The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgeryComparative Study
undefined Jan 2025
Esophageal cancers that invade the submucosa (T1b) have increased risk for occult lymph node metastases. To avoid the morbidity and recovery from esophagectomy, patients with cT1bN0 tumors have been increasingly managed endoscopically. We hypothesized that tumor attributes could predict upstaging and outcome associated with surgical and endoscopic treatment. Our objective was to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of esophagectomy across different cT1bN0 tumor attributes.
Treatment-naïve patients who underwent endoscopic management or esophagectomy for a clinical stage cT1bN0 esophageal cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2018 in the National Cancer Database were identified. Factors associated with upstaging were assessed by logistic regression. Adjusted survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis of 528 propensity-matched pairs and accelerated time failure models, stratified across tumor attributes.
Overall, 1469 patients classified as cT1bN0 were identified; 926 underwent esophagectomy and 543 were managed endoscopically. In general, patients who were managed endoscopically were older (median, 71; interquartile range, 63-78; vs 66; interquartile range, 60-72; P < .0001) with smaller tumors compared with the patients who were managed with esophagectomy. Nodal upstaging was associated with lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio [OR], 6.88; confidence interval [CI], 4.39-10.77; P < .0001), poor tumor differentiation (OR, 2.77; CI, 1.30-5.88; P = .0081), and tumor size >1 cm (OR, 3.19; CI, 1.49-6.83, P = .0028). Overall survival was better among propensity-matched patients who underwent esophagectomy (5-year 68.4% vs 59.7% endoscopic, P < .001). However, accelerated time failure models suggested similar outcomes among patients with well-differentiated tumors managed surgically or endoscopically.
Esophagectomy was associated with improved survival for cT1bN0 esophageal cancer; however, endoscopic treatment may achieve similar survival in patients with favorable tumor attributes. Further study is warranted.
Conflict of Interest Statement The authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest.
More resources:
Share: