Management of Radiation-Induced Esophageal Cancer: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Athanasios Syllaios
,
Michail Vailas
,
Maria Tolia
,
Nikolaos Charalampakis
,
Konstantinos Vlachos
,
Emmanouil I. Kapetanakis
,
Periklis I. Tomos
,
Dimitrios Schizas

Radiation-induced esophageal cancer (RIEC) can arise in a previously irradiated field, mostly in patients previously irradiated for thoracic malignancies such as breast cancer, Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas, head and neck cancers, lung cancer, or previous esophageal cancer. RIEC is rare and accounts for less than 1% of all carcinomas of the esophagus. RIEC seems to represent a biologically aggressive disease with a poor prognosis. Although it is difficult to perform radical surgery on a previously irradiated field, R0 resection remains the mainstay of treatment. The use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy remains very helpful in RIEC, similarly to conventional esophageal cancer protocols.

  • esophageal cancer
  • radiation
  • pathogenesis
  • treatment

1. Introduction

Incorporation of combined modality treatment (including neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgical resection) has been employed for the management of locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers [1]. The trimodal approach can potentially achieve higher rates of (a) tumor shrinkage-downstaging, (b) negative tumor resection (R0) margins, and (c) pathological complete response (pCR), thus offering lower disease recurrence rate and overall survival improvement [2][3][4][5][6][7]. The combination of (a) imaging with targeted irradiation techniques (i.e., Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, protons), (b) 4D-Computed Tomography (CT) planning or other respiratory motion management methods, and (c) biological targeting (i.e., Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/CT implementation in radiotherapy planning) can offer more accurate planning to target volume delineation margins that minimize healthy surrounding tissue dose (i.e., heart substructures and lungs) and limit early and late toxicity incidences [1][8][9][10][11][12]. As one of the most serious irradiation late side effects, the promotion of tumorigenesis should be considered in the optimal treatment decision-making of long-term cancer survivors that are at increased risk of developing second malignancies [3][13].
Radiation-induced esophageal cancer (RIEC) can arise in a previously irradiated area [3] and is considered a late radiation effect when it fits certain predetermined criteria, including the timing of RIEC development (>5 years after radiation), age at irradiation, dose received and volume of the irradiated area, type of irradiated organ, the origin from tissues within the irradiated field, radiation technique, the different histopathological features compared to the primary tumor, and individual and family history of cancer [3][13]. Those criteria seem to resemble Cahan’s criteria. Cahan et al. reported 11 cases of bone sarcomas arising in previously irradiated bones. The cases selected in their study fulfilled the following prerequisites: (1) microscopic or roentgenographic evidence of the nonmalignant nature of the initial bone condition, (2) the sarcoma must have arisen in the area included within the previously radiotherapeutic beam, (3) a relatively long (>5 years), asymptomatic latent period must have elapsed after irradiation and before the clinical appearance of the bone sarcoma, and (4) all sarcomas must have been proved histologically [14].

2. Epidemiology and Pathogenesis of RIEC

RIEC is rare and accounts for less than 1% of all carcinomas of the esophagus [15]. The first human case, reported by Slaughter in 1957, developed 27 years after the patient’s radiation exposure [16]. RIEC incidence increases mostly in patients previously irradiated for thoracic malignancies such as breast, Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL), head and neck, lung, or previous esophageal cancer.
Females seem to be predisposed to RIEC compared to males. Each Gray (Gy) of irradiation increases the solid cancer rate by approximately 58% in females (90% CI, 43–69%, vs. 35% (90% CI, 28–43%) in males [13]. The median presentation age is 65 years, with poor smoking or alcohol intake history. RIEC development risk increases after a latent 10-year period after irradiation exposure [12] and becomes greater if radiation was performed during childhood, suggesting higher radiation carcinogenicity when the organ is developing [12][15].
The most frequent histological subtype that can be identified is constituted by moderately or poorly differentiated esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) [12][15]. Nevertheless, adenocarcinoma accounts for approximately 16.2% of cases [12]. Markar et al. reported in their study more adenocarcinomas in the RIEC group in comparison to the non-RIEC group, probably due to differences in underlying etiology [12]. Most patients in the non-RIEC group had a history of ESCC related to tobacco consumption, exposing their upper airways, lungs, and esophagus to a second SCC through the ‘cancerization field’ concept [17].
A well-documented example of the carcinogenic effect of ionizing radiation is the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors [18]. However, the process of radio-carcinogenesis in secondary esophageal cancer is not clearly understood, and accurate risk models or pathogenic pathways do not exist.
Different degrees of acute esophagitis is the most important early side effect of radiotherapy [18], while fibrosis and scarred esophageal strictures are some of its late effects [19]. Irradiation-induced cell death mostly affects cells with rapid cell turnover [20]. During irradiation, the regeneration of the mucosal surface of the esophagus is impaired, leading to esophagitis and alterations including nuclear hyperchromasia or denudation, focal basal epithelial cell necrosis, epithelial swelling and erosions or edema, and petechiae in the lamina propria and in the submucosa. On the other hand, late side effects of radiotherapy include submucosal fibrosis, thickening of the wall of the esophagus, and chronic esophageal ulcers due to vascular insufficiency, resulting in motility disorders and stenosis/strictures/fistula, which are considered well-described radiation effects [20][21].

3. Management of RIEC

Several studies have tried to elucidate the optimal therapeutic approach for this disease to guide the clinical management of these patients better. A Multidisciplinary Tumor Board of a high-volume EC center has a crucial role in optimal therapeutic management. Clinical staging using a combination of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS), Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET/CT), and Computed Tomography (CT) scan are useful tools in determining the consistent variations in terms of diagnosis, assessment of resectability, and response to treatment.
The cornerstone of treatment in RIEC is complete surgical resection in a non-metastatic setting. If a radical surgical approach is not possible because of tumor extension, radiation toxicity (i.e., severe fibrosis), or poor patient performance status, radical re-irradiation or palliative chemotherapy should be considered. Radiation-induced malignancies are not less sensitive to chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. External beam re-irradiation may not be technically feasible, mainly due to overlapping with the initial fields and the presence of high spot areas. However, endoluminal brachytherapy can provide a safe alternative [15].
