Search

Background: Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) show survival benefits in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); however, ESCC patients still have a dismal prognosis. We conducted two phase-II, single-armed clinical trials to assess the potential benefits, efficacy, feasibility, and safety of esophagectomy after combining preoperative CT or CRT and neoadjuvant programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors in the treatment of ESCC. Methods: Patients were included with histologically confirmed ESCC (clinical stage II–IVA according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th staging system) from two phase-II, single-arm trials (NCT04506138 and NCT03940001). Patients underwent two doses of intravenous PD-1 inhibitor (either camrelizumab or sintilimab) every 3 weeks, combined with two cycles of either CT or CRT. The primary endpoint of the study was the safety and short-term outcomes of esophagectomy as measured by the risk of developing complications within 30 days, after the combination of preoperative PD-1 inhibitor and CT or CRT Secondary endpoint was to evaluate the pCR rates (pT0N0), primary tumor pCR rates (pT0), operation time, postoperative stay, and 30-day mortality rate between both groups. Results between both groups were compared using a multivariable log-binomial regression model to obtain the adjusted relative risk ratios (RRs). Results: Between May 2019 and June 2022, 55 patients were included. All patients completed neoadjuvant therapy. Age, sex, performance status, clinical stage, histologic subtype, procedure type, operative time, and blood loss volume were similar between the two groups. The primary tumor pCR rates were 52.9% in the nICRT group and 21.6% in the nICT group (P=0.03), while the postoperative pCR rates were 41.2% in the nICRT group and 21.6% in the nICT group (P=0.19). The minimally invasive surgery rates we

Background: Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications. Results: No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. Conclusions: Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.

Background Chest pain following a thoracotomy for esophageal cancer is frequently reported but poorly understood. This study aimed to (1) determine the prevalence of thoracotomy-related thoracic fractures on postoperative imaging and (2) compare complications, long-term pain, and quality of life in patients with versus without these fractures. Methods This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with esophageal cancer who underwent a thoracotomy between 2010 and 2020 with pre- and postoperative CTs (<1 and/or >6 months). Disease-free patients were invited for questionnaires on pain and quality of life. Results Of a total of 366 patients, thoracotomy-related rib fractures were seen in 144 (39%) and thoracic transverse process fractures in 4 (2%) patients. Patients with thoracic fractures more often developed complications (89% vs. 74%, p = 0.002), especially pneumonia (51% vs. 39%, p = 0.032). Questionnaires were completed by 77 after a median of 41 (P-25-P(75 )28-91) months. Long-term pain was frequently (63%) reported but was not associated with thoracic fractures (p = 0.637), and neither were quality of life scores. Conclusions Thoracic fractures are prevalent in patients following a thoracotomy for esophageal cancer. These thoracic fractures were associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications, especially pneumonia, but an association with long-term pain or reduced quality of life was not confirmed.

Background: The accurate clinical staging of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is pivotal for guiding treatment strategies. However, the current precision in staging for clinical T (cT)2 and cT3 stages remains unsatisfactory. This article discusses the role of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in the clinical staging and formulation of neoadjuvant treatment strategies for locally advanced operable ESCC. These challenges underscore the importance of precise staging in the decision-making process for appropriate therapeutic interventions. Case Description: Through the lens of two patient case studies with locally advanced resectable ESCC, the article showcases the intricate process of treatment planning undertaken by MDTs. It captures a range of expert perspectives from Japan, China, Hong Kong (China), Korea, the USA, and Europe, focusing on the challenges of differentiating between cT2 and cT3 stages of the disease, which is a critical determinant in the management and therapeutic approach for patients. Conclusions: The article concludes that the accurate staging of ESCC is a cornerstone in determining the most suitable treatment strategies. It underscores the vital role that MDTs play in both clinical staging and the decision-making process for treatment. Highlighting the limitations in current diagnostic methods, the article emphasizes the urgent need for advanced research and the refinement of diagnostic tools to improve the precision of staging, particularly between the cT2 and cT3 stages. It suggests that future research should consider whether a reclassification of these stages could be warranted to enhance treatment planning and outcomes for patients with ESCC.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance is being investigated as an alternative to standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer. It is unknown whether dysphagia persists or develops when the oesophagus is preserved after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and severity of dysphagia during active surveillance in patients with an ongoing response. METHODS: Patients who underwent active surveillance were identified from the Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer ('SANO') trial. Patients without evidence of residual oesophageal cancer until at least 6 months after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included. Study endpoints were assessed at time points that patients were cancer-free and remained cancer-free for the next 4 months. Dysphagia scores were evaluated at 6, 9, 12, and 16 months after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Scores were based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer oesophago-gastric quality-of-life questionnaire 25 (EORTC QLQ-OG25) (range 0-100; no to severe dysphagia). The rate of patients with a (non-)traversable stenosis was determined based on all available endoscopy reports. RESULTS: In total, 131 patients were included, of whom 93 (71.0 per cent) had adenocarcinoma, 93 (71.0 per cent) had a cT3-4a tumour, and 33 (25.2 per cent) had a tumour circumference of greater than 75 per cent at endoscopy; 60.8 to 71.0 per cent of patients completed questionnaires per time point after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. At all time points after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, median dysphagia scores were 0 (interquartile range 0-0). Two patients (1.5 per cent) underwent an intervention for a stenosis: one underwent successful endoscopic dilatation; and the other patient required temporary tube feeding. Notably, these patients did not participate in questionnaires. CONCLUSION: Dysphagia and c

