management of patients with non-resectable disease.

Complications of stent placement in patients with esophageal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Palliative treatments and stents are necessary for relieving dysphagia in patients with esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to simultaneously compare available treatments in terms of complications.

Methods

Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi² test and was quantified by I². The results of this study were summarized in terms of Risk Ratio (RR). The random effects model was used to report the results. The rank probability for each treatment was calculated using the p-score.

Results

Out of 17855 references, 24 RCTs reported complications including treatment related death (TRD), bleeding, stent migration, aspiration, severe pain and fistula formation. In the ranking of treatments, thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.82), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.70), brachytherapy (p-score = 0.72) and antireflux stent (p-score = 0.74) were better treatments in the network of TRD. Thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.86), the conventional stent (p-score = 0.62), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.82) were better treatments in the network of bleeding complications. Covered Evolution® (p-score = 0.78), uncovered (p-score = 0.88) and irradiation stents (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments in network of stent migration complications. In the network of severe pain, Conventional self-expandable nitinol alloy covered stent (p-score = 0.73), polyflex (p-score = 0.79), latex prosthesis (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments.

Conclusion

According to our results, thermal ablative therapy, covered Evolution® stents, brachytherapy, and antireflux stents are associated with a lower risk of TRD. Moreover, thermal ablative therapy, conventional, covered Evolution® and brachytherapy had lower risks of bleeding. Overall, fewer complications were associated with covered Evolution® stent and brachytherapy.

Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement for the Palliation of Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal stents have been used to palliate patients with dysphagia caused by esophageal cancer. Early rigid plastic prostheses have been associated with a high risk of complications. However, with the development of self-expanding stents, it has developed into a widely accepted method for treating malignant esophageal strictures and esophagorespiratory fistulas (ERFs). The present review covers various aspects of self-expanding metallic stent placement for palliating esophageal cancer, including its types, placement procedures, indications, contraindications, complications, and some of innovations that will become available in the future.

Comparison between gastrostomy feeding and self-expandable metal stent insertion for patients with esophageal cancer and dysphagia

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion and percutaneous gastrostomy (PG) feeding are commonly used for patients with esophageal cancer and dysphagia. This study aimed to compare outcomes between SEMS insertion and PG feeding for them.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 308 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent fully covered SEMS insertion (stent group) or PG (gastrostomy group) for dysphagia due to tumor. Patients with other causes of dysphagia, such as radiation-induced or postoperative stricture, were excluded from the study. Clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups, including overall survival and need for additional intervention and postprocedural nutritional status.

RESULTS

At baseline, the stent group (n = 169) had more stage IV patients, less cervical cancers, and received radiotherapy and esophagectomy less often than the gastrostomy group (n = 64). The Kaplan-Meier curves showed higher overall survival in the gastrostomy group than in the stent group. Multivariate analysis revealed that PG was associated with better survival compared with SEMS insertion (hazard ratio 0.541, 95% confidence interval 0.346-0.848, p = 0.007). In addition, the gastrostomy group needed additional intervention less often (3.1% vs. 21.9%, p < 0.001) and experienced less decrease in serum albumin levels (-0.15 ± 0.56 g/dL vs. -0.39 ± 0.58 g/dL, p = 0.011) than the stent group after procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggested that, compared with SEMS insertion, PG is associated with better overall survival in patients with esophageal cancer and dysphagia. Stabilized nutritional status by PG may play a role in improving patient survival.