Genomic Landscape of Adenocarcinomas Across the Gastroesophageal Junction: Moving on from the Siewert Classification.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how the Siewert classification of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas correlates with genomic profiles. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND DATA: Current staging and treatment guidelines recommend that tumors with an epicenter less than 2 cm into the gastric cardia be treated as esophageal cancers, while tumors with epicenter greater than 2 cm into the cardia be staged and treated as gastric cancers. To date, however, few studies have compared the genomic profiles of the 3 Siewert classification groups to validate this distinction. METHODS: Using targeted tumor sequencing data on patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction previously treated with surgery at our institution, we compared genomic features across Siewert classification groups. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients were included: 121 had Siewert type I, 170 type II, and 59 type III. Comparisons by Siewert location revealed that Siewert type I and II were primarily characterized as the chromosomal instability (CIN) molecular subtype and displayed Barrett's metaplasia and p53 and cell cycle pathway dysregulation. Siewert type III tumors, by contrast, were more heterogeneous, including higher proportions of microsatellite instability (MSI) and genomically stable (GS) tumors and more frequently displayed ARID1A and somatic CDH1 alterations, signet ring cell features, and poor differentiation. Overall, Siewert type I and II tumors demonstrated greater genomic overlap with lower esophageal tumors, while Siewert type III tumors shared genomic features with gastric tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our results support recent updates in treatment and staging guidelines. Ultimately, however, molecular rather than anatomic classification may prove more valuable in determining staging, treatment, and prognosis.

Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Segmentectomy for Occult Node-Positive Clinical Stage IA Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Results of recent clinical trials suggest segmentectomy may be an acceptable alternative to lobectomy for selected patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Increased use of segmentectomy may result in a concomitant increase in occult node-positive (N+) disease on surgical pathology. The optimal management for such patients remains unknown. METHODS: Clinicopathologic data were abstracted from a prospective institutional database to identify patients with pathologic N+ disease after segmentectomy for cT1N0M0 NSCLC. Propensity score matching identified a comparable lobectomy cohort for assessment of cumulative incidence of recurrence and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 759 included patients, 27 (4%) had nodal upstaging on final pathology. Of these, 4 (15%) had skip metastasis to N2 stations, and 20 (74%) received adjuvant therapy; no completion lobectomies were performed. Ten patients (37%) had recurrence: 3 isolated locoregional (11%) and 7 distant (26%). The median time to recurrence among patients with recurrence was 1.8 years; OS after recurrence was 3.4 years. After 5:1 matching with 109 lobectomy patients, all variables were balanced between the groups, except pathologic N2 stage and open surgical approach. Five-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was not significantly different between segmentectomy and lobectomy (42% vs 52%; Gray's p=0.1). Five-year OS (63% and 50%) and rate of locoregional recurrence (12% vs. 13%) were not statistically different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with occult N+ disease after segmentectomy for cT1N0M0 NSCLC had limited isolated locoregional recurrences and similar outcomes as patients who underwent lobectomy. Lobectomy may not provide an advantage in these patients.

A Real-World Assessment of Stage I Lung Cancer Through Electronic Nose Technology.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic nose (E-nose) technology has reported excellent sensitivity and specificity in the setting of lung cancer screening. However, the performance of E-nose specifically for early-stage tumors remains unclear. Therefore, the aim of our study was to assess the diagnostic performance of E-nose technology in clinical stage I lung cancer. METHODS: This phase IIc trial (NCT04734145) included patients diagnosed with a single greater than or equal to 50% solid stage I nodule. Exhalates were prospectively collected from January 2020 to August 2023. Blinded bioengineers analyzed the exhalates, using E-nose technology to determine the probability of malignancy. Patients were stratified into three risk groups (low-risk, [<0.2]; moderate-risk, [≥0.2-0.7]; high-risk, [≥0.7]). The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of E-nose versus histopathology (accuracy and F1 score). The secondary outcome was the clinical performance of the E-nose versus clinicoradiological prediction models. RESULTS: Based on the predefined cutoff (<0.20), E-nose agreed with histopathologic results in 86% of cases, achieving an F1 score of 92.5%, based on 86 true positives, two false negatives, and 12 false positives (n = 100). E-nose would refer fewer patients with malignant nodules to observation (low-risk: 2 versus 9 and 11, respectively; p = 0.028 and p = 0.011) than would the Swensen and Brock models and more patients with malignant nodules to treatment without biopsy (high-risk: 27 versus 19 and 6, respectively; p = 0.057 and p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of clinical stage I lung cancer, E-nose agrees well with histopathology. Accordingly, E-nose technology can be used in addition to imaging or as part of a "multiomics" platform.

A New Functional Threshold for Minimally Invasive Lobectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of a lower predicted postoperative (ppo) forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) or diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) (ppoFEV1/ppoDLCO) threshold to predict cardiopulmonary complications after minimally invasive surgery (MIS) lobectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although MIS is associated with better postoperative outcomes than open surgery, MIS uses risk-assessment algorithms developed for open surgery. Moreover, several different definitions of cardiopulmonary complications are used for assessment. METHODS: All patients who underwent MIS lobectomy for clinical stage I-II lung cancer from 2018 to 2022 at our institution were considered. The performance of a ppoFEV1/ppoDLCO threshold of <45% was compared against that of the current guideline threshold of <60%. Three different definitions of cardiopulmonary complications were compared: Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS), and Berry et al. RESULTS: In 946 patients, the ppoFEV1/ppoDLCO threshold of <45% was associated with a higher proportion correctly classified (79% [95% CI, 76%-81%] vs. 65% [95% CI, 62%-68%]; P<0.001). The complication with the biggest difference in incidence between ppoFEV1/ppoDLCO of 45%-60% and >60% was prolonged air leak (33 [13%] vs. 34 [6%]; P<0.001). The predicted probability curves for cardiopulmonary complications were higher for the STS definition than for the ESTS or Berry definitions across ppoFEV1 and ppoDLCO values. CONCLUSIONS: The ppoFEV1/ppoDLCO threshold of <45% more accurately classified patients for cardiopulmonary complications after MIS lobectomy, emphasizing the need for updated risk-assessment guidelines for MIS lobectomy to optimize additional cardiopulmonary function evaluation.

Multimodal Treatment of Resectable Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The current guidelines for the treatment of esophageal cancer recommend a multimodal approach that includes chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy, radiation, and surgery. Despite advances in treatment, rates of treatment failure, pathologic incomplete response, tumor metastasis, and death remain unacceptably high. METHODS: This study was a narrative literature review using the terms "resectable esophageal cancer" and "multimodal therapy" to identify prospective trials of neoadjuvant radiation and chemotherapy, individually or combined with surgery, for esophageal cancer. Trials performed between 1984 and 2022 were identified and analyzed. CLINICALTRIALS: gov was queried to identify ongoing studies. RESULTS: Twenty-one clinical studies were identified: 15 randomized controlled trials and 6 prospective nonrandomized trials. The results of the randomized trials suggest that multimodal therapy-in the form of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in combination with radiation or chemotherapy alone, followed by surgery-is associated with better rates of local disease control and partial clinical response and, potentially, longer survival than is surgery alone. Immunotherapy is an emerging option for the treatment of patients with esophageal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of patients with resectable esophageal cancer is rapidly evolving. Although previous treatment options have had only limited benefits for patients, significant progress has been made during last 3 decades. The results of the available studies suggest that advances in the treatment of esophageal cancer have the potential to improve survival in these patients; however, questions remain regarding mechanisms of action, patient selection, and the use of personalized approaches that are based on genetics.

High-risk features associated with recurrence in stage I lung adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of knowledge regarding the use of prognostic features in stage I lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Thus, we investigated clinicopathologic features associated with recurrence after complete resection for stage I LUAD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with pathologic stage I LUAD who underwent R0 resection from 2010 to 2020. Exclusion criteria included history of lung cancer, induction or adjuvant therapy, noninvasive or mucinous LUAD, and death within 90 days of surgery. Fine and Gray competing-risk regression assessed associations between clinicopathologic features and disease recurrence. RESULTS: In total, 1912 patients met inclusion criteria. Most patients (1565 [82%]) had stage IA LUAD, and 250 developed recurrence: 141 (56%) distant and 109 (44%) locoregional only. The 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was 12% (95% CI, 11%-14%). Higher maximum standardized uptake value of the primary tumor (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04), sublobar resection (HR, 2.04), higher International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer grade (HR, 5.32 [grade 2]; HR, 7.93 [grade 3]), lymphovascular invasion (HR, 1.70), visceral pleural invasion (HR, 1.54), and tumor size (HR, 1.30) were independently associated with a hazard of recurrence. Tumors with 3 to 4 high-risk features had a higher cumulative incidence of recurrence at 5 years than tumors without these features (30% vs 4%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence after resection for stage I LUAD remains an issue for select patients. Commonly reported clinicopathologic features can be used to define patients at high risk of recurrence and should be considered when assessing the prognosis of patients with stage I disease.

Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is a technically demanding operation that requires an experienced surgeon, assistant, and anesthesiologist. The preoperative workup should focus on the extent of disease and extent of resection required, as well as the cardiopulmonary fitness of the patient. Surgical outcomes show decreased postoperative pain, decreased morbidity largely due to a reduction in respiratory complications, and decreased length of stay. Quality metrics and 5-year overall survival are equivalent to traditional open esophagectomy.

Treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with a history of bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: The relationship among obesity, bariatric surgery, and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is complex, given that some bariatric procedures are thought to be associated with increased incidence of reflux and Barrett's esophagus. Previous bariatric surgery may complicate the use of the stomach as a conduit for esophagectomy. In this study, we presented our experience with patients who developed EAC after bariatric surgery and described the challenges encountered and the techniques used. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of our institutional database to identify all patients at our institution who were treated for EAC after previously undergoing bariatric surgery. RESULTS: In total, 19 patients underwent resection with curative intent for EAC after bariatric surgery, including 10 patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy. The median age at diagnosis of EAC was 63 years; patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy were younger (median age, 56 years). The median time from bariatric surgery to EAC was 7 years. Most patients had a body mass index (BMI) score of >30 kg/m2 at the time of diagnosis of EAC; approximately 40% had class III obesity (BMI score > 40 kg/m2). Six patients (32%) had known Barrett's esophagus before undergoing a reflux-increasing bariatric procedure. Sleeve gastrectomy patients underwent esophagectomy with gastric conduit, colonic interposition, or esophagojejunostomy. Only 1 patient had an anastomotic leak (after esophagojejunostomy). CONCLUSION: Endoscopy should be required both before (for treatment selection) and after all bariatric surgical procedures. Resection of EAC after bariatric surgery requires a highly individualized approach but is safe and feasible.

Participation in Virtual Prehabilitation and Outcomes Following Thoracic Cancer Surgery.

This cohort study evaluates the association of a virtual synchronized prehabilitation program with perioperative outcomes among patients undergoing thoracic cancer surgery.

Immunotherapy for Resectable Locally Advanced Esophageal Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The current standard of care for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy with surgical resection; however, disease-free survival in these patients remains poor. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved for adjuvant treatment of locally advanced esophageal and GEJ cancers, but their benefit in the perioperative and neoadjuvant settings remains under investigation. METHODS: We used the PubMed online database to conduct a literature search to identify studies that investigated immunotherapy for locally advanced esophageal and GEJ carcinoma. A review of ClinicalTrials.gov yielded a list of ongoing trials. RESULTS: Adjuvant nivolumab for residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery is the only approved immunotherapy regimen for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Early-phase trials investigating the addition of neoadjuvant or perioperative ICIs to standard-of-care multimodality approaches have observed pathologic complete response rates as high as 60%. Response rates are highest for ICIs plus chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and dual checkpoint inhibition in mismatch repair-deficient adenocarcinomas. Safety profiles are acceptable, with a pooled adverse event rate of 27%. Surgical morbidity and mortality with immunotherapy are similar to historical controls with no immunotherapy, and R0 resection rates are high. When reported, disease-free survival among patients treated with perioperative immunotherapy is promising. CONCLUSIONS: Outside of clinical trials, immunotherapy for resectable esophageal carcinoma is limited to the adjuvant setting. Phase III trials investigating neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy are now underway and will provide much-needed data on survival that may ultimately lead to practice-changing recommendations.

Clinical and molecular characteristics of early-onset vs average-onset esophagogastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: The rate of esophagogastric cancer is rising among individuals under 50 years of age. It remains unknown whether early-onset esophagogastric cancer represents a unique entity. This study investigated the clinical and molecular characteristics of early-onset and average-onset esophagogastric cancer . METHODS: We reviewed the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center gastric, esophageal, and gastroesophageal junction cancer database. Associations between baseline characteristics and tumor and germline molecular alterations were compared between those with early-onset and average-onset esophagogastric cancer using Fisher exact tests and the Benjamini-Hochberg method for multiple-hypothesis correction. RESULTS: We included 1123 patients with early-onset esophagogastric cancer (n = 219; median age = 43 years [range = 18-49 years]) and average-onset esophagogastric cancer (n = 904; median age = 67 years [range = 50-94 years]) treated between 2005 and 2018. The early-onset group had more women (39% vs 28%, P = .002). Patients with early-onset esophagogastric cancer were more likely to have a gastric primary site (64% vs 44%, P < .0001). The signet ring cell and/or diffuse type was 3 times more common in the early-onset esophagogastric cancer group (31% vs 9%, P < .0001). Early-onsite tumors were more frequently genomically stable (31% vs 18%, P = .0002) and unlikely to be microsatellite instability high (2% vs 7%, P = .003). After restricting to adenocarcinoma and signet ring cell and/or diffuse type carcinomas, we observed no difference in stage (P = .40) or overall survival from stage IV diagnosis (median = 22.7 vs 22.1 months, P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: Our study supported a preponderance of gastric primary disease sites, signet ring histology, and genomically stable molecular subtypes in early-onset esophagogastric cancer. Our findings highlight the need for further research to define the underlying pathogenesis and strategies for early detection and prevention.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction.

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction.

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Lung resection after initial nonoperative treatment for non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The study objectives were to assess the outcomes of lung resection in patients with non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with nonoperative treatment and to identify prognostic factors associated with survival. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery (2010-2022) after initial nonoperative treatment at a single institution were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Exclusion criteria included metachronous cancer, planned neoadjuvant therapy, and surgery for diagnostic or palliative indications. Cox models were constructed for overall survival and event-free survival. Survival of patients with stage IV disease was compared with survival of a nonstudy cohort who did not undergo surgery. RESULTS: In total, 120 patients met the inclusion criteria. Initial clinical stage was early stage in 16%, locoregionally advanced in 25%, and metastatic in 59% of patients. The indication for surgery was recurrence in 18%, local persistent disease in 23%, oligoprogression in 22%, and local control of oligometastatic disease in 38% of patients. Grade 3 or greater complications occurred in 5% of patients; 90-day mortality was 3%. Three-year event-free survival and overall survival were 39% and 73%, respectively. Male sex and lymphovascular invasion were associated with shorter event-free survival and overall survival; younger age and prior radiation therapy were associated with shorter overall survival. Patients with stage IV disease who received salvage lung resection had better overall survival than similar patients who received subsequent systemic therapy and no surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this selected, heterogeneous population, lung resection after initial nonoperative treatment for non-small cell lung cancer was safe. Surgery as local consolidative therapy was associated with encouraging outcomes and should be considered for these patients.

Tumor differentiation impacts response to neoadjuvant therapy and survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The current staging system for esophageal adenocarcinoma only considers tumor grade in early tumors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of tumor differentiation on response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and survival in patients with locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This was a multi-institution retrospective review of all patients with esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy from January 2010 to December 2017. Response to neoadjuvant therapy and survival was compared between patients with well- or moderately differentiated (G1/2) tumors versus poorly differentiated (G3) tumors. RESULTS: There were 550 patients, 485 men (88.2%) and 65 women. The median age was 61 years, and the tumor was G1/2 in 288 (52.4%) and G3 in 262 patients. Overall clinical stage before neoadjuvant therapy was similar between groups. Pathologic complete response (pCR) was found in 87 patients (15.8%). The frequency of pCR was similar between groups, but residual disease in the esophagus and lymph nodes was significantly more likely with G3 tumors. Median follow-up was 63 months and absolute survival, overall survival, and disease-free survival were all significantly worse in patients with G3 tumors. Further, even with pCR, patients with G3 tumors had significantly worse survival. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that response to neoadjuvant therapy was not affected by tumor differentiation. However, poor differentiation was associated with worse survival compared with patients with G1/2 tumors, even among those with pCR. These results suggest that poor differentiation should be considered as an added risk factor for clinical staging in patients with locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Biologic versus synthetic prosthesis for chest wall reconstruction: a matched analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes between biologic and synthetic reconstructions after chest wall resection in a matched cohort. METHODS: All patients who underwent reconstruction after full-thickness chest wall resection from 2000 to 2022 were reviewed and stratified by prosthesis type (biologic or synthetic). Biologic prostheses were of biologic origin or were fully absorbable and incorporable. Integer matching was performed to reduce confounding. The study end point was surgical site complications requiring reoperation. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify associated risk factors. RESULTS: In total, 438 patients underwent prosthetic chest wall reconstruction (unmatched: biologic, n = 49; synthetic, n = 389; matched: biologic, n = 46; synthetic, n = 46). After matching, the median (interquartile range) defect size was 83 cm2 (50-142) for the biologic group and 90 cm2 (48-146) for the synthetic group (P = 0.97). Myocutaneous flaps were used in 33% of biologic reconstructions (n = 15) and 33% of synthetic reconstructions (n = 15) in the matched cohort (P = 0.99). The incidence of surgical site complications requiring reoperation was not significantly different between biologic and synthetic reconstructions in the unmatched (3 [6%] vs 29 [7%]; P = 0.99) and matched (2 [4%] vs 4 [9%]; P = 0.68) cohorts. On the multivariable analysis, operative time [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00-1.01; P = 0.006] and operative blood loss (aOR = 1.00, 95% CI, 1.00-1.00]; P = 0.012) were associated with higher rates of surgical site complications requiring reoperation; microvascular free flaps (aOR = 0.03, 95% CI, 0.00-0.42; P = 0.024) were associated with lower rates. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of surgical site complications requiring reoperation was not significantly different between biologic and synthetic prostheses in chest wall reconstructions.

Controversies in the surgical management of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has risen dramatically over the last decade. Over this same period, our understanding and treatments have been revolutionized. Just over a decade ago, the majority of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer went directly to surgery and our overall survival was bleak. Our current strategy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma is a multi-disciplinary approach. This approach consists of chemotherapy plus or minus radiation followed by surgical resection followed by adjuvant immunotherapy with the presence of any residual disease. Therefore, now more than ever, the goals of surgery are to minimize morbidity, provide aggressive local control and allow patients to receive to quickly recover so they can receive adjuvant systemic therapy. Surgery continues to play a crucial role in the multi-disciplinary approach to EAC. This review will highlight the on-going areas of controversy in surgical treatment. These controversies are around surgical selection, perioperative decision making and the role of surgery. Specifically, there are controversies in the type of surgical approach offered. This review will discuss the benefits of minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy. The indications for gastrectomy versus esophagectomy in patients with gastroesophageal junction EAC. Further, at the time of operation, there is still debate and on-going trials addressing the addition of a pyloric intervention. Lastly, as we push the limits of systemic therapy, there are those who may not even need a surgical resection. This review will cover the most recent data on selective esophageal resection and the concerns regarding this approach.