S0356: a phase II clinical and prospective molecular trial with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and external-beam radiation therapy before surgery for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma

Pathologic complete response in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and chemotherapy are recommended for the treatment of nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment is mostly limited to patients who exhibit pathologic complete response (pCR). Existing estimates of pCR rates among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy have not been synthesized and lack precision.

METHODS

We conducted an independently funded systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42023397402) of pCR rates among patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radiation). Studies were identified from Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL database searches. Eligible studies included trials published from 1992 to 2022 that focused on nonmetastatic esophageal cancer, including the gastroesophageal junction. Histology-specific pooled pCR prevalence was determined using the Freeman-Tukey transformation and a random effects model.

RESULTS

After eligibility assessment, 84 studies with 6451 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in squamous cell carcinomas was 9% (95% CI: 6%-14%), ranging from 0% to 32%. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinomas was 32% (95% CI: 26%-39%), ranging from 8% to 66%. For adenocarcinoma, the pooled prevalence of pCR was 6% (95% CI: 1%-12%) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 22% (18%-26%) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Under one-third of patients with esophageal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemo(radiation) experience pCR. Patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinomas had higher rates of pCR than those with adenocarcinomas. As pCR represents an increasingly utilized endpoint in neoadjuvant trials, these estimates of pooled pCR rates may serve as an important benchmark for future trial design.

The Evolving Landscape of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Gastroesophageal Cancer

Despite advances in treatment strategies and surgical approaches in recent years, improving survival outcomes in esophagogastric cancer (EGC) patients treated with curative intent remains a significant area of unmet need. The recent emergence of adjuvant immunotherapy as the standard of care for resected EGC demonstrates the impact of immunotherapy in improving recurrence-free survival. Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapies represent another promising approach with potential advantages over adjuvant therapy. Despite the promising results of early neoadjuvant immunotherapy studies, there are several challenges and future research needs. The optimal timing, duration and number of doses in relation to surgery and the optimal combination of immunotherapies are still unclear. In addition, rigorous correlative studies need to be performed to identify biomarkers for patient selection and treatment response prediction to maximize the benefits of neoadjuvant immunotherapy. In this review, we provide a concise summary of the current standard of care for resectable EGC and discuss the rationale for the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in this setting and the pre-clinical and early clinical data of these novel therapies. Finally, we will examine the potential role and future direction of immunotherapy in the treatment paradigm and the perceived challenges and opportunities that lay ahead.

Durvalumab and PET-Directed Chemoradiation in Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Phase Ib/II Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of adding the anti-PD-L1 antibody durvalumab to induction FOLFOX and preoperative chemotherapy in locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant induction FOLFOX followed by positron emission tomography (PET) directed chemoradiation has demonstrated improved survival for esophageal adenocarcinoma. There is clear benefit now for the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors both in early and advanced stage disease. Given these results we investigated the safety and efficacy of adding durvalumab to induction FOLFOX and preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma received PET-directed chemoradiation with durvalumab before esophagectomy. Patients who had R0 resections received adjuvant durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks for 6 treatments. The primary endpoint of the study was pathologic complete response.

RESULTS

We enrolled 36 patients, 33 of whom completed all preoperative treatment and underwent surgery. Preoperative treatment was well tolerated, with no delays to surgery nor new safety signals. Pathologic complete response was identified in 8 [22% (1-sided 90% lower bound: 13.3%)] patients with major pathologic response in 22 [61% (1-sided 90% lower bound: 50%)] patients. Twelve and 24-month overall survival was 92% and 85%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of durvalumab to induction FOLFOX and PET-directed chemoradiotherapy before surgery is safe, with a high rate of pathologic response, as well as encouraging survival data.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy in esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is an aggressive malignancy that carries a high mortality rate. The treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer requires a multimodal approach involving chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgical resection. Optimal treatment combinations and sequences for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) versus adenocarcinoma (AC) histological subtypes are still being determined. For very early stage esophageal cancers, endoscopic therapies or surgical resection without chemotherapy and radiation are preferred. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgical resection has been the standard in locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer based on the landmark CROSS trial. Definitive chemoradiation is recommended for patients who are not surgical candidates or decline surgery. Perioperative chemotherapy without radiation can be considered for lower esophageal AC and gastroesophageal (GE)-junction AC based on landmark MAGIC and FLOT4 trials. Additional trials are underway to compare preoperative chemoradiation to perioperative chemotherapy in esophageal and GE-junction ACs. Thus far, targeted therapies against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) have not been successful in the neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting. The roll of immunotherapy in perioperative/adjuvant setting is promising. Based on the CheckMate 577 trial, adjuvant nivolumab should be considered for all patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and R0 resection with residual pathologic disease. Additional trials involving various immunotherapy agents are underway.

Gross Tumor Volume Predicts Survival and Pathological Complete Response of Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

Background

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neo-CRT) plus surgery has greatly improved the prognosis of locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) patients. But which factors may influence the pathological tumor response and long-term survival remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to identify the prognostic biomarkers of locally advanced EC patients receiving neo-CRT.

Methods

We reviewed the data of 72 patients with cT2-4N0-3M0 EC who underwent neo-CRT at our hospital. The patients received intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a total radiation dose of 41.4–60.0 Gy. Most patients received platinum + paclitaxel-based combination regimens every three weeks for 2–4 cycles. The recorded data included age, sex, smoking history, alcohol use, histology, tumor location, clinical TNM stage, tumor length, gross tumor volume (GTV), GTV of primary tumor (GTVp), GTV of lymph nodes (GTVn), radiation dose, and number of chemotherapy cycles. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and pathological complete response (pCR) were analyzed.

