Pathological Complete Response Is Not Always the Best Outcome: Survival Advantage of Minimal Residual Disease After Esophagectomy

Clicks: 1
ID: 315752
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #329 of 432 articles by views in the british journal of surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 432 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Esophageal cancer (EC) remains one of the most aggressive malignancies worldwide and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. In patients with locally advanced, resectable EC, standard treatment consists of either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to the CROSS protocol or perioperative chemotherapy following the FLOT protocol, both followed by esophagectomy. Since publication of the CheckMate 577 trial, patients with residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy routinely receive adjuvant immunotherapy with nivolumab. Aims To evaluate survival and recurrence outcomes according to pathological tumor stage after esophagectomy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent curative-intent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer (adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma) at our hospital between 2014 and 2024. Results A total of 235 patients were included, of whom 204 (86.4%) had adenocarcinoma.. Neoadjuvant treatment consisted of the CROSS protocol in 187 (78.9%) patients, the FLOT protocol in 25 (10.5%) patients, and other regimens in 5 (2.1%) patients. 20 (8.4%) patients had no preoperative therapy. Histopathological analysis revealed pathological tumor stages T0 (pathological complete response) in 50 (21.3%) patients, T1 in 50 (21.3%), T2 in 42 (17.7%), T3 in 88 (37.4%), and T4 in 5 (2.1%) patients. Overall survival was poorest in patients with T4 tumors, followed by T3 and T2 stages. Notably, patients with minimal residual disease (T1) demonstrated the most favorable survival outcomes, exceeding those observed in patients with pathological complete response (Figure 1). Conclusion Patients with minimal residual disease (T1) exhibited superior survival and lower recurrence rates compared to patients with pathological complete response. This may be explained by routine use of adjuvant nivolumab in patients with residual disease, while patients with complete response currently don’t receive immunotherapy. These findings, supported by previously reported data from our cohort showing recurrence rates exceeding 30% even after complete response, suggest that the role of adjuvant immunotherapy in this subgroup warrants further investigation.Figure 1:Overall survival according to postoperative histopathological T stage.For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text.
Reference Key
openalex_W7163347986 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors S Gerber, P Aeschbacher, D Kroell, M Berger, H Hemmatazad, Y Borbély
Journal the british journal of surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/bjs/znag055.067
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag055.067
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.