Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) with Additional Therapy for Superficial Esophageal Cancer with Submucosal Invasion

Esophagectomy Versus Endoscopic Resection with Adjuvant Therapy for T1b/T2 Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Esophageal cancer is the seventh most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide [...].

Lymph Node Metastasis for pN+ Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze lymph node metastasis (LNM) distribution in superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and its impact factors on survival.

METHODS

We reviewed 241 pT1N+ ESCC cases between February 2012 and April 2022 from 10 Chinese hospitals with a high volume of esophageal cancer (EC). We analyzed clinicopathological data to identify overall survival (OS) risk factors and LNM distribution in relation to tumor invasion depth.

RESULTS

Of the 241 patients, 26 (10.8%) had pT1a cancer and 215 (89.2%) had pT1b cancer. We showed that N3 stage, ≤ 28 lymphadenectomies, and nerve infiltration (NI) were negative factors for OS in superficial pN+ ESCC, whereas the OS was not definitively affected by the tumor depth and the choice of adjuvant therapy. In general, the LNM rates of the 193 pT1N+ ESCC cases can be ranked in the following order: station 106recR > station 106recL > station 1 > station 7 > station 2. With deeper tumor invasion, the higher LNM rate was observed near the bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerves (RLN), but there was no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

In superficial ESCC, LNM was frequently observed along the 106recR (35.8%) and 106recL (25.6%) stations. Advanced N-staging (N3) was a major negative impact factor in prognosis, and adequate lymph nodes dissected (LND) (N > 28) improved OS of pT1N+ ESCC. However, in superficial ESCC, tumor infiltration depth did not affect patients' OS or the distribution of positive LNs. The optimal adjuvant treatment that favors survival for these patients required further investigation.

Risk factors and pattern of metastatic recurrence after endoscopic resection with additional treatment for esophageal cancer

Although esophageal cancers invading the muscularis mucosa (pT1a-MM) or submucosa (pT1b-SM) after endoscopic resection (ER) are associated with a risk of lymph node metastasis, details of metastatic recurrence after additional treatment remain unknown. We aimed to identify the risk factors for metastatic recurrence and recurrence patterns in patients receiving additional treatment after ER for esophageal cancer. Between 2006 and 2017, patients with pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM esophageal cancer who underwent ER with additional treatment (esophagectomy, chemoradiotherapy [CRT], and radiation therapy) at 21 institutions in Japan were enrolled. We evaluated the risk factors for metastatic recurrence after ER with additional treatment. Subsequently, the rate and pattern (locoregional or distant) of metastatic recurrence were investigated for each additional treatment. Of the 220 patients who received additional treatment, 57, 125, and 38 underwent esophagectomy, CRT, and radiation therapy, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, lymphatic invasion was the sole risk factor for metastatic recurrence after additional treatment (hazard ratio, 3.50; P = 0.029). Although the risk of metastatic recurrence with additional esophagectomy was similar to that with CRT (hazard ratio, 1.01; P = 0.986), the rate of locoregional recurrence tended to be higher with additional esophagectomy (80.0% (4/5) vs. 36.4% (4/11)), leading to a better prognosis in patients with metastatic recurrence after additional esophagectomy than CRT (survival rate, 80.0% (4/5) vs. 9.1% (1/11)). Patients with lymphatic invasion have a high risk of metastatic recurrence after ER with additional treatment for pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM esophageal cancer. Additional esophagectomy may result in a better prognosis after metastatic recurrence.

A retrospective cohort study to observe the efficacy and safety of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) with adjuvant radiotherapy for T1a-MM/T1b-SM Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ESCC)

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The clinical outcome of endoscopy submucosal dissection with subsequent radiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma remain unclear. In this study we aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection with adjuvant radiotherapy in the treatment of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma involving the muscularis mucosae (T1a-MM) or the submucosa < 200 μm (T1b-SM1).

METHODS

We analyzed 20 patients with pathologically confirmed T1a-MM or T1b-SM1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection from 2016 to 2020 in Lihuili Hospital, 9 patients received adjuvant radiotherapy (RT group) and 11 patients received did not (non-RT group).

RESULTS

All 20 patients underwent en bloc resection, and both the vertical and horizontal margins were negative. There was no recurrence or lymph node metastasis in the RT group, and no serious complications or death were observed. In the non-RT group, 2 patients had local recurrence and 1 had distant metastasis. None of the 20 patients died of esophageal carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant radiotherapy following endoscopic submucosal dissection may be a safe and effective method for the treatment of T1a-MM/T1b-SM1 superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Radiotherapy Improves Survival of Patients With Lymphovascular Invasion in pT1b Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

INTRODUCTION

Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended for pT1b esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, it is unclear whether additional radiotherapy can improve patient survival. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy after ESD for pT1b ESCC.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study involving 11 hospitals in China. Between January 2010 and December 2019, patients with T1bN0M0 ESCC treated with or without adjuvant radiotherapy after ESD were included. Survival between groups was compared.

RESULTS

Overall, 774 patients were screened, and 161 patients were included. Forty-seven patients (29.2%) received adjuvant radiotherapy after ESD (RT group) and 114 (70.8%) underwent ESD alone (non-RT group). There were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the RT and non-RT groups. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was the only prognostic factor. In the LVI+ group, adjuvant radiotherapy significantly improved survival (5-year OS: 91.7% vs 59.5%, P = 0.050; 5-year DFS: 92.9% vs 42.6%, P = 0.010). In the LVI- group, adjuvant radiotherapy did not improve survival (5-year OS: 83.5% vs 93.9%, P = 0.148; 5-year DFS: 84.2% vs 84.7%, P = 0.907). The standardized mortality ratios were 1.52 (95% confidence interval 0.04-8.45) in the LVI+ group with radiotherapy and 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.15-1.42) in the LVI- group without radiotherapy.

DISCUSSION

Adjuvant radiotherapy could improve survival in pT1b ESCC with LVI+ other than LVI- after ESD. Selective adjuvant radiotherapy based on LVI status achieved survival rates similar to those of the general population.

Prognostic analysis and nomogram establishment in patients with early esophageal cancer receiving endoscopic therapy: a population-based study

Background

The growing numbers of early esophageal cancer (EEC) have increased the demand for endoscopic therapy.

Objectives

To clarify the influential factors for the prognosis of patients with EEC receiving endoscopic surgery, and to construct a nomogram to evaluate the prognostic value of endoscopic therapy.

Design

Prognostic analysis study.

Methods

Clinical data of EEC patients who received endoscopic therapy between 2004 and 2015 were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and used to construct the nomogram. The prognosis was analyzed by R language; the nomogram was constructed by Cox survival analysis; and the accuracy of the nomogram was verified by C index and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and calibration curves. X-Tile software was used to stratify the risk of patients.

Results

Our study constructed the nomogram of the prognosis of patients with EEC treated by endoscopic surgery, including 1118 patients and 5 independent prognostic factors of esophageal cancer-specific survival. The C index and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the training and verification cohorts were all >0.75. The calibration curve also reflected the good consistency of the model in predicting survival. Significant difference in the risk of patients from different stratifications with the same T staging existed, and the model had a better C index than that of the T staging.

Conclusion

Our study reports potential influential factors affecting the prognosis of EEC patients who received endoscopic therapy and establishes a reliable nomogram to predict the risk and prognosis, which has certain advantages compared with traditional TNM staging system.

Clinical models to predict lymph nodes metastasis and distant metastasis in newly diagnosed early esophageal cancer patients: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

Patients with early esophageal cancer (EC) receive individualized therapy based on their lymph node metastasis (LNM) and distant metastasis (DM) status; however, deficiencies in current clinical staging techniques and the issue of cost-effectiveness mean LNM and DM often go undetected preoperatively. We aimed to develop three clinical models to predict the likelihood of LNM, DM, and prognosis in patients with early EC.

METHOD

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for T1 EC patients from 2004 to 2015. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to recognize the risk factors of LNM and DM, predict overall survival (OS), and develop relevant nomograms. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC)/concordance index and calibration curves were used to evaluate the discrimination and accuracy of the three nomograms. Decision curve analyses (DCAs), clinical impact curves, and subgroups based on model scores were used to determine clinical practicability.

RESULTS

The area under the curve of the LNM and DM nomograms were 0.668 and 0.807, respectively. The corresponding C-index of OS nomogram was 0.752. Calibration curves and DCA showed an effective predictive accuracy and clinical applicability. In patients with T1N0M0 EC, surgery alone (p < 0.01) proved a survival advantage. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy indicated a better prognosis in the subgroup analysis for T1 EC patients with LNM or DM.

CONCLUSIONS

We created three nomograms to predict the likelihood of LNM, DM, and OS probability in patients with early EC using a generalizable dataset. These useful visual tools could help clinical physicians deliver appropriate perioperative care.

Efficacy of Organ Preservation Strategy by Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy after Non-Curative Endoscopic Resection for Superficial SCC: A Multicenter Western Study

BACKGROUND

In case of high risk of lymph node invasion after endoscopic resection (ER) of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) can be an alternative to surgery. We assessed long-term clinical outcomes of adjuvant therapy by CRT after non-curative ER for superficial SCC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter study. From April 1999 to April 2018, all consecutive patients who underwent ER for SCC with tumor infiltration beyond the muscularis mucosae were included.

RESULTS

A total of 137 ER were analyzed. The overall nodal or metastatic recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years was 88% and specific recurrence-free survival rates at 5 years with and without adjuvant therapy were, respectively, 97.9% and 79.1% (p = 0.011). Independent factors for nodal and/or distal metastatic recurrence were age (HR = 1.075, p = 0.031), Sm infiltration depth > 200 µm (HR = 4.129, p = 0.040), and the absence of adjuvant CRT or surgery (HR = 11.322, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

In this study, adjuvant therapy is associated with a higher recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years after non-curative ER. This result suggests this approach may be considered as an alternative to surgery in selected patients.

Prognostic Benefit of Additional Treatment After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Although additional treatment is considered for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) invading into the muscularis mucosa (pT1a-MM) or submucosa (pT1b-SM) after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the actual benefits of this method remain to be elucidated.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the prognostic benefits of additional treatment in such patients.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2017, we enrolled patients with pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM ESCC after ESD at 21 institutions in Japan. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were compared between the additional treatment and follow-up groups after propensity score matching, to reduce the bias of baseline characteristics. A subgroup analysis was performed according to the pathological findings: category A, pT1a-MM but negative for lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and vertical margin (VM); category B, tumor invasion into the submucosa ≤ 200 μm but negative for LVI and VM; category C, others.

RESULTS

Of 593 patients with pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM ESCC after ESD, 101 matched pairs were extracted after propensity score matching. The OSs were similar between the additional treatment and follow-up groups (80.6% vs. 78.6% in 5 years; P = 0.972). In a subgroup analysis, the OS in the additional treatment group was significantly lower than that in the follow-up group (65.7% vs. 95.2% in 5 years; P = 0.037) in category A, whereas OS did not significantly differ in category C (76.8% vs. 69.5% in 5 years; P = 0.360).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional treatment after ESD in patients with pT1a-MM/pT1b-SM ESCC was not associated with an improved prognosis.

Chemoradiation versus surgery for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection: comparison of long-term oncologic outcomes

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is the standard adjuvant treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC) following noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, recent reports have also shown that ESD with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has promising results. This retrospective study aimed to elucidate the efficacy of CRT compared to surgery in patients with SESCC after noncurative ESD.

METHODS

This study retrospectively compared the long-term outcomes of patients who received adjuvant treatment with surgery or CRT after noncurative ESD for SESCC.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 60 patients who developed SESCC after noncurative ESD, 34 of whom received adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and 26 underwent esophagectomy. The median follow-up periods were 46 and 56 months in the CRT and esophagectomy groups, respectively. The median patient age was significantly higher in the CRT group than in the esophagectomy group (69 vs. 65 years, p = 0.0054). CRT was completed in all patients, and the incidence of grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic adverse events was 6%. The overall and disease-free survival did not significantly differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT following ESD seems a promising nonsurgical strategy for optimizing the selection of therapies for high-risk SESCC and warrant further investigation.

Management of Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Early Gastric Cancer following Non-Curative Endoscopic Resection

According to the European and Japanese guidelines, additional treatment is recommended for cases of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and early gastric cancer (EGC) that do not meet the curability criteria for endoscopic resection (ER), i.e., non-curative ER, owing to the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM). However, the rates of LNM in such cases were relatively low (e.g., 8% for EGC). Several recent advances have been made in this field. First, pathological risk stratification for metastatic recurrence following non-curative ER without additional treatment was developed for both superficial ESCC and EGC. Second, the pattern of metastatic recurrence and prognosis after recurrence following non-curative ER without additional treatment was found to be considerably different between superficial ESCC and EGC. Third, a combination of ER and selective chemoradiotherapy was developed as a minimally invasive treatment method for clinical T1b-SM ESCC. These findings may help clinicians decide the treatment strategy for patients following non-curative ER; however, for optimal therapeutic decision-making in such patients, it is also important to predict the prognosis other than SESCC or EGC and impaired quality of life. Thus, a novel algorithm that considers these factors, as well as metastatic recurrence, should be developed.

Prediction model for selection of adjuvant therapy population after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment is the first choice for early esophageal lesions without obvious metastasis or infiltration, especially endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). However, the occurrence of non-curative resection, recurrence, or metastasis after ESD is inevitable, which may require adjuvant therapy such as additional surgery or chemora-diotherapy.

AIM

To analyze the risk factors for additional surgery or chemora-diotherapy after ESD for early esophageal lesions, and explore the effect of curative resection on additional adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ESD for stage T1 esophageal cancer (EC) and precancerous lesions were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative recurrence, metastasis, and adjuvant treatment were followed, and a prediction model for adjuvant treatment population selection was established.

RESULTS

Non-curative resection was correlated with patient age, proportion of lesions, and microscopic size(P < 0.05), among which the proportion of lesions > 2/3 (odds ratio [OR] = 7.958, P = 0.007) was an independent risk factor. Two of curative and ten of non-curative resection cases received additional treatment, indicating that further treatment after ESD might be required regardless of whether curative resection was performed. Patient age, proportion of lesions, lesion lifting, differentiation, vascular invasion, and tumor invasion depth were correlated with the need for further treatment (P < 0.05). Age ≥ 70 years (OR = 4.210, P = 0.049), poor lifting (OR = 18.171, P = 0.047), and depth of tumor up to SM2 (OR = 38.781, P = 0.012) were independent risk factors. The AUC of the nomogram model was 0.864 (95%CI: 0.766-0.962); the specificity and sensitivity were 95.8% and 75.0%, respectively. Calibration curve analysis, decision curve analysis, and Hosmer and Lemeshow test (χ² = 1.5954, P = 0.991) showed that the predictive value of the model was acceptable.

CONCLUSION

For patients with stage T1 EC and precancerous lesions, whether further surgery or chemoradiotherapy is needed after ESD should be comprehensively considered.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal lesions: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

ESGE recommends that the evaluation of superficial gastrointestinal (GI) lesions should be made by an experienced endoscopist, using high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based).ESGE does not recommend routine performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or positron emission tomography (PET)-CT prior to endoscopic resection.ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the treatment of choice for most superficial esophageal squamous cell and superficial gastric lesions.For Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated lesions, ESGE suggests the use of ESD for lesions suspicious of submucosal invasion (Paris type 0-Is, 0-IIc), for malignant lesions > 20 mm, and for lesions in scarred/fibrotic areas.ESGE does not recommend routine use of ESD for duodenal or small-bowel lesions.ESGE suggests that ESD should be considered for en bloc resection of colorectal (but particularly rectal) lesions with suspicion of limited submucosal invasion (demarcated depressed area with irregular surface pattern or a large protruding or bulky component, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm) or for lesions that otherwise cannot be completely removed by snare-based techniques.ESGE recommends that an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with histology no more advanced than intramucosal cancer (no more than m2 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma), well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion or ulceration, should be considered a very low risk (curative) resection, and no further staging procedure or treatment is generally recommended.ESGE recommends that the following should be considered to be a low risk (curative) resection and no further treatment is generally recommended: an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with superficial submucosal invasion (sm1), that is well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion, of size ≤ 20 mm for an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or ≤ 30 mm for a stomach lesion or of any size for a BE-related or colorectal lesion, and with no lymphovascular invasion, and no budding grade 2 or 3 for colorectal lesions.ESGE recommends that, after an endoscopically complete resection, if there is a positive horizontal margin or if resection is piecemeal, but there is no submucosal invasion and no other high risk criteria are met, this should be considered a local-risk resection and endoscopic surveillance or re-treatment is recommended rather than surgery or other additional treatment.ESGE recommends that when there is a diagnosis of lymphovascular invasion, or deeper infiltration than sm1, or positive vertical margins, or undifferentiated tumor, or, for colorectal lesions, budding grade 2 or 3, this should be considered a high risk (noncurative) resection, and complete staging and strong consideration for additional treatments should be considered on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.ESGE recommends scheduled endoscopic surveillance with high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based) with biopsies of only the suspicious areas after a curative ESD.

Best additional management after non-curative endoscopic resection of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic resection (ER) is an accepted first-line treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but when curative resection is not achieved, further treatment is not standardised. We aimed at evaluating outcomes of management strategies (esophagectomy, chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy (CRT/RT) or follow-up (FUP)) after a non-curative ESCC ER.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed evaluating outcomes of different management strategies after ESCC submitted to primary ER (T1a/T1b), without curative criteria (R1/Rx, T1a-m3/T1b, lymphovascular invasion (LVI) or poor differentiation). Primary outcomes included recurrence, overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Secondary outcomes consisted of treatment-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included for qualitative analysis (16 observational and 1 randomized controlled trial) including 788 patients with ESCC submitted to ER, managed by additional CRT/RT (n = 530), surgery (n = 98) or FUP (n = 160). Eight studies suited quantitative analysis. Patients only followed up after ER experienced recurrence rates of 0-36.4% (OR 3.6 (95%CI 1.06-12.20) vs further treatments). When submitted to CRT/RT following non-curative ER, recurrence was observed in 0-27.2% (OR 8.00 (95%CI 1.74-36.80) whereas after surgery no recurrence was noticeable. Reported 5 y-OS after CRT/RT for non-curative ER ranged among 75-100% whereas, for those offered surgeries, 5 y-OS was 89.5%. OS ranged between 54.5% and 100% after FUP. CRT/RT and surgery-related adverse events ranged from 0% to 32% and 14% to 28.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional treatment should be provided in ESCC after non-curative ER. Adjuvant esophagectomy might be the preferred treatment to medically fit patients with high-risk features (namely LVI). Properly designed trials assessing the role of CRT/RT are needed to manage these patients.

Influence of Esophageal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection on the Changes of Energy Metabolism during the Perioperative Period

Esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is considered to be more complex than gastric ESD. This study aimed to assess the physical invasiveness of esophageal ESD during perioperative periods by measuring resting energy expenditure (REE). The factors affecting REE that could be used to identify patients requiring perioperative management were also investigated. Overall, 75 patients who had undergone esophageal ESD were prospectively enrolled. REE, body weight, and basal energy expenditure were measured on the day of and the day following ESD. The mean REE/body weight was 20.2 kcal/kg/day on the day of ESD and significantly increased to 23.0 kcal/kg/day one day after ESD. The stress factor on the day after ESD was 1.11. White blood cell, neutrophil, and C-reactive protein levels increased on the day after ESD and correlated with the changes in REE. Among the factors including age, body mass index, total resection area, operation time, and sarcopenia, only the total resection area was associated with changes in REE. In conclusion, energy metabolism increases during the perioperative period for esophageal ESD. The increase in the stress factor for esophageal ESD was higher than that in gastric and colorectal ESD. Furthermore, patients with large resection areas require greater attention in perioperative management. 

Endoscopic resection as an independent predictive factor of local control in patients with T1bN0M0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with chemoradiotherapy: a retrospective study

Background

Although chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is one of the curative treatments for thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) with submucosal invasion, the risk of local recurrence after CRT remains a clinical problem. This retrospective study aimed to analyze the predictive factors for local recurrence after CRT.