Background: This study explores patients’ need for information and support in deciding on esophageal cancer treatment, when experimental active surveillance and standard surgery are both feasible. Methods: This psychological companion study was conducted alongside the Dutch SANO-trial (Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer). In-depth interviews and questionnaires were used to collect data from patients who declined participation in the trial because they had a strong preference for either active surveillance (n = 20) or standard surgery (n = 20). Data were analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative techniques. Results: Patients prefer to receive information directly from their doctors and predominantly rely on this information to make a treatment decision. Other information resources are largely used to confirm their treatment decision. Patients highly value support from their loved ones and appreciate emphatic doctors to actively involve them in the decision-making process. Overall, patients’ needs for information and support during decision-making were met.Conclusions: The importance of shared decision-making and the role doctors have in this process is underlined. The role of doctors is essential at the initial phase of decision-making: Once patients seem to have formed their treatment preference for either active surveillance or surgery, the influence of external resources (including doctors) may be limited.

Introduction: Few studies have been conducted into how physicians use steering behaviour that may persuade patients to choose for a particular treatment, let alone to participate in a randomised trial. The aim of this study is to assess if and how surgeons use steering behaviour in their information provision to patients in their choice to participate in a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial investigating an organ sparing treatment in (curable) oesophageal cancer (SANO trial). Materials and methods: A qualitative study was performed. Thematic content analysis was applied to audiotaped and transcribed consultations of twenty patients with eight different oncological surgeons in three Dutch hospitals. Patients could choose to participate in a clinical trial in which an experimental treatment of ‘active surveillance’ (AS) was offered. Patients who did not want to participate underwent standard treatment: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy. Results: Surgeons used various techniques to steer patients towards one of the two options, mostly towards AS. The presentation of pros and cons of treatment options was imbalanced: positive framing of AS was used to steer patients towards the choice for AS, and negative framing of AS to make the choice for surgery more attractive. Further, steering language, i.e. suggestive language, was used, and surgeons seemed to use the timing of the introduction of the different treatment options, to put more focus on one of the treatment options. Conclusion: Awareness of steering behaviour can help to guide physicians in more objectively informing patients on participation in future clinical trials.

Active surveillance instead of standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) has been proposed for patients with oesophageal cancer. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) may be used to facilitate selection of patients for surgery. We show that detection of ctDNA after nCRT seems highly suggestive of major residual disease. Tumour biopsies and blood samples were taken before, and 6 and 12 weeks after, nCRT. Biopsies were analysed with regular targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS). Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) was analysed using targeted NGS with unique molecular identifiers and digital polymerase chain reaction. cfDNA mutations matching pre-treatment biopsy mutations confirmed the presence of ctDNA. In total, 31 patients were included, of whom 24 had a biopsy mutation that was potentially detectable in cfDNA (77%). Pre-treatment ctDNA was detected in nine of 24 patients (38%), four of whom had incurable disease progression before surgery. Pre-treatment ctDNA detection had a sensitivity of 47% (95% CI 24–71) (8/17), specificity of 85% (95% CI 42–99) (6/7), positive predictive value (PPV) of 89% (95% CI 51–99) (8/9), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 40% (95% CI 17–67) (6/15) for detecting major residual disease (>10% residue in the resection specimen or progression before surgery). After nCRT, ctDNA was detected in three patients, two of whom had disease progression. Post-nCRT ctDNA detection had a sensitivity of 21% (95% CI 6–51) (3/14), specificity of 100% (95% CI 56–100) (7/7), PPV of 100% (95% CI 31–100) (3/3), and NPV of 39% (95% CI 18–64) (7/18) for detecting major residual disease. The addition of ctDNA to the current set of diagnostics did not lead to more patients being clinically identified with residual disease. These results indicate that pre-treatment and post-nCRT ctDNA detection may be useful in identifying patients at high risk of disease progression. The addition of ctDNA analysis to the current set of diagnostic modalities

