Current management of oesophageal cancer

Naufal Rashid, Mohamed Elshaer, Michael Kosmin and Amjid Riaz.

Introduction

Oesophageal cancer (OC) is the eighth most common cancer affecting an estimated 481,000 people worldwide with a rapidly rising incidence. Due to the poor prognosis of patients with these cancers it is the sixth leading cause of cancer related mortality with 406,000 deaths.^1,2 Although the overall 5-year survival has increased from 4% in the 1970s³ to currently ranging between 15 to 20%⁴, it remains a challenge to treat as clinical presentation is often late and diagnosis is made at advanced stages. Incidence and mortality rates for OCs are two fold higher in males compared to females, however this ratio rises to up to 5-10:1 for oesophageal adenocarcinomas. Cohort studies have shown that the incidence of OC increases with age; the average of onset is between 65 to 70 years. ¹⁴ This article seeks to discuss the epidemiology, diagnosis and staging, prevention and current trends in the management of OC.

Methods

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library and Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases up to November 2014. Our search strategy used a combination of MeSH, textwords, and appropriate words variants of “oesophagus”, “cancer”, “epidemiology”, “adenocarcinoma”, or “squamous cell carcinoma”, and “staging”, “transhiatal oesophagectomy”, “transthoracic oesophagectomy”, “chemotherapy”, “radiotherapy”. This was supplemented with selected systematic reviews, evidence based guidelines and consensus statements.

Epidemiology

There have been major changes in the epidemiology of OC over the last thirty years. The two key histological types of OC are adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and they differ significantly in their fundamental patterns of incidence and aetiological factors. Oesophageal SCC comprises the majority of cases worldwide and represents 90% of all OCs in most Eastern countries. However the incidence of adenocarcinoma has risen rapidly over the last three decades and it is now the predominant histological type in Western Europe, USA and Australia, particularly amongst white males.^{5, 6} There are other rare histological types, which include lymphoma, leiomyosarcoma, melanoma, rhabdomyosarcoma and small cell carcinoma.⁷ OC accounts for almost 3% of all cancers in the UK and is the ninth most common malignancy in the UK. There were 8,173 new cases in 2008; incidence rates have increased over the last thirty years in the UK and are now one of the highest in Europe.⁸ Incidence rates of OC differ markedly by geographical locations and between ethnic groups; overall, rates are twice as high in less developed regions compared with more-developed regions and the highest rates occur in Asia. In this region, especially in Iran, Turkey, Kazakhstan and China, a very high incidence of oesophageal SCC exists with greater than 100 cases per 100,000 population annually. A similar trend is also seen in South Africa.^9-12 In contrast, the rate of rise in incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in more-developed countries has exceeded that of oesophageal SCC, which has remained the same or decreased. Oesophageal adenocarcinoma now comprises approximately 50% of all OCs in these countries. ¹³

Who gets oesophageal cancer?

The aetiology of OC is multifactorial, with interactions between environmental risk exposures and genetic factors. These can be divided between the two different histological types of OC.

Pathology of oesophageal tumours

Oesophageal tumours are classified as epithelial and non epithelial. Epithelial tumours include papilloma, intraepithelial neoplasia, carcinoma and carcinoid tumours. Non epithelial tumours include leiomyoma, lipoma and gastrointestinal stromal tumours (Table 1).

Table 1: WHO histological classification of oesophageal tumours

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma

Established risk factors for oesophageal adenocarcinoma (Fig. 1) include gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, Barrett’s oesophagus, obesity, male sex, tobacco smoking and a low intake of fruit and vegetables.^{15, 16} There is evidence to suggest that previous infection with Helicobacter Pylori and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may decrease the risk of OC. ¹⁷

Fig. 1: Adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus (from Lewin et al. Gastrointestinal pathology and its clinical implications)

Barrett’s oesophagus (Fig. 2) occurs when there is metaplastic change in the lining of the oesophagus from normal stratified squamous mucosa to single layered columnar glandular mucosa with variable degrees of goblet cell differentiation.¹⁸ This transition usually occurs in the context of chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, which causes exposure of the epithelium to refluxate. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is a major contributory factor and 5% of people with reflux disease develop Barrett’s oesophagus. The estimated prevalence of Barrett’s oesophagus is just under 2% amongst adults in the West and the annual incidence is approximately 0.1%. However, there is evidence to suggest that the rate of diagnosis is increasing by 2% annually.¹⁹ There has been a rise in the incidence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, which may be explained by a number of factors. The rise in the prevalence of obesity, specifically central and intra-abdominal obesity has been found to have a link with oesophageal adenocarcinoma. This can be explained by the fact that an increase in adiposity will cause a rise in intra-abdominal pressure thereby increasing reflux that may be asymptomatic. However, studies also suggest that obesity is a strong independent risk factor for oesophageal adenocarcinoma regardless of gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms implying an underlying link. ^{20, 21} Another factor that may contribute to the rise in reflux disease is the increased use of drugs that relax the lower oesophageal sphincter. There is evidence to suggest that individuals with previous H. Pylori infections are less likely to develop oesophageal adenocarcinoma.²² This might be explained by the gastric atrophy that results from this infection, which will reduce the acidity and quantity of gastric secretions and thus decreasing the chances of gastro-oesophageal reflux. However, the prevalence of H. Pylori infections is decreasing in the Western population, which may contribute to the rising incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinoma was classified by Siewert and Stein into three types. Type I arises from 1 to 5 cm proximal to the GOJ (tumours of the distal oesophagus), type II arises from 1 cm proximal to 2 cm distal to the GOJ (true cardiacarcinoma), and type III arises from 2 to 5 cm distal to the GOJ (subcardial gastric carcinoma). ⁶¹

Fig. 2: Barrett’s oesophagus (adapted from WHO classification of oesophageal tumours)

Oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma

The major risk factors for the development of oesophageal SCC (Fig. 3,4) are tobacco use and alcohol consumption; particularly a combination of both.^{23, 24} Nitrosamine exposure in tobacco smoking and the alcohol metabolite aldehyde, which is a known carcinogen, are probably the underlying reasons for these two risk factors. The high incidence of oesophageal SCC in Northern China, Iran and areas of Southern Africa may be related to a diet rich in nitrosamines and deficient in trace elements and vitamins A & C.

Other risk factors for oesophageal SCC in the Western world include low socioeconomic status, poor oral hygiene, achalasia, history of thoracic radiation, caustic injury, hereditary tylosis and Plummer-Vinson Syndrome.²⁵

Fig. 3: Squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus

Fig. 4: Microscopic picture of squamous cell carcinoma (adapted from WHO classification of oesophageal tumours)

How does oesophageal cancer present clinically?

Patients presenting with symptoms of OC almost invariably have advanced disease. The most common presenting symptom is progressive dysphagia with 74% of patients reporting difficulty swallowing.²⁶ This is graded according to the following: ²⁷

• Grade 1: Able to swallow most foods
• Grade 2: Able to swallow soft foods only
• Grade 3: Able to swallow liquids only
• Grade 4: Unable to swallow anything

17% of patients will also report pain on swallowing food and liquids (odynophagia). ²⁶ Typically, patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma will be white males with a background of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease who have developed dysphagia. On the other hand, patients with oesophageal SCC will present with dysphagia, associated with weight loss and a history of smoking and increased alcohol intake may exist.

Other less common symptoms include dyspnoea, cough, hoarseness, acute haemorrhage and pain which may be retrosternal, back or right upper abdominal. These will usually represent the existence of metastatic disease.

Physical examination is often normal; positive clinical findings may include cachexia, lymphadenopathy and hepatomegaly in the presence of metastases.

How is oesophageal cancer diagnosed?

It is essential to have a low threshold if cancers are to be detected at an early, treatable stage. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines state that a patient presenting with symptoms suggestive of upper gastrointestinal cancer should be referred to a team specialising in the management of these cancers. Specifically; patients of any age presenting with dyspepsia in association with alarm symptoms should be urgently referred for endoscopy or to a specialist. The classical ‘alarm’ symptoms associated with OC includes dysphagia, vomiting, anorexia, weight loss and symptoms associated with gastro-intestinal blood loss. Patients aged 55 or more with persistent, recent onset, and unexplained dyspepsia should be referred urgently for an endoscopy.

Diagnosis is usually made by oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy where multiple biopsy samples must be taken from any mucosal abnormality to exclude early tumours. Suspicious lesions including oesophageal strictures may require repeated biopsies if initial results are negative.

Once diagnosis is made patients should be urgently referred to an Upper Gastro-intestinal team at a specialist centre for investigations to stage disease and further management.

Staging oesophageal cancers

It is essential to accurately stage disease to exclude patients with widespread metastatic disease for whom surgery will not be curative and to identify subgroups of patients who will require neo-adjuvant therapies. Whilst it is difficult to completely eliminate the possibility of ‘open and shut’ cases where tumours are found to be inoperable at the time of surgery; it is important to develop a staging strategy with investigations and procedures that help to minimise this risk. The TNM (Tumour, Node, Metastasis) staging system is used to classify the depth of tumour invasion into or through the oesophageal wall, the status of regional lymph nodes and metastases to distant sites. The TNM7 categories are shown in Tables 2 and the current stage groupings is shown in Table 3. ²⁸

Table 2: TNM7 staging system

Table 3: Stage classification for oesophageal cancer in the 2010 TNM7 staging system

Initial staging assessment includes Computed Tomography (CT) (Fig. 5) of the thorax, abdomen and pelvis and its major role will be in evaluating the T stage to detect local tumour invasion into adjacent structures and determining the presence or absence of metastatic disease. However CT will not be able to determine the depth of tumour invasion. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) (Fig. 6) is the main modality used to stage the primary tumour and primarily aids in distinguishing T1 lesions from T2-4 lesions. This method has an accuracy ranging from between 73% to 89% in tumour staging.²⁹ Accurately distinguishing tumour stage will affect treatment as T1 lesions may be treated with endoscopic therapy or with oesophagectomy whereas T2-4 lesions may require neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy prior to surgery. EUS is also used for evaluation of regional lymph nodes however although sensitivity is approximately 80%, the specificity is lower at approximately 70%. ³⁰ It is best to perform a EUS-guided lymph node biopsy for confirmation of involvement.

Fig. 5: CT scan shows irregular wall thickening of the esophagus and enlarged metastatic lymph node.

Fig. 6: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) of oesophagus showing T3 tumour

FDG-PET (¹⁸F-fluoroudeoxyglucose PET) (Fig. 7) is a key modality for the detection of distant metastatic disease in OC.^{31, 32} PET may reveal previously occult distant metastases in nodal and non-nodal sites with a sensitivity of 67% and high specificity of 97%. ³³ It can also reveal metastases to bone, which may not be detected using conventional methods. An investigation has shown PET to be the only modality that predicted intended curative resection and it may also be used to prevent unnecessary surgical explorations.³⁴ The use of PET has been shown in a study to change the management of patients from curative to palliative due to detection of previously unknown metastases.³⁵ It has also been used in a prospective study to assess response early after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy to determine the need for urgent surgery or further chemotherapy. The usage of CT and PET in combination has become increasingly available and is useful in selective cases.³⁶

Fig. 7: FDG PET/CT image demonstrating increased uptake at the distal oesophagus and coeliac lymph node in oesophageal cancer case

Minimally invasive surgery is also used as a method to stage OC in many specialist centres.³⁷ A staging laparoscopy can visualise the primary tumour, identify metastases such as hepatic and regional nodal and can accurately detect intraperitoneal dissemination of disease, which may not have been appreciated on other radiological staging investigations. Samples of peritoneal ascites or washings for cytology can also be obtained at this stage if present.

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) can provide accurate histological staging for high grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinomas. ³⁸ In many cases EMR alone can be a therapeutic intervention depending on the depth of invasion on the specimen.

Treatment

The management of OCs requires a multi-disciplinary team approach involving surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, specialist nurses, dietitians and specialists from other specialties if required. Patients considered for surgery or chemo-radiotherapy will require a fitness assessment. In addition to pulmonary function tests, ECG and echocardiogram, cardio-pulmonary exercise testing (CPEX/CPET) is now being increasingly used to assess fitness for major surgery.

OCs can be managed with surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, a combination of the three or palliation in many cases. Disease that is locally advanced without signs of distant metastases is treated with an intention to cure and this will involve a multimodal approach. Metastatic, disseminated and recurrent disease will be treated with palliative intent with chemotherapy to increase survival or measures such as radiotherapy or stent placement for symptomatic relief.

Surgical

Surgical resection can be part of a multimodal approach or alone and is the main option for curative treatment. There are a number of surgical procedures that can be used however it is important to ensure removal of macroscopic and microscopic tumour in association with dissection of lymph nodes with either method as these are vital prognostic factors following surgery.

Open oesophagectomy (OO):

Options for resection include trans-hiatal oesophagectomy and transthoracic approaches and the choice of approach will depend on the location of the tumour, access to lymph nodes and surgeon preference. An Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy (also known as Lewis-Tanner oesophagectomy) involves abdominal mobilization of the stomach and right thoracic approach for resection of the oesophagus. The three-stage modified McKeown oesophagectomy involves a laparotomy, right thoracotomy and neck anastomosis. A resection margin 8-10 cm proximally and 7 cm distally is recommended to achieve an R0 resection (recommendation class IIB, level of evidence C). The next step is to construct a conduit for the anastomosis and this can be achieved by using a gastric tube, large or small bowel. A gastric tube is preferred due to the following factors; ease of use, tension free and longest term conduit survival (recommendation class IIA, level of evidence C). The anastomosis can be performed in the chest or the neck. This relies on multiple factors such as ease of the anastomosis, tension on the repair, ability to diagnose and treat complications and the oncological status. Circular staplers or hand sewn technique usually used with no significant differences in the outcomes. A drainage procedure such as pyloroplasty is recommended to avoid delayed gastric emptying (recommendation class I, level of evidence B). ⁶²

Radical oesophagectomy using either approach has a perioperative mortality of 5-10% and morbidity of 30-40%. ³⁹ Lymph node dissection plays an important role owing to the extensive submucosal lymphatic drainage of the oesophagus. This has meant that nearly 80% of patients undergoing surgery have positive lymph nodes and prognostically this is of importance.^{40, 41} However, there has been controversy with regards to the extent of lymph node dissection required. For optimal staging 10 lymph nodes for T1 and 20-30 lymph nodes for T2 and T3 tumours should be harvested. ⁶² In order to perform a curative resection for carcinoma of the middle and lower third of the oesophagus it is recommended to dissect the abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes. Three-field lymphadenectomy in the abdomen, chest and neck, is performed in Japan for oesophageal SCC.⁴² Proponents of radical lymphadenectomy argue that it does allow optimal staging, improves loco-regional disease free survival improving the quality of life for these patients.

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO):

Minimally invasive approaches, which involve laparoscopic mobilisation of the stomach, thoracoscopic mobilisation of the oesophagus and hybrid or robotic approaches, are increasing in many specialist centres. Benefits of this approach include shorter recovery times, decreased post-operative pain and reduced cardiopulmonary complications without jeopardising the oncological outcomes. Luketich et al. reported a mortality rate of 1.7%, leak 5% and empyema 6% following MIO. ⁶³Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative studies were conducted to investigate the efficacy and outcomes of MIO. A study by Li et al was conducted on 407 patients underwent MIO and OO found that the overall incidence of complications was lower in the MIO patients. The incidence of pulmonary complications was 20.7% in contrast to 39.7% in the OO group. However, there was no difference in the overall survival among the groups. Another comparative retrospective study by Mu et al. didn’t reveal any difference in the morbidity, anastomotic leak rate, pulmonary complications and length of stay between the approaches and the authors concluded that both techniques are equivalent. ^{63, 64}

Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy

This aims to improve operability; achieving this by shrinking the tumour prior to surgery, down-staging the disease as well as treating occult metastatic disease. Response to treatment can be assessed prior to surgery with repeat radiological investigations. It is now common for patients in the UK with locally advanced disease to undergo neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by resection. This is based on the results of a multi-centre study conducted by the Medical Research Council (OEO2), which showed a 9% improvement in two-year survival in patients given 2 cycles of Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil chemotherapy compared to those who were not. Five-year survival with surgery alone was 17%, compared with 23% with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.⁴³ The MRC Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial randomized patients to chemotherapy with surgery or to surgery alone and it was found that patients in the chemotherapy group (who received Epirubicin, Cisplatin and infused 5-Fluorouracil, ‘ECF’) had a significant improvement in progression-free survival and a 13% increase in 5-year survival.⁴⁵

In a meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, there was an overall all-cause absolute survival benefit of 7% at 2 years with the addition of chemotherapy. When analysed by subtype, chemotherapy had no significant effect on mortality for patients with squamous cell carcinoma; however, there was a significant survival benefit for patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (HR 0.78; p=0.014). ⁴⁷

As a result of this evidence, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a standard of care for patients with operable mid and lower oesophageal and GOJ adenocarcinoma. The ongoing MRC OEO5 trial is evaluating optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens: 4 cycles of chemotherapy with ‘ECX’ (Epirubicin, Cisplatin and Capecitabine) compared to two cycles Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil, as in OEO2.⁴⁴

Patients who are deemed suitable for surgical management of mid or distal oesophageal (including GOJ) adenocarcinomas are referred to the GI oncology team to assess fitness for chemotherapy. Many of the criteria assessed are similar to those in the pre-operative assessment, particularly performance status and medical comorbidities. Significant history of renal disease or cardiovascular disease, especially ischaemic heart disease would be a relative contraindication to systemic chemotherapy. Toxicities from chemotherapy are wide-ranging and include gastrointestinal upset, hair loss, skin rash, neurotoxicity, renal toxicity, bone marrow suppression (with risk of neutropaenic sepsis, thrombocytopaenia, and anaemia), cardiovascular toxicity, and chemotherapy-related fatigue. In the MAGIC trial, three cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy were given both before and after surgery, and approximately one quarter of patients had CTCAE grade 3 or 4 neutropaenia. ⁴⁵

The REAL 2 trial ⁴⁸ was a 2x2 factorial non-inferiority comparison of cisplatin versus oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) versus oral capectiabine in patients with oesophageal, gastro-oesophageal junction and gastric tumours. Treatment was given as triplet chemotherapy: epirubicin plus platinum agent (cisplatin or oxaliplatin) plus 5-FU or capecitabine. The trial results showed that oxaliplatin was at least as effective as cisplatin, and oral capectibine was at least as effective as intravenous 5-fluorouracil. There was less grade 3 and 4 neutropaenia with oxaliplatin versus cisplatin, but this was offset by an increase in neuropathy and diarrhoea. As a result of this trial, EOX chemotherapy can be used as an alternative to ECX in both the neoadjuvant and metastatic settings (Table 4).

