The standard treatment regimen for esophageal cancer is chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy. However, the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy damages the surrounding tissue, which... Show moreThe standard treatment regimen for esophageal cancer is chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy. However, the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy damages the surrounding tissue, which potentially increases the risk of postoperative complications, including anastomotic leakage. The impact of definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT, 50.4 Gy radiotherapy) compared to the standard neoadjuvant scheme (nCRT, 41.4 Gy radiotherapy) prior to surgery on the incidence of anastomotic leakage remains poorly understood. To study this, all patients who received dCRT between 2011 and 2021 followed by esophagectomy were included. For each patient, two patients who received nCRT were selected as matched controls. Outcomes included postoperative anastomotic leakage, pulmonary and other complications, anastomotic stenosis, pulmonary and other postoperative complications (Clavien Dindo Classification ≥1), and overall survival. One hundred and eight patients were included with a median follow-up of 28 months. The time between neoadjuvant treatment and surgery was longer in the dCRT group compared to the nCRT group (65 vs. 48 days, P < 0.001). Postoperatively, significantly more patients in the dCRT group suffered from anastomotic leakage (11% vs. 1%, P = 0.04) and anastomotic stenosis (42% vs. 17%, P < 0.01). No differences were found for other complications or overall survival between both groups. In conclusion, preoperative dCRT is associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leakage and stenosis. These complications, however, can be treated effectively. Therefore, esophagectomy after dCRT is considered to be an appropriate treatment strategy in a selected patient group. Show less
Roumans, C.A.M.; Bogt, R.D. van der; Nieboer, D.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Rizopoulos, D.; Lansdorp-Vogelaar, I.; ... ; ProBar Study Grp 2022
Half of Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies do not adhere to guideline recommendations. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we assessed the clinical consequences of... Show moreHalf of Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies do not adhere to guideline recommendations. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we assessed the clinical consequences of nonadherence to recommended surveillance intervals and biopsy protocol. Data from BE surveillance patients were collected from endoscopy and pathology reports; questionnaires were distributed among endoscopists. We estimated the association between (non)adherence and (i) endoscopic curability of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), (ii) mortality, and (iii) misclassification of histological diagnosis according to a multistate hidden Markov model. Potential explanatory parameters (patient, facility, endoscopist variables) for nonadherence, related to clinical impact, were analyzed. In 726 BE patients, 3802 endoscopies were performed by 167 endoscopists. Adherence to surveillance interval was 16% for non-dysplastic (ND)BE, 55% for low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and 54% of endoscopies followed the Seattle protocol. There was no evidence to support the following statements: longer surveillance intervals or fewer biopsies than recommended affect endoscopic curability of EAC or cause-specific mortality (P > 0.20); insufficient biopsies affect the probability of NDBE (OR 1.0) or LGD (OR 2.3) being misclassified as high-grade dysplasia/EAC (P > 0.05). Better adherence was associated with older patients (OR 1.1), BE segments <= 2 cm (OR 8.3), visible abnormalities (OR 1.8, all P <= 0.05), endoscopists with a subspecialty (OR 3.2), and endoscopists who deemed histological diagnosis an adequate marker (OR 2.0). Clinical consequences of nonadherence to guidelines appeared to be limited with respect to endoscopic curability of EAC and mortality. This indicates that BE surveillance recommendations should be optimized to minimize the burden of endoscopies. Show less
Roumans, C.A.M.; Bogt, R.D. van der; Nieboer, D.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Rizopoulos, D.; Lansdorp-Vogelaar, I.; ... ; ProBar Study Grp 2022
Half of Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies do not adhere to guideline recommendations. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we assessed the clinical consequences of... Show moreHalf of Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies do not adhere to guideline recommendations. In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we assessed the clinical consequences of nonadherence to recommended surveillance intervals and biopsy protocol. Data from BE surveillance patients were collected from endoscopy and pathology reports; questionnaires were distributed among endoscopists. We estimated the association between (non)adherence and (i) endoscopic curability of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), (ii) mortality, and (iii) misclassification of histological diagnosis according to a multistate hidden Markov model. Potential explanatory parameters (patient, facility, endoscopist variables) for nonadherence, related to clinical impact, were analyzed. In 726 BE patients, 3802 endoscopies were performed by 167 endoscopists. Adherence to surveillance interval was 16% for non-dysplastic (ND)BE, 55% for low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and 54% of endoscopies followed the Seattle protocol. There was no evidence to support the following statements: longer surveillance intervals or fewer biopsies than recommended affect endoscopic curability of EAC or cause-specific mortality (P > 0.20); insufficient biopsies affect the probability of NDBE (OR 1.0) or LGD (OR 2.3) being misclassified as high-grade dysplasia/EAC (P > 0.05). Better adherence was associated with older patients (OR 1.1), BE segments <= 2 cm (OR 8.3), visible abnormalities (OR 1.8, all P <= 0.05), endoscopists with a subspecialty (OR 3.2), and endoscopists who deemed histological diagnosis an adequate marker (OR 2.0). Clinical consequences of nonadherence to guidelines appeared to be limited with respect to endoscopic curability of EAC and mortality. This indicates that BE surveillance recommendations should be optimized to minimize the burden of endoscopies. Show less
Cloos-van Balen, M.; Portier, E.S.H.; Fiocco, M.; Hartgrink, H.H.; Langers, A.M.J.; Neelis, K.J.; ... ; Slingerland, M. 2021
Background and objectives Since the first results of the Dutch randomized CROSS-trial, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by resection for primary... Show moreBackground and objectives Since the first results of the Dutch randomized CROSS-trial, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by resection for primary resectable nonmetastatic esophageal cancer (EC) has been implemented as standard curative treatment in the Netherlands. The purpose of this retrospective study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes of this treatment in daily practice in a large academic hospital. Methods Medical records of patients treated for primary resectable nonmetastatic EC between May 2010 and December 2015 at our institution were reviewed. Treatment consisted of five weekly courses of carboplatin (area under the curve 2) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m(2)) with concurrent external beam radiotherapy (23 fractions of 1.8 Gy), followed by transthoracic or transhiatal resection. Data on survival, progression, acute and late toxicity were recorded. Results A total of 145 patients were included. Median follow-up was 43 months. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 35 (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.8-40.2) and 30 (95% CI 19.7-40.3) months, respectively, with corresponding 3-year OS and PFS of 49.6% (95% CI 40.4-58.8) and 45.6% (95% CI 36.6-54.6). Acute toxicity grade >= 3 was observed in 25.5% of patients. Late adverse events grade >= 3 were seen in 24.8%, mostly esophageal stenosis. Conclusion Neoadjuvant CRT followed by resection for primary resectable nonmetastatic EC in daily practice results in a 3-year OS of 49.6% (95% CI 40.4-58.8) and PFS of 45.6% (95% CI 36.6-54.6), compared with 58% (51-65%) and 51% (43-58%) within the CROSS-trial. The slightly poorer survival in our daily practice group might be due to the presence of less favorable patient and tumor characteristics in daily practice, as is to be expected in daily practice. Toxicity was comparable with that in the CROSS-trial and considered acceptable. Show less
Cloos-van Balen, M.; Portier, E.S.H.; Fiocco, M.; Hartgrink, H.H.; Langers, A.M.J.; Neelis, K.J.; ... ; Slingerland, M. 2021
Background and objectivesSince the first results of the Dutch randomized CROSS-trial, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by resection for primary... Show moreBackground and objectivesSince the first results of the Dutch randomized CROSS-trial, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by resection for primary resectable nonmetastatic esophageal cancer (EC) has been implemented as standard curative treatment in the Netherlands. The purpose of this retrospective study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes of this treatment in daily practice in a large academic hospital.MethodsMedical records of patients treated for primary resectable nonmetastatic EC between May 2010 and December 2015 at our institution were reviewed. Treatment consisted of five weekly courses of carboplatin (area under the curve 2) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m2) with concurrent external beam radiotherapy (23 fractions of 1.8 Gy), followed by transthoracic or transhiatal resection. Data on survival, progression, acute and late toxicity were recorded.ResultsA total of 145 patients were included. Median follow-up was 43 months. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 35 (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.8–40.2) and 30 (95% CI 19.7–40.3) months, respectively, with corresponding 3-year OS and PFS of 49.6% (95% CI 40.4–58.8) and 45.6% (95% CI 36.6–54.6). Acute toxicity grade ≥3 was observed in 25.5% of patients. Late adverse events grade ≥3 were seen in 24.8%, mostly esophageal stenosis.ConclusionNeoadjuvant CRT followed by resection for primary resectable nonmetastatic EC in daily practice results in a 3-year OS of 49.6% (95% CI 40.4–58.8) and PFS of 45.6% (95% CI 36.6–54.6), compared with 58% (51–65%) and 51% (43–58%) within the CROSS-trial. The slightly poorer survival in our daily practice group might be due to the presence of less favorable patient and tumor characteristics in daily practice, as is to be expected in daily practice. Toxicity was comparable with that in the CROSS-trial and considered acceptable. Show less
Ruler, M.A.P. van; Peters, F.P.; Slingerland, M.; Fiocco, M.; Grootenboers, D.A.R.H.; Vulink, A.J.E.; ... ; Neelis, K.J. 2017
