Prognostic implications of the extent of downstaging after neoadjuvant therapy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background: There are few data evaluating the extent of downstaging in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma and the difference in outcomes for a similar pathological stage in neoadjuvant-naive patients. The aim of this study was to characterize the prognostic value of downstaging extent in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for oesophageal cancer.Methods: Oesophageal adenocarcinoma and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients receiving either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy between 2004 and 2017 were identified from the National Cancer Database. The extent of downstaging was defined as the extent of migration between groups (for example stage IVa to IIIb = one stage). Cox multivariable regression was used to produce adjusted models for downstaging extent.Results: Of 13 594 patients, 11 355 with oesophageal adenocarcinoma and 2239 with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma were included. In oesophageal adenocarcinoma, patients with downstaged disease by three or more stages (hazards ratio (HR) 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.36 to 0.44, P < 0.001), two stages (HR 0.43, 95 per cent c.i. 0.39 to 0.48, P < 0.001), or one stage (HR 0.57, 95 per cent c.i. 0.52 to 0.62, P < 0.001) had significantly longer survival than those with upstaged disease in adjusted analyses. In oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, patients with downstaged disease by three or more stages had significantly longer survival than those with less downstaged disease, no change, or upstaged disease. Patients with downstaged disease by three or more stages (HR 0.55, 95 per cent c.i. 0.43 to 0.71, P < 0.001), two stages (HR 0.58, 95 per cent c.i. 0.46 to 0.73, P < 0.001), or one stage (HR 0.69, 95 per cent c.i. 0.55 to 0.86, P = 0.001) had significantly longer survival than those with upstaged disease in adjusted analyses.Conclusion: The extent of downstaging is an important prognosticator, whereas the optimal neoadjuvant therapy remains controversial. Identifying biomarkers associated with response to neoadjuvant regimens may permit individualized treatment

Evaluating the diagnostic and triage performance of digital and online symptom checkers for the presentation of myocardial infarction; A retrospective cross-sectional study

Online symptom checkers are increasingly popular health technologies that enable patients to input their symptoms to produce diagnoses and triage advice. However, there is concern regarding the performance and safety of symptom checkers in diagnosing and triaging patients with life-threatening conditions. This retrospective cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate and compare commercially available symptom checkers for performance in diagnosing and triaging myocardial infarctions (MI). Symptoms and biodata of MI patients were inputted into 8 symptom checkers identified through a systematic search. Anonymised clinical data of 100 consecutive MI patients were collected from a tertiary coronary intervention centre between 1st January 2020 to 31st December 2020. Outcomes included (1) diagnostic sensitivity as defined by symptom checkers outputting MI as the primary diagnosis (D1), or one of the top three (D3), or top five diagnoses (D5); and (2) triage sensitivity as defined by symptom checkers outputting urgent treatment recommendations. Overall D1 sensitivity was 48±31% and varied between symptom checkers (range: 6–85%). Overall D3 and D5 sensitivity were 73±20% (34–92%) and 79±14% (63–94%), respectively. Overall triage sensitivity was 83±13% (55–91%). 24±16% of atypical cases had a correct D1 though for female atypical cases D1 sensitivity was only 10%. Atypical MI D3 and D5 sensitivity were 44±21% and 48±24% respectively and were significantly lower than typical MI cases (p<0.01). Atypical MI triage sensitivity was significantly lower than typical cases (53±20% versus 84±15%, p<0.01). Female atypical cases had significantly lower diagnostic and triage sensitivity than typical female MI cases (p<0.01).Given the severity of the pathology, the diagnostic performance of symptom checkers for correctly diagnosing an MI is concerningly low. Moreover, there is considerable inter-symptom checker performance variation. Patients presenting with atypical symptoms were under-diagnosed and under-triaged, especially if female. This study highlights the need for improved clinical performance, equity and transparency associated with these technologies

