Cargando…

The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Esophageal and esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinomas (EA/EGJAs) are a heterogeneous group of cancers. Stage is the most important prognostic factor, while morphology, determined by histologic analysis, has up until now played a minor role. Even new molecular classifications (whic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fiocca, Roberto, Mastracci, Luca, Lugaresi, Marialuisa, Grillo, Federica, D’Errico, Antonietta, Malvi, Deborah, Spaggiari, Paola, Tomezzoli, Anna, Albarello, Luca, Ristimäki, Ari, Bottiglieri, Luca, Bonora, Elena, Krishnadath, Kausilia K., Raulli, Gian Domenico, Rosati, Riccardo, Fumagalli Romario, Uberto, De Manzoni, Giovanni, Räsänen, Jari, Mattioli, Sandro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8533974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34680360
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205211
_version_ 1784587443194822656
author Fiocca, Roberto
Mastracci, Luca
Lugaresi, Marialuisa
Grillo, Federica
D’Errico, Antonietta
Malvi, Deborah
Spaggiari, Paola
Tomezzoli, Anna
Albarello, Luca
Ristimäki, Ari
Bottiglieri, Luca
Bonora, Elena
Krishnadath, Kausilia K.
Raulli, Gian Domenico
Rosati, Riccardo
Fumagalli Romario, Uberto
De Manzoni, Giovanni
Räsänen, Jari
Mattioli, Sandro
author_facet Fiocca, Roberto
Mastracci, Luca
Lugaresi, Marialuisa
Grillo, Federica
D’Errico, Antonietta
Malvi, Deborah
Spaggiari, Paola
Tomezzoli, Anna
Albarello, Luca
Ristimäki, Ari
Bottiglieri, Luca
Bonora, Elena
Krishnadath, Kausilia K.
Raulli, Gian Domenico
Rosati, Riccardo
Fumagalli Romario, Uberto
De Manzoni, Giovanni
Räsänen, Jari
Mattioli, Sandro
author_sort Fiocca, Roberto
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Esophageal and esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinomas (EA/EGJAs) are a heterogeneous group of cancers. Stage is the most important prognostic factor, while morphology, determined by histologic analysis, has up until now played a minor role. Even new molecular classifications (which should be based on accurate histologic assessment) are a long way off from being used in day to day practice. The reassessment of nearly 300 EA/EGJAs enabled us to re-evaluate morphology and identify a two-tiered grading approach in glandular adenocarcinomas (80%) based on a cut off of 6% of poorly differentiated components (well differentiated versus poorly differentiated). Furthermore, rare, but prognostically significant, variants were recognized with an in-depth morphologic description. On this basis, two morphologic risk groups (lower risk and higher risk) were identified, adding significant prognostic value to the stage. The accurate morphologic description of EA/EGJAs must be a prerequisite for a better understanding of prognosis, molecular events, and response to treatment. ABSTRACT: Stage significantly affects survival of esophageal and esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinomas (EA/EGJAs), however, limited evidence for the prognostic role of histologic subtypes is available. The aim of the study was to describe a morphologic approach to EA/EGJAs and assess its discriminating prognostic power. Histologic slides from 299 neoadjuvant treatment-naïve EA/EGJAs, resected in five European Centers, were retrospectively reviewed. Morphologic features were re-assessed and correlated with survival. In glandular adenocarcinomas (240/299 cases—80%), WHO grade and tumors with a poorly differentiated component ≥6% were the most discriminant factors for survival (both p < 0.0001), distinguishing glandular well-differentiated from poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas. Two prognostically different histologic groups were identified: the lower risk group, comprising glandular well-differentiated (34.4%) and rare variants, such as mucinous muconodular carcinoma (2.7%) and diffuse desmoplastic carcinoma (1.7%), versus the higher risk group, comprising the glandular poorly differentiated subtype (45.8%), including invasive mucinous carcinoma (5.7%), diffuse anaplastic carcinoma (3%), mixed carcinoma (6.7%) (CSS p < 0.0001, DFS p = 0.001). Stage (p < 0.0001), histologic groups (p = 0.001), age >72 years (p = 0.008), and vascular invasion (p = 0.015) were prognostically significant in the multivariate analysis. The combined evaluation of stage/histologic group identified 5-year cancer-specific survival ranging from 87.6% (stage II, lower risk) to 14% (stage IVA, higher risk). Detailed characterization of histologic subtypes contributes to EA/EGJA prognostic prediction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8533974
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85339742021-10-23 The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma Fiocca, Roberto Mastracci, Luca Lugaresi, Marialuisa Grillo, Federica D’Errico, Antonietta Malvi, Deborah Spaggiari, Paola Tomezzoli, Anna Albarello, Luca Ristimäki, Ari Bottiglieri, Luca Bonora, Elena Krishnadath, Kausilia K. Raulli, Gian Domenico Rosati, Riccardo Fumagalli Romario, Uberto De Manzoni, Giovanni Räsänen, Jari Mattioli, Sandro Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Esophageal and esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinomas (EA/EGJAs) are a heterogeneous group of cancers. Stage is the most important prognostic factor, while morphology, determined by histologic analysis, has up until now played a minor role. Even new molecular classifications (which should be based on accurate histologic assessment) are a long way off from being used in day to day practice. The reassessment of nearly 300 EA/EGJAs enabled us to re-evaluate morphology and identify a two-tiered grading approach in glandular adenocarcinomas (80%) based on a cut off of 6% of poorly differentiated components (well differentiated versus poorly differentiated). Furthermore, rare, but prognostically significant, variants were recognized with an in-depth morphologic description. On this basis, two morphologic risk groups (lower risk