Peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer in a nationwide cohort: Incidence, treatment and survival.

The aims of this study were to investigate incidence, risk factors and treatment of synchronous or metachronous peritoneal metastases (PM) from gastric cancer and to estimate survival of these patients using population-based data. Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer in 2015 to 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The incidence of synchronous and metachronous PM were calculated. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the occurrence of PM. Treatment and survival were compared between patients with synchronous and metachronous PM. Of 2206 patients with gastric cancer, 741 (34%) were diagnosed with PM. Of these, 498 (23%) had synchronous PM. The cumulative incidence of metachronous PM in patients who underwent potentially curative treatment (n = 675) was 22.8% at 3 years. A factor associated with synchronous and metachronous PM was diffuse type histology. Patients diagnosed with synchronous PM more often received systemic treatment than patients with metachronous PM (35% vs 18%, respectively, P < .001). Median overall survival was comparable between synchronous and metachronous PM (3.2 vs 2.3 months, respectively, P = .731). Approximately one third of all patients with gastric cancer are diagnosed with PM, either at primary diagnosis or during 3-year follow-up after potentially curative treatment. Patients with metachronous PM less often received systemic treatment than those with synchronous PM but survival was comparable between both groups. Future trials are warranted to detect gastric cancer at an earlier stage and to examine strategies that lower the risk of peritoneal dissemination. Also, specific treatment options for patients with gastric PM should be further investigated.

Multimodal Therapy Versus Primary Surgery for Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Diffuse Type Carcinoma, with a Focus on Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse type adenocarcinoma and, more specifically, signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) have a poor prognosis and the value of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (nCRT) is unclear. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery for diffuse type gastric and GEJ carcinoma between 2004 and 2015 were retrospectively included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The primary outcome was overall survival after surgery. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted. Furthermore, multivariable Poisson and Cox regressions were performed, correcting for confounders. To comply with the Cox regression proportional hazard assumption, gastric cancer survival was split into two groups, i.e. <90 days and >90 days, postoperatively by adding an interaction variable. RESULTS: Analyses included 2046 patients with diffuse type cancer: 1728 gastric cancers (50% SRCC) and 318 GEJ cancers (39% SRCC). In the gastric cancer group, 49% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and 51% received primary surgery (PS). All-cause mortality within 90 days postoperatively was lower after nCT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.44; p < 0.001). Also after 90 days, mortality was lower in the nCT group (HR for the interaction variable 2.84, 95% CI 1.87-4.30, p < 0.001; total HR 0.29*2.84 = 0.84). In the GEJ group, 38% received nCT, 22% received nCRT, and 39% received PS. All-cause mortality was lower after nCT (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.93; p = 0.020) compared with PS. The nCRT group was removed from the Cox regression analysis since the Kaplan-Meier curves of nCRT and PS intersected. The results for gastric and GEJ carcinomas were similar between the SRCC and non-SRCC subgroups. CONCLUSION: For gastric and GEJ diffuse type cancer, including SRCC, nCT was associated with increased survival.

Systemic Treatment Strategies and Outcomes of Patients With Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases of Gastric Origin: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Palliative systemic treatment is currently standard of care for metastatic gastric cancer. However, patients with peritoneal metastases of gastric origin are often underrepresented in clinical studies due to unmeasurable radiologic disease. This study describes the systemic treatment strategies and outcomes in patients with peritoneal metastases in a nationwide real-world setting. METHODS: Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma and synchronous peritoneal metastases (with or without other metastases) diagnosed in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2020 were identified from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Median overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment failure were determined and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to compare treatment groups, corrected for relevant tumor and patient characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 1,972 patients were included, of whom 842 (43%) were treated with palliative systemic therapy. The majority received capecitabine + oxaliplatin (CAPOX; 44%), followed by fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX; 19%), and epirubicin + capecitabine + oxaliplatin (EOX; 8%). Of the 99 (45%) patients who received second-line systemic treatment, ramucirumab + paclitaxel were administered most frequently (63%). After adjustment for sex, age, comorbidities, performance status, tumor location, Lauren classification, and the presence of metastases outside of the peritoneum, patients treated with a triplet containing docetaxel and those treated with a regimen containing trastuzumab had a significantly longer OS compared with patients treated with a doublet containing a fluoropyrimidine derivate + oxaliplatin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.91, and HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.91, respectively). Monotherapy was associated with a shorter OS (HR, 2.08, 95% CI, 1.53-2.83). CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial heterogeneity in systemic treatment choices in patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases in the Netherlands. In this study, patients treated with triplets containing docetaxel and with trastuzumab-containing regimens survived longer than patients who received doublet therapy. Despite this, median OS for all treatment groups remained below one year.

