Diagnosis and treatment for gastro-oesophageal cancer in England and Wales: analysis of the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) database 2012-2020.

BACKGROUND: The National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) captures patient data from diagnosis to end of primary treatment for all patients with oesophagogastric (OG) cancer in England and Wales. This study assessed changes in patient characteristics, treatments received, and outcomes for OG cancer surgery for the period 2012-2020, and examined which factors may have led to changes in clinical outcomes over this time. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with OG cancer between April 2012 and March 2020 were included. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographics, disease site, type, and stage, patterns of care, and outcomes over time. The treatment variables of unit case volume, surgical approach, and neoadjuvant therapy were included. Regression models were used to examine associations between surgical outcomes (duration of stay and mortality), and patient and treatment variables. RESULTS: In total, 83 393 patients diagnosed with OG cancer during the study period were included. Patient demographics and cancer stage at diagnosis showed little change over time. Altogether, 17 650 patients underwent surgery as part of radical treatment. These patients had increasingly more advanced cancers, and a greater likelihood of pre-existing comorbidity in more recent years. Significant decreases in mortality rates and duration of stay were noted, along with improvements in oncological outcomes (nodal yields and margin positivity rates). Following adjustment for patient and treatment variables, increasing audit year and trust volume were associated, respectively, with improved postoperative outcomes: lower 30-day mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.93 (95 per cent c.i. 0.88 to 0.98) and OR 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.99-0.99)) and lower 90-day mortality (OR 0.94 (95 per cent c.i. 0.91 to 0.98) and OR 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.99-0.99)), and a reduction in duration of postoperative stay (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.98 (95 per cent c.i. 0.97 to 0.98) and IRR 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.99 to 0.99)). CONCLUSION: Outcomes of OG cancer surgery have improved over time, despite little evidence of improvements in early diagnosis. The underlying drivers for improvements in outcome are multifactorial.

Metabolic tumour and nodal response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy on FDG PET-CT as a predictor of pathological response and survival in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: 2-deoxy-2[18F]Fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET-CT has an emerging role in assessing response to neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal cancer. This study evaluated FDG PET-CT in predicting pathological tumour response (pTR), pathological nodal response (pNR) and survival. METHODS: Cohort study of 75 patients with oesophageal or oesophago-gastric junction (GOJ) adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy then surgery at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London (2017-2020). Standardised uptake value (SUV) metrics on pre- and post-treatment FDG PET-CT in the primary tumour (mTR) and loco-regional lymph nodes (mNR) were derived. Optimum SUVmax thresholds for predicting pathological response were identified using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Predictive accuracy was compared to PERCIST (30% SUVmax reduction) and MUNICON (35%) criteria. Survival was assessed using Cox regression. RESULTS: Optimum tumour SUVmax decrease for predicting pTR was 51.2%. A 50% cut-off predicted pTR with 73.5% sensitivity, 69.2% specificity and greater accuracy than PERCIST or MUNICON (area under the curve [AUC] 0.714, PERCIST 0.631, MUNICON 0.659). Using a 30% SUVmax threshold, mNR predicted pNR with high sensitivity but low specificity (AUC 0.749, sensitivity 92.6%, specificity 57.1%, p = 0.010). pTR, mTR, pNR and mNR were independent predictive factors for survival (pTR hazard ratio [HR] 0.10 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.34; mTR HR 0.17 95% CI 0.06-0.48; pNR HR 0.17 95% CI 0.06-0.54; mNR HR 0.13 95% CI 0.02-0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic tumour and nodal response predicted pTR and pNR, respectively, in patients with oesophageal or GOJ adenocarcinoma. However, currently utilised response criteria may not be optimal. pTR, mTR, pNR and mNR were independent predictors of survival. KEY POINTS: • FDG PET-CT has an emerging role in evaluating response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with oesophageal cancer. • Prospective cohort study demonstrated that metabolic response in the primary tumour and lymph nodes was predictive of pathological response in a cohort of patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus or oesophago-gastric junction treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. • Patients who demonstrated a response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the primary tumour or lymph nodes on FDG PET-CT demonstrated better survival and reduced rates of tumour recurrence.