Active surveillance may be a safe and effective treatment in oesophageal cancer patients with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). In the NOSANO-study we gained insight in patients' motive to opt for either an experimental treatment called active surveillance or for standard immediate surgery. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses methods were used. Forty patients were interviewed about their treatment preference, 3 months after completion of nCRT (T1). Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed according to the principles of grounded theory. In addition, at T1 and T2 (12 months after completion of nCRT) questionnaires on health-related quality of life, coping, anxiety and decisional regret (only T2) were administered. Interview data analyses resulted in a conceptual model with ‘dealing with threat of cancer’ as the central theme. Patients preferring active surveillance tend to cope with this threat by confiding in their bodies and good outcomes. Their mind-set is one of ‘enjoy life now’. Patients preferring surgery tend to cope by minimizing uncertainty and eliminating the source of cancer. Their mind-set is one of ‘don't give up, act now’. Furthermore, questionnaire results showed that patients with a preference for standard surgery had a lower quality of life. Patient preferences are individualized and thus difficult to predict. Our model can help healthcare professionals to determine patient preferences for treatment. Coping style and mind-set seem to be determining factors here.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance after neoadjuvant treatment is increasingly implemented. The success of this strategy relies on the accurate detection of residual cancer. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic value of a second (bite-on-bite) biopsy for the detection of residual esophageal cancer and to correlate outcomes to the distribution of residual cancer found in the resection specimen.METHODS: A multicenter prospective study of esophageal cancer patients undergoing active surveillance after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was performed. At clinical response evaluations, an upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy was performed with at least four bite-on-bite biopsies of the primary tumor site. First and second biopsies were analyzed separately. Patients with histopathological evidence of residual cancer were included in the primary analysis. Two pathologists blinded for biopsy outcome examined all resection specimens.RESULTS: Between October 2017 and July 2020, 626 upper GI endoscopies were performed in 367 patients. Of 138 patients with residual cancer, 112 patients (81 %) had at least one positive biopsy. In 14 patients (10 %) only the first biopsy was positive and in 25 patients (18 %) only the second biopsy (P = 0.11). Remarkably, the rates of patients with tumor-free mucosa and deeper located tumors were higher in patients detected by the first biopsy. The second biopsy increased the false-positive rate by 3 percentage points. No adverse events occurred.CONCLUSIONS: A second (bite-on-bite) biopsy improves the detection of residual esophageal cancer by almost 20 percentage points, at the expense of increasing the false-positive rate by 3 percentage points. The higher detection rate is explained by the higher number of biopsies obtained rather than by the penetration depth.

Background Large studies comparing totally minimally invasive oesophagectomy (TMIE) with laparoscopically assisted (hybrid) oesophagectomy are lacking. Although randomized trials have compared TMIE invasive with open oesophagectomy, daily clinical practice does not always resemble the results reported in such trials. The aim of the present study was to compare complications after totally minimally invasive, hybrid and open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer. Methods The study was performed using data from the International Esodata Study Group registered between February 2015 and December 2019. The primary outcome was pneumonia, and secondary outcomes included the incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage, (major) complications, duration of hospital stay, escalation of care, and 90-day mortality. Data were analysed using multivariable multilevel models. Results Some 8640 patients were included between 2015 and 2019. Patients undergoing TMIE had a lower incidence of pneumonia than those having hybrid (10.9 versus 16.3 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.56, 95 per cent c.i. 0.40 to 0.80) or open (10.9 versus 17.4 per cent; OR 0.60, 0.42 to 0.84) oesophagectomy, and had a shorter hospital stay (median 10 (i.q.r. 8-16) days versus 14 (11-19) days (P = 0.041) and 11 (9-16) days (P = 0.027) respectively). The rate of anastomotic leakage was higher after TMIE than hybrid (15.1 versus 10.7 per cent; OR 1.47, 1.01 to 2.13) or open (15.1 versus 7.3 per cent; OR 1.73, 1.26 to 2.38) procedures. Conclusion Compared with hybrid and open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy, TMIE resulted in a lower pneumonia rate, a shorter duration of hospital stay, but higher anastomotic leakage rates. Therefore, no clear advantage was seen for either TMIE, hybrid or open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy when performed in daily clinical practice.

