Dataset Information

Discordant nodal staging identifies intermediate-risk group for overall survival in patients with cT3 oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma has a poor prognosis and relies on multi-modality assessment for accurate nodal staging. The aim of the study was to determine the prognostic significance of nodal concordance between PET/CT and EUS in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Consecutive patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma staged between 2010 and 2016 were included. Groups comprising concordant node-negative (C-ve), discordant (DC), and concordant node-positive (C+ve) patients were analysed. Survival analysis using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards model was performed. The primary outcome was overall survival. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

In total, 310 patients (median age = 66.0; interquartile range 59.5-72.5, males = 264) were included. The median overall survival was 23.0 months (95% confidence intervals (CI) 18.73-27.29). There was a significant difference in overall survival between concordance groups (X² = 44.91, df = 2, p < 0.001). The hazard ratios for overall survival of DC and C+ve patients compared with those of C-ve patients with cT3 tumours were 1.21 (95% CI 0.81-1.79) and 1.79 (95% CI 1.23-2.61), respectively. On multivariable analysis, nodal concordance was significantly and independently associated with overall survival (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.12-1.83, p = 0.004) and performed better than age at diagnosis (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.003-1.034, p = 0.016) and current cN-staging methods (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.978-1.48, p = 0.080).

Conclusions

Patients with discordant nodal staging on PET/CT and EUS represent an intermediate-risk group for overall survival. This finding was consistent in patients with cT3 tumours. These findings will assist optimum treatment decisions based upon perceived prognosis for each patient.

Key points

• Clinicians are commonly faced with results of discordant nodal staging in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. • There is a significant difference in overall survival between patients with negative, discordant, and positive lymph node staging. • Patients with discordant lymph node staging between imaging modalities represent an intermediate-risk group for overall survival.

SUBMITTER: Carder C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7248017 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Discordant nodal staging identifies intermediate-risk group for overall survival in patients with cT3 oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Carder Charles C Fielding Patrick P Roberts Ashley A Foley Kieran K

European radiology 20200213 6

<h4>Objectives</h4>Oesophageal adenocarcinoma has a poor prognosis and relies on multi-modality assessment for accurate nodal staging. The aim of the study was to determine the prognostic significance of nodal concordance between PET/CT and EUS in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.<h4>Methods</h4>Consecutive patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma staged between 2010 and 2016 were included. Groups comprising concordant node-negative (C-ve), discordant (DC), and concordant node-positive (C+ve) patients ...[more]

PMID: 32055952

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) is the standard of care for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) clinical staging, but it may have limited utility in evaluating subsolid lung adenocarcinomas that can have relatively indolent behavior without hypermetabolic activity.MethodsThe sensitivity and specificity of PET for determining pathologic lymph node status and disease-free survival were assessed in patients operated on for cT1 N0 subsolid lung adenocarcinoma from January 2006 to June 2022 (at Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA). Patients with clinical or pathologic tumor size >30 mm, hilar or mediastinal lymph node size >1cm, and purely solid tumors were excluded.ResultsPET was available in 498 of 534 (93.2%) patients and more often was used in older patients with larger and more solid tumors. The overall pathologic lymph node-positive rate was 8.4% (45 of 534). PET specificity was 95.1%, but sensitivity was only 20.0%. A tumor diameter of 18.5 mm and a solid component percentage of 62.5% had the maximum predictive accuracy for pathologic lymph node positivity, with a 0% and 1.5% rate of pathologic and PET lymph node positivity, respectively, for tumors with values lower than those thresholds. There was no significant difference in 5-year disease-free survival between individuals who did and did not undergo PET scanning (76.6% vs 96.8%; P = .07). Conversely, 134 (26.9%) patients who underwent PET scanning had 171 incidentally detected hypermetabolic lesions unrelated to lung cancer, with only 13 of 134 (9.7%) patients identified as having non-NSCLC premalignant or malignant conditions requiring further therapy.ConclusionsPET scan use for subsolid lung adenocarcinoma has high specificity but limited sensitivity for predicting pathologic lymph node positivity. PET also has no association with disease-free survival and often detects clinically unimportant findings rather than changing lung cancer management, particularly for patients with smaller and less solid tumors.

Project description:BackgroundPersonalising management of primary oesophageal adenocarcinoma requires better risk stratification. Lack of independent validation of proposed imaging biomarkers has hampered clinical translation. We aimed to prospectively validate previously identified prognostic grey-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) CT features for 3-year overall survival.MethodsFollowing ethical approval, clinical and contrast-enhanced CT data were acquired from participants from five institutions. Data from three institutions were used for training and two for testing. Survival classifiers were modelled on prespecified variables ('Clinical' model: age, clinical T-stage, clinical N-stage; 'ClinVol' model: clinical features + CT tumour volume; 'ClinRad' model: ClinVol features + GLCM_Correlation and GLCM_Contrast). To reflect current clinical practice, baseline stage was also modelled as a univariate predictor ('Stage'). Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) analysis; calibration by Brier scores; and clinical relevance by thresholding risk scores to achieve 90% sensitivity for 3-year mortality.ResultsA total of 162 participants were included (144 male; median 67 years [IQR 59, 72]; training, 95 participants; testing, 67 participants). Median survival was 998 days [IQR 486, 1594]. The ClinRad model yielded the greatest test discrimination (AUC, 0.68 [95% CI 0.54, 0.81]) that outperformed Stage (ΔAUC, 0.12 [95% CI 0.01, 0.23]; p = .04). The Clinical and ClinVol models yielded comparable test discrimination (AUC, 0.66 [95% CI 0.51, 0.80] vs. 0.65 [95% CI 0.50, 0.79]; p > .05). Test sensitivity of 90% was achieved by ClinRad and Stage models only.ConclusionsCompared to Stage, multivariable models of prespecified clinical and radiomic variables yielded improved prediction of 3-year overall survival.Clinical relevance statementPreviously identified radiomic features are prognostic but may not substantially improve risk stratification on their own.Key points• Better risk stratification is needed in primary oesophageal cancer to personalise management. • Previously identified CT features-GLCM_Correlation and GLCM_Contrast-contain incremental prognostic information to age and clinical stage. • Compared to staging, multivariable clinicoradiomic models improve discrimination of 3-year overall survival.

Project description:Background18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (18F-FDG PET/MRI) may improve cancer staging by combining sensitive cancer detection with high-contrast resolution and detail. We compared the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/MRI to 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) for staging oesophageal/gastro-oesophageal cancer. Following ethical approval and informed consent, participants with newly diagnosed primary oesophageal/gastro-oesophageal cancer were enrolled. Exclusions included prior/concurrent malignancy. Following 324 ± 28 MBq 18F-FDG administration and 60-min uptake, PET/CT was performed, immediately followed by integrated PET/MRI from skull base to mid-thigh. PET/CT was interpreted by two dual-accredited nuclear medicine physicians and PET/MRI by a dual-accredited nuclear medicine physician/radiologist and cancer radiologist in consensus. Per-participant staging was compared with the tumour board consensus staging using the McNemar test, with statistical significance at 5%.ResultsOut of 26 participants, 22 (20 males; mean ± SD age 68.8 ± 8.7 years) completed 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI. Compared to the tumour board, the primary tumour was staged concordantly in 55% (12/22) with PET/MRI and 36% (8/22) with PET/CT; the nodal stage was concordant in 45% (10/22) with PET/MRI and 50% (11/22) with PET/CT. There was no statistical difference in PET/CT and PET/MRI staging performance (p > 0.05, for T and N staging). The staging of distant metastases was concordant with the tumour board in 95% (21/22) with both PET/MRI and PET/CT. Of participants with distant metastatic disease, PET/MRI detected additional metastases in 30% (3/10).ConclusionIn this preliminary study, compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT, 18F-FDG PET/MRI showed non-significant higher concordance with T-staging, but no difference with N or M-staging. Additional metastases detected by 18F-FDG PET/MRI may be of additive clinical value.

Dataset Information

Discordant nodal staging identifies intermediate-risk group for overall survival in patients with cT3 oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key points

Publications

Discordant nodal staging identifies intermediate-risk group for overall survival in patients with cT3 oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets