Esophageal Cancer
Conditions
Keywords
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy, Open Esophagectomy, Quality of Life, 12-003
Brief summary
The goal of this study is to evaluate how surgery for esophageal cancer affects the patient's quality of life over time. The investigators hope this study will provide important information that can be used to improve the quality of life of patients with esophageal cancer. This study will also look at how standard tests and information collected from the patients difficulty swallowing can predict the extent of their esophageal cancer before surgery.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALQuality of Life instruments, FACT-E, Symptom Assessment Scale, Brief Pain Inventory and Daily Analgesic Log
Initial pre-operative assessment post-operative assessment in-hospital assessment at first post-operative visit (clinic visits, or by telephone or mail) assessments at 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months post-operatively (+/- 2 month window). For patients who have their surgery delayed, they may be asked to complete another, more updated set of pre-surgery surveys. For the dysphagia score and CT Scan vs EUS subset will be a dysphagia questionnaire, administered at the time of the initial clinic visit.
Sponsors
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age 18 or older * Diagnosis of esophageal cancer, stages I-IIIC, with no prior esophageal resection. Neoadjuvant therapy given prior to presentation at MSKCC will be accepted. * Anticipated to undergo surgical resection (Ivor Lewis, Trans Hiatal, thoracoabdominal, or McKeown procedure) of esophageal cancer either by open or minimally invasive methods * Chest and abdomen CT scan * Ability to speak read and write English.
Exclusion criteria
* Inability to give informed consent * Patients requiring a laryngectomy or colon interposition as part of their surgical resection. * Patients with scleroderma.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| short-term pain | 4 months | Pain intensity (average of the four pain severity items) measured by BPI at Post-op Days 1 and 3, after epidural removal, at first post-operative clinic visit, at 4 months |
| short -term quality of life (QOL) | 4 months | FACT-E score at the post-op visit and at the 4 months |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| long time quality of life (QOL) | 2 years | FACT- E score at 8 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months. Presence of symptoms with intensity ≥3, assessed by the Symptom Assessment Scale at 8 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months |
| Complications | 90 days | operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, ICU admission rates, ICU days, complication type, rates and severity as determined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) utilized by MSKCC, rate of anastomotic leak, rate of anastomotic stricture, 90-day (post-operative) hospital readmission rates, time to oral intake, and time to first ambulation. |
| differences in surgical outcomes | 90 days | operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, ICU admission rates, ICU days, complication type, rates and severity as determined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) utilized by MSKCC, rate of anastomotic leak, rate of anastomotic stricture, 90-day (post-operative) hospital readmission rates, time to oral intake, and time to first ambulation. |
| long-term pain | 2 years | Pain intensity assessed by BPI at 8 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months (average of the four pain severity items) Presence of symptoms with intensity ≥3, as assessed by the Symptom Assessment Scale at post-op visit, at 4 months visit (adjusted for pre-operative symptom intensity ) |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| predict EUS T3/T4/stricture disease | 2 years | To evaluate whether a combination of a dysphagia score of 2-4 and a specific CT scan maximal tumor thickness. the patient's CT scan (either performed elsewhere or at MSK) will be reviewed by one radiologist, who will assess the maximal thickness of tumor involvement (\>=cm). Patients will then undergo their planned a staging Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) by the gastroenterology service, at which time the EUS depth of invasion will be assigned. The dysphagia score and CT thickness will then be compared to the EUS depth (considered the 'gold standard') |
| predict EUS T3/T4/stricture or earlier EUS disease | 2 years | the patient's CT scan (either performed elsewhere or at MSK) will be reviewed by one radiologist, who will assess the maximal thickness of tumor involvement (\>=cm). Patients will then undergo their planned staging Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) by the gastroenterology service, at which time the EUS depth of invasion will be assigned. The dysphagia score and CT thickness will then be compared to the EUS depth (considered the 'gold standard') |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed