Impact of Extracapsular Lymph Node Involvement After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy Followed by Surgery in Carcinoma of the Esophagus: A Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: The current study aims to examine the impact of extracapsular lymph node involvement (EC-LNI) on survival for both esophageal adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT) followed by surgery. BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated the negative prognostic value of EC-LNI in primary surgery, but its impact after nCRT remains unclear. METHODS: From the databases of 6 European high-volume centers 1505 patients with R0 resections were withheld. Oncologic variables, including ypT, ypN, number of positive lymph nodes, and lymph node capsular status: EC-LNI and intracapsular lymph node involvement (IC-LNI), were examined. Statistical analysis was performed by Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: In SCC 182 patients (31.6%) had positive lymph nodes, of whom 60 (33.0%) showed EC-LNI. In AC 391 patients (42.1%) had positive lymph nodes, of whom 147 (37.6%) showed EC-LNI. Overall 5-year survival (O5YS) in SCC was 42.0%. Presence of EC-LNI meant a significantly worse O5YS than IC-LNI or pN0 (10.6%, 39.5%, and 47.4%, respectively; P < 0.05). O5YS in AC was 41.2%. No significant difference was observed between EC-LNI and IC-LNI (P = 0.322). In the multivariate analysis, among the examined possible prognosticators, presence of EC-LNI showed the highest hazard ratio (2.29, confidence interval: 1.52-3.47) as an independent prognosticator for overall survival in SCC, but it was not in AC. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this international multicenter study, the presence of EC-LNI after nCRT is at least as important as N-stage for survival and EC-LNI is the strongest prognosticator for overall survival in SCC but not in AC.

Optimum lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Using Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration data, we sought to (1) characterize the relationship between survival and extent of lymphadenectomy, and (2) from this, define optimum lymphadenectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: What constitutes optimum lymphadenectomy to maximize survival is controversial because of variable goals, analytic methodology, and generalizability of the underpinning data. METHODS: A total of 4627 patients who had esophagectomy alone for esophageal cancer were identified from the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration database. Patient-specific risk-adjusted survival was estimated using random survival forests. Risk-adjusted 5-year survival was averaged for each number of lymph nodes resected and its relation to cancer characteristics explored. Optimum number of nodes that should be resected to maximize 5-year survival was determined by random forest multivariable regression. RESULTS: For pN0M0 moderately and poorly differentiated cancers, and all node-positive (pN+) cancers, 5-year survival improved with increasing extent of lymphadenectomy. In pN0M0 cancers, no optimum lymphadenectomy was defined for pTis; optimum lymphadenectomy was 10 to 12 nodes for pT1, 15 to 22 for pT2, and 31 to 42 for pT3/T4, depending on histopathologic cell type. In pN+M0 cancers and 1 to 6 nodes positive, optimum lymphadenectomy was 10 for pT1, 15 for pT2, and 29 to 50 for pT3/T4. CONCLUSIONS: Greater extent of lymphadenectomy was associated with increased survival for all patients with esophageal cancer except at the extremes (TisN0M0 and >or=7 regional lymph nodes positive for cancer) and well-differentiated pN0M0 cancer. Maximum 5-year survival is modulated by T classification: resecting 10 nodes for pT1, 20 for pT2, and >or=30 for pT3/T4 is recommended.