Surgery alone, adjuvant tegafur/gimeracil/octeracil (S-1), or platinum-based chemotherapies for resectable gastric cancer: real-world experience and a propensity score matching analysis

Background

Adjuvant chemotherapy has changed the paradigm in resectable gastric cancer. S-1 is an oral chemotherapeutic with promising efficacy in Asia. However, comparisons with close observation or platinum-based doublets post D2 gastrectomy have been less reported, notably on real-world experiences.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated patients with D2-dissected stage IB-III gastric cancer who received S-1 (S-1, n = 67), platinum-based doublets (P, n = 145) and surgery with close observation (OBS, n = 221) from Jan 2008 to Oct 2018. A propensity score matching was used to compare for recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survivals (OS) in patients who had a locally-advanced disease (T3–4 or lymph node-positive). Adverse reactions, dosage, and associated factors for S-1 are also discussed.

Results

In a median follow-up time of 51.9 months, adjuvant S-1 monotherapy was associated with an intermediate survival as compared with P and OBS (median RFS/OS: S-1 vs. P, 20.9/35.8 vs. 31.2/50.5 months, HR = 1.76/2.14, p = 0.021/0.008; S-1 vs. OBS, 24.4/40.2 vs. 20.7/27.0 months, HR = 0.62/0.55, p = 0.041/0.024). The survival differences were more prominent in patients with N2–3 diseases. S-1 was well-tolerated with a relative dose intensity of 73.6%, a median duration of 8.3 months and associated with less adverse reactions as compared with P. S-1 monotherapy was selected by physicians based on age, lymph node stage, serum carcinoembryonic antigen and disease stage.

Conclusions

Adjuvant S-1 correlated with intermediate survival outcomes between OBS and P but conferred fewer adverse reactions as compared with P. Patients with a moderate risk of recurrence had comparable survivals when treated with S-1 while platinum-based doublets were favored in advanced cases. The study provides additional information about adjuvant S-1 in patients with selected risk of recurrence.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08487-z.

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.

A "Just Enough" Gross Proximal Margin Length Ensuring Pathologically Complete Resection in Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

Introduction

The objective of this study is to determine a "just enough" gross proximal margin (PM) length to ensure a pathologically negative PM in distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. There is a discrepancy between the gross and pathological proximal boundaries of gastric cancer. We must transect the stomach maintaining some safety margins to obtain a pathologically negative PM. However, we have no standard to indicate where to transect the stomach.

Methods

Patients undergoing distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer were enrolled. A new parameter named ΔPM, which corresponded to the pathological extension proximal to the gross tumor boundary toward the resection stump, was evaluated. The number of patients was counted in each ΔPM range of 1-cm increments. The maximum ΔPM was defined as the first value at which the number of patients became 0, and it was determined as the recommended gross PM length for each disease type.

Results

In cT1, 259 and 330 patients were assigned to differentiated (Dif) and undifferentiated types (Und), respectively. The maximum ΔPM was 20 mm for Dif and 40 mm for Und. In cT2-4, 194 and 490 patients were assigned to the expansive (Exp) and infiltrative (Inf) growth types. The maximum ΔPM was 30 mm for Exp. The maximum ΔPM was 50 mm for Inf of less than 80 mm and 60 mm for Inf of 80 mm or more.

Conclusions

A newly recommended gross PM length to ensure pathologically negative PMs in distal gastrectomy for each gastric cancer type was determined.

Primary results of a randomized two-by-two factorial phase II trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with two and four courses of cisplatin/S-1 and docetaxel/cisplatin/S-1 as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

AIM

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is promising to improve the survival of resectable gastric cancer. However, suitable regimen and treatment duration for NAC have not yet been established.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized phase II trial to compare two and four courses of neoadjuvant S-1/cisplatin (SC) and S-1/cisplatin/docetaxel(DCS) using a two-by-two factorial design for locally resectable advanced gastric cancer. Patients with M0 and either T4 or T3 in case of junctional cancer or scirrhous-type cancer received two or four courses of SC or DCS. Then, patients underwent D2 gastrectomy and adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy for 1 year. The primary endpoint was 3-year overall survival. The planned sample size was 120 eligible patients.

RESULTS

Between October 2011 and September 2014, 132 patients were assigned to CS (n = 66; 33 in 2-courses and 33 in 4-courses) and DCS (n = 66; 33 in 2-courses and 33 in 4-courses). The 3-year OS was 58.1% in CS and 60.0% in DCS with hazard ratio of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.48-1.34), while it was 53.1% in the two courses and 65.0% in the four courses with hazard ratio of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.43-1.22). In the survival analysis by duration in each regimen, the 3-year OS was 58.1% for both two and four courses in CS, while it was 48.5% for two courses of DCS and 71.9% for four courses of DCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering high 3-year OS, four courses DCS has a value to be tested in a future phase III study to confirm superiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery for high-risk advanced gastric cancer: long-term results of KDOG1001 trial

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the long-term survival outcomes of KDOG1001 trial after a minimum follow-up of 3 years.

METHODS

Patients with bulky N2 lymph nodes, linitis plastica (type 4), or large ulcero-invasive-type tumors (type 3) received up to four 28-day cycles of DCS neoadjuvant chemotherapy (docetaxel at 40 mg/m², cisplatin at 60 mg/m² on day 1, and S-1 at 40 mg/m² twice daily for 2 weeks) followed by gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy plus adjuvant S-1 therapy for 1 year. The final preplanned analysis of long-term outcomes including overall survival and relapse-free survival was conducted after minimum follow-up of 3 years. This trial is registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry, number UMIN 000003642, and has been completed.

RESULTS

From May 2010 through January 2017, 40 patients were enrolled. All included patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy with DCS followed by gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy, and 32 (80%) completed adjuvant S-1 therapy for 1 year. After a median follow-up for surviving patients of 68 months at the last follow-up in January 2020, 3-year overall survival rate was 77.5% (95% confidence interval 62.1-87.9%), while 3-year relapse-free survival rate was 62.5% (95% confidence interval 46.8-76.0%).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 4 cycles of DCS followed by D2 gastrectomy plus adjuvant S-1 was associated with relatively good long-term oncologic outcomes for patients with the high-risk gastric cancer.

Treatment of Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer (LAGC): Back to Lauren's Classification in Pan-Cancer Analysis Era?

Background: Guidelines recommend a perioperative approach in patients with stage II/III gastric cancer, but in real-life many patients receive immediate surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT). Although histologic subtypes may have different response to CT, no study has explored the influence of histotype on the efficacy of perioperative CT (pCT) or aCT. Materials and methods: The objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of clinicopathological features and histology (intestinal or diffuse) on survival according to strategy (pCT vs. aCT). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). Results: Out of 203 patients affected by LAGC, 83 received pCT and 120 aCT. At multivariate, histology and LVI in pCT cohort and positive resection margin in the aCT influenced both OS and EFS. No difference in EFS and OS was observed in relation to strategy. However, in the intestinal-type of pCT cohort survival outcomes were significantly higher compared to the aCT cohort, whereas in the diffuse-type were significantly worse in patients receiving pCT compared to those receiving aCT. Conclusions: Although retrospective and small-sized, this study suggests that the benefit of pCT might be limited to the intestinal-type. This hypothesis needs to be confirmed in prospective series.

A detailed analysis of the recurrence timing and pattern after curative surgery in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy or upfront surgery for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine whether the administration of neoadjuvant therapy (NAD) affects the incidence, timing, and pattern of recurrence in patients treated by curative gastrectomy.

METHODS

Sixty-nine patients undergoing NAD and R0 gastrectomy were compared with 198 patients undergoing upfront surgery using the propensity score matching (PSM) method. Disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses were conducted with a log-rank test and Cox regression. Risk factors for recurrence were assessed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 69 patients with NAD, 28 (40.6%) experienced recurrence, and signet-ring cell (SRC) carcinoma was the only factor independently associated with recurrence. In the whole sample, NAD did not influence DFS, DSS, rate of recurrence, or PFS. After PSM, the variables associated with DFS were cN1, type of gastrectomy, the presence of SRCs, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion. Variables independently associated with recurrence were cN1, type of gastrectomy, and the presence of SRCs.

CONCLUSIONS

NAD had no impact on DFS, DSS, or the pattern of recurrence in any patients with gastric cancer. To define a better treatment strategy, future studies should focus on subtypes that do not respond to the current neoadjuvant regimens.

Global updates in the treatment of gastric cancer: a systematic review. Part 2: perioperative management, multimodal therapies, new technologies, standardization of the surgical treatment and educational aspects

Gastric cancer is the fifth malignancy and the third cause of cancer death worldwide, according to the global cancer statistics presented in 2018. Its definition and staging have been revised in the eight edition of the AJCC/TNM classification, which took effect in 2018. Novel molecular classifications for GC have been recently established and the process of translating these classifications into clinical practice is ongoing. The cornerstone of GC treatment is surgical, in a context of multimodal therapy. Surgical treatment is being standardized, and is evolving according to new anatomical concepts and to the recent technological developments. This is leading to a massive improvement in the use of mini-invasive techniques. Mini-invasive techniques aim to be equivalent to open surgery from an oncologic point of view, with better short-term outcomes. The persecution of better short-term outcomes also includes the optimization of the perioperative management, which is being implemented on large scale according to the enhanced recovery after surgery principles. In the era of precision medicine, multimodal treatment is also evolving. The long-time-awaited results of many trials investigating the role for preoperative and postoperative management have been published, changing the clinical practice. Novel investigations focused both on traditional chemotherapeutic regimens and targeted therapies are currently ongoing. Modern platforms increase the possibility for further standardization of the different treatments, promote the use of big data and open new possibilities for surgical learning. This systematic review in two parts assesses all the current updates in GC treatment.

A phase I study of docetaxel/oxaliplatin/S-1 (DOS) combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction

BACKGROUND

The optimal dose of each drug used in the docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy remains to be clarified for the Japanese population. The purpose of this study was to determine a recommended dose for a combination neoadjuvant DOS chemotherapy for Japanese patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG).

METHODS

Patients with cT3 or more advanced AEG without distant metastasis were eligible for this study. The planned dosages of docetaxel (mg/m², day 1), oxaliplatin (mg/m², day 1), and S-1 (mg/day, days 1-14) were: 50/100/80-120 at level 1, and 60/100/80-120 at level 2, respectively. The treatment cycle was repeated every 3 weeks, and patients were assessed for response to the treatment after 2 and 3 cycles. This study was registered in the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN 000022210).

RESULTS

We enrolled 12 patients with locally advanced AEG in this study. At dose level 1, one of the six patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of grade 3 diarrhea and grade 3 febrile neutropenia. Two of the next six patients also experienced DLT of need for more than 2-week delay of the start of the second cycle due to adverse events at dose level 2. Based on these results, level 2 was considered the recommended dose for this regimen.

CONCLUSION

Recommended doses of docetaxel (mg/m²), oxaliplatin (mg/m²), and S-1 (mg/day) were 60/100/80-120. This chemotherapy scheme showed good preliminary efficacy with acceptable toxicity warranting a further phase II trial to investigate the efficacy of this regimen.

Perioperative chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer in Japan: current and future perspectives

The standard treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer differs across the world. In western countries, perioperative chemotherapy or postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy are the preferred treatment options, whereas in Asia, D2 gastrectomy followed by postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is standard. In Japan, adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 is the standard treatment for pStage II gastric cancer, whereas adjuvant chemotherapy with a doublet regimen is preferred for pStage III gastric cancer. The efficacy of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy using S-1 plus cisplatin, has been investigated in selected patients with expected poor survival outcomes. To expand the indications for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, a clinical trial investigating the efficacy of preoperative S-1 plus oxaliplatin in patients with cStage III (cT3-4N1-3) gastric cancer (JCOG1509) is ongoing in Japan. The addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to cytotoxic chemotherapy also seems promising and is being investigated in international randomized clinical trials. Although we have to await the final results of these studies, preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a promising treatment strategy and likely to become standard treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer in Japan.

Optimizing adjuvant therapies for the treatment of gastric cancer: with a special focus on Asia

Introduction: Today, there is a global consensus that adjuvant treatment is mandatory for stage II and III gastric cancer. What remains controversial, however, is what constitutes the best adjuvant therapy. A comprehensive review including published papers, doi documents, and abstracts from the ASCO annual meeting was undertaken to develop this updated review.Areas covered: Adjuvant treatments for stage II or more advanced and potentially curable gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma are, exclusively, reviewed and discussed.Expert opinion: The role of radiation is not yet established for gastric and GEJ cancers. Postoperative chemoradiotherapy offers no survival advantage over chemotherapy alone for patients who undergo D2 surgery. It is not yet clear if neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is better than adjuvant chemotherapy. Individualized treatment plans should be determined for many patients as efficacy depends on tumor histology, and toxicity varies enormously among effective options.

Multidisciplinary management of stage II-III gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer

The aim of this manuscript is to discuss the viewpoint of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Gastric Cancer Taskforce and Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) Gastric Cancer Study Group on the current challenges in the multidisciplinary management of stage II-III gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We seek to outline how these challenges are addressed in current trials of both groups. Key elements of future trials of EORTC and JCOG in this indication are described, and a joint vision on how multidisciplinary research of gastric and GEJ cancer patients should be organised is outlined.

An integrated analysis of two phase II trials (JCOG0001 and JCOG0405) of preoperative chemotherapy followed by D3 gastrectomy for gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastasis

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastasis is commonly regarded as unresectable, while preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy has been tested since 2000 in JCOG (JCOG0001 and JCOG0405). The survivals were quite different between the trials despite the similar eligibility criteria. The aim of this study was to investigate if survival is still better in JCOG0405 after adjusting baseline factors and if there is any subset of patients who benefit more from either treatment.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria for both trials included histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma; bulky nodal involvement around the celiac artery and its major branches (bulky N) and/or para-aortic lymph node (PAN); cM0 (except PAN); negative lavage cytology; not linitis plastica type; PS of 0 or 1. Patients received two or three cycles of preoperative chemotherapy of irinotecan plus cisplatin in JCOG0001, or S-1 plus cisplatin in JCOG0405, followed by D3 gastrectomy. Multivariable analysis for overall survival adjusting baseline and treatment factors was performed with the Cox regression model.

RESULTS

After adjusting baseline factors, S-1 plus cisplatin was superior to irinotecan plus cisplatin for overall survival (HR = 0.39: 95% CI 0.22-0.67). The 5-year overall survival was poor for patients with bulky N+/PAN+ (19.2%) compared with bulky N+/PAN- (50.7%) or bulky N-/PAN+ (43.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

S-1 plus cisplatin was shown to be a favorable preoperative treatment for gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastasis by multivariable analysis, while poor prognosis in patients having both bulky N+ and PAN+ may necessitate further treatment improvement.

Essential updates 2017/2018: Recent topics in the treatment and research of gastric cancer in Japan

Recent developments in diagnostic technology, accumulated clinical effort and established evidence have boosted early detection and drastically improved early and long-term outcomes of gastric cancer. However, gastric cancer continues to be one of the most aggressive and life-threatening malignancies among all cancers and is a global health problem. Between January 2017 and December 2018, various fascinating reports of managements and research were published, including the new 15th Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma reflecting the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control (AJCC/UICC) tumor, node and metastasis (TNM) classification (October 2017) and the new Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines version 5 (January 2018). Moreover, pivotal molecular features of gastric cancer were clarified by the worldwide cancer genome project, and various treatment targets and biomarkers such as circulating DNAs and microRNAs were detected. Novel treatment options using programmed cell death protein 1 immune checkpoint inhibitors have been started. In this review, we summarize the recent topics of classification, guidelines, and clinical and basic research in order to bring new insights to gastric cancer treatment.

Does neoadjuvant chemotherapy cancel out the negative survival impact induced by surgical complications after gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND

Postoperative infectious complications (ICs) are associated with a poor prognosis following gastric cancer surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) targeting scirrhous-type or bulky nodal disease reportedly exerts a prophylactic effect on the negative impact of ICs. However, a recent study clearly showed that NAC for scirrhous-type disease had no survival benefit. We investigated this prophylactic effect and significant interactions among subgroups of histological response, macroscopic type, and bulky nodal disease.

METHODS

We examined 115 patients who received NAC followed by radical gastrectomy between January 2008 and December 2015. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between those with and without ICs. Our cohort included 62 with type 4/giant type 3, 44 with bulky nodal disease/para-aortic nodal disease, and 25 with other diseases.

RESULTS

A histological response was observed in 80 patients (69.5%). Thirty three (28.7%) developed ICs. There was no significant difference in the OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-1.99, p = 0.920] or DFS (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.40-1.38, p = 0.342) by the presence of ICs. The HR was 1.00 in patients who had no response to NAC (grade 0/1a) and 0.95 in those who responded to NAC (grade 1b/2/3). No subgroups showed significant interactions for the OS.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC may cancel out the negative impact of morbidity on the survival in advanced gastric cancer patients. The prophylactic effects by NAC do not depend on the tumor type or histological response.

Efficacy of Postoperative Chemotherapy After Resection that Leaves No Macroscopically Visible Disease of Gastric Cancer with Positive Peritoneal Lavage Cytology (CY1) or Localized Peritoneum Metastasis (P1a): A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) patients with positive peritoneal lavage cytology (CY1) and/or localized peritoneum metastasis (P1a) are defined as stage IV in the 15th edition of the Japanese Classification of Gastric Cancer. In Japan, the most common treatment for patients with CY1 and/or P1a is gastrectomy followed by postoperative chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Subjects in this multi-institutional retrospective study were GC patients with CY1 and/or P1a who received surgical resection that leaves no macroscopically visible disease. Patients were selected from 34 institutions in Japan between 2007 and 2012. Selection criteria included adenocarcinoma, no distant metastasis except CY1 and P1a, and no prior treatment for GC before surgery.

RESULTS

Among 824 patients registered, 506 were identified as eligible, with a background of P0CY1, P1aCY0, or P1aCY1 (72.5%, 16.0%, and 11.5% of subjects, respectively). Sixty-two patients had not received postoperative chemotherapy (no-Cx), whereas 444 patients had received postoperative chemotherapy: S-1 monotherapy (S-1; n = 267, 52.7%), cisplatin plus S-1 (CS; n = 114, 22.5%), and others (n = 63, 12.6%). Overall survival (OS) was 29.5, 24.7, 25.4 and 9.9 months in the S-1, CS, 'others', and no-Cx groups, respectively [CS vs. S-1: hazard ratio (HR) 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.50; p = 0.275]. In multivariate analysis, OS was similar between the S-1 and CS groups (CS vs. S-1: HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.92-1.55; p = 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative chemotherapy after gastrectomy that leaves no macroscopically visible disease may have some survival benefits for GC patients with CY1 and/or P1a. In contrast, S-1 plus cisplatin seems to have no additional benefit over S-1 treatment alone.

A phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and S-1, followed by gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for high-risk advanced gastric cancer: results of the KDOG1001 trial

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with gastric cancer with bulky node metastasis, linitis plastica (type 4), or large ulcero-invasive-type tumors (type 3) remains poor. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and S-1 (DCS) for establishing a new treatment modality that improves prognosis.

METHODS

Patients received up to four 28-day cycles of DCS therapy (docetaxel at 40 mg/m², cisplatin at 60 mg/m² on day 1, and S-1 at 40 mg/m² twice daily for 2 weeks) followed by gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection. S-1 chemotherapy was administered for 1 year after surgical resection. The primary endpoint was the percentage of complete resections of the primary tumor with clear margins (R0 resection). The planned sample size was 40; this was calculated based on an expected R0 rate of 85% and a threshold R0 rate of 65%, with a one-sided alpha of 5% and a power of 90%.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2017, 40 patients were enrolled. The R0 resection rate was 90%. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events during DCS therapy were leukocytopenia (27.5%), neutropenia (55.0%), and hyponatremia (22.5%). The most common grade 3 or 4 surgical morbidity was pancreatic fistula (12.5%); mortality was 0%. The pathological response rate was 57.5% with a grade 3 histological response rate of 8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with DCS was feasible and showed a sufficient R0 resection rate. A future study with a sufficient follow-up period should confirm survival outcomes.

Survival Benefit of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with S-1 Plus Docetaxel for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background

Postoperative docetaxel plus S-1 (DS) chemotherapy is expected to be the standard therapeutic strategy for pStage III gastric cancer based on the results of the JACCRO GC-07 study. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is thought to have several advantages over adjuvant settings.

Objective

This study aimed to compare the efficacies of NAC DS and the surgery-first strategy for advanced gastric cancer patients with D2 gastrectomy.

Methods

This was a retrospective, single-institution observational study. Of 171 patients with locally advanced (cStage IIB or III) gastric cancer who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy and received NAC DS and/or S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy between 2011 and 2017, 76 (after propensity score matching for 132 patients who met the eligibility criteria) were enrolled in this study. The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was used to directly compare efficacies between NAC DS patients and surgery-first patients.

Results

The 3-year PFS rates for the NAC DS group were significantly higher than those for the surgery-first group (80.0 vs. 58.7; p = 0.037), and the progression hazard ratio of the NAC DS group compared with the surgery-first group was 0.394 (95% confidence interval 0.159–0.978; p = 0.045).

Conclusions

The NAC DS group showed a high 3-year PFS compared with the surgery-first group, with standard S-1 postoperative chemotherapy or observation. NAC DS can be expected to be beneficial as the standard therapy for advanced gastric cancer and should be adopted for the test arm of a randomized controlled phase III trial.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-019-07299-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Co-operative groups in the development of chemotherapy for gastric cancer

In the multimodality treatment strategy for gastric cancer, chemotherapy has an important role in conferring survival benefit. For the last three decades, great progress has been achieved in adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy. Powerful combination regimens using doublet or triplet cytotoxic agents have been developed and new molecular targeted drugs, including trastuzumab and ramucirumab, have been introduced in clinical practice. These advances have resulted from the accumulation of many clinical trials. A well-designed phase III trial can change standard treatment; however, such a trial is hard to complete due to its huge cost and need to recruit many patients. Some co-operative groups have actively made efforts at fundraising and patient recruitment, which can make implementation of high-quality and large-scale phase III trials possible. This review summarizes the development of chemotherapy for gastric cancer with focus on co-operative groups around the world, considering effective treatment developments in gastric cancer. We studied 11 active co-operative groups, including six in Europe, two in the United States, and three in Japan, that have completed one or more phase III trials cited in the major guidelines. Each co-operative group had its own characteristics and contributed to the establishment of standard treatment in each region. International collaboration in the development of gastric cancer treatment may be difficult due to regional differences in standards of care, particularly for resectable gastric cancer. Whereas, intergroup collaboration within each region is a reasonable method to effectively develop treatments for resectable and advanced gastric cancer.

Re-emerging role of macroscopic appearance in treatment strategy for gastric cancer

Pathological outcomes are definitely the most important prognostic factors in gastric cancer, but they can be obtained only after surgical resection. Use of preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is becoming widespread for aggressive human cancer, so clinical factors such as macroscopic features are important as they are highly predictive for patient prognosis. In gastric cancer, the macroscopic type represents a distinct prognosis; Type 0 represents early gastric cancer with excellent prognosis, but, among advanced tumors, giant Type III and Type IV tumors have a dismal prognosis. Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) Stomach Cancer Study Group adopted macroscopic features as high-risk entities in clinical trials. It makes sense for risk classification to use macroscopic phenotypes because The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Network has lately subcategorized different histologies associated with specific macroscopic types by the molecular features of the whole genome. Dismal prognosis of Type IV gastric cancer is notorious, but similar prognosis was seen in giant Type III gastric cancer defined as 8 cm or beyond, both of which are unique for their propensity of peritoneal dissemination. In this review, clinical relevance including prognosis of such macroscopic high-risk features will be separately debated in the context of precision medicine and updated prognostic outcomes will be presented under the present standard therapy of curative surgery followed by postoperative S-1 chemotherapy. Moreover, promising emerging novel therapeutic strategies including trimodal potent regimens or intraperitoneal chemotherapy will be described for such aggressive gastric cancer.