Bilateral transcervical mediastinoscopic-assisted transhiatal laparoscopic esophagectomy compared with thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Transcervical mediastinoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer is indicated in select institutions because of the complex surgical technique required and the unfamiliar surgical view compared with the standard transthoracic esophagectomy approach. This study was performed to compare the feasibility and efficacy of bilateral transcervical mediastinoscopic-assisted transhiatal laparoscopic esophagectomy (BTC-MATLE) with thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE) for esophageal cancer. METHODS: This study involved 392 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent curative minimally invasive esophagectomy with R0 resection (excluding salvage, conversion, and two-stage operations and open thoracotomy) at the National Cancer Center Hospital from 2017 to 2022. The patients underwent either BTC-MATLE or TE (32 and 360 consecutive patients, respectively). Propensity score-matching analysis was used to balance the baseline differences by covariates of age, performance status, and clinical stage. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in age, performance status, cT factor, cN factor, cStage, preoperative treatment, and surgical history for respiratory disease. After propensity score-matching, these significant differences (excluding a surgical history of respiratory disease) were no longer statistically significant, and 27 patients were assigned to each group. The total operation time and the postoperative intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter in the BTC-MATLE than TLE group. There were no significant differences in overall postoperative complications or the three major postoperative complications of recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis, anastomotic leakage, and pneumonia, even for patients whose preoperative pulmonary function indices (vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in 1 s) were significantly lower in the BTC-MATLE than TLE group. The numbers of total and thoracic harvested lymph nodes were significantly higher in the TLE than BTC-MATLE group; however, there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate between the two groups. CONCLUSION: BTC-MATLE may provide the same feasibility and oncological outcomes as TLE even for patients with significantly lower pulmonary function.

Association between preoperative serum zinc level and prognosis in patients with advanced esophageal cancer in the neoadjuvant treatment era.

Background: Zinc (Zn), an essential trace element, has an adverse influence on the prognosis of several cancers. However, the association between the preoperative serum Zn level and outcomes in patients with advanced esophageal cancer in the current neoadjuvant treatment era remains unclear. Methods: This study involved 185 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent R0 surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy from August 2017 to February 2021. We retrospectively investigated the relationship between the preoperative serum Zn level and the patients' outcomes. Results: The patients were divided into a low Zn group (<64 µg/dL) and a high Zn group (≤64 µg/dL) according to the mean preoperative serum Zn level. Low Zn had significantly worse overall survival (OS) (2-year OS rate: 76.2% vs. 83.3% in low vs. high Zn; p = 0.044). A low Zn in pathological non-responders (Grade ≤ 1a) was significantly associated with a shorter 2-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate (39.6% vs. 64.1% in low vs. high Zn; p = 0.032). The multivariate analysis identified low BMI and Zn level among preoperative nutritional status indices as an independent risk factor for worse RFS in non-responders. Compared with responders, pathological non-responders comprised significantly more males and a performance status of ≥1, and there was no difference in Zn level according to pathological response. Conclusion: A preoperative low Zn level had a negative impact on early recurrence in esophageal cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This suggests the need to administer Zn supplementation to patients with esophageal cancer who have preoperative Zn deficiency.

Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts recurrence of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant triplet chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy is the standard treatment for resectable advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Japan. Triplet chemotherapy is the standard neoadjuvant regimen. Inflammatory markers such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) are well-known prognostic factors for esophageal cancer. However, their usefulness in patients with resectable advanced disease undergoing esophagectomy after neoadjuvant triplet chemotherapy is unknown. METHOD: We examined 144 ESCC patients who underwent neoadjuvant triplet chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy between January 2015 and December 2020 to investigate the relationship between inflammatory markers and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Optimal marker cutoff values for RFS were determined using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Patients were divided into high and low NLR groups (NLR cutoff, 3.0). RESULTS: NLR was high in 61 patients and low in 83. Univariate analyses demonstrated that low NLR was significantly associated with worse RFS (p = 0.049). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that high NLR was an independent predictor of RFS (odds ratio, 1.911; 95% confidence interval, 1.098-3.327; p = 0.022). RFS significantly differed between the low and high NLR groups. RFS did not significantly differ between the patients when stratified according to the other inflammatory markers. CONCLUSION: Preoperative NLR is an easily obtained and useful predictor of RFS in patients with resectable advanced ESCC treated with neoadjuvant triplet chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy.

Technical feasibility and oncological outcomes of robotic esophagectomy compared with conventional thoracoscopic esophagectomy for clinical T3 or T4 locally advanced esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy is the first-line approach for esophageal cancer; however, there has recently been a paradigm shift toward robotic esophagectomy (RE). We investigated the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent RE compared with those of patients who underwent conventional minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for locally advanced cT3 or cT4 esophageal cancer using a propensity-matched analysis. METHODS: Overall, 342 patients with locally advanced cT3 or cT4 esophageal cancer underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymph node dissection between 2018 and 2022. The propensity-matched analysis was performed to assign the patients to either RE or TE by covariates of histological type, tumor location, and clinical N factor. RESULTS: Overall, 87 patients were recruited in each of the RE and TE groups according to the propensity-matched analysis. The total complication rate and the rates of the three major complications (recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis, anastomotic leakage, and pneumonia) were not significantly different between the RE and TE groups. However, the peak C-reactive protein concentration on postoperative day 3, rate of surgical site infection, and intensive care unit length of stay after surgery were significantly shorter in the RE group than in the TE group. No significant differences were observed in the harvested total and mediastinal lymph nodes. The total operation time was significantly longer in the RE group, while the thoracic operation time was shorter in the RE group than in the TE group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the recurrence rate of oncological outcomes after surgery. CONCLUSION: RE may facilitate early recovery after esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymph node dissection and has the same technical feasibility and oncological outcomes as TE.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Improves Feasibility of Larynx Preservation and Prognosis in Resectable Locally Advanced Cervical Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy for cervical advanced esophageal cancer remains controversial in terms of oncologic outcome as well as vocal and swallowing function. Recently, in East Asian countries, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been a standard strategy for advanced esophageal cancer. METHODS: This study included 37 patients who underwent NAC, and 33 patients who underwent definitive chemoradiation therapy (dCRT) as larynx-preserving treatment for locally advanced cervical esophageal cancer from 2016 to 2021. This study retrospectively investigated outcomes, with comparison between NAC and dCRT for locally advanced cervical esophageal cancer. RESULTS: Larynx preservation was successful for all the patients with NAC and dCRT. After NAC, the rate of complete or partial response was 78.4%, and 30 patients underwent larynx-preserving surgery. On the other hand, after dCRT, the complete response rate was 71.9%, and 4 patients underwent larynx-preserving salvage surgery. Overall survival (OS) and progression free survival were similar between the two groups. However, for the patients with resectable cervical esophageal cancer (cT1/2/3), the 2-year OS rate was significantly higher with NAC (79.9%) than with dCRT (56.8%) (P = 0.022), and the multivariate analyses identified only NAC and cN0, one of the two as a significantly independent factor associated with a better OS (NAC: P = 0.041; cN0, 1: P = 0.036). CONCLUSION: The study showed that NAC as larynx-preserving surgery for resectable cervical esophageal cancer preserved function and had a better prognosis than dCRT. The authors suggest that NAC may be standard strategy for larynx preservation in patients with resectable cervical esophageal cancer.

Effect of degalactosylated bovine glycoprotein formulations MAF and M сapsules on lymphopenia and clinical outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Targeting mucosal immunity of the gut, which is known to provide antigen processing, while avoiding excessive or unnecessary inflammation, was tested as a way to modulate COVID-19 severity. METHODS: Randomized open-label trial in 204 adults hospitalized with non-critical COVID-19 who received for 14 days in addition to standard of care (SOC) degalactosylated bovine glycoproteins formulations of either MAF capsules (MAF group) or M capsules (M group) or SOC only (control group). RESULTS: Median recovery time when patients did not require supplemental oxygen was 6 days in both study groups compared to 9 days in the control (MAF vs. control; P = 0.020 and M vs. control; P = 0.004). A greater reduction in mortality was seen in the MAF group compared to the control by day 14 (8.3% vs. 1.6%; P = 0.121) and by day 29 (15.3% vs. 3.2%; P = 0.020), and similarly in the M group by day 14 (8.3% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.276) and by day 29 (15.3% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.017). The proportion of those who had baseline absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) lower than 0.8 × 109/L was 13/63 (20.6%), 17/69 (24.6%), and 18/72 (25.0%) of patients in MAF, M, and control group respectively. Day 29 mortality among these lymphopenic patients was three times higher than for the intent-to-treat population (21% vs. 7%) and consisted in above subgroups: 2/13 (15%), 2/17 (12%), and 6/18 (33%) of patients. The decreased mortality in both study subgroups correlated with greater ALC restoration above 0.8 × 109/L level seen on day 14 in 91% (11/12) and 87.5% (14/16) of survivors in MAF and M subgroups respectively compared to 53.3% (8/15) of survivors in control subgroup. Incidences of any ALC decrease below the baseline level on day 14 occurred in 25.4% of patients in the MAF group and 29.0% of patients in the M group compared to 45.8% in control and ALC depletion by ≥ 50% from the baseline level consisted of 7.9%, 5.8%, and 15.3% of cases in these groups respectively. CONCLUSION: This study showed that both study agents prevented ALC depletion and accelerated its restoration, which is believed to be one of the mechanisms of improved crucial clinical outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered after the trial start in ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04762628, registered 21/02/2021, https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT04762628 .