Methods

Ninety-one patients with clinical or pathological (c/p) T1bN0M0 thoracic ESCC who underwent CRT from 2004 to 2017 in our institution were analyzed retrospectively. Sixty-three patients were diagnosed with pathological T1b after undergoing initial endoscopic resection (ER) and treated with additional CRT; meanwhile, 28 patients were clinically diagnosed with T1b and underwent definitive CRT. We investigated the predictors of disease–specific survival (DSS) and local recurrence–free survival (LRFS) by performing univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

The median observation period was 59.8 months. The 5-year DSS and LRFS rates were 84.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 76.1–92.5) and 87.1% (95% CI: 79.1–95.1), respectively. The multivariate analysis revealed no significant predictors associated with DSS. On the contrary, ER (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02–0.48, p = 0.003) and tumor length (HR: 6.78, 95% CI: 1.28–36.05, p = 0.025) were recognized as independent predictive factors for LRFS. During follow-up, recurrence was observed in 18 patients (19.8%). With regard to the patterns of relapse, local recurrence was the most common in 11 patients, and salvage ER was performed in 9 of 11 patients.

Conclusions

ER and tumor length were independent predictive factors for LRFS. Our study suggested that performance of ER prior to CRT improved the local control in patients with c/p T1bN0M0 ESCC. In addition, most of the patients who experienced local recurrence were treated with salvage ER, which contributed to preserving the organs.

[Treatment of Superficial Esophageal Cancer: An Update]

Superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC) is an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma confined to the mucosa or superficial submucosa. Recent Korean Guidelines recommend an endoscopic resection as the first-line treatment for SESCC without a distant or lymph node metastasis (LNM) after excluding those with an obvious submucosal invasion. Before endoscopic treatment of SESCC, Lugol chromoendoscopy or image-enhanced endoscopy is recommended to define the extent of the lesion, and endoscopic ultrasound is recommended to determine the T stage. The tumor size, macroscopic type of tumor, pathologic differentiation, depth of tumor, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) are risk factors of LNM in SESCC. No additional treatment is necessary after an en bloc complete resection of SESCC invading no more than the lamina propria without LVI. Although the risk of LNM in a SESCC invading into muscularis mucosa without LVI is low, a close follow-up is recommended without additional treatment. On the other hand, additional treatment is recommended in the case of a tumor with submucosal invasion or an LVI positive or positive vertical resection margin. Adjuvant therapy includes esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy (CRT), but it is unclear which treatment is better. The 5-year overall survival rates were reportedly 90-100% for esophagectomy and 75-85% for CRT. Nevertheless, patients with high-risk features including poorly differentiated histology, LVI positive, perineural invasion positive, T1b-SM2/T1b-SM3 cancer, and vertical resection margin positive need to be treated with an additional esophagectomy. Elderly patients, those with a physical condition and co-morbidities, and those with LNM or cancer-specific mortality require additional treatment after a non-curative endoscopic resection of SESCC.

Additional Radiotherapy With or Without Chemotherapy Following Endoscopic Resection for Stage I Esophageal Carcinoma: A Pilot Study

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of additional radiotherapy after endoscopic resection (ER) for stage I esophageal carcinoma (EC) with high-risk factors. Materials and methods: Patients with stage cT1N0M0 EC who underwent ER and additional radiotherapy between January 2010 and August 2019 at our institution were retrospectively included. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), local control rate, regional control rate, common acute toxicities, esophageal stricture, and dysphagia were analyzed. Results: Thirty-one consecutive patients were included in the study. The median age was 62 years (range, 49-78). Thirty patients (96.8%) had squamous cell carcinoma, and one patient (3.2%) had adenosquamous cell carcinoma. Twenty-six patients (83.9%) had submucosal invasion, 15 patients (48.4%) had lymphovascular invasion, and one patient (3.2%) had a venous invasion. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 100.0%, 86.9%, and 68.5%, respectively. The corresponding DFS rates were 100.0%, 85.2%, and 75.8%, respectively. The corresponding CSS rates were 100.0%, 89.8%, and 78.6%, respectively. The local and regional control rates were 100.0% and 93.5%, respectively. No grade 4-5 acute toxicities were observed. Fifteen patients (48.4%) were endoscopically diagnosed with esophageal strictures after ER. At the last follow-up, 28 patients (90.5%) were able to eat a regular diet, one patient (3.2%) could eat a soft diet, one needed a semifluid diet, and only one (3.2%) had to eat a fluid diet. Conclusions: For patients with stage I EC, additional radiotherapy following ER is safe and effective, with the swallowing function well-preserved. Nevertheless, prospective studies are needed to verify these results.

Additional Esophagectomy Following Noncurative Endoscopic Resection for Early Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is recommended after endoscopic resection (ER) for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) when histopathological factors indicate a risk of nodal metastasis and incomplete resection. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of surgery management in this clinical setting and evaluate risk factors for residual disease after ER.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of cT1N0M0 ESCC patients with noncurative ER and additional esophagectomy (2009-2019, eight centers). Noncurative ER was defined as positive resected margins on pathology, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), poor differentiation, or submucosal invasion. The pathology after ER and esophagectomy was analyzed to identify predictors of nodal metastasis and residual tumor.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 128 patients. Primary residual tumor and nodal metastasis were confirmed in 25 (19.5%) and 15 (11.7%) patients, respectively. On multivariate analysis, nodal metastasis was independently associated with submucosal invasion [odds ratio (OR), 9.9; 95% CI, 1.1-96.1], LVI (OR, 20.9; 95% CI, 2.9-150.5), and tumor size ≥ 2 cm (OR, 8.1; 95% CI, 1.4-48.2) (all P < 0.05), but not with poor differentiation (P = 0.613). Regarding residual primary tumor, only positive vertical margin was significant factor (OR, 147; 95% CI, 18 to > 999; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional esophagectomy after noncurative ER allowed the resection of residual tumor and nodal metastasis, with favorable outcomes. Close follow-up may be feasible for a positive horizontal margin alone or poor differentiation alone, whereas intensive treatment should be considered for patients with submucosal invasion, LVI, and a positive vertical margin, especially when combined with tumor size ≥ 2 cm. Prospective research is needed to confirm the optimal management after ER.

[Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer]

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Additional Treatment Following Noncurative Endoscopic Resection for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Comparison of Outcomes between Esophagectomy and Chemoradiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) has been widely implemented for cT1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Additional therapy, including esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy (CRT), is sometimes required after noncurative ER.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 108 patients who received any additional treatment following noncurative ER (positive vertical margins, lymphovascular invasion, or invasion depth of submucosa or more), and compared the short- and long-term outcomes between the two treatment modalities.

RESULTS

Of 108 patients, 56 underwent esophagectomy (E group), and 52 received CRT (CRT group). A positive vertical margin was observed in 17 (14.8%) patients and high risks of occult lymph node metastasis were observed in 91 (85.2%) patients, as well as lymphovascular invasion in 35 (32.4%) patients, invasion depth of the submucosa or more in 27 (25.0%) patients, and both in 29 (26.9%) patients. The E group patients were significantly younger (p = 0.046) and tended to present with larger tumors than those in the CRT group (p = 0.057). Lymphatic invasion was more frequent in the E group (p = 0.019), and, furthermore, one treatment-related death was observed in the E group. There were no significant differences between the groups in overall and disease-specific survival (p = 0.406 and 0.151, respectively), however, recurrence was only observed in the CRT group.

