Randomized trial of adjuvant chemotherapy versus control after curative resection for gastric cancer: 5-year follow-up

Multidisciplinary treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of multidisciplinary treatment for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) who underwent radical gastrectomy.

Patients and Methods

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), neoadjuvant CT, neoadjuvant RT, neoadjuvant CRT, perioperative CT and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for LAGC were searched. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence and metastasis, long-term mortality, adverse events (grade ≥3), operative complications and R0 resection rate were used as outcome indicators for meta-analysis.

Results

Forty-five RCTs with 10077 participants were finally analysed. Adjuvant CT had higher OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% credible interval [CI] = 0.66-0.82) and DFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.60-0.74) than surgery-alone group. Perioperative CT (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI = 1.19-5.50) and adjuvant CT (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.27-0.86) both had more recurrence and metastasis than HIPEC + adjuvant CT, while adjuvant CRT tended to have less recurrence and metastasis than adjuvant CT (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.29-2.42) and even adjuvant RT (OR = 1.83, 95% CI = 0.98-3.40). Moreover, the incidence of mortality in HIPEC + adjuvant CT was lower than that in adjuvant RT (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.11-0.72), adjuvant CT (OR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.23-0.86) and perioperative CT (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.05-5.41). Analysis of adverse events (grade ≥3) showed no statistically significant difference between any two adjuvant therapy groups.

Conclusion

A combination of HIPEC with adjuvant CT seems to be the most effective adjuvant therapy, which contributes to reducing tumour recurrence, metastasis and mortality - without increasing surgical complications and adverse events related to toxicity. Compared with CT or RT alone, CRT can reduce recurrence, metastasis and mortality but increase adverse events. Moreover, neoadjuvant therapy can effectively improve the radical resection rate, but neoadjuvant CT tends to increase surgical complications.

Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary management of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remains unstandardized worldwide. We performed a systemic review to summarize the advancements, regional differences, and current recommended multidisciplinary treatment strategies for LAGC.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases and Embase. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials which investigated survival of patients with LAGC who underwent gastrectomy with pre-/perioperative, postoperative chemotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy were included.

RESULTS

In total, we identified 11 studies of pre-/perioperative chemotherapy, 38 of postoperative chemotherapy, and 14 of chemoradiotherapy. In Europe and the USA, the current standard of care is perioperative chemotherapy for patients with LAGC using the regimen of 5-FU, folinic acid, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT). In Eastern Asia, upfront gastrectomy and postoperative chemotherapy is commonly used. The S-1 monotherapy or a regimen of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapOx) are used for patients with stage II disease, and the CapOx regimen or the S-1 plus docetaxel regimen are recommended for those with stage III Gastric cancer (GC). The addition of postoperative radiotherapy to peri- or postoperative chemotherapy is currently not recommended. Additionally, clinical trials testing targeted therapy and immunotherapy are increasingly performed worldwide.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent clinical trials showed a survival benefit of peri-over postoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. As such, this strategy may have a potential as a global standard for patients with LAGC. Outcome of the ongoing clinical trials is expected to establish the global standard of multidisciplinary treatment strategy in patients with LAGC.

Prognostic factors for survival in patients with gastric cancer: Single-centre experience

OBJECTIVE:

We aimed to investigate survival outcomes and survival-related prognostic factors in gastric cancer patients who were followed-up or received adjuvant therapy in our center.

METHODS:

Patients with gastric cancer treated between 2005 and 2016 were evaluated retrospectively. We included 345 non-metastatic (stage I-III) gastric cancer patients in the study. The clinical, demographic, histologic data of the patients and treatment characteristics were obtained from the patient’s files.

RESULTS:

While 50 patients were stage I, 94 patients were stage II, 201 patients were stage III. While 221 patients (64%) presenting with serosal or adjacent visceral organ invasion or with involved lymph nodes were treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 124 patients presenting with early-stage disease were followed after surgery. Median follow up time was 34 months (4–156 months). While the median overall survival (OS) was 51 months, median disease-free survival (DFS) was 35 months. Overall survival and disease-free survival rates for 1^st, 3^rd and 5^th years were 85%, 55%, 45% and 72%, 49%, 38%, respectively. According to univariate analysis, tumor size, T stage (p<0.001), N stage (p<0.001), TNM stage (p<0.001), grade (p<0.001) and presence of lymphovascular invasion (p=0.005) were determined as prognostic factors that affect overall survival significantly. According to the multivariate analysis, only T and N stage (p<0.001) were determined as independent prognostic factors for overall survival.

CONCLUSION:

Many different prognostic factors have been defined for gastric cancer. In concordance with the literature, we found T and N stages as prognostic factors in univariate and multivariate analysis.

COMplot, A Graphical Presentation of Complication Profiles and Adverse Effects for the Curative Treatment of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: For the curative treatment of gastric cancer, several neoadjuvant, and adjuvant treatment-regimens are available which have shown to improve overall survival. No overview is available regarding toxicity and surgery related outcomes. Our aim was to construct a novel graphical method concerning adverse events (AEs) associated with multimodality treatment and perform a meta-analysis to compare different clinically relevant cytotoxic regimens with each other.

Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO databases were searched up to May 2019 for randomized controlled trials investigating curative treatment regimens for gastric cancer. To construct single and bidirectional bar-charts (COMplots), grade 1–2 and grade 3–5 AEs were extracted per cytotoxic regimen. For surgery-related outcomes a pre-specified set of complications was used. Thereafter, treatment-arms comparing the same regimens were combined in a single-arm random-effects meta-analysis and pooled-proportions were calculated with 95% confidence-intervals. Comparative meta-analyses were performed based on clinical relevance and compound similarity.

Results: In total 16 RCTs (n = 4,526 patients) were included investigating pre-operative-therapy and 39 RCTs investigating adjuvant-therapy (n = 13,732 patients). Pre-operative COMplots were created for among others; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin-oxaliplatin-docetaxel (FLOT), epirubicin-cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine (ECF), cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine (CF), and oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine (FOx). Pre-operative FLOT showed a minor increase in grade 1–2 and grade 3–4 AEs compared to pre-operative ECF, CF, and FOx. A pooled analysis of patients who had received pre-operative therapy compared to patients who underwent direct surgery did not reveal any significant difference in surgery related morbidity/mortality. When we compared three commonly used adjuvant regimens; S-1 had the lowest amount of grade 3–4 AEs compared to capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and 5-FU with radiotherapy (5-FU+RT).

Conclusion: COMplot provides a novel tool to visualize and compare treatment related AEs for gastric cancer. Based on our comparisons, pre-operative FLOT had a manageable toxicity profile compared to other pre-operative doublet or triplet regimens. We found no evidence indicating surgical outcomes might be hampered by pre-operative therapy. Adjuvant S-1 had a more favorable toxicity profile compared to CAPOX and 5-FU+RT.

