Benny Weksler1, Kevin F Kennedy2, Jennifer L Sullivan3. 1. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tenn. Electronic address: bweksler@uthsc.edu. 2. Department of Biostatistics, St Lukes Health System, Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Mo. 3. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tenn.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic resection is gaining popularity as a treatment for early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, particularly for T1a tumors. The goal of this study was to create a scoring system to reflect the risk of nodal metastases in early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma to be used after endoscopic resection to better individualize treatment. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy. We identified variables affecting nodal metastases using multivariable logistic regression, which we then used to create a scoring system. We stratified the model for T1a or T1b tumors, tested model discrimination, and validated the models by refitting in 1000 bootstrap samples. C-statistics greater than 0.7 were considered relevant. RESULTS: We identified 1283 patients with T1a or T1b tumors; 146 had nodal metastases (11.4%). Tumor category (pT1a vs pT1b), grade, and size and the presence of angiolymphatic invasion significantly affected the risk of nodal metastases. We assigned points to each variable and added them to get a risk score. In patients with T1a tumors, less than 3% of patients with a risk score of 3 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 16.1% of patients with a risk score of 5 or greater had nodal metastases. In patients with T1b tumors, less than 5% of patients with a risk score of 2 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 41% of patients with a score of 6 or greater had nodal metastases (c-statistic = 0.805). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed scoring system seems to be useful in discriminating risk of nodal metastases in patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma and may be useful in directing patients who received endoscopic resection to esophagectomy or careful follow-up.
OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic resection is gaining popularity as a treatment for early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, particularly for T1a tumors. The goal of this study was to create a scoring system to reflect the risk of nodal metastases in early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma to be used after endoscopic resection to better individualize treatment. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy. We identified variables affecting nodal metastases using multivariable logistic regression, which we then used to create a scoring system. We stratified the model for T1a or T1b tumors, tested model discrimination, and validated the models by refitting in 1000 bootstrap samples. C-statistics greater than 0.7 were considered relevant. RESULTS: We identified 1283 patients with T1a or T1b tumors; 146 had nodal metastases (11.4%). Tumor category (pT1a vs pT1b), grade, and size and the presence of angiolymphatic invasion significantly affected the risk of nodal metastases. We assigned points to each variable and added them to get a risk score. In patients with T1a tumors, less than 3% of patients with a risk score of 3 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 16.1% of patients with a risk score of 5 or greater had nodal metastases. In patients with T1b tumors, less than 5% of patients with a risk score of 2 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 41% of patients with a score of 6 or greater had nodal metastases (c-statistic = 0.805). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed scoring system seems to be useful in discriminating risk of nodal metastases in patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma and may be useful in directing patients who received endoscopic resection to esophagectomy or careful follow-up.
Authors: Tamar B Nobel; Arianna Barbetta; Meier Hsu; Kay See Tan; Smita Sihag; Manjit S Bains; David R Jones; Daniela Molena Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2019-05-17 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Christina Oetzmann von Sochaczewski; Thomas Haist; Michael Pauthner; Markus Mann; Susanne Braun; Christian Ell; Dietmar Lorenz Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Vignesh Raman; Oliver K Jawitz; Soraya L Voigt; Chi-Fu J Yang; David H Harpole; Thomas A D'Amico; Matthew G Hartwig Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Tamar B Nobel; Jennifer Livschitz; Xin Xin Xing; Arianna Barbetta; Meier Hsu; Kay See Tan; Smita Sihag; David R Jones; Daniela Molena Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Tara R Semenkovich; Yan Yan; Melanie Subramanian; Bryan F Meyers; Benjamin D Kozower; Ruben Nava; G Alexander Patterson; Daniel Kreisel; Varun Puri Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 13.787
Authors: Ali Al-Kaabi; Rachel S van der Post; Jonathan Huising; Camiel Rosman; Iris D Nagtegaal; Peter D Siersema Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2019-09-25 Impact factor: 4.623