[Standardized and quality-assured predictive PD-L1 testing in the upper gastrointestinal tract. German version]

As a result of the high approval dynamics and the growing number of immuno-oncological therapy concepts, the complexity of therapy decisions and control in the area of carcinomas of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and stomach is constantly increasing. Since the treatment indication for PD‑1 inhibitors that are currently approved in the European Union is often linked to the expression of PD-L1 (programmed cell death-ligand 1), the evaluation of tissue-based predictive markers by the pathologist is of crucial importance for treatment stratification. Even though the immunohistochemical analysis of the PD-L1 expression status is one of the best studied, therapy-relevant biomarkers for an immuno-oncological treatment, due to the high heterogeneity of carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract, there are challenges in daily clinical diagnostic work with regard to implementation, standardization and interpretation of testing. An interdisciplinary group of experts from Germany has taken a position on relevant questions from daily pathological and clinical practice, which concern the starting material, quality-assured testing and the interpretation of pathological findings, and has developed recommendations for structured reporting.

Current and Future Biomarkers in Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Biomarker-based therapies have shown improved patient outcomes across various cancer types. The purpose of this review to summarize our knowledge of current and future biomarkers in esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGA).

METHODS

In this publication, we will review current standard biomarkers in patients with upper GI cancers. We will also discuss novel biomarkers that are under investigations and their associated therapies that are currently in clinical trials.

RESULTS

EGAa are a group of heterogeneous diseases, both anatomically and molecularly. There are several established biomarkers (HER2, PD-L1, microsattelite instability or mismatch repair protein expression) that allow for individualized treatments for patients with these cancers. There are also several emerging biomarkers for EGA, some of which have clinically relevant associated therapies. Claudin 18.2 is the furthest along among these. Anti-claudin antibody, zolbetuximab, improved overall survival in biomarker select patients with advanced GEA in two phase 3 studies. Other novel biomarkers, such as FGFR2b and DKN01, are also in the process of validation, and treatments based on the presence of these biomarkers are currently in clinical studies.

CONCLUSION

Ongoing efforts to identify novel biomarkers in EGA have led to enhanced subclassification of upper GI cancers. These advances, coupled with the strategic application of targeted therapies and immunotherapy when appropriate, hold promise to further improve patients outcomes.

Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab in previously untreated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and previously treated gastric cancer and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: results from two expansion cohorts of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial (COSMIC-021)

Background

Cabozantinib is approved for previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) and has been investigated in gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJ). Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is approved for unresectable or metastatic HCC untreated with prior systemic therapy. We evaluated efficacy and safety of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab in aHCC previously untreated with systemic anticancer therapy or previously treated GC/GEJ.

Methods

COSMIC-021 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03170960) is an open-label, phase 1b study in solid tumours with a dose-escalation stage followed by tumour-specific expansion cohorts, including aHCC (cohort 14) and GC/GEJ (cohort 15). Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years with measurable locally advanced, metastatic, or recurrent disease per RECIST version 1.1. Patients received oral cabozantinib 40 mg daily and intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg once every 3 weeks until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1.

Findings

Patients were screened between February 14, 2019, and May 7, 2020, and 61 (30 aHCC, 31 GC/GEJ) were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. Median duration of follow-up was 31.2 months (IQR 28.5-32.7) for aHCC and 30.4 months (28.7-31.9) for GC/GEJ. Objective response rate was 13% (4/30, 95% CI 4-31) for aHCC and 0% (95% CI 0-11) for GC/GEJ. Six (20%) aHCC patients and three (10%) GC/GEJ patients had treatment-related adverse events resulting in discontinuation of either study drug.

Interpretation

Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab had clinical activity with a manageable safety profile in aHCC previously untreated with systemic anticancer therapy. Clinical activity of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab was minimal in previously treated GC/GEJ.

Funding

Exelixis, Inc., Alameda, CA, USA.

Population Based Time Trends in the Epidemiology and Mortality of Gastroesophageal Junction and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available on the epidemiology of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJAC), particularly in comparison to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). With the advent of molecular non-endoscopic Barrett's esophagus (BE) detection tests which sample the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction, early detection of EAC and GEJAC has become a possibility and their epidemiology has gained importance.

AIMS

We sought to evaluate time trends in the epidemiology and survival of patients with EAC and GEJAC in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

EAC and GEJAC patients from 1976 to 2019 were identified using ICD 9 and 10 diagnostic codes from the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP). Clinical data and survival status were abstracted. Poisson regression was used to calculate incidence rate ratios (IRR). Survival analysis and Cox proportional models were used to assess predictors of survival.

RESULTS

We included 443 patients (287 EAC,156 GEJAC). The incidence of EAC and GEJAC during 1976-2019 was 1.40 (CI 1.1-1.74) and 0.83 (CI 0.61-1.11) per 100,000 people, respectively. There was an increase in the incidence of EAC (IRR = 2.45, p = 0.011) and GEJAC (IRR = 3.17, p = 0.08) from 2000 to 2004 compared to 1995-1999, plateauing in later time periods. Most patients had associated BE and presented at advanced stages, leading to high 5-year mortality rates (66% in EAC and 59% in GEJAC). Age and stage at diagnosis were predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSION

The rising incidence of EAC/GEJAC appears to have plateaued somewhat in the last decade. However, both cancers present at advanced stages with persistently poor survival, underscoring the need for early detection.

Treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma: A rapidly evolving landscape

Gastric adenocarcinoma (GC) and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma represent frequent and severe diseases whose management has radically changed over the last 10 years. With the advent of second- and third-line standard therapies for metastatic GC patients in the 2010s, the molecular dismemberment of the disease and positive trials with immunotherapy and targeted agents will mark the 2020s. New treatment options have emerged in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic setting. In addition to improved multimodal treatment in operable patients, new subgroups have emerged depending on molecular alterations (HER2, Microsatellite instability) or expression of specific proteins in the tumour (PDL1, Claudin 18.2) making immunohistochemistry central in profiling the tumour for an optimal individualised management. The aim of this review is to describe the current standards of management of early and late stage GC and the molecular markers needed today to optimally manage our patients together with future perspectives on this disease.

Standardized and quality-assured predictive PD-L1 testing in the upper gastrointestinal tract

As a result of the high approval dynamics and the growing number of immuno-oncological concepts, the complexity of treatment decisions and control in the area of cancers of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction and stomach is constantly increasing. Since the treatment indication for PD-1 inhibitors that are currently approved in the European Union is often linked to the expression of PD-L1 (programmed cell death-ligand 1), the evaluation of tissue-based predictive markers by the pathologist is of crucial importance for treatment stratification. Even though the immunohistochemical analysis of the PD-L1 expression status is one of the best studied, therapy-relevant biomarkers for an immuno-oncological treatment, due to the high heterogeneity of carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract, there are challenges in daily clinical diagnostic work with regard to implementation, standardization and interpretation of testing. An interdisciplinary group of experts from Germany has taken a position on relevant questions from daily pathological and clinical practice, which concern the starting material, quality-assured testing and the interpretation of pathological findings, and has developed recommendations for structured reporting.

Concordance of microsatellite instability and mismatch repair status in paired biopsies and surgical specimens of resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: time for a call to action

BACKGROUND

Reliability of mismatch repair proteins and microsatellite instability assessment is essential in order to define treatment strategy and identify candidates to immune checkpoint inhibitors in locally advanced gastroesophageal carcinoma. We evaluated the concordance of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) status between endoscopic biopsies and surgical specimens.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma classified as MSI-H/dMMR by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or immunohistochemistry (IHC) and operated at three referral Institutions were included. The primary endpoint was the rate of concordance between biopsy and surgical samples. If needed, central revision by IHC/PCR was performed by specialized pathologists from coordinating Institutions.

RESULTS

Thirteen (19.7%) out of 66 patients showed discordant MSI-H/dMMR results in the original pathology reports. In most cases (11, 16.7%) this was due to the diagnosis of proficient mismatch repair status on biopsies. Among the ten cases available for central review, four were due to sample issues, four were reclassified as dMMR, one case showed dMMR status but was classified as microsatellite stable by PCR, one was linked to misdiagnosis of endoscopic biopsy by the local pathologist. Heterogeneity of mismatch repair proteins staining was observed in two cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Available methods can lead to conflicting results in MSI-H/dMMR evaluation between endoscopic biopsies and surgical samples of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Strategies aiming to improve the reliability of assessment should be primarily focused on the optimization of tissue collection and management during endoscopy and adequate training of dedicated gastrointestinal pathologists within the multidisciplinary team.

Two decades of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer surgery

PURPOSE

Diagnosis and treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer have undergone many critical changes during the last two decades. We addressed the question of how clinical reality outside of clinical trials has changed for gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients in a European center for upper gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy for gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma between 1996 and 2017 in a tertiary upper gastrointestinal center were included. The time was divided into a) before (1996-2006) (pre-CTx) and b) after (2006-2017) (CTx) the MAGIC trial. Data were comprehensively analyzed for demographics, tumor stage, perioperative treatment, surgery, histopathology, and survival rates (SR).

RESULTS

737 patients (32% female) underwent gastrectomy, 255 patients in the pre-CTx era and 482 patients in the CTx era. The median age was 65 years and the median follow-up was 27.5 months for surviving patients. Around 16.9% of patients received neoadjuvant treatment in the pre-CTx era versus 46.3% in the CTx era. The 3-year survival rate (3-YSR) was 46.4% in the pre-CTx and 60.9% in the CTx era (p < 0.001). For pretreated patients, 3-YSR was 39.0% (pre-CTx) versus 55.3% (CTx) (p = 0.168). Survival rate (SR) for locally advanced tumor stages (cT3/cT4) was higher when neoadjuvant therapy was administered (3-YSR: 56.7% vs 40.6%; p = 0.022). There were no significant differences according to sex (p = 0.357), age (p = 0.379), pT category (p = 0.817), pN stage (p = 0.074), cM stage (p = 0.112), Laurén classification (p = 0.158), and SRs (3-YSR: 60.3% vs 59.4%; p = 0.898) between the MAGIC and FLOT regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival rates have dramatically improved for gastric cancer patients during the last two decades. MAGIC and FLOT regimens showed similar results in the postsurgical follow-up.

Does radiomics play a role in the diagnosis, staging and re-staging of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma?

Radiomics is an emerging field of investigation in medicine consisting in the extraction of quantitative features from conventional medical images and exploring their potentials in improving diagnosis, prognosis and outcome prediction after therapy. Clinical applications are still limited, mostly due to reproducibility and repeatability issues as well as to limited interpretability of predictive radiomic-based features/signatures. In the specific case of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, the expectancies are particularly high, mainly due to its increasing incidence and to the limited performance of conventional imaging techniques in assessing correct diagnosis and accurate pre-surgical tumor characterization. Accordingly, current literature was reviewed, emphasizing the methodological quality. In addition, papers were scored according to the Radiomic Quality Score (RQS), weighting more the clinical applicability and generalizability of the resulting models. According to the criteria of the search, only two papers were retained: the resulting technical quality was relatively high for both, while the corresponding RQS were 15 and 19 (on a scale of 31). Although the potentials of radiomics in the setting of GEJ adenocarcinoma are relevant, they remain largely unexplored, warranting an urgent need of high-quality, possibly prospective, multicenter studies.

Current molecular biomarkers evaluation in gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: pathologist does matter

The comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas has led to the improvement of targeted and more effective treatments. As a result, several biomarkers have been introduced into clinical practice and the implementation of innovative diagnostic tools is under study. Such assessments are mainly based on the evaluation of limited biopsy material in clinical practice. In this setting, the pathologist represents a key player in the selection of patients facilitating precision medicine approaches.

PET-directed combined modality therapy for gastroesophageal junction cancer: Results of the multicentre prospective MEMORI trial of the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)

BACKGROUND

Positron emission tomography (PET) may differentiate responding and non-responding tumours early in the treatment of locally advanced gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. Early PET non-responders (P-NR) after induction CTX might benefit from changing to chemoradiation (CRT).

METHODS

Patients underwent baseline ¹⁸F-FDG PET followed by 1 cycle of CTX. PET was repeated at day 14-21 and responders (P-R), defined as ≥35% decrease in SUV_mean from baseline, continued with CTX. P-NR switched to CRT (CROSS). Patients underwent surgery 4-6 weeks post-CTX/CRT. The primary objective was an improvement in R0 resection rates in P-NR above a proportion of 70%.