Prognostic and Predictive Factors for the Curative Treatment of Esophageal and Gastric Cancer in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

An overview of promising prognostic variables and predictive subgroups concerning the curative treatment of esophageal and gastric cancer from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO conferences were searched up to March 2019 for RCTs on the curative treatment of esophageal or gastric cancer with data on prognostic and/or predictive factors for overall survival. Prognostic factors were deemed potentially clinically relevant according to the following criteria; (1) statistically significant (p < 0.05) in a multivariate analysis, (2) reported in at least 250 patients, and (3) p < 0.05, in ≥ 33% of the total number of patients in RCTs reporting this factor. Predictive factors were potentially clinically-relevant if (1) the p-value for interaction between subgroups was <0.20 and (2) the hazard ratio in one of the subgroups was significant (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

For gastric cancer, 39 RCTs were identified (n = 13,530 patients) and, for esophageal cancer, 33 RCTs were identified (n = 8618 patients). In total, we identified 23 potentially clinically relevant prognostic factors for gastric cancer and 16 for esophageal cancer. There were 15 potentially clinically relevant predictive factors for gastric cancer and 10 for esophageal cancer.

CONCLUSION

The identified prognostic and predictive factors can be included and analyzed in future RCTs and be of guidance for nomograms. Further validation should be performed in large patient cohorts.

The Efficacy and Safety of (Neo)Adjuvant Therapy for Gastric Cancer: A Network Meta-analysis

Background: Alternatives in treatment-strategies exist for resectable gastric cancer. Our aims were: (1) to assess the benefit of perioperative, neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment-strategies and (2) to determine the optimal adjuvant regimen for gastric cancer treated with curative intent. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO conferences were searched up to August 2017 for randomized-controlled-trials on the curative treatment of resectable gastric cancer. We performed two network-meta-analyses (NMA). NMA-1 compared perioperative, neoadjuvant and adjuvant strategies only if there was a direct comparison. NMA-2 compared different adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy regimens, after curative resection. Overall-survival (OS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were analyzed using random-effects NMA on the hazard ratio (HR)-scale and calculated as combined HRs and 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Results: NMA-1 consisted of 9 direct comparisons between strategies for OS (14 studies, n = 4187 patients). NMA-2 consisted of 16 direct comparisons between adjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiotherapy regimens for OS (37 studies, n = 10,761) and 14 for DFS (30 studies, n = 9714 patients). Compared to taxane-based-perioperative-chemotherapy, surgery-alone (HR = 0.58, 95% CrI = 0.38⁻0.91) and perioperative-chemotherapy regimens without a taxane (HR = 0.79, 95% CrI = 0.58⁻1.15) were inferior in OS. After curative-resection, the doublet oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine (for one-year) was the most efficacious adjuvant regimen in OS (HR = 0.47, 95% CrI = 0.28⁻0.80). Conclusions: For resectable gastric cancer, (1) taxane-based perioperative-chemotherapy was the most promising treatment strategy; and (2) adjuvant oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine was the most promising regimen after curative resection. More research is warranted to confirm or reproach these findings.

Validity of studies suggesting postsurgical chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer: critical appraisal of randomised trials

Background and aim

In 2013, Diaz-Nieto et al published a Cochrane review to summarise the impact of postsurgical chemotherapy versus surgery alone on survival for resectable gastric cancer. The authors concluded that postsurgical chemotherapy showed an improvement in overall survival. The aim of this article was to assess the validity of four studies included in the Cochrane review and to investigate the impact of an exclusion of these four studies on the result of the meta-analysis.

Methods

Overall survival was selected as endpoint of interest. Among the 34 included papers which analysed this endpoint, we identified the four publications which have the highest weights to influence the final result. The validity of these papers was analysed using the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) checklist for randomised controlled trials. We performed a new meta-analysis without the four studies in order to assess their impact on the general result of the original meta-analysis.

Results

The analysed four studies revealed several inconsistencies: inappropriate answers were found in up to 77% of the items of the CONSORT checklist. Unclear or inadequate randomisation, missing blinded set-up, conflict of interest and lacking intention-to-treat analysis were the most common findings. When performing a meta-analysis excluding the four criticised studies, postsurgical chemotherapy still showed a significant improvement in overall survival. Even when excluding all single studies with a statistically significant outcome by themselves and performing a meta-analysis on the remaining 26 studies, the result remains statistically significant.

Conclusion

The four most powerful publications in the Cochrane review show substantial deficits. We suggest a more critical appraisal regarding the validity of single studies. However, after the exclusion of these four studies, the result of the meta-analysis did not change.

Current adjuvant treatment modalities for gastric cancer: From history to the future

The discrepancy between the surgical technique and the type of adjuvant chemotherapy used in clinical trials and patient outcomes in terms of overall survival rates has led to the generation of different adjuvant treatment protocols in distinct parts of the world. The adjuvant treatment recommendation is generally chemoradiotherapy in the United States, perioperative chemotherapy in the United Kingdom and parts of Europe, and chemotherapy in Asia. These options mainly rely on the United States Intergroup-0116, United Kingdom British Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy, and the Asian Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial of S-1 for Gastric Cancer and Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin Adjuvant Study in Stomach Cancer trials. However, the benefits were evident for only certain patients, which were not very homogeneous regarding the type of surgery, chemotherapy regimens, and stage of disease. Whether the dissimilarities in survival are attributable to surgical technique or intrinsic biological differences is a subject of debate. Regardless of the extent of surgery, multimodal therapy may offer modest survival advantage at least for diseases with lymph node involvement. Moreover, in the era of individualized treatment for most of the other cancer types, identification of special subgroups comprising those who will derive more or no benefit from adjuvant therapy merits further investigation. The aim of this review is to reveal the historical evolution and future reflections of adjuvant treatment modalities for resected gastric cancer patients.

Multimodality treatment of potentially curative gastric cancer: geographical variations and future prospects

After much controversy, multimodality therapy is now accepted worldwide as the gold standard for treatment of resectable bulky localized gastric cancer. There is significant regional variation in the style of multimodality treatment with adjuvant chemoradiation the North American standard, neoadjuvant chemotherapy preferred in Europe and Australasia, whilst adjuvant chemotherapy is preferred in Asia. With further standardization of surgery and D1+/D2 resections increasingly accepted world wide, and in particular in the West, as the surgical standard of care for potentially curable disease, it is timely to reassess the multimodality regimes being used. The challenge in the use of multimodality therapy is how current outcomes can be standardized and improved further. Recent studies indicate that mere intensification of the regime in time, dosage or addition of further agents does not improve localized gastric cancer outcomes. More novel strategies including early commencement of adjuvant therapies, intra-peritoneal chemotherapy or assessing neoadjuvant response with positron emission tomography scanning may give improvements in outcomes. The introduction of targeted therapies means that the adjuvant use of biological agents needs to be explored. By proper assessment of the patient's co-morbidities, full tumour staging, and a better understanding of the tumour's molecular pathology, multimodality therapy for gastric adenocarcinoma may be individualized to optimize the likelihood of cure.

What make differences in the outcome of adjuvant treatments for resected gastric cancer?

After a long history of Dark Age of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer, definite evidences of survival benefit from adjuvant treatment have been reported since 2000s. These survival benefits are likely attributed to something new approach different from pervious studies. In 2001, South West Oncology Group INT0116 trial yielded survival benefit in curatively resected gastric cancer patients with postoperative chemoradiotherapy [5-fluorouracil (5-FU) + Leucovorin + radiotherapy], followed by positive result by MAGIC Trial, employing peri-operative(pre- and postoperative chemotherapy with Epirubicin, cisplatin (CDDP), 5-fluorouracil (ECF) regimen in patients with curative resection. A novel drug [S1: ACTS-GC (Adjuvant chemotherapy trial of TS-1 for gastric cancer) in 2007], or new drug combination chemotherapys [CDDP + 5-FU: FNCLCC/FFCD (Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte contre le cancer/Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive) in 2011, Capecitabine + Oxaliplatin: CLASSIC in 2012] also produced positive results in terms of improved prognosis. Neoadjuvant or perioperative chemotherapy, novel anti-cancer drugs, and chemoradiotherapy might be the key words to develop further improvement in the adjuvant treatment of resectable gastric cancer. Moreover, it is not new but still true to stress the importance of D2 surgery as the baseline treatment in order to minimize the amount of residual tumor after surgery.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 regimen to treat advanced gastric cancer improves survival without increasing adverse events: a retrospective cohort study from a Chinese center

BACKGROUND/AIM

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of FOLFOX4 (5-fluomumcil/leucovorin combined and oxaliplatin) neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-eight AGC patients were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study, 23 in the neoadjuvant group and 35 in the adjuvant group. R0 resection, survival, and adverse events were compared.

RESULTS

The two groups were well-matched, with no significant differences in R0 resection rate (82.6% versus 82.0%) and number of lymph nodes dissection (16 (0-49) versus 13 (3-40)) between the two groups (P > 0.05). The number of lymph node metastases in the neoadjuvant group (3 (0-14)) was significantly fewer than that in the adjuvant group (6 (0-27)) (P = 0.04). The neoadjuvant group had significantly better median overall survival (29.0 versus 22.0 months) and 3-year survival rate (73.9% versus 40.0%) than the adjuvant group (P = 0.013). The positive expression rate of Ki-67 in the neoadjuvant group (40.0%, 8/20) was lower than that in the adjuvant group (74.2%, 23/31; P = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

The FOLFOX4 neoadjuvant chemotherapy could improve survival without increasing adverse events in patients with AGC.

Adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to review up-to-date clinical data published in the literature in regard to adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer after radical surgical resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline, Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Library and CBMDisc were searched to identify data published regarding this issue from 1966 to 2013. All the calculations and statistical tests were done using RevMan5.2 software.

RESULTS

A total of 29 trials with 8580 patients met all inclusion criteria. Among them, 27 studies reported survival rates at the end of follow-ups, 64.2% alive among 3981 patients in the adjuvant chemotherapy arm and 57.3% alive among 4027 patients in the observation arm. Statistical results showed that the observation arm had a shorter disease-free survival (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.07-1.15), and the treatment arm had a lower recurrence rate (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.74-0.84). Leucopenia, anemia, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, alopecia and infection occurred more frequently in the treatment arm. Adjuvant chemotherapy decreased the occurrence of peritoneum relapse [RR = 0.77, 95% CI (0.66-0.90)], lymphoid nodes relapse [RR = 0.58, 95% CI (0.45-0.75)] and local relapse [RR = 0.57, 95% CI (0.41-0.80)].

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant chemotherapy can improve the survival rate and disease-free survival rate and reduce the relapse rate after curative resection. Adjuvant chemotherapy cannot induce thrombocytopenia and mucositis or affect liver function. The tumor in situ recurrence and peritoneum, lymph nodes relapse decrease after chemotherapy, and patients benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy regardless of the numbers of positive lymph node, depth of local invasion, Asian or non-Asian, the length of follow-up, and numbers of cycles.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: Current evidence and future challenges

Gastric cancer still represents one of the major causes of cancer mortality worldwide. Patients survival is mainly related to stage, with a high proportion of patients with metastatic disease at presentation. Thus, the cure rate largely depend upon surgical resection. Despite the additional, albeit small, benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly demonstrated, no general consensus has been reached on the best treatment option. Moreover, the narrow therapeutic index of adjuvant chemotherapy (i.e., limited survival benefit with considerable toxicity) requires a careful assessment of expected risks and benefits for individual patients. Treatment choices vary widely based on the different geographic areas, with chemotherapy alone more often preferred in Europe or Asia and chemoradiotherapy in the United States. In the present review we discuss the current evidence and future challenges regarding adjuvant chemotherapy in curatively resected gastric cancer with particular emphasis on the recently completed landmark studies and meta-analyses. The most recent patient-level meta-analysis demonstrated the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy over curative surgery; the same Authors also showed that disease-free survival may be used as a surrogate end-point for overall survival. We finally discuss future research issues such as the need of economic evaluations, development of prognostic or predictive biomarkers, and the unmet clinical need of trials comparing perioperative chemotherapy with adjuvant treatment.

Chemotherapy for patients with gastric cancer after complete resection: A network meta-analysis

AIM: To conduct a network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of different chemotherapy regimens for patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS: PubMed (1966-2011.12), the Cochrane Library (2011 Issue 2) and EMBASE (1974-2011.12) were searched with the terms “gastric cancer” and “chemotherapy”, as well as the medical subject headings. References from relevant articles and conferences were also included. Patients who had previous gastric surgery, radiation before or after surgery or chemotherapy before surgery were excluded. In this study, only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered, and the end-point was the overall mortality. Direct comparisons were performed using traditional meta-analysis whereas indirect comparisons were performed using network meta-analysis.

RESULTS: In total, 31 RCTs with 7120 patients were included. Five chemotherapy regimens, fluorouracil (FU) + BCNU, FU + methyl-CCNU (mCCNU), FU + cisplatin, FU + anthracyclines and FU + mitomycin c (MMC) + cytarabine (Ara-c), were found to be less beneficial in terms of overall mortality. In contrast, four chemotherapy regimens were effective for the patients after surgery, including FU + MMC + adriamycin (FMA), FU + MMC (FM), Tegafur and MMC, There was no significant difference in terms of overall mortality among these regimens. The evidence for the FM regimen and MMC regimen was poor. Additionally, the FMA regimen, which includes a variety of chemotherapy drugs and causes many side effects, was not better than the Tegafur regimen.

CONCLUSION: Although the four chemotherapy regimens were effective in patients with gastric cancer after surgery and the overall mortality revealed no significant difference among them in the network meta-analysis, thorough analysis of the results recommends Tegafur as the first-line adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients after complete resection.

Post-surgical chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

For gastric cancer surgery is the mainstay treatment. Chemotherapy seems to improve the survival results. But chemotherapy is not a complication-free therapy and its role has been questioned by some trials.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether post-surgical chemotherapy should be used routinely in resectable gastric cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded (July 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing post-surgical chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastric cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and independently extracted the data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using the RevMan analysis software. We calculated the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on intention-to-treat or available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

The authors identified 34 studies (7824 patients) reporting overall survival (OS) and only 15 reporting disease free survival (DFS) as well. Post-surgical chemotherapy showed an improvement in OS (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.90) and an improvement in DFS (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87), although all the trials had a high risk of bias.The planned analysis of quality of life, return to work, and number of hospital admissions was impossible to complete as the outcome data for the analysis were not available from any trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Post-surgical chemotherapy should be used routinely for resectable gastric cancer where possible. Further RCTs are needed to determine the role at each stage of disease.

Chinese patients with gastric cancer need targeted adjuvant chemotherapy schemes

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common cancers in China. Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is a routine auxiliary treatment for GC recommended by the guidelines issued in 2011 by the Ministry of Health of the People's Republic of China, but the relevant credible consequences in China have been insufficient because of China's late start and ethical concerns.

METHODS

A series of databases, including Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Chinese database of the National Knowledge Infrastructure and the VIP database, were searched by 2 reviewers independently for studies investigating AC for GC through March 2012. The retrieved literature was screened according to the eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 35 randomized control trials (RCTs) were subjected to the final analysis, including 4,043 patients in treatment group and 3,884 in the control group, as well as 4 clinical-control trials (CCTs), which accessed the final analysis with 238 and 252 patients, respectively. AC reduced the risk of death as a protective treatment with statistical significance (HR=0.91, 95%CI: [0.85, 0.97], P=0.002), and it seemed more effective for Asian than non-Asian patients. The effects of AC were not influenced by the starting time (P>0.05). D2 lymphadenectomy-based chemotherapy was effective (HR=0.89, 95%CI: [0.80, 0.99], P=0.04). Oral S-1 40 mg/m2 after D2 lymphadenectomy might be a better choice for Asians with advanced GC and might result in a greater reduction of adverse events than in non-Asian patients. GRADE quality assessment determined that the strength of the evidence from foreign studies from Europe, the United States and Asian countries other than China was high, while it was moderate for Chinese studies.

CONCLUSION

AC was effective or even curative in Chinese patients in general, although it is still necessary to optimize a targeted AC scheme for Chinese patients with GC.

Long-term survival after gastrectomy for cancer in randomized, controlled oncological trials: comparison between West and East

BACKGROUND

The presence of mixed evidence about the value of lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer surgery coupled with the difference in patients' demographics and tumor stage between the West and East have doubted the needs to standardize surgical techniques in Western clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to compare survival rates between the West and East following gastrectomy in randomized, controlled, oncological trials with appropriate adjustment for confounding variables.

METHODS

Systematic search revealed 25 trials that have randomization into surgery and chemotherapy versus surgery alone between 1995 and 2012 (n = 7 (East) and n = 18 (West)). End points were 5-year survival and cancer recurrence.

RESULTS

There was association between gastrectomy performed in the East and improved 5-year survival (pooled odds ratio (OR) 4.83; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.27-7.12) and reduced cancer recurrence (pooled OR 0.33; 95 % CI 0.2-0.54). Association of improved 5-year survival with surgery in the East remained when meta-regression adjusted for the effect of age, sex, chemotherapy, tumor depth and nodal status, and gastrectomy type. Association of reduced cancer recurrence also persisted with meta-regression adjusting for age, chemotherapy, nodal status, and gastrectomy type. However, when adjustment for the percentage of patients with tumor depth T1 or 2 was made statistical significance was lost.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis shows association between gastrectomy performed in Eastern countries and improved survival. The known difference in surgical techniques between the East and the West is one potential unexamined variable that may be responsible in part for such discrepancy in outcomes.

Comparison of two different adjuvant treatment modalities for pN3 gastric cancer patients after D2 lymph node dissection: can we avoid radiotherapy in a subgroup of patients?

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the standard of care for gastric cancer patients in the USA. However, in countries where D2 lymph node dissection is performed, the effect of radiotherapy on locoregional recurrence is controversial. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes in pN3 gastric cancer patients following two adjuvant treatment modalities: chemotherapy (CT) and CRT after D2 lymph node dissection. Between 2005 and 2009, 71 gastric cancer patients who underwent D2 lymph node dissection and had pTanyN3M0 stage (according to AJCC 6th edition) were identified. Fifty-three patients were treated with CT and 18 patients received CRT. CRT consisted of bolus fluorouracil (FU) 425 mg/m(2) and leucovorin 20 mg/m(2) before, after, and during radiotherapy. For the CT arm, treatment protocols consisted of combination therapies involving FU and cisplatin as the backbone. Median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates for all patients were 26.3 months (15-37.7 months) and 12.5 months (8-17.1 months). Median OS in CT arm was 26.8 months and it was 34.2 months for CRT arm (p = 0.74). DFS rates did not differ statistically either (p = 0.56, 12.5 and 15.2 months for CT and CRT, respectively). Locoregional recurrence rates were also similar (p = 0.63). Only metastatic/dissected lymph node ratio (≥0.75) was identified as a prognostic factor in both univariate and multivariate analyses for DFS. Comparison of CT versus CRT for N3 stage gastric cancer patients with D2 lymph node dissection did not reveal any statistically significant difference in survival rates and locoregional recurrence.

Chemotherapy for operable gastric cancer: current perspectives

The majority of gastric cancer patients present with advanced, incurable disease and only a minority have localised disease that is suitable for radical treatment. A benefit has generally been demonstrated from adding chemotherapy to surgery for early disease though there are marked differences in how this is done globally. Whilst a perioperative approach, with chemotherapy given before and after gastric surgery is commonly used in the Europe and Australia most patients with operable gastric cancer in North America are treated with surgery and postoperative chemoradiation. In contrast, in East Asia, adjuvant fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy alone is used following D2 gastric resection surgery. However, despite the multimodality treatments, outcomes remain suboptimal as the majority of those treated for localised disease eventually relapse with incurable loco-regional or distant metastases. At the current time, an unmet need exists to further understand the biology of this aggressive disease and develop more efficacious therapies that can improve outcomes from this aggressive disease.

Gastric adenocarcinoma surgery and adjuvant therapy

Gastric adenocarcinoma is one of the most common causes of death worldwide. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of therapy, offering the only chance for complete cure. Resection is based on the principles of obtaining adequate margins, with the extent of lymphadenectomy remaining controversial. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies are used to reduce local recurrence and improve long-term survival. This article reviews the literature and provides a summary of surgical management options and neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapies for gastric adenocarcinoma.

Stomach cancer

INTRODUCTION

Stomach cancer is usually an adenocarcinoma arising in the stomach, and includes tumours arising at or just below the gastro-oesophageal junction (type II and III junctional tumours). The annual incidence varies among countries and by sex, with about 80/100,000 cases per year in Japanese men, 30/100,000 in Japanese women, 18/100,000 in British men, and 10/100,000 in British women.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of radical versus conservative surgical resection? What are the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 19 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, lymphadenectomy (radical, conservative), removal of adjacent organs, and subtotal gastrectomy for resectable distal tumours.

In vitro adenosine triphosphate based chemotherapy response assay in gastric cancer

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the reliability and the clinical applicability of the adenosine-triphosphate-based chemotherapy response assay (ATP-CRA) as a method of determining in vitro chemosensitivity in patients with gastric cancer.

Materials and Methods

A total of 243 gastric cancer tissue samples were obtained from gastrectomies performed between February 2007 and January 2010. We evaluated the effectiveness of the ATP-CRA assay in determining the chemosensitivity of gastric cancer specimens using eleven chemotherapeutic agents - etoposide, doxorubicin, epirubicin, mytomicin, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, docetaxel, paclitaxel, methotraxate, and cisplatin - for chemosensitivity studies using ATP-CRA. We assessed the failure rate, the cell death rate, and the chemosensitivity index.

Results

The failure rate of ATP-CRA was 1.6% (4/243). The mean coefficient of variation for triplicate ATP measurements was 6.5%. Etoposide showed the highest cell death rate (35.9%) while methotrexate showed the lowest (16.6%). The most active chemotherapeutic agent was etoposide, which most frequently ranked highest in the chemosensitivity test: 31.9% (51/160). Oxaliplatin was more active against early gastric cancers than advanced gastric cancers, whereas docetaxel was more active against advanced cancers. The lymph node negative group showed a significantly higher cell death rate than the lymph node positive group when treated with doxorubicin, epirubicin, and mitomycin.

Conclusions

ATP-CRA is a stable and clinically applicable in vitro chemosensitivity test with a low failure rate. The clinical usefulness of ATP-CRA should be evaluated by prospective studies comparing the regimen guided by ATP-CRA with an empirical regimen.

Feasibility study of adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 plus cisplatin for gastric cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of S-1 plus cisplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III gastric cancer after curative resection.

METHODS

Japanese patients with stage III gastric cancer who underwent gastrectomy with D2 lymph node resection were enrolled. Treatment consisted of 3 cycles of S-1 (80 mg/m(2)/day, b.i.d.) for 21 days followed by a 14-day rest, and cisplatin (60 mg/m(2) iv) on day 8. After that, S-1 monotherapy was given on days 1-28 every 6 weeks until 1-year postsurgery. After protocol amendment, the first chemotherapy cycle consisted of S-1 monotherapy; cisplatin was added to cycles 2, 3, and 4, followed by S-1 monotherapy up to 1-year postsurgery. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of three cycles of S-1 plus cisplatin.

RESULTS

A total of 63 enrolled patients have been evaluated. Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia (40%), anorexia (28%), and febrile neutropenia (4%) before protocol amendment (n = 25), and neutropenia (37%), anorexia (8%), and febrile neutropenia (3%) after amendment implementation (n = 38). Excluding ineligible cases, treatment completion rates were 57% (12/21) before and 81% (30/37) after the protocol amendment.

CONCLUSIONS

The amended S-1 plus cisplatin is more feasible than the original protocol because of early dose reduction of S-1 prior to cisplatin addition and greater recovery time from surgery prior to cisplatin. This treatment should be considered as a feasible experimental arm for the next postoperative adjuvant phase III trial.

The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on stage IV (T4N1-3M0 and T1-3N3M0) gastric cancer

PURPOSE

The optimal chemotherapeutic strategy for gastric cancer patients has not been determined, especially with respect to stage and the curability of gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of adjuvant chemotherapy on stage IV (T4N1-3M0 and T1-3N3M0) gastric cancer after curative gastrectomy between a chemotherapy (CTX) group and non-chemotherapy (non-CTX) group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among 1,760 patients who underwent gastric surgery by 1 surgeon in a single institution, 162 stage IV gastric cancer patients with curative gastrectomy were analyzed retrospectively, excluding patients with TanyNanyM1. One hundred twenty-five patients who received different chemotherapeutic regimens were compared to 37 patients who did not receive chemotherapy for reasons of old age or according to their expressed desire.

RESULTS

The clinicopathologic factors which showed a clinically significant difference between the two groups were age and histology, which were not associated with patient survival. The CTX group was younger, and had a larger proportion of undifferentiated gastric cancers than the non-CTX group. The mode of treatment failure revealed no significant difference between the CTX and non-CTX groups. The 1, 3, and 5-year disease-free survival and the 1, 3, and 5-year disease-specific survival of the CTX group were 63.9%, 38.4%, and 32.0%, and 85.4%, 52.3%, and 39.6%, respectively, which were more favorable than the non-CTX group (p=0.015 and p=0.001, respectively). Postoperative adjuvant CTX was an independent risk factor for disease-specific survival of stage IV (T4N1-3M0 and T1-3N3M0) gastric cancer patients after curative gastrectomy by multivariate analysis (odds ratio=2.153; 95% confidence interval=1.349-3.435; p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant CTX may be associated with survival benefit for younger patients with stage IV (T4N1-3M0 and T1-3N3M0) gastric cancer with undifferentiated histology after curative gastrectomy. A randomized controlled trial to reveal the effect of stage-specific adjuvant chemotherapy should be conducted.

Meta-analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical surgery for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus of opinion about postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy after radical surgery for advanced gastric cancer. This is a meta-analysis of the published results of relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Electronic databases from January 1998 to December 2007 were searched and 12 RCTs were selected. These included a total of 3809 patients. The hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival was calculated.

RESULTS

The pooled HR for overall survival was 0.78 (95 per cent confidence interval 0.71 to 0.85) in favour of chemotherapy. Subgroup analysis showed that the advantage of chemotherapy was not influenced by depth of tumour infiltration, status of lymph node metastasis, type of lymphadenectomy, geographical distribution of patients or route of drug administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative chemotherapy can improve overall survival after radical surgery for gastric cancer; there is no standardized chemotherapy regimen. Japanese-style D2 radical surgery plus oral 5-fluorouracil appears an effective treatment at present.

