Doublet chemotherapy, triplet chemotherapy, or doublet chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer (JCOG1109 NExT): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). However, the prognosis remains poor and more intensive neoadjuvant treatment might be needed to improve patient outcomes. We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant doublet chemotherapy, triplet chemotherapy, and doublet chemotherapy plus radiotherapy in patients with previously untreated locally advanced OSCC. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients aged 20-75 years with previously untreated locally advanced OSCC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were recruited from 44 centres across Japan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally via a web-based system to receive neoadjuvant doublet chemotherapy (two courses of fluorouracil [800 mg/m2 per day intravenously on days 1-5] and cisplatin [80 mg/m2 per day on day 1] separated by an interval of 3 weeks [NeoCF]), triplet chemotherapy (three courses of fluorouracil [750 mg/m2 per day on days 1-5], cisplatin [70 mg/m2 per day on day 1], and docetaxel [70 mg/m2 per day on day 1] repeated every 3 weeks [NeoCF+D]), or doublet chemotherapy (two courses of fluorouracil [1000 mg/m2 per day on days 1-4] and cisplatin [75 mg/m2 per day on day 1] separated by an interval of 4 weeks) plus 41·4 Gy radiotherapy [NeoCF+RT]) followed by oesophagectomy with regional lymph node dissection. Randomisation was stratified by T stage and institution. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were not masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Analysis of safety included all patients who received at least one course of chemotherapy, and analysis of surgical complications included those who also underwent surgery. This study is registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCTs031180202, and the trial is complete. FINDINGS: A total of 601 patients (529 male individuals and 72 female individuals) were randomly assigned between Dec 5, 2012, and July 20, 2018, with 199 patients in the NeoCF group, 202 patients in the NeoCF+D group, and 200 patients in the NeoCF+RT group. Compared with the NeoCF group, during a median follow-up period of 50·7 months (IQR 23·8-70·7), the 3-year overall survival rate was significantly higher in the NeoCF+D group (72·1% [95% CI 65·4-77·8] vs 62·6% [55·5-68·9]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·68, 95% CI 0·50-0·92; p=0·006) but not in the NeoCF+RT group (68·3% [61·3-74·3]; HR 0·84, 0·63-1·12; p=0·12). Grade 3 or higher febrile neutropenia occurred in two (1%) of 193 patients in the NeoCF group, 32 (16%) of 196 patients in the NeoCF+D group, and nine (5%) of 191 patients in the NeoCF+RT group. Treatment-related adverse events leading to termination of neoadjuvant therapy were more common in the NeoCF+D group (18 [9%] of 202 participants) than in the NeoCF+RT group (12 [6%] of 200) and NeoCF group (eight [4%] of 199). There were three (2%) treatment-related deaths during neoadjuvant therapy in the NeoCF group, four (2%) deaths in the NeoCF+D group, and two (1%) deaths in the NeoCF+RT group. Grade 2 or higher postoperative pneumonia, anastomotic leak, and recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis were reported in 19 (10%), 19 (10%), and 28 (15%) of 185 patients, respectively, in the NeoCF group; 18 (10%), 16 (9%), and 19 (10%) of 183 patients, respectively, in the NeoCF+D group; and 23 (13%), 23 (13%), and 17 (10%) of 178 patients, respectively, in the NeoCF+RT group. The in-hospital deaths following surgery included three deaths in the NeoCF group, two deaths in the NeoCF+D group, and one in the NeoCF+RT group. INTERPRETATION: Neoadjuvant triplet chemotherapy followed by oesophagectomy resulted in a statistically significant overall survival benefit compared with doublet chemotherapy and might be the new standard of care for locally advanced OSCC who are in good condition in Japan. Neoadjuvant doublet chemotherapy plus radiotherapy did not show significant improvement of survival compared with doublet chemotherapy. FUNDING: Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development and National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund.

Applying Untargeted Lipidomics to Evaluate the Efficacy of Combined Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Immunotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Carcinoma Treatment.

