Impact of surgical care on survival in esophageal cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 142-142
Author(s):  
Chase Campbell ◽  
Joshua S. Hill ◽  
Danielle Boselli ◽  
Jonathan C. Salo
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Tumor Biology ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival

142 Background: Survival after multimodality treatment of localized esophageal cancer depends upon complex interactions between the patient, tumor biology, and treatment factors. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to analyze prognostic factors to identify areas for treament optimization. Methods: 8,072 patients with localized esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy undergoing surgical resection between 2004 and 2006 were identified from the NCDB. Covariates were analyzed for association with survival using univariate and multivariate Cox models. Results: A multiviariate Cox proportional hazards model was constructed, with the following significant factors predictive of survival. (See Table.) Survival varied markedly based upon the annual surgical volume of esophageal resection performed at the hospital. For hospitals performing 5 or fewer esophageal resections per year (15% of cases), 5-year survival was 40.0%, compared with 48.6% for hospitals performing 20 or greater (26% of cases). Hospital length of stay after surgery also profoundly affected survival. For patients with a post-operative length of stay of less than 14 days, 5-year survival was 40% and median survival 39.1 months. Median survival was 28 months, 19 months, and 15 months in patients with a hospital length of stay of 14-21 days, 21-28 days, and greater than 28 days, respectively. Conclusions: Data from the NCDB confirms the association between perioperative events and long-term survival after resection for esophageal cancer. Given the wide variance in outcomes based upon perioperative treatment factors, future improvements in outcomes are unlikely to be dramatically influenced by optimization of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Improvement in outcomes of the treatment of esophageal cancer will likely require understanding how the perioperative period influences long-term survival, which should drive priorities for research and treatment improvement. [Table: see text]

Current Results of Esophageal Cancer Surgery. Time Trends in Operative Mortality and Long Term Survival

1987 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ugo Pastorino ◽  
Maurizio Valente ◽  
Marco Alloisio ◽  
Vittorio Bedini ◽  
Ignazio Cataldo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Operative Mortality ◽  
Chinese Literature ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Perioperative Mortality ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Esophageal Cancer Surgery

This paper represents a historical analysis of the results achieved by esophageal cancer surgery over the last three decades, as they appear in the literature of the years 1954–1985, and in our own experience between 1965 and 1985, with the aim of assessing the evolution of operative mortality and long-term survival. In a review of 4930 resections reported in western literature, mean values of perioperative mortality went down from 30 % to 9 %, while the five-year survival increased from 8 % to 19 %. Similar changes were evident in Japanese and Chinese literature where the survival rose from 9 % to 23 % in unscreened populations and up to 90 % in early cancers. In our experience, dividing the series in two decades (1965–74 and 1975–85), the overall perioperative mortality changed from 28 % to 13 %. The actuarial survival for the two periods was 8 % vs 18 % at 5 years, with a median survival of 9 and 18 months. A greater difference was evident for NO patients where the survival rose from 15 % to 35 % at 5 years, with a median survival of 15 vs 38 months.

PS01.209: POPULATION-LEVEL SURVIVAL FOR ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: AN ANALYSIS OF 13,930 PATIENTS IN A REGIONALIZED, SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH SYSTEM

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 109-109
Author(s):  
Vaibhav Gupta ◽  
Biniam Kidane ◽  
Jolie Ringash ◽  
Rinku Sutradhar ◽  
Gail Darling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Perioperative Mortality ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Centres Of Excellence

Abstract Background Despite advances in medical and surgical treatment, esophageal cancer remains a high-fatality disease. Regionalized cancer care may improve short and long-term survival. This study defines perioperative and long-term survival for esophageal cancer on a population level. Methods A population-based retrospective cohort study in a single-payer health system (Ontario, Canada; population 13.6M) was performed using linked health administrative data. Adults diagnosed with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer between 2002–2014 were included. Thoracic surgery was regionalized to 15 centres of excellence by 2010. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median survival. Rates of perioperative mortality, defined as in-hospital and 90-day post discharge death, were calculated before and after regionalization. Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with short and long-term survival. Results 13,930 patients were diagnosed with esophageal cancer during the study period. Median survival was 10.1 months from date of diagnosis (95% CI 9.9–10.5), and marginally better for patients with adenocarcinoma compared to squamous cell carcinoma (10.4 vs 9.0 months, P = 0.002). Cox regression analysis showed age, socioeconomic status, and region of residence were significantly associated with long-term survival. Approximately 30% of the cohort (n = 3880) underwent curative-intent surgery and had a median survival of 24.5 months (95% CI 23.4–25.9) from the date of surgery. In these patients, age, socioeconomic status, major surgical complications and year of diagnosis were significantly associated with long-term survival (P < 0.001). Perioperative mortality decreased from 13.8% in 2002 to 5.4% in 2014 (P < 0.001). Only age and major surgical complications were associated with increased perioperative mortality (P < 0.001). Surgery at a thoracic centre reduced the odds of perioperative mortality (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49–0.81), but did not influence long-term survival (P = 0.79). Conclusion Median survival for patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer remains poor but is greater than two years for patients undergoing curative-intent surgery. Perioperative mortality significantly decreased over time as surgical care was regionalized to centres of excellence, but this has not affected long-term survival. Further work should analyze variation in short and long-term survival across thoracic surgery centres of excellence. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

scholarly journals The Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Immunotherapy for Gastric Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis and Literature Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 107327482199743
Author(s):  
Ke Chen ◽  
Xiao Wang ◽  
Liu Yang ◽  
Zheling Chen
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
And Control

Background: Treatment options for advanced gastric esophageal cancer are quite limited. Chemotherapy is unavoidable at certain stages, and research on targeted therapies has mostly failed. The advent of immunotherapy has brought hope for the treatment of advanced gastric esophageal cancer. The aim of the study was to analyze the safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy and the long-term survival of patients who were diagnosed as gastric esophageal cancer and received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy. Method: Studies on anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy of advanced gastric esophageal cancer published before February 1, 2020 were searched online. The survival (e.g. 6-month overall survival, 12-month overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates (ORR)) and adverse effects of immunotherapy were compared to that of control therapy (physician’s choice of therapy). Results: After screening 185 studies, 4 comparative cohort studies which reported the long-term survival of patients receiving immunotherapy were included. Compared to control group, the 12-month survival (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.12, P < 0.0001) and 18-month survival (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.39 to 2.81, P = 0.0001) were significantly longer in immunotherapy group. The 3-month survival rate (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.36 to 3.06, P = 0.92) and 18-month survival rate (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 0.98 to 2.12, P = 0.07) were not significantly different between immunotherapy group and control group. The ORR were not significantly different between immunotherapy group and control group (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.65 to 3.66, P = 0.01). Meta-analysis pointed out that in the PD-L1 CPS ≥10 sub group population, the immunotherapy could obviously benefit the patients in tumor response rates (OR = 3.80, 95% CI: 1.89 to 7.61, P = 0.0002). Conclusion: For the treatment of advanced gastric esophageal cancer, the therapeutic efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy was superior to that of chemotherapy or palliative care.

EXTH-13. LOCAL DELIVERY OF AN IL-15 SUPERAGONIST USING A REPLICATING RETROVIRUS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES SURVIVAL AND LYMPHOCYTE INFILTRATION IN POORLY IMMUNOGENIC MURINE GLIOBLASTOMA MODELS

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi166-vi166
Author(s):  
Alexander Haddad ◽  
Jordan Spatz ◽  
Megan Montoya ◽  
Sara Collins ◽  
Sabraj Gill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
T Cell Activation ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Immunosuppressive Cell ◽  
Imaging Results ◽  
Local Immunosuppression ◽  
Inflammatory Changes

Abstract Glioblastoma (GBM) leads to severe systemic and local immunosuppression, and immunotherapies have had limited clinical success. Here, we evaluated the treatment efficacy of RLI, a superagonist of T-cell activator IL-15, delivered to tumor cells using a tumor-selective retroviral replicating vector (RRV) in the syngeneic murine SB28 and Tu2449 GBM models, which are both engineered to be poorly immunogenic with low-mutational burden and known resistance to immunotherapy, and hence more accurate biomimetic models of human GBM. RRV-RLI replicated and spread effectively in cultured murine GBM cells with robust production of functional RLI (165.4 ± 5.3 ng/mL). Stereotactic injection of RRV-RLI into pre-established intracerebral SB28 tumors significantly reduced tumor growth on bioluminescent imaging, and increased median survival compared to control mice (55 vs. 19 days, p=0.002), leading to long-term survival in 12% of treated mice. In the Tu2449 model, imaging results showed complete eradication of intracerebral tumors after RRV-RLI treatment, with long-term survival (median not reached) in &gt; 85% of treated mice, compared to a median survival of 12.5 days in control mice (p=0.001). RRV-RLI treated tumors showed significantly increased CD8 T-cell infiltration, without altering immunosuppressive cell populations. Similarly, broad anti-tumor inflammatory changes, including increased expression of genes involved in T-cell activation and killing, were observed in the NanoString nCounter platform using a 770-gene panel representing various immune cell types. Notably, RLI was not detected in the blood of treated mice, and tumor-localized RRV-RLI gene delivery showed no adverse systemic immune effects in either model. In summary, RRV-mediated RLI immunotherapy results in immunostimulatory and pro-inflammatory changes to the tumor microenvironment and achieves a significant survival benefit in two poorly immunogenic syngeneic murine models of GBM. This tumor-localized immunomodulatory gene therapy has the potential to safely reverse the T-cell depleted immunophenotype of GBM.