Multicenter, prospective cohort study of oesophageal injuries and related clinical outcomes (MUSOIC study)

Objective: To identify prognostic factors associated with 90-day mortality in patients with oesophageal perforation (OP), and characterize the specific timeline from presentation to intervention, and its relation to mortality. Background: OP is a rare gastro-intestinal surgical emergency with a high mortality rate. However, there is no updated evidence on its outcomes in the context of centralized esophago-gastric services; updated consensus guidelines; and novel non-surgical treatment strategies. Methods: A multi-center, prospective cohort study involving eight high-volume esophago-gastric centers (January 2016 to December 2020) was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was 90-day mortality. Secondary measures included length of hospital and ICU stay, and complications requiring re-intervention or re-admission. Mortality model training was performed using random forest, support-vector machines, and logistic regression with and without elastic net regularisation. Chronological analysis was performed by examining each patient’s journey timepoint with reference to symptom onset. Results: The mortality rate for 369 patients included was 18.9%. Patients treated conservatively, endoscopically, surgically, or combined approaches had mortality rates of 24.1%, 23.7%, 8.7%, and 18.2%, respectively. The predictive variables for mortality were Charlson comorbidity index, haemoglobin count, leucocyte count, creatinine levels, cause of perforation, presence of cancer, hospital transfer, CT findings, whether a contrast swallow was performed, and intervention type. Stepwise interval model showed that time to diagnosis was the most significant contributor to mortality. Conclusion: Non-surgical strategies have better outcomes and may be preferred in selected cohorts to manage perforations. Outcomes can be significantly improved through better risk-stratification based on afore-mentioned modifiable risk factors

Prevalence and risk factors for malignant nodal involvement in early esophago-gastric adenocarcinoma:Results from the multicenter retrospective CONGRESS study (endosCopic resectiON, esophaGectomy or gastrectomy foR Early eSophagogastric cancerS)

Objective: The aim of this study was to quantify LNM risk and outcomes following treatment of early esophago-gastric (EG) adenocarcinoma.Background: The standard of care for early T1N0 EG cancer is endoscopic resection (ER). Radical surgical resection is recommended for patients perceived to be at risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM). Current models to select organ-preserving vs. surgical treatment are inconsistent.Methods: CONGRESS is a UK-based multicentre retrospective cohort study. Patients diagnosed with clinical or pathological T1N0 EG adenocarcinoma from 2015-2022 were included. Outcomes and rates of LNM were assessed. Cox regression was performed to assess the impact of prognostic and treatment factors on overall survival.Results: 1,601 patients from 26 centres were included, with median follow-up 32 months(IQR 14-53). 1285/1612(80.3%) underwent ER, 497/1601(31.0%) underwent surgery. Overall rate of LNM was 13.5%. On ER staging, tumour depth (T1bsm2-3 17.6% vs. T1a 7.1%), lymphovascular invasion (17.2% vs. 12.6%), or signet cells (28.6% vs. 13.0%) were associated with LNM. In multivariable regression analysis, these were not significantly associated with LNM rates or survival. Adjusting for demographic and tumour variables, surgery after ER was associated with significant survival benefit, HR 0.33(0.15-0.77),P=0.010.Conclusion: This large multicentre dataset suggests that early EG adenocarcinoma is associated with significant risk of LNM. This data is representative of current real clinical practice with ER-based staging, and suggests previously held beliefs regarding reliability of predictive factors for LNM may need to be reconsidered. Further research to identify patients who may benefit from organ-preserving vs. surgical treatment is urgently required.</p

Long-Term Survival Associated with Direct Oral Feeding Following Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy:Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial (NUTRIENT II)

Advancements in perioperative care have improved postoperative morbidity and recovery after esophagectomy. The direct start of oral intake can also enhance short-term outcomes following minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL). Subsequently, short-term outcomes may affect long-term survival. This planned sub-study of the NUTRIENT II trial, a multicenter randomized controlled trial, investigated the long-term survival of direct versus delayed oral feeding following MIE-IL. The outcomes included 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and the influence of complications and caloric intake on OS. After excluding cases of 90-day mortality, 145 participants were analyzed. Of these, 63 patients (43.4%) received direct oral feeding. At 3 years, OS was significantly better in the direct oral feeding group (p = 0.027), but not at 5 years (p = 0.115). Moreover, 5-year DFS was significantly better in the direct oral feeding group (p = 0.047) and a trend towards improved DFS was shown at 3 years (p = 0.079). Postoperative complications and caloric intake on day 5 did not impact OS. The results of this study show a tendency of improved 3-year OS and 5-year DFS, suggesting a potential long-term survival benefit in patients receiving direct oral feeding after esophagectomy. However, the findings should be further explored in larger future trials.</p

Sex-related differences in oncologic outcomes, operative complications and health-related quality of life after curative-intent oesophageal cancer treatment: multicentre retrospective analysis

Background: Oesophageal cancer, in particular adenocarcinoma, has a strong male predominance. However, the impact of patient sex on operative and oncologic outcomes and recovery of health-related quality of life is poorly documented, and was the focus of this large multicentre cohort study. Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent oncological oesophagectomy from 2009 to 2015 in the 20 European iNvestigation of SUrveillance after Resection for Esophageal cancer study group centres were assessed. Clinicopathologic variables, therapeutic approach, postoperative complications, survival and health-related quality of life data were compared between male and female patients. Multivariable analyses adjusted for age, sex, tumour histology, treatment protocol and major complications. Specific subgroup analyses comparing adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell cancer for all key outcomes were performed. Results: Overall, 3974 patients were analysed, 3083 (77.6%) male and 891 (22.4%) female; adenocarcinoma was predominant in both groups, while squamous cell cancer was observed more commonly in female patients (39.8% versus 15.1%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated improved outcomes in female patients for overall survival (HRmales 1.24, 95% c.i. 1.07 to 1.44) and disease-free survival (HRmales 1.22, 95% c.i. 1.05 to 1.43), which was caused by the adenocarcinoma subgroup, whereas this difference was not confirmed in squamous cell cancer. Male patients presented higher health-related quality of life functional scores but also a higher risk of financial problems, while female patients had lower overall summary scores and more persistent gastrointestinal symptoms. Conclusion: This study reveals uniquely that female sex is associated with more favourable long-term survival after curative treatment for oesophageal cancer, especially adenocarcinoma, although long-term overall and gastrointestinal health-related quality of life are poorer in women

Sex-related differences in oncologic outcomes, operative complications and health-related quality of life after curative-intent oesophageal cancer treatment: multicentre retrospective analysis.

Oesophageal cancer, in particular adenocarcinoma, has a strong male predominance. However, the impact of patient sex on operative and oncologic outcomes and recovery of health-related quality of life is poorly documented, and was the focus of this large multicentre cohort study. All consecutive patients who underwent oncological oesophagectomy from 2009 to 2015 in the 20 European iNvestigation of SUrveillance after Resection for Esophageal cancer study group centres were assessed. Clinicopathologic variables, therapeutic approach, postoperative complications, survival and health-related quality of life data were compared between male and female patients. Multivariable analyses adjusted for age, sex, tumour histology, treatment protocol and major complications. Specific subgroup analyses comparing adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell cancer for all key outcomes were performed. Overall, 3974 patients were analysed, 3083 (77.6%) male and 891 (22.4%) female; adenocarcinoma was predominant in both groups, while squamous cell cancer was observed more commonly in female patients (39.8% versus 15.1%, P &lt; 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated improved outcomes in female patients for overall survival (HRmales 1.24, 95% c.i. 1.07 to 1.44) and disease-free survival (HRmales 1.22, 95% c.i. 1.05 to 1.43), which was caused by the adenocarcinoma subgroup, whereas this difference was not confirmed in squamous cell cancer. Male patients presented higher health-related quality of life functional scores but also a higher risk of financial problems, while female patients had lower overall summary scores and more persistent gastrointestinal symptoms. This study reveals uniquely that female sex is associated with more favourable long-term survival after curative treatment for oesophageal cancer, especially adenocarcinoma, although long-term overall and gastrointestinal health-related quality of life are poorer in women

