Effect of local therapy for the treatment of superficial esophageal cancer in non-operative candidates

Brazilian Group of Gastrointestinal Tumours' consensus guidelines for the management of oesophageal cancer

Oesophageal cancer is among the ten most common types of cancer worldwide. More than 80% of the cases and deaths related to the disease occur in developing countries. Local socio-economic, epidemiologic and healthcare particularities led us to create a Brazilian guideline for the management of oesophageal and oesophagogastric junction (OGJ) carcinomas. The Brazilian Group of Gastrointestinal Tumours invited 50 physicians with different backgrounds, including radiology, pathology, endoscopy, nuclear medicine, genetics, oncological surgery, radiotherapy and clinical oncology, to collaborate. This document was prepared based on an extensive review of topics related to heredity, diagnosis, staging, pathology, endoscopy, surgery, radiation, systemic therapy (including checkpoint inhibitors) and follow-up, which was followed by presentation, discussion and voting by the panel members. It provides updated evidence-based recommendations to guide clinical management of oesophageal and OGJ carcinomas in several scenarios and clinical settings.

Surgery versus radical endotherapies for early cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus is one of the most common pre-malignant lesions in the world. Currently the mainstay of therapy is surgical management of advanced cancer but this has improved the five-year survival very little since the 1980s. As a consequence, improved survival relies on early detection through endoscopic surveillance programmes. Success of this strategy relies on the fact that late-stage pre-malignant lesions or very early cancers can be cured by intervention. Currently there is considerable controversy over which method is best: that is conventional open surgery or endotherapy (techniques involving endoscopy).

OBJECTIVES

We used data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the effectiveness of endotherapies compared with surgery in people with Barrett's oesophagus, those with early neoplasias (defined as high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and those with early cancer (defined as carcinoma in-situ, superficially invasive, early cancer or superficial cancer T-1m (T1-a) and T-1sm (T1-b)).

SEARCH METHODS

We used the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy to identify RCTs in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ISI Web of Science, EBMR, Controlled Trials mRCT and ISRCTN, and LILACS, in July and August 2008. The searches were updated in 2009 and again in April 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: RCTs comparing endotherapies with surgery in the treatment of high-grade dysplasia or early cancer. All cellular types of cancer were included (i.e. adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and more unusual types) but will be discussed separately.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

patients of any age and either gender with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of early neoplasia (HGD and early cancer) in Barrett's or squamous lined oesophagus. Types of interventions; endotherapies (the intervention) compared with surgery (the control), all with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reports of studies that meet the inclusion criteria for this review would have been analysed using the methods detailed in Appendix 9.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies that met the inclusion criteria. In total we excluded 13 studies that were not RCTs but that compared surgery and endotherapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review has indicated that there are no RCTs to compare management options in this vital area, therefore trials should be undertaken as a matter of urgency. The problems with such randomised methods are standardising surgery and endotherapies in all sites, standardising histopathology in all centres, assessing which patients are fit or unfit for surgery and making sure there are relevant outcomes for the study (i.e. long-term survival (over five or more years)) and no progression of HGD.

Treatment modalities for T1N0 esophageal cancers: a comparative analysis of local therapy versus surgical resection

BACKGROUND

To investigate the role of nonsurgical treatment for early-stage esophageal cancer, we compared the outcomes of local therapy to esophagectomy, using a large, national database.

METHODS

Five-year cancer-specific and overall survival (OS) of patients, with T1N0M0 squamous cell or adenocarcinoma of the mid or distal esophagus treated with either surgery or local therapy, with ablative and/or excision techniques, in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry from 1998 to 2008, were compared using the Kaplan-Meier approach, and multivariable and propensity-score adjusted Cox proportional hazard, and competing risk models.

RESULTS

Of 1458 patients with T1N0 esophageal cancer, 1204 (83%) had surgery and 254 (17%) had local therapy only. The use of local therapy increased significantly from 8.1% in 1998 to 24.1% in 2008 (p < 0.001). The 5-year OS after local excisional therapy and surgery was not significantly different (55.5% versus 64.1% respectively, p = 0.07), and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) also did not differ (81.7% versus 75.8%, p = 0.10). However, after propensity-score adjustment, CSS was better for patients who underwent local therapy compared with those who underwent surgery (hazard ratio: 0.46, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.77, p = 0.003), whereas OS remained similar.

CONCLUSION

The use of local therapy for T1N0 esophageal cancers increased significantly from 1998 to 2008. Compared with those treated with esophagectomy, patients treated with local therapy had similar OS but improved CSS, indicating a higher chance of dying from other causes. Further studies are needed to confirm the oncologic efficacy of local therapy when used in patients whose lifespans are not limited by conditions other than esophageal cancer.