scholarly journals Genetic Alterations in Patients With Esophageal Cancer With Short- and Long-Term Survival Rates After Curative Esophagectomy

1997 ◽  
Vol 226 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yutaka Shimada ◽  
Masayuki Imamura ◽  
Ichio Shibagaki ◽  
Hisashi Tanaka ◽  
Tokiharu Miyahara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Genetic Alterations ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Curative Esophagectomy

Long-term survival in esophageal cancer after minimally invasive esophagectomy compared to open esophagectomy

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Eivind Gottlieb-Vedi ◽  
Joonas H. Kauppila ◽  
Fredrik Mattsson ◽  
Mats Lindblad ◽  
Magnus Nilsson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Open Esophagectomy

623 MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS OPEN MCKEOWN FOR PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Zheng ◽  
Wenqun Xing ◽  
Xianben Liu ◽  
Haibo Sun
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Group 14 ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Open Esophagectomy ◽  
Surgery Department

Abstract   McKeown Minimally invasive esophagectomy(McKeown-MIE) offers advantages in short-term outcomes compared with McKeown open esophagectomy(McKeown-OE). However, debate as to whether MIE is equivalent or better than OE regarding survival outcomes is ongoing. The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival between McKeown-MIE and McKeown-OE in a large cohort of esophageal cancer(EC) patients. Methods We used a prospective database of the Thoracic Surgery Department at our Cancer Hospital and included patients who underwent McKeown-MIE and McKeown-OE for EC during January 1, 2015, to January 6, 2018. The perioperative data and overall survival(OS) rate in the two groups were retrospectively compared. Results We included 502 patients who underwent McKeown-MIE (n = 306) or McKeown-OE (n = 196) for EC. The median age was 63 years. All baseline characteristics were well-balanced between two groups. There was a significantly shorter mean operative time (269.76 min vs. 321.14 min, P &lt; 0.001) in OE group. The 30-day and in hospital mortality were 0 and no difference for 90-day mortality (P = 0.116). The postoperative stay was shorter in MIE group, 14 days and 18 days in the MIE and OE groups(P &lt; 0.001). The OS at 32 months was 76.82% and 64.31% in the MIE and OE groups (P = 0.001); hazard ratio(HR) (95% CI): 2.333 (1.384–3.913). Conclusion These results showed the McKeown-MIE group was associated with a better long-term survival, compared with open-MIE for patients with resectable EC.

723 TWO- VS. THREE-FIELD LYMPHADENECTOMY FOR ESOPHAGEAL CANCER. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF SHORT- AND LONG-TERM OUTCOMES.

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Letícia Nogueira Datrino ◽  
Clara Lucato Santos ◽  
Guilherme Tavares ◽  
Luca Schiliró Tristão ◽  
Maria Carolina Andrade Serafim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Extended Lymphadenectomy ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Short And Long Term

Abstract   Nowadays, there is still no consensus about the benefits of adding neck lymphadenectomy to the traditional two-fields esophagectomy. An extended lymphadenectomy could potentially increase operation time and the risks for postoperative complications. However, extended lymphadenectomy allows resection of cervical nodes at risk for metastases, potentially increasing long-term survival rates. This study aims to estimate whether cervical prophylactic lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences short- and long-term outcomes through a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central, and Lilacs (BVS). The inclusion criteria were: (1) studies that compare two-field vs. three-field esophagectomy; (2) adults (&gt;18 years); (3) articles that analyze short- or long-term outcomes; and (4) clinical trials or cohort studies. The results were summarized by forest plots, with effect size (ES) or risk difference (RD) and 95% CI. Results Twenty-five articles were selected, comprising 8,954 patients. Three-field lymphadenectomy was associated to higher operation time (ES: -1.51; 95%CI -1.84, −1.18) and higher blood loss (ES: -0.24; 95%CI: −0.37, −0.11). Also, neck lymphadenectomy inputs additional risk for pulmonary complications (RD: 0.03; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.05). No difference was noted for morbidity (RD: 0.01; 95%CI: −0.01, 0.03); leak (−0.02; 95%CI: −0.07, 0.03); postoperative mortality (RD: 0.00; 95%CI: −0.00, 0.01), and hospital stay (ES: -0.05; 95%CI -0.20, 0.10). Three-field lymphadenectomy allowed higher number of retrieved lymph nodes (MD: -1.51; 95%CI -1.84, −1.18), but did not increase the overall survival (HR: 1.11; 95%CI: 0.96, 1.26). Conclusion Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution once it is associated with poorer short-term outcomes compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival. Future esophageal cancer studies should determine the subgroup of patients who could benefit from prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy in long-term outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document