Outcomes of adjuvant radiation therapy after chemotherapy in resected extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant capecitabine is considered a standard of care for resected cholangiocarcinoma per the BILCAP trial. The role of adjuvant radiation therapy in that trial was not addressed. This study was designed to examine the outcomes of adjuvant radiation in patients who received chemotherapy for resected cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, the authors identified high-risk patients with resected extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with either positive nodes (N+) or margins (R1) who received adjuvant chemotherapy between 2006 and 2014. Overall survival (OS) was determined with the Kaplan-Meier method. Propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were performed to identify prognostic factors for survival. RESULTS: The authors identified 1478 patients after PSM who were included in the analysis. There was no difference in OS between patients receiving single-agent chemotherapy and patients receiving multiagent chemotherapy (p = .69). There was a significant OS benefit associated with radiation therapy. The median OS and the 5-year OS rate for radiated patients versus nonradiated patients were 34 months and 33% versus 27 months and 24% (p < .001) for the whole group, 30 months and 29% versus 24 months and 19% (p = .007) for the N+ subgroup, and 25 months and 23% versus 20 months and 12% (p = .03) for the R1 subgroup. MVA demonstrated that age, N stage, T stage, R1, and grade were associated with increased mortality, whereas adjuvant radiation was associated with decreased mortality (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study showing that adjuvant radiation therapy after chemotherapy resulted in a significant OS benefit for patients with resected high-risk extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Trials are needed to address the role of radiation therapy in this population.

The use of indocyanine green (ICYG) angiography intraoperatively to evaluate gastric conduit perfusion during esophagectomy: does it impact surgical decision-making?

BACKGROUND: Ischemia is known to be a major contributor for anastomotic leaks and indocyanine green (ICYG) fluorescence angiography has been utilized to assess perfusion. Experienced esophageal surgeons have clinically assessed the gastric conduit with acceptable outcomes for years. We sought to examine the impact of ICYG in a surgeon's decision-making during esophagectomy. METHODS: We queried a prospectively maintained database to identify patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy. Time to initial perfusion, time to maximum perfusion, and residual ischemia were measured and used as a guide to resection of residual stomach. During esophagectomy the surgeon identified the anticipated line of ischemic demarcation (LOD) prior to ICYG injection. The distance between the surgeon's LOD and ICYG LOD was measured. RESULTS: We identified 312 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy, 251 without ICYG and 61 with ICGY. There were no differences in age, sex, race, body mass index, histology, stage, or neoadjuvant therapy use between groups. The incidence of anastomotic leak did not differ between groups (non-ICYG, 5.2% vs. ICYG, 6.6%), p = 0.67. The initial perfusion time was ≥ 10 s and max perfusion was > 25 s in all the patients in the ICYG that developed anastomotic leaks. All patients were noted to have at least 1 cm of residual gastric ischemia. Fifteen patients underwent independent surgeon evaluation of the ischemic LOD prior to ICYG. Differential distances were noted in 12 (80%) patients with a mean distance between surgical line of demarcation and ICYG LOD of 0.77 cm. CONCLUSION: While the implementation of ICYG during esophagectomy demonstrates no significant improvements in anastomotic leak rates compared to historical controls, surgeon's decision-making is impacted in 80% of cases resulting in additional resection of the gastric conduit. Elevated times to initial perfusion and maximum perfusion were associated with increased gastric ischemia and anastomotic leaks.

Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic approaches to gastrectomy: a National Cancer Database study.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer is associated with significant mortality worldwide. Radical gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy is considered the only curative option. Traditionally, these operations are associated with significant morbidity. Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and more recently robotic gastrectomy (RG) techniques have been developed to potentially decrease the perioperative morbidity. We sought to compare oncologic outcomes with laparoscopic and robotic techniques for gastrectomy. METHODS: Utilizing the National Cancer Database we identified patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma. Patients were stratified by open, robotic or laparoscopic surgical technique. Open gastrectomy patients were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 1,301 patients who underwent RG and 4,892 LG with median ages of 65 (20-90) and 66 (18-90) respectively, p = 0.02. The mean number of positive lymph nodes were higher in the LG 2.2 ± 4.4 vs RG 1.9 ± 3.8, p = 0.01. The R0 resections were higher in the RG at 94.5% vs 91.9% in LG, p = 0.001. Conversions to open were 7.1% in the RG and 16% in the LG group, p < 0.001. The median length of hospitalization was 8 (6-11) in both groups. There was no difference in the 30-day readmission (p = 0.65), 30-day mortality (p = 0.85) and 90-day mortality (p = 0.34) between groups. The median and overall 5-year survival was 71.3 mo and 56% in the RG and 66.1 mo and 52% in the LG, p = 0.03. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, location of gastric cancer, histology grade, pathologic T-stage, pathologic N-stage, surgical margins, and facility volume were all predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are both acceptable approaches to gastrectomy. However, conversions to open are higher and R0 resections rates are lower in the laparoscopic group. Additionally, a survival benefit is demonstrated in those undergoing robotic gastrectomy.

Adjuvant therapy for margin positive pancreatic cancer: A propensity score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation is often recommended for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We sought to examine the impact of these therapies on R1 resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Utilizing the National Cancer Database we identified patients who underwent pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma. Patients were stratified by resection status and adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: We identified 28,440 patients who underwent pancreatic resection. Patients with tumor size >2 cm were more likely to undergo R1 resections, p < 0.001. Adjuvant therapy improved survival in all patients with median and 5-year survival: adjuvant chemotherapy (21.7 months, 17.45%), chemoradiation (23.3 months, 20.9%) vs no adjuvant therapy (19.5 months, 19.1%), p < 0.001. In the R1 resection cohort survival was also improved with adjuvant therapy with chemoradiation demonstrating the most significant improvement: adjuvant chemotherapy (15.9 months, 6.5%), chemoradiation (18.7 months, 11.2%) vs no adjuvant therapy (12.5 months, 8.7%), p < 0.001. Chemoradiation but not adjuvant chemotherapy improved survival in the R1 node negative, p < 0.004, and node positive, p < 0.001. Adjuvant chemotherapy benefited survival in R1 node positive patients, p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pancreatic cancer who undergo R1 resection have significant improvement in survival when treated with adjuvant chemoradiation and adjuvant chemotherapy. However, benefits were greater in those receiving adjuvant chemoradiation.

Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive and robotic-assisted esophagectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has demonstrated superior outcomes compared to open approaches. The myriad of techniques has precluded the recommendation of a standard approach. The addition of robotics to esophageal resection has potential benefits. We sought to examine the outcomes with MIE to include robotics. METHODS: Utilizing a prospective esophagectomy database, we identified patients who underwent (MIE) Ivor Lewis via thoracoscopic/laparoscopic (TL), transhiatal (TH), or robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis (RAIL). Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and complications were analyzed via ANOVA, χ2, and Fisher exact where appropriate. RESULTS: We identified 302 patients who underwent MIE: TL 95 (31.5%), TH 63 (20.8%), and RAIL 144 (47.7%) with a mean age of 65 ± 9.6. The length of operation was longer in the RAIL: TL (299 ± 87), TH (231 ± 65), RAIL (409 ± 104 min), p < 0.001. However, the EBL was lower in the patients undergoing transthoracic approaches (RAIL + TL): TL (189 ± 188 ml), TH (242 ± 380 ml), RAIL (155 ± 107 ml), p = 0.03. Conversion to open was also lower in these patients: TL 7 (7.4%), TH 8 (12.7%), RAIL 0, p < 0.001. The R0 resection rate and lymph node (LN) harvest also favored the RAIL cohort: TL 86 (93.5%), TH 60 (96.8%), and RAIL 144 (100%), p = 0.01; LN: TL 14 ± 7, TH 9 ± 6, and RAIL 20 ± 9, p < 0.001. The overall morbidity was lower in MIE patients that underwent a transthoracic approach vs. transhiatal: TL 29 (30.5%), TH 39 (61.9%), RAIL 34 (23.6%), p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing MIE via thoracoscopic/laparoscopic and robotic transthoracic approaches demonstrated lower EBL, morbidity, and conversion to open compared to the transhiatal approach. Additionally the oncologic outcomes measured by R0 resections and LN harvest also favored the patients who underwent a transthoracic approach.

Effect of body mass index on operative outcome after robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: retrospective analysis of 129 cases at a single high-volume tertiary care center.

The impact of body weight on outcomes after robotic-assisted esophageal surgery for cancer has not been studied. We examined the short-term operative outcomes in patients according to their body mass index following robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy at a high-volume tertiary-care referral cancer center and evaluated the safety of robotic surgery in patients with an elevated body mass index. A retrospective review of all patients who underwent robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between April 2010 and June 2013 for pathologically confirmed distal esophageal cancer was conducted. Patient demographics, clinicopathologic data, and operative outcomes were collected. We stratified body mass index at admission for surgery according to World Health Organization criteria; normal range is defined as a body mass index range of 18.5-24.9 kg/m2. Overweight is defined as a body mass index range of 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 and obesity is defined as a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 and above. Statistics were calculated using Pearson's Chi-square and Pearson's correlation coefficient tests with a P-value of 0.05 or less for significance. One hundred and twenty-nine patients (103 men, 26 women) with median age of 67 (30-84) years were included. The majority of patients, 76% (N = 98) received neoadjuvant therapy. When stratified by body mass index, 28 (22%) were normal weight, 56 (43%) were overweight, and 45 (35%) were obese. All patients had R0 resection. Median operating room time was 407 (239-694) minutes. When stratified by body mass index, medians of operating room time across the normal weight, overweight and obese groups were 387 (254-660) minutes, 395 (310-645) minutes and 445 (239-694), respectively. Median estimated blood loss (EBL) was 150 (25-600) cc. When stratified by body mass index, medians of EBL across the normal weight, overweight and obese groups were 100 (50-500) cc, 150 (25-600) cc and 150 (25-600), respectively. Obesity significantly correlated with longer operating room time (P = 0.05) but without significant increased EBL (P = 0.348). Among the three body mass index groups there was no difference in postoperative complications including thrombotic events (pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis) (P = 0.266), pneumonia (P = 0.189), anastomotic leak (P = 0.090), wound infection (P = 0.390), any cardiac events (P = 0.793) or 30 days mortality (P = 0.414). Our data study demonstrates that patients with esophageal cancer and an elevated body mass index undergoing robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy have increased operative times but no significantly increased EBL during the procedure. Other potential morbidities did not differ with the robotic approach.

Body Mass Index and Perioperative Complications After Esophagectomy for Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given the increasing rate of obesity, the effects of excessive body weight on surgical outcomes constitute a relevant quality of care concern. Our aim was to determine the relationship between preoperative body mass index (BMI) on perioperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: From our comprehensive esophageal cancer database consisting of 510 patients, we identified 166 obese (BMI ≥30), 176 overweight (BMI 25-29), and 148 normal-weight (BMI 20-24) patients. Malnourished patients (BMI of <20) were excluded. Incidence of preoperative risk factors and perioperative complications in each group were analyzed. RESULTS: The patient group consists of 420 men and 70 women with a mean age at time of surgery were 64 years (range 28-86 years). The categories of patients (obese, overweight, and normal-weight) were similar in terms of demographics and comorbidities, with the exception of a younger age (62.5 years vs 66.2 years vs 65.3 years, P = 0.002), and a higher incidence of diabetes (23.5% vs 11.4% vs 10.1%, P = 0.001) and hiatal hernia (28.3% vs 14.8% vs 20.3%, P = 0.01) for obese patients. More patients with BMI >24 were found with adenocarcinoma, compared with the normal-weight group (90.8% vs 90.9% vs 82.5%, P = 0.03). Despite similar preoperative stage, obese patients were less likely to receive neoadjuvant treatment (47.6% vs 54.5% vs 66.2%, P = 0.004). The type of surgery performed, overall blood loss, extent of lymphadenectomy, rate of resections with negative margins, and postoperative complications were not influenced by BMI on univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, BMI did not affect number of harvested lymph-nodes, rates of negative margins, and morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy for cancer. In our experience, esophagectomy could be performed safely and efficiently in mildly obese patients.

Robotic Whipple Procedure for Pancreatic Cancer: The Moffitt Cancer Center Pathway.

BACKGROUND: Resection of malignancies in the head and uncinate process of the pancreas (Whipple procedure) using a robotic approach is emerging as a surgical option. Although several case series of the robotic Whipple procedure have been reported, detailed descriptions of operative techniques and a clear pathway for adopting this technology are lacking. METHODS: We present a focused review of the procedure as it applies to pancreatic cancer and describe our clinical pathway for the robotic Whipple procedure used in pancreatic cancer and review the outcomes of our early experience. A systematic review of the literature is provided, focusing on the indications, variations in surgical techniques, complications, and oncological results of the robotic Whipple procedure. RESULTS: A clinical pathway has been defined for preoperative training of surgeons, the requirements for hospital privileges, patient selection, and surgical techniques for the robotic Whipple procedure. The robotic technique for managing malignant lesions of the pancreas head is safe when following well-established guidelines for adopting the technology. Preliminary data demonstrate that perioperative convalescence may exceed end points when compared with the open technique. CONCLUSIONS: The robotic Whipple procedure is a minimally invasive approach for select patients as part of multidisciplinary management of periampullary lesions in tertiary centers where clinicians have developed robotic surgical programs. Prospective trials are needed to define the short- and long-term benefits of the robotic Whipple procedure.

Rate of Recurrent Luminal Esophageal Cancer in Asymptomatic Patients After Curative Treatment for Esophageal Cancer.

GOALS: The goal of this study was to determine the luminal recurrence rate of asymptomatic patients undergoing annual surveillance esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend surveillance EGD in postesophagectomy patients with esophageal cancer if there is clinical suspicion of local recurrence. However, many patients undergo annual surveillance EGD despite the recommendations to the contrary. STUDY: A query was performed of all patients who underwent esophagectomy between January 2000 and April 2010 at Moffitt Cancer Center. Patients were included if: they underwent esophagectomy with curative intent, had at least 12 months of follow-up after surgery, and had a R0 resection. Clinical and pathologic data in patients with and without recurrent disease were compared using the Fisher exact tests. Mean differences were examined using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: 346 patients were included with a mean age of 63.5±10.4 years and mean follow-up of 40.9±24.8 months. Recurrence was detected in 89 (25.7%) patients at a mean follow-up of 17.9±15.9 months after surgery. Seventeen (19.1%) patients had recurrence involving the esophagus but 7 (7.9%) patients had associated regional or distant metastases. Nine patients had abnormal signs/symptoms prompting evaluation with EGD. One patient had isolated luminal recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In this study the majority of patients recurred in the metastatic setting. One (0.29%) patient had localized recurrence; however, it was unclear if this patient had any symptoms or signs to prompt evaluation. Our results support the current recommendation of a symptom-base endoscopic evaluation for esophageal cancer recurrence.

Comparative long-term outcomes of upfront resected pancreatic cancer after preoperative biliary drainage.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether preoperative biliary drainage was predictive of recurrence and survival among patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic cancer who were treated with upfront surgery between 2000 and 2012 were identified and stratified by preoperative percutaneous transhepatic cholangiogram-guided drainage (PTBD), placement of endoscopic stents (ERCP), or no biliary drainage (NBD). The primary endpoint was overall survival. RESULTS: We identified 193 patients with resectable pancreatic head cancer (33 PTBD; 96 ERCP; and 64 NBD). Key differences between the three groups were more patients who underwent >1 preoperative biliary procedures (p = 0.004) in the PTBD cohort. PTBD patients had a significant increase in hepatic recurrence rate compared with patients who did not undergo PTBD (44.8 vs. 23.3 %, p = 0.02). PTBD patients also had worse overall survival. Median and 5-year survival for PTBD, ERCP, and NBD patients were 17.5 months and 3 %, 22.4 months and 24 %, and 28.9 months and 32 %, respectively (p = 0.002). MVA revealed that percutaneous drainage was an independent predictor of worse overall survival [HR 1.76, 95 % CI (1.05-2.99), p = 0.03]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who receive PTBD have more advanced disease, higher hepatic recurrence, and worse survival.

Adjuvant radiotherapy and lymph node dissection in pancreatic cancer treated with surgery and chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine the effects of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) and lymph node dissection (LND) on survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The 2004 to 2008 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was analyzed to identify patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent surgery and received chemotherapy and to evaluate the correlation between overall survival (OS), PORT, and LND. RESULTS: In total, 2966 patients were identified who underwent pancreatic resection (1842 PORT, 1124 no PORT). Median survival, 1-year OS, and 3-year OS were 21 months, 77%, and 28%, respectively, with PORT versus 20 months, 70%, and 25%, respectively, without PORT (P = .02). Subset analysis revealed that the benefit of PORT was limited to lymph node-positive (N1) patients. Median survival, 1-year OS, and 3-year OS for patients with N1 disease were 19 months, 73%, and 25%, respectively, for those who received PORT versus 18 months, 67%, and 20%, respectively, for those who did not receive PORT (P < .01). An increasing lymph node count was associated with increased survival on multivariate analysis in all patients and in patients with N1 disease (both P < .001). Significant cutoff points for OS based on LND in patients with N1 disease were identified for those who had ≥8, ≥10, ≥12, ≥15, and ≥20 lymph nodes resected. Multivariate analysis for OS revealed that increasing age, T3 and T4 tumors, N1 stage, and moderately and poorly differentiated grade were prognostic for increased mortality, while female gender, PORT, and LND were prognostic for decreased mortality. In patients with N1 disease, other than patient age, all of these factors remained significant. In patients with N0 disease, only T1 and T2 tumor classification and having a tumor that was less than high grade were associated with survival benefit. CONCLUSIONS: This SEER analysis demonstrated an associated survival benefit of PORT and LND in patients with N1, surgically resected pancreatic cancer who received chemotherapy.

Single-institution retrospective comparison of preoperative versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the impact of esophagectomy on survival in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus cancer after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS: A database of esophageal cancer was queried for nonmetastatic patients with adenocarcinoma treated between 2000 and 2011 with CRT. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) curves were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed by the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: We identified 154 patients (60 without surgery; 94 with surgery) who were included in the analysis. The only differences between the 2 groups were more advanced disease stage, improved performance status, and younger age in the surgery group. Patients undergoing surgery had significantly higher survival. Median and 5-year OS for surgical patients were 4.1 years and 43.6 %, versus 1.9 years and 35.6 % for nonsurgical patients (p = 0.007). Multivariate analysis for OS and RFS revealed that factors associated with increased survival were surgical resection, tumor length < 5 cm, male gender, and lower stage. Age, tumor location, radiation dose/technique, and induction chemotherapy were not prognostic. There was a trend toward improved survival on univariate analysis (p = 0.10) and multivariate analysis (p = 0.063) for surgical patients compared to nonsurgical patients who were healthy enough for surgery before CRT (n = 38), and no difference in OS in nonsurgical patients healthy enough for surgery after CRT (n = 22). CONCLUSION: Esophagectomy after CRT is associated with improved survival in patients with adenocarcinoma after CRT. Trimodal therapy should continue to remain the standard of care for esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Esophageal cancer in Hispanics: a demographic analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Hispanics are the fastest-growing minority and the second largest ethnic group in the United States, accounting for 18% of the national population. The American Cancer Society estimated 18,440 new cases of esophageal cancer (EC) in the United States in 2020. Hispanics are reported to be at high risk of EC. We sought to interrogate the demographic patterns of EC in Hispanics. Secondary objective was to examine evidence of socioeconomic disparities and differential therapy. METHODS: We identified Hispanic vs non-Hispanic patients with EC in the National Cancer Database between 2005 and 2015. Groups were statistically equated through propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3205 Hispanics (3.8%) were identified among 85,004 patients with EC. We identified significant disparities between Hispanic and non-Hispanic groups. Disparities among Hispanics included higher prevalence of squamous EC, higher likelihood of stage IV cancer diagnosis, younger age, uninsured status, and income< $38,000. Hispanics were less likely to have surgical intervention or any type of treatment when compared to non-Hispanics. Multivariate analysis showed that age, ethnicity, treatment, histology, grade, stage, and Charlson-Deyo scores were independent predictors of survival. Treated Hispanics survived longer than non-Hispanics. CONCLUSION: Despite the lower prevalence of EC, there is a disproportionately higher prevalence of metastatic and untreated cases among Hispanics. This disparity may be explained by Hispanics' limited access to medical care, exacerbated by their socioeconomic and insurance status. Further study is warranted to examine these health disparities among Hispanics.

Increased survival associated with surgery and radiation therapy in metastatic gastric cancer: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic gastric cancer have poor survival. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of metastatic gastric cancer patients stratified by surgery and radiation therapy. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was accessed to identify patients with AJCC M1 stage IV gastric cancer (based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edition) between 2004 thru 2008. Patients were divided into 4 groups: group 1, no surgery or radiation; group 2, radiation alone; group 3, surgery alone; group 4, surgery and radiation. Survival analysis was determined by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analysis. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was analyzed by the Cox proportional hazard ratio model. RESULTS: A total of 5072 patients were identified. Surgery and/or radiation were associated with a survival benefit. Median and 2-year survival for groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 7 months and 8.2%, 8 months and 8.9%, 10 months and 18.2%, and 16 months and 31.7%, respectively (P < .00001). MVA for all patients revealed that surgery and radiation were associated with decreased mortality whereas T-stage, N-stage, age, signet ring histology, and peritoneal metastases were associated with increased mortality. In patients treated with surgery, MVA showed that radiation was associated with decreased mortality, whereas T-stage, N-stage, age, removal of < 15 lymph nodes, signet ring histology, and peritoneal metastases was associated with increased mortality. Age was the only prognostic factor in patients who did not undergo surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery and radiation are associated with increased survival in a subset of patients with metastatic gastric cancer. Prospective trials will be needed to address the role and sequence of surgery and radiation in metastatic gastric cancer.

Outcomes associated with surgery for T4 esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: T4 esophageal cancer often portends a dismal prognosis even after surgical resection. Historical incomplete resections and poor survival rates often make surgery palliative rather than curative. METHODS: Using a comprehensive esophageal cancer database, we identified patients who underwent an esophagectomy for T4 tumors between 1994 and 2011. Neoadjuvant treatment (NT) and pathologic response variables were recorded, and response was denoted as complete response (pCR), partial response (pPR), and nonresponse (NR). Clinical and pathologic data were compared. Survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests for significance. RESULTS: We identified 45 patients with T4 tumors all who underwent NT. The median age was 60 years (range, 31-79 years) with a median follow-up of 27 months (range, 0-122 months). There were 19 pCR (42 %), 22 pPR (49 %), and 4 NR (9 %). R0 resections were accomplished in 43 (96 %). There were 18 recurrences (40 %) with a median time to recurrence of 13.5 months (2.2-71 months). In this group pCR represented 7 (38.9 %), whereas pPR and NR represented 10 (55.5 %), and 1 (5.5 %) respectively. The overall and disease-free survival for all patients with T4 tumors were 35 and 36 %, respectively. Patients achieving a pCR had a 5 year overall and disease-free survival of 53 and 54 %, compared with pPR 23 and 28 %, while there were no 5 year survivors in the NR cohort. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that neoadjuvant therapy and downstaging of T4 tumors leads to increased R0 resections and improvements in overall and disease-free survival.

Lymph node harvest in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the effects of lymph node (LN) harvest on survival in esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). METHODS: An analysis of surgically resected esophageal cancer patients after nCRT was performed to determine an association between the number of LNs resected and survival. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) curves were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank analysis. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was performed by the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: We identified 358 patients with a mean follow-up of 27.3 months. The number of LN removed was not impacted by the type of surgical procedure. The number of LNs removed (<10 vs. ≥10, <12 vs. ≥12, and <15 vs. ≥15) did not impact OS or DFS. We found a significant difference in OS and DFS by pathologic response. The median and 5-year OS for patients with complete, partial, and no response was 65.6 months and 52.7%, 29.7 months and 30.4%, and 17.7 months and 25.4% (p=0.0002). However, the number of LN harvested did not impact OS and DFS when patients were stratified by pathologic response. MVA also revealed that the number of lymph nodes removed was not prognostic for OS or DFS. Higher age, higher stage, and less than a complete response were associated with a decreased OS. Higher stage and less than a complete response were prognostic for worse DFS. CONCLUSIONS: The number of LNs harvested during esophagectomy does not impact survival after nCRT. Stage and pathologic response continue to be the strongest prognostic factors for survival in esophageal cancer after nCRT.

