Survival and Treatment Patterns in Stage II to III Esophageal Cancer
Authors: Jeon Won Jin , Park Daniel , Al-Manaseer Farris , Chen Yi-Jen , Kim Jae Y. , Liu Bo , Wu Shengyang , Castillo Dani 
Published: October 2024

Importance

Existing clinical trials favor neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NCRT) followed by surgery alone for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) and perioperative chemotherapy as the preferred modality for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, it is unclear whether these trial findings are reflected in the patterns of care and survival outcomes among patients in the clinical setting.

Objective

To investigate survival outcomes in the clinical setting among patients with EC after various treatment modalities.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study examined data from the National Cancer Database maintained by the American College of Surgeons and focused on patients with clinical stage II or III EC, excluding those with gastroesophageal junction cancer, who underwent trimodality therapy (NCRT followed by esophagectomy), definitive chemoradiation therapy (DCRT), radiotherapy (RT) alone, or perioperative chemotherapy from January 2006 to December 2020. Analyses were conducted from December 2023 to August 2024.

Exposures

Perioperative chemotherapy, trimodality therapy, DCRT, and single-modality RT.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to compare overall survival (OS) between treatment groups in the entire cohort, among patients with squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma, and among those older than 65 years. Landmark survival analysis at 6 months was performed to reduce survivorship bias.

Results

The study included 57 116 patients (median age, 64 [IQR, 57-72] years; 45 410 [79.5%] male); 21 619 patients (37.9%) received trimodality therapy, 32 493 (57.1%) received DCRT, 2692 (4.7%) received single-modality RT, and 312 (0.5%) received perioperative chemotherapy. In the overall study population, 37 698 patients (66.0%) had EAC, and of the 312 patients that received perioperative chemotherapy, 283 (90.7%) had EAC. In adjusted survival analysis, perioperative chemotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.28-0.39; P &amp;lt;.001) and trimodality therapy (AHR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.44-0.46; P &amp;lt; .001) were associated with improved OS compared with DCRT. In contrast, RT alone was associated with worse outcomes compared with DCRT (AHR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.30-1.45; P &amp;lt; .001). The median OS for perioperative chemotherapy of 66.2 months (95% CI, 43.1-111.9 months; P &amp;lt; .001) was longer compared with that for DCRT alone (18.1 months; 95% CI, 17.8-18.4 months; P &amp;lt; .001). Trimodality therapy was associated with a median OS of 43.9 months (95% CI, 42.8-45.5 months; P &amp;lt; .001), which was shorter than that for perioperative chemotherapy but improved compared with DCRT and RT alone, which was associated with a median OS of 13.5 months (95% CI, 12.8-14.0 months; P &amp;lt; .001). In the subgroup of patients older than 65 years, those who received perioperative chemotherapy had longer median OS (56.7 months; 95% CI, 36.4-115.2 months; P &amp;lt; .001) compared with those receiving other treatment modalities (eg, trimodality therapy: 40.1 months; 95% CI, 38.1-42.0 months; P &amp;lt; .001). Patients who received RT alone had the worst median OS (13.6 months; 95% CI, 12.8-14.4 months; P &amp;lt; .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients with stage II to III EC, trimodality therapy was associated with improved OS compared with DCRT or RT alone for locally advanced EC and perioperative chemotherapy was associated with improved OS for adenocarcinoma.