CONCLUSION

Both esophagectomy and CRT are safe and effective as additional treatments after noncurative ER in patients with ESCC. Esophagectomy is oncologically safe, whereas a risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality remains. Although the adverse events are acceptable, CRT has a certain degree of risk of disease recurrence.

Clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy.

METHODS

We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups.

RESULTS

The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER.

Organ Preservation after Endoscopic Resection of Early Esophageal Cancer with a High Risk of Lymph Node Involvement

Simple Summary

Virtually all early (T1) esophageal cancers can be resected endoscopically. However, the presence of histologic criteria on the resection specimen (deep submucosal invasion, lymphovascular involvement, poor tumor differentiation) are believed to be associated with a high risk (> 10%) of lymph node involvement. Therefore, the presence of such histoprognostic criteria currently require an esophagectomy. However, some patients are unfit for surgery or decline surgery, and undergo close follow-up or chemoradiotherapy. We analyzed the outcomes of these patients. We included 41 patients, of which thirteen (32%) were closely monitored, and 28 (68%) were treated by chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone. After a mean follow-up of 19 and 28 months, cancer specific survival was 100% and 96%, respectively. Our study shows that close follow-up may be an alternative to esophagectomy after endoscopic resection of an early esophageal cancer with a predicted high risk of lymph node involvement.

Abstract

Background: Esophagectomy is recommended after endoscopic resection of an early esophageal cancer when pejorative histoprognostic criteria indicate a high risk of lymph node involvement. Our aim was to analyze the clinical outcomes of a non-surgical, organ preserving management in this clinical setting. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was performed in two tertiary centers from 2015 to 2020. Patients were included if they had histologically complete resection of an early esophageal cancer, with poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion or deep submucosal invasion. Endoscopic resection was followed by chemoradiotherapy or follow-up in case of surgical contraindications or patient refusal. Outcome measures were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS) and toxicity of chemoradiotherapy. Results: Forty-one patients (36 with squamous cell carcinoma and 5 with adenocarcinomas) were included. The estimated high risk of lymph node involvement was based on poor differentiation (10/41; 24%), lympho-vascular invasion (11/41; 27%), muscularis mucosa invasion or deep sub-mucosal invasion (38/41; 93%). Thirteen patients (13/41; 32%) were closely monitored, and 28 (28/41; 68%) were treated by chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone. In the close follow-up group, DFS, OS and CSS were 92%, 92% and 100%, respectively vs. 75%, 79% and 96%, respectively in the chemoradiotherapy group at the end of the follow-up. Serious adverse events related to chemoradiotherapy occurred in 10% of the patients. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: Our study shows that close follow-up may be an alternative to systematic esophagectomy after endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer with a predicted high risk of lymph node involvement.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection with additional radiotherapy in the treatment of T1a esophageal squamous cell cancer: randomized controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is effective for treating T1a early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, occasional recurrences are inevitable. This trial was designed to clarify the efficacy of combining ESD with additional radiotherapy in the treatment of T1a ESCC.

METHODS

Between January 2015 and September 2018, patients with early ESCC (T1aN0M0) following ESD were randomly assigned (1:1) to the radiotherapy group or non-radiotherapy group. Patients in the radiotherapy group received a median radiation dose of 59.4 Gy within 2 months after ESD. In the non-radiotherapy group, patients underwent regular follow-up only. Recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, overall survival, and complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

70 patients completed the per-protocol treatment. Three patients in the non-radiotherapy group experienced intraluminal mucosal recurrence compared with none in the radiotherapy group. No local lymph node or distant metastases occurred in either group. The 3-year cumulative recurrence-free survival was 100 % in the radiotherapy group and 85.3 % in the non-radiotherapy group (P = 0.04; hazard ratio 0.08, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.01 - 0.86). However, there was no significant difference in RFS between the treatments within the T1a invasion subgroups (P > 0.05). No patient died in either group. Mucosal defects of more than three-quarters of the esophageal circumference were positively correlated with stenosis (P < 0.01; odds ratio 23.26, 95 %CI 4.04 - 133.86). No severe radiation toxicities were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiotherapy after ESD might be a safe and effective optional therapeutic strategy to prevent recurrence of T1a ESCC.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and comparison to surgery for superficial esophageal squamous cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial esophageal squamous cancer.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, ProQuest and Cochrane Library databases. Primary outcomes were overall survival, disease-specific survival and recurrence-free survival at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence and metastasis. Hazard ratios were calculated based on time to events for survival analysis, and odds radios were used to compare discrete variables.

RESULTS

A total of 3796 patients in 21 retrospective studies, including 5 comparative studies for ESD and esophagectomy were enrolled. The invasion depth was 52.0% for M1-M2, 43.2% for M3-SM1 and 4.7% for SM2 or deeper. The 5-year survival rate was: overall survival 87.3%, disease-specific survival 97.7%, and recurrence-free survival 85.1%, respectively. Pooled local recurrence of ESD was 1.8% and metastasis was 3.3%. In terms of the comparison between ESD and esophagectomy, there was no difference in the overall survival (86.4% versus 81.8%, hazard ratio = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.39-1.11) as well as disease-specific and recurrence-free survival. In addition, ESD was associated with fewer adverse events (19.8 % versus 44.0%, odds ratio = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.23-0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

For superficial esophageal squamous cancer, ESD may be considered as the primary treatment of for mucosal lesions, and additional treatment should be available for submucosal invasive cancers.

Esophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with clinical stage N0 and pathological stage T1b esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after endoscopic submucosal dissection: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial (Ad-ESD Trial)

Background

Esophagectomy is still advised as an additional treatment for pathological T1b (pT1b) esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) following attempted endoscopic resection (ER). ER followed with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) has shown increased quality of life as well as comparable oncological outcomes to esophagectomy. However, there is no well-designed phase III trial to compare the two treatments for patients with pT1b ESCC.

Methods

One hundred seventy-six patients with clinical stage N0 (cN0) and pT1b ESCC will be recruited at three centers and randomly assigned to the esophagectomy group or the dCRT group. The clinical lymph node status will be measured by image examination, including computer tomography and positron emission tomography–computed tomography. The pathological tumor status will be diagnosed after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). All patients will be followed up for 60 months after randomization. The primary endpoint is 5-year overall survival. The secondary endpoints are quality of life, related adverse events, 3-year overall survival, and relapse-free survival rates.

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first phase III randomized controlled trial to compare esophagectomy and dCRT for patients with cN0-pT1b ESCC after ESD. Based on the results of this study, we will show whether dCRT will benefit patients more than esophagectomy, which will contribute more high-quality evidence to the primary salvage treatment for these patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04135664. Registered on Aug. 10, 2019.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Risk of Recurrence and Metastasis for Patients with T1N0M0 Esophageal Carcinoma Who Achieve Completed Resection via Endoscopic Submucosal Resection: Evidence for the Appropriateness of the Watch and Wait Follow-Up Strategy

Purpose

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely performed procedure for esophageal carcinoma when the depth of invasion reaches the epithelium and lamina propria. However, ESD for esophageal carcinoma with depth of invasion exceeding the muscularis mucosa is controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of ESD for T1N0M0 (tumor invading the mucosa and submucosa [T1], no regional lymph node metastasis [N0], no distant metastasis [M0]) esophageal cancer.