Table 4: Efficacies of major combination chemotherapy drugs

Neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy

In contrast to the UK, patients in the USA commonly receive neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced oesophageal carcinoma. There is evidence that preoperative CRT is superior to surgery alone. A meta-analysis of ten randomised controlled trials showed a hazard ratio for all-cause mortality of 0.81 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.93; p=0.002). This corresponded to a 13% absolute survival benefit at 2 years.⁴⁷ In the subgroup analysis of the Dutch CRT trial (which used paclitaxel and carboplatin combination chemotherapy), the beneficial effect was more pronounced in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.65) compared to adenocarcinoma (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.16).⁴⁹

There has been no direct head-to-head comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant CRT in the context of a phase III randomised control trial. Concerns regarding the added morbidity of CRT have meant that chemotherapy alone is the standard neoadjuvant treatment of choice in the UK. However, the role of neoadjuvant CRT is currently being reassessed in the Neo-SCOPE trial.

Definitive chemo-radiotherapy (CRT)

According to current UK consensus guidelines, CRT is the definitive treatment of choice for localised squamous cell carcinoma of the proximal oesophagus. ⁵⁰ Localised squamous cell carcinoma of the middle or lower oesophagus may be treated with CRT alone, or CRT plus surgery. ⁵⁰

In a pivotal study, US Intergroup RTOG-8501 randomised 121 patients with squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma to receive CRT (cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil with 50 Gray in 25 fractions), or radiotherapy alone (64 Gray in 32 fractions). This trial ⁴⁶, together with a subsequent systematic review ⁵⁵, demonstrated a survival superiority of CRT over radiotherapy alone (1-year mortality odds ratio 0.61; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.89; p<0.001). This was at the expense of increased toxicity.

This and similar studies ^56-57 have demonstrated a remarkably consistent median survival of 14-18 months and 2 year overall survival of 30-40% with CRT.

CRT practice in the UK is somewhat varied, but within the authors’ multidisciplinary team Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil chemotherapy is given in weeks 1 and 5 of a five-and-a-half week course of radiotherapy. The radiation dose used is 50.4 Gray in 28 daily fractions, treating Mondays to Fridays. An alternative radiation dose-fractionation which is supported by the Royal College of Radiologists guidelines is 50 Gray in 25 daily fractions. ⁵⁸

There are few trials directly comparing surgery alone with CRT. A study of 80 patients with squamous cell carcinoma randomised to surgery or CRT failed to show superiority of either strategy in terms of early disease free survival or overall survival. ⁵¹ Adding surgery to CRT can improve local control rates compared with CRT alone, but combined-modality therapy has not been shown to improve survival. It predictably also leads to significantly more treatment-related morbidity.⁵²

The French FFCD 9102 trial recruited 444 patients with potentially resectable OC (90% squamous cell carcinoma) to receive induction CRT. Those patients who showed evidence of response to CRT were then randomised to further CRT or surgery. Median overall survival was 19.3 months in the CRT alone arm, and 17.7 months in those randomised to surgery. The trial met its endpoint of non-inferiority for 2 year overall survival. Again, toxicity was shown to be significantly higher in patients who received both CRT and surgery.⁵³

Although definitive CRT is a current recommended standard of care for localised squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus, there is insufficient evidence to to support either a surgical or non-surgical approach ⁵⁰. Surgery should be considered in patients who have histologically-confirmed residual disease at the end of CRT.

For patients deemed unsuitable for surgery with localised adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus, CRT is a valid option for treatment. An American case series of 25 patients with a median age of 77 years showed that CRT using two cycles of mitomycin-C and 5-fluorouracil in combination with radiation (dose 50.4Gy in 28 daily fractions) was effective and tolerable. 68% of these patients had no evidence of residual disease on post-treatment endoscopy. This small series of patients had a two year overall survival of 64%, with a median overall survival of 35 months.⁵⁴

Salvage surgery after definitive CRT

Local recurrence occurs within the first year in 10-30% of patients treated with definitive CRT.⁵⁰ Salvage curative oesophagectomy may be considered within a multidisciplinary team setting. Repeat staging investigations including a CT-PET and EUS are required before a final decision for salvage surgery is made. Survival benefit is limited, and such surgery is associated with an increased in-hospital mortality rate and increased morbidity.⁵⁹ Informing patients of the potential high risks and poor outcomes is an integral part of the decision-making process for salvage surgery.

