Adjuvant Therapy for Patients with a Tumor-Positive Resection Margin After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 4-9% of patients have a tumor-positive resection margin after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and esophagectomy. Although it is associated with decreased survival, Western guidelines do not recommend adjuvant treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the proportion of patients who received adjuvant therapy, and to evaluate overall survival (OS) after esophagectomy in patients with a tumor-positive resection margin. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with resectable (cT2-4a/cTxN0-3/NxM0) esophageal cancer between 2015 and 2022, and treated with nCRT followed by irradical esophagectomy, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a tumor-positive resection margin who started adjuvant treatment ≤16 weeks after esophagectomy, including chemotherapy/radiotherapy, immunotherapy, or targeted therapy. OS was calculated from the date of surgery until the date of death or last day of follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 376 patients were included in our study, of whom 357 were treated with nCRT. Of these 357 patients, 98.3% had a microscopically irradical resection and 1.7% had a macroscopically irradical resection. Approximately 72.3% of tumors showed a partial response (Mandard 2-3) and 11.8% showed little/no pathological response (Mandard 4-5) to nCRT. One of 357 patients underwent adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 39 patients (61%) underwent adjuvant immunotherapy (nivolumab). The median and 5-year OS rate of all patients was 16.4 months (95% confidence interval 13.1-19.8) and 21%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Real-world population-level data showed that no patients with a tumor-positive resection margin underwent adjuvant therapy following nCRT and esophagectomy prior to 2021. Interestingly, 61% of patients were treated with adjuvant nivolumab in 2021-2022. OS after irradical esophagectomy is poor and long-term data will explore the added value of nivolumab.

Survival after Ivor Lewis versus McKeown esophagectomy for cancer: propensity score matched analysis.

It is unknown whether Ivor Lewis (IL) or McKeown (McK) esophagectomy is preferred in patients with potentially curable esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Patients with mid- and distal esophageal and GEJ cancer without distant metastases who underwent IL or McK esophagectomy in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2017, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were propensity score matched for sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologist classification, comorbidity, tumor type, tumor location, clinical stage, neoadjuvant treatment and year of diagnosis. The primary outcome was a 3-year relative survival (RS). Secondary outcome parameters were number of lymph nodes examined, number of positive lymph nodes, radical resection rate, tumor regression grade, post-operative complications and mortality. A total of 1627 patients who underwent IL (n = 1094) or McK (n = 533) esophagectomy were included. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced after propensity score matching, leaving 658 patients to be compared. The 3-year RS was 54% after IL and 50% after McK esophagectomy, P = 0.140. The median number of lymph nodes examined, median number of positive lymph nodes, radical resection rate and tumor regression grade were comparable between both groups. Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (2 vs. 5%, P = 0.006) occurred less frequently after IL esophagectomy. No differences were observed in post-operative anastomotic leakage rate, pulmonary complication rate and mortality rates. There was no statistically significant difference in the 3-year RS between IL and McK esophagectomy. Based on these results, both IL and McK esophagectomy can be performed in patients with mid to distal esophageal and GEJ cancer.

Non-excisional techniques for the treatment of intergluteal pilonidal sinus disease: a systematic review.

Non-excisional techniques for pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) have gained popularity over the last years. The aim of this study was to review short and long-term outcomes for non-excisional techniques with special focus on the additive effect of treatment of the inner lining of the sinus cavity and the difference between primary and recurrent PSD. A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases for studies on non-excisional techniques for PSD including pit picking techniques with or without additional laser or phenol treatment, unroofing, endoscopic techniques and thrombin gelatin matrix application. Outcomes were recurrence rates, healing rates, complication rates, wound healing times and time taken to return to daily activities. In total, 31 studies comprising 8100 patients were included. Non-excisional techniques had overall healing rates ranging from 67 to 100%. Recurrence rates for pit picking, unroofing and gelatin matrix application varied from 0 to 16% depending on the follow-up time. Recurrence rates after additional laser, phenol and endoscopic techniques varied from 0 to 29%. Complication rates ranged from 0 to 16%, and the wound healing time was between three and forty-seven days. The return to daily activities varied from one to nine days. Non-excisional techniques are associated with fast recovery and low morbidity but recurrence rates are high. Techniques that attempt to additionally treat the inner lining of the sinus have worse recurrence rates than pit picking alone. Recurrence rates do not differ between primary and recurrent disease.

Supervised exercise after oesophageal cancer surgery: the PERFECT multicentre randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated whether a supervised exercise programme improves quality of life (QoL), fatigue and cardiorespiratory fitness in patients in the first year after oesophagectomy. METHODS: The multicentre PERFECT trial randomly assigned patients to an exercise intervention (EX) or usual care (UC) group. EX patients participated in a 12-week moderate- to high-intensity aerobic and resistance exercise programme supervised by a physiotherapist. Primary (global QoL, QoL summary score) and secondary (QoL subscales, fatigue and cardiorespiratory fitness) outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks and analysed as between-group differences using either linear mixed effects models or ANCOVA. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients (mean(s.d.) age 64(8) years) were included and randomized to EX (61 patients) or UC (59 patients). Patients in the EX group participated in 96 per cent (i.q.r. 92-100 per cent) of the exercise sessions and the relative exercise dose intensity was high (92 per cent). At 12 weeks, beneficial EX effects were found for QoL summary score (3.5, 95 per cent c.i. 0.2 to 6.8) and QoL role functioning (9.4, 95 per cent c.i. 1.3 to 17.5). Global QoL was not statistically significant different between groups (3.0, 95 per cent c.i. -2.2 to 8.2). Physical fatigue was lower in the EX group (-1.2, 95 per cent c.i. -2.6 to 0.1), albeit not significantly. There was statistically significant improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness following EX compared with UC (peak oxygen uptake (1.8 ml/min/kg, 95 per cent c.i. 0.6 to 3.0)). After 24 weeks, all EX effects were attenuated. CONCLUSIONS: A supervised exercise programme improved cardiorespiratory fitness and aspects of QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR 5045 (www.trialregister.nl/trial/4942).

Fit-for-Discharge Criteria after Esophagectomy: An International Expert Delphi Consensus.

There are no internationally recognized criteria available to determine preparedness for hospital discharge after esophagectomy. This study aims to achieve international consensus using Delphi methodology. The expert panel consisted of 40 esophageal surgeons spanning 16 countries and 4 continents. During a 3-round, web-based Delphi process, experts voted for discharge criteria using 5-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was reached if agreement was ≥75% in round 3. Consensus was achieved for the following basic criteria: nutritional requirements are met by oral intake of at least liquids with optional supplementary nutrition via jejunal feeding tube. The patient should have passed flatus and does not require oxygen during mobilization or at rest. Central venous catheters should be removed. Adequate analgesia at rest and during mobilization is achieved using both oral opioid and non-opioid analgesics. All vital signs should be normal unless abnormal preoperatively. Inflammatory parameters should be trending down and close to normal (leucocyte count ≤12G/l and C-reactive protein ≤80 mg/dl). This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for consensus criteria to determine 'fit-for-discharge' status after esophagectomy. Results of this Delphi survey may be applied to clinical outcomes research as an objective measure of short-term recovery. Furthermore, standardized endpoints identified through this process may be used in clinical practice to guide decisions regarding patient discharge and may help to reduce the risk of premature discharge or prolonged admission.

Residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: locations undetected by endoscopic biopsies in the preSANO trial.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance has been proposed for patients with oesophageal cancer in whom there is a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). However, endoscopic biopsies have limited negative predictive value in detecting residual disease. This study determined the location of residual tumour following surgery to improve surveillance and endoscopic strategies. METHODS: The present study was based on patients who participated in the prospective preSANO trial with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus or oesophagogastric junction treated in four Dutch hospitals between 2013 and 2016. Resection specimens and endoscopic biopsies taken during clinical response evaluations after nCRT were reviewed by two expert gastrointestinal pathologists. The exact location of residual disease in the oesophageal wall was determined in resection specimens. Endoscopic biopsies were assessed for the presence of structures representing the submucosal layer of the oesophageal wall. RESULTS: In total, 119 eligible patients underwent clinical response evaluations after nCRT followed by standard surgery. Residual tumour was present in endoscopic biopsies from 70 patients, confirmed on histological analysis of the resected organ. Residual tumour was present in the resection specimen from 27 of the other 49 patients, despite endoscopic biopsies being negative. Of these 27 patients, residual tumour was located in the mucosa in 18, and in the submucosa beneath tumour-free mucosa in eight. One patient had tumour in muscle beneath tumour-free mucosa and submucosa. CONCLUSION: Most residual disease after nCRT missed by endoscopic biopsies was located in the mucosa. Active surveillance could be improved by more sampling and considering submucosal biopsies.

ANTECEDENTES: Se ha propuesto un seguimiento activo para los pacientes con cáncer de esófago en los que se logra una respuesta clínica completa tras quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante (neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, nCRT). Sin embargo, las biopsias endoscópicas tienen un valor predictivo limitado para detectar la enfermedad residual. En este estudio se evaluó la localización del tumor residual tras la cirugía para poder determinar estrategias de seguimiento y endoscópicas. MÉTODOS: Este estudio se basa en pacientes que participaron en el ensayo prospectivo preSANO (adenocarcinoma o carcinoma escamoso del esófago o unión esofagogástrica en cuatro hospitales de los Países Bajos entre 2013 y 2016). Los especímenes quirúrgicos, así como las biopsias endoscópicas efectuadas durante las evaluaciones de la respuesta clínica después de nCRT fueron revisadas por dos patólogos gastrointestinales expertos. En los especímenes de resección, se determinó la localización exacta de la enfermedad residual en la pared del esófago. Se evaluaron las biopsias endoscópicas para identificar estructuras que constituyeran la capa submucosa de la pared del esófago. RESULTADOS: En total, 119 pacientes elegibles fueron sometidos a evaluaciones de la respuesta clínica tras nCRT seguida de cirugía estándar. Se detectó tumor residual en las biopsias endoscópicas de 70 pacientes, luego confirmadas en la histología de la pieza extirpada. Se identificó tumor residual en la pieza de resección de 27 de los otros 49 pacientes, a pesar de que las biopsias endoscópicas fueron negativas. En estos 27 pacientes, 18 presentaban tumor residual en la mucosa y ocho pacientes en la submucosa mas allá de una mucosa libre de tumor. Un paciente tenía tumor en el músculo más allá de una mucosa y submucosa libres de tumor. CONCLUSIÓN: La mayoría de los casos de enfermedad residual tras nCRT que no se detectaron en las biopsias endoscópicas, se localizaban en la mucosa. El seguimiento activo podría mejorar con la toma de más muestras y considerando las biopsias submucosas.

Diagnostic criteria and symptom grading for delayed gastric conduit emptying after esophagectomy for cancer: international expert consensus based on a modified Delphi process.

Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) after esophagectomy for cancer is associated with adverse outcomes and troubling symptoms. Widely accepted diagnostic criteria and a symptom grading tool for DGCE are missing. This hampers the interpretation and comparison of studies. A modified Delphi process, using repeated web-based questionnaires, combined with live interim group discussions was conducted by 33 experts within the field, from Europe, North America, and Asia. DGCE was divided into early DGCE if present within 14 days of surgery and late if present later than 14 days after surgery. The final criteria for early DGCE, accepted by 25 of 27 (93%) experts, were as follows: >500 mL diurnal nasogastric tube output measured on the morning of postoperative day 5 or later or >100% increased gastric tube width on frontal chest x-ray projection together with the presence of an air-fluid level. The final criteria for late DGCE accepted by 89% of the experts were as follows: the patient should have 'quite a bit' or 'very much' of at least two of the following symptoms; early satiety/fullness, vomiting, nausea, regurgitation or inability to meet caloric need by oral intake and delayed contrast passage on upper gastrointestinal water-soluble contrast radiogram or on timed barium swallow. A symptom grading tool for late DGCE was constructed grading each symptom as: 'not at all', 'a little', 'quite a bit', or 'very much', generating 0, 1, 2, or 3 points, respectively. For the five symptoms retained in the diagnostic criteria for late DGCE, the minimum score would be 0, and the maximum score would be 15. The final symptom grading tool for late DGCE was accepted by 27 of 31 (87%) experts. For the first time, diagnostic criteria for early and late DGCE and a symptom grading tool for late DGCE are available, based on an international expert consensus process.

Benchmarking Complications Associated with Esophagectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Utilizing a standardized dataset with specific definitions to prospectively collect international data to provide a benchmark for complications and outcomes associated with esophagectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Outcome reporting in oncologic surgery has suffered from the lack of a standardized system for reporting operative results particularly complications. This is particularly the case for esophagectomy affecting the accuracy and relevance of international outcome assessments, clinical trial results, and quality improvement projects. METHODS: The Esophageal Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) involving 24 high-volume esophageal surgical centers in 14 countries developed a standardized platform for recording complications and quality measures associated with esophagectomy. Using a secure online database (ESODATA.org), ECCG centers prospectively recorded data on all resections according to the ECCG platform from these centers over a 2-year period. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and December 2016, 2704 resections were entered into the database. All demographic and follow-up data fields were 100% complete. The majority of operations were for cancer (95.6%) and typically located in the distal esophagus (56.2%). Some 1192 patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (46.1%) and 763 neoadjuvant chemotherapy (29.5%). Surgical approach involved open procedures in 52.1% and minimally invasive operations in 47.9%. Chest anastomoses were done most commonly (60.7%) and R0 resections were accomplished in 93.4% of patients. The overall incidence of complications was 59% with the most common individual complications being pneumonia (14.6%) and atrial dysrhythmia (14.5%). Anastomotic leak, conduit necrosis, chyle leaks, recurrent nerve injury occurred in 11.4%, 1.3%, 4.7%, and 4.2% of cases, respectively. Clavien-Dindo complications ≥ IIIb occurred in 17.2% of patients. Readmissions occurred in 11.2% of cases and 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.4% and 4.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Standardized methods provide contemporary international benchmarks for reporting outcomes after esophagectomy.

Quality of Life During and After Completion of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal and Junctional Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The course of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) during and after completion of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for esophageal or junctional carcinoma is unknown. METHODS: This study was a multicenter prospective cohort investigation. Patients with esophageal or cancer to be treated with nCRT plus esophagectomy were eligible for inclusion in the study. The HRQOL of the patients was measured with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, QLQ-OG25, and QLQ-CIPN20 questionnaires before and during nCRT, then 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 weeks after nCRT and before surgery. Predefined end points were based on the hypothesized impact of nCRT. The primary end points were physical functioning, odynophagia, and sensory symptoms. The secondary end points were global quality of life, fatigue, weight loss, and motor symptoms. Mixed modeling analysis was used to evaluate changes over time. RESULTS: Of 106 eligible patients, 96 (91%) were included in the study. The rate of questionnaires returned ranged from 94% to 99% until week 12, then dropped to 78% in week 16 after nCRT. A negative impact of nCRT on all HRQOL end points was observed during the last cycle of nCRT (all p < 0.001) and 2 weeks after nCRT (all p < 0.001). Physical functioning, odynophagia, and sensory symptoms were restored to pretreatment levels respectively 8, 4, and 6 weeks after nCRT. The secondary end points were restored to baseline levels 4-6 weeks after nCRT. Odynophagia, fatigue, and weight loss improved after nCRT compared with baseline levels at respectively 6 (p < 0.001), 16 (p = 0.001), and 12 weeks (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: After completion of nCRT for esophageal cancer, HRQOL decreases significantly, but all HRQOL end points are restored to baseline levels within 8 weeks. Odynophagia, fatigue, and weight loss improved 6-16 weeks after nCRT compared with baseline levels.

Impact of Age and Comorbidity on Choice and Outcome of Two Different Treatment Options for Patients with Potentially Curable Esophageal Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the impact of age and comorbidity on choice and outcome of definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery. METHODS: In this population-based study, all patients with potentially curable EC (cT1N+/cT2-3, TX, any cN, cM0) diagnosed in the South East of the Netherlands between 2004 and 2014 were included. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression analysis were used to compare overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 702 patients was included. Age ≥ 75 years and multiple comorbidities were associated with a higher probability for dCRT (odds ratio [OR] 8.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.72-15.58; and OR 3.09; 95% CI 1.93-4.93). The strongest associations were found for the combination of hypertension plus diabetes (OR 3.80; 95% CI 1.97-7.32) and the combination of cardiovascular with pulmonary comorbidity (OR 3.18; 95% CI 1.57-6.46). Patients with EC who underwent dCRT had a poorer prognosis than those who underwent nCRT plus surgery, irrespective of age, number, and type of comorbidities. In contrast, for patients with squamous cell carcinoma with ≥ 2 comorbidities or age ≥ 75 years, OS was comparable between both groups (hazard ratio [HR] 1.52; 95% CI 0.78-2.97; and HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.13-4.14). CONCLUSIONS: Histological tumor type should be acknowledged in treatment choices for patients with esophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery should basically be advised as treatment of choice for operable esophageal adenocarcinoma patients. For patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma with ≥ 2 comorbidities or age ≥ 75 years, dCRT may be the preferred strategy.