Health-related quality of life following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus perioperative chemotherapy and esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a European multicenter study.

Curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer consists of (neo)adjuvant treatment followed by esophagectomy. Both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and perioperative chemotherapy improve the 5-year overall survival rate compared with surgery alone. However, it is unknown whether these treatment strategies are associated with differences in long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL). The aim of this study is to compare long-term HRQL in patients after esophagectomy treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy. Disease-free cancer patients having undergone esophagectomy and (neo)adjuvant treatment in one of the participating lasting symptoms after esophageal resection (LASER) study centers between 2010 and 2016, were identified from the LASER study dataset. Included patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-OG25, and LASER questionnaires at least 1 year after the completion of treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy, using univariable and multivariable regression and presented as differences in mean score. Among the 565 included patients, 349 (61.8%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and 216 (38.2%) perioperative chemotherapy. Patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy reported more symptomatology for diarrhea (difference in means 5.93), reflux (difference in means 7.40), and odynophagia (difference in means 4.66). The differences did not exceed the 10 points to be of clinical relevance. No significant differences for the LASER key symptoms were observed. The observed differences in long-term HRQL are in favor of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy; however, the differences were small. Patients need to be informed about long-term HRQL when considering allocation of (neo)adjuvant treatment.

Influence of postoperative complications following esophagectomy for cancer on quality of life: A European multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative complications following major surgery have been shown to be associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL), and severe complications may have profound negative effects. This study aimed to examine whether long-term HRQL differs with the occurrence and severity of complications in a European multicenter prospective dataset of patients following esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: Disease-free patients following esophagectomy for cancer between 2010 and 2016 from the LASER study were included. Patients completed the LASER, EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 questionnaires >1 year following treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients with and without postoperative complications, subgroup analysis was performed for severity of complications (no, minor [Clavien-Dindo I-II], severe [Clavien-Dindo ≥ III]), using univariable and multivariable regression. RESULTS: 645 patients were included: 283 patients with no, 207 with minor and 155 with severe complications. Significantly more dyspnea (QLQ-C30) was reported by patients with compared to patients without complications (differenceinmeans6.3). In subgroup analysis, patients with severe complications reported more dyspnea (difference in means 8.3) than patients with no complications. None of the differences were clinically relevant (difference in means ≥ 10 points). LASER-based low mood (OR2.3) was statistically different for minor versus severe complications. CONCLUSION: Comparable HRQL was found in patients with and without postoperative complications following esophagectomy for cancer, after a mean follow-up of 4.4 years. Furthermore, patients with different levels of severity of complications had comparable HRQL. The level of HRQL in esophageal cancer patients are more likely explained by the impact of the complex procedure of the esophagectomy itself.

ESMO Expert Consensus Statements on Cancer Survivorship: promoting high-quality survivorship care and research in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The increased number of cancer survivors and the recognition of physical and psychosocial challenges, present from cancer diagnosis through active treatment and beyond, led to the discipline of cancer survivorship. DESIGN AND METHODS: Herein, we reflected on the different components of survivorship care, existing models and priorities, in order to facilitate the promotion of high-quality European survivorship care and research. RESULTS: We identified five main components of survivorship care: (i) physical effects of cancer and chronic medical conditions; (ii) psychological effects of cancer; (iii) social, work and financial effects of cancer; (iv) surveillance for recurrences and second cancers; and (v) cancer prevention and overall health and well-being promotion. Survivorship care can be delivered by structured care models including but not limited to shared models integrating primary care and oncology services. The choice of the care model to be implemented has to be adapted to local realities. High-quality care should be expedited by the generation of: (i) focused and shared European recommendations, (ii) creation of tools to facilitate implementation of coordinated care and (iii) survivorship educational programs for health care teams and patients. The research agenda should be defined with the participation of health care providers, researchers, policy makers, patients and caregivers. The following patient-centered survivorship research areas were highlighted: (i) generation of a big data platform to collect long-term real-world data in survivors and healthy controls to (a) understand the resources, needs and preferences of patients with cancer, and (b) understand biological determinants of survivorship issues, and (ii) develop innovative effective interventions focused on the main components of survivorship care. CONCLUSIONS: The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) can actively contribute in the efforts of the oncology community toward (a) promoting the development of high-quality survivorship care programs, (b) providing educational material and (c) aiding groundbreaking research by reflecting on priorities and by supporting research networking.

Defunctioning stoma in rectal cancer surgery - A risk factor for Low Anterior Resection Syndrome?

BACKGROUND: In rectal cancer surgery the formation of a defunctioning stoma is common in order to reduce the consequences of an anastomotic leakage. The role of a defunctioning stoma and time to stoma reversal, in relation to major Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) in the long-term perspective, is still unclear. The aim of the study was to investigate the association between a defunctioning stoma and long-term bowel function. METHOD: Patients who underwent curative rectal cancer surgery between 2007 and 2013 in Stockholm county, Sweden, who had no history of anastomotic leakage, without a remaining stoma, free of cancer and alive in April 2017 were eligible for the study. The exposures were (i) use of defunctioning stoma at cancer surgery and (ii) time to stoma reversal. Main outcome was major LARS with information retrieved from the LARS score questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression model was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) primary comparing major LARS to no LARS. RESULTS: A total of 430 patients were included in analysis. The mean follow-up time was 6.7 years after surgery (range 3.4-10.7 years). The use of a defunctioning stoma was associated to major LARS with an adjusted OR of 2.43 (95% CI 1.14-5.20) when compared to no stoma. There were no evident associations between time to stoma reversal and the risk of major LARS. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the presence of a defunctioning stoma is associated with impaired bowel function in the long-term perspective, while failing to show any clear association to time to stoma reversal.

Health-related quality of life following total minimally invasive, hybrid minimally invasive or open oesophagectomy: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive oesophagectomy has been shown to reduce the risk of pulmonary complications compared with open oesophagectomy, but the effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and oesophageal cancer survivorship remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the longitudinal effects of minimally invasive compared with open oesophagectomy for cancer on HRQoL. METHODS: All patients who had surgery for oesophageal cancer in Sweden from January 2013 to April 2018 were identified. The exposure was total or hybrid minimally invasive oesophagectomy, compared with open surgery. The study outcome was HRQoL, evaluated by means of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 at 1 and 2 years after surgery. Mean differences and 95 per cent confidence intervals were adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Of the 246 patients recruited, 153 underwent minimally invasive oesophagectomy, of which 75 were hybrid minimally invasive and 78 were total minimally invasive procedures. After adjustment for age, sex, Charlson Co-morbidity Index score, pathological tumour stage and neoadjuvant therapy, there were no clinically and statistically significant differences in overall or disease-specific HRQoL after oesophagectomy between hybrid minimally invasive and total minimally invasive surgical technique versus open surgery. CONCLUSION: In this population-based nationwide Swedish study, longitudinal HRQoL after minimally invasive oesophagectomy was similar to that of the open surgical approach.

Patient-reported outcomes after oesophagectomy in the multicentre LASER study.

BACKGROUND: Data on the long-term symptom burden in patients surviving oesophageal cancer surgery are scarce. The aim of this study was to identify the most prevalent symptoms and their interactions with health-related quality of life. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional cohort study of patients who underwent oesophageal cancer surgery in 20 European centres between 2010 and 2016. Patients had to be disease-free for at least 1 year. They were asked to complete a 28-symptom questionnaire at a single time point, at least 1 year after surgery. Principal component analysis was used to assess for clustering and association of symptoms. Risk factors associated with the development of severe symptoms were identified by multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 1081 invited patients, 876 (81.0 per cent) responded. Symptoms in the preceding 6 months associated with previous surgery were experienced by 586 patients (66.9 per cent). The most common severe symptoms included reduced energy or activity tolerance (30.7 per cent), feeling of early fullness after eating (30.0 per cent), tiredness (28.7 per cent), and heartburn/acid or bile regurgitation (19.6 per cent). Clustering analysis showed that symptoms clustered into six domains: lethargy, musculoskeletal pain, dumping, lower gastrointestinal symptoms, regurgitation/reflux, and swallowing/conduit problems; the latter two were the most closely associated. Surgical approach, neoadjuvant therapy, patient age, and sex were factors associated with severe symptoms. CONCLUSION: A long-term symptom burden is common after oesophageal cancer surgery.

Psychological distress and health-related quality of life up to 2 years after oesophageal cancer surgery: nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Patients are at higher risk of suffering from psychological distress and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after oesophageal cancer surgery. This Swedish nationwide population-based longitudinal study aimed to evaluate the association between psychological distress and HRQoL up to 2 years after oesophageal cancer surgery. METHODS: The study included patients with oesophageal cancer who had survived for 1 year after oesophageal cancer surgery. The exposure was psychological distress measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Patients scoring at least 8 on either the anxiety or the depression subscale were classified as having psychological distress. The outcome was HRQoL assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire generic and disease-specific questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25). Exposure and outcome were measured at 1, 1.5, and 2 years after operation. Fixed-effects models with adjustment for all time-invariant confounding and potential time-varying confounders were used to examine the mean score difference in HRQoL between patients with and without psychological distress. RESULTS: In total, 180 patients were analysed. Clinically relevant, statistically significant and time-constant mean score differences were found in emotional function, social function, dyspnoea, anxiety, eating difficulty, eating in front of others, and weight loss (mean score difference range 10-29). Mean score differences for global quality of life, cognitive function, appetite loss, EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score, and trouble with taste increased over time, and reached clinical and statistical significance at 1.5 and/or 2 years after surgery. For body image, there was a clinically relevant decrease in mean score difference over time. CONCLUSION: Psychological distress was associated with several aspects of poor HRQoL up to 2 years after surgery for oesophageal cancer.

Impact of co-morbidity on reoperation or death within 90 days of surgery for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of preoperative co-morbidity on postoperative outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer is uncertain. A population-based and nationwide cohort study was conducted to assess the influence of preoperative co-morbidity on the risk of reoperation or mortality within 90 days of surgery for oesophageal cancer. METHODS: This study enrolled 98 per cent of patients who had oesophageal cancer surgery between 1987 and 2015 in Sweden. Modified Poisson regression models provided risk ratios (RRs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.) to estimate associations between co-morbidity and risk of reoperation or death within 90 days of oesophagectomy. The RRs were adjusted for age, sex, educational level, pathological tumour stage, neoadjuvant therapy, annual hospital volume, tumour histology and calendar period of surgery. RESULTS: Among 2576 patients, 446 (17.3 per cent) underwent reoperation or died within 90 days of oesophagectomy. Patients with a Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI) score of 2 or more had an increased risk of reoperation or death compared with those with a CCI score of 0 (RR 1.78, 95 per cent c.i. 1.44 to 2.20), and the risk increased on average by 27 per cent for each point increase of the CCI (RR 1.27, 1.18 to 1.37). The RR was increased in patients with pulmonary disease (RR 1.66, 1.36 to 2.04), cardiac disease (RR 1.37, 1.08 to 1.73), diabetes (RR 1.50, 1.14 to 1.99) and cerebral disease (RR 1.40, 1.06 to 1.85). CONCLUSION: Co-morbidity in general, and pulmonary disease, cardiac disease, diabetes and cerebral disease in particular, increased the risk of reoperation or death within 90 days of oesophageal cancer surgery. This highlights the value of tailored patient selection, preoperative preparation and postoperative care.

