Objective: This study investigated the patterns, predictors, and survival of recurrent disease following esophageal cancer surgery. Background: Survival of recurrent esophageal cancer is usually... Show moreObjective: This study investigated the patterns, predictors, and survival of recurrent disease following esophageal cancer surgery. Background: Survival of recurrent esophageal cancer is usually poor, with limited prospects of remission. Methods: This nationwide cohort study included patients with distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma after curatively intended esophagectomy in 2007 to 2016 (follow-up until January 2020). Patients with distant metastases detected during surgery were excluded. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify predictors of recurrent disease. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine the association of recurrence site and treatment intent with postrecurrence survival. Results: Among 4626 patients, 45.1% developed recurrent disease a median of 11 months postoperative, of whom most had solely distant metastases (59.8%). Disease recurrences were most frequently hepatic (26.2%) or pulmonary (25.1%). Factors significantly associated with disease recurrence included young age (<= 65 y), male sex, adenocarcinoma, open surgery, transthoracic esophagectomy, nonradical resection, higher T-stage, and tumor positive lymph nodes. Overall, median postrecurrence survival was 4 months [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 3.6-4.4]. After curatively intended recurrence treatment, median survival was 20 months (95% CI: 16.4-23.7). Survival was more favorable after locoregional compared with distant recurrence (hazard ratio: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.65-0.84). Conclusions: This study provides important prognostic information assisting in the surveillance and counseling of patients after curatively intended esophageal cancer surgery. Nearly half the patients developed recurrent disease, with limited prospects of survival. The risk of recurrence was higher in patients with a higher tumor stage, nonradical resection and positive lymph node harvest. Show less
Pape, M.; Vissers, P.A.J.; Bertwistle, D.; McDonald, L.; Slingerland, M.; Mohammad, N.H.; ... ; Verhoeven, R.H.A. 2022
Background: Real-world data on treatment and outcomes in patients with synchronous metastatic disease compared with patients with metachronous metastatic disease in esophagogastric cancer have not... Show moreBackground: Real-world data on treatment and outcomes in patients with synchronous metastatic disease compared with patients with metachronous metastatic disease in esophagogastric cancer have not been published before. The aim of our study was to explore treatment, overall survival (OS), and time to treatment fialure (TTF) in patients with synchronous and metachronous metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Methods: Patients with synchronous metastatic disease (2015-2017) and patients with metachronous metastatic disease initially treated with curative intent for nonmetastatic disease (2015-2016) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS and TTF were assessed from metastatic diagnosis for patients with synchronous, early metachronous (<= 6 months) or late metachronous (>6 months) metastatic disease using Kaplan-Meier curves with two-sided log-rank test. Results: Median OS was 4.2, 2.1, and 4.4 months in patients with synchronous, early metachronous, and late metachronous metastatic disease, respectively (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients receiving systemic treatment was 41.3%, 21.5%, and 32.5% for synchronous, early metachronous, and late metachronous metastatic disease, respectively (p = 0.001). Among patients receiving systemic treatment, median OS was 8.8, 4.5, and 9.1 months (p < 0.001) and median TTF was 6.1, 3.8, and 5.7 months (p < 0.001) in synchronous, early metachronous, and late metachronous metastatic disease, respectively. Conclusion: Patients with early metachronous metastatic disease have a worse survival compared with patients with synchronous or late metachronous metastatic disease. These patients less often receive systemic treatment, and even when treated, survival is worse compared with patients with synchronous or late metachronous metastatic disease, suggesting a more aggressive tumor behavior. Show less
Ham, J.C.; Meerten, E. van; Fiets, W.E.; Beerepoot, L.V.; Jeurissen, F.J.F.; Slingerland, M.; ... ; Herpen, C.M.L. van 2020
Background Methotrexate in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) has limited progression-free survival (PFS) benefit. We hypothesized that adding... Show moreBackground Methotrexate in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) has limited progression-free survival (PFS) benefit. We hypothesized that adding cetuximab to methotrexate improves PFS. Methods In the phase-Ib-study, patients with R/M SCCHN received methotrexate and cetuximab as first-line treatment. The primary objective was feasibility. In the phase-II-study patients were randomized to this combination or methotrexate alone (2:1). The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QoL). Results In six patients in the phase-Ib-study, no dose limiting toxicities were observed. In the phase II study, 30 patients received the combination and 15 patients methotrexate. In the phase-II-study median PFS was 4.5 months in the combination group vs 2.0 months in the methotrexate group (HR 0.37; P = .002). OS, toxicity, and QoL were not significantly different. Conclusion Cetuximab with methotrexate improved PFS without increased toxicity in R/M SCCHN-patients. Show less
Dijksterhuis, W.P.M.; Verhoeven, R.H.A.; Slingerland, M.; Mohammad, N.H.; Vos-Geelen, J. de; Beerepoot, L.V.; ... ; Laarhoven, H.W.M. van 2019
The optimal first-line palliative systemic treatment strategy for metastatic esophagogastric cancer is not well defined. The aim of our study was to explore real-world use of first-line systemic... Show moreThe optimal first-line palliative systemic treatment strategy for metastatic esophagogastric cancer is not well defined. The aim of our study was to explore real-world use of first-line systemic treatment in esophagogastric cancer and assess the effect of treatment strategy on overall survival (OS), time to failure (TTF) of first-line treatment and toxicity. We selected synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients treated with systemic therapy (2010-2016) from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 2,204). Systemic treatment strategies were divided into monotherapy, doublet and triplet chemotherapy, and trastuzumab-containing regimens. Data on OS were available for all patients, on TTF for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 (n = 1,700), and on toxicity for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2014 (n = 1,221). OS and TTF were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression, with adjustment for relevant tumor and patient characteristics. Up to 45 different systemic treatment regimens were found to be administered, with a median TTF of 4.6 and OS of 7.5 months. Most patients (45%) were treated with doublet chemotherapy; 34% received triplets, 10% monotherapy and 10% a trastuzumab-containing regimen. The highest median OS was found in patients receiving a trastuzumab-containing regimen (11.9 months). Triplet chemotherapy showed equal survival rates compared to doublets (OS: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.83-1.02; TTF: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.82-1.04) but significantly more grade 3-5 toxicity than doublets (33% vs. 21%, respectively). In conclusion, heterogeneity of first-line palliative systemic treatment in metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients is striking. Based on our data, doublet chemotherapy is the preferred treatment strategy because of similar survival and less toxicity compared to triplets. Show less
Meeuse, J.J.; Linden, Y.M. van der; Tienhoven, G. van; Gans, R.O.B.; Leer, J.W.H.; Reyners, A.K.L.; Dutch Bone Metastasis Study Grp 2010
BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is an effective treatment for painful bone metastases. Whether this applies also in patients with limited survival remains to be investigated. This study analyzed the... Show moreBACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is an effective treatment for painful bone metastases. Whether this applies also in patients with limited survival remains to be investigated. This study analyzed the effect of radiotherapy for painful bone metastases in patients with a survival <= 12 weeks. METHODS: In the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study, 1157 patients with painful bone metastases were randomized to single fraction (1 x 8 grays [Gy]) or multiple fraction (6 x 4 Gy) radiotherapy. Patients who died within 12 weeks after randomization were included in this analysis. Patients were classified as responders or nonresponders, based on their pain response to radiotherapy. This response was calculated considering changes in pain intensity (measured with an 11-point numeric rating scale) and analgesic usage. Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze pain response and survival. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-4 patients were included in this analysis. At randomization, the mean pain intensity score (+/- standard deviation) was 7 (+/- 2). The proportion showing a pain response did not differ between the single fraction and multiple fraction groups. Toward death, pain intensity score decreased to 5 (+/- 3) in responders (45%), whereas in nonresponders (55%) no change was observed. Despite the benefit in responders, in 60% of all patients pain intensity remained 5 after randomization. CONCLUSIONS: Pain responded in about half of the patients who survived <= 12 weeks after randomization into the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study. When considering radiotherapy, single fraction should be preferred. Additional palliative measures remain essential for adequate pain control. Cancer 2010;116:2716-25. (C) 2070 American Cancer Society. Show less
