Updated Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer

Surgical resection is currently the best curative approach for gastric cancer (GC); however, the prognosis of patients with advanced GC remains poor even with curative resection. For this reason, perioperative chemotherapy has been combined with surgery to reduce the risk of postoperative recurrence. Standard perioperative chemotherapy for resectable advanced GC varies from region to region. Postoperative S-1 therapy was standardized via the ACTS-GC study in East Asia, perioperative ECF (Epirubicin + Cisplatin + Fluorouracil) was standardized via the MAGIC study in Europe, and postoperative chemoradiotherapy was standardized via the US intergroup study in North America. Since then, more intensive regimens have been developed. In recent years, perioperative therapy using novel agents, such as molecular-targeted drugs and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has also been tested and evaluated in the three major regions (East Asia, Europe, and North America) with promising results. Perioperative chemotherapy has become an integral part of many treatment strategies and requires continued research and evaluation.

Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic approaches to gastrectomy: a National Cancer Database study

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is associated with significant mortality worldwide. Radical gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy is considered the only curative option. Traditionally, these operations are associated with significant morbidity. Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and more recently robotic gastrectomy (RG) techniques have been developed to potentially decrease the perioperative morbidity. We sought to compare oncologic outcomes with laparoscopic and robotic techniques for gastrectomy.

METHODS

Utilizing the National Cancer Database we identified patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma. Patients were stratified by open, robotic or laparoscopic surgical technique. Open gastrectomy patients were excluded.

RESULTS

We identified 1,301 patients who underwent RG and 4,892 LG with median ages of 65 (20-90) and 66 (18-90) respectively, p = 0.02. The mean number of positive lymph nodes were higher in the LG 2.2 ± 4.4 vs RG 1.9 ± 3.8, p = 0.01. The R0 resections were higher in the RG at 94.5% vs 91.9% in LG, p = 0.001. Conversions to open were 7.1% in the RG and 16% in the LG group, p < 0.001. The median length of hospitalization was 8 (6-11) in both groups. There was no difference in the 30-day readmission (p = 0.65), 30-day mortality (p = 0.85) and 90-day mortality (p = 0.34) between groups. The median and overall 5-year survival was 71.3 mo and 56% in the RG and 66.1 mo and 52% in the LG, p = 0.03. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, location of gastric cancer, histology grade, pathologic T-stage, pathologic N-stage, surgical margins, and facility volume were all predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are both acceptable approaches to gastrectomy. However, conversions to open are higher and R0 resections rates are lower in the laparoscopic group. Additionally, a survival benefit is demonstrated in those undergoing robotic gastrectomy.

The definition of "R1" lymph node dissection status in patients undergoing curative-aim gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma: A proof of concept study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to define and investigate the prognostic impact of "R1-Lymph-node dissection" during gastrectomy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study conducted with 499 patients undergoing curative-aim gastrectomy. We defined R1-Lymph dissection as an involvement of lymph node stations anatomically connected with lymph node stations outside the declared level of dissection (D1 to D2+). The primary outcomes were disease-free and disease-specific survival (DFS and DSS).

RESULTS

At multivariable analysis, the type of gastrectomy, pT and pN were associated with DFS, and the type of gastrectomy, R1-Margin status, R1-Lymph status, pT, pN and adjuvant therapy were associated with DSS. Moreover, pT and R1-Lymph status were the only factors associated with overall loco-regional recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we introduced the concept of R1-Lymph-node dissection, which was significantly associated with DSS and appeared to be a stronger prognostic factor for loco-regional recurrence than the R1 status on the resection margin.

Prevention and treatment of a positive proximal margin after gastrectomy for cardia cancer

A tumour-positive proximal margin (PPM) after extended gastrectomy for oesophagogastric junction (OGJ) adenocarcinoma is observed in approximately 2-20% of patients. Although a PPM is an unfavourable prognostic factor, the clinical relevance remains unclear as it may reflect poor tumour biology. This narrative review analyses the most relevant literature on PPM after gastrectomy for OGJ cancers. Awareness of the risk factors and possible measures that can be taken to reduce the risk of PPM are important. In patients with a PPM, surgical and non-surgical treatments are available but the effectiveness remains unclear.

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy vs adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of gastroesophageal junction after D2/R0 resection

BACKGROUND

For Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of gastroesophageal junction (AGE), the efficacy of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after D2/R0 resection remains uncertain.

AIM

To determine whether CRT was superior to chemotherapy (CT) alone after D2/R0 resection for locally advanced Siewert type II/III AGE.

METHODS

We identified 316 locally advanced Siewert type II/III AGE patients who were treated with D2/R0 resection at National Cancer Center from 2011 to 2018. 57 patients received adjuvant CRT and 259 patients received adjuvant CT. We followed patients for overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival, and recurrence pattern.

RESULTS

Five-year OS rates of the CRT group and the CT group for all patients were 66.7% and 41.9% (P = 0.010). Five-year OS rates of the CRT group and the CT group for Siewert type III AGE patients were 65.7% and 43.9% (P = 0.006). Among the 195 patients whose recurrence information could be obtained, 18 cases (34.6%) and 61 cases (42.7%) were diagnosed as recurrence in the CRT group and CT group, respectively. The local and regional recurrence rates in the CRT group were lower than that in the CT group (22.2% vs 24.6%, 27.8% vs 39.3%). Multivariable cox regression analysis showed that vascular invasion, nerve invasion, and adjuvant CRT were important prognostic factors for Siewert type III AGE.

CONCLUSION

For locally advanced Siewert type III AGE, adjuvant CRT may prolong OS and reduce the regional recurrence rate.

Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer: A Review

Importance

Surgery plays a critical role in the management of all stages of gastric cancer.

Observations

For patients with early gastric cancer and low risk of lymph node metastasis, endoscopic therapy or surgery alone is potentially curative. Novel techniques, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy, may allow for greater use of stomach-sparing procedures that could improve quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes; however, experience with these techniques is rare outside of East Asia, and studies of long-term outcomes are still ongoing. Patients with later-stage localized gastric cancer benefit from more extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodality therapy, as they are at risk for nodal and distant metastases. There have been recent advances in chemotherapy that have led to improved survival, but the optimal sequencing of multimodality therapy is still being investigated. Better systemic therapy may also increase the role of surgery for patients with oligometastatic disease. There are ongoing studies examining the efficacy of peritoneal-directed therapies in both patients with low-volume peritoneal disease and patients at high risk of peritoneal recurrence.

Conclusions and Relevance

The management of gastric cancer continues to evolve. Surgeons should be aware of novel surgical approaches currently under investigation as well as how surgery fits into the contemporary multidisciplinary approach to this disease.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Might Be Recommended to Patients With Positive Margin After Gastrectomy: A 20-Year Retrospective Analysis in a Single Center

Background

Margin positivity after gastric cancer resection is associated with poorer outcomes. However, the prognostic factors and the choice of postoperative adjuvant treatment of patients with positive margin (PM) after gastrectomy are still being debated.

Methods

A single-center, retrospective analysis was conducted for patients with PM after gastrectomy from the China National Cancer Center Gastric Cancer Database (NCCGCDB) from 1998 to 2018. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS).

Results

A total of 449 patients were included in the study, including 192 (42.8%) in the proximal PM group (PPM), 205 (45.7%) in the distal PM group (DPM), and 52 (11.6%) in the bilateral PM group (BPM). The 3- and 5-year OS rates for the PM patients investigated were 47.5% and 39.3%, respectively, and the 3- and 5-year RFS rates were 60.0% and 53.6%, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression analysis proved total gastrectomy (hazard ratio (HR): 1.783, 95%CI: 1.133–2.805, p = 0.012), pT4 (HR: 5.264, 95%CI: 1.493–18.565, p = 0.01), pN2 (HR: 2.263, 95%CI: 1.164–4.397, p = 0.016), pN3 (HR: 2.327, 95%CI: 1.233–4.393, p = 0.009), and combined resection (HR: 1.952, 95%CI: 1.256–3.034, p = 0.003) to be independent risk factors of OS, and pT3 (HR: 9.257, 95%CI: 1.152–74.386, p = 0.036) and pT4 (HR: 11.361, 95%CI: 1.469–87.847, p = 0.020) to be independent risk factors for RFS. Adjuvant chemotherapy prolonged OS in the PPM group (p = 0.032) and prolonged RFS in the PPM group (p < 0.001) and the DPM group (p = 0.035) compared with surgery alone.

Conclusions

Advanced pathologic stage was associated with poor prognosis, and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy might be recommended in PM patients after gastrectomy. Still, further prospective trials are warranted to verify and support our conclusions.

Perioperative chemotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy strategies in resectable gastric and gastroesophageal cancer: A Markov decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Perioperative chemotherapy has been shown to improve overall survival (OS) for operable gastric and gastroesophageal cancer. However, optimal sequence of surgery and chemotherapy has not been clearly identified. Markov models are useful for analyzing the outcomes of different treatment strategies in the absence of adequately powered randomized clinical trials. In this study, we use Markov decision analysis models to compare median OS (mOS), quality-adjusted mOS, life expectancy (LE), and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of perioperative chemotherapy with adjuvant chemotherapy strategies in resectable gastric and gastroesophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

Markov models are constructed to compare two strategies: adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery and preoperative chemotherapy followed by cancer resection and postoperative chemotherapy. LE and QALE are calculated analytically, and mOS are obtained by simulation. Parameters used in the models are computed from prospective clinical trial data published in PUBMED from January 2000 to July 2020.

RESULTS

Total of 8088 patients from 25 prospective studies were included in this analysis. Regardless of R0 resection ratio, the analyses of the models show a higher mOS for patients in the perioperative therapy arm compared to adjuvant chemotherapy. For R0 resected patients, the perioperative therapy arm provided an additional 11.0 mOS months (61.3 months vs. 50.3 months). For R1 resected patients, the perioperative therapy arm had mOS of 17.0 months vs. 10.7 months in adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The Markov models indicate that perioperative chemotherapy improves mOS, quality-adjusted mOS, LE, and QALE for resectable gastric and gastroesophageal cancer patients compared to adjuvant chemotherapy strategies.

The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): Clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer, 2021

There exist differences in the epidemiological characteristics, clinicopathological features, tumor biological characteristics, treatment patterns, and drug selections between gastric cancer patients from the Eastern and Western countries. The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) has organized a panel of senior experts specializing in all sub-specialties of gastric cancer to compile a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer since 2016 and renews it annually. Taking into account regional differences, giving full consideration to the accessibility of diagnosis and treatment resources, these experts have conducted expert consensus judgment on relevant evidence and made various grades of recommendations for the clinical diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer to reflect the value of cancer treatment and meeting health economic indexes in China. The 2021 CSCO Clinical Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer covers the diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, and screening of gastric cancer. Based on the 2020 version of the CSCO Chinese Gastric Cancer guidelines, this updated guideline integrates the results of major clinical studies from China and overseas for the past year, focused on the inclusion of research data from the Chinese population for more personalized and clinically relevant recommendations. For the comprehensive treatment of non-metastatic gastric cancer, attentions were paid to neoadjuvant treatment. The value of perioperative chemotherapy is gradually becoming clearer and its recommendation level has been updated. For the comprehensive treatment of metastatic gastric cancer, recommendations for immunotherapy were included, and immune checkpoint inhibitors from third-line to the first-line of treatment for different patient groups with detailed notes are provided.

Towards Personalization in the Curative Treatment of Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and has a high mortality rate. In the last decades, treatment strategy has shifted from an exclusive surgical approach to a multidisciplinary strategy. Treatment options for patients with resectable gastric cancer as recommended by different worldwide guidelines, include perioperative chemotherapy, pre- or postoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. Although gastric cancer is a heterogeneous disease with respect to patient-, tumor-, and molecular characteristics, the current standard of care is still according to a one-size-fits-all approach. In this review, we discuss the background of the different treatment strategies in resectable gastric cancer including the current standard, the specific role of radiotherapy, and describe the current areas of research and potential strategies for personalization of therapy.

What are the important prognostic factors in gastric cancer with positive duodenal margins? A multi-institutional analysis

PURPOSE

Positive margins are reported in from 4.8 to 9.5% of all gastric cancer surgeries and they have a negative impact on the overall survival. Few cases with positive duodenal margins have been included in previous studies regarding the prognosis.

METHODS

This multi-institutional retrospective study included 115 gastric cancer patients with positive duodenal margins following gastrectomy between January 2002 and December 2017. The association between clinicopathological factors and the overall survival was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The three-year overall survival was 22% and the median survival was 13 months. A multivariate analysis found that distant metastasis, no postoperative chemotherapy, and non-Type 4 disease were significantly associated with a poor survival. Patients without distant metastasis who received postoperative chemotherapy had a 3-year overall survival of 56% and a median survival of 44 months.

CONCLUSION

The patients who underwent post-operative chemotherapy showed a significantly better OS compared with those who did not undergo post-operative chemotherapy, regardless of the existence of distant metastasis. Postoperative chemotherapy may, therefore, improve the prognosis of surgically treated gastric cancer patients with positive duodenal margins.

Impact of adjuvant therapy in patients with a microscopically positive margin after resection for gastric and esophageal cancers

Background

A microscopically positive (R1) resection margin following resection for gastric and esophageal cancers has been documented to be a poor prognostic factor. The optimal strategy and impact of different modalities of adjuvant treatment for an R1 resection margin remain unclear.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed for patients with gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC) from 2006-2016. Electronic medical records of all patients with an R1 resection margin were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods were used to analyze recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) with stage and neoadjuvant treatment as covariates in the multivariate analysis.

Results

We identified 69 gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma patients with a R1 resection. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was used in 13% of patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 12%, surgery alone in 75%. Margins involved included proximal in 30%, distal in 14%, radial in 52% and multiple margins in 3% of patients. Pathological staging showed 3% with stage I disease, 20% stage II and 74% stage III. Adjuvant therapy was given in 52% of R1 pts (28% CRT, 20% chemotherapy alone, 3% radiation alone, 1% reoperation). Median RFS was 14.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.1-17.2]. The site of first recurrence was 72% distant, 12% mixed, 16% locoregional alone. Median OS was 34.5 months (95% CI, 23.3-57.9) for all patients. There was no significant difference in RFS (adjusted P=0.26) or OS (adjusted P=0.83) comparing modality of adjuvant therapy.

Conclusions

Most patients with positive margins after resection for gastric and esophageal cancer had advanced pathologic stage and prognosis was poor. Our study did not find improved RFS or OS with adjuvant treatment and only one patient had reresection. The main failure pattern was distant recurrence, suggesting that patients being considered for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) should be carefully selected. Further studies are required to determine factors to select patients with good prognosis despite a positive margin, or those who may benefit from adjuvant treatment.

Impact of proximal resection margin involvement on survival outcome in patients with proximal gastric cancer

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for proximal resection margin involvement and its impact on survival outcome in patients with proximal gastric cancer.

METHODS

A total of 488 patients who underwent potentially curative resection for proximal gastric cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Clinicopathological characteristics and survival differences between patients with positive and negative resection margins were compared and prognostic factors were determined by Cox multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

In this study, 7.6% (37/488) of patients with proximal gastric cancer had a positive proximal resection margin after postoperative histopathological examination. Positive resection margins were significantly associated with advanced tumour stage and more aggressive biological features including larger tumour size, serosal invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Serosal invasion (OR 4.543, 95% CI 2.201 to 9.380, p<0.001) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 2.279, 95% CI 1.129 to 4.600, p<0.05) were independent risk factors for positive proximal resection margins. In terms of survival outcome, positive resection margins had an adverse impact on the prognosis of patients with proximal gastric cancer (median DFS: 20.7 vs 30.2 months, p<0.001). The multivariate analysis indicated that positive resection margins (HR 1.494, 95% CI 1.042 to 2.142, p=0.029), T stage (T3-T4, HR 2.264, 95% CI 1.484 to 3.454, p<0.001) and N stage (N1-N2 stage, HR 1.696, 95% CI 1.279 to 2.248, p<0.001; N3 stage, HR 2.691, 95% CI 1.967 to 3.681, p<0.001) were independent prognostic factors for patients with proximal gastric cancer.

CONCLUSION

Proximal resection margin involvement was an indicator of more aggressive tumours and an independent prognostic factor for patients with proximal gastric cancer. Aggressive efforts should be made to achieve a negative resection margin if gastric cancer was deemed to be potentially resectable.

Current status of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer

Although radical gastrectomy is a standard treatment for advanced gastric cancer, recurrence remains high. After several large-scale controlled studies have shown the beneficial effects of adjuvant chemotherapy, that treatment emerged as a standard option for advanced gastric cancer after gastrectomy. However, various guidelines from different countries have suggested different adjuvant chemotherapies. Understanding the differences between guidelines is very important for investigating further therapeutic strategies. Fortunately, because there are many ongoing studies about new regimens for adjuvant treatment, it is expected that patients with gastric cancer after surgery will have better outcome.

How I treat gastric adenocarcinoma

Gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (GC) represents a worldwide problem, this being the fifth most common malignancy. The fragility of patients with GC together with the aggressiveness of this tumour makes it as one of the most difficult neoplasias to manage. This article summarises the main strategies for treating patients with GC. Correct assessment of patients with GC requires a multidisciplinary evaluation and close follow-up. For patients with resectable tumours, perioperative chemotherapy should be always considered, especially in the neoadjuvant setting given its capacity for tumour downstaging and eradication of micro-metastases. In the metastatic setting, first-line and second-line treatment improve survival and quality of life in patients with GC. In this setting, only trastuzumab as first-line therapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive tumours and ramucirumab as second-line therapy have demonstrated a clear survival improvement. The lack of adequate biomarker selection and the intrinsic heterogeneity of these tumours have jeopardised the possible usefulness of many other targeted agents. Finally, when considering GC carcinogenesis as a multiple stepwise process from initial inflammation starting in the gastric epithelia, immune checkpoint inhibitors may improve the survival of these patients, although the optimal setting for their activity has yet to be fully elucidated.

The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer

China is one of the countries with the highest incidence of gastric cancer. There are differences in epidemiological characteristics, clinicopathological features, tumor biological characteristics, treatment patterns, and drug selection between gastric cancer patients from the Eastern and Western countries. Non-Chinese guidelines cannot specifically reflect the diagnosis and treatment characteristics for the Chinese gastric cancer patients. The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) arranged for a panel of senior experts specializing in all sub-specialties of gastric cancer to compile, discuss, and revise the guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer based on the findings of evidence-based medicine in China and abroad. By referring to the opinions of industry experts, taking into account of regional differences, giving full consideration to the accessibility of diagnosis and treatment resources, these experts have conducted experts’ consensus judgement on relevant evidence and made various grades of recommendations for the clinical diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer to reflect the value of cancer treatment and meeting health economic indexes. This guideline uses tables and is complemented by explanatory and descriptive notes covering the diagnosis, comprehensive treatment, and follow-up visits for gastric cancer.

[Chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy indications in the treatment of locally advanced gastric carcinoma]

Currently, there is no international consensus on the best treatment regimen for patients with advanced resectable gastric carcinoma. Three approaches exist abroad continents. In France and Europe, perioperative chemotherapy and gastrectomy with D1.5 lymph-node dissection is the current standard. In Japan and South Korea, postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery with D2 lymph-node dissection is the standard treatment. In the United States, where limited lymph-node dissection is frequently performed, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after surgery is the standard treatment. In France, postoperative chemoradiotherapy indications are discussed in limited settings: patients with locally advanced gastric cancer or lymph node involvement discovered on the pathologic report of the gastrectomy without preoperative chemotherapy delivery or in case of non-carcinologic resection (R1). Exclusive chemoradiotherapy can be proposed in patients unfit for surgery.

Current challenges in gastric cancer surgery: European perspective

Gastric cancer (GC) remains one of the most common causes of cancer death worldwide with expected 5-year survival rates around 25% in Western countries. In order to improve treatment strategy, a most effective staging process should be completed. A novel TNM staging for GC has been proposed recently, along with a separate staging system for GC patients who underwent preoperative therapy (ypStage). Availability of high-quality imaging and access to diagnostic laparoscopy with lavage cytology should be applied while planning the multimodal therapy. In the European setting, GC treatment is based on a combination of surgery and perioperative chemotherapy. However, in selected groups of patients with high risk of locoregional recurrence, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy should be considered. New epidemiological trends of GC in the Western countries include an upward shift in the location of the primary tumour and a relative increase of advanced and diffuse type tumours. These trends dictate modification of surgical techniques towards a more individualized GC treatment approach.

Gastric cancer: French intergroup clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatments and follow-up (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO)

INTRODUCTION

This document is a summary of the French Intergroup guidelines regarding the management of gastric cancer published in October 2016, available on the website of the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org), updated in October 2017.

METHODS

This collaborative work was realized under the auspices of several French medical societies involved in management of gastric cancer. Recommendations are graded in three categories (A-C), according to the amount of evidence found in the literature until July 2017.

RESULTS

There are several known risk factors for gastric cancer, including Helicobacter pylori and genetic predispositions, both requiring a specific screening for patients and their relatives. The diagnosis and staging evaluation are essentially based on gastroscopy plus biopsies and computed tomography scan. The endoscopic ultrasonography can be used for superficial tumors in case of discussion for endoscopic resection (T1N0). For local disease (N+ and/or T > T1), the strategic therapy is based on surgery associated with perioperative chemotherapy. In the absence of preoperative treatment (for any raison), the postoperative chemoradiotherapy (or chemotherapy) should be discussed for patients with stage II or III tumor. For metastatic disease, the treatment is based on "palliative" chemotherapy consisting in a doublet or triplet regimens depending of age, performance status and HER2 tumor status. For patients with limited metastatic disease, surgical resection could be discussed in multidisciplinary meeting in case of stable disease after chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines in gastric cancer are done to help decision for daily clinical practice. These recommendations are permanently being reviewed. Each individual case must be discussed within a multidisciplinary team.

[Role of postoperative chemoradiotherapy in the therapeutic management of adenocarcinomas of the stomach and oesogastric junction]

The available data in the literature show that for gastric adenocarcinoma or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, postoperative chemoradiotherapy improves disease-free survival after surgery with D0 or D1 lymph node dissection (and perhaps D2) as well as in case of positive node or R1 resection. With the publications of perioperative chemotherapy trials, the role of postoperative radiotherapy in the therapeutic arsenal of gastric adenocarcinoma or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma becomes difficult to define. Postoperative radiotherapy is indicated in case of R1 resection.

Expression of microtubule-associated protein TPX2 in human gastric carcinoma and its prognostic significance

BACKGROUND

The molecular mechanisms underlying the development and progression of gastric carcinoma remain poorly understood. The main objective of this study was to investigate the expression level of targeting protein for Xenopus kinesin-like protein 2 (TPX2) and its clinical significance in human gastric carcinoma.

METHODS

Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and western blotting were used to determine the mRNA and protein levels of TPX2 in 20 paired gastric carcinoma tissues and the adjacent normal tissues, and the expression of TPX2 protein in 106 specimens of a gastric carcinoma tissue microarray was determined by immunohistochemistry. The associations of TPX2 expression with the clinicopathological features were analyzed, and the prognosis of gastric carcinoma patients was evaluated.

RESULTS

The results showed that the expression of TPX2 mRNA was significantly higher in gastric carcinoma than in the adjacent normal tissues in 20 paired samples. Western blotting analysis revealed that TPX2 protein was differentially increased in 17 of 20 specimens from primary human gastric carcinoma tissues compared with those from adjacent non-tumor tissues. Immunohistochemical staining showed that TPX2 over-expression was significantly associated with advanced age (P = 0.001) and tumor T stage (P = 0.003). In addition, TPX2 was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) in the multivariate analysis [hazard ratio (HR) 0.001; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.626-7.198; P = 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

TPX2 is up-regulated in gastric carcinoma and is associated with old age and tumor T stage. TPX2 may serve as a good prognostic indicator in patients with gastric carcinoma.

Recent insights in the therapeutic management of patients with gastric cancer

Gastric cancer remains frequent and one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide. In this article, we aimed to comprehensively review recent insights in the therapeutic management of gastric cancer, with focus on the surgical and perioperative management of resectable forms, and the latest advances regarding advanced diseases. Surgical improvements comprise the use of laparoscopic surgery including staging laparoscopy, a better definition of nodal dissection, and the development of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. The best individualized perioperative management should be assessed before curative-intent surgery for all patients and can consists in perioperative chemotherapy, adjuvant chemo-radiation therapy or adjuvant chemotherapy alone. The optimal timing and sequence of chemotherapy and radiation therapy with respect to surgery should be further explored. Patients with advanced gastric cancer have a poor prognosis. Nevertheless, they can benefit from doublet or triplet chemotherapy combination, including trastuzumab in HER2-positive patients. Upon progression, second-line therapy can be considered in patients with good performance status. Although anti-HER2 (trastuzumab) and anti-VEGFR (ramucirumab) may yield survival benefit, anti-EGFR and anti-HGFR therapies have failed to improve outcomes. Nevertheless, combination regimens containing cytotoxic drugs and targeted therapies should be further evaluated; keeping in mind that gastric cancer biology is different between Asia and the Western countries.

Adjuvant radiochemotherapy for gastric cancer: Should we use prognostic factors to select patients?

Radiotherapy has a not well-established role in the pre-operative and in the post-operative setting in gastric cancer (GC) patients. Randomized trials report controversial outcomes and impact on survival. In the D2 loco-regional node resection era, after a well-performed radical surgery, local treatment using radiotherapy combined to chemotherapy should be considered for locally advanced GC. Prognostic factors could help the better selection of subgroups that present high risk of loco-regional recurrence. Then, the addition of radiotherapy could improve the disease-free survival and also quality of life. There are no large prospective studies that have assessed specific factors predicting for recurrence or survival, but only retrospective series, some of them including high number of patients with homogeneous characteristics. In locally advanced GC adding radiotherapy to the post-operative chemotherapy seems to improve outcomes and quality of life. Prognostic factors such as T-stage, N-status, nodal ratio, and other histological factors should be considered to submit patients to post-operative combined treatment. Larger prospective series are necessary to investigate the role of combined chemoradiation after radical D2-resection, especially in locally advanced GC. Further prospective investigations are needed to suggest prognostic factors that have significant impact on survival and recurrence, improving the management and outcomes, particularly in locally advanced GC patients.

Recent trends and predictors of multimodality treatment for oesophageal, oesophagogastric junction, and gastric cancer: A Dutch cohort-study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, evidence supporting multimodality treatment for oesophageal, oesophagogastric junction (OGJ), and gastric cancer has accumulated. This population-based cohort-study investigates trends and predictors of utilisation of multimodality treatment for oesophagogastric cancer in the Netherlands.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry regarding patients with oesophageal (n = 5450), OGJ (n = 2168) and gastric cancer (n = 6683) without distant metastases who had undergone R0 or R1 surgery diagnosed between 2000 and 2012. Follow-up was completed until February 2014. Preoperative/postoperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy combined with surgery were considered multimodality treatment. Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyse the association of age, gender, socioeconomic status, clinical T and N classification, hospital type, comprehensive cancer centre network region, and year of diagnosis, with multimodality treatment receipt. Additional analyses were performed to explore differences in trends of utilisation of multimodality treatment between academic and non-academic hospitals.

RESULTS

Multimodality treatment utilisation for oesophageal, OGJ and gastric cancer increased significantly to 90%, 85% and 56% in 2012, respectively. In oesophageal and OGJ cancer patients, preoperative chemoradiotherapy was most frequently administered (85% and 47% in 2012, respectively), and in gastric cancer patients preoperative chemotherapy (47% in 2012). Lower age, higher clinical T and N classification, and diagnosis in more recent years were significantly associated with more frequent multimodality treatment receipt. The adoption of most types of multimodality treatment in academic hospitals preceded non-academic hospitals by a year.

CONCLUSION

In the Netherlands, the utilisation of multimodality treatment for oesophagogastric cancer has significantly increased during the past decade, especially in oesophageal and OGJ cancer. Multimodality treatment utilisation was especially dependent on patient and tumour characteristics and year of diagnosis, but multimodality treatment trends seem to be related to the publication of landmark studies, participation in nationally running clinical trials, and hospital type, preceding national guidelines.

IMRT limits nephrotoxicity after chemoradiotherapy for gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

This observational study compares the effect of different radiotherapy techniques on late nephrotoxicity after postoperative chemoradiotherapy for gastric cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Dosimetric parameters were compared between AP-PA, 3D-conformal and IMRT techniques. Renal function was measured by (99m)Tc-MAG-3 renography, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and the development of hypertension. Mixed effects models were used to compare renal function over time.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients treated between 2002 and 2010 were included, AP-PA (n=31), 3D-conformal (n=25) and IMRT (n=31), all 45 Gy in 25 fractions. Concurrent chemotherapy: 5FU/leucovorin (n=4), capecitabine (n=37), and capecitabine/cisplatin (n=46). Median follow-up time was 4.7 years (range 0.2-8). With IMRT, the mean dose to the left kidney was significantly lower. Left kidney function decreased progressively in the total study population, however with IMRT this occurred at a lower rate. A dose-effect relationship was present between mean dose to the left kidney and the left kidney function. GFR decreased only moderately in time, which was not different between techniques. Six patients developed hypertension, of whom none in the IMRT group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms progressive late nephrotoxicity in patients treated with postoperative chemoradiotherapy by different techniques for gastric cancer. Nephrotoxicity was less severe with IMRT and should be considered the preferred technique.