Adjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer: 5-year results of a randomised study by the Italian Trials in Medical Oncology (ITMO) Group

Impact of chemotherapy delay on long-term prognosis of laparoscopic radical surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer: a pooled analysis of four randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy following curative surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) significantly improves long-term patient prognosis. However, delayed chemotherapy (DC), in which patients are unable to receive timely treatment, is a common phenomenon in clinical practice for various reasons. This study aimed to investigate the impact of DC on the prognosis of patients with stage II-III locally AGC and explore the associated risk factors.

METHODS

Data from four prospective studies were included in the pooled analysis. The planned chemotherapy (PC) group was defined as the time interval between surgery and the first chemotherapy ≤ 49 d, while the DC group was defined as the time interval between surgery and chemotherapy > 49 d. The prognosis, recurrence, and risk factors were compared, and a nomogram for predicting DC was established.

RESULTS

In total, 596 patients were included, of whom 531 (89.1%) had PC and 65 (10.9%) had DC. Survival analysis revealed that the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were significantly lower in the DC group than those in the PC group (log-rank P < 0.001). Cox univariable and multivariable analyses showed that DC was an independent risk factor for OS and DFS in stage II-III patients (P < 0.05). Based on the significant factors for DC, a prediction model was established that had a good fit, high accuracy (AUC = 0.780), and clinical applicability in both the training and validation sets.

CONCLUSION

Delayed chemotherapy after gastrectomy is associated with poor long-term prognosis in patients with locally advanced stage II-III GC disease. But standardized, full-cycle adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery may play a remedial role, and can to a certain extent compensate the poor effects caused by delayed chemotherapy.

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.

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.

Survival Benefit of Three Different Therapies in Postoperative Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

Purpose: Gastric cancer is mainly treated by gastrectomy, the results of which were unsatisfactory without any adjuvant treatments. This study aimed to examine the performance of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy after surgery in order to acquire the optimal adjuvant treatment. Method: Embase and PubMed were retrieved to conduct a systematic research. Hazard ratios (HR) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as outcomes were calculated by synthesizing direct and indirect evidence to evaluate the efficacy of three treatments against surgery alone. The P-score ranking was utilized to rank the therapies. Consistency was assessed by heat plot. Begg's test was performed to evaluate publication bias. Results: A total of 35 randomized controlled studies (RCTs) with 8973 patients were included in our network meta-analysis (NMA). As for efficacy outcomes, OS and PFS of 1, 2, 3, and 5 years, all revealed chemoradiotherapy (CRT) as the best of three adjuvant therapies. Meanwhile, P-score ranking results also displayed that CRT was the optimal regimen. Additionally, radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) were two alternative options following CRT since RT performed well in short-term survival while CT could improve the long-term survival. Conclusion: CRT was the most recommended therapy to accompany surgery according to our results. However, no analysis about the safety of these three treatments was mentioned in our study. Further studies including safety outcomes were required to draw a more comprehensive conclusion.

A Modified Prognostic Score for Patients with Curatively Resected Gastric Cancer

Aims and background

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death worldwide; the risk of dying depends on several patient and disease characteristics. An existing prognostic score predicts survival in gastric cancer patients undergoing curative resection based on patient age, tumor site, extent of wall invasion and nodal status, categorized as simply as negative or positive.

Methods

Our aim was to modify the original prognostic score by incorporating information on nodal stage according to the latest TNM classification (number of involved nodes), based on a retrospective series of 610 chemotherapy-naïve gastric cancer patients recruited to a surgical clinical trial. We then tested the modified score on an independent series of 136 gastric cancer patients.

Results

Nodal stage added significant prognostic information to the nodal status classification (P <0.001), and was therefore included in the modified score. With the latter, we were able to identify three risk groups with overall five-year survival varying from more than 70% to less than 30%. The prognostic performance of the modified score was better than that achieved with the AJCC-UICC TNM staging.

Conclusions

The modified score, based on established prognostic factors, is proposed as a simple tool for prognostic grouping of gastric cancer patients undergoing curative surgery.

Original article: role of adjuvant chemotherapy in a perioperative chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer

Background

Multimodal treatment strategies – perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) and radical surgery – are currently accepted as treatment standard for locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the role of adjuvant postoperative CTx (postCTx) in addition to neoadjuvant preoperative CTx (preCTx) in this setting remains controversial.

