Primary Tumor Location Is a Predictor of Poor Prognosis in Patients with Locally Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer Treated with Perioperative Chemotherapy

Extension of resection after positive intraoperative pathology during surgery for gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Residual tumor at the resection margins after surgery for gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is a known prognostic factor. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study in a tertiary referral center, the authors aimed to evaluate the relevance of intraoperative pathology consultation (IOC) and consecutive extension of surgery on patient survival.

STUDY DESIGN

Of 737 consecutive patients undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy for gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, 679 cases with curative intent surgery between 05/1996 and 03/2019 were included. Patients were categorized into: R0 without further resection (direct R0), R0 after positive IOC and extension of resection (converted R0), and R1.

RESULTS

IOC was performed in 242 (35.6%) patients, in 216 (89.3%) at the proximal resection margin. Direct R0-status was achieved in 598 (88.1%), converted R0 in 26 (3.8%) of 38 (5.6%) patients with positive IOC and R1 in 55 (8.1%) patients. The median follow-up was 29 months for surviving patients. 3-year survival rate (3-YSR) was significantly higher for direct R0 compared to converted R0 with 62.3% compared to 21.8% (hazard ratio=0.298; 95% CI=0.186-0.477, P <0.001). 3-YSR was similar between converted R0 and R1 (21.8 vs. 13.3%; hazard ratio =0.928; 95% CI=0.526-1.636, P =0.792). In multivariate analysis, advanced T ( P <0.001), N ( P <0.001), R ( P =0.003), and M1 status ( P <0.001) were associated with worse overall survival.

CONCLUSION

IOC and consecutive extended resection for positive resection margins in gastrectomy for the proximal gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma does not achieve long-term survival benefits in advanced tumor stages.

PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY VERSUS UPFRONT SURGERY FOR ADVANCED GASTRIC CANCER: A PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection remains the main curative therapeutic modality for advanced gastric cancer. Recently, the association of preoperative chemotherapy has allowed the improvement of results without increasing surgical complications.

AIMS

To evaluate the surgical and oncological outcomes of preoperative chemotherapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A retrospective review of gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy was performed. Patients were divided into two groups for analysis: upfront surgery and preoperative chemotherapy. The propensity score matching analysis, including 9 variables, was applied to adjust for potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

Of the 536 patients included, 112 (20.9%) were referred for preoperative chemotherapy. Before the propensity score matching analysis, the groups were different in terms of age, hemoglobin level, node metastasis at clinical stage- status, and extent of gastrectomy. After the analysis, 112 patients were stratified for each group. Both were similar for all variables assigned in the score. Patients in the preoperative chemotherapy group had less advanced postoperative p staging (p=0.010), postoperative n staging (p<0.001), and pTNM stage (p<0.001). Postoperative complications, 30- and 90-days mortality were similar between both groups. Before the propensity score matching analysis, there was no difference in survival between the groups. After the analysis, patients in the preoperative chemotherapy group had better overall survival compared to upfront surgery group (p=0.012). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that American Society of Anesthesiologists III/IV category and the presence of lymph node metastasis were factors significantly associated with worse overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative chemotherapy was associated with increased survival in gastric cancer. There was no difference in the postoperative complication rate and mortality compared to upfront surgery.

ENDOSCOPIC CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH COMPLETE PATHOLOGICAL RESPONSE AFTER NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY FOR GASTRIC AND ESOPHAGOGASTRIC JUNCTION ADENOCARCINOMAS

Background:

Gastric and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma are responsible for approximately 13.5% of cancer-related deaths. Given the fact that these tumors are not typically detected until they are already in the advanced stages, neoadjuvancy plays a fundamental role in improving long-term survival. Identification of those with complete pathological response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a major challenge, with effects on organ preservation, extent of resection, and additional surgery. There is little or no information in the literature about which endoscopic signs should be evaluated after NAC, or even when such re-evaluation should occur.

Aim:

To describe the endoscopic aspects of patients with gastric and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinomas who underwent NAC and achieved pCR, and to determine the accuracy of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in predicting the pCR.

Methods:

A survey was conducted of the medical records of patients with these tumors who were submitted to gastrectomy after NAC, with anatomopathological result of pCR.

Results:

Twenty-nine patients were identified who achieved pCR after NAC within the study period. Endoscopic responses were used to classify patients into two groups: G1-endoscopic findings consistent with pCR and G2-endoscopic findings not consistent with pCR. Endoscopic evaluation in G1 was present in an equal percentage (47.4%; p=0.28) in Borrmann classification II and III. In this group, the predominance was in the gastric body (57.9%; p=0.14), intestinal subtype with 42.1% (p=0.75), undifferentiated degree, 62.5% (p=0.78), Herb+ in 73.3% (p=0.68). The most significant finding, however, was that the time interval between NAC and EGD was longer for G1 than G2 (24.4 vs. 10.2 days, p=0.008).

Conclusion:

EGD after NAC seems to be a useful tool for predicting pCR, and it may be possible to use it to create a reliable response classification. In addition, the time interval between NAC and EGD appears to significantly influence the predictive power of endoscopy for pCR.

Primary and metastatic peritoneal surface malignancies

Peritoneal surface malignancies comprise a heterogeneous group of primary tumours, including peritoneal mesothelioma, and peritoneal metastases of other tumours, including ovarian, gastric, colorectal, appendicular or pancreatic cancers. The pathophysiology of peritoneal malignancy is complex and not fully understood. The two main hypotheses are the transformation of mesothelial cells (peritoneal primary tumour) and shedding of cells from a primary tumour with implantation of cells in the peritoneal cavity (peritoneal metastasis). Diagnosis is challenging and often requires modern imaging and interventional techniques, including surgical exploration. In the past decade, new treatments and multimodal strategies helped to improve patient survival and quality of life and the premise that peritoneal malignancies are fatal diseases has been dismissed as management strategies, including complete cytoreductive surgery embedded in perioperative systemic chemotherapy, can provide cure in selected patients. Furthermore, intraperitoneal chemotherapy has become an important part of combination treatments. Improving locoregional treatment delivery to enhance penetration to tumour nodules and reduce systemic uptake is one of the most active research areas. The current main challenges involve not only offering the best treatment option and developing intraperitoneal therapies that are equivalent to current systemic therapies but also defining the optimal treatment sequence according to primary tumour, disease extent and patient preferences. New imaging modalities, less invasive surgery, nanomedicines and targeted therapies are the basis for a new era of intraperitoneal therapy and are beginning to show encouraging outcomes.

Significance of Detection of the HER2 Gene and PD-1/PD-L1 in Gastric Cancer

Objective

To explore the relationship between the HER2 gene and PD-1/PD-L1 in gastric cancer and its significance.

Methods

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were used to detect HER2 protein expression, HER2 gene amplification, and PD-1/PD-L1 expression in 78 cases of gastric cancer.

Results

The expression rate of HER2 protein was 43.6% (34/78), of which 19.4% (14/78) were HER2 3+, 14.1% (11/78) were HER2 2+, and 11.5% (9/78) were HER2 1+. The results showed that 19.2% (15/78) of samples had HER2 gene amplification, 3.8% (3/78) of samples had a HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0, and 19.2% (15/78) of samples had HER2 gene amplificationf and HER2 copy/cell ≥6.0, as detected by FISH. The positive rate of PD-L1 was 38.5% (30/78) in gastric cancer cells and 50.0% (39/78) in interstitial lymphocytes. The expression of the HER2 gene, PD-L1, and PD-1 in gastric cancer was correlated with the stage and lymph node metastasis of gastric cancer (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The combined detection of the HER2 gene and PD-1/PD-L1 in gastric cancer provides an important reference index for the prognosis of gastric cancer and the benefit of targeted antitumor drugs.

Preoperative Neutrophil Lymphocyte Ratio Can Be Used as a Predictor of Prognosis in Patients With Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis

Objective: Neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR), Lymphocyte mononuclear cell ratio (LMR), and Platelet lymphocyte ratio (PLR) can be used as various prognostic factors for malignant tumors, but the value of prognosis for patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) has not been determined. This study used meta-analysis to assess the value of these indicators in the evaluation of AEG prognosis. Methods: Relevant literatures on the prognostic relationship between NLR, LMR, PLR, and AEG was retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Wanfang data, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure. The search time from database establishment to June 30, 2019. The language is limited to English and Chinese. Data was analyzed using Stata 15.0 software. Result: Six retrospective studies were included, five of them involved NLR and six of them involved PLR. No LMR literature that adequately satisfied the conditions was retrieved. Increased NLR was significantly associated with a significant reduction in overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), or disease specific survival (DSS) in patients with AEG [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.545, 95% CI: 1.096-2.179, P < 0.05]. Subgroup analysis showed that NLR had significant value in the prognosis of both Chinese and Non-Chinese patients (P = 0.009 vs. P = 0.000). NLR had significant prognostic value for ≥3 and <3 groups (P = 0.022 vs. P = 0.000). NLR has a significant prognostic value for samples ≥500 and <500 (P = 0.000 vs. P = 0.022). NLR and OS/CSS/DSS single factor meta-regression showed that regional NLR cut-off values and sample size may be the source of heterogeneity in AEG patients (all P < 0.05). There was no significant association between elevated PLR and OS in patients with AEG (HR = 1.117, 95% CI: 0.960-1.300, P > 0.05). PLR had no significant prognostic value for both Chinese and UK patients (P = 0.282 vs. P = 0.429). PLR had no significant prognostic value for ≥150 group and <150 group (P = 0.141 and P = 0.724). No significant prognostic value was found in either the 300 group and <300 group (P = 0.282 vs. P = 0.429). Conclusion: Preoperative NLR rise was an adverse prognostic indicator of AEG. High-risk patients should be treated promptly. The results showed that PLR was not recommended as a prognostic indicator of AEG.