There is a lot of skepticism concerning the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer developed in an irradiated field. Thus, a significantly reduced utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (19.1% versus 47%; p < 0.005) has been reported in the post-radiation EC group [12]. Moreover, a three-stage procedure is commonly used in these patients, due to tumor location in the upper-third of the esophagus [12]. A greater incidence of R1/2 margins (21.3% versus 10.9%; p < 0.001), with a vertical margin more commonly involved (11.0% versus 4.3%; p = 0.001) in post-radiation EC patients, but no significant difference in lateral margin involvement between the two groups has also been reported. Increased in-hospital (14.0% versus 7.1%; p = 0.003) and 90 days (14.0% versus 6.9%; p = 0.002) mortality, overall morbidity (68.4% versus 56.4%; p = 0.006), surgical site infection (22.8% versus 14.5%; p = 0.009), neurological complications (17.6% versus 4.7%; p < 0.001), and an increased median length of hospital stay (29.3 days versus 24.9 days; p = 0.019) have also been reported in the first group [12].
In a study conducted by Nobel et al., patients with RIEC presented with earlier stage disease than patients with primary ESCC (stage II disease 50.7% vs. 28.5%, p = 0.002) [4]. On the other hand, more patients with primary ESCC presented with stage III disease (63.2% vs. 44%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in tumor location or grade. RIEC patients received surgery alone more frequently (20% vs. 7.3%) and definitive chemoradiation less often (52% vs. 65.9%) than patients with primary ESCC (p = 0.012). Additionally, RIEC patients were less likely to receive any neoadjuvant therapy (58.3% vs. 78.6%, p = 0.039) and moreover, were much less likely to receive specifically neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (29.2% vs. 72.9%, p < 0.001) [4]. Among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy in the same study, there is a higher frequency of pCR in patients with primary ESCC compared to RIEC ones (38.5% vs. 16.7%, respectively; p = 0.024), with no difference in nodal positivity, lymphovascular invasion, or margin status. However, RIEC patients may have a higher rate of neural invasion (61% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.001). These results possibly implicate different tumor characteristics and cancer biology between RIEC and primary ESCCs [4]. The authors concluded that patients with previous malignancies are more likely to be in frequent contact with healthcare providers and be enrolled in regular follow-up, explaining why RIEC is identified in earlier stages than primary EC cases in this cohort [4].
In a retrospective study by Micke et al., 66 RIEC patients were reported. Most patients received surgical resection, 14 patients underwent radiotherapy alone, 2 had chemotherapy only, 1 patient received hyperthermic chemotherapy, and 1 patient received definitive high-dose-rate brachytherapy with Iridium-192 [15]. A total of 42.3% of the surgically treated patients achieved long-term survival, while most patients without surgery died within a few months. Although patients managed with chemoradiotherapy or brachytherapy did not achieve long-term survival, some patients achieved long-term remissions of cancer. The authors suggested that when a radical surgical approach is not feasible (i.e., in patients with large tumor extension or poor performance status), re-irradiation alone or palliative chemotherapy can be carried out as an alternative palliative method [15].
Ueda et al. reported that 11 RIEC thoracic esophagus patients developed after postoperative radiation therapy for breast cancer. In 8 patients, esophagectomy was performed, while 2 patients were managed by irradiation only. Additionally, 4 of the surgically treated patients received postoperative radiation, achieving long-term survival of 13 years, even with aggressive tumor characteristics. Patients managed with re-irradiation alone achieved survival of 13 months. Re-irradiation treatment may offer an alternative palliative therapy when surgery is not feasible. The authors highlighted the fact that radiation therapy is beneficial to radiation-induced cancers of the thoracic esophagus [22].
Finally, in a study by Taal., 8 patients with RIEC were re-irradiated. Not all patients were eligible for full dose radiotherapy, and the reported survival was between 2 and 13 months, concluding that none of the radiation-induced EC patients could be cured, but in the absence of a radical surgery, re-irradiation may be an option [23]

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/medicina58070949

References

  1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers (Version 2.2022). Available online: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/EsophagealandEsophagogastricJunctionCancers.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2022).
  2. Sjoquist, K.M.; Burmeister, B.H.; Smithers, B.M.; Zalcberg, J.R.; Simes, R.J.; Barbour, A.; Gebski, V.; Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group. Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for resectable oesophageal carcinoma: An updated meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2011, 12, 681–692.
  3. Schena, M.; Battaglia, A.F.; Munoz, F. Esophageal cancer developed in a radiated field: Can we reduce the risk of a poor prognosis cancer? J. Thorac. Dis. 2017, 9, 1767–1771.
  4. Nobel, T.B.; Barbetta, A.; Hsu, M.; Tan, K.S.; Pinchinat, T.; Schlottmann, F.; Bains, M.S.; Ku, G.Y.; Wu, A.J.; Patti, M.G.; et al. Outcomes of Radiation-Associated Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: The MSKCC Experience. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2019, 23, 11–22.
  5. Charalampakis, N.; Tsakatikas, S.; Schizas, D.; Kykalos, S.; Tolia, M.; Fioretzaki, R.; Papageorgiou, G.; Katsaros, I.; Abdelhakeem, A.A.F.; Sewastjanow-Silva, M.; et al. Trimodality treatment in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers: Current approach and future perspectives. World J. Gastrointest. Oncol. 2022, 14, 181–202.
  6. Guo, X.F.; Fang, W.T. The role of neoadjuvant therapy in multimodality treatment of locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Perspective from the NEOCRTEC5010 trial. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2021, 59, 646–650.
  7. Tang, S.; Ou, J.; Wu, Y.-P.; Li, R.; Chen, T.-W.; Zhang, X.-M. Contrast-enhanced CT radiomics features to predict recurrence of locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell cancer within 2 years after trimodal therapy: A case-control study. Medicine 2021, 100, e26557.
  8. Nkhali, L.; Thureau, S.; Edet-Sanson, A.; Doyeux, K.; Benyoucef, A.; Gardin, I.; Michel, P.; Vera, P.; DuBray, B. FDG-PET/CT during concomitant chemo radiotherapy for esophageal cancer: Reducing target volumes to deliver higher radiotherapy doses. Acta Oncol. 2015, 54, 909–915.
  9. Lesueur, P.; Servagi-Vernat, S. Détermination des marges du volume cible anatomoclinique au volume cible prévisionnel pour la radiothérapie conformationnelle des cancers de l’œsophage . Cancer/Radiothérapie 2016, 20, 651–656.
  10. Han, D.; Yuan, Y.; Chai, J.; Zhang, G.; Wang, L.; Ren, A.; Song, P.; Fu, Z.; Yu, J. Subclinical Lesions of the Primary Clinical Target Volume Margin in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Association with FDG PET/CT. Front. Oncol. 2019, 9, 336.
  11. Wang, X.; Palaskas, N.L.; Hobbs, B.P.; Abe, J.-I.; Nead, K.T.; Yusuf, S.W.; Hermann, J.; Deswal, A.; Lin, S.H. The Impact of Radiation Dose to Heart Substructures on Major Coronary Events and Patient Survival after Chemoradiation Therapy for Esophageal Cancer. Cancers 2022, 14, 1304.
  12. Markar, S.R.; Gronnier, C.; Pasquer, A.; Duhamel, A.; Behal, H.; Théreaux, J.; Gagnière, J.; Lebreton, G.; Brigand, C.; Meunier, B.; et al. Surgically treated oesophageal cancer developed in a radiated field: Impact on peri-operative and long-term outcomes. Eur. J. Cancer 2017, 75, 179–189.
  13. Dracham, C.B.; Shankar, A.; Madan, R. Radiation induced secondary malignancies: A review article. Radiat. Oncol. J. 2018, 36, 85–94.
  14. Cahan, W.G.; Woodard, H.Q.; Higinbotham, N.L.; Stewart, F.W.; Coley, B.L. Sarcoma arising in irradiated bone: Report of eleven cases. Cancer 1998, 82, 8–34.
  15. Micke, O.; Schäfer, U.; Glashörster, M.; Prott, F.-J.; Willich, N. Radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma 30 years after mediastinal irradiation: Case report and review of the literature. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 1999, 29, 164–170.
  16. Slaughter, D.P.; Southwick, H.W. Mucosal Carcinomas as a Result of Irradiation. Arch. Surg. 1957, 74, 420–429.
  17. Braakhuis, B.J.M.; Tabor, M.P.; Kummer, J.A.; Leemans, C.R.; Brakenhoff, R.H. A genetic explanation of Slaughter’s concept of field cancerization: Evidence and clinical implications. Cancer Res. 2003, 63, 1727–1730.
  18. Pierce, D.A.; Shimizu, Y.; Preston, D.L.; Vaeth, M.; Mabuchi, K. Studies of the Mortality of Atomic Bomb Survivors. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950–1990. Radiat. Res. 2012, 178, AV61-87.
  19. Emami, B.; Lyman, J.; Brown, A.; Cola, L.; Goitein, M.; Munzenrider, J.E.; Shank, B.; Solin, L.J.; Wesson, M. Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1991, 21, 109–122.
  20. Vanagunas, A.; Jacob, P.; Olinger, E. Radiation-induced esophageal injury: A spectrum from esophagitis to cancer. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 1990, 85, 808–812.
  21. Adebahr, S.; Schimek-Jasch, T.; Nestle, U.; Brunner, T.B. Oesophagus side effects related to the treatment of oesophageal cancer or radiotherapy of other thoracic malignancies. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2016, 30, 565–580.
  22. Ueda, M.; Matsubara, T.; Kasumi, F.; Nishi, M.; Kajitani, T. Possible radiation induced cancer of the thoracic esophagus after postoperative irradiation in breast cancer. Nihon Kyobu Geka Gakkai Zasshi 1991, 39, 1852–1857.
  23. Taal, B.G.; Aleman, B.M.P.; Lebesque, J.V.; Steinmetz, R. The management of radiation-associated oesophageal carcinoma: A report of 16 cases. Eur. J. Cancer 1993, 29, 1114–1119.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback