Active Surveillance Versus Immediate Surgery in Clinically Complete Responders After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Propensity Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer and clinically complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) undergoing active surveillance or immediate surgery. BACKGROUND: Since nearly one-third of patients with esophageal cancer show pathologically complete response after nCRT according to CROSS regimen, the oncological benefit of immediate surgery in cCR is topic of debate. METHODS: Patients with cCR based on endoscopic biopsies and endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration initially declining or accepting immediate surgery after nCRT were identified between 2011 and 2018. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), rate and timing of distant dissemination, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Some 98 patients with cCR were identified: 31 in the active surveillance- and 67 in the immediate surgery group with median followup of survivors of 27.7 and 34.8 months, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in 2 comparable groups (n = 29 in both groups). Patients undergoing active surveillance or immediate surgery had a 3-year OS of 77% and 55% (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.14-1.20, P = 0.104), respectively. The 3-year PFS was 60% and 54% (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.44-2.67, P = 0.871), respectively. Patients undergoing active surveillance or immediate surgery had a comparable distant dissemination rate (both groups 28%), radical resection rate (both groups 100%), and severity of postoperative complications (Clav- ien-Dindo grade ≥ 3: 43% vs 45%, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, OS and PFS in patients with cCR undergoing active surveillance or immediate surgery were not significantly different. Active surveillance with postponed surgery for recurrent disease was not associated with a higher distant dissemination rate or more severe adverse postoperative outcomes.

Accuracy of detecting residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (preSINO trial): a prospective multicenter diagnostic cohort study.

BACKGROUND: After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for esophageal cancer, high pathologically complete response (pCR) rates are being achieved especially in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). An active surveillance strategy has been proposed for SCC patients with clinically complete response (cCR) after nCRT. To justify omitting surgical resection, patients with residual disease should be accurately identified. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of response evaluations after nCRT based on the preSANO trial, including positron emission tomography with computed tomography (PET-CT), endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in patients with potentially curable esophageal SCC. METHODS: Operable esophageal SCC patients who are planned to undergo nCRT according to the CROSS regimen and are planned to undergo surgery will be recruited from four Asian centers. Four to 6 weeks after completion of nCRT, patients will undergo a first clinical response evaluation (CRE-1) consisting of endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies. In patients without histological evidence of residual tumor (i.e. without positive biopsies), surgery will be postponed another 6 weeks. A second clinical response evaluation (CRE-2) will be performed 10-12 weeks after completion of nCRT, consisting of PET-CT, endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and EUS with FNA. Immediately after CRE-2 all patients without evidence of distant metastases will undergo esophagectomy. Results of CRE-1 and CRE-2 as well as results of the three single diagnostic modalities will be correlated to pathological response in the resection specimen (gold standard) for calculation of sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value. DISCUSSION: If the current study shows that major locoregional residual disease (> 10% residual carcinoma or any residual nodal disease) can be accurately (i.e. with sensitivity of 80.5%) detected in patients with esophageal SCC, a prospective trial will be conducted comparing active surveillance with standard esophagectomy in patients with a clinically complete response after nCRT (SINO trial). TRIAL REGISTRATION: The preSINO trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03937362 (May 3, 2019).

Detection of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer (preSANO): a prospective multicentre, diagnostic cohort study.

BACKGROUND: After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer, roughly half of the patients with squamous cell carcinoma and a quarter of those with adenocarcinoma have a pathological complete response of the primary tumour before surgery. Thus, the necessity of standard oesophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy should be reconsidered for patients who respond sufficiently to neoadjuvant treatment. In this study, we aimed to establish the accuracy of detection of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with different diagnostic approaches, and the optimal combination of diagnostic techniques for clinical response evaluations. METHODS: The preSANO trial was a prospective, multicentre, diagnostic cohort study at six centres in the Netherlands. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had histologically proven, resectable, squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus or oesophagogastric junction, and were eligible for potential curative therapy with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (five weekly cycles of carboplatin [area under the curve 2 mg/mL per min] plus paclitaxel [50 mg/m2 of body-surface area] combined with 41·4 Gy radiotherapy in 23 fractions) followed by oesophagectomy. 4-6 weeks after completion of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, patients had oesophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsies and endoscopic ultrasonography with measurement of maximum tumour thickness. Patients with histologically proven locoregional residual disease or no-pass during endoscopy and without distant metastases underwent immediate surgical resection. In the remaining patients a second clinical response evaluation was done (PET-CT, oesophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsies, endoscopic ultrasonography with measurement of maximum tumour thickness, and fine-needle aspiration of suspicious lymph nodes), followed by surgery 12-14 weeks after completion of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the correlation between clinical response during clinical response evaluations and the final pathological response in resection specimens, as shown by the proportion of tumour regression grade (TRG) 3 or 4 (>10% residual carcinoma in the resection specimen) residual tumours that was missed during clinical response evaluations. This study was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR4834), and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between July 22, 2013, and Dec 28, 2016, 219 patients were included, 207 of whom were included in the analyses. Eight of 26 TRG3 or TRG4 tumours (31% [95% CI 17-50]) were missed by endoscopy with regular biopsies and fine-needle aspiration. Four of 41 TRG3 or TRG4 tumours (10% [95% CI 4-23]) were missed with bite-on-bite biopsies and fine-needle aspiration. Endoscopic ultrasonography with maximum tumour thickness measurement missed TRG3 or TRG4 residual tumours in 11 of 39 patients (28% [95% CI 17-44]). PET-CT missed six of 41 TRG3 or TRG4 tumours (15% [95% CI 7-28]). PET-CT detected interval distant histologically proven metastases in 18 (9%) of 190 patients (one squamous cell carcinoma, 17 adenocarcinomas). INTERPRETATION: After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer, clinical response evaluation with endoscopic ultrasonography, bite-on-bite biopsies, and fine-needle aspiration of suspicious lymph nodes was adequate for detection of locoregional residual disease, with PET-CT for detection of interval metastases. Active surveillance with this combination of diagnostic modalities is now being assessed in a phase 3 randomised controlled trial (SANO trial; Netherlands Trial Register NTR6803). FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society.

Impact of Surgical Approach on Long-term Survival in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Patients With or Without Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) with limited lymphadenectomy or transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) with extended lymphadenectomy with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). BACKGROUND: The application of neoadjuvant therapy might change the association between the extent of lymphadenectomy and survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. This may influence the choice of surgical approach in patients treated with nCRT. METHODS: Patients with potentially curable subcarinal esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with surgery alone or nCRT followed by surgery in 7 centers were included. The effect of surgical approach on overall survival, differentiated by the addition or omission of nCRT, was analyzed using a multivariable Cox regression model that included well-known prognostic factors and factors that might have influenced the choice of surgical approach. RESULTS: In total, 701 patients were included, of whom 318 had TTE with extended lymphadenectomy and 383 had THE with limited lymphadenectomy. TTE had differential effects on survival (P for interaction = 0.02), with a more favorable prognostic effect in patients who were treated with surgery alone [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-1.03]. This association was statistically significant in a subgroup of patients with 1 to 8 positive lymph nodes in the resection specimen (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.90). The favorable prognostic effect of TTE over THE was absent in the nCRT and surgery group (HR = 1.16, 95% CI 0.80-1.66) and in the subgroup of nCRT patients with 1 to 8 positive lymph nodes in the resection specimen (HR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.61-1.68). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to surgery alone, the addition of nCRT may reduce the need for TTE with extended lymphadenectomy to improve long-term survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Outcome of Patients Treated Within and Outside a Randomized Clinical Trial on Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Plus Surgery for Esophageal Cancer: Extrapolation of a Randomized Clinical Trial (CROSS).

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) can provide a high level of evidence for medical decision making, but it is unclear if the results apply to patients treated outside such trials. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer treated within and outside an RCT. METHODS: All patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery for esophageal cancer between 2002 and 2008 (ChemoRadiotherapy for Esophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study [CROSS] cohort) who participated in multicenter, phase II-III trials were compared with patients who underwent the same treatment outside the trial between 2008 and 2013 (post-CROSS cohort). The differences between these cohorts were analyzed using t tests, while logistic regression models were used to evaluate adverse events. Overall and disease-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 208 CROSS patients and 173 post-CROSS patients were included in this study. Patients from the post-CROSS cohort were older, had more co morbidities, and had poorer performance status. Clinical N stage, but not cT stage, was worse in the post-CROSS cohort. There were no statistically significant differences in adverse events (pulmonary, cardiac, or anastomotic complications) or survival between the comparison cohorts. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of patients treated with nCRT plus esophagectomy for cancer have a high external consistency and can be extrapolated to the daily practice of physicians involved in the treatment and care of esophageal cancer patients.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus active surveillance for oesophageal cancer: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery is a standard treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. With this treatment, 29% of patients have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen. This provides the rationale for investigating an active surveillance approach. The aim of this study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of active surveillance vs. standard oesophagectomy after nCRT for oesophageal cancer. METHODS: This is a phase-III multi-centre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. A total of 300 patients with clinically complete response (cCR, i.e. no local or disseminated disease proven by histology) after nCRT will be randomised to show non-inferiority of active surveillance to standard oesophagectomy (non-inferiority margin 15%, intra-correlation coefficient 0.02, power 80%, 2-sided α 0.05, 12% drop-out). Patients will undergo a first clinical response evaluation (CRE-I) 4-6 weeks after nCRT, consisting of endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies of the primary tumour site and other suspected lesions. Clinically complete responders will undergo a second CRE (CRE-II), 6-8 weeks after CRE-I. CRE-II will include 18F-FDG-PET-CT, followed by endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and ultra-endosonography plus fine needle aspiration of suspected lymph nodes and/or PET- positive lesions. Patients with cCR at CRE-II will be assigned to oesophagectomy (first phase) or active surveillance (second phase of the study). The duration of the first phase is determined randomly over the 12 centres, i.e., stepped-wedge cluster design. Patients in the active surveillance arm will undergo diagnostic evaluations similar to CRE-II at 6/9/12/16/20/24/30/36/48 and 60 months after nCRT. In this arm, oesophagectomy will be offered only to patients in whom locoregional regrowth is highly suspected or proven, without distant dissemination. The main study parameter is overall survival; secondary endpoints include percentage of patients who do not undergo surgery, quality of life, clinical irresectability (cT4b) rate, radical resection rate, postoperative complications, progression-free survival, distant dissemination rate, and cost-effectiveness. We hypothesise that active surveillance leads to non-inferior survival, improved quality of life and a reduction in costs, compared to standard oesophagectomy. DISCUSSION: If active surveillance and surgery as needed after nCRT leads to non-inferior survival compared to standard oesophagectomy, this organ-sparing approach can be implemented as a standard of care.

P53 and SOX2 Protein Expression Predicts Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the association between p53, SOX2, and CD44 protein expression and tumor response, and to validate potential predictive biomarker(s) in an independent cohort. BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery has become a standard of care for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, the response to nCRT is highly variable among patients. METHODS: EAC patients who underwent nCRT and surgery, between January 2003 and December 2014 at the Erasmus University Medical Center, were included and divided into a primary (n = 77) and a validation cohort (n = 70). P53, SOX2, and CD44 expression was detected by immunohistochemistry in pretreatment tumor biopsies, and scored independently by 2 investigators. Response to nCRT was assessed based on tumor regression grade (TRG) in the resection specimen. RESULTS: Forty-one (53%) patients in the primary cohort and 33 (47%) patients in the validation cohort showed major response (TRG1 or TRG2) in the resection specimen. Aberrant p53 and absence of SOX2 were associated with major response in the primary cohort: adjusted odds ratio (OR) 6.3 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-30.1) and adjusted OR 4.1 (95% CI, 1.4-12.4), respectively. The same was true for the validation cohort (p53: adjusted OR 8.6; 95% CI, 0.93-80.9 and SOX2: adjusted OR 6.1; 95% CI, 1.6-23.4). The highest probability of a major response was seen in patients with concurrent aberrant p53 and absence of SOX2 expression, with an OR of 6.7 (95% CI, 2.1-21.4) and 6.2 (95% CI, 1.8-21.2) in the primary and validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Pattern of p53 and particularly SOX2 protein expression in EAC predicts response to nCRT. These biomarkers may help to individualize treatment in EAC patients.

Palliative chemotherapy and targeted therapies for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer.

BACKGROUND: Almost half of people with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer have metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. Chemotherapy and targeted therapies are increasingly used with a palliative intent to control tumor growth, improve quality of life, and prolong survival. To date, and with the exception of ramucirumab, evidence for the efficacy of palliative treatments for esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of cytostatic or targeted therapy for treating esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer with palliative intent. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Web of Science, PubMed Publisher, Google Scholar, and trial registries up to 13 May 2015, and we handsearched the reference lists of studies. We did not restrict the search to publications in English. Additional searches were run in September 2017 prior to publication, and they are listed in the 'Studies awaiting assessment' section. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy versus best supportive care or control in people with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the quality and risk of bias of eligible studies according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We calculated pooled estimates of effect using an inverse variance random-effects model for meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 41 RCTs with 11,853 participants for inclusion in the review as well as 49 ongoing studies. For the main comparison of adding a cytostatic and/or targeted agent to a control arm, we included 11 studies with 1347 participants. This analysis demonstrated an increase in overall survival in favor of the arm with an additional cytostatic or targeted therapeutic agent with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 0.84, high-quality evidence). The median increased survival time was one month. Five studies in 750 participants contributed data to the comparison of palliative therapy versus best supportive care. We found a benefit in overall survival in favor of the group receiving palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy compared to best supportive care (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92, high-quality evidence). Subcomparisons including only people receiving second-line therapies, chemotherapies, targeted therapies, adenocarcinomas, and squamous cell carcinomas all showed a similar benefit. The only individual agent that more than one study found to improve both overall survival and progression-free survival was ramucirumab. Palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy increased the frequency of grade 3 or higher treatment-related toxicity. However, treatment-related deaths did not occur more frequently. Quality of life often improved in the arm with an additional agent. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: People who receive more chemotherapeutic or targeted therapeutic agents have an increased overall survival compared to people who receive less. These agents, administered as both first-line or second-line treatments, also led to better overall survival than best supportive care. With the exception of ramucirumab, it remains unclear which other individual agents cause the survival benefit. Although treatment-associated toxicities of grade 3 or more occurred more frequently in arms with an additional chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent, there is no evidence that palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy decrease quality of life. Based on this meta-analysis, palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy can be considered standard care for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma.

Using the Comprehensive Complication Index to Assess the Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy on Complication Severity After Esophagectomy for Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery for patients with esophageal or junctional cancer has become a standard of care. The comprehensive complication index (CCI) has recently been developed and accounts for all postoperative complications. Hence, CCI better reflects the burden of all combined postoperative complications in surgical patients than the Clavien-Dindo score alone, which incorporates only the most severe complication. This study was designed to evaluate the severity of complications in patients treated with nCRT followed by esophagectomy versus in patients who underwent esophagectomy alone using the comprehensive complication index. STUDY-DESIGN: All patients included in the CROSS trial-a randomized, clinical trial on the value of nCRT followed by esophagectomy-were included. Complications were assessed and graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification. CCI was derived from these scores, using the CCI calculator available online ( www.assessurgery.com ). CCI of patients who underwent nCRT followed by surgery was compared with the CCI of patients who underwent surgery alone. RESULTS: In both groups 161 patients were included. The median (and interquartile range) CCI of patients with nCRT and surgery was 26.22 (17.28-42.43) versus 25.74 (8.66-43.01) in patients who underwent surgery alone (p = 0.58). There also was no difference in CCI between subgroups of patients with anastomotic leakage, pulmonary complications, cardiac complications, thromboembolic events, chyle leakage, and wound infections. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to CROSS did not have a negative impact on postoperative complication severity expressed by CCI compared with patients who underwent surgery alone for potentially curable esophageal or junctional cancer.

National compliance to an evidence-based multidisciplinary guideline on pancreatic and periampullary carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated national compliance to selected quality indicators from the Dutch multidisciplinary evidence-based guideline on pancreatic and periampullary carcinoma and identified areas for improvement. METHODS: Compliance to 3 selected quality indicators from the guideline was evaluated before and after implementation of the guideline in 2011: 1) adjuvant chemotherapy after tumor resection for pancreatic carcinoma, 2) discussion of the patient within a multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting and 3) a maximum 3-week interval between final MDT meeting and start of treatment. RESULTS: In total 5086 patients with pancreatic or periampullary carcinoma were included. In 2010, 2522 patients were included and in 2012, 2564 patients. 1) Use of adjuvant chemotherapy following resection for pancreatic carcinoma increased significantly from 45% (120 out of 268) in 2010 to 54% (182 out of 336) in 2012 which was mainly caused by an increase in patients aged <75 years. 2) In 2012, 64% (896 of 1396) of patients suspected of a pancreatic or periampullary carcinoma was discussed within a MDT meeting which was higher in patients aged <75 years and patients starting treatment with curative intent. 3) In 2012, the recommended 3 weeks between final MDT meeting and start of treatment was met in 39% (141 of 363) of patients which was not influenced by patient and tumor characteristics. CONCLUSION: Compliance to three selected quality indicators in pancreatic cancer care was low in 2012. Areas for improvement were identified. Future compliance will be investigated through structured audit and feedback from the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Initial results of the ChemoRadiotherapy for Oesophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone in patients with squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus or oesophagogastric junction showed a significant increase in 5-year overall survival in favour of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group after a median of 45 months' follow-up. In this Article, we report the long-term results after a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: Patients with clinically resectable, locally advanced cancer of the oesophagus or oesophagogastric junction (clinical stage T1N1M0 or T2-3N0-1M0, according to the TNM cancer staging system, sixth edition) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio with permuted blocks of four or six to receive either weekly administration of five cycles of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (intravenous carboplatin [AUC 2 mg/mL per min] and intravenous paclitaxel [50 mg/m(2) of body-surface area] for 23 days) with concurrent radiotherapy (41·4 Gy, given in 23 fractions of 1·8 Gy on 5 days per week) followed by surgery, or surgery alone. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention-to-treat. No adverse event data were collected beyond those noted in the initial report of the trial. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR487, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between March 30, 2004, and Dec 2, 2008, 368 patients from eight participating centres (five academic centres and three large non-academic teaching hospitals) in the Netherlands were enrolled into this study and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups: 180 to surgery plus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 188 to surgery alone. Two patients in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group withdrew consent, so a total of 366 patients were analysed (178 in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 188 in the surgery alone group). Of 171 patients who received any neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in this group, 162 (95%) were able to complete the entire neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimen. After a median follow-up for surviving patients of 84·1 months (range 61·1-116·8, IQR 70·7-96·6), median overall survival was 48·6 months (95% CI 32·1-65·1) in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 24·0 months (14·2-33·7) in the surgery alone group (HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·53-0·88]; log-rank p=0·003). Median overall survival for patients with squamous cell carcinomas was 81·6 months (95% CI 47·2-116·0) in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 21·1 months (15·4-26·7) in the surgery alone group (HR 0·48 [95% CI 0·28-0·83]; log-rank p=0·008); for patients with adenocarcinomas, it was 43·2 months (24·9-61·4) in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 27·1 months (13·0-41·2) in the surgery alone group (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·55-0·98]; log-rank p=0·038). INTERPRETATION: Long-term follow-up confirms the overall survival benefits for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy when added to surgery in patients with resectable oesophageal or oesophagogastric junctional cancer. This improvement is clinically relevant for both squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma subtypes. Therefore, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to the CROSS trial followed by surgical resection should be regarded as a standard of care for patients with resectable locally advanced oesophageal or oesophagogastric junctional cancer. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF Kankerbestrijding).

Problems and needs in patients with incurable esophageal and pancreaticobiliary cancer: a descriptive study.

Patients with incurable esophageal cancer (EC) or pancreaticobiliary cancer (PBC) often have multiple symptoms and their quality of life is poor. We investigated which problems these patients experience and how often care is expected for these problems to provide optimal professional care. Fifty-seven patients with incurable EC (N = 24) or PBC (N = 33) from our outpatient clinic completed the validated "Problems and Needs for Palliative Care" (PNPC) questionnaire and two disease-specific quality of life questionnaires, European Organization for Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC). Although patients in general had several problems, physical, emotional, and loss of autonomy (LOA) problems were most common. For these physical and emotional problems, patients also expected professional care, although to a lesser extent for LOA problems. Inadequate care was received for fatigue, fear, frustration, and uncertainty. We conclude that an individualized approach based on problems related to physical, emotional, and LOA issues and anticipated problems with healthcare providers has priority in the follow-up policy of patients with incurable upper gastrointestinal cancer. Caregivers should be alert to discuss needs for fatigue, feelings of fear, frustration, and uncertainty.

Prolonged time to surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy increases histopathological response without affecting survival in patients with esophageal or junctional cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relation between time to surgery (TTS) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and pathologically complete response (pCR), surgical outcome, and survival in patients with esophageal cancer. BACKGROUND: Standard treatment for potentially curable esophageal cancer is nCRT plus surgery after 4 to 6 weeks. In rectal cancer patients, evidence suggests that prolonged TTS is associated with a higher pCR rate and possibly with better survival. METHODS: We identified patients treated with nCRT plus surgery for esophageal cancer between 2001 and 2011. TTS (last day of radiotherapy to day of surgery) varied mainly for logistical reasons. Minimal follow-up was 24 months. The effect of TTS on pCR rate, postoperative complications, and survival was determined with (ordinal) logistic, linear, and Cox regression, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 325 patients were included. Median TTS was 48 days (p25-p75=40-60). After 45 days, TTS was associated with an increased probability of pCR [odds ratio (OR)=1.35 per additional week of TSS, P=0.0004] and a small increased risk of postoperative complications (OR=1.20, P<0.001). Prolonged TTS had no effect on disease-free and overall survivals (HR=1.00 and HR=1.06 per additional week of TSS, P=0.976 and P=0.139, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged TTS after nCRT increases the probability of pCR and is associated with a slightly increased probability of postoperative complications, without affecting disease-free and overall survivals. We conclude that TTS can be safely prolonged from the usual 4 to 6 weeks up to at least 12 weeks, which facilitates a more conservative wait-and-see strategy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to be tested.

Lymph node retrieval during esophagectomy with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: prognostic and therapeutic impact on survival.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the association between total number of resected nodes and survival in patients after esophagectomy with and without nCRT. BACKGROUND: Most studies concerning the potentially positive effect of extended lymphadenectomy on survival have been performed in patients who underwent surgery alone. As nCRT is known to frequently "sterilize" regional nodes, it is unclear whether extended lymphadenectomy after nCRT is still useful. METHODS: Patients from the randomized CROSS-trial who completed the entire protocol (ie, surgery alone or chemoradiotherapy + surgery) were included. With Cox regression models, we compared the impact of number of resected nodes as well as resected positive nodes on survival in both groups. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-one patients underwent surgery alone, and 159 patients received multimodality treatment. The median (interquartile range) number of resected nodes was 18 (12-27) and 14 (9-21), with 2 (1-6) and 0 (0-1) resected positive nodes, respectively. Persistent lymph node positivity after nCRT had a greater negative prognostic impact on survival as compared with lymph node positivity after surgery alone. The total number of resected nodes was significantly associated with survival for patients in the surgery-alone arm (hazard ratio per 10 additionally resected nodes, 0.76; P=0.007), but not in the multimodality arm (hazard ratio 1.00; P=0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The number of resected nodes had a prognostic impact on survival in patients after surgery alone, but its therapeutic value is still controversial. After nCRT, the number of resected nodes was not associated with survival. These data question the indication for maximization of lymphadenectomy after nCRT.

Impact of a multidisciplinary tumour board meeting for upper-GI malignancies on clinical decision making: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The Dutch guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of upper-GI malignancies recommend review of patients by a multidisciplinary tumour board (MDT). The purpose of this study was to determine the effect on clinical decision making of an MDT for patients with upper-GI malignancies. METHODS: All physicians participating in the MDT completed an electronic standardised case form to delineate their proposed treatment plan for the patients they presented, including the intent of treatment and the modality of treatment. This therapeutic or diagnostic proposal was then compared with the plan on which consensus was reached by the MDT. RESULTS: A total of 252/280 (90.0%) forms were completed and suitable for analysis. In 87/252 (34.5%) of the case presentations, the MDT altered the proposed plan of management. In 29/87 (33.3%) cases, a more extensive diagnostic work-up was decided upon. In 8/87 (9.2%) cases the curative intent of the proposed treatment was altered to palliation only. In 2/75 (2.7%) cases, however, it was decided that a patient could be treated with curative intent instead of the proposed palliative intent. CONCLUSION: In over 1/3 of cases, the diagnostic work-up or treatment plan is altered after evaluation by a multidisciplinary tumour board. This study supports Dutch guidelines recommending discussion of patients with upper-GI malignancies by a multidisciplinary tumour board.

Chemotherapy aNd chemoradiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the OESophagus and esophagogastric junction with oligometastases: Protocol of the TNT-OES-1 trial.

Background: FLOT and CROSS are effective neoadjuvant regimens for esophageal cancer patients. Chemotherapy (FLOT) is aimed to have merely a systemic effect whereas neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CROSS) achieves good locoregional response with clinically complete response (cCR) rates up to 33% [1]. The aim of the present study is to assess safety and feasibility of dual therapy (FLOT-CROSS) in patients with oligometastases. Methods: This phase-II single-center, single-arm, intervention study includes patients with oligometastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction. Patients will be treated with four biweekly cycles of FLOT, consisting of intravenous fluorouracil (2600 mg/m2), leucovorin (200 mg/m2), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2) and docetaxel (50 mg/m2). Response evaluation by CT-scan will be performed 4-6 weeks after completion of FLOT. In case of regression or stable disease according to RECIST criteria (v.1.1), patients will receive additional CROSS, consisting of five weekly cycles of intravenous carboplatin (AUC 2) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m2), with concurrent 41.4 Gy radiotherapy, in 23 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy [2]. Response evaluation by endoscopy with biopsies, endoscopic ultrasonography and CT-scan will be performed 4-6 weeks after completion of CROSS. Primary endpoint is tolerability of FLOT-CROSS, defined as the proportion of patients who complete the full regimen. Secondary endpoints include disease control rate, objective response rate, overall survival and progression-free survival. In total, 20 patients will be included. Discussion: If patients are able to complete and tolerate FLOT-CROSS, this regimen should be tested in a phase-III trial and as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with locally advanced non-metastatic esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma.

