Do pathologists agree with each other on the histological assessment of pT1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma?

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Malignant Nodal Involvement in Early Esophago-Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Results From the Multicenter Retrospective Congress Study (endosCopic resectiON, esophaGectomy or Gastrectomy for Early Esophagogastric Cancers)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to quantify lymph node metastasis (LNM) risk and outcomes following treatment of early esophago-gastric (EG) adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND

The standard of care for early T1N0 EG cancer is endoscopic resection (ER). Radical surgical resection is recommended for patients perceived to be at risk of LNM. Current models to select organ-preserving versus surgical treatment are inconsistent.

METHODS

CONGRESS is a UK-based multicenter retrospective cohort study. Patients diagnosed with clinical or pathological T1N0 EG adenocarcinoma from 2015 to 2022 were included. Outcomes and rates of LNM were assessed. Cox regression was performed to assess the impact of prognostic and treatment factors on overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 1601 patients from 26 centers were included, with median follow-up 32 months (IQR 14-53). 1285/1612 (80.3%) underwent ER, 497/1601 (31.0%) underwent surgery. Overall rate of LNM was 13.5%. On ER staging, tumour depth (T1bsm2-3 17.6% vs T1a 7.1%), lymphovascular invasion (17.2% vs 12.6%), or signet cells (28.6% vs 13.0%) were associated with LNM. In multivariable regression analysis, these were not significantly associated with LNM rates or survival. Adjusting for demographic and tumour variables, surgery after ER was associated with significant survival benefit, HR 0.33 (0.15-0.77), P =0.010.

CONCLUSIONS

This large multicenter data set suggests that early EG adenocarcinoma is associated with significant risk of LNM. These data are representative of current real clinical practice with ER-based staging, and suggests previously held beliefs regarding reliability of predictive factors for LNM may need to be reconsidered. Further research to identify patients who may benefit from organ-preserving versus surgical treatment is urgently required.

Management of high risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma following endoscopic resection

High-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR-T1 EAC) is defined as T1 cancer, with one or more of the following histological criteria: submucosal invasion, poorly or undifferentiated cancer, and/or presence of lympho-vascular invasion. Esophagectomy has long been the only available treatment for these HR-T1 EACs and was considered necessary because of a presumed high risk of lymph node metastases up to 46%. However, endoscopic submucosal disscection have made it possible to radically remove HR-T1 EAC, irrespective of size, while leaving the esophageal anatomy intact. Parallel to this development, new publications demonstrated that the risk of lymph node metastases for HR-T1 EAC may be even <24%. Therefore, indications for endoscopic treatment of HR-T1 EAC are being reconsidered and current research aims at finding the optimal management strategy for this indication, where watchful waiting may proof to be an acceptable strategy in selected patients. In this review, we will discuss the latest developments in this field.

Measuring the Submucosal Depth of Invasion in Endoscopic Mucosal Resections for Barrett-associated Adenocarcinoma: Practical Issues and Relevance for the Decision for Esophagectomy

CONTEXT.—

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has made it possible for Barrett esophagus patients with superficial cancers to be treated without esophagectomy. Recent guidelines recommend measuring depth of invasion (DOI) in submucosal cancers based on reports that in low-risk cancers, submucosal invasion 500 μm or less is associated with low nodal metastasis rates. However, pathologists face challenges in reproducibly measuring DOI.

OBJECTIVE.—

To determine how often DOI measurements could impact treatment and to evaluate reproducibility in measuring submucosal DOI in EMR specimens.

DESIGN.—

Consecutive adenocarcinoma EMR cases were identified, including cases of "low histologic risk" submucosal cancer, as follows: those with negative deep margins, no high-grade histology (G3), and no lymphovascular invasion. Submucosal DOI was measured by 7 pathologists according to guidelines.

RESULTS.—

Of 213 cancer EMR cases, 46 were submucosa invasive and 6 cases were low histologic risk submucosal cancers for which measurement could impact decision-making. Of these low histologic risk cases, 3 were categorized as superficial, indicating that measurement would be a clinically actionable decision point in only 1.4% of adenocarcinoma EMRs. Interobserver agreement for in-depth categorization between 7 pathologists was moderate (κ = 0.42), and the range of measurements spanned the 500-μm relevant threshold in 40 of 55 measured samples (72.7%).

CONCLUSIONS.—

While therapeutic decisions would rarely have depended on DOI measurements alone in our cohort, interobserver variability raises concerns about their use as a sole factor on which to offer patients conservative therapy. Responsibly reporting and clinically using submucosal DOI measurements will require practical experience troubleshooting common histologic artifacts, as well as multidisciplinary awareness of the impact of variable specimen-handling practices.

Individual risk calculator to predict lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lymph node metastasis (LNM) is possible after endoscopic resection of early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). This study aimed to develop and internally validate a prediction model that estimates the individual risk of metastases in patients with pT1b EAC.

METHODS

A nationwide, retrospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted in patients with pT1b EAC treated with endoscopic resection and/or surgery between 1989 and 2016. The primary end point was presence of LNM in surgical resection specimens or detection of metastases during follow-up. All resection specimens were histologically reassessed by specialist gastrointestinal pathologists. Subdistribution hazard regression analysis was used to develop the prediction model. The discriminative ability of this model was assessed using the c-statistic.

RESULTS

248 patients with pT1b EAC were included. Metastases were seen in 78 patients, and the 5-year cumulative incidence was 30.9 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 25.1 %-36.8 %). The risk of metastases increased with submucosal invasion depth (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 1.08, 95 %CI 1.02-1.14, for every increase of 500 μm), lymphovascular invasion (SHR 2.95, 95 %CI 1.95-4.45), and for larger tumors (SHR 1.23, 95 %CI 1.10-1.37, for every increase of 10 mm). The model demonstrated good discriminative ability (c-statistic 0.81, 95 %CI 0.75-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

A third of patients with pT1b EAC experienced metastases within 5 years. The probability of developing post-resection metastases was estimated with a personalized predicted risk score incorporating tumor invasion depth, tumor size, and lymphovascular invasion. This model requires external validation before implementation into clinical practice.

Significant variation in histopathological assessment of endoscopic resections for Barrett's neoplasia suggests need for consensus reporting: propositions for improvement

Endoscopic resection (ER) is an important diagnostic step in management of patients with early Barrett's esophagus (BE) neoplasia. Based on ER specimens, an accurate histological diagnosis can be made, which guides further treatment. Based on depth of tumor invasion, differentiation grade, lymphovascular invasion, and margin status, the risk of lymph node metastases and local recurrence is judged to be low enough to justify endoscopic management, or high enough to warrant invasive surgical esophagectomy. Adequate assessment of these histological risk factors is therefore of the utmost importance. Aim of this study was to assess pathologist concordance on these histological features on ER specimens and evaluate causes of discrepancy. Of 62 challenging ER cases, one representative H&E slide and matching desmin and endothelial marker were digitalized and independently assessed by 13 dedicated GI pathologists from 8 Dutch BE expert centers, using an online assessment module. For each histological feature, concordance and discordance were calculated. Clinically relevant discordances were observed for all criteria. Grouping depth of invasion categories according to expanded endoscopic treatment criteria (T1a and T1sm1 vs. T1sm2/3), ≥1 pathologist was discrepant in 21% of cases, increasing to 45% when grouping diagnoses according to the traditional T1a versus T1b classification. For differentiation grade, lymphovascular invasion, and margin status, discordances were substantial with 27%, 42%, and 32% of cases having ≥1 discrepant pathologist, respectively. In conclusion, histological assessment of ER specimens of early BE cancer by dedicated GI pathologists shows significant discordances for all relevant histological features. We present propositions to improve definitions of diagnostic criteria.

