• Changes in CT body composition occur after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer. • Sarcopenia was more prevalent after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. • Fat mass, fat-free mass and weight decreased after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. • Changes in body composition were associated with CRM positivity. • Changes in body composition did not affect perioperative complications and survival.

Post-operative weight loss and low BMI at 6 months post-surgery are independent markers of poor prognosis in patients who undergo surgery for oesophageal cancer.

Although short-term dysphagia scores improved, biodegradable stents do not appear to offer a clear beneficial effect in most cases of malignant strictures, particularly due to a local inflammatory reaction that may be induced. Technical improvement of the device and delineation of the patient group that would benefit from its use is necessary if further studies are to be conducted in the future.

Objectives 2-deoxy-2[18F]Fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) PET-CT has an emerging role in assessing response to neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal cancer. This study evaluated FDG PET-CT in predicting pathological tumour response (pTR), pathological nodal response (pNR) and survival. Methods Cohort study of 75 patients with oesophageal or oesophago-gastric junction (GOJ) adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy then surgery at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London (2017–2020). Standardised uptake value (SUV) metrics on pre- and post-treatment FDG PET-CT in the primary tumour (mTR) and loco-regional lymph nodes (mNR) were derived. Optimum SUVmax thresholds for predicting pathological response were identified using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Predictive accuracy was compared to PERCIST (30% SUVmax reduction) and MUNICON (35%) criteria. Survival was assessed using Cox regression. Results Optimum tumour SUVmax decrease for predicting pTR was 51.2%. A 50% cut-off predicted pTR with 73.5% sensitivity, 69.2% specificity and greater accuracy than PERCIST or MUNICON (area under the curve [AUC] 0.714, PERCIST 0.631, MUNICON 0.659). Using a 30% SUVmax threshold, mNR predicted pNR with high sensitivity but low specificity (AUC 0.749, sensitivity 92.6%, specificity 57.1%, p = 0.010). pTR, mTR, pNR and mNR were independent predictive factors for survival (pTR hazard ratio [HR] 0.10 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03–0.34; mTR HR 0.17 95% CI 0.06–0.48; pNR HR 0.17 95% CI 0.06–0.54; mNR HR 0.13 95% CI 0.02–0.66). Conclusions Metabolic tumour and nodal response predicted pTR and pNR, respectively, in patients with oesophageal or GOJ adenocarcinoma. However, currently utilised response criteria may not be optimal. pTR, mTR, pNR and mNR were independent predictors of survival. Key Points • FDG PET-CT has an emerging role in evaluating response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with oesophageal cancer. • Prospective cohort study demonstrated that metabolic response in the primary tumour and lymph nodes was predictive of pathological response in a cohort of patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus or oesophago-gastric junction treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. • Patients who demonstrated a response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the primary tumour or lymph nodes on FDG PET-CT demonstrated better survival and reduced rates of tumour recurrence.

Background 18F-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%. Results Out 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). Conclusion In 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.