Esophageal cancer: staging system and guidelines for staging and treatment

Survival of esophageal cancer is improving but remains poor. Esophageal cancer stage is based on depth of tumor invasion, involvement of regional lymph nodes, and the presence or absence of metastatic disease. Appropriate work-up is critical to identify accurate pre-treatment staging so that both under-treatment and unnecessary treatment is avoided. Treatment strategy should follow guideline recommendations, and generally should be developed after multidisciplinary evaluation.

Survival of patients with superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma after endoscopic treatment vs surgery

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic therapy can improve long-term outcomes of patients with superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), producing fewer complications than esophagectomy. However, there have been few population-based studies to compare long-term outcomes of patients who received these treatments. We used a large national cancer database to evaluate the outcomes of patients with superficial EAC who underwent endoscopic therapy or surgery.

METHODS

We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database to identify 1618 patients with Tis or T1 N0M0 EAC from 1998-2009. Patients were grouped on the basis of whether they received endoscopic therapy (n = 306) or surgery (n = 1312). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with endoscopic therapy. We collected survival data through the end of 2009; overall survival and esophageal cancer-specific survival were compared after controlling for relevant covariates.

RESULTS

The use of endoscopic therapy increased progressively from 3% in 1998 to 29% in 2009. Factors associated with use of endoscopic therapy included age older than 65 years, diagnosis in 2006-2009 vs 1998-2001, and the absence of submucosal invasion. Overall survival after 5 years was higher in the surgery group than in the endoscopic therapy group (70% vs 58%, respectively). After adjusting for patient and tumor factors, patients treated by endoscopy had similar overall survival times (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.58) and esophageal cancer-specific survival times (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.11).

CONCLUSION

In a population-based analysis, the use of endoscopic therapy for superficial EAC tended to increase from 1998-2009. Long-term survival of patients with EAC did not appear to differ between those who received endoscopic therapy and those treated with surgery.

Surgery versus radical endotherapies for early cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus is one of the most common pre-malignant lesions in the world. Currently the mainstay of therapy is surgical management of advanced cancer but this has improved the five-year survival very little since the 1980s. As a consequence, improved survival relies on early detection through endoscopic surveillance programmes. Success of this strategy relies on the fact that late-stage pre-malignant lesions or very early cancers can be cured by intervention. Currently there is considerable controversy over which method is best: that is conventional open surgery or endotherapy (techniques involving endoscopy).

OBJECTIVES

We used data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the effectiveness of endotherapies compared with surgery in people with Barrett's oesophagus, those with early neoplasias (defined as high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and those with early cancer (defined as carcinoma in-situ, superficially invasive, early cancer or superficial cancer T-1m (T1-a) and T-1sm (T1-b)).

SEARCH METHODS

We used the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy to identify RCTs in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ISI Web of Science, EBMR, Controlled Trials mRCT and ISRCTN, and LILACS, in July and August 2008. The searches were updated in 2009 and again in April 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: RCTs comparing endotherapies with surgery in the treatment of or early cancer. All cellular types of cancer were included (i.e. adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and more unusual types) but will be discussed separately.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

patients of any age and either gender with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of early neoplasia (HGD and early cancer) in Barrett's or squamous lined oesophagus.Types of interventions; endotherapies (the intervention) compared with surgery (the control), all with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reports of studies that meet the inclusion criteria for this review would have been analysed using the methods detailed in Appendix 9.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies that met the inclusion criteria. In total we excluded 13 studies that were not RCTs but that compared surgery and endotherapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review has indicated that there are no RCTs to compare management options in this vital area, therefore trials should be undertaken as a matter of urgency. The problems with such randomised methods are standardising surgery and endotherapies in all sites, standardising histopathology in all centres, assessing which patients are fit or unfit for surgery and making sure there are relevant outcomes for the study (i.e. long-term survival (over five or more years)) and no progression of HGD.

Ablation of Barrett's oesophagus: towards improved outcomes for oesophageal cancer?

Barrett's oesophagus is the major risk factor for the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The management of Barrett's oesophagus entails treating reflux symptoms with acid-suppressing medication or surgery (fundoplication). However, neither form of anti-reflux therapy produces predictable regression, or prevents cancer development. Patients with Barrett's oesophagus usually undergo endoscopic surveillance, which aims to identify dysplastic changes or cancer at its earliest stage, when treatment outcomes should be better. Alternative endoscopic interventions are now available and are suggested for the treatment of early cancer and prevention of progression of Barrett's oesophagus to cancer. Such treatments could minimize the risks associated with oesophagectomy. The current status of these interventions is reviewed. Various endoscopic interventions have been described, but with long-term outcomes uncertain, they remain somewhat controversial. Radiofrequency ablation of dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus might reduce the risk of cancer progression, although cancer development has been reported after this treatment. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) allows a 1.5-2 cm diameter piece of oesophageal mucosa to be removed. This provides better pathology for diagnosis and staging, and if the lesion is confined to the mucosa and fully excised, EMR can be curative. The combination of EMR and radiofrequency ablation has been used for multifocal lesions, but long-term outcomes are unknown. The new endoscopic interventions for Barrett's oesophagus and early oesophageal cancer have the potential to improve clinical outcomes, although evidence that confirms superiority over oesphagectomy is limited. Longer-term outcome data and data from larger cohorts are required to confirm the appropriateness of these procedures.