Effect of the Proton Pump Inhibitor Esomeprazole on the Systemic Exposure of Capecitabine: Results of A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Retrospective data suggest that gastric acid reduction by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) impairs the dissolution and subsequent absorption of capecitabine, and thus potentially reduces the capecitabine exposure. Therefore, we examined prospectively the effect of esomeprazole on the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine. In this randomized crossover study, patients with cancer were assigned to 2 sequence groups, each consisting of 3 phases: capecitabine with esomeprazole administration 3 hours before (phase A), capecitabine alone (phase B), and capecitabine concomitant with cola and esomeprazole co-administration 3 hours before (phase C). The primary end point was the relative difference (RD) in exposure to capecitabine assessed by the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-inf ) and analyzed by a linear mixed effect model. Twenty-two evaluable patients were included in the analysis. After esomeprazole, there was a 18.9% increase in AUC0-inf of capecitabine (95% confidence interval (CI) -10.0% to 57.0%, P = 0.36). In addition, capecitabine half-life was significantly longer after esomeprazole (median 0.63 hours vs. 0.46 hours, P = 0.005). Concomitant cola did not completely reverse the effects observed after esomeprazole (RD 3.3% (95% CI -16.3 to 27.4%, P = 1.00). Capecitabine exposure is not negatively influenced by esomeprazole cotreatment. Therefore, altered capecitabine pharmacokinetics do not explain the assumed worse clinical outcome of PPI-cotreated patients with cancer.

Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for evaluating early response during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy before surgery can improve survival in patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer, but not all patients respond. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) has been proposed to identify nonresponders early during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The aim of the present study was to determine whether FDG-PET could differentiate between responding and nonresponding esophageal tumors early in the course of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: This clinical trial comprised serial FDG-PET before and 14 days after start of chemoradiotherapy in patients with potentially curable esophageal carcinoma. Histopathologic responders were defined as patients with no or less than 10% viable tumor cells (Mandard score on resection specimen). PET response was measured using the standardized uptake value (SUV). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to evaluate the ability of SUV in distinguishing between histopathologic responders and nonresponders. RESULTS: In 100 included patients, 64 were histopathologic responders. The median SUV decrease 14 days after the start of therapy was 30.9% for histopathologic responders and 1.7% for nonresponders (P = 0.001). In receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the curve was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.60-0.82). Using a 0% SUV decrease cutoff value, PET correctly identified 58 of 64 responders (sensitivity 91%) and 18 of 36 nonresponders (specificity 50%). The corresponding positive and negative predictive values were 76% and 75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SUV decrease 14 days after the start of chemoradiotherapy was significantly associated with histopathologic tumor response, but its accuracy in detecting nonresponders was too low to justify the clinical use of FDG-PET for early discontinuation of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer.

Chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone in patients with resectable oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: long-term results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This is a randomized, controlled trial of preoperative chemotherapy in patients undergoing surgery for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Patients were allocated to chemotherapy, consisting of 2-4 cycles of cisplatin and etoposide, followed by surgery (CS group) or surgery alone (S group). Initial results reported only in abstract form in 1997, demonstrated an advantage for overall survival in the CS group. The results of this trial have been updated and discussed in the timeframe in which this study was performed. METHODS: This trial recruited 169 patients with OSCC, 85 patients assigned to preoperative chemotherapy and 84 patients underwent immediate surgery. The primary study endpoint was overall survival (OS), secondary endpoints were disease free survival (DFS) and pattern of failure. Survival has been determined from Kaplan-Meier curves and treatment comparisons made with the log-rank test. RESULTS: There were 148 deaths, 71 in the CS and 77 in the S group. Median OS time was 16 months in the CS group compared with 12 months in the S group; 2-year survival rates were 42% and 30%; and 5-year survival rates were 26% and 17%, respectively. Intention to treat analysis showed a significant overall survival benefit for patients in the CS group (P = 0.03, by the log-rank test; hazard ratio [HR] 0.71; 95%CI 0.51-0.98). DFS (from landmark time of 6 months after date of randomisation) was also better in the CS-group than in the S group (P = 0.02, by the log-rank test; HR 0.72; 95%CI 0.52-1.0). No difference in failure pattern was observed between both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative chemotherapy with a combination of etoposide and cisplatin significantly improved overall survival in patients with OSCC.