Results

The 3-year OS and PFS rates of these patients who underwent neo-CRT were 51.14% and 43.28%, respectively. In the univariate analyses, smoking history, clinical stage, GTV, GTVp, and GTVn were significantly associated with OS, whereas alcohol use, GTV, GTVp, and GTVn were significantly associated with PFS. Furthermore, in the multivariate analysis, GTV was an independent prognostic predictor of OS (hazard ratio (HR): 14.14, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.747–53.33, P < 0.0001) and PFS (HR: 6.090, 95% CI: 2.398–15.47, P < 0.0001). In addition, GTV < 60.50 cm³ compared to > 60.50 cm³ was significantly associated with higher pCR rate (59.3% and 27.8%, respectively, P = 0.038). High dose (> 50 Gy) and increased number of chemotherapy cycles (≥ 3) didn’t improve the OS or PFS in patients with GTV > 60.50 cm³.

Conclusion

GTV was an independent prognostic factor of long-term survival in EC patients, which may be because GTV is associated with histological response to neo-CRT. Additionally, patients with GTV > 60.50 cm³ didn’t benefit from increased radiation dose or increased number of chemotherapy cycles.

Esophageal cancer: emerging therapeutics

INTRODUCTION

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a worldwide healthcare concern and represents an aggressive malignancy. Squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and adenocarcinoma (EAC) are the two primary histological subtypes but have yet to vastly differ in management. Outcomes remain poor with current treatment approaches; however, recent progress is focused on distinguishing separate targets based on these histological subtypes.

AREAS COVERED

Here we provide an overview of EC management via a historical review and recent discoveries. As noted in this review, targeted therapy has lagged behind other solid tumors. Over the previous decade, for EACs there were only two targeted therapies used in the advanced setting with limited benefits. ESCC progress was rather non-existent. We present current ongoing advancements that have occurred in the realm of immunotherapy and emerging new agents.

EXPERT OPINION

It is becoming clearer that segregating these two histological subtypes in trials should be the goal of future trial designs. ESCC appears to be more amenable to immune modulation than EAC, however, we are navigating in exciting times as molecular interrogations of EC has expanded with the hopes of making more rapid progress. There is still hard work ahead of us to painfully define subsets representing heterogeneity and then finding appropriate agents.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

PET/CT-tailored treatment of locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma: a report on the feasibility of the multicenter GastroPET study

BACKGROUND

Perioperative chemotherapy is a recommended treatment approach for localised oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma, but not all patients respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Early identification of non-responders and treatment adaptation in the preoperative period could improve outcomes. GastroPET is a national, multicentre phase II trial evaluating a 18FDG-PET/CT-guided preoperative treatment strategy with the R0 resection rate as a primary endpoint. Here, we report on the accuracy of the methodology, the feasibility of the study design and patient safety data after enrolment of the first 63 patients.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma (Siewert I - III) stage Ib-IIIc underwent baseline 18FDG-PET/CT scanning and re-evaluation after 14 days of oxaliplatinum-5FU-(docetaxel) chemotherapy. Responders were defined by a ⩾ 35% decrease in tumour FDG standardised uptake value (SUV)average from baseline. Responders continued with the same chemotherapy for 2 to 3 months prior to surgery. PET-non-responders switched to preoperative chemoradiotherapy [weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions)]. Here, we aim to confirm the feasibility of FDG-PET-based response assessment in a multicenter setting and to compare local versus central reading. In addition, we report on the feasibility of the study conduct and patient safety data.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients received baseline and sequential 14-day 18FDG-PET/CT scanning. And, 63 were allocated to the respective treatment arm according to PET-response [35 (56%) responders and 28 (44%) non-responders]. The concordance of local versus central reading of SUV changes was 100%. Until the date of this analysis, 47 patients (28 responders and 19 non-responders) completed surgery. Postoperative complications of grade ⩾ 3 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, CTCAE Version 5.0) were reported in five responders (18%; 95% CI: 7.9-36%) and two non-responders (11%; 95% CI: 2.9-31%), with no statistical difference (p = 0.685). One patient in each arm died after surgery, leading to a postoperative in-hospital mortality rate of 4.3% (2/47 patients; 95% CI: 1.2-14%).

CONCLUSION

Local and central FDG-SUV quantification and PET-response assessment showed high concordance. This confirms the accuracy of a PET-response-guided treatment algorithm for locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction cancer in a multicenter setting. Preoperative treatment adaptation revealed feasible and safe for patients.

Randomized Phase II Study of PET Response-Adapted Combined Modality Therapy for Esophageal Cancer: Mature Results of the CALGB 80803 (Alliance) Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the use of early assessment of chemotherapy responsiveness by positron emission tomography (PET) imaging to tailor therapy in patients with esophageal and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

After baseline PET, patients were randomly assigned to an induction chemotherapy regimen: modified oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil (FOLFOX) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP). Repeat PET was performed after induction; change in maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) from baseline was assessed. PET nonresponders (< 35% decrease in SUV) crossed over to the alternative chemotherapy during chemoradiation (50.4 Gy/28 fractions). PET responders (≥ 35% decrease in SUV) continued on the same chemotherapy during chemoradiation. Patients underwent surgery at 6 weeks postchemoradiation. Primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in nonresponders after switching chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-one eligible patients received Protocol treatment, of whom 225 had an evaluable repeat PET. The pCR rates for PET nonresponders after induction FOLFOX who crossed over to CP (n = 39) or after induction CP who changed to FOLFOX (n = 50) was 18.0% (95% CI, 7.5 to 33.5) and 20% (95% CI, 10 to 33.7), respectively. The pCR rate in responders who received induction FOLFOX was 40.3% (95% CI, 28.9 to 52.5) and 14.1% (95% CI, 6.6 to 25.0) in responders to CP. With a median follow-up of 5.2 years, median overall survival was 48.8 months (95% CI, 33.2 months to not estimable) for PET responders and 27.4 months (95% CI, 19.4 months to not estimable) for nonresponders. For induction FOLFOX patients who were PET responders, median survival was not reached.

CONCLUSION

Early response assessment using PET imaging as a biomarker to individualize therapy for patients with esophageal and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma was effective, improving pCR rates in PET nonresponders. PET responders to induction FOLFOX who continued on FOLFOX during chemoradiation achieved a promising 5-year overall survival of 53%.

Chemoradiation Therapy as Definitive Treatment of Esophageal Cancer

Definitive chemoradiation therapy avoids the perioperative and long-term morbidity of esophagectomy and is the standard of care for cervical esophageal cancer. There are significant differences in tumor response to chemoradiation and recurrence patterns between squamous cell cancer and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Multimodality therapy for esophageal cancer continues to progress, now with the widespread use of PET scanning and possible active surveillance in patients with complete clinical response to chemoradiation. As drug development and targeted therapy trials continue to expand, our understanding of tumor biology and precision medicine will continue to refine the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Evolving treatment paradigms in esophageal cancer

A heterogenous disease with a dismal prognosis, esophageal cancer poses a major health challenge worldwide. In recent years, the treatment landscape for esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) has undergone major evolution, with the elucidation of underlying biologic pathways and predispositions. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation has emerged as a leading approach for the management of locoregional esophageal cancer, while perioperative chemotherapy has shown promising outcomes specifically in adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). Studies also explore the implementation of chemoradiation in various sequential preoperative strategies, as well as in the adjuvant setting. Definitive chemoradiation is considered a valid alternative for non-surgical candidates with SCC. Clinical trials currently evaluating the potential benefits of different approaches may shed light on existing controversies regarding optimal management of locoregional disease. For patients with metastatic cancer, chemotherapy remains the backbone of antineoplastic treatment alongside palliative care, moreover the discovery of novel biological targets has led to the initiation of targeted and immune therapy for specific subpopulations. Taken together, an era of burgeoning clinical trials and changing paradigms has evolved in esophageal oncology. Multidisciplinary collaboration is key to effective combination and sequencing of treatment modalities tailored per patient and per tumor histology. This work aims to provide a comprehensive overview of state-of-the-art oncological management of esophageal cancer, with consideration of new challenges and obstacles to be overcome.

Association of XPD Lys751Gln gene polymorphism with susceptibility and clinical outcome of colorectal cancer in Pakistani population: a case-control pharmacogenetic study

BACKGROUND

XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism may modulate inter-individual variation in repair capacity of DNA, which may enhance a person's susceptibility to develop colorectal cancer (CRC). The analysis of XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism may provide important information for identifying high-risk individuals and for selecting the most appropriate treatment for poor prognostic CRC patients.

OBJECTIVE

The overall objective was to find out the association of XPD Lys751Gln gene polymorphism with the risk of having a colorectal cancer and the ultimate clinical outcomes. In this study a total of 300 subjects (CRC and Controls), were genotyped for XPD Lys751Gln.

METHODS

Using PCR-RFLP methods, the association of XPD Lys751Gln gene polymorphism with the risk of having a colorectal cancer was studied. In addition to overall risk assessment, genotyping results were also investigated with respect to the lifestyle risk factors, patients treated with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and clinicopathological characteristics.

RESULTS

The overall correlation between the XPD Lys751Gln genetic variation and the CRC risk was observed to be significant with both the homozygous variant genotype Gln/Gln as well as heterozygous genotype Lys/Gln being associated with the increased risk of CRC. Additional stratified analyses revealed that XPD Lys751Gln variants remarkably increased risk of CRC in males and younger individuals (≤ 50 years), Naswar users (8.09-fold) and high intake of red meat.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the relationship between the XPD Lys751Gln variants and lifestyle factors modulates the risk for CRC in Pakistani population.

Esophagus and Gastrointestinal Junction Tumors

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma account for 95% of all esophageal malignancies. The rates of esophageal adenocarcinoma have increased in Western countries, making it the predominant type of esophageal cancer. Treatment of both types of cancer has transformed to a more minimally invasive approach, with endoscopic methods being used for superficial cancers and more frequent use of video-assisted and laparoscopic modalities for locally advanced tumors. The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines advocate a trimodal approach to treatment, with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery for locally advanced cancers.

Randomized, Phase II Study Prospectively Evaluating Treatment of Metastatic Esophageal, Gastric, or Gastroesophageal Cancer by Gene Expression of ERCC1: SWOG S1201

PURPOSE

Platinum-based therapy is the standard of care in patients who have HER2-negative, advanced esophagogastric cancer (AEGC). Retrospective data suggest that intratumoral ERCC1 levels may determine platinum sensitivity. A randomized, phase II study was performed in patients with AEGC to explore whether the efficacy of a platinum-based therapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) versus a non-platinum-containing regimen of irinotecan and docetaxel (IT) differed according to ERCC1 levels.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Overall, 202 untreated patients with HER2-negative AEGC and a Zubrod performance status of 0-1 were evaluated prospectively for mRNA expression of ERCC1 level and then randomly assigned to FOLFOX or IT, stratified by the intratumoral statuses of ERCC1 low (< 1.7) or high (≥ 1.7). Objectives were to assess progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in all patients treated with FOLFOX compared with IT, stratified by low and high ERCC1 levels, and to assess for interactive effects between ERCC1 expression and treatment arm.

RESULTS

Eighty-six percent of patients had ERCC1 values < 1.7. Thus, evaluation of the ERCC1-high subgroup was limited. Grade ≥ 3 anemia, dehydration, diarrhea, and fatigue were greater in patients with IT. Occurrences of grade ≥ 3 neuropathy and decreased neutrophils were greater in patients with FOLFOX. In all patients, FOLFOX had a statistically superior median PFS compared with IT (5.7 v 2.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.68; P = .02). In patients with ERCC1 levels < 1.7 receiving FOLFOX, PFS and response rate were statistically superior to IT, with no significant difference in OS.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of ERCC1 in patients with upper GI tumors was thwarted by an overwhelming predominance of low ERCC1 mRNA expression. Nonetheless, distribution of treatment effects on PFS did not vary with expression. For all patients and for those with low ERCC1 expression, FOLFOX was superior in efficacy to IT.

Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Esophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common histology in Eastern Europe and Asia, and adenocarcinoma is most common in North America and Western Europe. Surgery is a major component of treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer, and randomized trials have shown that the addition of preoperative chemoradiation or perioperative chemotherapy to surgery significantly improves survival. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, ramucirumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with esophageal and EGJ cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on recommendations for the management of locally advanced and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and EGJ.

Multimodal treatment in locally advanced gastric cancer

According to the data of the GLOBOCAN-network of the World Health Organization, there were 952,000 (6.8% of the total) new cases of gastric cancer in 2012, making it the fifth most common malignancy in the world. It represents a substantive change since the very first estimates in 1975 when stomach cancer was the most common neoplasm. More than 70% of cases (677,000 cases) occur in developing countries, and half the world total occurs in Eastern Asia, mainly in China. Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death in both sexes worldwide (Globocan, Estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2012, http://globocan.iarc.fr , 2012). Annually, worldwide 723,000 patients die of this tumor entity. Interestingly, a strong change in incidence rates in relation to the anatomical-topographic localization of the primary tumors in the stomach and esophagus has been experienced. While the frequency of proximal gastric carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the cardiac and subcardiac region in Europe and North America has been constantly rising, distal gastric carcinomas have become less common (Torre et al. in JAMA 65:87-108, 2015). Furthermore, the relative incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (mostly localized in the distal esophagus) has strongly increased (Jemal et al. in JAMA 58:71-96, 2008; Crew and Neugut 31:450-464, 2004; Pohl and Welch 97:142-146, 2005).

Translational study identifies XPF and MUS81 as predictive biomarkers for oxaliplatin-based peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma

Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is used to treat patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), but no biomarkers are currently available for patient selection. We performed a prospective, clinical trial to identify potential biomarkers associated with clinical outcomes. Tumor tissue was obtained from 38 patients with resectable EAC before and after 2 cycles of oxaliplatin-fluorouracil chemotherapy. Pre-treatment mRNA expression of 280 DNA repair (DNAR) genes was tested for association with histopathological regression at surgery, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). High expression of 13 DNA damage repair genes was associated with DFS less than one year (P < 0.05); expression of 11 DNAR genes were associated with worse OS (P < 0.05). From clinical associations with outcomes, two genes, ERCC1 and EME1, were identified as candidate biomarkers. In cell lines in vitro, we showed the mechanism of action related to repair of oxaliplatin-induced DNA damage by depletion and knockout of protein binding partners of the candidate biomarkers, XPF and MUS81 respectively. In clinical samples from the clinical trial, pre-treatment XPF protein levels were associated with pathological response, and MUS81 protein was associated with 1-year DFS. XPF and MUS81 merit further validation in prospective clinical trials as biomarkers that may predict clinical response of EAC to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy.

Overview of different available chemotherapy regimens combined with radiotherapy for the neoadjuvant and definitive treatment of esophageal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) is the current standard of care for treatment of locally advanced cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Many efforts have been made over the last years to identify the best chemotherapy and radiotherapy combination regimen, but specific randomized trials addressing this issue are still lacking. Areas covered: A systematic review of the literature was performed searching in PubMed all published studies of combinations CTRT regimens for operable or unresectable esophageal cancer to describe activity and toxicity. Studies considered were prospective series or clinical phase II-III trials including at least 40 patients and published in English language. Expert commentary: Long-term results of CROSS trial have established RT combined with carboplatin plus paclitaxel chemotherapy as the preferred neoadjuvant treatment option for both squamous and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. More effective multimodal treatment strategies integrating novel biological agents including immunotherapy and based on an extensive molecular tumor characterization are eagerly awaited.

Oesophageal cancer: Which treatment is the easiest to swallow? A review of combined modality treatments for resectable carcinomas

Oesophageal cancer is a relatively uncommon malignancy, but with poor prognosis. Despite several treatment options that are available, the 5-year survival rates rarely exceed 40%. This review discusses the main challenges of oesophageal cancer, the available treatment options, and the most effective treatment in terms of overall survival. The outcomes of clinical trials show that neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy using cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil followed by oesophagectomy results in the greatest survival. However, the optimal chemotherapy and radiotherapy schedule remains unclear. There is no satisfactory treatment to date, particularly for patients with co-morbidities or advanced tumours.

Combination Approach: the Future of the War Against Cancer

Cancer remains one of the major health problems worldwide and is responsible for one in eight deaths. The worldwide research against cancer as well as genome wide association studies was successful in indentifying the loci associated with cancer but still a substantial amount of casualty remains unexplained. The reason being the cancer cell rapidly develops resistance against the chemotherapeutic or chemopreventive agent in use. Over the last decade, the thorough understanding of molecular and biochemical mechanisms of the carcinogenesis process lead to the rationale of combining anti-cancer agents (therapeutic as well as chemopreventive) to target multiple pathways. Scientists, the world over trying various combinations of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, chemopreventive agents, nanoparticles, etc., in order to specifically as well as efficiently target cancer cells. The present review article summarizes the recent advances in the combination approach against cancer in order to enhance efficacy of treatment with minimal side effects.

Change in chemotherapy during concurrent radiation followed by surgery after a suboptimal positron emission tomography response to induction chemotherapy improves outcomes for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

A positron emission tomography (PET) scan after induction chemotherapy before preoperative chemoradiation and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma predicts outcomes. Some patients with progression on PET after induction chemotherapy had long-term overall survival (OS) when they were changed to alternative chemotherapy during radiation.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed esophageal adenocarcinoma patients who received induction chemotherapy and chemoradiation before planned surgery; all had undergone a PET scan before and after induction chemotherapy.

RESULTS

There were 201 patients, and 113 (56%) were PET responders (≥35% decrease in the maximum standardized uptake value of the tumor). All PET responders received the same chemotherapy during radiation, whereas 38 of the 88 PET nonresponders (43%) changed chemotherapy. Among the 152 patients who underwent surgery, the pathologic complete response rate was 15% for PET responders and 3% for PET nonresponders who did not change chemotherapy (P = .046). The median progression-free survival (PFS; 18.9 vs 10.0 months, P < 0.01) and OS (37 vs 25.3 months, P = .02) were significantly better for PET responders versus PET nonresponders who did not change chemotherapy. The median PFS for PET nonresponders who changed chemotherapy was 17.9 months, and it was superior to the median PFS for PET nonresponders who did not change chemotherapy (P = .01). For PET nonresponders, the 5-year OS rates were 37% for those who changed chemotherapy and 25% for those who did not change chemotherapy (P = .18).

CONCLUSIONS

A PET scan after induction chemotherapy predicts outcomes for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma patients who undergo chemoradiation and surgery. The median PFS is improved, and trends toward improved OS appear possible in PET nonresponders who change chemotherapy during radiation. The fully accrued Cancer and Leukemia Group B 80803 study (NCT01333033) is evaluating this strategy. Cancer 2016;122:2083-90. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and American College of Radiology Imaging Network Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Neoadjuvant Preoperative Paclitaxel/Cisplatin/Radiation Therapy (RT) or Irinotecan/Cisplatin/RT in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: Long-Term Outcome and Implications for Trial Design

PURPOSE

Toxicity, pathologic complete response, and long-term outcomes are reported for the neoadjuvant therapies assessed in a randomized phase 2 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and American College of Radiology Imaging Network trial for operable esophageal adenocarcinoma, staged as II-IVa by endoscopy/ultrasonography (EUS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 86 eligible patients began treatment. For arm A, preoperative chemotherapy was cisplatin, 30 mg/m(2), and irinotecan, 50 mg/m(2), on day 1, 8, 22, 29 during 45 Gy radiation therapy (RT), 1.8 Gy per day over 5 weeks. Adjuvant therapy was cisplatin, 30 mg/m(2), and irinotecan, 65 mg/m(2) day 1, 8 every 21 days for 3 cycles. Arm B therapy was cisplatin, 30 mg/m(2), and paclitaxel, 50 mg/m(2), day 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 with RT, followed by adjuvant cisplatin, 75 mg/m(2), and paclitaxel, 175 mg/m(2), day 1 every 21 days for 3 cycles. Stratification included EUS stage and performance status.

RESULTS

In arm A, median overall survival was 35 months, and 5-, 6-, and 7-year survival rates were 46%, 39%, and 35%, respectively, whereas for arm B, they were 21 months and 27%, 27%, and 23%, respectively. Median progression- or recurrence-free survival (PFS) was 39.8 months with a 3-year PFS of 50% for arm A and 12.4 months (P=.046) with 3-year PFS of 28% for arm B. Eighty percent of the observed incidents of progression occurred within 19 months. Survival did not differ significantly by EUS and performance status strata.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival was similar for both arms and did not appear superior to results achieved with other standard regimens.

Analysis of pathological complete response rates with paclitaxel-based regimens in trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer

The study aimed to examine whether omission of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-containing chemotherapy alters pathological complete response rates in patients receiving trimodality therapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer. A total of 159 patients were identified. One hundred twenty-nine patients received platinum/5-FU concurrently with radiotherapy, and 30 received taxane/platinum-containing chemoradiotherapy prior to esophagectomy. Patients were staged using the 2002 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system. Patients were matched between chemotherapeutic groups, with no significant demographic or clinical differences other than T stage (14% T2 in the 5-FU group; no T2 in the platinum/taxane group) and radiotherapy technique (8.5% received intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the 5-FU group; 60% in the platinum/taxane group). Pathological complete response rates for 5-FU and platinum/taxane-based groups were not significantly different (45% and 30%, respectively; P = 0.1548). Five-year overall survival and progression-free survival were not statistically different between the two groups. Significant predictors of pathological complete response included N stage (56% N0 and 33% N1; P = 0.0083), histology (37% adenocarcinoma and 59% squamous cell; P = 0.0123), tumor location (39% distal and 59% proximal/mid; P = 0.048), gastroesophageal junction involvement (33% involved and 55% uninvolved; P = 0.005), and radiotherapy end-to-surgery interval (50% < 55 days and 34% ≥ 55 days; P = 0.04). Grades 3-4 hematological toxicity was higher in the 5-FU group (36%) than in the paclitaxel-containing therapy group (17%; P = 0.0484). Use of paclitaxel-containing chemoradiotherapy did not result in inferior pathological complete response, overall survival, or progression-free survival rates, and resulted in less hematological toxicity than 5-FU treatment.

Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is rapidly increasing in incidence in Western cultures. Barrett's esophagus is the presumed precursor lesion for this cancer. Several other risk factors for this cancer have been described, including chronic heartburn, tobacco use, white race, and obesity. Despite these known associations, most patients with EAC present with symptoms of dysphagia from late-stage tumors; only a small number of patients are identified by screening and surveillance programs. Diagnostic analysis of EAC usually commences with upper endoscopy followed by cross-sectional imaging. Endoscopic ultrasonography is useful to assess the local extent of disease as well as the involvement of regional lymph nodes. T1a EAC may be treated endoscopically, and some patients with T1b disease may also benefit from endoscopic therapy. Locally advanced disease is generally managed with esophagectomy, often accompanied by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy. The prognosis is based on tumor stage; patients with T1a tumors have an excellent prognosis, whereas few patients with advanced disease have long-term survival.

Intended use for a neoadjuvant chemoradiation response prediction test for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma: a survey analysis of thoracic surgeons in the US

OBJECTIVE

A multi-analyte immunohistochemistry (IHC) based test (DecisionDx-EC * *DecisionDx-EC, Castle Biosciences, Incorporated, Friendswood, TX. Hereafter referred to as the "IHC-based test". ) was developed and proved able to accurately predict response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoCTRT) in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EC) patients with locoregional disease. A survey was conducted with surgeons attending the 2013 Society of Thoracic Surgeons Annual Conference to assess their intention to change standard of care patient treatment based on predictive results obtained from this test.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Fifty-seven thoracic surgeons were provided a questionnaire regarding the current clinical management of locoregional EC patients, and their intention to change management strategy if a patient is predicted by the multi-analyte IHC-based test to experience pathological complete response (pathCR) or extremely resistant to neoCTRT (exCTRT).

RESULTS

Forty-four out of 46 enrolled respondents indicated that they administer neoCTRT followed by surgery to treat locally advanced EC. Fifteen (32%) respondents presently prescribing neoCTRT to EC patients acknowledged that a pathCR prediction provided by the multi-analyte IHC-based test would change their current regimens. Conversely, 28 surgeons (61%) would be willing to adjust their current strategy for patients predicted to be resistant to neoCTRT, significantly more than the case where patients are predicted to be pathCR (p = 0.01). Twenty-five percent (25%) of surgeons willing to adjust treatment in response to a patient being a potential exCTRT chose to remove CTRT from the strategy, and instead would choose surgery alone for these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from the current survey show that patients' response to neoCTRT predicted by the multi-analyte IHC-based test has a significant influence on the decision-making process in the clinic. Nearly twice as many surgeons stated an intention to change strategy with the knowledge that the patient is likely to have extreme resistance to planned treatments than when one is a potential responder. The current survey study is limited by its 'intended use' nature, therefore does not reflect physicians' real action in the clinic upon implementation of this test. However, survey results strongly suggest that use of the IHC-based predictive test is of great interest to physicians, and would likely contribute to more individualized treatment for patients with distinct sensitivity to neoCTRT.

Controversies in the treatment of local and locally advanced gastric and esophageal cancers

Despite overall progress in the therapy of local and locally advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinomas, death as a result of these tumors remains a common outcome. Most randomized phase III trials on which level-one evidence has been built have included the heterogeneous histologies and locations associated with these tumors. However, the different etiologies, molecular biology, and recurrence patterns associated with gastroesophageal malignancies suggest the need to split rather than lump. Biologic and response differences exist between squamous and adenocarcinomas, as well as diffuse and intestinal histologies. This may be a cause behind conflicting outcomes in similar trials. The accepted standard of chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers is based on a few positive trials, with the best chemotherapy and total dose of radiation remaining controversial. In the West, the staging evaluations of locally advanced gastric cancer are not uniform. Yet, these evaluations will inform the results of preoperative and perioperative treatments. Although postoperative chemoradiotherapy for gastric cancer has been an accepted treatment option for the last decade, more recent studies have called into question the need for radiotherapy. In perioperative strategies, it has yet to be determined whether histologic or molecular changes in the operative specimen should inform postoperative treatment. An appropriate place for targeted therapy needs to be found in preoperative and postoperative treatment regimens. Finally, because so much is lost when trials are forced to close for lack of accrual, it is imperative to build multidisciplinary consensus before they are launched.

Results of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy With Docetaxel and 5-Fluorouracil Followed by Esophagectomy to Treat Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is most frequently treated with platinum-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We previously described a phase I study of definitive CRT with docetaxel (DOC) and 5-fluorouracil (5FU) in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. This regimen had low toxicity and was effective without platinating agents. The present study aims to determine the antitumor effects of neoadjuvant CRT with DOC and 5FU and surgical outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed data from 38 patients with locally advanced cancer of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction who underwent trimodality therapy comprising neoadjuvant CRT with DOC and 5FU followed by esophagectomy between 2003 and 2008.

RESULTS

Esophagitis was the most common toxicity associated with neoadjuvant CRT (grade 3; 26.3%), and hematologic toxicity was mild. Transthoracic esophagectomy and pharyngolaryngoesophagectomy proceeded in 36 (94.7%) and 2 (5.3%) patients, respectively, and 35 (92.1%) underwent R0 resection. Five (13.2%) patients had complete pathologic responses (pCR) of the primary tumor, and 23 (60.5%) had pathologic reductions of over two-thirds of the primary tumor. The T or N status was also down-staged in 26 (68.4%) patients. Overall postoperative morbidity developed in 21 (55.3%) patients, and mortality due to postoperative morbidity was zero. The 5-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 39.5% and 44.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of neoadjuvant CRT toxicity and postoperative complications were acceptable, and the complete resection rate and survival data were favorable. This regimen is promising as neoadjuvant CRT for esophageal cancer and very useful as an alternative regimen for treating patients with esophageal cancer who cannot tolerate cisplatin.

DNA repair gene ERCC1 C118T polymorphism predicts sensitivity of recurrent esophageal cancer to radiochemotherapy in a Chinese population

Background

DNA repair gene polymorphisms could alter DNA repair capacity and therefore associate with tumor sensitivity to radiochemotherapy. This study assessed excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1) C118T and X-ray cross-complementing group 1 (XRCC1) G399A single-nucleotide polymorphisms in esophageal patients for an association with sensitivity to radiation and chemotherapy.

Methods

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients (n = 118) who relapsed after surgery were enrolled for assessment of ERCC1 C118T and XRCC1 G399A polymorphisms by direct DNA sequencing.

Results

The response rate of treatments was 48.30%: 14 complete response (CR, 11.86%), 43 partial response (PR, 36.44%), 49 stable disease (SD, 41.53%), and 12 progressive disease (PD, 10.17%). ERCC1 C118T was significantly associated with treatment response (C/T vs. C/C + T/T, odds ratio [OR] = 6.035, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.114–17.226, P = 0.001) after adjusting for other clinicopathological factors. Patients carrying the C/T genotype had significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with C/C and T/T (median OS 43.00 vs. 27.00, P = 0.027). Multivariate Cox regression showed that a response was only an independent prognostic factor for OS (CR + PR vs. SD+PD, HR = 0.471 95% CI 0.269–0.826, P = 0.009). Grade III and IV adverse events occurred in 12 of 118 patients (10.17%). Only concurrent radiochemotherapy significantly increased these adverse events (OR = 26.529, 95% CI 2.312–304.389, P = 0.008).

Conclusion

ERCC1 C118T could be a predictive factor for the response to radiotherapy and chemotherapy, but not a prognostic factor for OS in esophageal cancer patients after surgery.

Randomized phase 2 trial of S1 and oxaliplatin-based chemoradiotherapy with or without induction chemotherapy for esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To assess, in a randomized, phase 2 trial, the efficacy and safety of chemoradiotherapy with or without induction chemotherapy (ICT) of S1 and oxaliplatin for esophageal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with stage II, III, or IVA esophageal cancer were randomly allocated to either 2 cycles of ICT (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and S1 at 40 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14, every 3 weeks) followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) (46 Gy, 2 Gy/d with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 21 and S1 30 mg/m(2) twice daily, 5 days per week during radiation therapy) and esophagectomy (arm A), or the same CCRT followed by esophagectomy without ICT (arm B). The primary endpoint was the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate.

RESULTS

A total of 97 patients were randomized (arm A/B, 47/50), 70 of whom underwent esophagectomy (arm A/B, 34/36). The intention-to-treat pCR rate was 23.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.2-35.6%) in arm A and 38% (95% CI 24.5% to 51.5%) in arm B. With a median follow-up duration of 30.3 months, the 2-year progression-free survival rate was 58.4% in arm A and 58.6% in arm B, whereas the 2-year overall survival rate was 60.7% and 63.7%, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia during CCRT was more common in arm A than in arm B (35.4% vs 4.1%). The relative dose intensity of S1 (89.5% ± 20.6% vs 98.3% ± 5.2%, P=.005) and oxaliplatin (91.4% ± 16.8% vs 99.0% ± 4.2%, P=.007) during CCRT was lower in arm A compared with arm B. Three patients in arm A, compared with none in arm B, died within 90 days after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination chemotherapy of S1 and oxaliplatin is an effective chemoradiotherapy regimen to treat esophageal cancer. However, we failed to show that the addition of ICT to the regimen can improve the pCR rate.

Prognostic value of hematologic parameters in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma using tyrosine kinase inhibitors

BACKGROUND

The prognostic significance of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for progression free survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma is unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 45 patients diagnosed with metastatic RCC previously treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors from two centers, Akdeniz University Hospital and Afyon Kocatepe University. The prognostic value of the pretreatment neutrophil- tolymphocyte ratio, and other clinical and laboratory parameters were assessed by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Median progression free survival (PFS) was 13.9 months [95% CI for HR (6.88-20.91)] and overall survival figure of 16.6 months [95% CI for HR (7.23-26.03)] Univariate analysis revealed that PFS was significantly affected by hemoglobin level [p=0.013 (95% CI for HR (0.71-0.96))], eosinophil count [p=0.031 (95% CI for HR (0.20-0.92))], ratio of neutrophil lymphocytes (NLR) [p=0.007 (95% CI for HR (1.47-11.74))] and calcium level [p=0.006 (95% CI for HR (0.15-0.73))]. However, only NLR [p=0.031 (95% CI for HR (1.15- 18.1))] and calcium levels [p=0.018 (95% CI for HR (0.20-18.1))] retained significance with multivariate analysis. Median PFS was 23.9 vs 8.6 months in patients with NLR ≤ 2 vs NLR >2 (Log rank; p= 0.040).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that increased pretreatment NLR is an independent prognostic factor for patients with metastatic RCC using tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

The current status of neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer

Through the contribution of a very large number of single-arm phase II trials and many less randomized phase III trials, the standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer has evolved to either combination chemotherapy plus radiation or combination chemotherapy. In this review, we focus on the key findings of these studies and selected meta-analyses that have led to this evolution. We note differences in outcomes for adenocarcinomas of the esophagus when compared to squamous cell esophageal cancers. Despite progress in developing a consensus for therapy, the outcome for patients with locally advanced remains poor. We complete the review by noting newer areas of investigation seeking to provide targeted and more personalized therapy to patients with esophageal cancer.

Current strategies in chemoradiation for esophageal cancer

Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has an important role in the treatment of esophageal cancer in both the inoperable and the pre-operative settings. Pre-operative chemoradiation therapy is generally given to 41.4-50.4 Gy with platinum or paclitaxel based chemotherapy. The most common definitive dose in the U.S. is 50-50.4 Gy. New advances in CRT for esophageal cancer have come from looking for ways to minimize toxicity and maximize efficacy. Recent investigations for minimizing toxicity have focused advanced radiation techniques such as IMRT and proton therapy, have sought to further define normal tissue tolerances, and have examined the use of tighter fields with less elective clinical target volume coverage. Efforts to maximize efficacy have included the use of early positron emission tomography (PET) response directed therapy, molecularly targeted therapies, and the use of tumor markers that predict response.

A phase II study with cetuximab and radiation therapy for patients with surgically resectable esophageal and GE junction carcinomas: Hoosier Oncology Group G05-92

INTRODUCTION

On the basis of the promising activity of cetuximab and radiation therapy for head and neck cancers, we evaluated the efficacy of this regimen followed by surgery in patients with resectable esophageal cancer. This was a phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study of patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Patients received two weekly doses of cetuximab followed by weekly cetuximab combined with radiation therapy for 6 weeks. After a 6- to 8-week rest, patients' primary tumor was resected. The main objective was to evaluate pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in the primary tumor after cetuximab and radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients completed the study. Most patients were men (93%), median age was 64 years, performance status was 0 to 1 (95%), patients had a histology of adenocarcinoma (78%), and tumors were located in the esophagus (63%). Grade 3 toxicities in more than 5% of patients included dysphagia (17%), anorexia and dehydration (7%), and dyspnea, fatigue, hypernatremia (5%). Grade 5 aspiration occurred in 2% (1 patient). Four patients died, two from disease progression, one from aspiration pneumonia postsurgery, and one from septic shock. Thirty-one patients (76%) underwent esophagectomy. The pCR rate was 36.6% by intention-to-treat and 48% for patients who underwent esophagectomy. The pCR by histology was 6 of 9 (67%) for squamous cell carcinomas and 9 of 32 (28%) for adenocarcinoma. Earlier-stage disease was associated with increased pCR (IIA 70%, IIB 29%, III 28%).

CONCLUSIONS

Cetuximab and radiation therapy results in a pCR rate that seems at least comparable with that of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. This regimen may be better tolerated than preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with resectable esophageal cancers.

The XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism has predictive value in colorectal cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The predictive value of the xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD) Lys751Gln polymorphism regarding clinical outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy has been evaluated in numerous published studies, but the results remain inconclusive. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the precise role of the XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism in this clinical situation and optimize individual chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multiple search strategy was used to identify eligible studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs), generalized odds ratio (ORG) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to estimate the objective response, while hazard ratios (HRs) with 95%CIs were used for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies including 2,286 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the XPD 751Gln allele was associated with a non-significant reduced objective response to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in all patients or in the Asian and Caucasian subgroups. However, poor PFS and OS of CRC patients treated with oxaliplatin-based regimens were significantly related to the XPD 751Gln allele in the dominant model (PFS: HR=2.10, 95%CI: 1.65-2.67; OS: HR=3.18, 95%CI: 1.57-6.47). On stratified analysis by ethnicity, these relationships were more pronounced in Asians (PFS: HR=2.49, 95%CI: 1.79-3.47; OS: HR=5.25, 95%CI: 3.46-7.94) than in Caucasians (PFS: HR=1.73, 95%CI: 1.22-2.46; OS: HR=1.78, 95%CI: 1.06-2.99).

CONCLUSIONS

The XPD Lys751Gln polymorphism may have prognostic value in patients with CRC undergoing oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy.

New and emerging combination therapies for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer comprises two different histological forms - squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC). While the incidence of AC has increased steeply in Western countries during the last few years, the incidence of SCC is fairly stable. Both forms differ in pathogenesis and response to chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Plenty of studies have evaluated new chemotherapy combination regimens in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and palliative setting. In addition, new radiation and chemoradiation protocols have been investigated. Finally, molecular-targeted therapy has been included in several new randomized prospective trials. Therefore, this review presents new data on this topic and critically discusses promising approaches towards a more effective treatment in a disease with a grim prognosis.

Chemoradiotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with oesophageal cancer (SCOPE1): a multicentre, phase 2/3 randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is an alternative to surgery for the curative treatment of oesophageal carcinoma. The SCOPE1 trial aimed to investigate the addition of cetuximab to cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine-based definitive CRT in patients with localised oesophageal squamous-cell cancer and adenocarcinomas to assess activity, safety, and feasibility of use.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older from UK radiotherapy centres who had non-metastatic, histologically confirmed carcinoma of the oesophagus (adenocarcinoma, squamous-cell, or undifferentiated; WHO status 0-1; stage I-III disease) and been selected to receive definitive CRT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a central computerised system using stratified minimisation (with an 80:20 random element) to receive CRT alone or CRT with cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by 250 mg/m(2) weekly), stratified by recruiting hospital, primary reason for not having surgery, tumour histology, and tumour stage. CRT consisted of cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) (day 1) and capecitabine 625 mg/m(2) twice daily (days 1-21) for four cycles; cycles three and four were given concurrently with 50 Gy in 25 fractions of radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were treatment failure free at week 24 for the phase 2 trial and overall survival for the phase 3 trial, both measured from randomisation. We analysed data by intention to treat. This trial is an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number 47718479.

FINDINGS

258 patients (129 assigned to each treatment group) from 36 UK centres were recruited between Feb 7, 2008, and Feb 22, 2012. Recruitment was stopped without continuation to phase 3 because the trial met criteria for futility, but we continued to follow-up recruited patients until all had reached at least 24-week follow-up (median follow-up of patients who survived was 16.8 months [IQR 11.2-24.5]). Fewer patients were treatment failure free at 24 weeks in the CRT plus cetuximab group (79 of 119 patients [66·4%, 90% CI 58·6-73·6]) than in the CRT only group (93 of 121 patients [76.9%, 69.7-83.0]). The CRT plus cetuximab group also had shorter median overall survival (22.1 months [95% CI 15.1-24.5] vs 25.4 months [20.5-37.9]; adjusted HR 1.53 [95% CI 1.03-2.27]; p=0.035). Patients who received CRT plus cetuximab had more non-haematological grade 3 or 4 toxicities (102 [79%] of 129 patients vs 81 [63%] of 129 patients; p=0.004). The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities were low white blood cell count (14 [11%] in the CRT plus cetuximab group vs 21 [16%] in the CRT only group), low absolute neutrophil count (15 [12%] vs 24 [19%]), fatigue (26 [20%] vs 25 [19%]), and dysphagia (35 [27%] vs 37 [29%]).

INTERPRETATION

The addition of cetuximab to standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy cannot be recommended for patients with oesophageal cancer suitable for definitive CRT.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Present status and progress of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer

Trimodality based on neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery is gaining popularity as a treatment strategy for locally advanced esophageal cancer. In this review, we summarize the role of nCRT and the recommended nCRT regimens based on clinical trials and meta-analyses. We analyze the relationship of nCRT with pathologic complete response (pCR) and then identify potential predictive markers of response. Compared with surgery alone and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery, trimodality provides longer survival and has the advantage of local control compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy. The standard regimen is a platinum-based regimen with a radiation dose range of 41.4-50.4 Gy by conventional fractionation. Evidence shows that patients with pCR tend to live longer than non-responders, indicating that pCR is a significant prognostic factor for patients with esophageal cancer. Individualized medicine requires predictive markers of individual patients based on their own genes. Currently, no definite marker is proved to be sufficiently sensitive and specific for use in clinical practice, although 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography shows promise in predicting response to nCRT.