Patterns of care and prognostic evaluation for stage I-III upper esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a population-based study

Dongbo Chen; Xiaozhu Zha; Dongmei Ye; Mei Kang; Liyang Zhu; Mingwei Yang; Yu Chen; Kechao Zhu; Wanli Xia; Zhi Wang; Yichun Wang

doi:10.21037/atm-22-4577

Patterns of care and prognostic evaluation for stage I-III upper esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a population-based study

Ann Transl Med. 2022 Nov;10(22):1222. doi: 10.21037/atm-22-4577.

Authors

Dongbo Chen^#¹, Xiaozhu Zha^#², Dongmei Ye³, Mei Kang¹, Liyang Zhu¹, Mingwei Yang¹, Yu Chen³, Kechao Zhu³, Wanli Xia³, Zhi Wang¹, Yichun Wang¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiation Oncology, First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China.
² Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Anqing Medical College, Anqing, China.
³ Department of Thoracic Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China.

^# Contributed equally.

Abstract

Background: There is no strong evidence regarding the optimal treatment and specific prognosis prediction model for upper esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (UESCC). This study aimed to investigate the real-world treatment patterns and develop models to predict overall survival (OS) and esophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS) in patients with stage I-III UESCC.

Methods: Patients with T1-4N0-3M0 UESCC in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were identified from 2010 to 2017, and randomized to a training cohort and a validation cohort. The effect of treatment patterns on survival were comprehensively analyzed. Nomograms were developed by incorporating independent prognostic factors analyzed by Cox regression in the training cohort and evaluated by the concordance index (C-index), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analyses (DCA) in two cohorts.

Results: A total of 677 patients were identified, including 452 in the training cohort and 225 in the validation cohort. Among all populations, 71.9% (487) received chemoradiotherapy without surgery, and chemoradiotherapy or/and surgery showed better survival than other treatments. However, surgery was rarely carried out for patients with stage II-III. T stage, N stage, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy were independent risks for both OS and ECSS, while age was also an independent risk for OS. The C-indexes for nomograms to predict OS (0.71 and 0.72) and ECSS (0.70 and 0.73) were greater than 7th AJCC staging system to predict OS (0.61 and 0.64) and ECSS (0.64 and 0.64) in both the training cohort and the validation cohort. Time-dependent ROC curves and DCA also suggested that nomograms performed consistently better than 7th AJCC staging system. The calibration curves demonstrated good consistency in predicting survival.

Conclusions: Chemoradiotherapy was a major treatment with preferable survival for patients with stage I-III UESCC. We have firstly developed and validated prognostic nomograms in patients with stage I-III UESCC, which would play a supplementary role in the current staging system.

Keywords: Esophageal cancer; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER); chemoradiotherapy; nomogram; prognosis.