and higher risk) were identified, adding significant prognostic value to the stage. The accurate morphologic description of EA/EGJAs must be a prerequisite for a better understanding of prognosis, molecular events, and response to treatment. ABSTRACT: Stage significantly affects survival of esophageal and esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinomas (EA/EGJAs), however, limited evidence for the prognostic role of histologic subtypes is available. The aim of the study was to describe a morphologic approach to EA/EGJAs and assess its discriminating prognostic power. Histologic slides from 299 neoadjuvant treatment-naïve EA/EGJAs, resected in five European Centers, were retrospectively reviewed. Morphologic features were re-assessed and correlated with survival. In glandular adenocarcinomas (240/299 cases—80%), WHO grade and tumors with a poorly differentiated component ≥6% were the most discriminant factors for survival (both p < 0.0001), distinguishing glandular well-differentiated from poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas. Two prognostically different histologic groups were identified: the lower risk group, comprising glandular well-differentiated (34.4%) and rare variants, such as mucinous muconodular carcinoma (2.7%) and diffuse desmoplastic carcinoma (1.7%), versus the higher risk group, comprising the glandular poorly differentiated subtype (45.8%), including invasive mucinous carcinoma (5.7%), diffuse anaplastic carcinoma (3%), mixed carcinoma (6.7%) (CSS p < 0.0001, DFS p = 0.001). Stage (p < 0.0001), histologic groups (p = 0.001), age >72 years (p = 0.008), and vascular invasion (p = 0.015) were prognostically significant in the multivariate analysis. The combined evaluation of stage/histologic group identified 5-year cancer-specific survival ranging from 87.6% (stage II, lower risk) to 14% (stage IVA, higher risk). Detailed characterization of histologic subtypes contributes to EA/EGJA prognostic prediction. MDPI 2021-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8533974/ /pubmed/34680360 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205211 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Fiocca, Roberto
Mastracci, Luca
Lugaresi, Marialuisa
Grillo, Federica
D’Errico, Antonietta
Malvi, Deborah
Spaggiari, Paola
Tomezzoli, Anna
Albarello, Luca
Ristimäki, Ari
Bottiglieri, Luca
Bonora, Elena
Krishnadath, Kausilia K.
Raulli, Gian Domenico
Rosati, Riccardo
Fumagalli Romario, Uberto
De Manzoni, Giovanni
Räsänen, Jari
Mattioli, Sandro
The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma
title The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma
title_full The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma
title_fullStr The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma
title_full_unstemmed The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma
title_short The Prognostic Impact of Histology in Esophageal and Esophago-Gastric Junction Adenocarcinoma
title_sort prognostic impact of histology in esophageal and esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8533974/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34680360
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13205211
work_keys_str_mv AT fioccaroberto theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT mastracciluca theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT lugaresimarialuisa theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT grillofederica theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT derricoantonietta theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT malvideborah theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT spaggiaripaola theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT tomezzolianna theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT albarelloluca theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT ristimakiari theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT bottiglieriluca theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT bonoraelena theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT krishnadathkausiliak theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT raulligiandomenico theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT rosatiriccardo theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT fumagalliromariouberto theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT demanzonigiovanni theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT rasanenjari theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT mattiolisandro theprognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT fioccaroberto prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT mastracciluca prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT lugaresimarialuisa prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT grillofederica prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT derricoantonietta prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT malvideborah prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT spaggiaripaola prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT tomezzolianna prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT albarelloluca prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT ristimakiari prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT bottiglieriluca prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT bonoraelena prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT krishnadathkausiliak prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT raulligiandomenico prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT rosatiriccardo prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT fumagalliromariouberto prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT demanzonigiovanni prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT rasanenjari prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma
AT mattiolisandro prognosticimpactofhistologyinesophagealandesophagogastricjunctionadenocarcinoma