National guidelines may reduce socioeconomic disparities in treatment selection for esophageal cancer.

The 2011 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines first incorporated the results of the landmark CROSS trial, establishing induction therapy (chemotherapy ± radiation) and surgery as the treatment standard for locoregional esophageal cancer in the United States. The effect of guideline publication on socioeconomic status (SES) inequalities in cancer treatment selection remains unknown. Patients diagnosed with Stage II/III esophageal cancer between 2004 and 2013 who underwent curative treatment with definitive chemoradiation or multimodality treatment (induction and surgery) were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare registry. Clinicopathologic characteristics were compared between the two therapies. Multivariable regression analysis was used to adjust for known factors associated with treatment selection. An interaction term with respect to guideline publication and SES was included Of the 2,148 patients included, 1,478 (68.8%) received definitive chemoradiation and 670 (31.2%) induction and surgery. Guideline publication was associated with a 16.1% increase in patients receiving induction and surgery in the low SES group (21.4% preguideline publication vs. 37.5% after). In comparison, a 4.5% increase occurred during the same period in the high SES status group (31.8% vs. 36.3%). After adjusting for factors associated with treatment selection, guideline publication was associated with a 78% increase in likelihood of receiving induction and surgery among lower SES patients (odds ratio 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05,3.03). Following the new guideline publication, patients living in low SES areas were more likely to receive optimal treatment. Increased dissemination of guidelines may lead to increased adherence to evidence-based treatment standards.

Does neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer increase postoperative morbidity or mortality?

Neoadjuvant therapy has proven to be effective in the reduction of locoregional recurrence and mortality for esophageal cancer. However, induction treatment has been reported to be associated with increased risk of postoperative complications. We therefore compared outcomes after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer for patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and patients treated with surgery alone. Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2005-2011), we identified 1939 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Seven hundred and eight (36.5%) received neoadjuvant therapy, while 1231 (63.5%) received no neoadjuvant therapy within 90 days prior to surgery. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality, and secondary outcomes included overall and serious morbidity, length of stay, and operative time. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment were younger (62.3 vs. 64.7, P < 0.001), were more likely to have experienced recent weight loss (29.4% vs. 15.9%, P < 0.001), and had worse preoperative hematological cell counts (white blood cells <4.5 or >11 × 10(9) /L: 29.3% vs. 15.0%, P < 0.001; hematocrit <36%: 49.7% vs. 30.0%, P < 0.001). On unadjusted analysis, 30-day mortality, overall, and serious morbidity were comparable between the two groups, with the exception of the individual complications of venous thromboembolic events and bleeding transfusion, which were significantly lower in the surgery-only patients (5.71% vs. 8.27%, P = 0.027; 6.89% vs. 10.57%, P = 0.004; respectively). Multivariable and matched analysis confirmed that 30-day mortality, overall, and serious morbidity, as well as prolonged length of stay, were comparable between the two groups of patients. An increasing trend of preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer was observed through the study years (from 29.0% in 2005-2006 to 44.0% in 2011, P < 0.001). According to our analysis, preoperative neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer does not increase 30-day mortality or the overall risk of postoperative complications after esophagectomy.