PurposeThe efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) plus surgery for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains controversial. In this trial, we compared the survival and safety of NCRT plus surgery with surgery alone in patients with locally advanced ESCC.Patients and MethodsFrom June 2007 to December 2014, 451 patients with potentially resectable thoracic ESCC, clinically staged as T1-4N1M0/T4N0M0, were randomly allocated to NCRT plus surgery (group CRT; n = 224) and surgery alone (group S; n = 227). In group CRT, patients received vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 IV day 1, or 25 mg/m2 IV on days 1 to 4 every 3 weeks for two cycles, with a total concurrent radiation dose of 40.0 Gy administered in 20 fractions of 2.0 Gy on 5 days per week. In both groups, patients underwent McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. The primary end point was overall survival.ResultsThe pathologic complete response rate was 43.2% in group CRT. Compared with group S, group CRT had a higher R0 resection rate (98.4% v 91.2%; P = .002), a better median overall survival (100.1 months v 66.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.96; P = .025), and a prolonged disease-free survival (100.1 months v 41.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P < .001). Leukopenia (48.9%) and neutropenia (45.7%) were the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events during chemoradiotherapy. Incidences of postoperative complications were similar between groups, with the exception of arrhythmia (group CRT: 13% v group S: 4.0%; P = .001). Peritreatment mortality was 2.2% in group CRT versus 0.4% in group S (P = .212).ConclusionThis trial shows that NCRT plus surgery improves survival over surgery alone among patients with locally advanced ESCC, with acceptable and manageable adverse events.

SUMMARY Controversy exists on the advantages of robotic McKeown esophagectomy (RME) versus thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown esophagectomy (TLME). The aim was to evaluate the short- and mid-term outcomes of RME and TLME in the treatment of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). A consecutive series of 652 patients, 280 in RME and 372 in TLME, who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for ESCC at our department from November 2015 to June 2018 was analyzed. A propensity score-matched comparison with clinicopathological covariates was performed between the two groups. Complications were categorized based on the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) recommendation. To identify the recurrence, all patients with R0 resection were followed with a median follow-up period of 20.2 months (range 1–33 months). After propensity score matching, 271 patients were identified for each cohort. In the matched cohorts, two patients died within 90 days in TLME, whereas no patients died in RME. RME was associated with similar intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.895), but with shorter surgical duration (244.5 vs. 276.0 min, P &lt; 0.001), shorter thoracic duration (85.0 vs. 102.9 min, P &lt; 0.001) and lower thoracic conversions (0.7% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.001). In spite of the similar results on total and thoracic lymph nodes dissection, RME yielded more lymph nodes along recurrent laryngeal nerve (4.8 vs. 4.1, P = 0.012), as well as the higher incidence of recurrent nerve injury (29.2% vs. 15.1%, P &lt; 0.001) when compared to TLME. Tumor recurrence occurred in 30 patients and was locoregional only in 9 (3.5%) patients, systemic only in 17 (6.7%) patients, and combined in 4 (1.6%) patients in RME, while in 26 patients and was locoregional only in 10 (10.6%) patients, systemic only in 7 (2.8%) patients, and combined in 9 (3.6%) patients in TLME. RME was associated with a lower rate of mediastinal lymph nodes recurrence (2.0% vs. 5.3%, P = 0.044). Overall and disease-free survival was not different between the two cohorts (P = 0.097 and P = 0.248, respectively). RME was shown to be a safe and oncologically effective approach with favorable short- and mid-term outcomes in the treatment of patients with ESCC.

IMPORTANCEThe prognosis of patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains poor after surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) has been shown to potentially improve survival.OBJECTIVE To compare the treatment efficacy of NCRT plus surgery with surgery alone for long-term survival among patients with locally advanced ESCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThe Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer 5010 study was a multicenter open-label randomized phase 3 clinical trial that enrolled patients between June 1, 2007, and December 31, 2014. Follow-up ended on December 31, 2019. The study was conducted at 8 centers in China. A total of 451 patients aged 18 to 70 years with thoracic ESCC stage T1-4N1M0/T4N0M0 were enrolled and randomized. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020.INTERVENTIONS Patients randomized to receive NCRT plus surgery (NCRT group) received preoperative chemotherapy (25 mg/m 2 of vinorelbine on days 1 and 8 and 75 mg/m 2 of cisplatin on day 1 or 25 mg/m 2 of cisplatin on days 1 to 4) every 3 weeks for 2 cycles and concurrent radiotherapy (40.0 Gy, administered in 20 fractions of 2.0 Gy for 5 days per week) followed by surgery. Patients randomized to receive surgery alone (surgery group) underwent surgery after randomization. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary end point was disease-free survival.RESULTS A total of 451 patients (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [7.0] years; 367 men [81.4%]) were randomized to the NCRT (n = 224) and surgery (n = 227) groups and were eligible for the intention-to-treat analysis. By December 31, 2019, 224 deaths had occurred. The median follow-up was 53.5 months (interquartile range, 18.2-87.4 months). Patients receiving NCRT plus surgery had prolonged overall survival compared with those receiving surgery alone (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.57-0.97; P = .03), with a 5-year survival rate of 59.9% (95% CI, 52.9%-66.1%) vs 49.1% (95% CI, 42.3%-55.6%), respectively. Patients in the NCRT group compared with the surgery group also had prolonged disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45-0.80; P < .001), with a 5-year survival rate of 63.6% (95% CI, 56.0%-70.2%) vs 43.0% (95% CI, 36.0%-49.7%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this randomized clinical trial, treatment with NCRT plus surgery significantly improved long-term overall survival and disease-free survival and therefore may be considered a standard of care for patients with locally advanced ESCC.

Objective:To compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the treatment for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).Summary Background Data:RAMIE has emerged as an alternative to traditional open or thoracoscopic approaches. Efficacy and safety of RAMIE and MIE in the surgical treatment for ESCC remains uncertain given the lack of high-level clinical evidence.Methods:The RAMIE trial was designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial that compares the efficacy and safety of RAMIE and MIE in the treatment of resectable ESCC. From August 2017 to December 2019, eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either RAMIE or MIE performed by experienced thoracic surgeons from 6 high-volume centers in China. Intent-to-treat analysis was performed.Results:Significantly shorter operation time was taken in RAMIE (203.8 vs 244.9 min, P<0.001). Compared with MIE, RAMIE showed improved efficiency of thoracic lymph node dissection in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (15 vs 12, P = 0.016), as well as higher achievement rate of lymph node dissection along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (79.5% vs 67.6%, P = 0.001). No difference was found in blood loss, conversion rate, and R0 resection. The 90-day mortality was 0.6% in each group. Overall complications were similar in RAMIE (48.6%) compared with MIE (41.8%) (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.92–1.46; P = 0.196). Besides, the rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III) was also comparable (12.2% vs 10.2%, P = 0.551). RAMIE showed similar incidences of pulmonary complications (13.8% vs 14.7%; P = 0.812), anastomotic leakage (12.2% vs 11.3%; P = 0.801), and vocal cord paralysis (32.6% vs 27.1%, P = 0.258) to MIE.Conclusions:Early results demonstrate that both RAMIE and MIE are safe and feasible for the treatment of ESCC. RAMIE can achieve shorter operative duration and better lymph node dissection in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy. Long-term results are pending for further follow-up investigations.Trial Registration:ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT03094351.