Prevalence of low anterior resection syndrome and impact on quality of life after rectal cancer surgery: population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after rectal cancer surgery varies from 17·8 to 56·0 per cent, but data from high-quality studies are sparse. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of LARS and its association with quality of life (QoL) in a large, well defined, population-based cohort. METHODS: This was a population-based study that included all patients who had curative rectal cancer surgery with total or partial mesorectal excision in Stockholm County in Sweden between 2007 and 2013. Patients without a remaining stoma, free from cancer and alive in April 2017 were eligible for the study. The LARS score questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30 and Cleveland Clinic Florida Fecal Incontinence score were used as outcome measures. Adjusted mean scores (and differences) of EORTC QLQ-C30 for LARS groups were calculated using repeated measures ANCOVA regression models while adjusting for predefined confounders. RESULTS: In total, 481 patients (82·6 per cent response rate) were included in the analysis. Mean follow-up time was 6·7 (range 3·4-11·0) years after surgery. The prevalence of LARS was 77·4 per cent (370 of 478 patients), with 53·1 per cent (254 of 478) experiencing major LARS. Patients with major LARS reported worse on all EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales (except for financial difficulties) than patients without LARS. A higher mean LARS score was associated with a greater impact on bowel-related QoL. CONCLUSION: After anterior resection for rectal cancer, the majority of patients suffer from major LARS with a negative impact on QoL.

ANTECEDENTES: La prevalencia del síndrome de resección anterior baja (Low Anterior Resection Syndrome, LARS) mayor después de cirugía del cáncer de recto varía entre 17,8% y 56,0%, pero los datos procedentes de estudios de alta calidad son escasos. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar la prevalencia de LARS y su asociación con la calidad de vida (quality of life, QoL) en una gran cohorte poblacional bien definida. MÉTODOS: Este fue un estudio de base poblacional con todos los pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía curativa de cáncer de recto con exéresis total o parcial del mesorrecto en el condado de Estocolmo en Suecia entre 2007-2013. Los pacientes sin estoma definitivo, sin recidiva y vivos en abril de 2017 fueron elegibles para el estudio. El cuestionario de puntuación LARS, el EORTC QLQ-C30 y el sistema de puntuación de incontinencia de la Cleveland Clinic Florida se usaron como medidas de resultado. Las puntuaciones medias ajustadas (y las diferencias) de EORTC QLQ-C30 para grupos LARS se calcularon utilizando modelos de regresión ANCOVA de medidas repetidas ajustando por factores de confusión predefinidos. RESULTADOS: En total, 481 pacientes (tasa de respuesta del 82,6%) se incluyeron en el análisis. El tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 6,7 años después de la cirugía (rango 3,4-11,0 años). La prevalencia de LARS fue 77,4% (n = 370) y un 53,1% (n = 254) presentó un LARS mayor. Los pacientes con LARS mayor tuvieron peores resultados en todas las subescalas EORTC QLQ-C30 (excepto por dificultades financieras) que los pacientes sin LARS. Una puntuación LARS media más alta se asoció con un mayor impacto en la calidad de vida relacionada con el intestino. CONCLUSIÓN: Después de una resección anterior por cáncer de recto, la mayoría de los pacientes sufren un LARS mayor con un impacto negativo en la calidad de vida.

Impact of co-morbidities on health-related quality of life 10 years after surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oesophagectomy for cancer is associated with long-term decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of co-morbidities on HRQoL among survivors of oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional cancers after 10 years or more. METHODS: The study included a prospectively collected, population-based cohort, comprising all patients who had surgery for oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer in Sweden in 2001-2005 with follow-up until 31 December 2016. All data regarding patient and tumour characteristics, treatment details and HRQoL were collected using a prospectively created database. Multivariable ANCOVA regression models, adjusting for age, sex, tumour histology, stage and surgical technique, were used to calculate adjusted mean scores with 95 per cent confidence intervals for all HRQoL outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 92 survivors (88·5 per cent) responded to the questionnaires. Patients were stratified in two groups according to whether they reported a low or high impact of co-morbidities on general health. Patients in the high-impact group had clinically significantly decreased HRQoL and an increased level of symptoms, but differences between these two groups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Co-morbidities with high impact on general health still contribute to impaired HRQoL 10 years after oesophagectomy for cancer.

ANTECEDENTES: La esofaguectomía por cáncer se asocia con un descenso de la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud (health-related quality of life, HRQoL) a largo plazo. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar el efecto de las comorbilidades sobre la HRQOL entre pacientes supervivientes de cánceres de esófago o de la unión gastroesofágicas después de 10 años o más. MÉTODOS: Este estudio incluye una cohorte de base poblacional recogida de forma prospectiva que incluía todos los pacientes operados de cáncer de esófago o de la unión gastroesofágica en Suecia en 2001-2005 con seguimiento hasta el 31 de diciembre de 2016. Todos los datos relacionados con las características de los pacientes y del tumor, detalles del tratamiento y HRQoL se recogieron en una base de datos prospectiva. Se utilizaron modelos de regresión multivariable ANCOVA, ajustados por edad, sexo, histología del tumor, estadio, y técnica quirúrgica, para calcular las puntuaciones medias ajustadas con los i.c. del 95% para todas las variables de la HRQoL. RESULTADOS: Un total de 92 (88%) supervivientes respondieron a los cuestionarios. En función del impacto de las comorbilidades en la salud en general, se clasificaron a los pacientes en los grupos de bajo versus alto impacto. Los resultados muestran que los pacientes en el grupo de alto impacto presentaban un descenso clínicamente significativo de la HRQoL y un aumento en el nivel de síntomas, pero las diferencias entre estos dos grupos no fueron estadísticamente significativas. CONCLUSIÓN: A los 10 años de la esofaguectomía por cáncer, las comorbilidades con un alto impacto sobre la salud general siguen contribuyendo en el deterioro de la HRQoL.

Health-related quality of life in a randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy plus surgery in patients with oesophageal cancer (NeoRes trial).

BACKGROUND: There are few data comparing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (nCT) compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with oesophageal cancer. METHODS: In the NeoRes trial, patients were assigned randomly in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive either cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1 and an infusion of 750 mg per m2 5-fluorouracil over 24 h on days 1-5 in three 21-day cycles (nCT) or the same chemotherapy regimen, but with the addition of 40 Gy radiotherapy (nCRT). HRQoL data were collected at baseline, after neoadjuvant therapy and at 1, 3 and 5 years after surgery. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire QLQ-C30 and disease-specific modules were used. RESULTS: Of 181 patients randomized, 165 were included in the analysis of HRQoL. In a direct comparison between the allocated treatments, odynophagia after completion of neoadjuvant therapy but before surgery (P = 0·047) and troublesome coughing at 3 years' follow-up (P = 0·011) were more pronounced in the nCRT arm. In the longitudinal analyses within each treatment arm, a large deterioration in HRQoL was noted at 1 year. Some recovery was seen in both arms over time but, after 3 and 5 years, patients in the nCRT arm reported more symptoms compared with baseline than patients in the nCT arm. CONCLUSION: HRQoL after multimodal treatment for cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction was impaired and more pronounced in patients who underwent nCRT, with only partial recovery over time.

ANTECEDENTES: Se dispone de poca información sobre la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud (health-related quality of life, HRQOL) en pacientes con cáncer de esófago después de quimioterapia neoadyuvante sola en comparación con quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante. MÉTODOS: En el ensayo NeoRes, los pacientes fueron asignados de forma aleatoria 1:1 a tratamiento con cisplatino 100 mg/m2 en el día uno y 5-Fluorouracilo 750 mg/m2 /infusión de 24 horas en los días 1-5 en tres ciclos de 21 días (nCT) o al mismo régimen de quimioterapia, pero con la adición de radioterapia 40 Gy (nCRT). Los datos de HRQOL se recogieron al inicio, tras el tratamiento neoadyuvante y al cabo de 1, 3 y 5 años tras la cirugía. Se utilizaron los cuestionarios QLQ-C30 de la European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) y los módulos específicos para la enfermedad. RESULTADOS: De 181 pacientes aleatorizados, 165 fueron incluidos en el análisis de la HRQOL. En la comparación directa entre los tratamientos asignados, la odinofagia tras terminar nCRT pero antes de la cirugía (P = 0,047) y la tos molesta a los 3 años de seguimiento (P = 0,011), fueron más acentuadas en el brazo de nCRT. En el análisis longitudinal dentro de cada rama de tratamiento hubo un fuerte deterioro en la HRQOL al año. Se observó cierta recuperación en ambas ramas con el tiempo, pero a los 3 y 5 años de seguimiento, los pacientes de la rama de nCRT describieron más síntomas en comparación con la situación de inicio que los pacientes de la rama de nCT. CONCLUSIÓN: La HRQOL después del tratamiento multimodal del cáncer de esófago o de la unión gastroesofágica se ve afectada, siendo dicha afectación más pronunciada en pacientes que recibieron nCRT, recuperándose solo parcialmente con el tiempo.

Effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy vs chemotherapy alone on the relief of dysphagia in esophageal cancer patients: secondary endpoint analysis in a randomized trial.

Dysphagia is the most significant symptom in patients with esophageal cancer. There are different therapeutic interventions designed to relieve dysphagia, but few studies have addressed the effects of neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of this study is to compare the effects on dysphagia of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and further to study the association between dysphagia response and histological response. Patient reported swallowing function was a secondary endpoint in the NeoRes trial, in which patients were randomized between neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Patients completed dysphagia questionnaires before the start and after neoadjuvant therapy, using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) esophageal cancer modules QLQ-OES24/OG25. Chirieac tumor regression grade (TRG) was used to assess the histological response. Out of 181 patients were randomized, of whom 87% completed the dysphagia questionnaires before and 73% after neoadjuvant treatment. Patient characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. Among patients reporting dysphagia at baseline, neoadjuvant therapy improved dysphagia in both arms. The mean dysphagia score after neoadjuvant treatment was significantly lower after nCT compared to after nCRT (P = 0.022). The reported dysphagia did not differ between those with a complete histological response (TRG 1) and those without any response at all (TRG 4) (P = 0. 583).

Outcomes of nutritional jejunostomy in the curative treatment of esophageal cancer.

Substantial weight loss and eating problems are common before and after esophagectomy for cancer. The use of jejunostomy might prevent postoperative weight loss, but studies evaluating other outcomes are scarce. This study aims to assess the influence of jejunostomy on postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL), complications, reoperation, hospital stay, and survival. This prospective and population-based cohort study included all patients operated on for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer in Sweden in 2001-2005 with follow-up until 31st December 2016. Data regarding patient and tumor characteristics and treatment were prospectively collected. Multivariable logistic regression provided odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whereas Cox regression provided hazard ratios with 95% CI. All risk estimates were adjusted for age, sex, tumor histology, stage, comorbidity, surgical approach, neoadjuvant therapy, and body mass index and weight loss at baseline. Among 397 patients, 181 (46%) received a jejunostomy during surgery. The use of jejunostomy did not influence the HRQOL at 6 months or 3 years after treatment. Jejunostomy users had no statistically significantly increased risk of postoperative complications (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.86-1.87) or reoperation (OR 1.70; 95% CI 0.88-3.28). Intensive unit care and length of hospital stay was the same independent of the use of jejunostomy. The all-cause mortality was not increased in the jejunostomy group (HR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.74-1.07). This study indicates that jejunostomy does not influence postoperative HRQOL, complications, or survival after esophageal cancer surgery, it can be considered a safe method for early enteral nutrition after esophageal cancer surgery but benefits for the patients need further investigations.

Health-related quality of life after open transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer have similar survival rates. Whether these approaches differ in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is uncertain and was examined in this study. METHODS: Patients undergoing transhiatal or transthoracic surgery for lower-third oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer between 2011 and 2015 were selected from an institutional database. HRQoL outcomes were measured at 6 and 12 months after surgery using validated written questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25). Linear mixed models provided mean score differences (MSDs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals, adjusted for preoperative HRQoL, age, physical status (ASA fitness grade), tumour location, tumour stage, neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy and postoperative complications. MSD values of 10 or more were regarded as clinically relevant. RESULTS: Some 146 patients underwent transhiatal (86, 58·9 per cent) or transthoracic (60, 41·1 per cent) oesophagectomy. The HRQoL questionnaires were returned by 111 patients at 6 months and 74 at 12 months. At 6 months, transthoracic oesophagectomy was associated with worse role function (MSD -12, 95 per cent c.i. -23 to 0; P = 0·046). At 12 months, patients in the transthoracic group had more nausea and vomiting (MSD 11, 0 to 22; P = 0·045), dyspnoea (MSD 13, 1 to 25; P = 0·029) and constipation (MSD 20, 7 to 33; P = 0·003) than those in the transhiatal group. CONCLUSION: Transhiatal oesophagectomy seems to offer better HRQoL than transthoracic oesophagectomy 6 and 12 months after surgery.

Complications during neoadjuvant therapy and prognosis following surgery for esophageal cancer.

Previous researchers have focused upon the influence of postoperative complications upon prognosis from esophagectomy, with very little attention paid to the potential negative effects of complications during neoadjuvant therapy. The hypothesis under investigation in this study was that the prognosis after esophageal cancer surgery is negatively influenced by complications causing hospital admission during neoadjuvant therapy. Patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for esophageal cancer between 1987 and 2010 were identified from a population-based nationwide Swedish cohort study and followed up until 2016. The association between hematological and nonhematological complications during neoadjuvant therapy and risk of short- and long-term mortality following surgery was analyzed using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, providing hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The HRs were adjusted for appropriate confounding variables.Among 587 patients, complications during neoadjuvant therapy requiring emergency hospitalization affected 65 (12%) patients. Hematological complications were associated with an increased 90-day overall mortality (HR = 5.60; 95% CI 1.27-24.75), particularly in subgroups of patients of tumor stage 0-II, adenocarcinoma, and radical and nonradical resection margins, and rendered increased 5-year disease-specific mortality specifically for esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR = 3.22; 95% CI 1.00-10.40). Occurrence of nonhematological complications was followed by an increase in 5-year mortality (HR = 2.35; 95% CI 1.15-4.81) in poor prognostic groups (tumor stage III-IV). There was no increased 5-year mortality following hematological or nonhematological complications in other subgroups of patients. Complications during neoadjuvant therapy may adversely impact short and long-term mortality in subgroups of patients with esophageal cancer receiving esophagectomy. Patient selection, optimization of neoadjuvant therapy, and timing of surgical resection, remain important areas for future development in the management of esophageal cancer.

Impact of weight loss and eating difficulties on health-related quality of life up to 10 years after oesophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Severe weight loss is experienced by patients with eating difficulties after surgery for oesophageal cancer. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to asssess the influence of eating difficulties and severe weight loss on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) up to 10 years after oesophagectomy. METHODS: Data on bodyweight and HRQoL were collected at 6 months, 3, 5 and 10 years in patients who underwent surgery for oesophageal cancer in Sweden between 2001 and 2005. Exposures were percentage weight loss, and eating difficulties defined by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-OES18 questionnaire. Outcomes were HRQoL scores from the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Repeated-measures ANOVA, adjusting for potential confounders, was used to assess the association between eating difficulties and weight loss (4 exposure groups) and HRQoL scores at each time point. Mean score differences (MDs) between time points or exposure groups were defined as clinically relevant in accordance with evidence-based interpretation guidelines. RESULTS: In total, 92 of 104 10-year survivors (88·5 per cent) responded to the questionnaires. Weight loss was greatest within 6 months of surgery. Patients with eating difficulties with or without weight loss reported clinically and statistically significantly worsened HRQoL in almost all aspects. The largest MD was seen between 5 and 10 years after surgery for global quality of life, physical, role and social function (MD -22 to -30), as well for fatigue, nausea, dyspnoea, insomnia, appetite loss and diarrhoea (MD 24-36). CONCLUSION: Eating difficulties are associated with deterioration in several aspects of HRQoL up to 10 years after surgery for oesophageal cancer.

Weekday of cancer surgery in relation to prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Later weekday of surgery seems to affect the prognosis adversely in oesophageal cancer, whereas any such influence on other cancer sites is unknown. This study aimed to test whether weekday of surgery influenced prognosis following commonly performed cancer operations. METHODS: This nationwide Swedish population-based cohort study from 1997 to 2014 analysed weekday of elective surgery for ten major cancers in relation to disease-specific and all-cause mortality. Cox regression provided hazard ratios with 95 per cent confidence intervals, adjusted for the co-variables age, sex, co-morbidity, hospital volume, calendar year and tumour stage. RESULTS: A total of 228 927 patients were included. Later weekday of surgery (Thursdays and, even more so, Fridays) was associated with increased mortality rates for gastrointestinal cancers. Adjusted hazard ratios for disease-specific mortality, comparing surgery on Friday with that on Monday, were 1·57 (95 per cent c.i. 1·31 to 1·88) for oesophagogastric cancer, 1·49 (1·17 to 1·88) for liver/pancreatic/biliary cancer and 1·53 (1·44 to 1·63) for colorectal cancer. Excluding mortality during the initial 90 days of surgery made little difference to these findings, and all-cause mortality was similar to disease-specific mortality. The associations were similar in analyses stratified for co-variables. No consistent associations were found between weekday of surgery and prognosis for cancer of the head and neck, lung, thyroid, breast, kidney/bladder, prostate or ovary/uterus. CONCLUSION: Later weekday of surgery (Thursday or Friday) seems to influence the prognosis adversely for cancers of the gastrointestinal tract.

Meta-analysis of health-related quality of life after minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between minimally invasive and open oesophagectomy for cancer at different postoperative time points. METHODS: A search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies that compared open with minimally invasive oesophagectomy. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for studies that measured HRQoL scores using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18 questionnaires. Mean differences (MDs) greater than 10 in scores were considered clinically relevant. Pooled effects of MDs with 95 per cent confidence intervals were estimated to assess statistical significance. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the qualitative analysis, involving 1157 patients who had minimally invasive surgery and 907 patients who underwent open surgery. Minimally invasive surgery resulted in better scores for global quality of life (MD 11·61, 95 per cent c.i. 3·84 to 19·39), physical function (MD 11·88, 3·92 to 19·84), fatigue (MD -13·18, -17·59 to -8·76) and pain (MD -15·85, -20·45 to -11·24) compared with open surgery at 3 months after surgery. At 6 and 12 months, no significant differences remained. CONCLUSION: Patients report better global quality of life, physical function, fatigue and pain 3 months after minimally invasive surgery compared with open surgery. No such differences remain at longer follow-up of 6 and 12 months.

The impact of pre- and post-operative weight loss and body mass index on prognosis in patients with oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss is a cardinal symptom of oesophageal cancer and is often continued after surgery. High body mass index (BMI) is a strong risk factor for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. This study aimed to assess the impact of pre- and post-operative weight loss and BMI on long-term mortality after resection for oesophageal cancer. METHODS: This prospective and nationwide cohort study included 390 patients, operated on for oesophageal cancer in Sweden in 2001-2005 with follow-up until 2016, who responded to a questionnaire on weight history 6 months after surgery. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models provided hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of mortality while adjusting for several prognostic factors, including tumour stage. RESULTS: Compared to weight stable patients, pre-surgery weight loss indicated increased HRs of overall all-cause mortality (HR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.94-1.86) and disease-specific mortality (HR = 1.36, 95% CI 0.93-1.98). Patients with >20% weight loss post-surgery had worse overall all-cause mortality (HR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.01-2.88) and disease-specific mortality (HR = 2.20, 95% CI 1.24-3.89). Compared to patients with normal BMI, decreased HRs were indicated for patients who were obese at the time of surgery (overall all-cause mortality HR 0.87 95% CI, 0.58-1.31 and disease-specific mortality HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.57-1.40), while patients with BMI ≤19.9 at 6 months post-surgery had increased all-cause mortality (HR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.03-1.95) and disease-specific mortality (HR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.21). CONCLUSION: Post-operative weight loss and low BMI at 6 months post-surgery are independent markers of poor prognosis in patients who undergo surgery for oesophageal cancer.