You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Cancers
  • Editorial
  • Open Access

17 June 2021

New Trends in Esophageal Cancer Management

and
1
Eso-Gastric Surgery Unit, Department of Digestive Surgery, Magellan Center, Bordeaux University Hospital, 33600 Pessac, France
2
Faculty of Medicine, Bordeaux Ségalen University, 33000 Bordeaux, France
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue New Trends in Esophageal Cancer Management

1. Introduction

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a condition with a five-year survival rate of around 15% for all stages considered. It is the eighth most common cancer and the sixth worst prognosis because of its poor survival rate and aggressiveness [1]. It is important to distinguish the two main histological subtypes of EC with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (ADC).
SCC preferentially affects the middle third of the esophagus and is associated with alcohol and tobacco abuse and a poor social setting. ADC most often affects the lower third of the esophagus and is associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).
The prevalence of EC is currently evolving. Although SCC remains the most common cancer in the world, ADC is rapidly increasing and becoming the most prevalent form in developed countries [1].
EC’s management can be palliative or curative. Curative treatment of advanced disease requires peri-operative chemotherapy or pre-operative radiochemotherapy followed by surgery. The most frequently performed surgical procedure is esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy for which the minimally invasive approach is increasingly used (MIRO trial) [2]. Advances in perioperative management and techniques have led to a decrease in postoperative morbidity and mortality. However, the improvement in long-term survival is slow. The development of targeted therapies (depending on the characteristics of the tumor) gives good hope for improving the overall prognosis. Research on the genetic characteristics of esophageal tumors and multidrug resistance are fields of study offering particularly interesting prospects. The role of palliative treatments allowing a prolonged and quality survival must also be carefully integrated in the treatment strategy.

3. The Value of Precision Imaging in EC

Imaging plays a fundamental role in the assessment of the stage and in particular for the establishment of the therapeutic strategy. The combination of different complementary imaging modalities (CT- ± PET scan and MRI) is most often used for staging. For lymph node staging, echo-endoscopy and MRI (in particular fat-suppression T2WI sequence) are the most efficient. CT and PET scan are the most interesting for the evaluation of metastases. The evaluation of the response to treatment gives valuable prognostic information [3]. The first examination performed is the upper GI endoscopy with biopsies. Current research is aimed at detecting cancer at an early stage. Thus, new approaches for early detection of cancer and surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus are being developed. The endoscopic detection of early stages of EC is difficult and this has led to the development of research in the field of artificial intelligence [4]. Deep learning has made possible the improvement of image and video processing. Prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm the value of artificial intelligence in prognosis prediction.

6. Genetics Advances in EC

EC is associated with mutations in TP53, NOTCH and MTOR genes. ADC is often associated with HER2-Neu overexpression. Individual variations in the prognosis of EC point to the need for advances in personalized therapy. In a systematic review of the literature, gene expression profiles were linked to survival in nine studies [27].
Long non-coding RNA and microRNA are significant regulators of gene expression and chromatin configuration and have a key role in esophageal carcinogenesis and may alter the response to some targeted therapies. Several long non-coding RNA and miRNA panels have been reported to be associated with survival of EC patients and may be prognostic markers, especially in the evaluation of response to therapy [28].
Circular RNA, an endogenous non -coding RNA with a circular structure can link specifically to miRNA and directly or indirectly regulate gene expression in EC and could also be used as biomarkers [29].

7. Multidrug Resistance

Multidrug resistance (MDR) is a major obstacle to effective treatment, particularly in recurrent tumors. Several approaches are being investigated to understand the mechanisms of resistance to therapeutics in EC. First, the plasticity of cancer stem cells has been identified as playing a role in treatment resistance in relation to their heterogeneity. Second, their key signaling pathways (Wnt/β-catenin, Notch, Hedgehog, YAP, JAK/STAT3) modulate CSCs during EC progression [30].
The exploration of resistance mechanisms has highlighted the DNA damage response, epithelial mesenchymal transition, metabolic reprogramming, and the interaction between CSCs and their environment. Thus, the targeting of CSCs could open the way to new therapeutic strategies for EC. Moreover, epigenetic deregulation and the hypoxic microenvironment have been shown to play a role in resistance to radiotherapy [31].
Recent randomized trials have demonstrated the value of anti-PD1 and anti-PDL1 in the treatment of advanced or metastatic EC [32,33] and as adjuvant treatment after R0 resection [34].
Current research perspectives on EC are based on both multiomic characterization and validation of cancer aggressiveness elements in order to establish an atlas of tumor aggressiveness and guide future treatment strategies, and also on targeting cancer stem cells [35].
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been identified as new biomarkers, providing very important clinical information to predict cancer prognosis, monitor therapeutic response or the mechanism of metastasis of different cancers. The isolation of CTCs is an application of liquid biopsy.
A recent meta-analysis confirmed the diagnostic value of liquid biopsies using a molecular combination and EC and showed that the presence of CTCs is associated with a poor prognosis [36]. Liquid biopsies in EC are a particularly interesting area of research for the future.