Gastric cancer, version 2.2013: featured updates to the NCCN Guidelines.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Gastric Cancer provide evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for a multidisciplinary approach for the management of patients with gastric cancer. For patients with resectable locoregional cancer, the guidelines recommend gastrectomy with a D1+ or a modified D2 lymph node dissection (performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume centers). Postoperative chemoradiation is the preferred option after complete gastric resection for patients with T3-T4 tumors and node-positive T1-T2 tumors. Postoperative chemotherapy is included as an option after a modified D2 lymph node dissection for this group of patients. Trastuzumab with chemotherapy is recommended as first-line therapy for patients with HER2-positive advanced or metastatic cancer, confirmed by immunohistochemistry and, if needed, by fluorescence in situ hybridization for IHC 2+.

Neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for resectable esophageal cancer: is there a standard of care?

BACKGROUND: Carcinoma of the esophagus is an aggressive and lethal disease with an increasing incidence worldwide. Despite changes in the treatment approach over the past two decades and even following complete resection, most patients will eventually relapse and die as a result of their disease. Several clinical trials evaluated different modalities in treating locally advanced esophageal cancer; however, because of stage migration and the changes in disease epidemiology, applying these trials to clinical practice has become a daunting task. METHODS: We searched Medline and conference abstracts for randomized studies published in the past three decades. We restricted our search to articles published in English. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection is an accepted standard of care in the United States for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Esophagectomy remains an essential component of treatment and can lead to improved overall survival, especially when performed at high-volume institutions. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection in patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation remains unclear. CONCLUSIONS: Several questions still need to be answered regarding the use of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. The optimal chemotherapy regimen has not yet been identified for these patients, although newer therapies show promise.

The impact of age on morbidity and mortality following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: In patients with esophageal cancer, treatment decisions often involve a balance between a high-risk procedure and the chance for long-term benefit. The decision can be additionally challenging for elderly patients since some studies have reported an increased incidence of morbidity and mortality in this age group, and data are not clear on the overall benefit of multimodality therapy. METHODS: To investigate the management and outcomes associated with esophagectomy in elderly patients with esophageal cancer, we performed a review of the literature as well as an analysis of our own institutional data, with a focus on the impact of age on surgical outcomes. We examined type of surgery, neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, postoperative complications, length of hospitalization, and mortality as variables in elderly patients with esophageal cancer. RESULTS: When assessing the impact of age on the success of esophagectomy, several studies have concluded that advanced age itself is not a predictor of outcomes as much as associated comorbidities are. Our own experience suggests that age is not associated with adverse outcomes when controlling for patient comorbidities. This finding is similar to data reported elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS: When considering treatment for patients of advanced age, the risks of treatment should be compared with the survival benefits of the therapy prescribed, taking into account additional factors such as poor performance status, existing comorbidities, and residual tumor following neoadjuvant therapy. Many reports, as well as our own experience, have concluded that when adjusted for comorbidities, patient age does not significantly affect outcomes.

Targeting the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 in esophageal cancer.

The importance of human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER2) in terms of prognosis and aggressiveness of growth has long been known in breast cancer, and interruption of its growth cascade by agents such as trastuzumab and lapatinib has markedly improved outcomes for these patients with HER2 overexpression. HER2 overexpression also occurs in many other tumor types, including esophageal cancer. In this disease, a different scoring system for determining overexpression is used. Limited data exist concerning the biological and therapeutic implications of HER2 overexpression in esophageal cancer. One trial, the so-called ToGA trial, included patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) tumors that overexpressed HER2. Patients who received trastuzumab plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy had more responses and longer progression-free and overall survival than those who received the chemotherapy alone. Enthusiasm concerning these results must be tempered by the facts that only 25% of the study group had GEJ tumors and, of these, only 33% had HER2 overexpression. Thus, the role of trastuzumab in the management of HER2-overexpressing esophageal cancers remains to be determined. In addition to presenting data on the HER2 cascade, the authors review clinical trials performed to date and also present the validated standard scoring system for HER2 overexpression in esophageal cancer.