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is an aggressive malignant tumor with a poor prognosis due to insidious symptoms that make early diagnosis difficult. Despite the combination of multiple treatment modalities, the recurrence and mortality rates of ESCC remain high. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy is an emerging treatment modality that improves the prognosis of patients with ESCC. However, owing to the presence of hyperprogression and pseudoprogression, the currently used methods cannot accurately evaluate the efficacy of this therapy in patients, thus creating an evaluation bias and depriving these patients of the opportunity to benefit. We used untargeted lipidomics to identify the differences in lipid composition between cancer specimens and normal tissue specimens in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with the immunotherapy group and the surgery-alone group of esophageal cancer patients and constructed a prediction model based on sphingomyelin 12:1;2O/30:0 and triglyceride (TG) 60:3 | TG 18:0_24:1_18 using a machine learning approach, which helps to better evaluate the neoadjuvant efficacy of combination therapy and better guide the treatment of ESCC.

Cancer-related fatigue trajectories up to 5 years after curative treatment for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Whether cancer-related fatigue develops differently after curative-intended oesophageal cancer treatment and the related modifiable factors are unclear. METHODS: This population-based and longitudinal cohort included 409 oesophageal cancer patients who underwent curative oesophagectomy in 2013-2020 in Sweden. The main outcome was cancer-related fatigue trajectories with measurements at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4 and 5 years postoperatively by validated EORTC QLQ-FA12 questionnaire, and analysed using growth mixture models. Weighted logistic regressions provided odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for underlying sociodemographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcome factors in relation to the identified trajectories. RESULTS: Two distinct overall cancer-related fatigue trajectories were identified: low level of persistent fatigue and high level of increasing fatigue, with 64% and 36% of patients, respectively. The odds of having high level of fatigue trajectory were increased by Charlson comorbidity index (≥ 2 versus 0: OR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.07-5.94), pathological tumour Stage (III-IV versus 0-I: OR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.33-4.77), anxiety (OR = 7.58, 95% CI 2.20-26.17), depression (OR = 15.90, 95% CI 4.44-56.93) and pain (continuous score: OR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term trajectories with high level of increasing cancer-related fatigue and the associated modifiable factors were identified after oesophageal cancer treatment. The results may facilitate early identification and targeted intervention for such high-risk patients.

Short-term Outcomes of Different Techniques for Gastric Ischemic Preconditioning Before Esophagectomy: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ischemia at the anastomotic site plays a critical role determinant in the development of anastomosis-related complications after esophagectomy. Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) before esophagectomy has been described to improve the vascular perfusion at the tip of the gastric conduit with a potential effect on anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS) risk minimization. Laparoscopic (LapGIC) and angioembolization (AngioGIC) techniques have been reported. PURPOSE: Compare short-term outcomes among different GIC techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. One-step esophagectomy (noGIC), LapGIC, and AngioGIC were compared. Primary outcomes were AL, AS, and gastric conduit necrosis (GCN). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were used to assess relative inference. RESULTS: Overall, 1760 patients (14 studies) were included. Of those, 1028 patients (58.4%) underwent noGIC, 593 (33.6%) LapGIC, and 139 (8%) AngioGIC. AL was reduced for LapGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.68; 95% CrI 0.47-0.98) and AngioGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.52; 95% CrI 0.31-0.93). Similarly, AS was reduced for LapGIC versus noGIC (RR=0.32; 95% CrI 0.12-0.68) and AngioGIC versus noGIC (RR=1.30; 95% CrI 0.65-2.46). The indirect comparison, assessed with the network methodology, did not show any differences for LapGIC versus AngioGIC in terms of postoperative AL and AS risk. No differences were found for GCN, pulmonary complications, overall complications, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality among different treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to noGIC, both LapGIC and AngioGIC before esophagectomy seem equivalent and associated with a reduced risk for postoperative AL and AS.

Early Interventional Treatment of High Output Chyle Leak After Esophagectomy is Associated With Improved Survival.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate overall survival and length of stay (LOS) associated with differing management for high output (>1 L over 24 hours) leaks (HOCL) after cancer-related esophagectomy. BACKGROUND: Although infrequent, chyle leak after esophagectomy is an event that can lead to significant perioperative sequelae. Low-volume leaks appear to respond to nonoperative measures, whereas HOCLs often require invasive therapeutic interventions. METHODS: From a prospective single-institution database, we retrospectively reviewed patients treated from 2001 to 2021 who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Within that cohort, we focused on a subgroup of patients who manifested a HOCL postoperatively. Clinicopathologic and operative characteristics were collected, including hospital LOS and survival data. RESULTS: A total of 53/2299 patients manifested a HOCL. These were mostly males (77%), with a mean age of 62 years. Of this group, 15 patients received nonoperative management, 15 patients received prompt (<72 hours from diagnosis) interventional management, and 23 received late interventional management. Patients in the late intervention group had longer LOSs compared with early intervention (slope = 9.849, 95% CI: 3.431-16.267). Late intervention (hazard ratio: 4.772, CI: 1.384-16.460) and nonoperative management (hazard ratio: 4.731, CI: 1.294-17.305) were associated with increased mortality compared with early intervention. Patients with early intervention for HOCL had an overall survival similar to patients without chyle leaks in survival analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HOCL should receive early intervention to possibly reverse the prognostic implications of this potentially detrimental complication.

Recurrence and Survival After Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Ensure Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of operative approach [open (OE), hybrid minimally invasive (HMIE), and total minimally invasive (TMIE) esophagectomy] on operative and oncologic outcomes for patients treated with curative intent for esophageal and junctional cancer. BACKGROUND: The optimum oncologic surgical approach to esophageal and junctional cancer is unclear. METHODS: This secondary analysis of the European multicenter ENSURE study includes patients undergoing curative-intent esophagectomy for cancer between 2009 and 2015 across 20 high-volume centers. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and the incidence and location of disease recurrence. Secondary endpoints included among others R0 resection rate, lymph node yield, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 3199 patients were included. Of these, 55% underwent OE, 17% HMIE, and 29% TMIE. DFS was independently increased post-TMIE [hazard ratio (HR): 0.86 (95% CI: 0.76-0.98), P = 0.022] compared with OE. Multivariable regression demonstrated no difference in absolute locoregional recurrence risk according to the operative approach [HMIE vs OE, odds ratio (OR): 0.79, P = 0.257; TMIE vs OE, OR: 0.84, P = 0.243]. The probability of systemic recurrence was independently increased post-HMIE (OR: 2.07, P = 0.031), but not TMIE (OR: 0.86, P = 0.508). R0 resection rates ( P = 0.005) and nodal yield ( P < 0.001) were independently increased after TMIE, but not HMIE ( P = 0.424; P = 0.512) compared with OE. OS was independently improved following both HMIE (HR: 0.79, P = 0.009) and TMIE (HR: 0.82, P = 0.003) as compared with OE. CONCLUSION: In this European multicenter study, TMIE was associated with improved surgical quality and DFS, whereas both TMIE and HMIE were associated with improved OS as compared with OE for esophageal cancer.

Antimicrobial Prophylaxis With Ampicillin-sulbactam Compared With Cefazolin for Esophagectomy: Nationwide Inpatient Database Study in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of antimicrobial prophylaxis with ampicillin-sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) compared with cefazolin (CEZ) on the short-term outcomes after esophagectomy. BACKGROUND: CEZ is widely used for antimicrobial prophylaxis in esophagectomy without procedure-specific evidence, whereas ABPC/SBT is preferred in some hospitals to target both aerobic and anaerobic oral bacteria. METHODS: Data of patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer between July 2010 and March 2019 were extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. Overlap propensity score weighting was conducted to compare the short-term outcomes [including surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and respiratory failure] between antimicrobial prophylaxis with CEZ and ABPC/SBT after adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were also performed using propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses. RESULTS: Among 17,772 eligible patients, 16,077 (90.5%) and 1695 (9.5%) patients were administered CEZ and ABPC/SBT, respectively. SSI, anastomotic leakage, and respiratory failure occurred in 2971 (16.7%), 2604 (14.7%), and 2754 patients (15.5%), respectively. After overlap weighting, ABPC/SBT was significantly associated with a reduction in SSI [odds ratio 0.51 (95% CI: 0.43-0.60)], anastomotic leakage [0.51 (0.43-0.61)], and respiratory failure [0.66 (0.57-0.77)]. ABPC/SBT was also associated with reduced respiratory complications, postoperative length of stay, and total hospitalization costs. The proportion of Clostridioides difficile colitis and noninfectious complications did not differ between the groups. Propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated equivalent results. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of ABPC/SBT as antimicrobial prophylaxis for esophagectomy was associated with better short-term postoperative outcomes compared with CEZ.

Impact of the interval between neoadjuvant immunotherapy and surgery on prognosis in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): a real-world study.

BACKGROUND: The time interval between neoadjuvant immunotherapy and surgery is 6 weeks for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but whether delayed surgery affects prognosis remains unclear. METHODS: Clinical data of locally advanced ESCC who underwent neoadjuvant immunotherapy followed by esophagectomy from November 2019 to December 2022 were collected. The surgery outcomes and prognosis were compared between short-interval (time to surgery ≤ 6 weeks) and long-interval groups (time to surgery > 6 weeks). RESULTS: 152 patients were enrolled totally, with a ratio of 91:61 between short-interval and long-interval groups. The rate of pathological complete response in the short-interval and long-interval groups were 34.1% and 24.6% (P = 0.257). Delayed surgery did not have a significantly impact on the number of lymph node dissections (P = 0.133), operative duration (P = 0.689), blood loss (P = 0.837), hospitalization duration (P = 0.293), chest drainage duration (P = 0.886) and postoperative complications (P > 0.050). The 3-year Overall survival (OS) rates were 85.10% in the short-interval group, and 82.07% in the long-interval group (P = 0.435). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 83.41% and 70.86% in the two groups (P = 0.037). Subgroup analysis revealed that patients with a favorable response to immunotherapy (tumor regression grade 0) exhibited inferior 3-year OS (long-interval vs. short-interval: 51.85% vs. 91.08%, P = 0.035) and DFS (long-interval vs. short-interval: 47.40% vs. 91.08%, P = 0.014) in the long-interval group. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed surgery after neoadjuvant immunotherapy does not further improve pathological response; instead, it resulted in a poorer DFS. Especially for patients with a favorable response to immunotherapy, delayed surgery increases the risk of mortality and recurrence.

Dynamic radiological features predict pathological response after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) plus esophagectomy has emerged as a promising treatment option for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESCC). Pathologic complete response (pCR) is a key indicator associated with great efficacy and overall survival (OS). However, there are insufficient indicators for the reliable assessment of pCR. METHODS: 192 patients with LA-ESCC treated with NICT from December 2019 to October 2023 were recruited. According to pCR status, patients were categorized into pCR group (22.92%) and non-pCR group (77.08%). Radiological features of pretreatment and preoperative CT images were extracted. Logistic and COX regressions were trained to predict pathological response and prognosis, respectively. RESULTS: Four of the selected radiological features were combined to construct an ESCC preoperative imaging score (ECPI-Score). Logistic models revealed independent associations of ECPI-Score and vascular sign with pCR, with AUC of 0.918 in the training set and 0.862 in the validation set, respectively. After grouping by ECPI-Score, a higher proportion of pCR was observed among the high-ECPI group and negative vascular sign. Kaplan Meier analysis demonstrated that recurrence-free survival (RFS) with negative vascular sign was significantly better than those with positive (P = 0.038), but not for OS (P = 0.310). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates dynamic radiological features are independent predictors of pCR for LA-ESCC treated with NICT. It will guide clinicians to make accurate treatment plans.

Defining Volume Targets for Regionalization of Pancreaticoduodenectomy, Esophagectomy, and Major Lung Resection Centers to Improve Oncologic and Surgical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Performance of complex cancer surgeries at high-volume (HV) centers has been shown to reduce operative mortality. However, the case volume threshold that should be used to define HV centers is unknown. In this study, we determined thresholds to define HV pancreaticoduodenectomy, esophagectomy, and major lung resection centers based on clinical parameters. Then, we assessed the association of hospital volume with oncologic outcomes and overall survival. METHODS: We identified adult NCDB patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, esophagectomy, and major lung resections between 2004 and 2015. Multivariable models with restricted cubic splines were built to predict 5-year overall survival for each surgery group according to average yearly case volume, adjusting for demographic and clinicopathologic factors. The change point procedure was then used to identify volume cut-points for each surgery type. RESULTS: We identified the following thresholds to define HV status: 25 cases/year for pancreaticoduodenectomy; 18 cases/year for esophagectomy; and 54 cases/year for major lung resections. For all surgery types, treatment at a HV center was associated with an increased likelihood of R0 resection and adequate lymph node evaluation. HV centers had significantly decreased 30- and 90-day, postoperative mortality after adjusting for age, sex, race, comorbidities, histology, and stage. An overall survival benefit also was observed for patients undergoing resections at HV centers. CONCLUSIONS: Using novel methodology, our study identified volume thresholds for HV pancreaticoduodenectomy, esophagectomy, and major lung resection centers that were associated with improved oncologic outcomes and overall survival. These definitions of HV centers should be considered when evaluating regionalization of complex cancer care.

Prognostic Factors and Outcomes in Elderly Esophagectomy Patients with Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Choosing the appropriate treatment for elderly patients with esophageal cancer remains a contentious issue. While surgery is still a valid option, we aimed to identify predictors and outcomes in elderly esophagectomy patients with esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed characteristics, surgical outcomes, survival rates, cause-specific mortality, and recurrence in 120 patients with stage I-IV esophageal cancer. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors for event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 31 months, with 5-year overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) rates standing at 45.2% and 41.5%, respectively. Notably, lower body mass index (BMI ≤ 22 kg/m2) and reduced preoperative albumin levels (pre-ALB < 40 g/L) led to a significant decrease in OS rates. Postoperative pulmonary complications resulted in higher in-hospital and 90-day mortality rates. After about 31 months post-surgery, the rate of cancer-specific deaths stabilized. The most common sites for distant metastasis were the lungs, supraclavicular lymph nodes, liver, and bone. The study identified lower BMI, lower pre-ALB levels, and postoperative pulmonary complications as independent risk factors for poorer EFS and OS outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Esophagectomy remains a safe and feasible treatment for elderly patients, though the prevention of postoperative pulmonary infection is crucial. Factors such as lower BMI, lower pre-ALB levels, advanced tumor stage, postoperative pulmonary complications, and certain treatment modalities significantly influence the outcomes in elderly esophagectomy patients. These findings provide critical insights into the characteristics and outcomes of this patient population.

Prediction of Morbidity and Mortality After Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has a complication rate of up to 60%. Prediction models could be helpful to preoperatively estimate which patients are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the best prediction models for morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy and to identify commonalities among the models. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , study ID CRD42022350846). Pubmed, Embase, and Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection were searched for studies published between 2010 and August 2022. The Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Extracted data were tabulated and a narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Of the 15,011 articles identified, 22 studies were included using data from tens of thousands of patients. This systematic review included 33 different models, of which 18 models were newly developed. Many studies showed a high risk of bias. The prognostic accuracy of models differed between 0.51 and 0.85. For most models, variables are readily available. Two models for mortality and one model for pulmonary complications have the potential to be developed further. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of rigorous prediction models is limited. Several models are promising but need to be further developed. Some models provide information about risk factors for the development of complications. Performance status is a potential modifiable risk factor. None are ready for clinical implementation.

Enhanced Recovery Protocol Versus Conventional Care in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy for Cancer: Advantages in Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol and conventional care in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer, which have not previously been compared. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study included prospective PRO data from August 2019 to June 2021. Clinical outcomes included perioperative complications and postoperative length of stay (PLOS). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed by using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 (QLQ-C30) and esophagus-specific module (QLQ-OES18) preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively. Mixed-effects models were used to longitudinally compare quality of life (QOL) scores between the two modes. RESULTS: Patients undergoing conventional care and ERAS were analyzed (n = 348 and 109, respectively). The ERAS group had fewer overall complications, pneumonia, arrhythmia, and a shorter PLOS than the conventional group, and outperformed the conventional group in five functional QLQ-C30 domains and five symptom QLQ-OES18 domains, including less dysphagia (p < 0.0001), trouble talking (p = 0.0006), and better eating (p < 0.0001). These advantages persisted for 3 months postoperatively. For the cervical circular stapled anastomosis, the initial domains and duration of benefit were reduced in the ERAS group. CONCLUSIONS: The ERAS protocol has significant advantages over conventional care in terms of clinical outcomes, lowering postoperative symptom burden, and improving functional QOL in patients who have undergone esophagectomy. Selection of the optimal technique for cervical anastomosis is a key operative component of ERAS that maintains the symptom domains and duration of the advantages of PROs.

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Near-Infrared Fluorescent Imaging-Guided Mediastinal Lymphadenectomy and Conventional Surgery for Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of using near-infrared fluorescent imaging (NIRF) imaging with indocyanine green as an intraoperative tool for achieving complete mediastinal lymph node (LN) resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between September 2019 and July 2021, patients with potential for esophagectomy due to middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer were enrolled in this study. All patients were scheduled for NIRF-guided mediastinal lymphadenectomy during esophageal cancer surgery and were appropriately assigned to the NIRF group. Patients who underwent esophagectomy between September 2017 and September 2019 were assigned to the historical control group upon satisfying the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Surgical outcomes and the number of removed LNs were compared between the two groups using 1:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of 67 eligible patients, 59 patients were included in the NIRF group after postsurgical exclusions. The operative time was significantly shorter in the NIRF group than in the historical control group [180 (140-420) min versus 202 (137-338) min; P < 0.001]. The incidence of postoperative chylothorax and hoarseness were significantly lower in the NIRF group than in the historical control group (0% versus 10.2 %; P = 0.036, 3.4% versus 13.6%; P = 0.047). The number of dissected total LNs, mediastinal LNs, and negative LNs was significantly larger in the NIRF group than in the historical control group. The number of overall metastatic LNs and abdominal LNs was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: NIRF imaging can assist in the thorough and complete mediastinal LNs dissections without increasing complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Provides Better Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Than Open Esophagectomy in Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been increasingly performed for locally advanced esophageal cancer in place of open transthoracic esophagectomy (OE). This study explored the significance of MIE for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), focusing mainly on the depth of primary esophageal tumors. METHODS: This study retrospectively assessed short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy for ESCC from 2005 through 2021. The inverse probability of the treatment-weighting (IPTW) method was used to compare the outcomes between OE and MIE. The outcomes also were evaluated in the subgroups stratified by cT category. RESULTS: Among 1117 patients, 447 (40%) underwent OE and 670 (60%) underwent MIE. After IPTW adjustment, the incidence of any postoperative complications was significantly higher in the OE group than in the MIE group (60.8% vs 53.7%; p = 0.032), whereas the R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the MIE group (98.6% vs 92.7%; p < 0.001). The MIE group showed better 3 year overall and cancer-specific survival than the OE group (p < 0.001). The incidence of locoregional recurrence within the surgical field was significantly more frequent in the OE group (p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis stratified by cT category, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher and the incidence of locoregional recurrence was lower in the MIE group among the patients with cT3-4 tumors. In the patients with cT1-2 tumors, MIE showed no significant benefit over OE. CONCLUSIONS: For the patients with cT3-4 tumors, MIE showed fewer postoperative complications, better locoregional control, and better prognosis than OE. Compared with OE, MIE is beneficial, especially for locally advanced ESCC.

Patients' Preferences Towards Decision Counseling for Active Surveillance After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Decision counseling (DC) is offered to enable patients to reflect on their treatment preferences and to think through the consequences of alternative treatment options. However, the timing of DC is debatable. In this study, patients who underwent DC at different times were interviewed about their experiences, specifically focusing on the timing of DC. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer eligible for participation in a prospective cohort study on active surveillance (SANO-2 study) were offered DC either before or after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Structured interviews were conducted by phone 1 week after DC, and responses were analyzed using frequency counts for the answers to set response categories. The primary outcome was the preferred time to receive DC, while the secondary outcome was the overall experience of patients with DC. RESULTS: Overall, 40 patients were offered DC between 2021 and 2023. Patients who had counseling before the start of nCRT (n = 20) were satisfied with the timing of DC. Of the 20 patients who had DC after nCRT, 6 would have preferred counseling at an earlier time point. Patients who had DC both before or after the completion of nCRT reflected positively on DC. CONCLUSION: It is recommended to introduce the option of DC as early as possible and discuss with the patient at which moment during the decision-making process they prefer to discuss all treatment options more extensively.

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.