8. Palliative Care

Palliative management has taken a major place in the management of advanced EC, particularly dysphagia, the management of which can improve quality of life and nutritional status [37].

9. Conclusions

Over the last few years, we have witnessed an evolution in the epidemiology of EC, a medical treatment with a particular focus on targeted therapies, and surgical treatment with the predominance of the minimally invasive approach. The objective of this special issue is to provide an overview of the current management of EC concerning pre-treatment assessment, perioperative treatment, nutritional management, surgical treatment, and special situations. The ambition is to be an aid in the daily practice of physicians confronted with EC.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Uhlenhopp, D.J.; Then, E.O.; Sunkara, T.; Gaduputi, V. Epidemiology of Esophageal Cancer: Update in Global Trends, Etiology and Risk Factors. Clin. J. Gastroenterol. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mariette, C.; Markar, S.R.; Dabakuyo-Yonli, T.S.; Meunier, B.; Pezet, D.; Collet, D.; D’Journo, X.B.; Brigand, C.; Perniceni, T.; Carrère, N.; et al. Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 380, 152–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Elsherif, S.B.; Andreou, S.; Virarkar, M.; Soule, E.; Gopireddy, D.R.; Bhosale, P.R.; Lall, C. Role of Precision Imaging in Esophageal Cancer. J. Thorac. Dis. 2020, 12, 5159–5176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Huang, L.-M.; Yang, W.-J.; Huang, Z.-Y.; Tang, C.-W.; Li, J. Artificial Intelligence Technique in Detection of Early Esophageal Cancer. World J. Gastroenterol. 2020, 26, 5959–5969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Shapiro, J.; van Lanschot, J.J.B.; Hulshof, M.C.C.M.; van Hagen, P.; van Berge Henegouwen, M.I.; Wijnhoven, B.P.L.; van Laarhoven, H.W.M.; Nieuwenhuijzen, G.A.P.; Hospers, G.A.P.; Bonenkamp, J.J.; et al. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy plus Surgery versus Surgery Alone for Oesophageal or Junctional Cancer (CROSS): Long-Term Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015, 16, 1090–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ajani, J.A.; D’Amico, T.A.; Bentrem, D.J.; Chao, J.; Corvera, C.; Das, P.; Denlinger, C.S.; Enzinger, P.C.; Fanta, P.; Farjah, F.; et al. Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2019, 17, 855–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Markar, S.R.; Mikhail, S.; Malietzis, G.; Athanasiou, T.; Mariette, C.; Sasako, M.; Hanna, G.B. Influence of Surgical Resection of Hepatic Metastases From Gastric Adenocarcinoma on Long-Term Survival: Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis. Ann. Surg. 2016, 263, 1092–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Al-Batran, S.-E.; Homann, N.; Pauligk, C.; Illerhaus, G.; Martens, U.M.; Stoehlmacher, J.; Schmalenberg, H.; Luley, K.B.; Prasnikar, N.; Egger, M.; et al. Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Surgical Resection on Survival in Patients with Limited Metastatic Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The AIO-FLOT3 Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017, 3, 1237–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. van Velzen, M.J.M.; Derks, S.; van Grieken, N.C.T.; Haj Mohammad, N.; van Laarhoven, H.W.M. MSI as a Predictive Factor for Treatment Outcome of Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2020, 86, 102024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shah, M.A.; Kojima, T.; Hochhauser, D.; Enzinger, P.; Raimbourg, J.; Hollebecque, A.; Lordick, F.; Kim, S.-B.; Tajika, M.; Kim, H.T.; et al. Efficacy and Safety of Pembrolizumab for Heavily Pretreated Patients with Advanced, Metastatic Adenocarcinoma or Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus: The Phase 2 KEYNOTE-180 Study. JAMA Oncol. 2019, 5, 546–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhao, Q.; Yu, J.; Meng, X. A Good Start of Immunotherapy in Esophageal Cancer. Cancer Med. 2019, 8, 4519–4526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yang, Y.-M.; Hong, P.; Xu, W.W.; He, Q.-Y.; Li, B. Advances in Targeted Therapy for Esophageal Cancer. Signal Transduct. Target Ther. 2020, 5, 229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Al-Batran, S.-E.; Homann, N.; Pauligk, C.; Goetze, T.O.; Meiler, J.; Kasper, S.; Kopp, H.-G.; Mayer, F.; Haag, G.M.; Luley, K.; et al. Perioperative Chemotherapy with Fluorouracil plus Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin, and Docetaxel versus Fluorouracil or Capecitabine plus Cisplatin and Epirubicin for Locally Advanced, Resectable Gastric or Gastro-Oesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma (FLOT4): A Randomised, Phase 2/3 Trial. Lancet 2019, 393, 1948–1957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ashok, A.; Niyogi, D.; Ranganathan, P.; Tandon, S.; Bhaskar, M.; Karimundackal, G.; Jiwnani, S.; Shetmahajan, M.; Pramesh, C.S. The Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Protocol to Promote Recovery Following Esophageal Cancer Resection. Surg. Today 2020, 50, 323–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Low, D.E.; Kuppusamy, M.K.; Alderson, D.; Cecconello, I.; Chang, A.C.; Darling, G.; Davies, A.; D’Journo, X.B.; Gisbertz, S.S.; Griffin, S.M.; et al. Benchmarking Complications Associated with Esophagectomy. Ann. Surg. 2019, 269, 291–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Biere, S.S.A.Y.; van Berge Henegouwen, M.I.; Maas, K.W.; Bonavina, L.; Rosman, C.; Garcia, J.R.; Gisbertz, S.S.; Klinkenbijl, J.H.G.; Hollmann, M.W.; de Lange, E.S.M.; et al. Minimally Invasive versus Open Oesophagectomy for Patients with Oesophageal Cancer: A Multicentre, Open-Label, Randomised Controlled Trial. Lancet 2012, 379, 1887–1892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Degisors, S.; Pasquer, A.; Renaud, F.; Béhal, H.; Hec, F.; Gandon, A.; Vanderbeken, M.; Caranhac, G.; Duhamel, A.; Piessen, G.; et al. Are Thoracotomy and/or Intrathoracic Anastomosis Still Predictors of Postoperative Mortality After Esophageal Cancer Surgery?: A Nationwide Study. Ann. Surg. 2017, 266, 854–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. van der Sluis, P.C.; van der Horst, S.; May, A.M.; Schippers, C.; Brosens, L.A.A.; Joore, H.C.A.; Kroese, C.C.; Haj Mohammad, N.; Mook, S.; Vleggaar, F.P.; et al. Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Thoracolaparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann. Surg. 2019, 269, 621–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gottlieb-Vedi, E.; Kauppila, J.H.; Malietzis, G.; Nilsson, M.; Markar, S.R.; Lagergren, J. Long-Term Survival in Esophageal Cancer After Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ann. Surg. 2019, 270, 1005–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mariette, C.; Markar, S.; Dabakuyo-Yonli, T.S.; Meunier, B.; Pezet, D.; Collet, D.; D’Journo, X.B.; Brigand, C.; Perniceni, T.; Carrere, N.; et al. Health-Related Quality of Life Following Hybrid Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Patients with Esophageal Cancer, Analysis of a Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Phase III Controlled Trial: The MIRO Trial. Ann. Surg. 2020, 271, 1023–1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Souche, R.; Nayeri, M.; Chati, R.; Huet, E.; Donici, I.; Tuech, J.J.; Borie, F.; Prudhomme, M.; Jaber, S.; Fabre, J.M. Thoracoscopy in Prone Position with Two-Lung Ventilation Compared to Conventional Thoracotomy during Ivor Lewis Procedure: A Multicenter Case-Control Study. Surg. Endosc. 2020, 34, 142–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Markar, S.R.; Wiggins, T.; Antonowicz, S.; Zacharakis, E.; Hanna, G.B. Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Lateral Decubitus vs. Prone Positioning; Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis. Surg. Oncol. 2015, 24, 212–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ohi, M.; Toiyama, Y.; Omura, Y.; Ichikawa, T.; Yasuda, H.; Okugawa, Y.; Fujikawa, H.; Okita, Y.; Yoshiyama, S.; Hiro, J.; et al. Risk Factors and Measures of Pulmonary Complications after Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer. Surg. Today 2019, 49, 176–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Liu, Q.-X.; Deng, X.-F.; Hou, B.; Min, J.-X.; Dai, J.-G. Preventing and Localizing Esophagogastric Anastomosis Leakage by Sleeve-Wrapping of the Pedicled Omentum. World J. Gastroenterol. 2014, 20, 16282–16286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Asteriou, C.; Barbetakis, N.; Lalountas, M.; Kleontas, A.; Tsilikas, C. Modified Pleural Tenting for Prevention of Anastomotic Leak after Ivor Lewis Esophagogastrectomy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2011, 18, 3737–3742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Barberio, M.; Felli, E.; Pop, R.; Pizzicannella, M.; Geny, B.; Lindner, V.; Baiocchini, A.; Jansen-Winkeln, B.; Moulla, Y.; Agnus, V.; et al. A Novel Technique to Improve Anastomotic Perfusion Prior to Esophageal Surgery: Hybrid Ischemic Preconditioning of the Stomach. Preclinical Efficacy Proof in a Porcine Survival Model. Cancers 2020, 12, 2977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Visser, E.; Franken, I.A.; Brosens, L.A.A.; Ruurda, J.P.; van Hillegersberg, R. Prognostic Gene Expression Profiling in Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 5566–5577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ghafouri-Fard, S.; Shoorei, H.; Dashti, S.; Branicki, W.; Taheri, M. Expression Profile of LncRNAs and MiRNAs in Esophageal Cancer: Implications in Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Therapeutic Response. J. Cell. Physiol. 2020, 235, 9269–9290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhang, X.; Lu, N.; Wang, L.; Wang, Y.; Li, M.; Zhou, Y.; Yan, H.; Cui, M.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, L. Circular RNAs and Esophageal Cancer. Cancer Cell Int. 2020, 20, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Zhou, C.; Fan, N.; Liu, F.; Fang, N.; Plum, P.S.; Thieme, R.; Gockel, I.; Gromnitza, S.; Hillmer, A.M.; Chon, S.-H.; et al. Linking Cancer Stem Cell Plasticity to Therapeutic Resistance-Mechanism and Novel Therapeutic Strategies in Esophageal Cancer. Cells 2020, 9, 1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Macedo-Silva, C.; Miranda-Gonçalves, V.; Henrique, R.; Jerónimo, C.; Bravo, I. The Critical Role of Hypoxic Microenvironment and Epigenetic Deregulation in Esophageal Cancer Radioresistance. Genes 2019, 10, 927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Huang, J.; Xu, J.; Chen, Y.; Zhuang, W.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Chen, J.; Zhang, H.; Niu, Z.; Fan, Q.; et al. Camrelizumab versus Investigator’s Choice of Chemotherapy as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Oesophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ESCORT): A Multicentre, Randomised, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study. Lancet Oncol. 2020, 21, 832–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kojima, T.; Shah, M.A.; Muro, K.; Francois, E.; Adenis, A.; Hsu, C.-H.; Doi, T.; Moriwaki, T.; Kim, S.-B.; Lee, S.-H.; et al. Randomized Phase III KEYNOTE-181 Study of Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy in Advanced Esophageal Cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, 4138–4148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Kelly, R.J.; Ajani, J.A.; Kuzdzal, J.; Zander, T.; Van Cutsem, E.; Piessen, G.; Mendez, G.; Feliciano, J.; Motoyama, S.; Lièvre, A.; et al. Adjuvant Nivolumab in Resected Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2021, 384, 1191–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Bi, G.; Liang, J.; Zheng, Y.; Li, R.; Zhao, M.; Huang, Y.; Zhan, C.; Xu, S.; Fan, H. Multi-Omics Characterization and Validation of Invasiveness-Related Molecular Features across Multiple Cancer Types. J. Transl. Med. 2021, 19, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Matsushita, D.; Arigami, T.; Okubo, K.; Sasaki, K.; Noda, M.; Kita, Y.; Mori, S.; Uenosono, Y.; Ohtsuka, T.; Natsugoe, S. The Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of a Liquid Biopsy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers 2020, 12, 3070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Levy, A.; Wagner, A.D.; Chargari, C.; Moehler, M.; Verheij, M.; Durand-Labrunie, J.; Kissel, M.; Chirat, E.; Burtin, P.; Ducreux, M.; et al. Palliation of Dysphagia in Metastatic Oesogastric Cancers: An International Multidisciplinary Position. Eur. J. Cancer 2020, 135, 103–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.