Evaluation of Treatment Strategies and Survival of Patients with cT4bM0 Esophageal Cancer: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal therapeutic strategy for patients with cT4bM0 esophageal cancer is controversial and varies internationally. This study aimed to describe treatment and survival of patients with cT4bM0 esophageal cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients staged with cT4bM0 esophageal cancer who were registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) were included. All patients were categorized by the treatment modality received. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival of them. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2020, 286 patients with cT4bM0 esophageal cancer were included. Treatment consisted of preoperative chemoradiotherapy/chemotherapy followed by surgery (8%), chemoradiotherapy alone (35%), chemotherapy alone (6%), radiotherapy alone (19%), and best supportive care (32%). The median follow-up was 28.1 months. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of each group were 82%, 58%, 49% for preoperative therapy plus surgery; 53%, 27%, 16% for chemoradiotherapy only; 13%, 0%, 0% for chemotherapy only; 13%, 0%, 0% for radiotherapy only; and 5%, 0%, 0% for best supportive care. CONCLUSION: In a selected group of patients, preoperative therapy followed by esophagectomy may lead to improved survival, which is comparable to patients with <cT4bM0 tumors. Therefore, reevaluation following chemo(radio)therapy is recommended in these patients to evaluate the possibility of additional surgical resection.

SOURCE beyond first-line: A survival prediction model for patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma after failure of first-line palliative systemic therapy.

Prior models have been developed to predict survival for patients with esophagogastric cancer undergoing curative treatment or first-line chemotherapy (SOURCE models). Comprehensive clinical prediction models for patients with esophagogastric cancer who will receive second-line chemotherapy or best supportive care are currently lacking. The aim of our study was to develop and internally validate a new clinical prediction model, called SOURCE beyond first-line, for survival of patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma after failure of first-line palliative systemic therapy. Patients with unresectable or metastatic esophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma (2015-2017) who received first-line systemic therapy (N = 1067) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient, tumor and treatment characteristics at primary diagnosis and at progression of disease were used to develop the model. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was developed through forward and backward selection using Akaike's Information Criterion. The model was internally validated through 10-fold cross-validations to assess performance. Model discrimination (C-index) and calibration (slope and intercept) were used to evaluate performance of the complete and cross-validated models. The final model consisted of 11 patient tumor and treatment characteristics. The C-index was 0.75 (0.73-0.78), calibration slope 1.01 (1.00-1.01) and calibration intercept 0.01 (0.01-0.02). Internal cross-validation of the model showed that the model performed adequately on unseen data: C-index was 0.79 (0.77-0.82), calibration slope 0.93 (0.85-1.01) and calibration intercept 0.02 (-0.01 to 0.06). The SOURCE beyond first-line model predicted survival with fair discriminatory ability and good calibration.

Conditional relative survival in nonmetastatic esophagogastric cancer between 2006 and 2020: A population-based study.

Conditional relative survival (CRS) is useful for communicating prognosis to patients as it provides an estimate of the life expectancy after having survived a certain time after treatment. Our study estimates the 3-year relative survival conditional on having survived a certain period for patients with esophageal or gastric cancer. Patients with nonmetastatic esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 treated with curative intent (resection with or without [neo]adjuvant therapy, or chemoradiotherapy) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. CRS was calculated since resection or last day of chemoradiotherapy. The probability of surviving an additional 3 years (ie, 3-year CRS), if the patients survived 1, 3 and 5 years after diagnosis was 62%, 79%, 87% and 69%, 84%, 90% for esophageal and gastric cancer, respectively. The 3-year CRS after having survived 3 years for patients with esophageal cancer who underwent a resection (n = 12 204) was 91%, 88%, 77% and 60% for pathological Stage 0, I, II and III, and for patients with esophageal cancer who received chemoradiotherapy (n = 4158) was 51% and 66% for clinical Stage II and III, respectively. The 3-year CRS after having survived 3 years for patients with gastric cancer who underwent a resection (n = 6531) was 99%, 90%, 73% and 59% for pathological Stage 0, I, II and III, respectively. Despite poor prognosis of patients with esophageal or gastric cancer, life expectancy increases substantially after patients have survived several years after treatment. Our study provides valuable information for communication of prognosis to patients during follow-up after treatment.

Trends in best-case, typical and worst-case survival scenarios of patients with non-metastatic esophagogastric cancer between 2006 and 2020: A population-based study.

New treatment options and centralization of surgery have improved survival for patients with non-metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. It is unknown, however, which patients benefitted the most from treatment advances. The aim of this study was to identify best-case, typical and worst-case scenarios in terms of survival time, and to assess if survival associated with these scenarios changed over time. Patients with non-metastatic potentially resectable esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Best-case (20th percentile), upper-typical (40th percentile), typical (median), lower-typical (60th percentile) and worst-case (80th percentile) survival scenarios were defined, and regression analysis was used to investigate the change in survival time for each scenario across years. For patients with esophageal cancer (N = 24 352) survival time improved on average 12.0 (until 2011), 1.5 (until 2018), 0.7, 0.4 and 0.2 months per year for the best-case, upper-typical, median, lower-typical and worst-case scenario, respectively. For patients with gastric cancer (N = 9993) survival time of the best-case scenario remained constant, whereas the upper-typical, median, lower-typical and worst-case scenario improved on average with 1.0 (until 2018), 0.5, 0.2 and 0.2 months per year, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that, survival scenarios improved for nearly all patients across treatment groups and for patients with squamous cell carcinomas or adenocarcinomas. Survival improved for almost all patients suggesting that in clinical practice the vast majority of patients benefitted from treatment advances. The clinically most meaningful survival advantage was observed for the best-case scenario of esophageal cancer.

Risk of Lymph Node Metastasis in T1b Gastric Cancer: An International Comprehensive Analysis from the Global Gastric Group (G3) Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to define criteria associated with low lymph node metastasis risk in patients with submucosal (pT1b) gastric cancer from 3 Western and 3 Eastern countries. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Accurate prediction of lymph node metastasis risk is essential when determining the need for gastrectomy with lymph node dissection following endoscopic resection. Under present guidelines, endoscopic resection is considered definitive treatment if submucosal invasion is only superficial, but this is not routinely assessed. METHODS: Lymph node metastasis rates were determined for patient groups defined according to tumor pathological characteristics. Clinicopathological predictors of lymph node metastasis were determined by multivariable logistic regression and used to develop a nomogram in a randomly selected subset that was validated in the remainder. Overall survival was compared between Eastern and Western countries. RESULTS: Lymph node metastasis was found in 701 of 3166 (22.1%) Eastern and 153 of 560 (27.3%) Western patients. Independent predictors of lymph node metastasis were female sex, tumor size, distal stomach location, lymphovascular invasion, and moderate or poor differentiation. Patients fulfilling the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline criteria, excluding the requirement that invasion not extend beyond the superficial submucosa, had a lymph node metastasis rate of 8.9% (53/594). Excluding moderately differentiated tumors lowered the rate to 3.4% (10/296). The nomogram's area under the curve was 0.690. Regardless of lymph node status, overall survival was better in Eastern patients. CONCLUSIONS: The lymph node metastasis rate was lowest in patients with well differentiated tumors that were ≤3 cm and lacked lymphovascular invasion. These criteria may be useful in decisions regarding endoscopic resection as definitive treatment for pT1b gastric cancer.

