Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Department of Pathology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Aug;30(8):5195-5202. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13464-w. Epub 2023 Jun 5.
Although intramural metastasis (IM) in esophageal cancer is considered a poor prognostic factor, there are only limited reports detailing its clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic impact.
We retrospectively included patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) with esophagectomy at our institution between 2010 and 2016. We compared patients with intramural metastases (IMs) (IM group) versus those without IMs (non-IM group) to clarify the clinical significance of intramural metastasis in ESCC.
A total of 23 (3.9%) out of all 597 patients were identified to have IM. The IMs were located on the cranial side in 13 (56.5%) and caudal side in 10 (43.5%) of the primary tumor, with two multiple cases. The IM group, compared with the non-IM group, was associated with higher percentage of cN-positive (91.3 versus 67.9%, P = 0.02), pN-positive (82.6 versus 55.9%, P = 0.04), and pM(lym)-positive (30.4 versus 12.5%, P = 0.02) cases. Five-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was significantly worse in the IM group than the non-IM group (14.9 versus 55.0 %, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis of recurrence-free survival identified pT (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.36-2.23, P < 0.001), pN (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.60-2.78, P < 0.001), histological classification (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21-2.35, P = 0.002), and pM(LYM) (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.64-2.95, P < 0.001), along with presence of IM (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.37-3.64, P < 0.001) to be independent prognostic factors. Lymphatic (65.2 versus 24.9%, P < 0.001) and hepatic (26.1 versus 6.8%, P = 0.005) recurrences were significantly more common in the IM group than in the non-IM group.
IM was shown to be associated with dismal survival after surgery. A treatment strategy emphasizing more intensive systemic control should be considered for patients with ESCC with IM.
尽管食管癌的壁内转移(IM)被认为是预后不良的因素,但详细描述其临床病理特征和预后影响的报道有限。
我们回顾性纳入了 2010 年至 2016 年期间在我院接受食管切除术的食管鳞状细胞癌(ESCC)患者。我们比较了有壁内转移(IM)的患者(IM 组)和无壁内转移的患者(非 IM 组),以明确 ESCC 中壁内转移的临床意义。
总共 23 例(3.9%)的 597 例患者被确定为存在 IM。IM 位于原发肿瘤的颅侧 13 例(56.5%)和尾侧 10 例(43.5%),有两例为多灶性。与非 IM 组相比,IM 组 cN 阳性(91.3%比 67.9%,P = 0.02)、pN 阳性(82.6%比 55.9%,P = 0.04)和 pM(lym)-阳性(30.4%比 12.5%,P = 0.02)的比例更高。IM 组的 5 年无复发生存率(RFS)明显低于非 IM 组(14.9%比 55.0%,P < 0.001)。无复发生存的多变量分析确定了 pT(HR 1.74,95%CI 1.36-2.23,P < 0.001)、pN(HR 2.11,95%CI 1.60-2.78,P < 0.001)、组织学分类(HR 1.68,95%CI 1.21-2.35,P = 0.002)和 pM(LYM)(HR 1.64,95%CI 1.64-2.95,P < 0.001)以及 IM 的存在(HR 2.24,95%CI 1.37-3.64,P < 0.001)是独立的预后因素。与非 IM 组相比,IM 组的淋巴(65.2%比 24.9%,P < 0.001)和肝转移(26.1%比 6.8%,P = 0.005)更为常见。
IM 与手术后的生存预后不良有关。对于存在 IM 的 ESCC 患者,应考虑强调更强化的系统控制的治疗策略。