The optimal management of patients with locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma is unclear. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy (trimodality therapy) is supported as a standard of care, but definitive chemoradiotherapy is frequently given in practice to patients who may have been surgical candidates. This multi-institutional retrospective cohort study compared the outcomes of consecutive patients diagnosed with stage II to IVA esophageal adenocarcinoma between 2004 and 2018 who planned to undergo trimodality therapy or definitive chemoradiotherapy. A total of 493 patients were included, of whom 435 intended to undergo trimodality therapy and 56 intended to undergo definitive chemoradiotherapy. After a median follow-up of 7.3 years, trimodality therapy was associated with a lower risk of locoregional failure (5-year risk, 30.5% vs. 61.3%; HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.62; p<0.001) but not distant metastases (5-year risk, 58.2% vs. 53.9%; HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.77-1.91; p=0.40). There were no differences in overall survival (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.56-1.09; p=0.14) or cancer-specific survival (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.57-1.21; p=0.33). Findings were consistent on propensity score-matched sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, trimodality therapy was associated with a lower risk of locoregional failure, but this did not translate into a significantly lower risk of distant failure or improved survival. Further studies are required to accurately estimate the trade-offs between the two treatment strategies.

UNASSIGNED: Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is the standard treatment for unresectable locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, this treatment is associated with substantial toxicity, and most malnourished or elderly patients are unable to complete this therapy. Therefore, there is a need for a more suitable radiotherapy combination regimen for this population. This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination regimen comprising chemotherapy with nimotuzumab and S-1 and concurrent radiotherapy for patients with fragile locally advanced esophageal cancer with a high Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) score.
UNASSIGNED: Eligible patients with unresectable esophageal carcinoma who had an NRS-2002 score of 2 or higher were enrolled. They were treated with S-1 and nimotuzumab with concurrent radiotherapy, followed by surgery or definitive radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the locoregional control (LRC) rate.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 55 patients who met the study criteria were enrolled. After completion of treatment, surgery was performed in 15 patients and radiotherapy was continued in 40 patients. The median follow-up period was 33.3 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 31.4-35.1)] months. The LRC rate was 77.2% (95% CI, 66.6%-89.4%) at 1 year in the entire population. The overall survival (OS) rate and event-free survival (EFS) rate were 57.5% and 51.5% at 3 years, respectively. Surgery was associated with better LRC [hazard ratio (HR)=0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.70; P=0.015], OS (HR=0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.80; P=0.024), and EFS (HR=0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.75; P=0.013). Most adverse events were of grade 1 or 2, and no severe adverse events occurred.
UNASSIGNED: For malnourished or elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, radiotherapy combined with nimotuzumab and S-1 is effective and has a good safety profile.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard for resectable, locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is surgery-based treatment; however, it is unclear whether esophagectomy or chemoradiotherapy is suitable for older patients. This retrospective study aimed to identify the treatment outcomes of surgery-based therapy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) as an initial treatment for older patients with resectable, locally advanced ESCC.
METHODS: Data from 434 patients who received radical treatment for resectable, locally advanced ESCC were collected from January 2011 to December 2020. Of the patients >75 years of age, 49 underwent radical esophagectomy and 26 received dCRT. Survival was compared between the surgery and dCRT groups.
RESULTS: The mean ages of the surgery and chemoradiotherapy groups were 77.3 and 78.8 years, respectively. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the two groups were not statistically significant (3-year OS: surgery 66.2%, dCRT 55.7%, p = 0.236). Multivariate analysis for OS showed a hazard ratio of 1.229 for dCRT versus surgery (90% confidence interval 0.681-2.217). OS did not differ between the groups in any of the performance statuses. For patients who were able to receive chemotherapy using fluorouracil and cisplatin, OS tended to be better in the surgery group, but the difference was not statistically significant (3-year OS: surgery 68.1%, dCRT 51.8%, p = 0.117).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no clear difference in survival outcome between surgery-based therapy and dCRT as an initial treatment for esophageal cancer in older patients. Either treatment may be an option for older patients.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is a potentially curative therapy for esophageal cancer. As indications for dCRT differ widely, it is challenging to draw conclusions on outcomes and survival. The aim of this study was to evaluate overall survival (OS) and recurrence patterns according to indications for treatment. Patients who underwent dCRT (50.4 Gy concomitant with carboplatin/paclitaxel) for esophageal cancer between 2012 and 2022 were identified. Indications for dCRT were: cervical tumor, irresectable disease, unfit for surgery, and patient and/or physician preference. The primary endpoint was OS calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients that completed the dCRT regimen, 30- and 90-day mortality, and disease recurrence. One hundred and fifty-seven patients were included (72.6% esophageal squamous cell carcinoma) with a median follow-up of 20 months (IQR 10.0-43.9). The full dCRT regimen was completed by 116 patients (73.9%). Thirty- and 90-day mortality were 2.5% and 8.3%, respectively. Median and 5-year OS for all patients were 22.9 months (95% CI 18.0-27.9) and 31.4%, respectively. The median OS per indication was 23.7 months (95% CI 6.5-40.8) for patients with cervical tumors, 10.9 months (95% 0.0-23.2) for irresectable disease, 28.2 months (95% CI 12.3-44.0) for unfit patients, and 22.9 months (95% CI 15.4-30.5) for patients\' preference for dCRT (P = 0.11). Disease recurrence was observed in 74 patients (46%), located locoregionally (46%), distant (19%), or combined (35%). Patients who underwent dCRT had a 5-year OS of 31.4%, but OS differed according to indications for treatment with patients who had irresectable disease having the worst prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Recent developments in esophageal cancer treatment, including studies exploring active surveillance following chemoradiotherapy, have led to a need for clear terminology and definitions regarding different multimodal treatment options.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to reach worldwide consensus on the definitions and semantics of multimodal esophageal cancer treatment.
METHODS: In total, 72 experts working in the field of multimodal esophageal cancer treatment were invited to participate in this Delphi study. The study comprised three Delphi surveys sent out by email and one online meeting. Input for the Delphi survey consisted of terminology obtained from a systematic literature search. Participants were asked to respond to open questions and to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with different statements. Consensus was reached when there was ≥75% agreement among respondents.
RESULTS: Forty-nine of 72 invited experts (68.1%) participated in the first online Delphi survey, 45 (62.5%) in the second survey, 21 (46.7%) of 45 in the online meeting, and 39 (86.7%) of 45 in the final survey. Consensus on neoadjuvant and definitive chemoradiotherapy with or without surgery was reached for 27 of 31 items (87%). No consensus was reached on follow-up after treatment with definitive chemoradiotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached on most statements regarding terminology and definitions of multimodal esophageal cancer treatment. Implementing uniform criteria facilitates comparison of studies and promotes international research collaborations.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and surgical resection are the standard of care for cT1N0M0 esophageal cancer (EC), whereas definitive chemoradiotherapy (d-CRT) is a treatment option. Nevertheless, the comparative efficiency and safety of ESD, surgery and d-CRT for cT1N0M0 EC remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficiency and safety of ESD, surgery and d-CRT for cT1N0M0 EC.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the hospitalized data of a total of 472 consecutive patients with cT1N0M0 EC treated at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer center between 2017-2019 and followed up until October 30th, 2022. We analyzed demographic, medical recorded, histopathologic characteristics, imaging and endoscopic, and follow-up data. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to analyze the difference of survival outcome by treatments. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to minimize potential confounding factors.
RESULTS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent ESD (n = 99) or surgery (n = 220) or d-CRT (n = 16) at the Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from 2017 to 2019. The median follow-up time for the ESD group, the surgery group, and the d-CRT group was 42.0 mo (95%CI: 35.0-60.2), 45.0 mo (95%CI: 34.0-61.75) and 32.5 mo (95%CI: 28.3-40.0), respectively. After adjusting for background factors using IPTW, the highest 3-year overall survival (OS) rate and 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate were observed in the ESD group (3-year OS: 99.7% and 94.7% and 79.1%; and 3-year RFS: 98.3%, 87.4% and 79.1%, in the ESD, surgical, and d-CRT groups, respectively). There was no difference of severe complications occurring between the three groups (P ≥ 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that treatment method, histology and depth of infiltration were independently associated with OS and RFS.
CONCLUSIONS: For cT1N0M0 EC, ESD had better long-term survival and lower hospitalization costs than those who underwent d-CRT and surgery, with a similar rate of severe complications occurring.

Surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer (EC); however, chemoradiotherapy without surgery has been recommended in specific cases. The aim of this meta-analysis is to analyse the survival between surgeries after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy in order to provide a theoretical basis for clinically individualised differential treatment. We conducted an initial search of MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Library, and Embase for English-only articles that compared treatment regimens and provided survival data. According to the final I2 value of the two survival indicators, the random effect model or fixed effect model was used to calculate the overall hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Cochrane\'s Q test was used to judge the heterogeneity of the studies, and a funnel plot was used to evaluate for publication bias. A sensitivity analysis was performed to verify the stability of the included studies. A total of 38 studies involving 29161 patients (neoadjuvant therapy: 15401, definitive chemoradiotherapy: 13760) were included in the analysis. The final pooled results (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.67-0.82) showed a statistically significant increase in overall survival with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Subgroup analyses were performed to determine the effects of heterogeneity, additional treatment regimens, study types, and geographic regions, as well as histologic differences, complications, and recurrence, on the overall results. For people with esophageal cancer that can be removed, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy combined with surgery improves survival compared to definitive chemoradiotherapy. However, more research is needed to confirm these results and help doctors make decisions about treatment.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of induction immunochemotherapy followed by definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). We identified unresectable stage III NSCLC patients who received induction immunochemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary endpoints. From February 2019 to August 2022, 158 patients were enrolled. Following the completion of induction immunochemotherapy, the objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 52.5% and 83.5%, respectively. The ORR of CRT was 73.5%, representing 68.4% of the total cohort. The median PFS was 17.8 months, and the median OS was 41.9 months, significantly higher than in patients who received CRT alone (p < 0.001). Patients with concurrent CRT demonstrated markedly improved PFS (p = 0.012) and OS (p = 0.017) than those undergoing sequential CRT. Additionally, those with a programmed-death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of 50% or higher showed significantly elevated ORRs (72.2% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.011) and superior OS (median 44.8 vs. 28.6 months, p = 0.004) compared to patients with PD-L1 expression below 50%. Hematologic toxicities were the primary severe adverse events (grade ≥ 3) encountered, with no unforeseen treatment-related toxicities. Thus, induction immunochemotherapy followed by definitive CRT demonstrated encouraging efficacy and tolerable toxicities for unresectable LA-NSCLC.

Objective  The aim of this study is to determine prognostic values of sequential 18 F-FDG PET/CT metabolic parameters in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Materials and Methods  Forty locally advanced ESCC patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) who received pre-treatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT (PET1) and 3-months post-treatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT (PET2) were enrolled in the prospective study. 18 F-FDG PET parameters of the primary tumor including maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax, SUVmean), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were calculated on PET delineated primary tumor. Using Kaplan-Meier curves to estimated overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local-regional control (LRC). Cox regression analysis was performed to find significant prognostic factors for survival. Results  With a median follow-up of 13.5 months, the 4-year OS, PFS, and LRC rates were 67.3%, 52.6%, and 53.4% respectively. Patients with MTV 2 > 5.7 had lower OS, PFS, and LRC rates than the lower MTV 2 group (p < 0.05). Univariate Cox regression analysis showed that MTV2 was a significant prognostic factor for OS, PFS, and LRC (p < 0.05). Conclusion  MTV parameter of sequential 18 F-FDG PET/CT could be used as a prognostic factor for OS, PFS, and LRC in locally advanced ESCC patients treated with dCRT.

Pulmonary lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma (PLELC) is a rare form of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) that shares similarities with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The optimal treatment for stage III-N2 PLELC remains controversial.
We conducted a retrospective analysis from stage III-N2 PLELC patients between 2009 and 2022 in our center. The patients were categorized into three groups: Group 1 (G1, definitive chemoradiotherapy), Group 2 (G2, radical surgery plus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy), and Group 3 (G3, radical surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy).
A total of 103 patients were included in the study, with 34, 25, and 44 patients in G1, G2, and G3, respectively. The median follow-up time was 47.4 months. The overall median PFS was 66.6 months, with 3-year PFS and 3-year OS rates of 66.0% and 92.4%, respectively, for all patients. Multivariate analysis revealed no significant difference in PFS between G1 and G2 (p = 0.354), while both groups exhibited significantly longer PFS than G3 (p < 0.001; p = 0.039). Similarly, no significant difference in OS was observed between G1 and G2 (p = 0.649), but both tended to demonstrate improved OS compared to G3 (p = 0.081; p = 0.092). Only one case of grade 3 radiation esophagitis was observed in G1, and no grade 3 or higher radiation pneumonitis were reported.
Patients with stage III-N2 PLELC have a favorable prognosis, with radiotherapy playing a crucial role in treatment. Both definitive chemoradiotherapy and radical surgery followed by chemoradiotherapy demonstrate favorable efficacy and manageable toxicity.