Patients and Methods

Esophageal cancer was evaluated via pathology and computed tomography (CT) in consecutive patients with negative margin and without additional therapy. A total of 84 patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 42 (range, 9-99) months.

Results

No recurrence and metastasis were detected in the M1 and M2 group. The 5-year locoregional recurrence rate and distant metastasis rate were 4.2% and 5.6% for the M3 group and were 0% and 1.4% for the SM group, respectively. The 3- and 5-year overall survival were 94.4% (M1+M2 group, 95.0%; M3 group, 95.0%; SM group, 92.9%) and 80.9% (M1+M2 group, 95.0%; M3 group, 95.0%; SM group, 92.9%). Meanwhile, the 3- and 5-year disease-specific survival rates were 100% (M1+M2 group, 100%; M3 group, 100%; SM group, 100%) and 90.8% (M1+M2 group, 100%; M3 group, 90.0%; SM group, 85.7%). The major complications were postoperative strictures, most of which were grade 1-2. In total, two (4.8%) and one (1.2%) patient developed grade 3 and 5 late esophageal strictures, respectively.

Conclusion

ESD complete resection yields low recurrence and metastasis rates in early esophageal cancer (T1N0M0). Thus, additional treatment is not necessary, and a watch and wait strategy may be reasonable.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer

Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by <i>en bloc</i> fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Adjuvant therapy for pT1a-m3/pT1b esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after endoscopic resection: Esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy? A critical review

Endoscopic resection (ER) combined with adjuvant therapy appears to be a new treatment for esophageal squamous cell cancers (ESCC) invading to deep mucosa (pT1a-m3) or submucosa (pT1b). Adjuvant therapy can take the form of esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy (CRT), but it is unclear which treatment is better. This review is to explore the outcomes of adjuvant therapy between esophagectomy and CRT for the treatment of pT1a-m3/pT1b ESCC after ER. Ten relevant studies with a total of 285 patients were included. The reported 5-year overall survival rates ranged between 90-100 % for ER-esophagectomy and 75-85 % for ER-CRT. ESCC with the invasion of ≥ sm2 combined with lymphovascular involvement was associated with a high-risk of relapse in patients receiving ER-CRT, but not in ER-esophagectomy. In conclusion, patients with a high-risk of relapse should be treated with ER-esophagectomy; ER-CRT may be used as an alternative treatment for patients with a nonhigh risk of relapse.

Current status of esophageal cancer treatment

Esophageal cancer (EC) remains one of the most common and aggressive diseases worldwide. This review discusses some debates in the modern management of the disease. Endoscopic procedures for early cancer (T1a−b) are now embedded in routine care and the challenge will be to more accurately select patients for endoscopic resection with or without adjuvant therapy. Perioperative multimodal therapies are associated with improved survival compared to surgery alone for locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, there is no global consensus on the optimal regimen. Furthermore, histological subtype (adenocarcinomavs. squamous cell cancer) plays a role in the choice for treatment. New studies are underway to resolve some issues. The extent of the lymphadenectomy during esophagectomy remains controversial especially after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The ideal operation balances between limiting surgical trauma and optimizing survival. Minimally invasive esophagectomy and enhanced recovery pathways are associated with decreased morbidity and faster recovery albeit there is no consensus yet what approach should be used. Finally, immune checkpoint inhibitors present promising preliminary results in the novel treatment of advanced or metastatic EC but their widespread application in clinical practice is still awaited.

Comparison of long-term outcomes between esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy after endoscopic resection of submucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Esophagectomy represents the standard treatment strategy for superficial esophageal cancer diagnosed pathologically as submucosal disease (pT1b) following an endoscopic resection (ER). However, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is expected to become an alternative treatment option. This study retrospectively compared the outcomes of patients who underwent ER of submucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, and who received additional treatment in the form of surgery and CRT. Data were collected from 83 patients who underwent ER and were diagnosed as pT1b (sm) between January 2002 and December 2013. Of them, 52 patients underwent additional treatment (19 surgery, 33 CRT). The long-term outcomes, recurrent patterns, and recurrence risk factor were analyzed retrospectively. No significant differences were identified between the two groups regarding the following aspects: sex, Charlson comorbidity index, tumor size, macroscopic type, cut end positivity, and en bloc resection rate. On the contrary, significant differences were observed in age (P = 0.042) and lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.003) between the two groups. There were more patients with positive lymphovascular invasion, which was one of the strongest risk factors, in the surgery group. The 3-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were both 100% in the surgery group and 90.4% and 87.4%, respectively, in the CRT group. The 5-year OS and RFS rates both decreased to 89.5% in the surgery group and to 80.3% and 70.4%, respectively, in the CRT group. The surgery group achieved a superior OS and RFS compared to the CRT group, though not significant (P = 0.172, P = 0.127). Tumor recurrence was observed in 6 patients. All these patients were in the CRT group (P = 0.075). They included 3 patients with hematogenous metastases (of the lung, bone, and adrenal gland) and 3 patients with regional lymph node metastasis. The patient with hematogenous adrenal gland metastasis had simultaneous extended lymph node metastasis. Through a univariate analysis, it was observed that tumor size (≥ 40 mm) and positive lymphatic invasion represented the significant risk factors for recurrence in the CRT group (P = 0.048 and P = 0.035, respectively). To achieve a better long-term survival, surgery is recommended as the additional treatment for ER-pT1b esophageal cancer. While CRT represents an acceptable alternative, the indication should be carefully decided, especially in high-risk patients for recurrence with large tumor size (≥ 40 mm) or positive lymphatic invasion.

Outcomes of esophagectomy after noncurative endoscopic resection of early esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend performing esophagectomy after endoscopic resection for early esophageal cancer when the risk of lymph node metastasis or residual cancer is found to be significant and endoscopic treatment is therefore noncurative. Our aim was to assess the safety and oncological outcomes of esophagogastric resection in this specific clinical setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review from 2012 to 2018 was performed at four tertiary referral centers. All patients had a noncurative endoscopic resection of a clinical T1 esophageal cancer, followed by esophagectomy. Outcome measures were the rates of T0N0 specimens, overall survival, disease-free and cancer-specific survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 30 patients (13 with squamous cell carcinoma and 17 with adenocarcinoma) were included. The reasons for noncurative endoscopic resection were: positive vertical margins (n = 12), squamous cell carcinoma with muscularis mucosae or submucosal layer invasion (n = 3 and 9), adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (n = 11), poorly differentiated tumor (n = 6) and lymphovascular invasion (n = 6). Overall, 63% of the esophagi were T0N0: most residual lesions were T1a metachronous lesions, and four (13%) patients had advanced pT status (n = 3) or lymph node metastases (n = 2). Overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival were 83%, 75%, and 90% respectively. A total of 43% of patients had severe postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality was 7%.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort, esophagectomy allowed the resection of residual advanced cancer or lymph node metastases in 13% of cases, at the cost of 43% severe morbidity and 7% mortality. Therefore, the possibility of close follow up needs to be balanced with a highly morbid surgical management in these patients.