Patient perspectives on key symptoms and preferences for follow-up after upper gastro-intestinal cancer surgery.

PURPOSE: Long-lasting symptoms and reductions in quality of life are common after oesophago-gastric surgery. Post-operative follow-up has traditionally focussed on tumour recurrence and survival, but there is a growing need to also identify and treat functional sequelae to improve patients' recovery. METHODS: An electronic survey was circulated via a British national charity for patients undergoing oesophago-gastric surgery and their families. Patients were asked about post-operative symptoms they deemed important to their quality of life, as well as satisfaction and preferences for post-operative follow-up. Differences between satisfied and dissatisfied patients with reference to follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: Among 362 respondents with a median follow-up of 58 months since surgery (range 3-412), 36 different symptoms were reported as being important to recovery and quality of life after surgery, with a median of 13 symptoms per patient. Most (84%) respondents indicated satisfaction with follow-up. Satisfied patients were more likely to have received longer follow-up (5-year or longer follow-up 60% among satisfied patients vs 27% among unsatisfied, p < 0.001). These were also less likely to have seen a dietitian as part of routine follow-up (37% vs 58%, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: This patient survey highlights preferences regarding follow-up after oesophago-gastrectomy. Longer follow-up and dietician involvement improved patient satisfaction. Patients reported being concerned by a large number of gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal symptoms, highlighting the need for multidisciplinary input and a consensus on how to manage the poly-symptomatic patient.

Chest drainage after oesophageal resection: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Modern enhanced recovery protocols discourage drain use due to negative impacts on patient comfort, mobility, and recovery, and lack of proven clinical benefit. After oesophagectomy, however, drains are still routinely placed. This review aimed to assess the evidence for, and how best to use chest drains after oesophageal surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in Medline, Embase and Cochrane collaboration databases. Studies reporting outcomes for different types or uses of thoracic drainage, or outcomes related to drains after trans-thoracic oesophagectomy were included. Studies were collated into domains based on variations in number, position, type, removal criteria, diagnostic use and complications of drains. Methodological quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scores. RESULTS: Among 434 potentially relevant studies, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria and these included 2564 patients. Studies that examined the number of drains showed pain reduction with a single drain compared to multiple drains (3 studies, n = 103), and transhiatal placement compared to intercostal (6 studies, n = 425). Amylase levels may aid diagnosis of anastomotic leak (9 studies, n = 888). Narrow calibre Blake drains may effectively drain both air and fluid (2 studies, n = 163). Drain removal criteria by daily drainage volumes of up to 300 mL did not impact subsequent effusion rates (2 studies, n = 130). Complications related directly to drains were reported by 3 studies (n = 59). CONCLUSION: Available evidence on the impact of thoracic drainage after oesophagectomy is limited, but has the potential to negatively affect outcomes. Further research is required to determine optimum drainage strategies.

Transition from esophagectomy to endoscopic therapy for early esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: To assess the outcomes of patients with early esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia comparing esophagectomy, the historical treatment of choice, to endoscopic eradication therapy (EET). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with early esophageal cancer/high-grade dysplasia, treated between 2000 and 2018 at a tertiary center. Primary outcomes were all-cause and disease-specific mortality assessed by multivariable Cox regression and a propensity score matching sub analysis, providing hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for age, tumor grade (G1/2 vs. G3), tumor stage, and lymphovascular invasion. Secondary outcomes included complications, hospital stay, and overall costs. RESULTS: Among 269 patients, 133 underwent esophagectomy and 136 received EET. Adjusted survival analysis showed no difference between groups regarding all-cause mortality (HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.73, 4.72) and disease-specific mortality (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.26, 4.65). In-hospital and 30-day mortality was 0% in both groups. The surgical group had a significantly higher rate of complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3 26.3% vs. endoscopic therapy 0.74%), longer in-patient stay (median 14 vs. 0 days endoscopic therapy) and higher hospital costs(£16 360 vs. £8786 per patient). CONCLUSION: This series of patients treated during a transition period from surgery to EET, demonstrates a primary endoscopic approach does not compromise oncological outcomes with the benefit of fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower costs compared to surgery. It should be available as the gold standard treatment for patients with early esophageal cancer. Those with adverse prognostic features may still benefit from esophagectomy.

Does a high Mandard score really define a poor response to chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma?

BACKGROUND: A high Mandard score implies a non-response to chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. However, some patients exhibit tumour volume reduction and a nodal response despite a high score. This study examines survival and recurrence patterns in these patients. METHODS: Clinicopathological factors were analysed using multivariable Cox regression assessing time to death and recurrence. Computed tomography-estimated tumour volume change was examined in a subgroup of consecutive patients. RESULTS: Five hundred and fifty-five patients were included. Median survival was 55 months (Mandard 1-3) and 21 months (Mandard 4 and 5). In the Mandard 4 and 5 group (332 patients), comparison between complete nodal responders and persistent nodal disease showed improved survival (90 vs 18 months), recurrence rates (locoregional 14.75 vs 28.74%, systemic 24.59 vs 48.42%) and circumferential resection margin positivity (22.95 vs 68.11%). Complete nodal response independently predicted improved survival (hazard ratio 0.34 (0.16-0.74). Post-chemotherapy tumour volume reduction was greater in patients with a complete nodal response (-16.3 vs -7.7 cm3, p = 0.033) with no significant difference between Mandard groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with a complete nodal response to chemotherapy have significantly improved outcomes despite a poor Mandard score. High Mandard score does not correspond with a non-response to chemotherapy in all cases and patients with nodal downstaging may still benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.

The role of surgery after prolonged primary chemotherapy for advanced oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Most patients presenting with oesophageal cancer do so with advanced disease not suitable for surgery. However, there are examples of encouraging survival following surgery in highly selected patients who respond well to chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who presented with advanced but nonvisceral metastatic oesophageal cancer. Consecutive patients on a prolonged primary chemotherapy pathway who underwent surgical resection following a favourable response to chemotherapy were included. Survival and recurrence rates were analysed using Cox regression, providing hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 57 patients included in the cohort operated between 2007 and 2015, the overall median survival was 44 months and the 5-year survival was 42%. Prechemotherapy cN0/cN1 (HR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.62) conferred an independent survival advantage compared to cN2 and cN3 disease. Poor differentiation (HR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.11-5.42), R1 resection (HR: 2.43, 95% CI: 1.14-5.19) and advanced nodal status (HR: 3.28, 95% CI: 1.44-7.47) predicted worse survival on univariable analysis. Poor differentiation (HR: 3.93, 95% CI: 1.62-9.56) was independently associated with poor survival when adjusted for other variables. CONCLUSION: Patients who present with advanced inoperable oesophageal cancer who have a favourable response to chemotherapy represent a limited group of patients who may benefit from surgery.

Predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is often used prior to surgical resection for oesophageal adenocarcinoma but remains ineffective in a high proportion of patients. The histological Mandard tumour regression grade is used to determine chemoresponse but is not available at the time of treatment decision-making. The aim of this cohort study was to identify factors that predict chemotherapy response prior to surgery. METHODS: A prospectively collected database of patients undergoing surgical resection for oesophageal adenocarcinoma from a high-volume UK institution was used. Patients were subcategorised using pathological tumour response into 'responders' (Mandard grade 1-3) and 'non-responders' (Mandard grade 4 and 5). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to calculate crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for responder status adjusting for a variety of parameters. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated. RESULTS: Among 315 patients included, 102 (32%) were responders and 213 (68%) non-responders. A decrease in radiological tumour volume (OR 1.92 95%CI 1.02-3.62; p = 0.05), a 'partial response' RECIST score (OR 7.16 95%CI 1.49-34.36; p = 0.01), a clinically improved dysphagia score (OR 2.79 95%CI 1.05-7.04; p = 0.04) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 0.06 95%CI 0.02-0.13; p = 0.000) influenced responder status. ROC curve analysis for responder status utilising all available parameters had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86. CONCLUSION: This study has highlighted the potential for using pre-defined factors to identify those patients who have responded to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, prior to surgical resection, potentially facilitating a more individualised therapeutic approach.

Adjuvant therapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery for oesophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with clear resection margins.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant therapy in patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and surgery is contentious. In UK practice, surgical resection margin status is often used to classify patients into receiving adjuvant treatment. This study aimed to assess any survival benefit of adjuvant therapy in patients with clear resection margins. METHODS: This was a retrospective collaborative cohort study combining two prospectively collected UK institutional databases of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Multivariable Cox regression and propensity matched analyses were used to compare overall and recurrence-free survival according to the adjuvant treatment. RESULTS: Of 374 patients with clear resection margins, 221 patients (59%) had no adjuvant treatment, 137 patients (37%) had adjuvant chemotherapy and 16 patients (4%) had adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. For patients who had received NAC (290, 76%), when adjuvant chemotherapy was compared to no adjuvant treatment, hazard ratios (HRs) favoured adjuvant chemotherapy but did not reach independent significance (overall survival [OS] HR 0.65 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.06; p .0.087). Responders to NAC (Mandard 1-3) were seemingly more likely to demonstrate a survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.42 95% CI 0.15-1.11; p .1.081). CONCLUSIONS: Although no independent survival benefit was observed, the point estimates favoured adjuvant treatment, predominantly in patients with chemo-responsive tumours.

Analysis of outcomes of a transoral circular stapled anastomosis following major upper gastrointestinal cancer resection.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal anastomoses performed following esophagectomy and total gastrectomy are technically challenging with a significant risk of anastomotic leak. A safe, reliable, and easy anastomotic technique is required to improve patient outcomes and reduce morbidity. METHOD: This paper analyses 328 consecutive patients who underwent transoral circular stapled esophageal anastomosis (ORVIL™) from a prospectively collected single-center database between December 2011 and February 2019. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-seven esophagectomies and 101 gastrectomies were performed using OrVil™ anastomoses. The mean patient age was 63.7 years. Of 328 consecutive OrVil™-based anastomoses, there were 10 clinically significant anastomotic leaks requiring radiological or operative intervention (3.05%). Twenty-eight (8.54%) patients developed anastomotic stricture, all of which were successfully treated with endoscopic balloon dilatation (a median of 1 dilatation was required per patient). CONCLUSION: The OrVil™ anastomotic technique is reliable and safe to perform. This is the largest reported series of the OrVil™ anastomotic technique to date. Leak rates and anastomotic dilations were similar to other reported series. Based on our experience, we consider the use of the OrVil™ device for reconstruction after major upper GI resection to be safe and reliable.

Staging FDG PET-CT changes management in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who are eligible for radical treatment.

AIM: 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG PET-CT) is valuable in the management of patients with oesophageal cancer, but a role in gastric cancer staging is debated. Our aim was to review the role of FDG PET-CT in a large gastric cancer cohort in a tertiary UK centre. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from 330 patients presenting with gastric adenocarcinoma between March 2014 and December 2016 of whom 105 underwent pre-treatment staging FDG PET-CT scans. FDG PET-CT scans were graded qualitatively and quantitatively (SUVmax) and compared with staging diagnostic CT and operative pathology results (n = 30) in those undergoing resection. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients (74 M, median age 73 years) 86% of primary tumours were metabolically active (uptake greater than normal stomach) on FDG PET-CT [41/44 (93%) of the intestinal histological subtype (SUVmax 14.1 ± 1.3) compared to 36/46 (78%) of non-intestinal types (SUVmax 9.0 ± 0.9), p = 0.005]. FDG PET-CT upstaged nodal or metastastic staging of 20 patients (19%; 13 intestinal, 6 non-intestinal, 1 not reported), with 17 showing distant metastases not evident on other imaging. On histological analysis, available in 30 patients, FDG PET-CT showed low sensitivity (40%) but higher specificity (73%) for nodal involvement. CONCLUSION: FDG PET-CT provides new information in a clinically useful proportion of patients, which leads to changes in treatment strategy, most frequently by detecting previously unidentified metastases, particularly in those with intestinal-type tumours.

A Role for Tumor Volume Assessment in Resectable Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer has a poor prognosis, and many patients undergoing surgery have a low chance of cure. Imaging studies suggest that tumor volume is prognostic. The study aimed to evaluate pathological tumor volume (PTV) as a prognostic variable in esophageal cancer. METHODS: This single-center cohort study included 283 patients who underwent esophageal cancer resections between 2000 and 2012. PTVs were obtained from pathological measurements using a validated volume formula. The prognostic value of PTV was analyzed using multivariable regression models, adjusting for age, tumor grade, tumor (T) stage, nodal stage, lymphovascular invasion, resection margin, resection type, and chemotherapy response, which provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Primary outcomes were time to death and time to recurrence. Secondary outcomes were margin involvement and lymph node positivity. Correlation analysis was performed between imaging and PTVs. RESULTS: On unadjusted analysis, increasing PTV was associated with worse overall mortality (HR 2.30, 95 % CI 1.41-3.73) and disease recurrence (HR 1.87, 95 % CI 1.14-3.07). Adjusted analysis demonstrated worse overall mortality with increasing PTV but reached significance in only one subgroup (HR 1.70, 95 % CI 1.09-2.38). PTV was an independent predictor of margin involvement (OR 2.28, 95 % CI 1.02-5.13) and lymph node-positive status (OR 2.77, 95 % CI 1.23-6.28). Correlation analyses demonstrated significant positive correlation between computed tomography (CT) software and formula tumor volumes (r = 0.927, p < 0.0001), CT and positron emission tomography tumor volumes (r = 0.547, p < 0.0001), and CT and PTVs (r = 0.310, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Tumor volume may predict survival, margin status, and lymph node positivity after surgery for esophageal cancer.

Long-term outcome and quality of life after supercharged jejunal interposition for oesophageal replacement.

BACKGROUND: The consequences of major conduit necrosis following oesophagectomy are devastating. Jejunal interposition with vascular supercharging is an alternative reconstructive method if colon is unavailable. Aims of this study were to review the long-term outcome and quality of life of patients undergoing this surgery in our tertiary unit. METHODS: Patients undergoing oesophageal reconstruction with supercharged jejunum were identified and retrospective review of hospital notes performed. Each patient was then interviewed for follow up data and quality of life assessment using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. RESULTS: Six patients (5 men) (median age 59 years (range 34-72) underwent supercharged pedicled jejunal (SPJ) interposition from May 2005-August 2010. Indications for surgery were loss of both gastric and colonic conduits following surgery for oesophageal cancer (n = 4), loss of gastric conduit and previous colectomy (n = 1) and lastly, gastric and colonic infarction in a strangulated paraoesophageal hernia (n = 1). Median time to reconstruction was 12 months [6-15 range]. There were no in-hospital deaths. Median postoperative stay was 46 days [13-118]. Three patients required surgical re-intervention for leak, sepsis and reflux, respectively. Median follow up was 6.5 years [range 7-102 months]. One patient died seven months following surgery due to respiratory complications. On follow up, 5 patients have an enteral diet without supplemental nutrition, maintaining weight and good quality of life scores. CONCLUSIONS: Supercharged jejunal interposition is a suitable alternative conduit for delayed oesophageal replacement in patients with otherwise limited reconstructive options. Good functional outcomes can be achieved despite formidable technical challenges in this group.

Surveillance endoscopy at five or more years after cardiomyotomy for achalasia.

OBJECTIVE: To perform long-term histopathological and clinical assessment of patients who have previously undergone cardiomyotomy for achalasia. BACKGROUND: There are few studies on long-term outcome for patients treated by cardiomyotomy for achalasia. Recent publications suggest that these patients may be at high risk of both squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. METHODS: All patients, in whom at least 5 years had elapsed since laparoscopic cardiomyotomy for achalasia, were identified from a prospective database. Patients were invited to attend for endoscopy and clinical outcome was assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: Out of 171 patients identified, 2 had died from esophageal carcinoma. Of the remainder, 68 were recruited [mean age 52 years (range 26-72)]. Fifty-six percent reported minimal symptoms and 6% experienced frequent reflux symptoms. Almost all patients (93%) reported some dysphagia, but dysphagia scores remained significantly lower than preoperatively (P < 0.0001). Quality of life was comparable to normal subjects, and 97% of patients indicated they had made the correct decision to undergo surgery. At endoscopy 83% had evidence of chronic inflammation in the distal esophagus on histopathology, including 22% with moderate to severe esophagitis and 7% with Barrett's esophagus. Five patients showed esophageal candidiasis, and 2 had eosinophilic esophagitis. No dysplasia or malignancy was identified. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical outcome remains excellent in most patients at long-term follow-up after cardiomyotomy for achalasia. Surveillance endoscopy might identify high-risk patients but routine endoscopy in all patients is probably not necessary, particularly early after surgery.

Factors associated with early recurrence and death after esophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Accurate selection of patients for radical treatment of esophageal cancer is essential to avoid early recurrence and death (ERD) after surgery. We sought to evaluate a large series of consecutive resections to assess factors that may be associated with this poor outcome. METHODS: This was a cohort study including 680 patients operated for esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2010. The poor outcome group comprised 100 patients with tumor recurrence and death within 1 year of surgery. The comparison group comprised 267 long-term survivors, defined as those surviving more than 3 years from surgery. Pathological characteristics associated with poor outcome were analyzed using logistic regression to determine odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: On the adjusted model T stage and N stage predicted poor survival, with the greatest risk being patients with locally advanced tumors and three or more involved lymph nodes (OR 10.6, 95% CI 2.8-40.0). Poor differentiation (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.4-5.5), chemotherapy response (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.2-10.6), and involved resection margins (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.0) were all significant independent prognostic markers in the multivariable model. There was a trend toward worse survival with lymphovascular invasion (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.9-4.2) and low albumin (OR 1.9, 95% CI 0.8-4.4) but not of statistical significance in the adjusted model. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal cancer patients with poorly differentiated tumors and three or more involved lymph nodes have a particularly high risk of ERD after surgery. Accurate risk stratification of patients may identify a group who would be better served by alternative oncological treatment strategies.

Impact of thoracic duct resection during radical esophagectomy on oncological and survival outcomes: Systematic review.

Practice is variable in the inclusion or exclusion of the thoracic duct (TD) as part of the resected specimen and associated lymphadenectomy in radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. While some surgeons believe that the removal of TD-associated nodes may improve radicality and survival, others suggest this represents systemic disease and resection may increase morbidity without survival benefit. A systematic review was performed up to March 2023 using the search terms 'esoph∗' AND 'thoracic duct' for relevant articles which compared thoracic duct preservation (TDP) to resection (TDR) in esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Included studies were required to report relevant oncological outcomes including at least one of overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS) and nodal yield. Seven cohort studies were included in data synthesis, including data for 5926 patients. None of the reported studies were randomised controlled trials. All studies originated from Japan or South Korea with almost exclusively squamous cell-type cancer. Nodal yield was higher in TDR groups. TDR was equivalent or inferior to TDP with reference to clinical outcomes (length of stay, morbidity, mortality). A single study reported increased OS in the TDR group while the remaining studies reported no significant difference. Overall study quality was moderate to poor. While an increased nodal yield may be associated with TDR, this may also be associated with higher morbidity, and currently available data does not suggest any survival benefit.

The current landscape of nutrition care in oesophageal and gastric cancer - insights from the national oesophagogastric nutrition audit (NONA) survey.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Specialist nutritional support is important during treatment for oesophagogastric (OG) cancer yet current practice remains unstandardised across the UK. The National Oesophagogastric Nutrition Audit (NONA) aimed to describe the current landscape of OG dietetic services in the UK and Ireland, with a specific focus on resource allocation, barriers to dietetic support, and the provision of support throughout the cancer pathway. METHODS: Tertiary cancer units, secondary care, and community services across the UK and Ireland were invited to complete a 28-point electronic questionnaire. Team leaders and senior specialist OG dietitians were the target respondents. All data points were peer-reviewed, piloted, and revised by the NONA steering committee before distribution. Data points covered a range of areas related to resources, skill mix, provision of support throughout the cancer pathway, and involvement with national audit and research. RESULTS: Complete responses were received from 50 individual units (tertiary surgical units, n = 35 and tertiary oncology units, n = 10). Secondary care and community services were underrepresented (n = 5). Of the units proving tertiary cancer care, the majority (77%) agreed or strongly agreed they were able to provide adequate nutritional care in the post-operative period. However, confidence dropped significantly in the early diagnostic phase and in the neoadjuvant period, with 52% and 67% of tertiary units disagreeing that they could provide adequate dietetic support during these parts of the cancer pathway, respectively. Inadequate funding, understaffing, and the prioritisation of inpatients were commonly reported barriers. There was significant variation in practice regarding nutritional assessment, service structure, and staffing resource allocation across specialist units. CONCLUSION: The NONA survey provides a 'real-world' landscape of nutritional care for patients with OG cancer. Lack of funding, resource, and evidence-base may explain the variation seen in services provided across the UK. Further research and consensus is required to help standardise nutritional care, guide service specification, and improve nutritional outcomes for patients with OG cancer.

Pathologic Lymph Node Regression After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Predicts Recurrence and Survival in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study in the United Kingdom.

PURPOSE: There is limited evidence regarding the prognostic effects of pathologic lymph node (LN) regression after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma, and a definition of LN response is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate how LN regression influences survival after surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Multicenter cohort study of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection at five high-volume centers in the United Kingdom. LNs retrieved at esophagectomy were examined for chemotherapy response and given a LN regression score (LNRS)-LNRS 1, complete response; 2, <10% residual tumor; 3, 10%-50% residual tumor; 4, >50% residual tumor; and 5, no response. Survival analysis was performed using Cox regression adjusting for confounders including primary tumor regression. The discriminatory ability of different LN response classifications to predict survival was evaluated using Akaike information criterion and Harrell C-index. RESULTS: In total, 17,930 LNs from 763 patients were examined. LN response classified as complete LN response (LNRS 1 ≥1 LN, no residual tumor in any LN; n = 62, 8.1%), partial LN response (LNRS 1-3 ≥1 LN, residual tumor ≥1 LN; n = 155, 20.3%), poor/no LN response (LNRS 4-5; n = 303, 39.7%), or LN negative (no tumor/regression; n = 243, 31.8%) demonstrated superior discriminatory ability. Mortality was reduced in patients with complete LN response (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.56), partial LN response (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.93) or negative LNs (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.42) compared with those with poor/no LN response. Primary tumor regression and LN regression were discordant in 165 patients (21.9%). CONCLUSION: Pathologic LN regression after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was a strong prognostic factor and provides important information beyond pathologic TNM staging and primary tumor regression grading. LN regression should be included as standard in the pathologic reporting of esophagectomy specimens.

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.

Nasogastric tube drainage and pyloric intervention after oesophageal resection: UK practice variation and effect on outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Over 1500 patients with oesophageal cancer undergo a resection in the UK each year. At surgery, patients commonly have a nasogastric tube (NGT) placed and may undergo a pyloric intervention. There is conflicting evidence on the use of both NGTs and pyloric interventions during oesophageal resections. We performed a national survey of oesophageal centres and assessed practice variation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic survey was distributed to all resection centres in England, Wales and Scotland. Variations in practice regarding NGTs and pyloric intervention were assessed, and compared to nationally reported centre volumes and length-of-stay data. RESULTS: Most centres (31/39, 79%) responded to the survey. All centres reported routine NGT use. The majority of centres (19/31, 61%) did not perform pyloric interventions. When used, surgical pyloroplasty was the most frequent strategy (8/31, 26%). Routine post-operative radiological assessment was utilised in 9/31 (29%) of centres. Criteria for NGT removal and dietary progression was highly variable, with every centre reporting different protocols. There were no significant differences in practice between high and low volume centres. There were also no trends seen when comparing centres above vs at-or-below the median length-of-stay. The majority (68%) of centres were willing to take part in a trial assessing NGT use and pyloric interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Pyloric intervention use varies widely, with no clear link to outcomes. NGT use remains standard practice despite evidence for safe omission. Surgeons require and recognise the need for a trial to assess requirement for NGTs and pyloric intervention after oesophageal resection.