Incidence and Prediction of Unrelated Mortality After Successful Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Follow-up (FU) strategies after endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for Barrett's neoplasia do not consider the risk of mortality from causes other than esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to evaluate this risk during long-term FU, and to assess whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) can predict mortality. METHODS: We included all patients with successful EET from the nationwide Barrett registry in the Netherlands. Data were merged with National Statistics for accurate mortality data. We evaluated annual mortality rates (AMRs, per 1000 person-years) and standardized mortality ratio for other-cause mortality. Performance of the CCI was evaluated by discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: We included 1154 patients with a mean age of 64 years (±9). During median 59 months (p25-p75 37-91; total 6375 person-years), 154 patients (13%) died from other causes than EAC (AMR, 24.1; 95% CI, 20.5-28.2), most commonly non-EAC cancers (n = 58), cardiovascular (n = 31), or pulmonary diseases (n = 26). Four patients died from recurrent EAC (AMR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-1.4). Compared with the general Dutch population, mortality was significantly increased for patients in the lowest 3 age quartiles (ie, age <71 years). Validation of CCI in our population showed good discrimination (Concordance statistic, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84) and fair calibration. CONCLUSION: The other-cause mortality risk after successful EET was more than 40 times higher (48; 95% CI, 15-99) than the risk of EAC-related mortality. Our findings reveal that younger post-EET patients exhibit a significantly reduced life expectancy when compared with the general population. Furthermore, they emphasize the strong predictive ability of CCI for long-term mortality after EET. This straightforward scoring system can inform decisions regarding personalized FU, including appropriate cessation timing. (NL7039).

Impact of expert center endoscopic assessment of confirmed low grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus diagnosed in community hospitals.

BACKGROUND : The optimal management for patients with low grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is unclear. According to the Dutch national guideline, all patients with LGD with histological confirmation of the diagnosis by an expert pathologist (i. e. "confirmed LGD"), are referred for a dedicated re-staging endoscopy at an expert center. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of re-staging endoscopy by an expert endoscopist for patients with confirmed LGD. METHODS : This retrospective cohort study included all patients with flat BE diagnosed in a community hospital who had confirmed LGD and were referred to one of the nine Barrett Expert Centers (BECs) in the Netherlands. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with prevalent high grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer during re-staging in a BEC. RESULTS : Of the 248 patients with confirmed LGD, re-staging in the BEC revealed HGD or cancer in 23 % (57/248). In 79 % (45/57), HGD or cancer in a newly detected visible lesion was diagnosed. Of the remaining patients, re-staging in the BEC showed a second diagnosis of confirmed LGD in 68 % (168/248), while the remaining 9 % (23/248) had nondysplastic BE. CONCLUSION : One quarter of patients with apparent flat BE with confirmed LGD diagnosed in a community hospital had prevalent HGD or cancer after re-staging at an expert center. This endorses the advice to refer patients with confirmed LGD, including in the absence of visible lesions, to an expert center for re-staging endoscopy.

Intensified Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with Potentially Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment consisting of five cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Gy), followed by esophagectomy, is the standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer in The Netherlands. It remains unclear whether intensification of neoadjuvant therapy leads to better outcomes. This study analyzed the outcomes of intensified chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: We included patients who were deemed eligible for esophagectomy between January 2008 and December 2014. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of six cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 2 mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m2 of body surface area) and concurrent radiotherapy (50.4 Gy administered in 28 fractions of 1.8 Gy each, 5 days per week), followed by esophagectomy. RESULTS: Of the 176 patients included in this study, 73% underwent a resection. At a median follow-up of 29.3 months for the total cohort, median disease-free survival (DFS) was 22.5 months. DFS at 3 and 5 years was 42% and 36%, respectively, while the overall survival (OS) rates were 47% and 38%, respectively. In addition, the 5-year DFS and OS rates of our resection group were 44% and 48%, respectively. In 102 patients (58%), grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed, mainly hematological. The postoperative mortality rate within 30 days was 4%, and pathological complete response was achieved in 35% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Intensification of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer is well tolerated, yielding high pathological complete response rates, but adverse events occurred frequently, and survival compared with conventional neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy seems similar. Therefore, intensification of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy should not be routinely used.