Impact of the Charlson Comorbidity Index on the treatment strategy and survival in elderly patients after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

In elderly patients with superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), the optimal treatment strategy after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the validity of additional treatments after non-curative ESD and post-ESD survival predictors in elderly patients with ESCC.

METHODS

Elderly patients (age > 75 years) treated with ESD for ESCC between January 2010 and July 2014 at six tertiary referral hospitals in Japan were retrospectively investigated and stratified according to lymph node metastasis risk, based on histological findings (high-risk factors: positive lymphovascular invasion, submucosal invasion, and positive/indeterminate vertical margin) and post-ESD treatment strategy: group A (287 patients; low risk), group B (41 patients; high risk, without additional treatment), and group C (32 patients; high risk, with additional treatment). We evaluated 3- and 5-year overall survival and disease-specific survival, and prognostic factors for post-ESD survival.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 38, 40, and 49 months, respectively, there was 1 esophageal cancer-related death in group A, 1 in group B, and none in group C, whereas 22, 9, and 3 patients in groups A, B, and C died of other diseases. The groups differed significantly in overall survival (92.4%; 87.6%; 93.4%, p = 0.022), although not in disease-specific survival (99.4%; 96.3%; 100%, p = 0.217). On multivariate analysis, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) ≥ 2 was the only independent risk factor for post-ESD death (hazard ratio 7.92; 95% confidence interval 3.42-18.3; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A follow-up strategy without additional treatment after ESD for ESCC may be acceptable in high-risk elderly patients, especially for CCI ≥ 2.

The influence of adjuvant radiation therapy after endoscopic resection on survival for early stage EC: an analysis of the surveillance epidemiology and end results (SEER) database

Background

Endoscopic resection (ER) followed by radiation therapy (RT) is a treatment option for early stage esophageal cancer (EC). We used the surveillance epidemiology and end results (SEER) database to investigate the influence of adjuvant RT after ER on survival for early stage EC.

Methods

The SEER database [1998-2013] was queried for locoregional cases of EC. Tumor staging was redefined with the 8th Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)/Union for International Cancer Control tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system. The T1-2 stage EC cases in which ER were followed by radiation or observation were included. Kaplan-Meier methods were performed to compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) between the patients who received radiation and those who did not. Subgroup analysis was made according to AJCC stage. A multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used to identify independent covariates which may influence survival.

Results

The median survival of the no-radiation group was significantly longer than that of the radiation group [74 vs. 31 months; hazard risk (HR), 2.39; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.782-3.197; P<0.001]. In T1a stage subgroup, patients who did not receive RT had significantly better OS and CSS outcomes (OS: 90 vs. 31 months; HR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.766-4.773; P<0.001; CSS: 105 vs. 48 months; HR, 5.40; 95% CI, 2.636-8.226; P<0.001). In the T1b and T2 subgroup analyses, both the OS and CSS were not significantly different between the radiation group and the no-radiation group (all P>0.05). In multivariate regression analysis, radiation was not a significant factor for OS and CSS after adjustment for confounding factors (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Using SEER data, we revealed that RT after ER did not improve survival in early stage EC patients; specifically, RT did not benefit T1b and T2 patients and may lead to poorer survival in T1a patients. Our findings do not support the addition of RT after ER for early stage EC, especially T1a EC.

Treatments and outcomes of older patients with esophageal cancer: Comparison with younger patients

The number of older patients with esophageal cancer (EC) is increasing due to the population aging and increasing life expectancy. However, no optimal treatment strategy for older patients with EC has been established to date. The aim of the present study was to review and compare the treatment modalities and outcomes of 990 younger and older patients diagnosed with EC in our institution. The patients were divided into younger (≤74 years) and older (≥75 years) groups. The majority of the patients in both groups had early-stage EC and were treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The older patients with locally advanced (stage II and III) EC were more likely to undergo chemoradiotherapy rather than esophagectomy. Among the older patients, 22% selected best supportive care. The disease-specific survival rate of the older patients was significantly lower compared with that of the younger patients, which was likely due to the less intense treatment modalities applied. The prognosis following esophagectomy was significantly better compared with that of chemoradiotherapy in the younger, but not in the older patients. In conclusion, the poorer prognosis of older patients (aged ≥75 years) with stage I EC may improve with multidisciplinary treatment after ESD. Although CRT is currently considered the optimal treatment for older patients with stage II/III EC, more efficient treatment modalities are urgently required.

Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early oesophageal squamous cell neoplasia at a Western centre

Background and aims

Endoscopic submucosal dissection is the reference treatment for early oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, data from Western centres are scarce.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study from a prospectively collected database at a tertiary care centre in France. All consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic submucosal dissection for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma were included. The main outcome was the curative resection rate. Secondary outcomes were en-bloc resection rates, histologically complete resection rates, morbidity, recurrence-free and overall survival.

Results

Fifty-six cases of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (49 patients; mean age 61.5 ± 10 years; 36 men) were included. En-bloc, histologically complete and curative resection rates were 98%, 86% and 71%, respectively. Fifteen (30%) patients received an additional treatment after endoscopic submucosal dissection, nine treated by chemoradiotherapy, four by surgery and two by further endoscopic submucosal dissection. Within a mean follow-up of 21 ± 15 months, recurrences occurred in 14 (29%) patients (four local, eight metachronous and three distant recurrences). Eight patients died during follow-up, of which two (4%) patients died from oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Factors significantly associated with mortality in this series were: moderate or poor differentiation of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (p = 0.02) and recurrence of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (p = 0.028).

Conclusion

Moderately or poorly differentiated cancer is a major prognostic factor and should probably be taken into account when indicating an additional treatment after endoscopic submucosal dissection. Close endoscopic follow-up is essential considering the high recurrence rate.

