Nodal Yield <15 Is Associated With Reduced Survival in Esophagectomy and Is a Quality Metric.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy remains the cornerstone of curative management of esophageal adenocarcinoma and is frequently used for squamous cell carcinoma. The optimal extent of lymphadenectomy and whether increasing lymph node yields confer a survival benefit remains unclear. Guidelines suggest resecting and examining a minimum of 15 lymph nodes at esophagectomy. This study assessed the impact of lymph node yield and lymph node ratio (LNR) on survival, identifying factors influencing nodal yield and radicality of resection. METHODS: All patients undergoing esophagectomy with curative intent at a single institution (stage 1-4 inclusive) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, were reviewed. Clinical and pathologic variables were interrogated. LNR was calculated by dividing positive lymph nodes by the total nodes resected. RESULTS: Esophagectomy was performed in 397 patients, with 288 undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Margin status (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.15-2.83; P < .01), nodal yield <15 (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29-3.04; P = .002), and elevated LNR (HR, 8.16; 95% CI, 2.89-23.06; P < .001) predicted survival. MIE had higher nodal yields compared with open procedures (30.7 vs 25.3, P < .001). Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy had lower nodal yields compared with those with no neoadjuvant therapy and those with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (26.4 vs 30.6 vs 36.8, respectively; P < .001). Regression analysis determined a LNR of <0.05 was associated with a survival benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Textbook lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival. Low lymph node yield and a high LNR are associated with reduced overall survival. A LNR of <0.05 is associated with significant survival benefit. A minimum nodal yield of 15 should remain the standard of care.

Importance of tumor size in resectable stage III-N2 non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The 8th TNM edition classifies stage III-N2 disease as IIIA and IIIB based on a tumor size cutoff of 5 cm. However, the importance of tumor size on survival in patients with resectable stage III-N2 disease has not been analyzed systematically. METHODS: Survival analysis based on tumor size (>5 cm vs ≤ 5 cm) for 255 consecutive patients with nonbulky (maximal lymph node diameter of 1.5 cm) stage III-N2 non-small cell lung cancer treated with surgery in our institution. RESULTS: Ninety patients (35.3%) underwent induction chemoradiation therapy (n = 72, 28%) or induction chemotherapy (n = 18, 7%), and 165 patients underwent primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 52, 32%), adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (n = 47, 29%), or adjuvant radiation therapy (n = 14, 13.2%). After a median follow-up of 6.5 years, the overall survival was 46.5% at 5 years and 28.9% at 10 years. In tumors 5 cm or less, there was no difference in survival between patients treated with induction or adjuvant therapy. However, in tumors greater than 5 cm, the survival was significantly better after induction therapy compared with adjuvant therapy or surgery alone. Pathologic multi-station N2 disease was more frequently detected in tumors greater than 5 cm (31% vs 18% in tumors ≤5 cm, P = .042), and the rate of R1 resection was lower after induction therapy (2.2% vs 8.5% in primary surgery, P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the redefinition of tumors greater than 5 cm with resectable N2 disease to stage IIIB. This change should help to refine the multimodality approach for stage III-N2 lung cancer.