RESULTS

In total, 160 patients with resectable gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas were prospectively investigated by PET scanning. Eighty-five patients (53%) were excluded. Seventy-five eligible patients were enrolled in the study. Based on PET criteria, 50 (67.6%)/24 (32.4%) were P-R and P-NR, respectively. Resection was performed on 46 responders, including one patient who withdrew the ICF, and 22 non-responders (per-protocol population). R0 resection rates were 95.6% (43/45) for P-R and 86.4% (19/22) for P-NR. No treatment related deaths occurred. With a median follow-up time of 24.5 months, estimated 18 months DFS was 75.4%/64.2% for P-R/P-NR, respectively. The estimated 18 months OS was 95.5% for P-R and 68.2% for P-NR.

CONCLUSION

The primary endpoint of the study to increase the R0 resection rate in metabolic NR was not met. PET response after induction CTX is prognostic for outcome with a prolonged OS and DFS in PET responders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00002014-000860-16.

Esophagectomy vs Gastrectomy for Early Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Gastroesophageal Junction: What is the Optimal Oncologic Surgical Treatment?

Guidelines for the management of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma recommend esophagectomy as the preferred surgical treatment. Gastrectomy has been proposed as an equivalent procedure. This study aims to compare the oncologic outcomes of these operations. The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical T1N0M0 (all sizes) and T2N0M0 (≤2cm) GEJ adenocarcinoma from 2004-2017. Patients treated with surgery-only were included and were stratified by surgical treatment. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was used to create a balanced cohort. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate for factors predictive of treatment. Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare overall survival (OS). 2,446 patients were identified. 75.1% received esophagectomy, while 24.9% were treated with gastrectomy. Patients at high volume facilities were more likely to undergo esophagectomy (OR 1.750, P < 0.001). Factors associated with lower likelihood of undergoing esophagectomy included age ≥75 years (OR 0.588, P = 0.001), female sex (OR 0.706, P = 0.003), and non-White race (OR 0.430, P < 0.001), compared to age ≤50 years, male, and White race, respectively. In the unmatched cohort, gastrectomy was associated with a higher rate of positive margins (4.1% vs 2.3%, P = 0.022). PSM yielded 591 pairs. In the matched cohort, patients treated with esophagectomy had improved 5-year OS compared to gastrectomy (70.6% vs 66.5%, P = 0.030). Multivariable analysis showed improved OS in patients treated with esophagectomy compared to gastrectomy (HR 0.767, P = 0.010). Esophagectomy is associatedwith improved survival and a lower incidence of positive margins in patients with early-stage GEJ adenocarcinoma when compared to gastrectomy.

Epidemiological Review of Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma in Asian Countries

BACKGROUND

Similar trends in the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), obesity, and Helicobacter pylori infection have been observed in Asian and Western countries despite their time differences. However, it is unclear whether the prevalence of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas in Asian countries is increasing. In this review, we discuss the epidemiological trends of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in Asian countries.

SUMMARY

The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asian countries, but most cases are considered mild. Obesity is a serious problem worldwide, but it is considered less serious in Asia than in Western countries. In Asian countries where gastric cancer is common, both cardiac and noncardiac cancers are associated with high rates of H. pylori infection, which is considered a carcinogenic risk factor for both sites of cancer. The widespread use of H. pylori eradication therapy for chronic gastritis in several Asian countries has not directly led to an increased prevalence of esophageal adenocarcinoma. One of the originating sites of junctional adenocarcinoma in most Asian countries is Barrett's esophagus, with short-segment Barrett's esophagus having much lower carcinogenicity than long-segment Barrett's esophagus. Key Messages: Considering the future trends of several risk factors for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in Asian countries, it is likely that the incidence of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma will gradually increase, but not at a rate that exceeds that of squamous cell carcinoma, as in Western countries.

Tumor Response and Symptom Palliation from RAINBOW, a Phase III Trial of Ramucirumab Plus Paclitaxel in Previously Treated Advanced Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

In the intent-to-treat (ITT) population of the RAINBOW study, objective response rate (ORR) was 28% and 16% in the ramucirumab and control arms, respectively. To further characterize tumor response, we present details on timing and extent of tumor shrinkage, as well as associations with symptom palliation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Tumor response was assessed with RECIST v1.1, and quality of life (QoL) was assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) v3.0. Prespecified and post hoc analyses were conducted in the ITT population, patients with measurable disease, or responders, and included best overall response (BOR), ORR, disease control rate (DCR), duration of response, time to response (TtR), change in tumor size, and associations of QoL with tumor shrinkage and BOR.

RESULTS

In both treatment arms, median TtR was 1.5 months. Responses were more durable in the ramucirumab versus control arm (median 4.4 vs. 2.8 months). In patients with measurable disease (78% of ITT), ORR was 36% versus 20%; DCR was 81% versus 61% in the ramucirumab versus control arms. Waterfall plots demonstrated more tumor shrinkage in the ramucirumab versus control arm. Regardless of treatment, tumor response and stable disease were associated with improved or stable QoL, with more tumor shrinkage associated with greater symptom palliation.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with ramucirumab plus paclitaxel yielded the highest ORR reported to date for patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Additional details demonstrate robustness of tumor response results. The extent of tumor shrinkage is directly associated with symptom palliation and should be considered when evaluating patient needs and treatment selection. Clinical trial identification number. NCT01170663.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel is a recognized standard of care as it improves survival for patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who have been previously treated with recommended first-line therapy. These additional data on tumor response demonstrate a positive association between tumor shrinkage and symptom palliation in a patient population that is often symptomatic. These observations included patients with nonmeasurable disease, a group of patients often underrepresented in clinical trials. This knowledge can inform treatment decisions, which align individual patient characteristics and needs with demonstrated benefits.

Brain metastases in patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer is associated with proximally located adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases

BACKGROUND

As cancer patients are surviving longer, more patients manifest brain metastases (BRMs). However, the rate of BRMs from upper gastrointestinal cancer is unclear. We therefore evaluated the frequency and prognostic effect of BRMs in this setting.

METHODS

We analyzed records of 2348 patients who were treated between January 2002 and December 2016 for upper gastrointestinal cancer, including esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (EAC; proximal EAC, Siewert types I and II), esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC; Siewert type III and stomach cancer) in our Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Database. Frequency, risk factors, and survival after BRMs were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 2348 patients, 68 (2.9%) had BRMs upon follow-up. The BRM rates were as follows: proximal EAC, 4.8%; Siewert type I, 5.9%; Siewert type II, 2.2%; Siewert type III, 0.7%; ESCC: 1.2%; and stomach cancer, 0%. Among EAC patients, Siewert type I and lymph node metastases were independent the risk factors for BRMs in the multivariable analysis. The median overall survival (OS) in the 68 patients with BRMs was only 1.16 years (95% CI 0.78-1.61). However, OS for patients who had a solitary BRM, who had BRM but no other distant metastasis, or who underwent surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery favorable.

CONCLUSION

Patients with proximally located adenocarcinoma, or with lymph node metastases are at a higher risk for BRMs and patients fare better after treatment of isolated BRM.

True esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: background of its definition and current surgical trends

The definition of true esophagogastric junction (EGJ) adenocarcinoma and its surgical treatment are debatable. We review the basis for the current definition and the Japanese surgical strategy in managing true EGJ adenocarcinoma. The Siewert classification is a well-known anatomical classification system for EGJ adenocarcinomas: type II tumors in the region 1 cm above and 2 cm below the EGJ are described as "true carcinoma of the cardia". Coincidentally, this range matches gastric cardiac gland distribution. Conversely, Nishi's classification is generally used to describe EGJ carcinomas, defined as tumors with the center located within 2 cm above and 2 cm below the EGJ, regardless of their histological subtype. This range coincides with the extent of the lower esophageal sphincter combined with gastric cardiac gland distribution. The current Japanese surgical strategy focuses on the tumor range from the EGJ to the esophagus and stomach. According to previous studies, the strategy can be roughly classified into three types. The optimal surgical procedure for true EGJ adenocarcinoma is controversial. However, an ongoing Japanese nationwide prospective trial will help confirm the appropriate standard surgery, including the optimal extent of lymph node dissection.

SEOM clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJA) (2019)

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide with a varied geographic distribution and an aggressive behavior. In Spain, it represents the sixth cause of cancer death. In Western countries, the incidence is decreasing slightly, with an increase in gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJA), a different entity that we separate specifically in the guideline. Molecular biology advances have been done recently, but do not yet lead to the choice in treatment approach except in advanced disease with overexpression of HER2. Endoscopic resection in very early stage, perioperative chemotherapy in locally advanced tumors and preliminary immune therapy resulting in advanced disease are the main treatment innovations in the GC/GEJA treatment. We describe the different evidences and recommendations following the statements of the American College of Physicians.

Cancer-Related Pneumopericardium: A Case Report and Literature Review

Pneumopericardium is a relatively rare entity mostly described in the literature as a result of causes such as penetrating/blunt trauma and iatrogenic causes during cardiothoracic procedures. We are presenting a case of pneumopericardium as a complication of progressed gastroesophageal junction tumor along with a literature review of all cancer-related pneumopericardium cases reported in the last decade. We present the case of a 65-year-old male with a past medical history significant for locally advanced gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who presented to the hospital with complaints of shortness of breath and fever. A chest X-ray showed an intact esophageal stent along with radiolucency around the cardiac silhouette which suggested pneumopericardium. Computed tomography scan of the chest confirmed the presence of pneumopericardium in posterior pericardium with foci of gas above the esophageal stent likely to be communicating with the pericardium. An echocardiogram was obtained which showed no signs of tamponade. Given the advanced nature of the disease we applied a conservative management given that the pneumopericardium was deemed to be small with no tamponade. Goals of care were discussed with the patient and his family and the patient opted for comfort care measures. This case report prompted us to perform an extensive literature review of cancer-related pneumopericardium from 2008 to 2019. We found 11 cases where it was reported secondary to malignancies of different kinds. Our aim is to compile a review for clinicians to view varied presentations and better direct therapy dependent on the individual case and clinical presentation in patients with cancer-related pneumopericardium. Moreover, although pneumopericardium is rare, it should be considered in differential diagnosis in patients presenting with shortness of breath or chest pain especially with cancers involving the cardiothoracic region.

FGFR2-Altered Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinomas Are an Uncommon Clinicopathologic Entity with a Distinct Genomic Landscape

Little is known about the genomic landscape of FGFR2‐altered gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas. This article attempts to bridge that gap, with a focus on concurrent alterations that may affect sensitivity to FGFR2‐directed therapies.

Background.

With the exception of trastuzumab, therapies directed at receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) in gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEA) have had limited success. Recurrent fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) alterations exist in GEA; however, little is known about the genomic landscape of FGFR2‐altered GEA. We examined FGFR2 alteration frequency and frequency of co‐occurring alterations in GEA.

Subjects, Materials, and Methods.

A total of 6,667 tissue specimens from patients with advanced GEA were assayed using hybrid capture‐based genomic profiling. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was determined on up to 1.1 Mb of sequenced DNA, and microsatellite instability was determined on 95 or 114 loci. Descriptive statistics were used to compare subgroups.

Results.

We identified a total of 269 (4.0%) FGFR2‐altered cases consisting of FGFR2‐amplified (amp; 193, 72% of FGFR2‐altered), FGFR2‐mutated (36, 13%), FGFR2‐rearranged (re; 23, 8.6%), and cases with multiple FGFR2 alterations (17, 6.3%). Co‐occurring alterations in other GEA RTK targets including ERBB2 (10%), EGFR (8%), and MET (3%) were observed across all classes of FGFR2‐altered GEA. Co‐occurring alterations in MYC (17%), KRAS (10%), and PIK3CA (5.6%) were also observed frequently. Cases with FGFR2amp and FGFR2re were exclusively microsatellite stable. The median TMB for FGFR2‐altered GEA was 3.6 mut/mb, not significantly different from a median of 4.3 mut/mb seen in FGFR2 wild‐type samples.

Conclusion.

FGFR2‐altered GEA is a heterogenous subgroup with approximately 20% of FGFR2‐altered samples harboring concurrent RTK alterations. Putative co‐occurring modifiers of FGFR2‐directed therapy including oncogenic MYC, KRAS, and PIK3CA alterations were also frequent, suggesting that pretreatment molecular analyses may be needed to facilitate rational combination therapies and optimize patient selection for clinical trials.

Implications for Practice.

Actionable receptor tyrosine kinase alterations assayed within a genomic context with therapeutic implications remain limited to HER2 amplification in gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEA). Composite biomarkers and heterogeneity assessment are critical in optimizing patients selected for targeted therapies in GEA. Comprehensive genomic profiling in FGFR2‐altered GEA parallels the heterogeneity findings in HER2‐amplified GEA and adds support to the utility of genomic profiling in advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas.

Combination of apatinib mesylate and second-line chemotherapy for treating gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

Objective

To investigate the safety and efficacy of acitinib mesylate combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Methods

A total of 119 patients with gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma were enrolled and randomized into an experimental group (n = 60) and a control group (n = 59). Both groups were treated with a combination of taxane, irinotecan and fluorouracil, while the experimental group also received acitinib mesylate. The clinical efficacy, survival time and adverse reactions of patients in two groups were recorded and analyzed.

Results

The total remission rate in the experimental group and the control group was 15.79% and 3.23%, respectively; the disease control rate was 73.68% and 54.84%, respectively; and progression-free survival was 3.72 months (1–13.5 months) and 3.04 months (1–6 months), respectively. Overall survival was 13.66 months (5–24 months) and 10.08 months (6.5–19.5 months), in the experimental group and the control group, respectively. In addition, the incidence of adverse events in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group.

Conclusion

Apatinib mesylate combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma was safe and effective, with improved survival benefit compared with control.

Epidemiology of Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma in Korea

The incidence of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJAC) in Western countries has increased in recent decades, in addition to a rise in the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and low Helicobacter pylori (HP) infection rate have been nominated as risk factors for such cancers. Among these risk factors, the increased prevalence of GERD and obesity and the decreased prevalence of HP infection are of special interest owing to the currently increasing prevalence of GEJAC in Western countries. Although similar trends in the prevalence of GERD, obesity, and HP infection are observed in Asian countries after a time lag from Western countries, it is still uncertain if the prevalence of GEJAC in Asian countries is increasing, especially in Korea. The incidence of GERD in Korea is currently increasing; it was below 3% in the 1990s. The incidence of obesity in the Korean population is increasing owing to the adoption of westernized lifestyles, including food preferences, and the HP infection rate in Korea is known to be decreasing. Therefore, based on logical extrapolation of observations of Western countries, the incidence of GEJAC will increase in Korea. However, the proportion of GEJAC among other upper gastrointestinal malignancies in Korea appears to be currently unchanged compared with that in the 1990s. Presently, there is a lack of epidemiologic studies on this issue in this region; therefore, more studies are needed to clarify the characteristics of these tumors and to improve clinical outcomes for patients with these tumors.

Personalized therapy based on image for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

Preoperative therapy is the gold standard for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Positron emission tomography (PET) is not only essential for tumor staging, but changes in glucose consumption correspond with response to therapy and correlated with prognosis. Therefore, with further refinement, PET parameter can serve as a tool for personalized therapy. For instance, the Municon trials suggested the possibility of PET-response guided therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients, however there are limitations. New PET parameters such as total lesion glycolysis (TLG) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may provide better response prediction. Furthermore, PET parameters combined with genomic profiling might enhance better treatment selection, prediction, and prognostication. Here, we summarized the current state of understanding and future possibilities.

Surgical approaches to adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: the Siewert II conundrum. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017;402:1153-1158. [PMID: 28803334 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-017-1610-9]

BACKGROUND

The Siewert classification system for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma has provided morphological and topographical information to help guide surgical decision-making. Evidence has shown that Siewert I and III tumors are distinct entities with differing epidemiologic and histologic characteristics and distinct patterns of disease progression, requiring different treatment. Siewert II tumors share some of the characteristics of type I and III lesions, and the surgical approach is not universally agreed upon. Appropriate surgical options include transthoracic esophagogastrectomy, transhiatal esophagectomy, and transabdominal extended total gastrectomy.

PURPOSE

A review of the available evidence of the surgical management of Siewert II tumors is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful review of the data appear to support the fact that a satisfactory oncologic resection can be achieved via a transabdominal extended total gastrectomy with a slight advantage in terms of perioperative complications, and overall postoperative quality of life. Overall and disease-free survival compares favorably to the transthoracic approach. These results can be achieved with careful selection of patients balancing more than just the Siewert type in the decision-making but considering also preoperative T and N stages, histological type (diffuse type requiring longer margins that are not always achievable via gastrectomy), and the presence of Barrett's esophagus.

Western strategy for EGJ carcinoma

In this paper, the epidemiological and clinicobiological behavior of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) adenocarcinoma in the West is compared and contrasted to that in the East, and an overview is provided of current therapeutic strategies employed for this type of tumor in Western countries. It is well known that multimodal treatment is the therapeutic standard in locally advanced EGJ adenocarcinoma, but whether neoadjuvant/perioperative chemotherapy (CT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the optimal approach is still debated. Neoadjuvant CRT improves local control in locally advanced Siewert type I and II tumors, so it should be considered the treatment of choice. In the subset of these patients with microscopic systemic disease at diagnosis, more intensive exclusive chemotherapy protocols could be of benefit. Therefore, there is an urgent need to identify these patients before planning the treatment. For Siewert type III tumors, perioperative chemotherapy is the standard. While there is general agreement on the optimal surgical approach for Siewert types I and III (a two-field Ivor Lewis operation and a total gastrectomy with distal esophagectomy, respectively), no standard surgical treatment has been defined for Siewert type II tumors. When data from Western series on proximal and circumferential resection margins and on nodal spread in Siewert type II tumors are taken into account, the optimal surgical approach appears to be Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Whether the extent of esophageal invasion can correctly predict nodal involvement in middle-upper mediastinal stations as a means to restrict indications for transthoracic esophagectomy requires further investigation in the West.

Targeted therapies for advanced and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: is there something new?

Despite improvements in systemic chemotherapy (CT), the prognosis of metastatic adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction remains poor. Over the years, new targeting agents have become available and were tested, with or without CT, in first or subsequent lines of therapy. The epidermal growth factor receptor family was targeted with monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) (trastuzumab, cetuximab, panitumumab) and tyrosin kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (lapatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib). Only trastuzumab, in combination with cisplatin and fluoropyrimidines, significantly improved overall survival (OS) in first-line therapy (13.8 vs. 11.1 months). Angiogenesis also was targeted with MoAbs (bevacizumab and ramucirumab); ramucirumab, a vascular endothelial growth factor-receptor 2 antagonist, enhanced OS in two phase III studies in the first (9.6 vs. 7.4 months) and subsequent lines of treatment (5.2 vs. 3.8 months), while the bevacizumab study was negative. TKIs (sunitinib, sorafenib, regorafenib, apatinib) were tested in this setting in phase II studies in the second/third line, only showing modest antitumor activity. The hepatocyte growth factor receptor (MET) was targeted in untreated patients in a phase III trial with MoAb rilotumumab, with or without CT, but the study was stopped because of mortality excess in the rilotumumab arm. Mammalian target of rapamycin (MTOR) pathway inhibition with everolimus was tested in pretreated patients in a placebo-controlled phase III trial who failed to improve OS (5.4 vs. 4.3 months). In conclusion, considering the modest survival gain obtained overall, the high cost of these therapies and the quality of life issue must be primarily considered in treating these patients.

Neoadjuvant therapy for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma

Gastric and esophageal adenocarcinomas are one of the main causes of cancer-related death worldwide. While the incidence of gastric adenocarcinoma is decreasing, the incidence of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma is rising rapidly in Western countries. Considering that surgical resection is currently the major curative treatment, and that the 5-year survival rate highly depends on the pTNM stage at diagnosis, gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma management is very challenging for oncologists. Several treatment strategies are being evaluated, and among them systemic chemotherapy, to decrease recurrences and improve overall survival. The MAGIC and FNCLCC-FFCD trials showed a survival benefit of perioperative chemotherapy in patients with operable gastric and lower esophageal cancer, and these results had an impact on the European clinical practice. New strategies, including induction chemotherapy followed by preoperative chemoradiotherapy, targeted therapies in combination with perioperative chemotherapy and the new cytotoxic regimens, are currently assessed to improve current standards and help developing patient-tailored therapeutic interventions.