ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: 5-survival (5YS) and life span after radical surgery for esophageal cancer (EC) patients (ECP) (T1-
4N0-2M0) was analyzed.
METHODS: We analyzed data of 556 consecutive ECP (age=56.5±8.9 years; tumor size=6±3.5 cm) radically
operated (R0) and monitored in 1975-2022 (m=415, f=141; esophagogastrectomies (EG) Garlock=287, EG
Lewis=269, combined EG with resection of pancreas, liver, diaphragm, aorta, VCS, colon transversum, lung, trachea,
pericardium, splenectomy=167; adenocarcinoma=318, squamous=228, mix=10; T1=129, T2=115, T3=184, T4=128;
N0=281, N1=70, N2=205; G1=157, G2=141, G3=258; early EC=110, invasive=446; only surgery=424, adjuvant
chemoimmunoradiotherapy-AT=132: 5-FU+thymalin/taktivin+radiotherapy 45-50Gy). Multivariate Cox modeling,
clustering, SEPATH, Monte Carlo, bootstrap and neural networks computing were used to determine any significant
dependence.
RESULTS: Overall life span (LS) was 1877±2221.6 days and cumulative 5-year survival (5YS) reached 52%, 10
years – 45%, 20 years – 33.4%, 30 years – 27%. 186 ECP lived more than 5 years (LS=4283.3±2412.6 days), 99
ECP – more than 10 years (LS=5883±2296.6 days). 227 ECP died because of EC (LS=631.8±323.4 days). AT
significantly improved 5YS (60.3% vs. 42%) (P=0.0029 by log-rank test). Cox modeling displayed that 5YS of ECP
significantly depended on: phase transition (PT) N0—N12 in terms of synergetics, cell ratio factors (ratio between
cancer cells- CC and blood cells subpopulations), T, G, histology, age, AT, localization, prothrombin index,
hemorrhage time, residual nitrogen, protein (P=0.000-0.021). Neural networks, genetic algorithm selection and
bootstrap simulation revealed relationships between 5YS and P PT early-invasive EC (rank=1); healthy cells/CC (2),
erythrocytes/CC (3), PT N0—N12 (4) thrombocytes/CC (5); segmented neutrophils/CC (6), stick neutrophils/CC (7),
lymphocytes/CC (8), monocytes/CC (9); leucocytes/CC (10); eosinophils/CC (11). Correct prediction of 5YS was
100% by neural networks computing (area under ROC curve=1.0; error=0.0).
CONCLUSIONS: 5-year survival of ECP after radical procedures significantly depended on: 1) PT “early-invasive
cancer”; 2) PT N0--N12; 3) Cell Ratio Factors; 4) blood cell circuit; 5) biochemical factors; 6) hemostasis system; 7)
AT; 8) EC characteristics; 9) tumor localization; 10) anthropometric data; 11) surgery type. Optimal diagnosis and
treatment strategies for EC are: 1) screening and early detection of EC; 2) availability of experienced
thoracoabdominal surgeons because of complexity of radical procedures; 3) aggressive en block surgery and
adequate lymph node dissection for completeness; 4) precise prediction; 5) adjuvant chemoimmunoradiotherapy for
ECP with unfavorable prognosis.
Survival Rate:
Alive……………………………………….....292 (52.5%)
5-Year Survivors…………..……………….186 (33.5%)
10-Year Survivors…………………………...99 (17.8%)
Losses………………………………………..227 (40.8%)
General Life Span=1877±2221.6 days
For 5-Year Survivors=4283.3±2412.6 days
For 10-Year Survivors=5883±2296.6 days
For Losses=631.8±323.4 days
Cumulative 5-Year Survival……………………..52%
Cumulative 10-Year Survival…………………....45%
Cumulative 20-Year Survival…………………....33.4%
General Esophageal Cancer Patients Survival after Complete
Esophagogastrectomies (Kaplan-Meier) (n=556):
Survival Function
5YS=52%; 10YS=45%; 20YS=33.4%.
Complete Censored
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Years after Esophagogastrectomy
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cumulative
Proportion
Surviving
Results of Univariate Analysis of Phase Transition Early—Invasive Cancer in
Prediction of Esophageal Cancer Patients Survival (n=556):
Cumulative Proportion Surviving (Kaplan-Meier)
5YS of Early ECP=100%; 5YS of Invasive ECP=39.2%;
P=0.0000 by Log-Rank Test.
Complete Censored
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Years after Esophagogastrectomy
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cumulative
Proportion
Surviving
Invasive ECP=446
Early ECP=110
Results of Univariate Analysis of Phase Transition N0—N1-2
in Prediction of Esophageal Cancer Patients Survival (n=556):
Cumulative Proportion Surviving (Kaplan-Meier)
5YS of ECP with N0=73.4%; 5YS of ECP with N12=29%;
P=0.0000 byLog-Rank Test.
Complete Censored
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Years after Esophagogastrectomy
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cumulative
Proportion
Surviving
ECP with N12
ECP with N0
Results of Univariate Analysis of Adjuvant Chemoimmunoradiotherapy
in Prediction of Esophageal Cancer Patients Survival (n=556):
Cumulative Proportion Surviving (Kaplan-Meier)
5YS of ECP after Adjuvant Chemoimmunoradiotherapy=68.4%;
5YS of ECP after Surgery along=48.6%;
P=0.0005 by Log-Rank Test.
Complete Censored
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Years after Esophagogastrectomy
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cumulative
Proportion
Surviving
ECP after Adjuvant Chemoimmunoradiotherapy
ECP after Surgery along
Results of Univariate Analysis of Localization (Upper/3 vs. Others) in
Prediction of Esophageal Cancer Patients Survival (n=556):
Cumulative Proportion Surviving (Kaplan-Meier)
5YS of ECP in Upper/3=65%; 5YS of Others ECP=49.6%;
P=0.00297 by Log-Rank Test.
Complete Censored
0 5 10 15 20 25
Years after Esophagogastrectomy
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cumulative
Proportion
Surviving
Others
ECP with Upper/3
Results of Kohonen Self-Organizing Neural Networks Computing in Prediction of
Esophageal Cancer Patients Survival after Complete Esophagogastrectomies (n=413):