A meta-analysis on salvage surgery as a potentially curative procedure in patients with isolated local recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer after chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Isolated local recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer (EC) after curative intended definitive (dCRT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with initially omitted surgery, is a potential indication for salvage surgery. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of salvage surgery in these patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was performed using databases of PubMed/Medline. All included studies were performed in patients with persistent or recurrent EC after initial treatment with dCRT or nCRT, between 2007 and 2017. Survival analysis was performed with an inverse-variance weighting method. RESULTS: Of the 278 identified studies, 28 were eligible, including a total of 1076 patients. Postoperative complications after salvage esophagectomy were significantly more common among patients with isolated persistent than in those with locoregional recurrent EC, including respiratory (36.6% versus 22.7%; difference in proportion 10.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) [3.1; 18.7]) and cardiovascular complications (10.4% versus 4.5%; difference in proportion 5.9 with 95% CI [1.5; 10.2]). The pooled estimated 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.6% [1.6; 3.6] and 8.0% [6.3; 9.8], respectively. The pooled estimated 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 39.0% (95% CI: [35.8; 42.2]) and 19.4% [95% CI:16.5; 22.4], respectively. Patients with isolated persistent or recurrent EC after initial CRT had similar 5-year OS (14.0% versus 19.7%, difference in proportion -5.7, 95% CI [-13.7; 2.3]). CONCLUSIONS: Salvage surgery is a potentially curative procedure in patients with locally recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer and can be performed safely after definitive or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy when surgery was initially omitted.

Prognostic Value of the Circumferential Resection Margin in Esophageal Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Circumferential resection margins (CRM) for esophageal cancer (EC), defined by the College of American Pathologists (CAP; >0 mm) or the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP; >1 mm) as tumor-free (R0), are based on a surgery-alone approach. We evaluated the usefulness of both definitions in current practice with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). METHODS: CRMs were measured in 209 patients (104 with nCRT) with locally advanced EC after transthoracic esophagectomy. Local recurrence and cancer related death were scored as events. Patients were followed for at least 2 years or until death. Prognostic factors (P < 0.1 in univariate analyses) for 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were incorporated in multivariate Cox regression analyses. Both CRM measurements were analyzed separately and prognostic cutoff values (0-1.0 mm) were assessed in both groups. RESULTS: Independent prognostic factors (P < 0.05) for 2-year DFS were tumor length, lymph node ratio, angioinvasion, and CAP R0 in the surgery-alone group and pN stage (P < 0.01) in the nCRT group. Prognostic factors (P < 0.05) for 2-year LRFS were CAP, lymph node ratio, and tumor length in the surgery-alone group, and CAP and grade in the nCRT group. Optimal CRM cutoff values between 0.0 and 0.2 mm were prognostic for 2-year DFS in the surgery-alone and at 0.3 mm for the nCRT group. CONCLUSIONS: nCRT affected the CRM cutoff values. After nCRT, the CRM R0 according to the CAP was only prognostic for 2-year LRFS. However, in the surgery-alone group, it was prognostic for both the 2-year DFS and LRFS.

Prognostic impact of clinicopathological features and expression of biomarkers related to (18)F-FDG uptake in esophageal cancer.

PURPOSE: To analyze the association between pretreatment 18-F-fluoro-deoxyglucose (FDG) uptake and characteristics of aggressive tumor biology in predicting outcome in esophageal cancer (EC). METHODS: Tumor FDG-uptake was measured by maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) in 47 patients undergoing esophagectomy with curative intent. ROC analyses were used to predict an optimal SUVmax cutoff for survival. Expression of hexokinase-II (HK-II), glucose transporter I (GLUT-I), hypoxia inducible factor-1α (HIF-Iα), vascular endothelial growth factor-C (VEGF-C), p53, and proliferative activity (Ki-67) were correlated with SUVmax values and clinicopathological characteristics. RESULTS: A SUVmax > 3.67 predicted a significantly lower disease-free survival (DFS) and distant recurrence-free survival (p = 0.022 and p = 0.005). High HK-II expression was correlated with reduced SUVmax values (p = 0.002) and was significantly higher in esophageal adenocarcinoma compared with squamous cell carcinoma (p = 0.005). Preoperative high FDG uptake in primary tumors was associated with nodal metastases (pN1; Spearman correlation 0.39, p = 0.01). We found no positive correlation between SUVmax and GLUT-1, HK-1, HIF-Iα 1, VEGF-C, p53, and Ki-67 expression. CONCLUSIONS: High preoperative FDG-uptake strongly predicts poor survival outcome and is associated with lymph node metastases in EC patients. HK-II expression was related to SUVmax and DFS.

A comparison of carboplatin and paclitaxel with cisplatinum and 5-fluorouracil in definitive chemoradiation in esophageal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: In esophageal cancer (EC) patients who are not eligible for surgery, definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) with curative intent using cisplatinum with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is the standard chemotherapy regimen. Nowadays carboplatin/paclitaxel is also often used. In this study, we compared survival and toxicity rates between both regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter study included 102 patients treated in five centers in the Northeast Netherlands from 1996 till 2008. Forty-seven patients received cisplatinum/5-FU (75 mg/m(2) and 1 g/m(2)) and 55 patients carboplatin/paclitaxel (AUC2 and 50 mg/m(2)). RESULTS: Overall survival (OS) was not different between the cisplatinum/5-FU and carboplatin/paclitaxel group {[P = 0.879, hazard ratio (HR) 0.97 [confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.51]}, with a median survival of 16.1 (CI 11.8-20.5) and 13.8 months (CI 10.8-16.9). Median disease-free survival (DFS) was comparable [P = 0.760, HR 0.93 (CI 0.60-1.45)] between the cisplatinum/5-FU group [11.1 months (CI 6.9-15.3)] and the carboplatin/paclitaxel group [9.7 months (CI 5.1-14.4)]. Groups were comparable except clinical T stage was higher in the carboplatin/paclitaxel group (P = 0.008). High clinical T stage (cT4) was not related to OS and DFS in a univariate analysis (P = 0.250 and P = 0.201). A higher percentage of patients completed the carboplatin/paclitaxel regimen (82% versus 57%, P = 0.010). Hematological and nonhematological toxicity (≥grade 3) in the carboplatin/paclitaxel group (4% and 18%) was significantly lower than in the cisplatinum/5-FU (19% and 38%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we showed comparable outcome, in terms of DFS and OS for carboplatin/paclitaxel compared with cisplatinum/5-FU as dCRT treatment in EC patients. Toxicity rates were lower in the carboplatin/paclitaxel group together with higher treatment compliance. Carboplatin/paclitaxel as an alternative treatment of cisplatinum/5-FU is a good candidate regimen for further evaluation.