Lymphovascular invasion quantification could improve risk prediction of lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma

Aim

To quantify lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and to assess the prognostic value in patients with pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

In this nationwide, retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they were treated with surgery or endoscopic resection for pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma. Primary endpoint was the presence of metastases, lymph node metastases, or distant metastases, in surgical resection specimens or during follow‐up. A prediction model to identify risk factors for metastases was developed and internally validated.

Results

248 patients were included. LVI was distributed as follows: no LVI (n = 196; 79.0%), 1 LVI focus (n = 16; 6.5%), 2–3 LVI foci (n = 21; 8.5%) and ≥4 LVI foci (n = 15; 6.0%). Seventy‐eight patients had metastases. The risk of metastases was increased for tumors with 2–3 LVI foci [subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) 3.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.10–5.47] and ≥4 LVI foci (SHR 3.81, 95% CI 2.37–6.10). The prediction model demonstrated a good discriminative ability (c‐statistic 0.81).

Conclusion

The risk of metastases is higher when more LVI foci are present. Quantification of LVI could be useful for a more precise risk estimation of metastases. This model needs to be externally validated before implementation into clinical practice.

Measuring depth of invasion of submucosa - invasive adenocarcinoma in oesophageal endoscopic specimens: how good are we?☆

AIMS

Emerging data support that submucosa-invasive (pT1b) esophageal adenocarcinomas are cured via endoscopic resection, provided that invasion measures ≤500 μm, they lack other histological features predictive of nodal metastasis and have negative margins. Hence, pathologists' measurement of the depth of submucosal invasion in endoscopic resections may dictate further management (i.e. endoscopic follow-up versus oesophagectomy). In this study, we assessed the interobserver agreement in measuring the depth of submucosal invasion in oesophageal endoscopic resections.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Six subspecialised gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists from five academic centres independently measured the depth of submucosal invasion in μm from the deepest muscularis mucosae on 37 oesophageal endoscopic resection slides (round 1 scoring). A consensus meeting with a systematic approach for measuring and discussion of pitfalls was undertaken and remeasuring (round 2 scoring) was conducted. Interobserver agreement was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen's kappa statistics. A lack of agreement was seen among the six reviewers with a poor ICC for both rounds: 1 [0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.26-0.56] and 2 (0.49, 95% CI = 0.34-0.63). When measurements were categorised as < or >500 μm, the overall agreement among the six reviewers was only fair for both rounds: 1 (kappa = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.22-0.53) and 2 (kappa = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.12-0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows a lack of agreement among gastrointestinal pathologists in measuring the depth of submucosal invasion in oesophageal endoscopic resections despite formulating a consensus approach for scoring. If important management decisions continue to be based upon this parameter, more reproducible and concrete guidelines are needed.

Outcomes of patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The treatment of submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) remains in evolution, with some evidence supporting endoscopic management of low-risk lesions. Using a multicenter cohort, we evaluated outcomes of patients with T1b EAC and predictors of survival.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed between 2001 and 2016 with T1b EAC were identified from 3 academic medical centers in the United States. Demographic, clinical, and outcome data were collected. Outcomes studied were overall and cancer-free survival. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to assess independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-one patients were included, of whom 68 (48%) underwent esophagectomy and 73 (52%) were treated endoscopically. Most patients (85.8%) had high-risk histologic features. Thirty-day operative mortality was 2.9%. Median follow-up in the esophagectomy and endoscopic cohorts was 49.4 and 43.4 months, respectively. Patients treated endoscopically were older with higher comorbidity scores, with 46 (63%) achieving histologic remission. Nineteen patients (26.0%) also received chemoradiation. Five-year overall survival rates in the surgical and endoscopic cohorts were 89% and 59%, respectively, whereas 5-year cancer-free survival rates were 92% and 69%. Presence of high-risk histologic features was associated with reduced overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large multicenter study of patients with T1b EAC, esophagectomy was associated with improved overall but not cancer-free survival. High-risk histologic features were associated with poorer survival.