TNM Staging Matched-pair Comparison of Surgery After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy, Surgery Alone and Definitive Chemoradiotherapy for Thoracic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Neoadjuvant versus definitive chemoradiation in locally advanced esophageal cancer for patients of advanced age or significant comorbidities

The addition of surgery to chemoradiation for esophageal cancer has not shown a survival benefit in randomized trials. Patients with more comorbidities or advanced age are more likely to be given definitive chemoradiation due to surgical risk. We aimed to identify subsets of patients in whom the addition of surgery to chemoradiation does not provide an overall survival (OS) benefit. The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer who received either definitive chemoradiation or neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery. Bivariate analysis was used to assess the association between patient characteristics and treatment groups. Log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models were performed to assess for differences in survival. A total of 15,090 with adenocarcinoma and 5,356 with squamous cell carcinoma met the inclusion criteria. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery had significantly improved survival by Cox proportional hazards model regardless of histology if <50, 50-60, 61-70, or 71-80 years old. There was no significant benefit or detriment in patients 81-90 years old. Survival advantage was also significant with a Charlson/Deyo comorbidity condition score of 0, 1, 2, and ≥3 in adenocarcinoma squamous cell carcinoma with scores of 2 or ≥3 had no significant benefit or detriment. Patients 81-90 years old or with squamous cell carcinoma and a Charlson/Deyo comorbidity score ≥ 2 lacked an OS benefit from neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery compared with definitive chemoradiation. Careful consideration of esophagectomy-specific surgical risks should be used when recommending treatment for these patients.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery for locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The literature lacks robust evidence comparing definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery (nCRS) for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This study aimed to compare long-term survival of these approaches in patients with ESCC.

METHODS

A systematic review performed according to PRISMA guidelines included studies identified from PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases up to July 2021 comparing outcomes between dCRT and nCRS for ESCC. The main outcome measure was overall survival (OS), secondary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). A meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects modelling to determine pooled adjusted multivariable hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

Ten studies including 14 092 patients were included, of which 30 per cent received nCRS. Three studies were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and the remainder were retrospective cohort studies. dCRT and nCRS regimens were reported in six studies and surgical quality control was reported in two studies. Outcomes for OS and DFS were reported in eight and three studies respectively. Following meta-analysis, nCRS demonstrated significantly longer OS (HR 0.68, 95 per cent c.i. 0.54 to 0.87, P < 0.001) and DFS (HR 0.50, 95 per cent c.i. 0.36 to 0.70, P < 0.001) compared with dCRT.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy correlated with improved survival compared with definitive chemoradiation in the treatment of ESCC; however, there is a lack of literature on RCTs.

Survival Comparison Among Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Esophagectomy, Definitive Chemoradiotherapy, and Esophagectomy Alone for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

For patients with locoregional esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), survival outcomes among neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by operation (nCRT-OP), definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), and esophagectomy alone remain controversial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Information from the 2008-2016 Taiwan Cancer Registry was used. A total of 7637 cT1b-4, N0/+, M0 ESCC patients receiving nCRT-OP (n = 1955), dCRT (n = 4122), or esophagectomy alone (n = 1560) were included. Propensity score matching was performed to balance clinical variables among the three groups. Stage-specific overall survival was compared before and after propensity score matching. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching resulted in 1407 cases for comparison. The 5-year overall survival rates for matched patients treated via dCRT, nCRT-OP, and esophagectomy alone were 19.77%, 31.23%, and 30.52%, respectively (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, treatment modality was still an independent prognostic factor both before and after propensity score matching. nCRT-OP and esophagectomy alone were associated with significantly better overall survival than dCRT for locoregional ESCC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This propensity-matched study revealed that nCRT-OP and esophagectomy provided better survival than dCRT in cT1b-4, N0/+, M0 ESCC patients.

Optimal preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide, especially in East Asia. ESCC accounts for more than 90% of esophageal cancer. Currently, neoadjuvant therapy in combination with surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment. However, the overall survival rate of patients with locally advanced ESCC is not satisfactory even when treated following the standard treatment guidelines. With neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy, or emerging immunotherapy, continuous exploration of efficacy in relation to ESCC is expected to improve overall survival further. Here, we review and summarize current evidence for efficacy of preoperative therapy for locally advanced ESCC.

Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Versus Trimodality Therapy for Resectable Oesophageal Carcinoma: Meta-analyses and Systematic Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

Standard therapy for loco-regionally advanced, resectable oesophageal carcinoma is trimodality therapy (TMT) consisting of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy. Evidence of survival advantage of TMT over organ-preserving definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is inconclusive. The aim of this study is to compare survival between TMT and dCRT.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analyses were conducted. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies on resectable, curatively treated, oesophageal carcinoma patients above 18 years were included. Three online databases were searched for studies comparing TMT with dCRT. Primary outcomes were 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools for RCTs and cohort studies. Quality of evidence was evaluated according to Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies described in 35 articles were included in this systematic review, and 33 were included in the meta-analyses. Two-, three- and five-year overall survival was significantly lower in dCRT compared to TMT, with relative risks (RRs) of 0.69 (95% CI 0.57-0.83), 0.76 (95% CI 0.63-0.92) and 0.57 (95% CI 0.47-0.71), respectively. When only analysing studies with equal patient groups at baseline, no significant differences for 2-, 3- and 5-year overall survival were found with RRs of 0.83 (95% CI 0.62-1.10), 0.81 (95% CI 0.57-1.14) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.36-1.12).

CONCLUSION

These meta-analyses do not show clear survival advantage for TMT over dCRT. Only a non-significant trend towards better survival was seen, assuming comparable patient groups at baseline. Non-operative management of oesophageal carcinoma patients might be part of a personalised and tailored treatment approach in future. However, to date hard evidence proving its non-inferiority compared to operative management is lacking.

Survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Whether there is a difference in survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (CRT-S) compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) in patients with locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) remains controversial.

Methods

Patients with SCC who underwent curative treatment from 2008 to 2014 were identified from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. Propensity score matching was undertaken to balance pretreatment clinical variables. Overall survival was compared between patients undergoing CRT-S or dCRT. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for overall survival.

Results

A total of 5832 patients with clinical stage II and III oesophageal SCC receiving CRT-S (1754) or dCRT (4078) were included. After propensity score matching, each group included 1661 patients. The 3-year overall survival rate for patients treated with CRT-S was 41·1 per cent compared with 17·9 per cent for those who had dCRT (P &lt; 0·001). In multivariable analysis, treatment modality was an independent prognostic factor in the overall cohort before propensity score matching: hazard ratio 0·45 (95 per cent c.i. 0·40 to 0·51) for CRT-S versus dCRT (P &lt; 0·001). In separate analyses of patients with clinical stage II and those with stage III disease, CRT-S was associated with significantly better overall survival than dCRT.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy is associated with better overall survival than dCRT in patients with stage II and III oesophageal SCC.

The current optimal multimodality treatments for oesophageal squamous-cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimodality treatments including definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) or chemotherapy (nCT) followed by surgery (S) are frequently used to improve prognosis in locally advanced oesophageal squamous-cell carcinoma (LAESCC), while the optimal multimodality regimen has yet to be defined; therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to find out the current best multimodality regimen for LAESCC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane Library databases for studies comparing nCRT + S with nCT + S or dCRT. The primary outcome was overall survival. The secondary outcomes were the rates of R0 resection, pathologic complete response (pCR), tumor-free lymph nodes (pN0) and postoperative recurrence.

RESULTS

Five studies comparing nCRT + S with nCT + S and fourteen studies comparing nCRT + S with dCRT were finally included. Meta-analysis showed that nCRT + S had higher rates of R0 resection (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.03-3.29), pCR (OR: 2.90 95% CI 1.37-6.14) and pN0 (OR: 2.55 95% CI 1.54-4.24) with a significant survival advantage (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.52-0.99) when compared with nCT + S in LAESCC. When nCRT + S was compared with dCRT, nCRT + S yielded a significant survival benefit (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.56-0.76) and had a significantly lower rate of local recurrence (OR: 0.35 95% CI 0.22-0.57).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that CRT + S may be the optimal potential curative treatment mode for patients with LAESCC as long as they are suitable for this multimodality regimen.

Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy with Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil Improves Survival of Patients with Advanced Esophageal Cancer Compared with Conventional Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy with Cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil

Purpose: To compare treatment outcomes and adverse events between concurrent chemoradiotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF-RT) and conventional concurrent chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF-RT). Methods and Materials: We retrospectively investigated treatment outcomes and adverse events in 121 patients with advanced esophageal cancer who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy with CF-RT (n = 83) or DCF-RT (n = 38). In the CF-RT group, patients were administered cisplatin (70 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (700 mg/m2) for 5 days; in the DCF-RT group, patients were administered docetaxel (50 mg/m2), cisplatin (50 mg/m2), and 5-fluorouracil (500 mg/m2) for 5 days. The radiotherapy dose was 1.8-2 Gy per session, up to a total of 50-60 Gy. Results: The complete response (CR) rate was 37.8% in the CF-RT group and 52.6% in the DCF-RT group. Overall survival (OS) rates at 2 and 3 years were 45.0% and 37.5%, respectively, in the CF-RT group and 62.9% and 56.7%, respectively, in the DCF-RT group, with a significant intergroup difference (p = 0.032). Progression-free survival rates at 2 and 3 years were 44.1% and 36.9%, respectively, in the CF-RT group and 45.0% and 45.0%, respectively, in the DCF-RT group (p = 0.10). Local control rates at 2 and 3 years were 59.1% and 54.6%, respectively, in the CF-RT group and 71.8% and 71.8%, respectively, in the DCF-RT group (p = 0.12). The incidence of Grade 3/4 leukopenia was 55.4% (n = 46) in the CF-RT group and 78.9% (n = 30) in the DCF-RT group, with a significant intergroup difference (p = 0.022). The incidence of Grade 3/4 neutropenia was 47.0% (n = 39) in the CF-RT group and 65.8% (n = 25) in the DCF-RT group, with a notable albeit not statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.054). There were no significant intergroup differences in anemia, thrombocytopenia, radiation-induced dermatitis, radiation esophagitis, or late adverse events. Conclusions: Rates of OS and CR were improved after treatment with DCF-RT compared with CF-RT. Although DCF-RT-treated patients had higher rates of leukopenia, treatment safety was ensured through proper management of myelotoxicity. DCF-RT is a promising treatment regimen for advanced esophageal cancer.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for stage II to III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) remains the most commonly used treatment for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), because of perceptions that esophagectomy offers an unclear survival advantage. We compare recurrence, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients treated with definitive CRT or neoadjuvant CRT followed by surgery (trimodality).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with stage II and III SCC of the middle and distal esophagus in patients who completed CRT. Treatment groups were matched (1:1) on covariates using a propensity score-matching approach. The effect of trimodality treatment, compared with definitive CRT, on OS, DFS, and site-specific recurrence was evaluated as a time-dependent variable and analyzed using Cox regression with a gamma frailty term for matched units.

RESULTS

We included 232 patients treated between 2000 and 2016: 124 (53%) with definitive CRT and 108 (47%) with trimodality. Trimodality was used less frequently over time (61% before 2009 and 29% after 2009; P < .0001). After matching, each group contained 56 patients. Median OS and DFS were 3.1 and 1.8 years for trimodality versus 2.3 and 1.0 years for CRT. Surgery was independently associated with improved OS (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.97; P = .039) and DFS (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.83; P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

CRT followed by surgery might decrease local recurrence and increase DFS and OS in patients with esophageal SCC. Until better tools to select patients with pathological complete response are available, surgery should remain an integral component of the treatment of locally advanced esophageal SCC.

Efficacy and safety of chemoradiation therapy compared with chemotherapy for esophageal carcinoma: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The role of the chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and chemotherapy (CT) in the treatment of esophageal carcinoma (EC) remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of CRT with CT in the treatment of EC patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane library were systematically reviewed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared CRT with CT. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), pathological complete response (pCR), R0 resection, recurrence rate, mortality rate, and adverse events. Pooled estimates were expressed with hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 1274 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with CT, CRT was not associated with significantly improved OS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.01; P = .072) and PFS (RR = 3.62, 95% CI: 1.10, 11.95; P = .035). The pCR rate and R0 resection rate were significant higher in the CRT group than that in the CT group (RR = 3.62, 95% CI: 1.10, 11.95, P = .035; RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.27, P < .001; respectively). EC patients who received CRT had a higher mortality rate (RR = 2.50, 95% CI: 1.14, 5.48; P = .022) than those treated with CT, and the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was similar between the 2 groups (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.62, 1.32; P = .612).

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the current evidence, our results suggested that CRT seemed to have benefit in the radical resection, but no effect in the survival benefits. Further large-scale, well-conducted RCTs are needed to verify our findings.