Methods

Between 4/2006 and 12/2013, 116 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer were treated with preCTx. 72 patients (62 %), in whom complete tumor resection (R0, subtotal/total gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy) was achieved, were divided into two groups, one of which receiving adjuvant therapy (n = 52) and one without (n = 20). These groups were analyzed with regard to survival and exclusion criteria for adjuvant therapy.

Results

Postoperative complications, as well as their severity grade, did not correlate with fewer postCTx cycles administered (p = n.s.). Long-term survival was shorter in patients receiving postCTx in comparison to patients without postCTx, but did not show statistical significance. In per protocol analysis by excluding two patients with perioperative death, a shorter 3-year survival rate was observed in patients receiving postCTx compared to patients without postCTx (3-year survival: 71.2 % postCTx group vs. 90.0 % non-postCTx group; p = 0.038).

Conclusion

These results appear contradicting to the anticipated outcome. While speculative, they question the value of post-CTx. Prospectively randomized studies are needed to elucidate the role of postCTx.

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.

The Efficacy of Adjuvant FOLFOX6 for Patients With Gastric Cancer after D2 Lymphadenectomy: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis

Adjuvant 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6) are widely used for treating resected gastric cancer in clinics in China, but only few clinical trials have investigated its efficacy. Using propensity score matching, we evaluated the efficacy of adjuvant FOLFOX6 following D2 lymphadenectomy. Patients who received adjuvant FOLFOX6 following D2 lymphadenectomy (FOLFOX6, n = 113) or D2 lymphadenectomy only (surgery-only, n = 512) between 1998 and 2007 at our center were propensity score-matched; we identified a balanced 1:2 cohort, with 96 patients in the FOLFOX6 group and 192 patients in the surgery-only group. The overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method; factors affecting survival were identified by Cox regression models. A nomogram incorporating independent prognosticators was constructed for predicting the 3-, 5-, and 7-year OS, and bootstrap validation was performed. The median follow-up was 9.3 years, and the 7-year OS was 52.1% in the FOLFOX6 group and 43.8% in the surgery-only group (P = 0.04), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.69 (95% confidence interval = 0.49-0.98). A prognostic nomogram was generated with the identified significant prognosticators (adjuvant FOLFOX6, number of total harvested nodes, the interaction effect between these two variables, tumor size, T and N stage). Internal validation of the nomogram revealed good predictive abilities, with a bootstrap-corrected concordance index of 0.70. Adjuvant FOLFOX6 following D2 lymphadenectomy is associated with survival benefit in resected gastric cancer. Receiving adjuvant FOLFOX6 can be developed into a nomogram with other independent prognosticators to refine OS prediction and estimation of benefit from adjuvant FOLFOX6 for resected gastric cancer.

Neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer: current evidence and future directions

Although surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment for gastric cancer (GC), poor long-term outcomes with resection alone compel a multimodality approach to this disease. Multimodality strategies vary widely; while adjuvant approaches are typically favored in Asia and the United States (USA), a growing body of evidence supports neoadjuvant and/or perioperative strategies in locally advanced tumors. Neoadjuvant approaches are particularly attractive given the morbidity associated with surgical management of GC and the substantial risk of omission of adjuvant therapy. The specific advantages of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) compared to chemotherapy have not been well defined, particularly in the preoperative setting and trials aimed at determining the optimal elements and sequencing of therapy are underway. Future studies will also define the role of targeted and biologic therapies.

Adjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy in Gastric Cancer: Critically Reviewing the Past and Visualizing the Next Step Forward

Gastric cancer remains one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Despite the significant advances in surgical treatment and multimodality strategies, prognosis has modestly improved over the last two decades. Locoregional relapse remains one of the main issues and the combined chemoradiation treatment seems to be one of the preferred approaches. However, more than ten years after the hallmark INT-0116 trial, minimal progress has been made both in terms of effectiveness and toxicity. Moreover, new regimens added to combined therapy failed to prove favourable results. Herein, we attempt a thorough literature review comparing pros and cons of all relative studies and potential bias, targeting well-designed future approaches.

Selection of chemotherapy for hyperthermic intraperitoneal use in gastric cancer

PURPOSE

Several studies have shown the potential benefit of cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer patients. At present the most effective chemotherapeutic regime in HIPEC for gastric cancer is unknown. The aim of this review was to provide a comprehensive overview of chemotherapeutic agents used for HIPEC in gastric cancer.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed database to identify studies on chemotherapy used for HIPEC in gastric cancer patients.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The chemotherapeutic regime of choice in HIPEC for gastric cancer has yet to be determined. The wide variety in studies and study parameters, such as chemotherapeutic agents, dosage, patient characteristics, temperature of perfusate, duration of perfusion, carrier solutions, intraperitoneal pressure and open or closed perfusion techniques, warrant more experimental and clinical studies to determine the optimal treatment schedule. A combination of drugs probably results in a more effective treatment.

Adjuvant therapy for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in China. Since the rate of early diagnosis is low, postoperative recurrence and metastasis rates are still high. In recent years, the curative effect of postoperative adjuvant therapy is becoming better with the development of new chemotherapy drugs, targeted drugs, biological immune therapy and postoperative rehabilitation. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the progress in postoperative adjuvant therapy for gastric carcinoma.

Photodynamic therapy using nanoparticle loaded with indocyanine green for experimental peritoneal dissemination of gastric cancer

Although there have been multiple advances in the development of novel anticancer agents and operative procedures, prognosis of patients with advanced gastric cancer remains poor, especially in patients with peritoneal metastasis. In this study, we established nanoparticles loaded with indocyanine green (ICG) derivatives: ICG loaded lactosomes (ICGm) and investigated the diagnostic and therapeutic value of photodynamic therapy (PDT) using ICGm for experimental peritoneal dissemination of gastric cancer. Experimental peritoneal disseminated xenografts of human gastric cancer were established in nude mice. Three weeks after intraperitoneal injection of the cancer cells, either ICGm (ICGm-treated mice) or ICG solution (ICG-treated mice) was injected through the tail vein. Forty-eight hours after injection of the photosensitizer, in vivo and ex vivo imaging was carried out. For PDT, 48 h after injection of the photosensitizer, other mice were irradiated through the abdominal wall, and the body weight and survival rate were monitored. In vivo imaging revealed that peritoneal tumors were visualized through the abdominal wall in ICGm-treated mice, whereas only non-specific fluorescence was observed in ICG-treated mice. The PDT reduced the total weight of the disseminated nodules and significantly improved weight loss and survival rate in ICGm-treated mice. In conclusion, ICGm can be used as a novel diagnostic and therapeutic nanodevice in peritoneal dissemination of gastric cancer.

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.

Proper timing of adjuvant chemotherapy affects survival in patients with stage 2 and 3 gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with gastric cancer. However, the relationship between the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival has not been investigated.

METHODS

Patients with D2-resected stage 2 and 3 gastric cancer that received adjuvant chemotherapy from 2005 to 2011 at Yonsei University Health System were included. The patients were grouped according to intervals between surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Among 840 patients, the interval from surgery to the start of adjuvant therapy was less than 4 weeks in 337 (40.1 %) patients (early group), 4-8 weeks in 467 (55.6 %) patients (intermediate group), and more than 8 weeks in 36 (4.3 %) patients (late group). The 5-year RFS was 55.7 % in the early group, 54.4 % in the intermediate group, and 43.6 % in the late group (p = 0.076). The corresponding 5-year OS rates were 63.4, 62.8, and 51.7 % (p = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to suggest starting adjuvant chemotherapy within 4 weeks after surgery for patients with D2 resected stage 2 and 3 gastric cancer. However, delayed treatment of adjuvant chemotherapy after 8 weeks showed worse survival outcomes than early and intermediate treatment initiation, suggesting that adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered start within 8 weeks after radical resection.

Postoperative chemo-radiotherapy versus chemotherapy for resected gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (direct and indirect) of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effects of postoperative chemo-radiotherapy (ChRT) with chemotherapy (Ch) on overall and disease-free survival (DFS) for patients with resectable gastric cancer.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and CENTRAL from the date of inception and annual meeting proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology from 1999 to November 2012 for RCTs comparing postoperative ChRT with Ch, postoperative ChRT with surgery alone and postoperative Ch with surgery alone. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included DFS and toxicity. Hazard ratios (HRs), confidence intervals (CIs) and P values (P) were estimated with fixed effects models using Revman 5.1.

RESULTS

We found six trials comparing postoperative ChRT with Ch (n = 1171). Meta-analysis of direct comparison trials showed that postoperative ChRT significantly improved both OS (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.98, P = 0.03) and DFS (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.91, P = 0.003) when compared with Ch. There were no significant differences in toxicity between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests a survival benefit of postoperative ChRT over Ch in patients with resected gastric cancer.

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.

Perioperative chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers and a main cause of cancer-related death worldwide, since the majority of patients suffering of this malignancy are usually faced with a poor prognosis due to diagnosis at later stages. In order to improve treatment outcomes, the association of surgery with chemo and/or radiotherapy (multimodal therapy) has become the standard treatment for locally advanced stages. However, despite several treatment options currently available for management of these tumors, perioperative chemotherapy has been mainly accepted for the comprehensive therapeutic strategy including an appropriated D2-gastrectomy. This manuscript presents a (nonsystematic) critical review about the use of perioperative chemotherapy, with a special focus on the drugs delivery.

Disease-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in adjuvant trials of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In investigations of the effectiveness of surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancers, overall survival (OS) is considered the gold standard endpoint. However, the disadvantage of using OS as the endpoint is that it requires an extended follow-up period. We sought to investigate whether disease-free survival (DFS) is a valid surrogate for OS in trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

The GASTRIC group initiated a meta-analysis of individual patient data collected in randomized clinical trials comparing adjuvant chemotherapy vs surgery alone for patients with curatively resected gastric cancer. Surrogacy of DFS was assessed through the correlation between the endpoints as well as through the correlation between the treatment effects on the endpoints. External validation of the prediction based on DFS was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Individual patient data from 14 randomized clinical trials that included a total of 3288 patients were analyzed. The rank correlation coefficient between DFS and OS was 0.974 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.971 to 0.976). The coefficient of determination between the treatment effects on DFS and on OS was as high as 0.964 (95% CI = 0.926 to 1.000), and the surrogate threshold effect based on adjusted regression analysis was 0.92. In external validation, the six hazard ratios for OS predicted according to DFS were in very good agreement with those actually observed for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

DFS is an acceptable surrogate for OS in trials of cytotoxic agents for gastric cancer in the adjuvant setting.

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.

(Neo)-adjuvant chemo(-radio) therapy for adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction and the stomach in the West

Worldwide, the treatment of adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction and stomach has changed over the past decades. It is no longer surgery alone. Nowadays, most patients undergo surgery plus pre- and/or postoperative therapies. However, there are still marked differences in surgical procedures between the East and the West which might influence the surgical prognosis and thereby also the choice of perioperative treatment strategies. In the East, with its more extended surgical procedures, including standard D2 dissections, the current treatment philosophy is primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant approaches are restricted to really advanced tumors, and perioperative chemoradiation is not routinely used (at least to date). This clearly differs from treatment strategies currently recommended in Western countries. In Europe and North America, pre- plus postoperative chemotherapy has become the recommended treatment for locally more advanced tumors, and preoperative chemoradiation is increasingly administered to patients with adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction (Siewert type I/II). However, the role of postoperative chemotherapy (despite its increasing use) is still under discussion in the West (especially Europe) and not generally recommended/accepted as a standard treatment. Postoperative chemoradiation, which is one standard treatment in North America, is only regarded as a treatment option for patients after 'inadequate surgery' (i.e. <D2 dissection) in many European countries.

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.

Selecting the best treatment for an individual patient

Several factors concur in determining outcome for locally advanced gastric cancer patients. Shockingly, geographic origin of the patient seems to play a major role. In Eastern countries, the high level of surgery that can be expected grants a high percentage of success in a strategy that employs surgery as immediate treatment followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, mainly based on oral fluoropyrimidines (S-1 or Capecitabine), with satisfactory results. In Western countries, the expertise of the surgeon maintains its role as predictor of high likelihood of cure. Indeed, patients treated with standard D2 lymph node dissection have a significantly better survival than those who do not obtain the same kind of treatment. For patients who underwent a suboptimal resection (less than a D1) the classical indication is for a combined adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In patients who obtain a good surgical outcome, the benefit of the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy is still debatable: the gain in survival seems to be small (around 8 % at 5 years) and with noticeable toxicities (usually with dismal compliance for patients treated). On this basis, neoadjuvant treatment is a promising option even if there is a general lack of conclusive data regarding which is the best regimen to use. Even with the limitation of a small number of studies (with difficulties in enrollment), neoadjuvant chemotherapy is usually feasible, allows for a greater chance of receiving chemotherapy at all, and opens the possibility of a downstaging and downsizing of the tumor, allowing an easier surgery. Regarding this strategy preliminary results have also been presented about the addition of monoclonal antibodies. For example, in the TOGA trial, a significant benefit in terms of overall survival, response rate, and progression free survival was observed also for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer and not just for the metastatic ones. In the AVAGAST trial also, the addition of Bevacizumab failed to determine a significant improvement in the primary outcome, overall survival, for patients treated with the combination, but in the subgroup analysis, patients with locally advanced gastric cancer had a significantly better overall survival and response rate. This data was the basis for the newest neoadjuvant trial, of Cunningham et al., the MAGIC2 trial, with the peri-operative use of ECX+Bevacizumab. Finally, an increasing interest in the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in other types of solid tumors (including those of the gastrointestinal tract such as colon cancer) has led to evaluate this treatment modality in gastric cancer patients with peritoneal involvement. It should be noted that it is still to be considered an experimental approach, even though it would be intriguing to evaluate if a particular subset of patients, those who are more likely to develop peritoneal metastasis, may benefit from this technique in the adjuvant setting. It should be considered that other than histologic subtype (diffuse vs intestinal) there seems to be a series of polymorphisms of genes usually involved in cell interaction and migration that can explain a different metastatic pattern in resected patients. Further research on these determinants of metastatic spread could be used to select those patients who may benefit from HIPEC and those who may benefit from standard adjuvant or that gain no benefit at all.

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.

Management of localized gastric cancer

Gastric cancer continues to be a fatal disease with majority of cases presenting in late stages. For patients with advanced disease, we can only recommend palliative therapy. For localized gastric cancer, the approaches vary in various regions of the world. In western countries, preoperative chemotherapy or adjuvant chemo-radiation is preferred; however in Asia, surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is favored. The extent of the lymph node dissection also varies by region. D2 gastrectomy is difficult to implement in most western countries while it is standardized and is a routine in Asia. We recommend multidisciplinary evaluation of each patient before starting any therapy. The prognosis after resection depends of the pathologic stage. Long-term survivors are often <50% in the West and <70% in many Asian countries. Regional and systemic recurrences are common. Improved systemic treatments are needed. Detailed studies of molecular biology might uncover novel therapeutic targets and prognostic subgroups.

Neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for resectable gastric cancer: a systematic review and practice guideline for North America

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is a global health problem accounting for 10% of all new cancer cases and 12% of all cancer deaths worldwide. Many clinical trials and meta-analyses have explored the value of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in gastric cancer; however, these studies have produced conflicting results. The purpose of this guidance document was to determine whether patients with resectable gastric cancer should receive neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy in addition to surgery. Outcomes of interest were overall survival, disease-free survival, and adverse events.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken to inform recommendations regarding neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancer in Ontario, Canada. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, as well as American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting proceedings and American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) proceedings were systematically searched from 2002 to 2010. Oral fluoropyrimidine trials were excluded owing to the unavailability of these agents in North America.

RESULTS

Overall, 22 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 13 meta-analyses, and two secondary analyses were included. The systematic review informed the development of a clinical practice guideline with the following recommendations. Postoperative 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiotherapy based on the Macdonald approach or perioperative ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin, fluorouracil) chemotherapy based on the Cunningham/MAGIC (Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy) approach are both acceptable standards of care in North America. Choice of treatment should be made on a case-by-case basis. Adjuvant chemotherapy is a reasonable option for those patients for whom the Macdonald and MAGIC protocols are contraindicated. All patients with resectable gastric cancer should undergo a pretreatment multidisciplinary assessment to determine the best plan of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall survival in patients with resectable gastric cancer is significantly improved with the use of either postoperative chemoradiation (Macdonald approach) or perioperative ECF (MAGIC protocol).

Radiotherapy for tumors of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction--a review of its role in multimodal therapy

There is broad consensus on surgical resection being the backbone of curative therapy of gastric- and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. Nevertheless, details on therapeutic approaches in addition to surgery, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy are discussed controversially; especially whether external beam radiotherapy should be applied in addition to chemotherapy and surgery is debated in both entities and differs widely between regions and centers. Early landmark trials such as the Intergroup-0116 and the MAGIC trial must be interpreted in the context of potentially insufficient lymph node resection. Despite shortcomings of both trials, benefits on overall survival by radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were confirmed in populations of D2-resected gastric cancer patients by Asian trials.

