Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Refining Esophageal Cancer Staging After Neoadjuvant Therapy: Importance of Treatment Response

  • Thoracic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Accurate staging is vital for esophageal cancer management. The utility of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system 6th edition for esophageal cancer has been questioned for resected patients who receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). This study was undertaken to assess the AJCC staging system for patients with esophageal cancer that have received neoadjuvant CRT and to identify clinicopathological variables that predict survival.

Methods

Review of a prospective esophageal cancer database was undertaken for patients that received neoadjuvant CRT and resection. Primary tumor response was defined as major (≤10% residual tumor cells) or minor (>10% residual tumor cells). Cox regression and concordance analyses were used to determine prognostic factors. Median follow-up was 61 months.

Results

Of 131 patients with invasive cancer, there were 40/131 (31%) with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and 88/131 (65%) with adenocarcinoma. The procedure-related mortality rate was 3.8%. Median survival was 33 months. A major response was demonstrated by 79/131 (60%) patients. Survival analyses found that the AJCC 6th edition was unable to discriminate between stages 0, I, and IIa or stages IIb and III. Multivariate survival analyses found age, pretreatment tumor length >6 cm, positive lymph nodes, and a major tumor response were independent prognostic factors. These data were used to derive a new staging system that had improved discrimination of stage groups over the current AJCC system.

Conclusion

The current AJCC staging system for esophageal cancer is inadequate for patients that receive neoadjuvant CRT. Refinement of the AJCC staging system should include primary tumor response for patients receiving neoadjuvant CRT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lerut T, Coosemans W, Decker G, et al. Extended surgery for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. J Surg Res 2004;117:58–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Griffin SM, Wayman J. Sub-total oesophagectomy with 2 field lymphadenectomy. Minerva Chir 2002; 57:753–66.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Chu KM, Law SY, Fok M, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of transhiatal and transthoracic resection for lower-third esophageal carcinoma. Am J Surg 1997; 174:320–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hulscher JB, van Sandick JW, de Boer AG, et al. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Engl J Med 2002; 347:1662–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Macdonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J, et al. Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:725–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Group. Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 359:1727–33

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355:11–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kelsen DP, Ginsberg R, Pajak TF, et al. Chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for localized esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 1998; 339:1979–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Walsh TN, Noonan N, Hollywood D, et al. A comparison of multimodal therapy and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med 1996; 335:462–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Burmeister BH, Smithers BM, Gebski V, et al. Surgery alone versus chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for resectable cancer of the oesophagus: a randomised controlled phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 2006; 6:659–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gebski V, Burmeister B, Smithers BM, et al. Survival benefits from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy in oesophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8:226–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Stahl M, Stuschke M, Lehmann N, et al. Chemoradiation with and without surgery in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:2310–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Brucher BL, Becker K, Lordick F, et al. The clinical impact of histopathologic response assessment by residual tumor cell quantification in esophageal squamous cell carcinomas. Cancer 2006; 106:2119–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mandard AM, Dalibard F, Mandard JC, et al. Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Clinicopathologic correlations. Cancer 1994; 73:2680–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Swisher SG, Hofstetter W, Wu TT, et al. Proposed revision of the esophageal cancer staging system to accommodate pathologic response (pP) following preoperative chemoradiation (CRT). Ann Surg 2005; 241:810–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Weber WA, Ott K, Becker K, et al. Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction by metabolic imaging. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:3058–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rizk NP, Venkatraman E, Bains MS, et al. American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system does not accurately predict survival in patients receiving multimodality therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:507–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Swisher SG, Hofstetter W, Wu TT, et al. Proposed revision of the esophageal cancer staging system to accommodate pathologic response (pP) following preoperative chemoradiation (CRT). Ann Surg 2005; 241:810–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schneider PM, Baldus SE, Metzger R, et al. Histomorphologic tumor regression and lymph node metastases determine prognosis following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for esophageal cancer: implications for response classification. Ann Surg 2005; 242:684–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Green FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al., eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edition. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 2002:111–9

  21. Siewert JR, Feith M, Werner M, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: results of surgical therapy based on anatomical/topographic classification in 1,002 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 2000; 232:353–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Suntharalingam M, Haas ML, Sonett JR, et al. Accurate lymph node assessment prior to trimodality therapy for esophageal carcinoma. Cancer J 2001; 7:509–15.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, et al. Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg 2007; 245:232–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chirieac LR, Swisher SG, Ajani JA, et al. Posttherapy pathologic stage predicts survival in patients with esophageal carcinoma receiving preoperative chemoradiation. Cancer 2005; 103:1347–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gonen M, Heller G. Concordance probability and discriminatory power in proportional hazards regression. Biometrika 2005; 92:965–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Walsh TN, Noonan N, Hollywood D, et al. A comparison of multimodal therapy and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med 1996; 335:462–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Swisher SG, Erasmus J, Maish M, et al. 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101:1776–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Swisher SG, Maish M, Erasmus JJ, et al. Utility of PET, CT, and EUS to identify pathologic responders in esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78:1152–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rohatgi PR, Swisher SG, Correa AM, et al. Failure patterns correlate with the proportion of residual carcinoma after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for carcinoma of the esophagus. Cancer 2005; 104:1349–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee JL, Park SI, Kim SB, et al. A single institutional phase III trial of preoperative chemotherapy with hyperfractionation radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2004; 15:947–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Donington JS, Miller DL, Allen MS, et al. Tumor response to induction chemoradiation: influence on survival after esophagectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003; 24:631–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Torres C, Turner JR, Wang HH, et al. Pathologic prognostic factors in Barrett’s associated adenocarcinoma: a follow-up study of 96 patients. Cancer 1999; 85:520–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Swanson SJ, Batirel HF, Bueno R, et al. Transthoracic esophagectomy with radical mediastinal and abdominal lymph node dissection and cervical esophagogastrostomy for esophageal carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 72:1918–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Gu Y, Swisher SG, Ajani JA, et al. The number of lymph nodes with metastasis predicts survival in patients with esophageal or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma who receive preoperative chemoradiation. Cancer 2006; 106:1017–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Eloubeidi MA, Desmond R, Arguedas MR, et al. Prognostic factors for the survival of patients with esophageal carcinoma in the U.S.: the importance of tumor length and lymph node status. Cancer 2002; 95:1434–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Griffiths EA, Brummell Z, Gorthi G, et al. Tumor length as a prognostic factor in esophageal malignancy: univariate and multivariate survival analyses. J Surg Oncol 2006; 93:258–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Beahrs OH, Meyers MH, eds. Manual for Staging of Cancer. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia, PA, 1983:61–6

  38. Sabel MS, Smith JL, Nava HR, et al. Esophageal resection for carcinoma in patients older than 70 years. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9:210–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Jougon JB, Ballester M, Duffy J, et al. Esophagectomy for cancer in the patient aged 70 years and older. Ann Thorac Surg 1997; 63:1423–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Moskovitz AH, Rizk NP, Venkatraman E, et al. Mortality increases for octogenarians undergoing esophagogastrectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 82:2031–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Blazeby JM, Alderson D, Farndon JR. Quality of life in patients with oesophageal cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 2000; 155:193–204.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr Andrew Clouston, Dr Ian Martin, Dr Jennifer Harvey, and Dr Euan Walpole for their clinical contribution to the data presented in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Ipswich Road, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, Queensland, 4102, Australia

    Andrew P. Barbour MBBS, PhD, David C. Gotley MD, Janine Thomas BN & B. Mark Smithers MBBS

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Mark Jones PhD

  3. Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Mithat Gonen PhD

  4. Department of Medical Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Damien B. Thomson MBBS

  5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Bryan Burmeister MBBS

Authors
  1. Andrew P. Barbour MBBS, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Jones PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mithat Gonen PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David C. Gotley MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Janine Thomas BN
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Damien B. Thomson MBBS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Bryan Burmeister MBBS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. B. Mark Smithers MBBS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew P. Barbour MBBS, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barbour, A.P., Jones, M., Gonen, M. et al. Refining Esophageal Cancer Staging After Neoadjuvant Therapy: Importance of Treatment Response. Ann Surg Oncol 15, 2894–2902 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0084-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0084-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation