Does chemoradiotherapy improve outcomes for surgically resected adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagus?

A qualitative classification signature for post-surgery 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in gastric cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Currently, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ACRT) is a preferred regimen for post-surgery gastric cancer (GC). However, the survival outcome of 5-FU-based ACRT varies greatly among different GC patients. Thus, it is necessary to classify which patients may benefit from 5-FU-based ACRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected 577 GC and 84 adjacent normal samples for training and 675 GC samples for validation. Based on the within-sample relative expression orderings (REOs) of gene expression levels, reversal gene pairs were selected, and the pairs correlating with overall survival (OS) of GC patients receiving 5-FU-based ACRT were identified as candidates. Finally, an optimized set of candidate gene pairs was selected as a classification signature in training data and validated in validation data.

RESULTS

A signature consisting of 34 gene pairs was identified in training data and validated in three independent datasets. The classified low-risk group had better OS than the classified high-risk group. We also analyzed the recurrent free survival or disease free survival (RFS/DFS) of the validation datasets, and the similar results were shown. Furthermore, although the signature was identified based on the OS of GC patients receiving ACRT, it was not a prognostic signature for patients treated with surgery alone, but may be a potential signature for 5-FU-based chemotherapy alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The signature can accurately classify GC patients who may benefit from 5-FU-based ACRT, which could aid clinicians in tailoring more effective GC treatments.

Clinicopathological Characteristics and Prognosis of Upper Gastric Cancer Patients in China: A 32-Year Single-Center Retrospective Clinical Study

Purpose

Upper or proximal gastric cancer occurs in the upper third of the stomach between the cardia and a line connecting the greater and lesser curvatures. As it differs from other gastric cancers in pathology and prognosis, we evaluated patient and disease characteristics that might guide improved treatment and survival of upper gastric cancer.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 649 patients with upper gastric cancer and 1551 patients with lower gastric cancer and R0 radical surgery at our institution between January 1980 and December 2012.

Results

Survival after radical surgery for upper gastric cancer was 77.8% at 1 year, 49.6% at 3 years, and 41.1% at 5 years. The corresponding rates for lower gastric cancer were 85.9%, 60.0%, and 57.2% (p < 0.001). Upper gastric cancer had a poor prognosis. Sex (p = 0.036), tumor diameter (p = 0.001), macroscopic type (p < 0.001), pTM stage (p < 0.001), tissue differentiation type (p = 0.003), and serosal invasion (p = 0.034) were independently associated with lymph node metastasis. The macroscopic type (p = 0.045), lymphovascular tumor emboli (p = 0.021), and pTNM stage were independently associated with recurrence and metastasis. Survival of 333 patients with D2 total gastrectomy was 81.3% at 1 year, 54.4% at 3 years, and 45.2% at 5 years. The corresponding rates for 316 proximal gastrectomy patients were 75.4%, 44.9%, and 36.7%. Radical total gastrectomy had better survival than radical proximal resection.

Conclusions

Upper gastric cancers were more aggressive, had a worse prognosis, and were more prone to recurrence and metastasis compared with lower gastric cancers. Survival was better after total gastrectomy than after proximal resection.

Are the indications for postoperative radiotherapy in the NCCN guidelines for patients with gastric adenocarcinoma too broad? A study based on the SEER database

Background

The types of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) for whom postoperative radiotherapy can improve the disease-specific survival rate (DSS) remain controversial. This study aims to explore the ideal indications.

Methods

Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database with T3–4Nx or TxN+ GA from January 1988 to December 2012 were included and divided into a postoperative chemoradiotherapy group (Group R) and a postoperative chemotherapy group (Group C). We established a nomogram to predict DSS and then divided entire patient cohort into low-risk and high-risk groups based on the DSS predicted by the nomogram.

Results

The Cox multiple regression analysis demonstrated that various risk factors affected DSS for Group R. Based on these risk factors, a nomogram for predicting DSS was established. The decision curve indicated that the best clinical effect could be obtained when the threshold probability was 0–58%. The patients were then divided into low-risk (< 69 points) and high-risk (≥ 69 points) groups according to the five-year DSS predicted. DSS was significantly better for Group R than for Group C for high-risk patients (P < 0.001) but was similar for low-risk patients (P = 0.732).

Conclusion

At present, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines may include an overly broad range of indications for postoperative radiotherapy for patients with GA. For intestinal GA patients with a postoperative pathologic stage of T1 N1 who are younger than 65 years, have had more than 15 lymph nodes dissected, and have received postoperative chemotherapy, postoperative radiotherapy should not be recommended.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4957-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinicopathological features and prognosis of patients <45 years old with esophageal adenocarcinoma comparing to other age groups

BACKGROUND

To analyze the clinicopathological features and prognosis of younger patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).

METHODS

A total of 2,601 patients diagnosed with EAC between 1988 and 2011 were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. All patients underwent primary tumor resection and regional lymphadenectomy without preoperative radiotherapy. The patients were into four age groups (<45, 45-59, 60-74, ≥75), with 94, 813, 1,272 and 422 patients in each group respectively.

RESULTS

Patients in the age <45 group were more likely to have lymph node (LN) metastasis (P=0.002), postoperative radiotherapy (P<0.001) and advanced T and N stage (P=0.003, 0.014) compared to the other three groups. We then conducted two Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for the sex, race, number of LNs examined, histological grade, postoperative radiation. The hazard ratio (HR) was higher in patients <45 y and the survival rate were paradoxically lower compared to the patients between 45-60 years old (P=0.046, 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients <45 y had the most aggressive clinicopathological features of EAC and poorer survival rate after radical esophagectomy.

Phase I study of postoperative radiotherapy combined with capecitabine for gastric cancer

AIM: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of capecitabine combined with postoperative radiotherapy for gastric cancer.

METHODS: We enrolled patients with any T stage and node-positive gastroesophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma after complete resection with negative margins (R0) or microscopic (R1) or macroscopic (R2) resection. Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using a five-to-seven-field, coplanar, sliding window technique was delivered to the tumor bed (T4b), anastomosis site, duodenal stump and regional lymph nodes (LNs) to a total dose of 45 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction, 5 d/wk). Patients with R1 or R2 resection received 10.8 Gy as a boost. Capecitabine was administered twice daily on every radiotherapy treatment day in a dose-escalation schedule (mg/m²) of 625 (level I, n = 6), 700 (level II, n = 6), 800 (level III, n = 6), 900 (level IV, n = 0) and 1000 (level V, n = 0). DLT was defined as grade 4 leukopenia or neutropenia, grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia or anemia and grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity.

RESULTS: Between October 2007 and August 2009, 18 patients (12 men, 6 women; median age, 54 years) were enrolled in the study. The median number of positive LNs was 6, and total number of resected LNs was 19. Twelve patients underwent R0 resection (66.7%). Fifteen patients received adjuvant chemotherapy under the leucovorin, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) regimen. Six patients each were enrolled at dose levels I, II and III. Grade 1-3 leukopenia (16 patients, 88.9%), anorexia (15, 83.3%) and nausea (15, 83.3%) were the most common toxicities. Grade 3 anorexia/nausea and grade 4 vomiting occurred in one level-I patient. Grade 3 anorexia and nausea occurred in one level-II patient. One level-III patient developed grade 4 neutropenia, while another developed grade 3 radiation esophagitis. No abnormal liver or renal function examinations were observed. Three patients did not finish chemoradiotherapy because of DLTs and two without DLTs received sequential boosts (total dose, 55.8 Gy).

CONCLUSION: The MTD of capecitabine was 800 mg/m² twice daily concurrent with IMRT for gastric cancer after surgery. The DLTs were anorexia/nausea, vomiting, neutropenia and radiation esophagitis.

Does neoadjuvant chemotherapy improve outcomes for patients with gastric cancer?

BACKGROUND

The role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy for gastric cancer remains undefined. We compared the outcomes for patients treated with surgery alone or with the addition of adjuvant or neaodjuvant treatment.

METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective evaluation of a prospective database of gastric cancer patients treated from 2000 to 2008 was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 173 patients with gastric cancer underwent surgical extirpation. Of the 173 patients, 43% had early-stage disease (less than stage 2) and 57% had late-stage disease (stage 2 or greater; American Joint Committee on Cancer, 2010). The median survival from the date of diagnosis for those treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) (n = 35), adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 21), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (n = 18), both NAC and adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 11), or surgery alone (n = 88) was 26.3, 17.3, greater than 60, greater than 60, and 50.3 months, respectively. The addition of NAC to surgery was detrimental to survival in those with early-stage disease (P = 0.002) and did not improve survival in those with late-stage disease (P = 0.687). For those with late-stage disease, surgery with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy exhibited the best overall survival compared with surgery alone (P = 0.021) or surgery with adjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.01). Patients treated with NAC had a greater rate of R0 resection compared with surgery alone (P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC for patients with gastric cancer does not significantly improve the overall outcomes for those with late-stage disease and could be detrimental to survival for those with early-stage disease. However, treatment with NAC resulted in an improved rate of R0 resection.