Road map to esophagectomy for nurses

Esophageal cancer, although considered uncommon in the United States, continues to exhibit increased incidence. Esophageal cancer now ranks seventh among cancers in mortality for men in the United States. Even as treatment continues to advance, the mortality rate remains high, with a 5-year survival rate less than 35%. Esophageal cancer typically is discovered in advanced stages, which reduces the treatment options. When disease is locally advanced, esophagectomy remains the standard for treatment. Surgery remains challenging and complicated. Multiple surgical approaches are available, with the choice determined by tumor location and stage of disease. Recovery is often fraught with complications-both physical and emotional. Nursing care revolves around complex care managing multiple body systems and providing effective education and emotional support for both patients and patients' families. Even after recovery, local recurrence and distant metastases are common. Early diagnosis, surgical advancement, and improvements in postoperative care continue to improve outcomes.

Surgery versus radical endotherapies for early cancer and high grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus is one of the most common premalignant lesions in the world. Currently the mainstay of therapy is surgical management of advanced cancer but this has improved the five-year survival very little in the last 30 years. As a consequence, improved survival relies on early detection through endoscopic surveillance programmes. Success of this strategy relies on the fact that late stage premalignant lesions or very early cancers can be cured by intervention. Currently there is considerable controversy over which method is best: i.e. conventional open surgery or endotherapy (techniques involving endoscopy).

OBJECTIVES

We used data from randomised controlled trials to examine the effectiveness of endotherapies compared with surgery, in people with Barrett's Oesophagus; those with early neoplasias (defined as high grade dysplasia (HGD), and those with early cancer (defined as carcinoma in-situ, superficially invasive, early cancer or superficial cancer T-1m (T1-a) and T-1sm (T1-b)).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy to identify randomised trials in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science, EBMR, Controlled Trials mRCT and ISRCTN and LILACS, in July and August 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: randomised controlled trials comparing endotherapies with surgery in the treatment of high grade dysplasia (HGD), or early cancer. All cellular types of cancer were included (i.e. adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and more unusual types) but will be discussed separately.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

patients of any age and either gender with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of early neoplasia (HGD and early cancer) in Barrett's or squamous lined oesophagus.Types of interventions; endotherapies (the intervention) compared with surgery (the control), all with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reports of studies which meet the inclusion criteria for this review would have been analysed using the methods detailed in Appendix 9.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies which met the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review has indicated that there are no randomised control trials to compare management options in this vital area, therefore trials should be undertaken as a matter of urgency. The problems with such randomised methods are standardising surgery and endotherapies in all sites; standardising histopathology in all centres; assessing which patients are fit or unfit for surgery; and making sure there are relevant outcomes for the study i.e. long term survival (over five or more years) and no progression of high grade dysplasia.

Surgery versus radical endotherapies for early cancer and high grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus is one of the most common premalignant lesions in the world. Currently the mainstay of therapy is surgical management of advanced cancer but this has improved the five-year survival very little in the last 30 years. As a consequence, improved survival relies on early detection through endoscopic surveillance programmes. Success of this strategy relies on the fact that late stage premalignant lesions or very early cancers can be cured by intervention. Currently there is considerable controversy over which method is best: i.e. conventional open surgery or endotherapy (techniques involving endoscopy).

OBJECTIVES

We used data from randomised controlled trials to examine the effectiveness of endotherapies compared with surgery, in people with Barrett's Oesophagus; those with early neoplasias (defined as high grade dysplasia (HGD), and those with early cancer (defined as carcinoma in-situ, superficially invasive, early cancer or superficial cancer T-1m (T1-a) and T-1sm (T1-b)).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy to identify randomized trials in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science, EBMR, Controlled Trials mRCT and ISRCTN and LILACS, in July and August 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: randomised controlled trials comparing endotherapies with surgery in the treatment of high grade dysplasia (HGD), or early cancer. All cellular types of cancer were included (i.e. adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and more unusual types) but will be discussed separately.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

patients of any age and either gender with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of early neoplasia (HGD and early cancer) in Barrett's or squamous lined oesophagus.Types of interventions; endotherapies (the intervention) compared with surgery (the control), all with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reports of studies which meet the inclusion criteria for this review would have been analysed using the methods detailed in Appendix 9.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies which met the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review has indicated that there are no randomised control trials to compare management options in this vital area, therefore trials should be undertaken as a matter of urgency. The problems with such randomised methods are standardising surgery and endotherapies in all sites; standardising histopathology in all centres; assessing which patients are fit or unfit for surgery; and making sure there are relevant outcomes for the study i.e. no progression of high grade dysplasia or long term survival i.e. over five years.