Gastrointestinal Symptoms After Resection of Esophagogastric Cancer: A Longitudinal Study on Their Incidence and Impact on Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This study assesses the incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms in the first year after resection of esophageal or gastric cancer and its association with health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functioning, work productivity, and daily activities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with esophageal or gastric cancer between 2015 and 2021, who underwent a resection, and completed ≥ 2 questionnaires from the time intervals prior to resection and 0-3, 3-6, 6-9, and 9-12 months after resection were included. Multivariable generalized linear mixed models were used to assess changes in gastrointestinal symptoms over time and the impact of the number of gastrointestinal symptoms on HRQoL, functioning, work productivity, and daily activities for patients who underwent an esophagectomy or gastrectomy separately. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 961 (78.8%) and 259 (21.2%) patients who underwent an esophagectomy and gastrectomy, respectively. For both groups, the majority of gastrointestinal symptoms changed significantly over time. Most clinically relevant differences were observed 0-3 after resection compared with prior to resection and included increased diarrhea, appetite loss, and eating restrictions, and specifically after esophagectomy dry mouth, trouble with coughing, and trouble talking. At 9-12 after resection one or more severe gastrointestinal symptoms were reported by 38.9% after esophagectomy and 33.7% after gastrectomy. A higher number of gastrointestinal symptoms was associated with poorer functioning, lower HRQoL, higher impairment in daily activities, and lower work productivity. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that gastrointestinal symptoms are frequently observed and burdensome after esophagectomy or gastrectomy, highlighting the importance to address these sequelae for high quality survivorship.

The influence of multidisciplinary team meetings on treatment decisions in advanced bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of specialised genitourinary multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) in decision-making and identify factors that influence the probability of receiving a treatment plan with curative intent for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data relating to patients with cT2-4aN0/X-1 M0 urothelial cell carcinoma, diagnosed between November 2017 and October 2019, were selected from the nationwide, population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry ('BlaZIB study'). Curative treatment options were defined as radical cystectomy (RC) with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, chemoradiation or brachytherapy. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association between MDTM factors and curative treatment advice and how this advice was followed. RESULTS: Of the 2321 patients, 2048 (88.2%) were discussed in a genitourinary MDTM. Advanced age (>80 years) and poorer World Health Organization performance status (score 1-2 vs 0) were associated with no discussion (P < 0.001). Being discussed was associated with undergoing treatment with curative intent (odds ratio [OR] 3.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-4.9), as was the involvement of a RC hospital (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.09-2.65). Involvement of an academic centre was associated with higher rates of bladder-sparing treatment (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.31-3.21). Patient preference was the main reason for non-adherence to treatment advice. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with MIBC, the probability of being discussed in a MDTM was associated with age, performance status and receiving treatment with curative intent, especially if a representative of a RC hospital was present. Future studies should focus on the impact of MDTM advice on survival data.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in older patients with gastric cancer undergoing surgery: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In trials evaluating perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer, which serve as the basis for treatment guidelines, patients are selected. The generalizability of these trial findings to older patients is uncertain. METHODS: This population-based retrospective cohort study compared the survival outcomes of patients ≥ 75 years with gastric adenocarcinoma treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2015 and 2019. Additionally, the percentage of patients < 75 years and ≥ 75 years who did not proceeded to surgery after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were examined. RESULTS: A total of 1995 patients, of whom 1249 aged < 75 years and 746 aged ≥ 75 years, were included. In the group of patients ≥ 75 years, 275 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 471 patients were directly scheduled for gastrectomy. Patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy differed significantly from one and another in characteristics. Overall survival of patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not significantly different (median 34.9 vs. 32.3 months; P = 0.506), also after adjusting for potential confounders (HR 0.87; P = 0.263). Of patients ≥ 75 years who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 43 (15.6%) did not proceed to surgery compared to 111 (8.9%) patients < 75 years (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without chemotherapy were highly selected, and overall survival was not significantly different between both groups. Nonetheless, the proportion of patients who did not proceed to surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was higher in patients ≥ 75 years compared to patients < 75 years. Therefore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered with more caution in patients ≥ 75 years, while identifying those who may benefit.

Long-term health-related quality of life in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer receiving first-line systemic therapy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of systemic therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer in daily clinical practice. This study assessed the HRQoL of patients with esophagogastric cancer during first-line systemic therapy, at disease progression, and after progression in a real-world context. METHODS: Patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer (2014-2021) receiving first-line systemic therapy registered in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Oesophageal-gastric cancer (POCOP) were included (n = 335). HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25. Outcomes of mixed-effects models were presented as adjusted mean changes. RESULTS: Results of the mixed-effect models showed the largest significant improvements during systemic therapy for odynophagia (- 18.9, p < 0.001), anxiety (- 18.7, p < 0.001), and dysphagia (- 13.8, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. After progression, global health status (- 6.3, p = 0.002) and cognitive (- 6.2, p = 0.001) and social functioning (- 9.7, p < 0.001) significantly worsened. At and after progression, physical (- 9.0, p < 0.001 and - 8.8, p < 0.001) and role functioning (- 15.2, p = 0.003 and - 14.7, p < 0.001) worsened, respectively. Trouble with taste worsened during systemic therapy (11.5, p < 0.001), at progression (12.0, p = 0.004), and after progression (15.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In general, HRQoL outcomes in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer improved during first-line therapy. Deterioration in outcomes was mainly observed at and after progression. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Identification of HRQoL aspects is important in shared decision-making and to inform patients on the impact of systemic therapy on their HRQoL.

Endoscopic therapy replaces surgery for clinical T1 oesophageal cancer in the Netherlands: a nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection for early oesophageal cancer was introduced around 2000 in the Netherlands. The scientific question was how the treatment and survival of early oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer has changed over time in the Netherlands. METHODS: Data were obtained from the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. All patients diagnosed with clinical in situ or T1 oesophageal or GOJ cancer without lymph node or distance metastasis during the study period (2000-2014) were extracted. Primary outcome parameters were the trends in treatment modalities over time and relative survival of each treatment regime. RESULTS: A total of 1020 patients were diagnosed with a clinical in situ or T1 oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer without lymph node or distance metastasis. The proportion of patients who received endoscopic treatment increased from 2.5% in 2000 to 58.1% in 2014. During the same period the proportion of patients who received surgery decreased from 57.5 to 23.1%. Five-year relative survival of all patients was 69%. Five-year relative survival after endoscopic therapy was 83% and after surgery 80%. Relative excess risk analyses showed no significant difference in survival between patients in the endoscopic therapy group and patients in the surgery group after adjustment for age, sex, clinical TNM classification, morphology and tumour location (RER 1.15; CI 0.76-1.75; p 0.76). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate an increase in endoscopic treatment and a decrease of surgical treatment for in situ and T1 oesophageal/GOJ cancer between 2000-2014 in the Netherlands. The relative 5-year survival after endoscopic treatment is high (83%) and comparable with surgery (80%).

The association between postoperative complications and long-term survival after esophagectomy: a multicenter cohort study.

Conflicting results are reported on the association between post-esophagectomy complications and long-term survival. This multicenter study assesses the association between complications after an esophagectomy and long-term overall survival. Five Dutch high-volume centers collected data from consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy between 2010 and 2016 and merged these with long-term survival data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Exclusion criteria were non-curative resections and 90-day mortality, among others. Primary outcome was overall survival related to the presence of a postoperative complication in general. Secondary outcomes analyzed the presence of anastomotic leakage and cardiopulmonary complications. Propensity score matching was performed and the outcomes were analyzed via Log-Rank test and Kaplan Meier analysis. Among the 1225 patients included, a complicated course occurred in 719 patients (59.0%). After matching for baseline characteristics, 455 pairs were successfully balanced. Patients with an uncomplicated postoperative course had a 5-year overall survival of 51.7% versus 44.4% in patients with complications (P = 0.011). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 18.4% (n = 226), and in 208 matched pairs, it was shown that the 5-year overall survival was 57.2% in patients without anastomotic leakage versus 44.0% in patients with anastomotic leakage (P = 0.005). Overall cardiopulmonary complication rate was 37.1% (n = 454), and in 363 matched pairs, the 5-year overall survival was 52.1% in patients without cardiopulmonary complications versus 45.3% in patients with cardiopulmonary complications (P = 0.019). Overall postoperative complication rate, anastomotic leakage, and cardiopulmonary complications were associated with a decreased long-term survival after an esophagectomy. Efforts to reduce complications might further improve the overall survival for patients treated for esophageal carcinoma.

Treatment patterns and survival in advanced unresectable esophageal squamous cell cancer: A population-based study.

Data on treatment and survival of patients with advanced unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from Western populations are limited. Here we describe treatment and survival in patients with advanced unresectable ESCC: patients with cT4b disease without metastases (cT4b), metastases limited to the supraclavicular lymph nodes (SCLNM) or distant metastatic ESCC at the population level. All patients with unresectable (cT4b) or synchronous metastatic ESCC at primary diagnosis (2015-2018) or patients with metachronous metastases after primary non-metastatic diagnosis in 2015-2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Fifteen percent of patients had cT4b disease (n = 146), 12% SCLNM (n = 118) and 72% distant metastases (n = 681). Median overall survival (OS) time was 6.3, 11.2, and 4.4 months in patients with cT4b, SCLNM, and distant metastases, respectively (P < .001). Multivariable Cox regression showed that patients with cT4b (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-1.99) and patients with distant metastases (hazard ratio 1.42, 95% CI 1.12-1.80) had a worse survival time compared with patients with SCLNM. Among patients who received chemoradiotherapy and/or underwent resection (primary tumor and/or metastases), median OS was 11.9, 16.1, and 14.0 months in patients with cT4b, SCLNM, and distant metastases, respectively (P = .76). Patients with SCLNM had a better survival time compared with patients with cT4b and patients with distant metastases. Survival of patients with advanced unresectable ESCC in clinical practice was poor, even in patients treated with curative intent.

Long-term Survival After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Nationwide Propensity-score Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare long-term survival following MIE versus OE for esophageal cancer using a nationwide propensity-score matched cohort. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: MIE provides lower postoperative morbidity and mortality, and similar short-term oncological quality compared to OE. METHODS: Data was acquired from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. Patients undergoing minimally invasive or open, transthoracic or transhiatal esophagectomy for primary esophageal cancer between 2011 and 2015 were included. A propensity-score matching analysis for MIE versus OE was performed separately for transthoracic and transhiatal esoph-agectomies. RESULTS: A total of 1036 transthoracic MIE and OE patients, and 582 transhiatal MIE and OE patients were matched. Long-term survival was comparable for MIE and OE for both transthoracic and transhiatal procedures (5-year overall survival: transthoracic MIE 49.2% vs OE 51.1%, P 0.695; transhiatal MIE 48.4% vs OE 50.7%, P 0.832). For both procedures, MIE yielded more lymph nodes (transthoracic median 21 vs 18, P < 0.001; transhiatal 15 vs 13, P 0.007). Postoperative morbidity was comparable after transthoracic MIE and OE (60.8% vs 64.9%, P 0.177), with a reduced length of stay after transthoracic MIE (median 12 vs 15 days, P < 0.001). After transhiatal MIE, more postoperative complications (64.9% vs 56.4%, P 0.034) were observed, without subsequent difference in length of stay. CONCLUSION: Long-term survival after MIE was equivalent to open in both propensity-score matched cohorts of patients undergoing transthoracic or transhiatal esophageal resections. Transhiatal MIE was accompanied withmore postoperative morbidity. Both transthoracic and transhiatal MIE resulted in a more extended lymphadenectomy.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes After Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage: A Retrospective Dutch Population-based Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the impact of anastomotic leak (AL) after colon cancer (CC) and rectal cancer (RC) surgery on 5-year relative survival, disease-free survival (DFS), and disease recurrence. BACKGROUND: AL after CC and RC resection is a severe postoperative complication with conflicting evidence whether it deteriorates long-term outcomes. METHODS: Patients with stage I to IV CC and RC who underwent resection with primary anastomosis were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2008-2018). Relative survival, measured from day of resection, and multivariable relative excess risks (RERs) were analyzed. DFS and recurrence were evaluated in a subset with stage I to III patients operated in 2015. All analyses were performed with patients who survived 90 days postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 65,299 CC and 22,855 RC patients were included. Five-year relative survival after CC resection with and without AL was 95% versus 100%, 89% versus 94%, 66% versus 76%, and 28% versus 25% for stage I to IV disease. AL was associated with a significantly higher RER for death in stage II and III CC patients. Stage-specific 5-year relative survival in RC patients with and without AL was 97% versus 101%, 90% versus 95%, 74% versus 83%, and 32% versus 41%. AL was associated with a significantly higher RER for death in stage III and IV RC patients. DFS was significantly lower in CC patients with AL, but disease recurrence was not associated with AL after colorectal cancer resection. CONCLUSION: AL has a stage-dependent negative impact on survival in both CC and RC, but no independent association with disease recurrence.