Stomach cancer

INTRODUCTION

Stomach cancer is usually an adenocarcinoma arising in the stomach, and includes tumours arising at or just below the gastro-oesophageal junction (type II and III junctional tumours). The annual incidence varies among countries and by sex, with about 80 cases a year per 100,000 in Japanese men, 30/100,000 in Japanese women, 18/100,000 in British men, and 10/100,000 in British women.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of radical versus conservative surgical resection? What are the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to August 2007 (BMJ Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 18 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, lymphadenectomy (radical, conservative), removal of adjacent organs, and subtotal gastrectomy for resectable distal tumours.

Surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy

It was clearly demonstrated that good local control by either radiotherapy or D2 surgery is essential to cure gastric cancer. D2 surgery can be carried out safely with a large volume of patients and can provide better survival than limited surgery. More extended surgery than D2 cannot provide better survival and causes greater morbidity; therefore, it should not be carried out as prophylactic lymphadenectomy. The effect of adjuvant treatment depends on the type of surgery. Neoadjuvant plus post-operative triplet chemotherapy, postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and postoperative S-1 monotherapy now are the standards of care in Europe, the United States, and Japan, respectively.

The role of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy following curative resection for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

To evaluate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival rates after curative resection of gastric cancer, MEDLINE (1969-2006), EMBASE (1974-2006), bibliographies, and review articles were searched for relevant articles. The meta-analysis was finally based on 15 trials that included 3212 patients. RR for death in the treated group was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.96) (P = 0.0010). Little or no significant benefits were suggested in subgroup analyses between different population and regimens either. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer confers slightly significant benefits compared to the surgery only group. The prognoses after surgery may differ among various population groups or because of different regimens.

An updated meta-analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection for gastric cancer

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether and how much gastric cancer patients after curative resection could benefit from chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Meta-analysis was conducted with all the qualified clinical randomized trials which compared adjuvant chemotherapy with surgery alone. The database includes MEDLINE, EMBase and CBM disc, and the censor data were up to November 2007. Primary outcomes were relative risk (RR) on death and disease-free survival (DFS); secondary outcomes include RR of adverse reactions of the two arms. Sub-group analysis and sensitivity analysis were also performed. All the calculations and statistical tests were done with the RevMan 4.2.8 software.

RESULTS

Finally, 23 trials which included 4919 patients (2441 in the adjuvant chemotherapy arm, 2478 in the observation arm) achieved all the criteria. Among them, 19 studies reported the survival rate at the end of follow-up, 60.6% alive among 2286 patients in the adjuvant chemotherapy arm, 53.4% alive among 2313 patients in the observation arm, with the RR on death of 0.85 (95%CI: 0.80-0.90). Eight studies reported the DFS, and the observation arm had a shorter DFS (RR: 0.88, 95%CI: 0.77-0.99). Grade 3/4 of myelosuppression and GI toxicity occurred more frequently in the treatment arm. Nine studies reported the recurrence rate and suggested that the treatment arm had a lower recurrence rate (RR: 0.78, 95%CI: 0.71 approximately 0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically, adjuvant chemotherapy could improve the survival rate and disease-free survival rate in gastric cancer after curative resection and reduce the relapse rate. However, the clinical benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy still need to be improved. Additionally, post-operative chemotherapy could be tolerated.

Gastric carcinoma

Although gastric cancer is still a worldwide major public health concern, it remains relatively uncommon in the Western countries. Despite improvement in surgical morbidity and mortality, as well as significant advancement of chemotherapy and radiotherapy options, the survival for gastric cancer has not significantly improved over the past decades. In the United States, standard of care for localized resectable gastric cancer is with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In this article, we summarize salient randomized and phase II and III clinical trials representing current treatment for gastric cancer.

The effectiveness of intravenous 5-fluorouracil-containing chemotherapy after curative resection for gastric carcinoma: A systematic review of published randomized controlled trials

This is a review of randomized controlled trials of intravenous 5-flurorouracil (5-FU)-containing chemotherapy after curative resection versus surgery alone in patients with gastric carcinoma to determine the impact on survival rate, safety and economics. Data sources were the Cochrane Library (2006, Issue 2), Pub-Medline and Chinese Biomedical Database. We included 22 randomized controlled trials comparing 4501 patients. Intravenous 5-FU-containing chemotherapy after curative resection had a slightly significant improvement in 3-, 5- and 7-year overall survival rate (OR 1.49, 1.41 and 1.32). No benefit of postoperative disease-free survival rate was induced by 5-FU-containing chemotherapy. Sensitivity analysis was restricted to trials with the highest methodological quality, and the result was similar when the studies with Jadad score less than 3' were excluded. Subgroup analyses found borderline improved overall survival rate in both Western and Eastern countries but the statistical significance was stronger in the Eastern subset. The combinations of 5-FU plus mitomycin C, 5-FU plus cytosine arabinoside and 5-FU plus adriamycin or epidoxorubicin induced potentially more improvement of 3- and 5-year overall survival rates. Severe toxicities were reported in 1629 patients from 15 included trials, and hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities were the most remarkable side effects, around 5%-15% respectively. The chemotherapy-related overall mortality was 1.1%. No trials mentioned cost-effectiveness analysis. Although the results provide some evidence of a beneficial effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with 5-FU-containing regimens, they are inconclusive due to the limitations of methodological quality of including randomized controlled trials. Large scale randomized controlled trials with a positive result are still mandatory before postoperative chemotherapy are recommended.

Reflections on adjuvant treatment of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer constitutes a significant health problem in the world due to its high incidence in certain geographical areas. The basic treatment of this tumor in its localized stages is surgery. Unfortunately, survival is less than 5 years, despite radical surgery. Radical and extensive surgery has proved to be crucial to survival, although there is no agreement on the need for reaching the nodes until there is more than 3 cm of tumor. However, even with the most extensive surgery, survival does not reach more than approximately 35% at 5 years, if we consider all the localized stages. Adjuvant treatment is therefore necessary for this neoplasm. The role of post-operative chemotherapy, as that of radiochemotherapy, is not well established and there is no standard. However, there is relative evidence of the benefit of adjuvant treatment in some chemotherapy studies and in combination with radiotherapy, so that it is an option for treatment in these patients.

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for gastric carcinoma: dosimetric implications of conventional gastric bed irradiation and toxicity

AIMS

Recently, a survival advantage has been shown using adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after complete resection of gastric cancer. If survival advantages are to be maintained, treatment-related complications must be minimised. In this study, we explored the dosimetric implications and toxicity of conventional large field gastric bed irradiation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2000 and 2002, 16 patients received adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) chemoradiotherapy after complete resection of gastric cancer. Radiotherapy was simulator planned using anterior-posterior parallel opposed fields to 45 Gy in 25 daily fractions over 5 weeks.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (81%) completed radiotherapy and eight patients (50%) completed chemotherapy as planned. Toxicity was the main factor for discontinuation. Substantial dose inhomogeneities were shown using retrospective computed tomography recreation of dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of the organs at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the delivery of chemoradiotherapy using conventional two-dimensional simulator planning is a feasible technique, significant under-appreciation of dose inhomogeneity exists. Conformal computed tomography planning is vital to document doses received by organs at risk, especially the spinal cord and kidneys, which may receive high doses, and prospectively correlate these with acute and long-term toxicity in order to redefine organ at risk tolerances in the setting of chemoradiation.

