Prognostic Impact of Squamous Cell Carcinoma Antigen During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients With Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated With Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

Squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC) is widely used as a tumor marker for esophageal cancer. In this study, we investigated the relationship between SCC and long-term outcomes in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Between 2010 and 2018, 124 patients with ESCC who underwent MIE after NAC (cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil) were included. Patients were divided into low and high groups based on their pre-NAC SCC level, according to the cut-off value determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve. These two patient groups were further divided into subgroups by receiver operating characteristics according to whether SCC was low or high after NAC. For overall survival (OS), the cut-off value for SCC pre-NAC was 0.9 ng/ml. Ninety-six patients were in the high SCC group (≥0.9 ng/ml) and 28 patients were in the low SCC group (<0.9 ng/ml) prior to NAC. The patients were then divided into pre-NAC/post-NAC SCC subgroups accordingly: low/low SCC (n=7), low/high SCC (n=21), high/low SCC (n=53), and high/high SCC (n=43). The 5-year OS rates were 100%, 66.7%, 50.9%, and 32.6%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis for OS, a high/high pre-NAC/post-NAC SCC status was an independent prognostic factor for poorer OS, along with pathological N stage. For patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with NAC followed by MIE, a high SCC level prior to NAC which was also high after NAC was an independent prognostic factor and might contribute to deciding the need for adjuvant therapy.

Torigoe R ，Oshikiri T ，Goto H ，Koterazawa Y ，Sawada R ，Ikeda T ，Harada H ，Urakawa N ，Hasegawa H ，Kanaji S ，Yamashita K ，Matsuda T ，Kakeji Y ... -  《-》

Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.

Survival estimation for patients with symptomatic skeletal metastases ideally should be made before a type of local treatment has already been determined. Currently available survival prediction tools, however, were generated using data from patients treated either operatively or with local radiation alone, raising concerns about whether they would generalize well to all patients presenting for assessment. The Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine-learning algorithm (SORG-MLA), trained with institution-based data of surgically treated patients, and the Metastases location, Elderly, Tumor primary, Sex, Sickness/comorbidity, and Site of radiotherapy model (METSSS), trained with registry-based data of patients treated with radiotherapy alone, are two of the most recently developed survival prediction models, but they have not been tested on patients whose local treatment strategy is not yet decided. (1) Which of these two survival prediction models performed better in a mixed cohort made up both of patients who received local treatment with surgery followed by radiotherapy and who had radiation alone for symptomatic bone metastases? (2) Which model performed better among patients whose local treatment consisted of only palliative radiotherapy? (3) Are laboratory values used by SORG-MLA, which are not included in METSSS, independently associated with survival after controlling for predictions made by METSSS? Between 2010 and 2018, we provided local treatment for 2113 adult patients with skeletal metastases in the extremities at an urban tertiary referral academic medical center using one of two strategies: (1) surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy or (2) palliative radiotherapy alone. Every patient's survivorship status was ascertained either by their medical records or the national death registry from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration. After applying a priori designated exclusion criteria, 91% (1920) were analyzed here. Among them, 48% (920) of the patients were female, and the median (IQR) age was 62 years (53 to 70 years). Lung was the most common primary tumor site (41% [782]), and 59% (1128) of patients had other skeletal metastases in addition to the treated lesion(s). In general, the indications for surgery were the presence of a complete pathologic fracture or an impending pathologic fracture, defined as having a Mirels score of ≥ 9, in patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of less than or equal to IV and who were considered fit for surgery. The indications for radiotherapy were relief of pain, local tumor control, prevention of skeletal-related events, and any combination of the above. In all, 84% (1610) of the patients received palliative radiotherapy alone as local treatment for the target lesion(s), and 16% (310) underwent surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy. Neither METSSS nor SORG-MLA was used at the point of care to aid clinical decision-making during the treatment period. Survival was retrospectively estimated by these two models to test their potential for providing survival probabilities. We first compared SORG to METSSS in the entire population. Then, we repeated the comparison in patients who received local treatment with palliative radiation alone. We assessed model performance by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration analysis, Brier score, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The AUROC measures discrimination, which is the ability to distinguish patients with the event of interest (such as death at a particular time point) from those without. AUROC typically ranges from 0.5 to 1.0, with 0.5 indicating random guessing and 1.0 a perfect prediction, and in general, an AUROC of ≥ 0.7 indicates adequate discrimination for clinical use. Calibration refers to the agreement between the predicted outcomes (in this case, survival probabilities) and the actual outcomes, with a perfect calibration curve having an intercept of 0 and a slope of 1. A positive intercept indicates that the actual survival is generally underestimated by the prediction model, and a negative intercept suggests the opposite (overestimation). When comparing models, an intercept closer to 0 typically indicates better calibration. Calibration can also be summarized as log(O:E), the logarithm scale of the ratio of observed (O) to expected (E) survivors. A log(O:E) > 0 signals an underestimation (the observed survival is greater than the predicted survival); and a log(O:E) < 0 indicates the opposite (the observed survival is lower than the predicted survival). A model with a log(O:E) closer to 0 is generally considered better calibrated. The Brier score is the mean squared difference between the model predictions and the observed outcomes, and it ranges from 0 (best prediction) to 1 (worst prediction). The Brier score captures both discrimination and calibration, and it is considered a measure of overall model performance. In Brier score analysis, the "null model" assigns a predicted probability equal to the prevalence of the outcome and represents a model that adds no new information. A prediction model should achieve a Brier score at least lower than the null-model Brier score to be considered as useful. The DCA was developed as a method to determine whether using a model to inform treatment decisions would do more good than harm. It plots the net benefit of making decisions based on the model's predictions across all possible risk thresholds (or cost-to-benefit ratios) in relation to the two default strategies of treating all or no patients. The care provider can decide on an acceptable risk threshold for the proposed treatment in an individual and assess the corresponding net benefit to determine whether consulting with the model is superior to adopting the default strategies. Finally, we examined whether laboratory data, which were not included in the METSSS model, would have been independently associated with survival after controlling for the METSSS model's predictions by using the multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Between the two models, only SORG-MLA achieved adequate discrimination (an AUROC of > 0.7) in the entire cohort (of patients treated operatively or with radiation alone) and in the subgroup of patients treated with palliative radiotherapy alone. SORG-MLA outperformed METSSS by a wide margin on discrimination, calibration, and Brier score analyses in not only the entire cohort but also the subgroup of patients whose local treatment consisted of radiotherapy alone. In both the entire cohort and the subgroup, DCA demonstrated that SORG-MLA provided more net benefit compared with the two default strategies (of treating all or no patients) and compared with METSSS when risk thresholds ranged from 0.2 to 0.9 at both 90 days and 1 year, indicating that using SORG-MLA as a decision-making aid was beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting for treatment was 0.2 to 0.9. Higher albumin, lower alkaline phosphatase, lower calcium, higher hemoglobin, lower international normalized ratio, higher lymphocytes, lower neutrophils, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lower platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, higher sodium, and lower white blood cells were independently associated with better 1-year and overall survival after adjusting for the predictions made by METSSS. Based on these discoveries, clinicians might choose to consult SORG-MLA instead of METSSS for survival estimation in patients with long-bone metastases presenting for evaluation of local treatment. Basing a treatment decision on the predictions of SORG-MLA could be beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting to undergo a particular treatment strategy ranged from 0.2 to 0.9. Future studies might investigate relevant laboratory items when constructing or refining a survival estimation model because these data demonstrated prognostic value independent of the predictions of the METSSS model, and future studies might also seek to keep these models up to date using data from diverse, contemporary patients undergoing both modern operative and nonoperative treatments. Level III, diagnostic study.

Lee CC ，Chen CW ，Yen HK ，Lin YP ，Lai CY ，Wang JL ，Groot OQ ，Janssen SJ ，Schwab JH ，Hsu FM ，Lin WH ... -  《-》

Response to chemotherapy could predict the prognosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) followed by surgery: long-term results in a single institute.

Preoperative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (FP) followed by surgery has been considered a standard treatment for patients with stage II/III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) based on the results of a phase III trial (JCOG9907) in Japan. Subsequently, the phase III NExT trial (JCOG1109) revealed the survival benefit of the neoadjuvant DCF regimen, which adds docetaxel to FP, and it became a standard treatment. However, the long-term results and prognostic factors of neoadjuvant DCF therapy in the real world are unknown. We retrospectively investigated 50 patients with ESCC treated with neoadjuvant DCF therapy from July 2012 to December 2017 at The University of Tokyo Hospital. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 32.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 21.0-NA] and 10.0 months (95% CI 6.3-15.6), respectively. Median OS [not reached (95% CI 31.5-NA) vs. 21.4 months (95% CI 13.5-33.0); p = 0.028] and PFS [83.3 months (95% CI 6.4-NA) vs. 7.4 months (95% CI 6.0-12.8] were significantly longer in patients with an objective response than in non-responders. Of 44 surgical cases, median PFS tended to be longer in pathological lymph node metastasis-negative patients. Conversely, survival did not differ according to cStage (II/III vs. IV) or the average relative dose intensity (ARDI, ≥ 85% vs. < 85%). The response to neoadjuvant DCF therapy could predict patient prognosis. Additionally, pN+ tended to increase the recurrence risk, whereas cStage and ARDI did not influence survival.