Population-based study of treatment and outcome of recurrent oesophageal or junctional cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction have a high risk of recurrence after treatment with curative intent. The aim of this study was to analyse the site of recurrence, treatment, and survival in patients with recurrent disease. METHODS: Patients with non-metastatic oesophageal or junctional carcinoma treated with curative intent between January 2015 and December 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Data on recurrence were collected in the second half of 2019. Overall survival (OS) was assessed by Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: In total, 862 of 1909 patients (45.2 per cent) for whom information on follow-up was available had disease recurrence, and 858 patients were included. Some 161 of 858 patients (18.8 per cent) had locoregional recurrence only, 415 (48.4 per cent) had distant recurrence only, and 282 (32.9 per cent) had combined locoregional and distant recurrence. In all, 518 of 858 patients (60.4 per cent) received best supportive care only and 315 (39.6 per cent) underwent tumour-directed therapy. Patients with locoregional recurrence alone more often received chemoradiotherapy than those with distant or combined locoregional and distant recurrence (19.3 per cent versus 0.7 and 2.8 per cent), and less often received systemic therapy (11.2 per cent versus 30.1 and 35.8 per cent). Median OS was 7.6, 4.2, and 3.3 months for patients with locoregional, distant, and combined locoregional and distant recurrence respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Disease recurred after curative treatment in 45.2 per cent of patients. Locoregional recurrence developed in only 18.8 per cent. The vast majority of patients presented with distant or combined locoregional and distant recurrence, and received best supportive care.

Gastric cancer incidence and mortality trends 2007-2016 in three European countries.

BACKGROUND : Increased awareness of gastric cancer risk, easy access to upper endoscopy, and high definition endoscopes with virtual chromoendoscopy may have led to the increase in early diagnosis of gastric cancer observed in recent years in Europe, which may be associated with improved survival. Currently, no data exist on the impact of early diagnosis on survival at a populational level in Europe. Our aim was to assess gastric cancer incidence, early diagnosis, and survival in northwestern and southern European countries with a low-to-moderate incidence of gastric cancer. METHODS : Data on 41 138 gastric cancers diagnosed in 2007-2016 were retrieved from national cancer registries of Belgium, the Netherlands, and northern Portugal. Age-standardized incidence and mortality rates were assessed and expressed per 100 000 person-years. Early diagnosis was defined as T1 tumors. Net survival estimates for 2007-2011 vs. 2012-2016 were compared. RESULTS : Age-standardized incidence and mortality decreased over time in Belgium, northern Portugal, and the Netherlands (relative incidence decrease 8.6 %, 4.5 %, and 46.8 %, respectively; relative mortality decrease 22.0 %, 30.9 %, and 50.0 %, respectively). Early gastric cancer diagnosis increased over time for all countries. Net 1-year survival improved significantly between the two time periods in all countries, and at 5 years in Belgium and Portugal. CONCLUSIONS : This is the first study comparing trends (2007-2016) in gastric cancer incidence and mortality in some European countries. We found an increasing proportion of T1 gastric cancers and a decrease in age-standardized mortality over time, supporting the use of secondary prevention strategies.

Beyond Median Overall Survival: Estimating Trends for Multiple Survival Scenarios in Patients With Metastatic Esophagogastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, clinical trials have shown improved survival of patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. The number of patients participating in clinical trials is limited, and survival improvements observed from clinical trials are unrepresentative for the full population. The aim of our study was to assess trends in survival for the best-case, typical, and worst-case scenarios in patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. METHODS: We selected patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Survival was calculated for different percentiles of the survival curve for each incidence year (eg, the 10th percentile [p10] represents the top 10% of patients with the best survival): p10 (best-case), p25 (upper-typical), p50 (median), p75 (lower-typical), and p90 (worst-case). Weighted linear regression analyses were performed to test whether changes in survival were significant. RESULTS: The overall median survival between 2006 and 2020 remained unchanged for patients with esophageal cancer (n=10,448; from 5.2 to 5.2 months, respectively; P=.06) and improved for patients with gastric cancer (n=10,512; from 3.5 to 4.3 months, respectively; P=.001). For patients with esophageal cancer, survival for the best-case scenario (p10; best 10% of patients) significantly improved from 17.2 to 21.0 months (P=.006). For patients with gastric cancer, survival significantly improved for the best-case scenario (p10) from 15.9 to 23.5 months (P<.001) and the upper-typical scenario (p25) scenario improved from 7.9 to 9.9 months (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant survival improvements in clinical trials, survival improvements were not observed for the majority of patients treated in daily clinical practice. An increase in survival was only observed for patients with the best prognosis.