Low-density lipoprotein receptor expression is involved in the beneficial effect of photodynamic therapy using talaporfin sodium on gastric cancer cells

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a therapeutic method used to destroy tumor tissue via reactive oxygen. Notably, reactive oxygen is induced by a combination of photosensitizers, including talaporfin sodium (TS) and laser light. Gastric cancer cell lines, MKN45 and MKN74, were used to evaluate the effect of TS-PDT in vitro. The antitumor effect of TS-PDT, which was evaluated via cellular viability assay, on MKN74 was weaker than that on MKN45 cells, suggesting that MKN74 cell could be resistant to TS-PDT. However, using a higher TS concentration or setting a longer treatment time (24 h) resulted in effective TS-PDT treatment on MKN74 cells. In addition, when irradiation power of LED was raised up to 5.06 J/cm2, TS-PDT was able to induce an antitumor effect on MKN74 cells. This suggested that the difference in TS-PDT efficacy between MKN45 and MKN74 cells is based on the difference in cellular uptake of TS. As expected, uptake of TS by MKN74 cells was lower than that by MKN45 cells. The expression levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor in MKN74 cells were lower than those in MKN45 cells. With GW3965 treatment, an agonist/activator of Liver X Receptor, LDL receptor expression was reduced, weakening the TS-PDT effect. Furthermore, as a hydroxymethylglutaryl-Coenzyme A reductase inhibitor, treatment using simvastatin increased LDL receptor expression, leading to enhancement of the TS-PDT effect on MKN74 cells. In conclusion, the difference in LDL receptor expression between the two gastric cell lines could influence TS-PDT efficacy; simvastatin may enhance the antitumor effect of TS-PDT through upregulating the LDL receptor even on PDT-resistant gastric cancer cells.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection vs Esophagectomy for T1 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in a Real-World Cohort

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for early-stage esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (EESCC), but patients who undergo this procedure have high morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a less-invasive procedure for treatment of EESCC, but is considered risky because this tumor frequently metastasizes to the lymph nodes. We aimed to directly compare outcomes of patients with EESCC treated with ESD vs esophagectomy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with T1a-m2/m3, or T1b EESCCs who underwent ESD (n = 322) or esophagectomy (n = 274) from October 1, 2011 through September 31, 2016 at Zhongshan Hospital in Shanghai, China. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the end of follow up (minimum of 6 months). Secondary outcomes included operation time, hospital stay, cost, perioperative mortalities/severe non-fatal adverse events, requirement for adjuvant therapies, and disease-specific mortality and cancer recurrence or metastasis at the end of the follow up period.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent ESD were older (mean 63.5 years vs 62.3 years for patients receiving esophagectomy; P = .006) and a greater proportion was male (80.1% vs 70.4%; P = .006) and had a T1a tumor (74.5% vs 27%; P = .001). A lower proportion of patients who underwent ESD had perioperative mortality (0.3% vs 1.5% of patients receiving esophagectomy; P = .186) and non-fatal severe adverse events (15.2% vs 27.7%; P = .001)-specifically lower proportions of esophageal fistula (0.3% of patients receiving ESD vs 16.4% for patients receiving esophagectomy; P = .001) and pulmonary complications (0.3% vs 3.6%; P = .004). After a median follow-up time of 21 months (range, 6-73 months), there were no significant differences between treatments in all-cause mortality (7.4% for ESD vs 10.9%; P = .209) or rate of cancer recurrence or metastasis (9.1% for ESD vs 8.9%; P = .948). Disease-specific mortality was lower among patients who received ESD (3.4%) vs patients who patients who received esophagectomy (7.4%) (P = .049). In Cox regression analysis, depth of tumor invasion was the only factor associated with all-cause mortality (T1a-m3 or deeper vs T1a-m2: hazard ration, 3.54; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

In a retrospective study of patients with T1am2/m3 or T1b EESCCs treated with ESD (n = 322) or esophagectomy (n = 274), we found lower proportions of patients receiving ESD to have perioperative adverse events or disease specific mortality after a median follow up time of 21 months. We found no difference in overall survival or cancer recurrence or metastasis in patients with T1a or T1b ESCCs treated with ESD vs esophagectomy.

Interaction between Medical Treatment and Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment for the Malignancies of the Digestive Tract

Recently, endoscopic diagnosis and treatment methods for early cancer in the digestive tract have made rapid progress. As for surgery, laparoscopic and thoracoscopic techniques have achieved rapidly advancing development in the last 2 decades. Early detection of the malignant lesion and the evolution of endoscopic and surgical device enabled in performing the minimally invasive surgery. Collaboration of medical treatment and minimally invasive surgery for advanced cancer is ongoing in the case of some conditions and in a few institutes. In this review, the contents of the core symposia on "Interaction between medical treatment and minimally invasive surgical treatment for the malignancies of the digestive tract", held at the 11, 12 and 13th annual meeting of the Japanese Gastroenterological Association, are summarized. At each annual meeting, the core symposium focused primarily on gastric, colorectal, and esophageal cancer treatment. For gastric cancer, endoscopic resection and laparoscopic surgery were 2 important key words. For colorectal cancer, multidisciplinary therapy was a major key word. And for esophageal cancer, endoscopic resection, chemoradiotherapy, thoracoscopic surgery and salvage surgery were key words. Patients' survival and quality of life are expected to further advance as a result of the collaboration of such therapeutic modalities.

Early esophageal cancer: the significance of surgery, endoscopy, and chemoradiation

Early carcinomas of the esophagus are histologically classified as adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and microscopically subdivided into mucosal and submucosal carcinomas depending on infiltration depth. The prevalence of lymph node metastasis in mucosal carcinoma remains low. However, lymph node metastases arise frequently from tumors with submucosal infiltration, with increasing prevalence in the deeper submucosal sublayers. According to current German guidelines, endoscopic resection is the recommended treatment in mucosal adenocarcinoma without histologic risk factors (lymphatic invasion 1, vascular invasion 1, >grade 2, R1-margin). In superficial submucosal infiltration without histologic risk factors, endoscopic resection can be considered. In squamous cell carcinoma, endoscopic resection is indicated up to middle layer mucosal carcinoma. Beyond these criteria, surgical resection should be considered. The gold standard is a subtotal transthoracic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Total esophagectomy is performed in cervical esophageal carcinoma and transhiatal extended gastrectomy in carcinoma of the cardia. Minimally invasive procedures show good oncologic results and reduce the morbidity of radical esophagectomy. Reduced morbidity might be an argument for surgical resection in borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection. In early squamous cell cancer, the combination of endoscopic resection and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a therapeutic option with promising results.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection under general anesthesia for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is associated with better clinical outcomes

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely accepted for treating superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESD for SESCC and the effect of different sedation methods on their clinical outcomes.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed a total of 169 patients (175 lesions) who underwent ESD for SESCC at Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea. Short-term and long-term clinical outcomes were evaluated and compared according to the sedation method (conscious sedation [CS] vs general anesthesia [GA]).

Results

En bloc resection, complete resection, and curative resection (CuR) were achieved in 93.7, 74.9, and 58.9% of cancers, respectively. Perforation and stricture occurred in 8.0 and 12.0% of lesions, respectively. During a mean follow-up period of 33.7 months for survival, 3 (3.0%) patients died without evidence of recurrence after achieving CuR. During a mean follow-up period of 32.5 months for recurrence, 1 (1.0%) patient experienced lymph node metastasis. Synchronous and metachronous cancer were found in 1.0% and in 3.0% of patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that GA was associated with a higher complete resection rate and a lower perforation rate as compared to CS (odds ratio 3.401, 95% confidence interval 1.317–8.785, P = 0.011 and odds ratio 0.067, 95% confidence interval 0.006–0.775, P = 0.030, respectively).

Conclusions

ESD is an oncologically effective treatment modality for SESCC, particularly when CuR is achieved. Applying GA for esophageal ESD could improve the clinical outcomes of ESD in patients with SESCC.