Palliation

The majority of patients diagnosed with OC are never treated with curative intent as a result of advanced disease or their physical fitness and comorbidities not allowing for radical treatment. It also includes patients who have developed recurrent or metastatic disease following resection. For this group of patients, there are a number of palliative treatments available for relief of symptoms, prolonging and maximising their quality of life. Once again, a multidisciplinary, holistic approach is required to provide the best treatment.

Treatments to provide symptomatic relief such as dysphagia can include intraluminal brachytherapy, endoscopic stenting using self-expanding metal stents or repeated endoscopic dilatations. Dysphagia can also be palliated by chemotherapy or external beam radiotherapy. Laser-thermal Nd-YAG endoluminal tumour destruction and photodynamic therapy can also be administered however this requires a number of treatments and may be more suitable for short exophytic tumours. It is essential to manage pain and nutrition and feeding options through a gastrostomy, jejunostomy or even intravenously can be provided to ensure adequate nutritional status. In addition to providing symptomatic relief it is important to also ensure that these patients receive social and psychological support by identifying and addressing the needs of the patients as well as their carers.

Palliative radiotherapy can be offered to patients with symptomatic primary oesophageal tumours in the context of metastatic or inoperable disease. Palliative dose and fractionation options are varied, but include 27 Gray in 6 fractions treating twice a week for 3 weeks; 30 Gray in 10 fractions treating daily for 2 weeks; 20 Gray in 5 fractions treating daily for 1 week.⁵⁸ The aim of such radiation treatment is to palliate dysphagia. This effect is not immediate, and therefore patients with significant dysphagia are better served initially by endoscopic stenting.

Chemotherapy has been shown to be effective in improving symptoms and overall survival. Patients with good performance status are offered combination chemotherapy. This can be with EOX, as per the MAGIC trial, ⁴⁵or with Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil, with or without the addition of Epirubicin (CF or ECF). 5-Fluorouracil can be substituted for oral Capecitabine (i.e. CX or ECX) without any adverse effects on outcomes.⁴⁵

When choosing palliative systemic chemotherapy for patients with incurable OC, the primary aim should be about maximising quality of life. Improvements in outcome with more intensive chemotherapy regimens, such as docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil, have been shown to be offset by significantly more toxicity.⁶⁰ As a result, Docetaxel containing regimens are not approved in the UK for this indication.⁵⁰

Conclusions

The incidence of oesophageal carcinoma is increasing and despite advances in management and treatment the overall prognosis remains poor. It is essential to recognize and diagnose early, to have a clear pathway for subsequent investigations to ensure accurate staging. This will allow appropriate therapy to be administered to ensure the best possible outcomes are achieved. Treatment of OC is still a challenge however recent advances in surgery, endoscopic treatments and new therapeutic agents will hopefully improve prognosis.

References

1. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127: 2893–917
2. Pisani P, Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J. Estimates of the worldwide mortality from 25 cancers in 1990. Int J Cancer 1999; 83: 870-3.
3. Brown L, Devesa S. Epidemiologic trends in esophageal and gastric cancer in the United States. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2002; pp. 235–256
4. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Neyman N, Aminou R, Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Cho H, Mariotto A, Eisner MP, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2009 (Vintage 2009 Populations), National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, Available on http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/esoph.html#survival, accessed on 02/04/2013
5. Lepage C, Rachet B, Jooste V, Faivre J, Coleman MP. Continuing rapid increase in esophageal adenocarcinoma in England and Wales. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 2694–99
6. Devesa S, Blot, WJ and Fraumeni, JF (1998), Changing patterns in the incidence of esophageal and gastric carcinoma in the United States. Cancer, 83: 2049–2053
7. Shields TW, LoCicero J, Reeds C, Fein R, Less Common Malignant Tumors of the Esophagus. General Thoracic Surgery 2005 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. pp. 2041 - 2055.
8. Office for National Statistics. Cancer Statistics registrations: Registrations of cancer diagnosed in 2008, England. Series MB1 no.39. 2011, National Statistics: London
9. Blot WJ, McLaughlin JK.,The changing epidemiology of esophageal cancer. Seminars in Oncology 1999; 26(5 Suppl 15): 2-8
10. Holmes R, Vaughan T, Epidemiology and pathogenesis of Esophageal Cancer. Seminars in Radiation Oncology 2007; Volume 17, Issue 1: 2-9
11. Umar SB, Fleischer DE, Esophageal cancer: epidemiology, pathogenesis and prevention. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 5: 517–26.
12. Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF. Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2137–50.
13. Edgren G, Adami H, Vainio E, & Nyrén O, A global assessment of the oesophageal adenocarcinoma epidemic. Gut 2012.
14. Cancer Research UK. Oesophageal Cancer Incidence Statistics 2008. Available online at http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/types/oesophagus/incidence/#source5. Accessed on -04/04/2013
15. Vaughan T, Davis S, Kristal A, Thomas DB. Obesity, alcohol,
and tobacco as risk factors for cancers of the esophagus and gastric cardia: adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell carcinoma.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1995; 4: 85–92.
16. Gammon MD, Schoenberg JB, Ahsan H, et al. Tobacco, alcohol, and socioeconomic status and adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and gastric cardia. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 1277–84.
17. Corley D, Kerlikowske K, Verma R, et al. Protective association of aspirin/NSAIDs and esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124(1):47–56.
18. Fitzgerald R, Barrett’s oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma: how does acid interfere with cell proliferation and differentiation. Gut. 2005 Mar; 54 Suppl 1:i21-6.
19. Jankowski J, Barr H, Wang K, Delaney B, Diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. BMJ. 2010; 341: c4551
20. Edelstein ZR, Farrow DC, Bronner MP, Rosen SN, Vaughan TL. Central adiposity and risk of Barrett's esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2007; 133:403-411.
21. Corley DA, Kubo A, Zhao W. Abdominal obesity and the risk of esophageal and gastric cardia carcinomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008; 17: 352-358.
22. Anderson LA, Murphy SJ, Johnston BT, et al. Relationship between Helicobacter pylori infection and gastric atrophy and the stages of the oesophageal inflammation, metaplasia, adenocarcinoma sequence: results from the FINBAR case-control study. Gut. 2008; 57: 734-739.
23. Lubin JH, Cook MB, Pandeya N, et al. The importance of exposure rate on odds ratios by cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption for esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in the Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium. Cancer Epidemiol. 2012; 36: 306-316.
24. Gammon MD, Schoenberg JB, Ahsan H, et al. Tobacco, alcohol, and socioeconomic status and adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and gastric cardia. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 1277–84
25. Stoner GD, Gupta A, Etiology and chemoprevention of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Carcinogenesis 2001; 22 (11): 1737 – 46
26. Daly JM, Fry WA, Little AG, et al. Esophageal cancer: results of an American College of Surgeons Patient Care Evaluation Study. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 2000; 190: 562-72.
27. Knyrim K, Wagner H-J, Bethge N, Keymling M, Nimish. A controlled trial of an expansile metal stent for palliation of esophageal obstruction due to inoperable cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 1993; 329: 1302-7
28. AJCC: Esophageal and esophagogastric junction. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al., AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer, 2010, pp 103-15.
29. Cen P, Hofstetter WL, Lee JH, et al. Value of endoscopic ultrasound staging in conjunction with the evaluation of lymphovascular invasion in identifying low-risk esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 2008; 112: 503–10
30. Van Vliet EP, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Hunink MG, Kuipers EJ, Siersema PD. Staging investigations for oesophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2008; 98: 547–57.
31. Luketich JD, Friedman DM, Weigel TL, et al. Evaluation of distant metastases in esophageal cancer: 100 consecutive positron emission tomography scans. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999; 68: 1133–6.
32. Meyers BF, Downey RJ, Decker PA, et al. The utility of positron emission tomography in staging of potentially operable carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus: results of the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0060 trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007; 133: 738–45.
33. van Westreenen HL, Westerterp M, Bossuyt PM, et al. Systematic review of the staging performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 3805–12.
34. van Westreenen HL, Heeren PA, van Dullemen HM, et al. Positron emission tomography with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in a combined staging strategy of esophageal cancer prevents unnecessary surgical explorations. J Gastrointest Surg. 2005; 9: 54–61.
35. Duong CP, Demitriou H, Weih L, et al. Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG-PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006; 33: 759–69
36. Plukker J, van Westreenen HL, Staging in Oesophageal Cancer. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology. 2006; 20 (5): 877-91
37. Conlon KCP, Minnard EA, The Value of Laparoscopic Staging in Upper Gastrointestinal Malignancy. The Oncologist 1997, 2(1): 10-17
38. Ponchon, Thierry, Endoscopic Mucosal Resection. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 2001; 32 (1): 6-10
39. Wu PC, Posner MC, The role of surgery in the management of oesophageal cancer. The Lancet Oncology 2003; 4: 481-88
40. Holscher AH, Bollschweiler E, Bumm R, et al. Prognostic factors of resected adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Surgery 1995; 118: 845–55
41. Clark GW,Peters JH, Ireland AP, et al. Nodal metastasis and sites of recurrence after en bloc esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma.
 Ann Thorac Surg 1994; 58: 646–53; discussion 653–54
42. Nishihira T, Hirayama K, Mori S. A prospective randomized trial of extended cervical and superior mediastinal lymphadenectomy for carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus. Am J Surg 1998;
175: 47–51.
43. Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Party. Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 359: 1727-1733.
44. Evans M, Crosby T, Oesophageal cancer: current trends and management. J R Coll Physicians Edinb 2008; 38: 242-5
45. Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, et al, and the MAGIC Trial Participants. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 11–20.
46. Cooper JS, Guo MD, Herskovic A, et al, and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced esophageal cancer: long-term follow-up of a prospective randomized trial (RTOG 85-01). JAMA 1999; 281: 1623–27.
47. Gebski V, Burmeister B, Smithers BM, et al. Survival benefits from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy in oesophageal cncaer: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncology 2007: 8: 226-34.
48. Cunningham D, Starling N, Rao S, et al. Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin for Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 36-46.
49. Gaast AV, van Hagen P, Hulshof MASCO. Effect of preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy on survival of patients with resectable esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancer: results from a mulitcenter randomised phase III study. J Clin Oncol 2010; 25(15 Suppl): Suppl Abs. 4004.
50. Allum WH, Blazeby JM, Griffin SM, et al. Guidelines for the management of oesophageal and gastric cancer. Gut 2011; 60: 1449-1472.
51. Chiu PW, Chan AC, Leung SF, et al. Multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing standard esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy for treatment of squamous esophageal cancer: early results from the Chinese University Research Group for Esophageal Cancer (CURE). J Gastrointest Surg 2005; 9: 794-802.
52. Stahl M, Stuschke M, Lehmann H, et al. Chemoradiation with and without surgery in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. J Clin Onc 2007; 25: Suppl Abs. 4530.
53. Bedenne L, Michel P, Bouche O, et al. Chemoradiation followed by surgery compared with chemoradiation alone in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: FFCD 9102. J Clin Onc 2007; 25: 1160-8.
54. Anderson SE, Minsky BD, Bains M, et al. Combined modality chemoradiation in elderly esophageal cancer patients. Br J Cancer 2007; 96: 1823-7.
55. Wong R, Malthaner R. Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy (without surgery) compared with radiotherapy alone in localized carcinoma of the esophagus. Cochrane Database Systematic Review 2006: CD002092.
56. Gwynne S, Hurt C, Evans M, et al. Definitive chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer – a standard of care in patients with non-metastatic oesophageal cancer. Clin Onc 2011; 23(3): 182-188.
57. Herskovic A, Martz k, al-Sarraf M, et al. Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with cancer of the esophagus. NEJM 2006; 326(24): 1593-8.
58. Website: https://www.rcr.ac.uk/docs/oncology/pdf/DoseFract_45_Gastro-oes.pdf [Accessed 26th October 2014]
59. Gardner-Thorpe J, Hardwick RH, Dwerryhouse SJ. Salvage oesophagectomy after local failure of definitive chemoradiotherapy. Br J Surg 2007; 94: 1059-66.
60. Van CE, Moiseyenko VM, Tjulandin S, et al. Phase III study of docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil compared with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a report of the V325 Study Group. J Clin Onc 2006;24: 4991-7.
61. Siewert, J.R. & H.J. Stein. 1998. Classification of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction. Br. J. Surg. 85: 1457–1459.
62. Allum WH, Bonavina L, Cassivi SD, Cuesta MA, Dong ZM, Felix VN, Figueredo E, Gatenby PA, Haverkamp L, Ibraev MA, Krasna MJ, Lambert R, Langer R, Lewis MP, Nason KS, Parry K, Preston SR, Ruurda JP, Schaheen LW, Tatum RP, Turkin IN, van der Horst S, van der Peet DL, van der Sluis PC, van Hillegersberg R, Wormald JC, Wu PC, Zonderhuis BM. Surgical treatments for oesophageal cancers. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2014;1325:242-68.
63. Li J, Shen Y, Tan L, Feng M, Wang H, Xi Y, Wang Q. Is minimally invasive oesophagectomy beneficial to elderly patients with esophageal cancer?. Surg Endosc. 2014 Sep 24. [Epub ahead of print].
64. Mu J, Yuan Z, Zhang B, Li N, Lyu F, Mao Y, Xue Q, Gao S, Zhao J, Wang D, Li Z, Gao Y, Zhang L, Huang J, Shao K, Feng F, Zhao L, Li J, Cheng G, Sun K, He J. Comparative study of minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer in a single cancer centre. Chin Med J (Engl). 2014;127(4):747-52.

The above article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.