Background: Large studies comparing totally minimally invasive oesophagectomy (TMIE) with laparoscopically assisted (hybrid) oesophagectomy are lacking. Although randomized trials have compared TMIE invasive with open oesophagectomy, daily clinical practice does not always resemble the results reported in such trials. The aim of the present study was to compare complications after totally minimally invasive, hybrid and open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer. Methods: The study was performed using data from the International Esodata Study Group registered between February 2015 and December 2019. The primary outcome was pneumonia, and secondary outcomes included the incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage, (major) complications, duration of hospital stay, escalation of care, and 90-day mortality. Data were analysed using multivariable multilevel models. Results: Some 8640 patients were included between 2015 and 2019. Patients undergoing TMIE had a lower incidence of pneumonia than those having hybrid (10.9 versus 16.3 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.56, 95 per cent c.i. 0.40 to 0.80) or open (10.9 versus 17.4 per cent; OR 0.60, 0.42 to 0.84) oesophagectomy, and had a shorter hospital stay (median 10 (i.q.r. 8-16) days versus 14 (11-19) days (P = 0.041) and 11 (9-16) days (P = 0.027) respectively). The rate of anastomotic leakage was higher after TMIE than hybrid (15.1 versus 10.7 per cent; OR 1.47, 1.01 to 2.13) or open (15.1 versus 7.3 per cent; OR 1.73, 1.26 to 2.38) procedures. Conclusion: Compared with hybrid and open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy, TMIE resulted in a lower pneumonia rate, a shorter duration of hospital stay, but higher anastomotic leakage rates. Therefore, no clear advantage was seen for either TMIE, hybrid or open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy when performed in daily clinical practice.

Aim: Compared to open esophagectomy (OE), both totally minimally invasive (TMIE) and laparoscopy-assisted hybrid minimally invasive (HMIE) reduce postoperative morbidity and improve short-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We aimed to compare lasting symptoms and long-term HRQoL in an international population-based setting between patients who underwent Ivor Lewis TMIE, HMIE or OE. Methods: Patients who were relapse-free at least one year after TMIE, HMIE or OE for esophageal or junctional carcinoma between January 2010 and June 2016 were included. Patients completed the LASER questionnaire to assess lasting symptoms after esophagectomy and the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 questionnaires to assess HRQoL. Primary endpoint was chest pain and secondary endpoints were pain from chest scars or abdominal scars, abdominal pain, fatigue and physical functioning. Differences in lasting symptoms and HRQoL were assessed with multivariable logistic and ANCOVA regression, respectively. Results: A total of 362 patients were included (TMIE n = 91, HMIE n = 85, OE n = 186). Median follow-up was 3.9 years (IQR 2.8–5.4). Chest pain was reported less after TMIE compared with HMIE (adjusted OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05–0.84), but was comparable between TMIE and OE (adjusted OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.12–1.41) and between HMIE and OE (adjusted OR 1.85, 95% CI 0.71–4.81). All secondary endpoints were comparable between TMIE, HMIE and OE. The impact of symptoms on taking medication, return to work, and performance status were comparable between groups. Conclusion: Surgical technique seems to have little effect on lasting symptoms and long-term HRQoL after a median of four years after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with different ethnic and genetic backgrounds may respond differently to anticancer therapies. This study aimed to assess whether patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in East Asia had an inferior pathological response compared with patients treated in Northwest Europe. METHODS: Patients with OSCC who underwent nCRT according to the CROSS regimen (carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent 41.4 Gy radiotherapy) followed by oesophagectomy between June 2012 and April 2020 were identified from East Asian and Dutch databases. The primary outcome was pCR, defined as ypT0 N0. Groups were compared using propensity score matching, adjusting for sex, Charlson Co-morbidity Index score, tumour location, cT and cN categories, interval between nCRT and surgery, and number of resected lymph nodes. RESULTS: Of 725 patients identified, 133 remained in each group after matching. A pCR was achieved in 37 patients (27.8 per cent) in the Asian database and 58 (43.6 per cent) in the Dutch database (P = 0.010). The rate of ypT1-4 was higher in Asian than Dutch data (66.2 and 49.6 per cent; P = 0.004). The ypN1-3 rate was 44.4 per cent in the Asian and 33.1 per cent in the Dutch data set. Clear margins were achieved in 92.5 per cent of Asian and 95.5 per cent of Dutch patients. CONCLUSION: Regional differences in responses to CROSS nCRT for oesophageal cancer were apparent, the origin of which will need evaluation.