Endogenous aldehyde accumulation generates genotoxicity and exhaled biomarkers in esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Volatile aldehydes are enriched in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients' breath and could improve early diagnosis, however the mechanisms of their production are unknown. Here, we show that weak aldehyde detoxification characterizes EAC, which is sufficient to cause endogenous aldehyde accumulation in vitro. Two aldehyde groups are significantly enriched in EAC biopsies and adjacent tissue: (i) short-chain alkanals, and (ii) medium-chain alkanals, including decanal. The short-chain alkanals form DNA-adducts, which demonstrates genotoxicity and confirms inadequate detoxification. Metformin, a putative aldehyde scavenger, reduces this toxicity. Tissue and breath concentrations of the medium-chain alkanal decanal are correlated, and increased decanal is linked to reduced ALDH3A2 expression, TP53 deletion, and adverse clinical features. Thus, we present a model for increased exhaled aldehydes based on endogenous accumulation from reduced detoxification, which also causes therapeutically actionable genotoxicity. These results support EAC early diagnosis trials using exhaled aldehyde analysis

Multimodality treatment for esophageal adenocarcinoma: Multi-center propensity-score matched study

Background: The primary aim of this study was to compare survival from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (NCRS) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (NCS) for the treatment of esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. The secondary aims were to compare pathological effects, short-term mortality and morbidity, and to evaluate the effect of lymph node harvest upon survival in both treatment groups. Methods: Data were collected from 10 European centers from 2001 to 2012. Six hundred and eight patients with stage II or III oesophageal or oesophago-gastric junctional adenocarcinoma were included; 301 in the NCRS group and 307 in the NCS group. Propensity score matching and Cox regression analyses were used to compensate for

Recurrence and Survival after Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Ensure Study

Objective: To determine the impact of operative approach [open (OE), hybrid minimally invasive (HMIE), and total minimally invasive (TMIE) esophagectomy] on operative and oncologic outcomes for patients treated with curative intent for esophageal and junctional cancer. Background: The optimum oncologic surgical approach to esophageal and junctional cancer is unclear. Methods: This secondary analysis of the European multicenter ENSURE study includes patients undergoing curative-intent esophagectomy for cancer between 2009 and 2015 across 20 high-volume centers. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and the incidence and location of disease recurrence. Secondary endpoints included among others R0 resection rate, lymph node yield, and overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 3199 patients were included. Of these, 55% underwent OE, 17% HMIE, and 29% TMIE. DFS was independently increased post-TMIE [hazard ratio (HR): 0.86 (95% CI: 0.76-0.98), P = 0.022] compared with OE. Multivariable regression demonstrated no difference in absolute locoregional recurrence risk according to the operative approach [HMIE vs OE, odds ratio (OR): 0.79, P = 0.257; TMIE vs OE, OR: 0.84, P = 0.243]. The probability of systemic recurrence was independently increased post-HMIE (OR: 2.07, P = 0.031), but not TMIE (OR: 0.86, P = 0.508). R0 resection rates (P = 0.005) and nodal yield (P < 0.001) were independently increased after TMIE, but not HMIE (P = 0.424; P = 0.512) compared with OE. OS was independently improved following both HMIE (HR: 0.79, P = 0.009) and TMIE (HR: 0.82, P = 0.003) as compared with OE. Conclusion: In this European multicenter study, TMIE was associated with improved surgical quality and DFS, whereas both TMIE and HMIE were associated with improved OS as compared with OE for esophageal cancer