Sato Y ，Mori K ，Atsumi S ，Sakamoto K ，Oya S ，Okamoto A ，Urabe M ，Miwa Y ，Yajima S ，Yagi K ，Nomura S ，Yamashita H ，Seto Y ... -  《-》

Survival comparison between open and thoracoscopic esophagectomy for node-negative esophageal squamous cell cancer: an ambispective cohort study.

It is controversial whether there is a survival difference between open esophagectomy (OE) and thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for esophageal cancer (EC). Therefore, this study aimed to compare the differences in survival and safety between two surgical approaches in patients with node-negative esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This ambispective cohort study included 1104 patients with node-negative ESCC who received OE or TE treatment at a Grate-A tertiary hospital in Henan Province between January 2015 and December 2016. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary endpoint was surgical safety. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to analyze the effect of surgical approaches on OS and DFS, and propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to match confounding factors between two groups. Patients were followed up ranged from 1.03 to 91.60 months, with a median follow-up time of 67.37 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed statistically significant differences between OE and TE in OS (70.05% vs 83.73%, P < 0.001) and DFS (67.15% vs 77.76%, P < 0.001). Furthermore, multivariate Cox regression analysis also demonstrated significant differences in long-term survival between the two groups (OS, HR (95% CI): 0.54 (0.41, 0.70); DFS, HR (95% CI): 0.68 (0.54, 0.86)). TE was associated with a reduction in intraoperative bleeding (median: 100 ml vs. 200 ml, P < 0.001), and an increase in the number of lymph nodes dissection (median: 23 vs. 28, P < 0.001). Similar results were found after PSM. In a selected cohort of patients with node-negative ESCC, TE surgical treatment was safer and had better long-term survival outcomes compared to OE. This provided corresponding clinical guidance to enhance survival benefits for patients. In the future, we hope to further explore the reasons for TE achieving higher survival rates.

Jia X ，Ren T ，Chen P ，Xin X ，Zhang Y ，Yang Y ... -  《-》

The impact of time to postoperative recurrence on the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer post recurrence: exploratory analysis of OGSG 1003.

The association between recurrence timing and prognosis in patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by esophagectomy remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify this association using multicenter prospective clinical trial data. Among 162 patients enrolled in a NAC phase II study comparing the efficacy of cisplatin and fluorouracil plus docetaxel with cisplatin and fluorouracil plus adriamycin, 64 patients with recurrence after R0 resection were included in this study. We evaluated the association between recurrence timing and overall survival after recurrence (OSr), along with clinicopathological factors associated with recurrence timing and OSr. Among 64 patients, 46 (71.9%) and 59 (92.2%) experienced recurrence within 1 and 2 years after surgery, respectively. Groups based on recurrence timing, including ≤ 6, 6-12, and > 12 months, had median OSr of 3.6, 13.9, and 13.4 months, respectively. The prognosis was significantly poorer for patients with recurrence ≤ 6 months after surgery than for other patients (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed pathological lymph node staging as an independent factor associated with early recurrence (odds ratio: 3.46, 95% confidence interval: 1.47-8.02, P = 0.0045). On the other hand, multivariate analysis for factors associated with OSr revealed pT (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.91, 95%CI 1.26-2.88, P = 0.0022), early recurrence (HR: 6.88, 95%CI 2.68-17.6, P < 0.001), and treatment after recurrence, with both local treatment (HR: 0.47, 95%CI 0.22-0.98, P = 0.043) and chemotherapy (HR: 0.25, 95%CI 0.11-0.58, P = 0.0011) as independent prognostic factors. Patients with advanced esophageal cancer experiencing recurrence within 6 months after esophagectomy following NAC have an extremely poor prognosis, suggesting that an advanced pN stage is associated with early recurrence.

Hori S ，Yamasaki M ，Yamamoto N ，Harino T ，Momose K ，Yamashita K ，Tanaka K ，Sugimura K ，Makino T ，Takeno A ，Shiraishi O ，Motoori M ，Miyata H ，Kimura Y ，Hirao M ，Yasuda T ，Yano M ，Doki Y ... -  《-》