Background
Nearly half of all patients undergoing curative esophagectomy for esophageal cancer develop recurrence, and in approximately half of these patients, the recurrence appears within the first year postoperatively. According to the type of recurrence, the metachronous lesions are classified as locoregional, distant, and of mixed type. Distant recurrences include hematogenous metastasis within a solid organ, abdominal paraortic lymph node metastasis, and peritoneal metastasis [
1]. Solid organs presenting distant recurrence are usually the lung, the liver, the brain, the kidneys, and the adrenal glands [
2]. The prognosis of patients with locoregional recurrence tends to be better than of those with distant metastasis, while the mixed type has the poorest outcome [
3].
Abate et al. showed that survival is considerably improved in patients undergoing therapy for their recurrence [
4]. However, there is no consensus concerning the type of treatment to be followed in case of recurrence. Regarding the patients with isolated tumor recurrence, salvage therapeutic options include systemic chemotherapy, irradiation, surgical resection, or a combination of the above. Because of poor prognosis, only a few retrospective studies with small series of selected patients and several case reports showing the results of surgical treatment exist. Therefore, the benefit of surgical resection as a part of multimodality treatment to patients with isolated distant recurrence in solid organs is controversial. The aim of this study is to review the outcomes of surgical management of such lesions and to discover which patients’ characteristics may predict a better outcome after surgical resection.
Discussion
Our study showed that there are only sporadic cases of surgical treatment of distant recurrence of esophageal cancer in visceral organs. The few case series and comparative studies include highly selected patients and are therefore subjected to selection bias. Large-scale randomized multicenter trials are unlikely to be feasible. Hiyoshi et al. reported a study comparing surgical and non-surgical treatment of distant recurrence. Among 14 patients that underwent surgical treatment, 6 patients underwent partial pulmonary resection, 1 patient underwent partial hepatectomy, and 1 patient resection of brain recurrence. The surgery group showed a more favorable prognosis in terms of both survival after esophagectomy and survival after initial recurrence [
10]. The largest retrospective study comparing different treatment options for different subtypes of recurrence of esophageal cancer following curative surgical resection (anastomotic, locoregional, single solid organ metastasis, single metastasis at another location, multiple hematogenic metastasis, or mixed-type recurrence) has been conducted by Depypere et al. Regarding the subgroup of patients with single solid organ metastasis (liver, brain, lung, and adrenal), the authors found that the surgically treated patients, with or without systematic chemotherapy (
n = 20), had a significantly better survival in comparison with the non-surgically treated patients (
n = 63), with a median survival after diagnosis of recurrence of 54.8 months (5-year survival of 43.9%) and 11.6 months (5-year survival of 4.6%), respectively (
p = 0.0004) [
41]. However, in comparative studies, various prognostic variables are unevenly distributed among the surgical and non-surgical groups. For that reason, no definitive conclusions regarding the potential survival advantage offered by the surgical treatment of solitary recurrent lesions can be drawn.
However, recent improvements in surgical treatment and optimization of perioperative management guarantee an acceptable operative risk, making surgical resection of solitary recurrence lesions a considerable therapeutic option. Indeed, evidence shows that patients with a single distant recurrence may have a favorable prognosis in comparison to patients with more than one lesions [
8,
20]. Taking into account, though the very small number of patients operated with more than one distant metastases, no statistical significance can be noted. Therefore, the choice of treatment modality should be individualized. Certain characteristics of patients with good functional status may indicate which patients could be surgical candidates in case of a technically resectable solitary distant recurrence. Moreover, since metastasectomy is widely accepted as a possible curative treatment modality for recurrences of cancers of various visceral organs, including colorectal cancer, conclusions drawn from the analysis of these primaries could be helpful in the comprehension of the benefit of surgical therapy in the esophageal cancer recurrence. Metastasectomy has been also applied as part of the treatment of highly selected patients with oligometastatic gastric cancer and some retrospective, non-randomized studies suggest that surgical intervention may prolong survival [
42‐
44].
Other uncommon sites of isolated esophageal cancer recurrence include skin, eyes, muscle, heart, jaw, skull, breast, thyroid glands, and gastrointestinal tract. Special anatomic features of the esophagus, such as the absence of serosa, its shared arterial and venous vasculature, and its complex lymphatic drainage may be implicated in this rare distribution pattern of tumor recurrences. A systematic review of the literature of the past four decades has shown that surgical resection has been a part of the management in 44% of these special cases, which presented an overall survival rate of 13 and 6.1 months for synchronous and metachronous metastases, respectively [
45].
DFI between the initial surgical treatment of the primary and the diagnosis of recurrence appears to be an important factor to be considered. Long DFI implicates a less aggressive tumor biology, and in case of a surgical excision of a distant recurrence, a local control of the disease could be possibly better achieved, potentially offering curative treatment. Most patients included in the abovementioned studies and case reports underwent a surgical resection after a DFI of more than 12 months. As discussed before, short DFI is negatively correlated with survival [
20], and long DFI is considered as a favorable prognostic factor for overall survival of both surgical and non-surgical groups [
7]. Kobayashi et al. and Shiono et al. suggested a DFI > 12 months as a statistically significant favorable prognostic factor for pulmonary metastasectomy (
p < 0.05) [
18,
19]. With regard to pulmonary recurrence, long DFI is noted to be a favorable prognostic factor from the International Registry of Lung Metastases, but many different tumor types have been assessed in this study [
46]. Regarding surgical resection of liver metastasis of colorectal primary, there is no consensus regarding the impact of DFI on outcomes. Some authors have reported that a short DFI did not impact disease-free or overall survival; however, other investigators consider DFI as a reliable prognostic factor [
47,
48].
Primary tumor stage has been also accepted as a significant prognostic factor regarding survival, with advanced tumor stage being associated with a worse survival. Increased depth of tumor invasion and the presence and the mean number of positive nodal metastases are found to correlate with an increased incidence of recurrent disease [
2]. Regarding resection of colorectal liver recurrence, positive lymph node status is found to correlate with worse outcome. Between all studies regarding esophageal cancer recurrence mentioned above, only that of Kanamori et al. revealed primary positive nodal status as a significant unfavorable prognostic factor concerning survival after pulmonary metastasectomy [
20]. Depth of invasion of the primary tumor could not be identified as an independent prognostic factor. Apparently, accumulation of more patients is again needed to evaluate the significance of these factors.
The size of metastasis is another factor under investigation for its significance regarding survival. In their study [
8], included 138 patients with liver and/or lung recurrence after esophagectomy. The statistical analysis resulted in the identification of the maximum size of metastases as a predictor of survival in patients with hepatic and/or pulmonary metastases (risk ratio of 2.39, 95% 1.10–5.18 for maximum size of metastases ≥ 21 mm,
p = 0.029), but the outcome refers to both surgical and non-surgical groups [
8]. The abovementioned studies failed to show any significance of the size of distant recurrence for the survival benefit of the surgical resection.
The predominant histologic type of the cases mentioned above is the squamous cell carcinoma whereas the adenocarcinoma represents only a small percentage of all cases. Regarding the histological differentiation, only one study revealed poor differentiation as a prognostic factor influencing prognosis in patients undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy [
18].
The site of the isolated distant recurrence appears to correlate with the location of the primary tumor; tumors located in the cervical and upper thoracic esophagus tend to recur more often in the lungs, while isolated recurrences of the tumors of the lower esophagus tend to appear mostly in the liver [
8]. However, no conclusions regarding correlation of the primary tumor location and survival after recurrence resection can be drawn.
Other parameters investigated, such as age, gender, elevated tumor markers, initial curative treatment (esophagectomy or definitive chemoradiotherapy), or the operative procedure followed for the recurrence failed to show any relevance in terms of benefit of surgical resection.
Limitations of the studies mentioned above include their retrospective character, the relatively small number of patients included, leading to non-significant statistically conclusions, the selection bias due to the fact that patients with poor medical condition were generally excluded from any surgical treatment and the heterogeneity of the baseline characteristics of the study populations. Due to the lack of strict guidelines pertaining to the therapeutic approach in each recurrence site, well-organized prospective multicenter studies may offer a possibility to draw firmer conclusions. To this end, we suggest that—when feasible—future prospective studies should randomize patients with solitary distant recurrence and DFI > 12 months after curative esophageal cancer resection into surgery and non-surgery groups so that accumulating evidence can permit the formulation of strict guidelines in each setting in the future.