In vitro chemosensitivity test to predict chemosensitivity for paclitaxel, using human gastric carcinoma tissues

BACKGROUND

Therapy guided by chemotherapy sensitivity and resistance assays may lead to rational treatment decisions. Paclitaxel, one of several new drugs for gastric carcinoma, has not been extensively evaluated by in vitro chemosensitivity tests.

METHODS

Chemosensitivity testing by histoculture drug response assay (HDRA) was performed with fresh specimens of primary tumor from 113 patients with gastric carcinoma. The test was performed in medium containing paclitaxel at three different concentrations for the initial 45 samples. Correlations between the results of chemosensitivity testing, determined at the optimal concentration, and the patients' clinicopathologic factors and outcome were then assessed for all patients.

RESULTS

By analyzing the initial 45 samples, 10 microg/ml was considered the optimal concentration of paclitaxel for this test. HDRA was successfully performed for 100 of 113 samples and chemosensitivity, calculated as the percentage of optical density of a tumor treated with anticancer drugs in relation to the optical density of the tumor cultured in the medium only, was distributed widely at this concentration. No significant correlation was observed between chemosensitivity and age, sex, clinical stage, histopathologic type, and outcome of patients with gastric carcinoma.

CONCLUSION

A histoculture drug response assay can now be performed to predict the chemosensitivity of paclitaxel at the concentration found in the current study. The accuracy of the assay to actually predict survival needs to be validated by a prospective clinical trial involving patients who have received paclitaxel in the postoperative adjuvant setting.

Postoperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer after potentially curative surgery has been under clinical investigation for more than four decades. However, potentially curative resection can be performed in only 30%-50% of patients. The objective of this article is to review briefly the clinical trials available in the current literature using adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer after potentially curative surgical resection.

METHODS

Computerized (MEDLINE) and manual searches were performed to identify papers published on this topic between 1965 and 2005. Only articles with an English abstract were reviewed for inclusion; information abstracted included histologic proof of diagnosis, number of patients, dose and modality of treatment, survival duration, and side effects.

RESULTS

Forty-three reports were identified. Single-agent chemotherapy was evaluated in four clinical trials, and postoperative combination chemotherapy was evaluated in 33 trials. Furthermore, we identified five meta-analyses. Five-year survival rates ranged from 12%-91.2%, and the median survival durations were 13-60+ months. Adjuvant chemotherapy, when compared with surgery alone, seems to result in longer survival.

CONCLUSION

The high rate of recurrence, even in patients undergoing state-of-the art curative resection, suggests that effective adjuvant chemotherapy might indeed be an attractive concept to improve the overall outcome of patients with gastric cancer. However, because there is no standard regimen for postoperative treatment at the moment, patients with R0-resected (no residual tumors) gastric cancer should be offered the opportunity to participate in prospective clinical trials.

Chemotherapy as a component of multimodal therapy for gastric carcinoma

Prognosis of locally advanced gastric cancer remains poor, and several multimodality strategies involving surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation have been tested in clinical trials. Phase III trial testing the benefit of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy over treatment with surgery alone have revealed little impact on survival, with the exception of some small trials in Western nations. A large trial from the United States exploring postoperative chemoradiation was the first major success in this category. Results from Japanese trials suggest that moderate chemotherapy with oral fluoropyrimidines may be effective against less-advanced (T2-stage) cancer, although another confirmative trial is needed to prove this point. Investigators have recently turned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and some promising results have been reported from phase II trials using active drug combinations. In 2005, a large phase III trial testing pre- and postoperative chemotherapy has proven its survival benefit for resectable gastric cancer. Since the rate of pathologic complete response is considered to affect treatment results of this strategy, neoadjuvant chemoradiation that further increases the incidence of pathologic complete response could be a breakthrough, and phase III studies testing this strategy may be warranted in the near future.

Predicting individual survival after gastric cancer resection: validation of a U.S.-derived nomogram at a single high-volume center in Europe

OBJECTIVE

Validation of a U.S.-derived nomogram for individual prediction of disease-specific gastric cancer survival at a European institution.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

One major issue of modern cancer treatment is the individualization of therapy. For gastric cancer, Kattan et al, at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, developed a nomogram, allowing to predict individual patient risk of tumor-related death after R0 resection from basic patient-related variables. The validity of the nomogram has not yet been shown in patients from other institutions. The accuracy of the nomogram when applied to patients after having undergone R0 gastric cancer resection at a European high-volume center was investigated.

METHODS

Clinical data from patients who underwent R0 gastric cancer resection at Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Germany and fitted the respective derivation criteria were used for external validation (n = 862). Nomogram predictions for 60- and 108-month disease-specific survival were calculated for each patient and compared with actual survival. The concordance index was used as an accuracy measure.

RESULTS

The bootstrap-corrected concordance index was 0.77 and was superior when compared with the predictive ability of International Union Against Cancer tumor stage (P < 0.008). Nomogram calibration was excellent for 60-month disease-specific survival. Nomogram predictions showed the trend to underestimate survival in stage II/III disease of the MRI patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the nomogram created by Kattan et al is not only confined to the institution where it was created, but it can be adopted by other institutions with similar surgical strategies.

Perioperative adjunctive treatment in the management of operable gastric cancer

Outcome in the management of clinically resectable gastric carcinoma has been disappointing, at least in Western populations, despite increasingly radical surgery and extensive experience with adjunctive perioperative treatment with innumerable single and combined modality regimens. The United States Intergroup Study, a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of adjuvant chemoradiation, demonstrated significant improvement in disease-free and overall survival. Consequently, this regimen of postoperative fluoruracil plus leucovorin and locoregional radiation has been incorporated into current clinical practice. In hopes of further improving cure rates, many other regimens are under investigation, including the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy alone, combined neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, and adjuvant therapy alone. In these clinical trials, therapeutic agents are prescribed alone or in multimodal regimens and include systemic chemotherapy, intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy with or without hyperthermia, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), and postoperative external beam irradiation. Several molecular markers have been identified, which seem to predict that a given tumor may be effective or resistant to a drug, raising the possibility of customized chemotherapy regimens. Preclinical studies suggest potential efficacy of angiogenesis inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and antisense agents.

Adjuvant chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin compared with surgery alone for gastric cancer: 7-year results of the FFCD randomized phase III trial (8801)

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection for gastric cancer in a randomized controlled trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After curative resection, stage II-III-IVM0 gastric cancer patients were randomly assigned to postoperative chemotherapy or surgery alone. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) 800 mg/m(2) daily (5-day continuous infusion) was initiated before day 14 after resection. One month later, four 5-day cycles of 5-FU (1 g/m(2) per day) plus cisplatin (100 mg/m(2) on day 2) were administered every 4 weeks.

RESULTS

The study was closed prematurely after enrollment of 260 patients (79.7% N+), owing to poor accrual. At 97.8 months median follow-up, 5- and 7-year overall survival were 41.9% and 34.9% in the control group versus 46.6% and 44.6% in the chemotherapy group (P=0.22). Cox model hazard ratios were 0.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-1.02; P=0.063] for death and 0.70 (95% CI 0.51-0.97; P=0.032) for recurrence. An invaded/removed lymph nodes ratio >0.3 was the main independent poor prognostic factor identified by multivariate analysis (P=0.0001). Because of toxicity, only 48.8% of patients received more than 80% of the planned dose.

CONCLUSION

There was no statistically significant survival benefit with this toxic cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy, but a risk reduction in recurrence was observed.

Gastrointestinal cancer: recent developments in medical oncology

BACKGROUND

Progress in the medical oncological treatment of gastrointestinal cancer has resulted from advances in tumour biology as well as randomised clinical trials. This review updates oncologists on developments in perioperative therapy for gastrointestinal tumours, optimal use of chemotherapy for colorectal cancer, and novel targeted monoclonal antibodies (mAbs).

METHODS

The recent literature, including published abstracts, was reviewed with respect to current and developing treatments for gastrointestinal cancers. Emphasis was given to randomised clinical trials published within the last 5 years.

RESULTS

Randomised evidence exists to support the use of pre-operative chemotherapy in patients with resectable oesophageal cancer and pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy for rectal cancer. There is preliminary randomised evidence to support the use of perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer. Adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer has been shown to improve survival. Improved disease-free survival for colorectal cancer patients treated with either adjuvant capecitabine or oxaliplatin has been demonstrated. MAbs targeting epidermal growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary strategies for patients with localised gastrointestinal cancers; and improved systemic therapies for patients with advanced disease are leading to superior patient outcomes. Further improvements are required, and targeted agents may contribute to future progress.

N/A

N/A

Recurrence patterns after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: prognostic factors and implications for postoperative adjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

A recent Intergroup trial demonstrated a significant survival advantage of postgastrectomy chemoradiation in gastric cancer patients, primarily because of a reduction of a relative locoregional recurrence (LRR) rate exceeding 70% in control patients. Radical gastrectomy with extended lymphadenectomy may reduce LRR, possibly affecting adjuvant treatment strategies.

METHODS

Information on patients undergoing gastrectomy for potentially curable gastric cancer between 1990 and 2000 was reviewed. Patterns of first disease recurrence, survival, and disease-free survival were calculated, and predictors were identified.

RESULTS

Gastrectomies were performed in 73 patients, with R0 resections in 82%. The median lymph node count was 24; positive nodes were found in 64% of patients. The median actuarial survival was 27 months, with a 5-year survival of 37%. Disease recurred in 35 patients (48%) after a median interval of 7 months (range,.5-67). Recurrent disease patterns included distant only (37%), peritoneal only (23%), peritoneal/locoregional (17%), all sites combined (14%), locoregional only (6%), and distant/locoregional (3%). Recurrence predictors were N3 category for distant recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 10.2; P =.005), T3/4 category for peritoneal recurrence (HR, 4.8; P =.008), peritoneal relapse (HR, 40; P =.002), and a prior abdominal operation for LRR (HR, 3.2; P =.01). N2 disease had a distant failure risk similar to N1 status and an intraperitoneal failure risk similar to an N3 category.

CONCLUSIONS

Isolated LRR of gastric cancer after gastrectomy and extended lymphadenectomy is rare in this series. Most recurrences appeared diffusely at distant or peritoneal sites, and most LRRs occurred in conjunction with relapse at extraregional sites. Pathologic predictors of intraperitoneal (T3/4) or systemic failure (>N1) could be used to guide individualized, risk-oriented, adjuvant treatment.

Adjuvant therapy for resected gastric carcinoma

Despite its continued decline over the past 40 years, gastric carcinoma is a common gastrointestinal cancer and a major health problem around the world. In Asian countries, such as Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and China, it remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related death. Similarly, it is a common malignancy in many South American countries, Eastern European countries, and many countries of the former Soviet Union. In North America, the incidence of gastric carcinoma is low; however, the incidence of proximal gastric carcinoma has risen over the past 15 years. In 2001, approximately 21,700 new cases and 12,800 deaths were estimated in the United States as a result of gastric carcinoma. In the United States, gastric cancer ranks 14th among all cancers in incidence rate and 10th in overall mortality rate. An early detection program has been established in Japan, where nearly 6,000,000 adults are screened annually. This type of mass screening for gastric cancer is not practiced elsewhere, however. Because the risk of relapse remains high for patients after a curative resection, there is a great need for effective adjuvant therapy for patients with gastric carcinoma.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with CPT-11 and cisplatin downstages locally advanced gastric cancer

We examined the role of neoadjuvant therapy in downstaging locally advanced gastric cancer. Preoperative staging was performed with a combination of CT scans, endoscopic ultrasonography and/or laparoscopy, and laparoscopic ultrasonography. Patients with T > or =3 tumors and/or node-positive disease by preoperative clinical staging were eligible for entry. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of two cycles of CPT-11 (75 mg/m(2)) with cisplatin (25 mg/m(2)) weekly four times every 6 weeks. This was followed by resection with D2 lymph node dissection and two cycles of intraperitoneal chemotherapy with floxuridine and cisplatin. Twenty-two patients were entered into the study (4 with T3N0 disease and 18 with T3N1 disease). Induction chemotherapy was well tolerated with major toxicities being neutropenia and diarrhea. A median of 78%/75% of the planned dosage of CPT-11/cisplatin was delivered. Two patients withdrew consent during the first cycle and were lost to follow-up. One patient progressed to stage IV disease during induction chemotherapy and did not undergo surgery. Nineteen patients underwent surgery. One patient had undetected stage IV disease (liver) and underwent a palliative R2 resection. Of the 18 remaining patients, 17 had curative R0 resections and one had a palliative R1 resection. A median of 21 lymph nodes (range 1 to 121) were examined histologically. There was one postoperative death. Surgical morbidity did not appear to increase after the neoadjuvant regimen. The median postoperative length of hospital stay was 9 days (range 3 to 75 days). Postoperative pathologic staging yielded 16% T3 lesions compared to 85% before treatment based on clinical staging; postoperative American Joint Committee on Cancer staging yielded 37% stage IIIA disease compared to 70% stage IIIA before treatment. With a median follow-up of 15 months, median survival has not yet been reached. We conclude that CPT-11-based neoadjuvant therapy downstages locally advanced gastric cancer. Further follow-up is necessary to determine the ultimate impact of this combination therapy on recurrence and survival.