Recent results on junctional carcinoma patients strongly suggest a survival benefit of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in curatively resectable patients. An effect of chemotherapy in the perioperative setting as given in the MAGIC study has been confirmed by the ACCORD07 trial for junctional carcinomas; however both the studies by Stahl et al. and the excellent outcome in the CROSS trial as compared to all other therapeutic approaches indicate a superiority of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy as compared to perioperative chemotherapy in junctional carcinoma patients. Surgery alone without neoadjuvant or perioperative therapy is considered suboptimal in patients with locally advanced disease.

In gastric carcinoma patients, perioperative chemotherapy has not been compared to adjuvant radiochemotherapy in a randomized setting. Nevertheless, the results of the recently published ARTIST trial and the Chinese data by Zhu and coworkers, indicate a superiority of adjuvant radiochemotherapy as compared to adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of disease free survival in Asian patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. The ongoing CRITICS trial is supposed to provide reliable conclusions about which therapy should be preferred in Western patients with gastric carcinoma. If radiotherapy is performed, modern approaches such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy and image guidance should be applied, as these methods reduce dose to organs at risk and provide a more homogenous coverage of planning target volumes.

Bimonthly regimen of high-dose leucovorin, infusional 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cisplatin (modified ECF) as adjuvant chemotherapy in resected gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The administration of the de Gramont regimen in combination with cisplatin and epirubicin (modified ECF) has previously been reported as a treatment for advanced gastric cancer, but here we report this regimen combination in an adjuvant setting for the first time.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients with curatively resected gastric cancer were treated. Each 2-week cycle consisted of epirubicin (50 mg/m(2)), cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) IV bolus (400 mg/m(2)) and 5-FU IV (2,400 mg/m(2)) over 46 h plus leucovorin IV (400 mg/m(2)) over 2 h. Postoperative chemoradiotherapy was also administered to the patients when indicated. We retrospectively reviewed the patients who were treated with modified ECF.

RESULTS

The median disease-free survival (DFS) was 40.7 months and the 1-, 3- and 5-year DFS rates were 78.5, 55.7 and 44.6%, respectively. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were hematological and gastrointestinal.

CONCLUSION

A modified ECF regimen may be an effective and convenient treatment with tolerable toxicities for the adjuvant treatment of gastric cancer. It may provide an alternative regimen to the standard ECF when a continuous ambulatory infusion pump is not feasible or not preferred by the patient.

Treatment of resectable gastric cancer

Stomach cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide, despite its declining overall incidence. Although there are differences in incidence, etiology and pathological factors, most studies do not separately analyze cardia and noncardia gastric cancer. Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment for advanced, resectable gastric cancer, but locoregional relapse rate is high with a consequently poor prognosis. To improve survival, several preoperative and postoperative treatment strategies have been investigated. Whereas perioperative chemotherapy and postoperative chemoradiation (CRT) are considered standard therapy in the Western world, in Asia postoperative monochemotherapy with S-1 is often used. Several other therapeutic options, although generally not accepted as standard treatment, are postoperative combination chemotherapy, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and preoperative radiotherapy and CRT. Postoperative combination chemotherapy does show a statistically significant but clinically equivocal survival advantage in several meta-analyses. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is mainly performed in Asia and is associated with a higher postoperative complication rate. Based on the currently available data, the use of postoperative radiotherapy alone and the use of intraoperative radiotherapy should not be advised in the treatment of resectable gastric cancer. Western randomized trials on gastric cancer are often hampered by slow or incomplete accrual. Reduction of toxicity for preoperative and especially postoperative treatment is essential for the ongoing improvement of gastric cancer care.

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.

The role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment for adenocarcinoma of the upper gastrointestinal tract

Both locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach and gastro-esophageal junction are associated with poor prognosis due to the lack of effective treatment. Recently multimodal treatment consisting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in combination with radiotherapy is reported to improve survival when compared to surgery alone. Neoadjuvant therapy in these locally advanced tumors allows for early tumor responses and the extent of tumor regression that can be achieved is considered a significant prognostic factor. This, in turn, increases the resectability of these tumors. Also due to the high frequency of lymph node metastasis, patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma should undergo a D2 lymphadenectomy. Postoperative chemoradiation and perioperative chemotherapy have been studied in gastric adenocarcinomas and showed a survival benefit. However, the surgical techniques used in these trials are no longer considered to be standard by today's surgical practice. In addition, there are no standard recommendations for adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation after R0 resection and adequate lymph node dissection.

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.

Capecitabine with radiation is an effective adjuvant therapy in gastric cancers

AIM: To analyze the outcome of patients who received concurrent capecitabine (Xeloda) and radiation (XRT) compared to the established concurrent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) with radiation (5FU-RT) and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone as adjuvant treatment in gastric cancers.

METHODS: All patients with gastric cancers who received adjuvant treatment at the National Cancer Centre Singapore between 1996 and 2006 were reviewed. Treatment outcomes of patients who received XRT were compared with those who had 5FU-RT or chemotherapy alone as adjuvant therapy for gastric cancers.

RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were reviewed. Median age at diagnosis was 60. The majority of the patients (64.8%) had advanced stage III and IV disease (with no distant metastasis). All except 4 patients had D2 gastrectomy. Twenty one patients (19.4%) had positive surgical resection margins. Thirty three patients received XRT compared with 52 who had 5FU-RT and 23 who received chemotherapy alone. For the patients in the chemotherapy-only group, all had fluoropyrimidine-based therapy, with added cisplatin in 7 patients and epirubicin in 2 patients. Median recurrence-free survival was longer for the XRT group (52 mo) compared to the 5FU-RT (35 mo) and chemotherapy-only groups (25 mo) (P = 0.48). The patients in the XRT group achieved similar median overall survival (53 mo) as the 5FU-RT (54 mo) and the chemotherapy-only groups (44 mo) (P = 0.5).

CONCLUSION: Capecitabine with concurrent radiation was as effective as concurrent 5FU with radiation or fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone when used as adjuvant treatment in patients with gastric cancers.

Novel perspectives for the treatment of gastric cancer: from a global approach to a personalized strategy

Although recent advances have been made, surgery still remains the mainstay of any curative treatment for gastric cancer patients, with radical gastrectomy representing the procedure of choice. However, patients with locally advanced disease show high rates of locoregional or distant recurrence even after potentially curative resections. According to global results presented in the setting of locally advanced resectable gastric carcinoma, perioperative chemotherapy may be considered a valuable option. On the other hand, clinical trials for advanced gastric cancer seem to suggest that a limit in efficacy has been reached for standard chemotherapy. Interesting data are expected from the development of targeted agents that, similarly to other cancer sites, showed appealing results in gastric cancer as well. Along with new effective therapeutic opportunities, better clinical and molecularly driven patient selection will represent the cornerstone of the global care for these patients.

Adjuvant FOLFOX-4 in patients with radically resected gastric cancer: Tolerability and prognostic factors

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of the FOLFOX-4 regimen as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer after radical surgery. Fifty-four patients (1 stage Ib, 6 stage II, 22 stage IIIa, 14 stage IIIb and 11 stage IV) received 8-12 cycles of FOLFOX-4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), Day 1; leucovorin 100 mg/m(2) i.v., Days 1 and 2; 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus, Days 1 and 2 and 600 mg/m(2) in 22 h i.v. continuous infusion, Days 1 and 2; every 14 days). Toxicity was recorded at each cycle according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria. Disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Thirty-eight patients (70.4%) completed the prescribed number of cycles of chemotherapy. The toxicity was mild. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 57% of patients, thrombocytopenia and anemia in 2% of cases. Peripheral neuropathy was experienced by 46% of the patients (grade 4 in 2% of cases). Five patients experienced grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity. After a median follow-up of 33.1 months, 17 patients relapsed and 17 succumbed to the disease. The mean observed DFS and OS were 49.7 months (range 40.7-58.8) and 57.9 months (range 49.6-66.2), respectively. At univariate analysis, females and patients who had received <8 cycles of chemotherapy had a significantly worse probability of DFS and OS. The Cox model showed gender to be independent of the factors affecting DFS. Adjuvant FOLFOX-4 is feasible and well-tolerated in patients radically resected for gastric cancer. Receiving <4 months of adjuvant FOLFOX-4 could be detrimental to prognosis.