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

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Low-Dose Versus High-Dose Radiation Therapy for the Palliation of Dysphagia From Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Clinical evidence regarding optimal radiation dose for palliation of dysphagia from esophageal cancer is generally lacking. In an effort to investigate optimal radiation dose, we assessed 2 different radiation schedules for palliation of dysphagia.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a multicenter, retrospective study comparing low-dose radiation therapy (LR: 5 x 4 Gy external beam radiation therapy [EBRT]) with high-dose radiation therapy (HR: 10 x 3 Gy EBRT and 12-Gy single-dose intraluminal brachytherapy) for palliation of dysphagia in patients with inoperable or metastasized esophageal cancer. Primary outcome was improvement of dysphagia at 6 weeks after start of radiation therapy. Additional outcomes were persistent and recurrent dysphagia during patients' remaining life, severe adverse events, and survival.

RESULTS

In total, 292 patients (LR, n = 117; HR, n = 175) were included in this study. After matching, 144 patients (72 in each group) were compared. Improvement of dysphagia at 6 weeks was achieved in 50% of patients after LR and in 66% after HR (P = .071). Persistent or recurrent dysphagia occurred in 64% of patients after LR and in 42% after HR (P = .012). No difference in the rate of severe adverse events was found (P = .889). Median survival was 88 days (95% confidence interval, 64-112) after LR and 177 days (95% confidence interval, 131-223) after HR (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that both LR and HR were well tolerated and effective in short-term relief of dysphagia in patients with inoperable or metastasized esophageal cancer. HR was associated with better long-term relief of dysphagia compared with LR. Our findings suggest that HR could be considered for patients with a longer life expectancy, but prospective studies are required.

Risk factors and clinical outcomes of endoscopic dilation in benign esophageal strictures: a long-term follow-up study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic dilation (ED) is still the mainstay of therapeutic management of benign esophageal strictures (BESs). This study aimed to establish risk factors for refractory BESs and assess long-term clinical outcomes of ED.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study in 891 patients who underwent ED from 2003 to 2018 for BESs. We searched electronic medical records in 6 tertiary care centers in the Netherlands for data on clinical outcome of ED. Median follow-up was 39 months. The primary endpoint was risk factors for refractory BESs, defined as factors associated with an increased number of ED sessions during follow-up. Secondary endpoints were time from first to last ED session and adverse events.

RESULTS

Dilation up to 13 to 15 mm was associated with a higher number of ED sessions than dilation up to 16 to 18 mm (5.0 vs 4.1; hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; P = .001). Compared with peptic strictures, anastomotic (4.9 vs 3.6; HR, 2.1; P < .001), radiation (5.0 vs 3.6; HR, 3.0; P < .001), caustic (7.2 vs 3.6; HR, 2.7; P < .001), and postendotherapy (3.9 vs 3.6; HR, 1.8; P = .005) strictures were associated with a higher number of ED sessions. After 1 year of follow-up, the proportions of patients who remained free of ED was 75% in anastomotic, 71% in radiation, 70% in peptic, 83% in postendotherapy, and 62% in caustic strictures. Esophageal perforation occurred in 23 ED sessions (.4%) in 22 patients (2.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

More than 60% of patients with BESs remain free of ED after 1 year of follow-up. Because dilation up to 16 to 18 mm diameter was associated with fewer ED sessions during follow-up, we suggest that clinicians should consider dilation up to at least 16 mm to reduce the number of ED sessions in these patients.

Impact of multidisciplinary tumor board discussion on palliation of patients with esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction cancer: a population-based study

Background: The Dutch guidelines for esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer recommend discussion of patients by a multidisciplinary tumor board (MDT). Despite this recommendation, one previous study in the Netherlands suggested that therapeutic guidance was missing for palliative care of patients with esophageal cancer. The aim of the current study was therefore to assess the impact of an MDT discussion on initial palliative treatment and outcome of patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer.Material and methods: The population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry was used to identify patients treated for esophageal or GEJ cancer with palliative intent between 2010 and 2017 in 7 hospitals. We compared patients discussed by the MDT with patients not discussed by the MDT in a multivariate analysis. Primary outcome was type of initial palliative treatment. Secondary outcome was overall survival.Results: A total of 389/948 (41%) patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer were discussed by the MDT before initial palliative treatment. MDT discussion compared to non-MDT discussion was associated with more patients treated with palliative intent external beam radiotherapy (38% vs. 21%, OR 2.7 [95% CI 1.8-3.9]) and systemic therapy (30% vs. 23%, OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.0-2.5]), and fewer patients treated with stent placement (4% vs. 12%, OR 0.3 [95% CI 0.1-0.6]) and best supportive care alone (12% vs. 33%, OR 0.2 [95% CI 0.1-0.3]). MDT discussion was also associated with improved survival (169 days vs. 107 days, HR 1.3 [95% CI 1.1-1.6]).Conclusion: Our study shows that MDT discussion of patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer resulted in more patients treated with initial palliative radiotherapy and chemotherapy compared with patients not discussed by the MDT. Moreover, MDT discussion may have a positive effect on survival, highlighting the importance of MDT meetings at all stages of treatment.

Through-the-scope placement of a fully covered metal stent for palliation of malignant dysphagia: a prospective cohort study (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To further optimize endoscopic stent placement, an esophageal fully covered self-expandable metal stent with a through-the-scope (TTS) delivery system was designed, providing direct endoscopic control during stent placement. The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility and safety of a TTS stent approach for palliation of malignant dysphagia.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective feasibility study included patients with malignant dysphagia undergoing stent placement. The primary outcome was technical success of TTS stent placement. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome, adverse events, and survival. Patients were prospectively evaluated at days 14 and 28, and monthly thereafter, until death or stent removal.

RESULTS

In total, 33 stents were placed in 32 patients. TTS stent placement was feasible in 30 (91%) procedures. In the other 3 procedures (9%), no large-channel endoscope could be introduced because of patient discomfort. In 10 (33%) TTS procedures, technical success was achieved because no fluoroscopy and/or guidewire was used, whereas in 20 (67%) TTS procedures, placement was supported by a guidewire (n = 9), or fluoroscopy and a guidewire (n = 11). After 2 weeks, dysphagia scores had improved in 24 (86%) patients. Median dysphagia-free time was 32 days (interquartile range [IQR], 17-76 days). In 20 (63%) patients, 29 serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred. Recurrent dysphagia occurred in 13 (41%) patients due to migration (n = 5), tissue overgrowth (n = 4), and stent deformation (n = 4). Other SAEs included significant retrosternal pain (n = 4), hemorrhage (n = 2), and esophageal perforation (n = 1). No patient died from a stent-related cause. Median survival was 42 days (IQR, 28-91 days).

CONCLUSION

Placement of an esophageal TTS stent was feasible in most of the patients with malignant dysphagia. However, stent placement was associated with a relatively high adverse event rate, and in more than one-third of patients, stent placement still required fluoroscopy, which limited optimal benefit of the TTS approach. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03269903.).

Cardiorespiratory Comorbidity and Postoperative Complications following Esophagectomy: a European Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The impact of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on operative outcomes after esophagectomy remains controversial. This study investigated the effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on postoperative complications for patients treated for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A European multicenter cohort study from five high-volume esophageal cancer centers including patients treated between 2010 and 2017 was conducted. The effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity and respiratory function upon postoperative outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

In total 1590 patients from five centers were included; 274 (17.2%) had respiratory comorbidity, and 468 (29.4%) had cardiac comorbidity. Respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of overall postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, pneumonia, increased Clavien-Dindo score, and critical care and hospital length of stay. After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of anastomotic leak [odds ratio (OR) 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.04], pneumonia (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.10-2.47), and any pulmonary complication (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.04-2.22), an effect which was not observed following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone. Cardiac comorbidity was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular and pulmonary complications, respiratory failure, and Clavien-Dindo score ≥ IIIa. Among all patients, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio > 70% was associated with reduced risk of overall postoperative complications, cardiovascular complications, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary complications, and pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that cardiorespiratory comorbidity and impaired pulmonary function are associated with increased risk of postoperative complications after esophagectomy performed in high-volume European centers. Given the observed interaction with neoadjuvant approach, these data indicate a potentially modifiable index of perioperative risk.

Palliation of dysphagia

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

Esophageal Stenting in Clinical Practice: an Overview

OPINION STATEMENT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Esophageal stents are used in clinical practice for endoscopic treatment of a wide variety of esophageal diseases and conditions. This review provides key principles and a literature update on the utility and limitations of esophageal stenting in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Indications for esophageal stenting can be subdivided into two groups. The first group consists of patients with malignant or benign dysphagia, in which an esophageal stent restores luminal patency. In the past years, temporary stent placement has increasingly been used in the therapeutic management of refractory benign esophageal strictures. When endoscopic repeated bougie dilation and other endoscopic treatment modalities have failed, an esophageal stent could be considered. Based on the literature, a fully covered self-expandable metal stent may be the preferred choice for the treatment of both malignant and benign dysphagia. The second group consists of patients with leakage from the esophageal lumen into the surrounding tissue. Esophageal leakage can be subdivided into three forms, benign esophageal perforations (iatrogenic and spontaneous), anastomotic leakage after reconstructive esophageal surgery, and fistula. In a carefully selected group of patients, a covered esophageal stent may be used for sealing off the leakage, thereby preventing further contamination of the tissue surrounding the defect. The past few years, several validated prediction tools have been developed that may assist clinicians in the selection of patients eligible for esophageal stent placement. Based on retrospective studies and expert opinion, a partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stent may have a role in treatment of esophageal leakage. Research do date supports the utilization of esophageal stents for the treatment of malignant or benign dysphagia and esophageal leakage.

Management of eosinophilic esophagitis in daily clinical practice

In recent years, new guidelines and recommendations have been published regarding the diagnostic criteria and therapeutic management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). The aim of this study is to assess the diagnostic and therapeutic management of patients diagnosed with EoE in daily clinical practice and whether this was performed according to current guidelines and recommendations. A population-based, multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the national pathology registry (PALGA), medical records, and telephone interviews of patients diagnosed with EoE in two academic and two nonacademic hospitals in the period 2004 to 2014. The study was approved by all involved ethical committees. Data regarding demographics, clinical manifestations, endoscopic results, histologic samples, and therapeutic strategies were collected. Standard statistical analyses were performed to summarize patient characteristics. We included 119 patients diagnosed with EoE in this study. The median age at onset of symptoms was 29 years (IQR: 15-42) and the median age at diagnosis was 38 years (IQR: 23-51 years), leading to a median diagnostic patients' delay of 6.5 years (IQR: 2-14 years). The median physicians' delay in diagnosis between first contact in the hospital and diagnosis was 1.0 year (IQR: 1-7 years). The incidence of newly diagnosed patients with EoE increased steadily over a period of 11 years. Criteria for the microscopic diagnosis of EoE varied between pathologists in each hospital. Initial treatment included topical corticosteroids (TCS) (30.3%), proton pump inhibitors (PPI) (29.4%), or a combination (10.1%). A follow-up endoscopy was performed in 40.3% of patients. During follow-up, treatment included PPIs (76.0%), TCS (59.6%), a combination of PPIs and TCS (45.4%), and endoscopic dilations (6.7%). Diagnostic and therapeutic discrepancies between daily clinical practice and recommendations from current and past guidelines were observed. Apart from developing guidelines, efforts should be undertaken to implement these in daily clinical practice.