Significance of Neoadjuvant Downstaging in Carcinoma of Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of downstaging on outcomes in esophageal cancer, the prognostic value of clinical and pathological stage, and the difference in survival in patients with similar pathological stages with and without neoadjuvant treatment. BACKGROUND: There is little data evaluating adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and difference in outcomes for similar pathological stage with and without neoadjuvant treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with esophageal cancer from a single center were evaluated. Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma or SCC treated with transthoracic esophagectomy and two-field lymphadenectomy were included. Comparison of outcomes with those primarily treated with surgery was made. The cTNM and ypTNM 8th edition was used. RESULTS: This study included 992 patients, of whom 417 received surgery alone and 575 received neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. In the neoadjuvant group, 7 (1%) had cTNM stage 2 and 418 (73%) had cTNM stage 3. Downstaging rates were similar between adenocarcinoma and SCC (54% vs. 61%, p = 0.5). Downstaging was associated with longer survival than patients with no change (adenocarcinoma, median: 82 vs. 26 months, p < 0.001; SCC, median: NR vs. 29 months, p < 0.001). On Cox regression analysis, downstaging was associated with significantly longer survival in adenocarcinoma but not in SCC. For SCC and more advanced adenocarcinoma, overall survival was significantly better when comparing like-for-like ypTN to pTN groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pathological stage provides a better estimate of prognosis compared with clinical stage. Downstaged patients may have an improved outcome over those with comparable pathological stage who did not receive neoadjuvant treatment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-020-08358-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.