Is Robotic Surgery the Future for Resectable Esophageal Cancer?: A Systematic Literature Review of Oncological and Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Radical esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer is a major surgical intervention, associated with considerable postoperative morbidity. The introduction of robotic surgical platforms in esophagectomy may enhance advantages of minimally invasive surgery enabled by laparoscopy and thoracoscopy, including reduced postoperative pain and pulmonary complications. This systematic review aims to assess the clinical and oncological benefits of robot-assisted esophagectomy. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane databases was performed for studies published up to 1 August 2023. This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022370983). Clinical and oncological outcomes data were extracted following full-text review of eligible studies. RESULTS: A total of 113 studies (n = 14,701 patients, n = 2455 female) were included. The majority of the studies were retrospective in nature (n = 89, 79%), and cohort studies were the most common type of study design (n = 88, 79%). The median number of patients per study was 54. Sixty-three studies reported using a robotic surgical platform for both the abdominal and thoracic phases of the procedure. The weighted mean incidence of postoperative pneumonia was 11%, anastomotic leak 10%, total length of hospitalisation 15.2 days, and a resection margin clear of the tumour was achieved in 95% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: There are numerous reported advantages of robot-assisted surgery for resectable esophageal cancer. A correlation between procedural volume and improvements in outcomes with robotic esophagectomy has also been identified. Multicentre comparative clinical studies are essential to identify the true objective benefit on outcomes compared with conventional surgical approaches before robotic surgery is accepted as standard of practice.

Clinical Outcomes of Preserving Bronchial Arteries During Radical Esophagectomy: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pneumonia is a common and major cause of mortality after radical esophagectomy. Intraoperative preservation of the bronchial arteries is often aimed at avoiding tracheobronchial ischemia; however, it is unknown whether this contributes to a reduction in postoperative pneumonia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We enrolled 348 consecutive patients who underwent radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at Toranomon Hospital from January 2011 to July 2018. We classified patients into a bronchial artery-resected (BA-R) group (n = 93) and a bronchial artery-preserved (BA-P) group (n = 255) and compared the incidence of postoperative pneumonia between the two groups. A propensity score-matching analysis for bronchial artery preservation versus resection was performed. RESULTS: Overall, 182 patients were matched. Univariate analysis of the propensity score-matched groups showed that Brinkman index ≥ 400, vital capacity (%VC) < 80%, and bronchial artery resection were associated with the development of postoperative pneumonia. Multivariate analysis revealed three significant factors associated with postoperative pneumonia: Brinkman index ≥ 400 [p = 0.006, odds ratio (HR) 3.302, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.399-7.790], %VC < 80% (p = 0.034, HR 6.365, 95% CI 1.151-35.205), and bronchial artery resection (p = 0.034, HR 2.131, 95% CI 1.060-4.282). The incidence of postoperative complications (CD grade III) was higher in the BA-R group (BA-R 42.8% versus BA-P 27.5%, p = 0.030). There was no significant difference in overall survival between the two groups at 5 years (BA-R 63.1% versus BA-P 72.1%, p = 0.130). CONCLUSION: Preserving the bronchial artery is associated with a decreased incidence of postoperative pneumonia.

A Comparison of Clinicopathologic Outcomes and Patterns of Lymphatic Spread Across Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy, and Neoadjuvant Immunochemotherapy in Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) is recommended as the treatment standard for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The use of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting has gained attention. Multiple, clinical trials have explored the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT). We evaluated the differences in clinicopathologic outcomes and the patterns of lymphatic spread among patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), NCRT, and NICT before esophagectomy for locally advanced ESCC. METHODS: A total of 702 patients with ESCC who completed transthoracic esophagectomy followed neoadjuvant therapy were included. Pathological characteristics, including pathologic complete response (pCR), tumor regression grade (TRG) score and patterns of lymphatic spread, were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared with the NCT group, the NCRT group and NICT group had an advantage in pathological response (P < 0.05). The pCR rate was 8.1% in the NCT group, 29.9% in the NCRT group, and 23.6% in the NICT group. The TRG score (P < 0.05) and pathologic T stage (P < 0.05) in the NCT group were significantly higher. Compared with NICT, NCRT can significantly reduce the rate of lymph node metastasis rate in station 1R (0 vs. 3.4%, P < 0.05) and 2R (1.1% vs. 6.8%, P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis according to the tumor location distribution showed that NICT group had higher lymph node metastasis rate in station 2R (9.1%) in middle thoracic cases (P < 0.05) and in station 18 (7.5%) (P < 0.05) in lower thoracic cases. CONCLUSIONS: NCRT or NICT followed by surgery may result in a promising pCR rate and show a better performance in therapeutic response of primary lesion. For patients with lymph node metastasis in station 1R and 2R, NCRT should be the optimal preoperative treatment strategy.