Evolution of the treatment of esophageal cancer: artificial intelligence and the role of sentinel lymph node assessment in esophageal cancer
Alia P. Qureshi , Thitiporn Chobarporn , Daniela Molena
Artificial Intelligence Surgery ›› 2024, Vol. 4 ›› Issue (2) : 68 -76.
Evolution of the treatment of esophageal cancer: artificial intelligence and the role of sentinel lymph node assessment in esophageal cancer
Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has revolutionized the staging and prognosis of breast cancer and melanoma. Because of the complicated lymphatic network around the esophagus, the utility of SLN biopsy for esophageal cancer is less clear. The accuracy of SLN mapping in esophageal cancer depends on tumor site, disease stage, use of neoadjuvant therapy, and patient characteristics. SLN biopsy may improve staging and result in less morbidity in patients with early esophageal cancer, compared with radical lymphadenectomy and esophagectomy. A recent study that investigated hybrid tracers in sentinel node navigation surgery (SNNS) demonstrated promising results for the detection of peritumoral SLNs. However, evidence that firmly establishes the concept of the SLN for esophageal cancer is still lacking. Big data analytics and artificial intelligence have been associated with improvements in the detection and prognosis of esophageal cancer. This review considers the roles of the evolving technologies of SLN biopsy and artificial intelligence, which together have the potential to further improve prognoses and outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer. Additional investigation is necessary to establish standardized protocols and to determine the long-term effectiveness of these approaches in settings involving neoadjuvant therapy and advanced-stage disease.
Sentinel node navigation surgery / esophageal cancer / T1b stage / sentinel lymph node biopsy
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al; MSLT Group. Final trial report of sentinel-node biopsy versus nodal observation in melanoma.N Engl J Med2014;370:599-609 PMCID:PMC4058881 |
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, et al; American Society of Clinical Oncology. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer.J Clin Oncol2005;23:7703-20 |
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
Gómez B, Milla Collado L, Rodríguez M. Artificial intelligence in esophageal cancer diagnosis and treatment: where are we now? - a narrative review.Ann Transl Med2023;11:353 PMCID:PMC10477654 |
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
Obermannová R, Alsina M, Cervantes A, et al; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Oesophageal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.Ann Oncol2022;33:992-1004 |
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
van der Werf LR, Busweiler LAD, van Sandick JW, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BPL; Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA) group. Reporting national outcomes after esophagectomy and gastrectomy according to the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group (ECCG).Ann Surg2020;271:1095-101 |
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
Nieuwenhuis EA, van Munster SN, Meijer SL, et al; Dutch Barrett Expert Centers. Analysis of metastases rates during follow-up after endoscopic resection of early “high-risk” esophageal adenocarcinoma.Gastrointest Endosc2022;96:237-47.e3 |
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |