KEYNOTE-585: Phase III study of perioperative chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab for gastric cancer

Advancements in immunotherapy for gastric cancer: Unveiling the potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors and emerging strategies

Gastric cancer (GC) is linked to high morbidity and mortality rates. Approximately two-thirds of GC patients are diagnosed at an advanced or metastatic stage. Conventional treatments for GC, including surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, offer limited prognostic improvement. Recently, immunotherapy has gained attention for its promising therapeutic effects in various tumors. Immunotherapy functions by activating and regulating the patient's immune cells to target and eliminate tumor cells, thereby reducing the tumor burden in the body. Among immunotherapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the most advanced. ICIs disrupt the inhibitory protein-small molecule (PD-L1, CTLA4, VISTA, TIM-3 and LAG3) interactions produced by immune cells, reactivating these cells to recognize and attack tumor cells. However, adverse reactions and resistance to ICIs hinder their further clinical and experimental development. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the advancements in ICIs for GC is crucial. This article discusses the latest developments in clinical trials of ICIs for GC and examines combination therapies involving ICIs (targeted therapy, chemotherapy, radiotherapy), alongside ongoing clinical trials. Additionally, the review investigates the tumor immune microenvironment and its role in non-responsiveness to ICIs, highlighting the function of tumor immune cells in ICI efficacy. Finally, the article explores the prospects and limitations of new immunotherapy-related technologies, such as tumor vaccines, nanotechnologies, and emerging therapeutic strategies, aiming to advance research into personalized and optimized immunotherapy for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Advances in Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapy for Gastric Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Gastric cancer remains one of the most prevalent and lethal malignancies worldwide, characterized by poor survival rates, particularly in advanced stages. In recent years, a paradigm shift in gastric cancer treatment has been witnessed with the introduction of immunotherapy and targeted therapies. This review provides a detailed examination of current immunotherapeutic strategies, including adoptive cell therapy (ACT), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and cancer vaccines. Additionally, it explores advancements in targeted therapies, focusing on the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) signaling pathways, as well as emerging targets such as claudin 18.2. Clinical trials investigating chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, T-cell receptor-engineered T-cell (TCR-T) therapy, and natural killer (NK) cell-based treatments have shown promise, particularly when combined with conventional chemotherapeutic regimens. However, challenges such as cytokine release syndrome, immune-related toxicities, and scalability issues remain significant. The combination of immunotherapy with targeted therapies represents a promising approach to enhance treatment outcomes. Future directions emphasize the need to overcome resistance mechanisms and refine treatment strategies to improve efficacy while reducing adverse effects. This review aims to elucidate the current landscape of immunotherapy and targeted therapy in gastric cancer and to explore their potential in shaping the future of clinical management for this devastating disease.

Immunotherapy as a new perspective for the therapy of esophageal cancer

The therapeutic landscape in nearly every therapeutic line in advanced/metastatic patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGC) is enriched by recent approvals of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In curative intended therapy, patients without pathological residual disease of SCC or GEJ (esophagogastric junction) cancer after preoperative chemoradiation and complete resection have access to adjuvant immunotherapy (independent of PD-L1 (programmed cell death protein 1) status, nivolumab, CHECKMATE 577). For metastatic SCC in the first-line, nivolumab combined with chemotherapy or with ipilimumab (TPS (tumor proportion score) ≥1 %, SCC, CHECKMATE 648) are approved, as well as second-line nivolumab alone regardless of PD-L1 status (ATTRACTION 03). For both, locally advanced or metastatic SCC and EGC, chemotherapy with pembrolizumab is available for patients with CPS (combined positive score) ≥10 (KEYNOTE 590) and for adenocarcinoma with nivolumab (CPS ≥5, CHECKMATE 649). Recent added approvals are chemotherapy with pembrolizumab in CPS ≥1 patients (KEYNOTE 859) and the addition of trastuzumab for personalized therapy in HER-2 positive/CPS ≥1 gastric and GEJ patients (KEYNOTE 811).

Emerging molecular phenotypes and potential therapeutic targets in esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma unearthed by whole genome and transcriptome analyses

BACKGROUND

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and stomach demands a deeper molecular understanding to advance treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes. Here, we profiled the genome and transcriptome landscape of these cancers, explored molecular characteristics that are undetectable by other sequencing platforms, and analyzed their potential clinical ramifications.

METHODS

Our study employed state-of-the-art integrative analyses of whole genome and transcriptome sequencing on 51 matched tumor and germline samples from 46 patients. Mutations and rearrangements in clinically relevant cancer genes were investigated and correlated with OncoKB, a knowledge-based precision oncology database, to identify treatment implications. Genome-wide signatures and manually curated molecular profiles were also determined.

RESULTS

The analyses revealed 90 targetable oncogenic mutations and fusions in 63 % of the patients, including novel NTRK, NRG1, ALK, and MET fusions, and structural variants in cancer genes like RAD51B. Also, molecular signatures associated with mismatch repair and homologous recombination deficiency were elucidated. Notably, we identified CDK12-type genomic instability associated with CDK12 fusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the potential of whole genome and transcriptome sequencing analyses as a comprehensive approach to identify treatment targets in adenocarcinoma of the stomach and the esophagus, and their application in precision oncology.

Digestive cancers: mechanisms, therapeutics and management

Cancers of the digestive system are major contributors to global cancer-associated morbidity and mortality, accounting for 35% of annual cases of cancer deaths. The etiologies, molecular features, and therapeutic management of these cancer entities are highly heterogeneous and complex. Over the last decade, genomic and functional studies have provided unprecedented insights into the biology of digestive cancers, identifying genetic drivers of tumor progression and key interaction points of tumor cells with the immune system. This knowledge is continuously translated into novel treatment concepts and targets, which are dynamically reshaping the therapeutic landscape of these tumors. In this review, we provide a concise overview of the etiology and molecular pathology of the six most common cancers of the digestive system, including esophageal, gastric, biliary tract, pancreatic, hepatocellular, and colorectal cancers. We comprehensively describe the current stage-dependent pharmacological management of these malignancies, including chemo-, targeted, and immunotherapy. For each cancer entity, we provide an overview of recent therapeutic advancements and research progress. Finally, we describe how novel insights into tumor heterogeneity and immune evasion deepen our understanding of therapy resistance and provide an outlook on innovative therapeutic strategies that will shape the future management of digestive cancers, including CAR-T cell therapy, novel antibody-drug conjugates and targeted therapies.

Multimodal Treatment of Resectable Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The current guidelines for the treatment of esophageal cancer recommend a multimodal approach that includes chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy, radiation, and surgery. Despite advances in treatment, rates of treatment failure, pathologic incomplete response, tumor metastasis, and death remain unacceptably high.

METHODS

This study was a narrative literature review using the terms "resectable esophageal cancer" and "multimodal therapy" to identify prospective trials of neoadjuvant radiation and chemotherapy, individually or combined with surgery, for esophageal cancer. Trials performed between 1984 and 2022 were identified and analyzed.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov was queried to identify ongoing studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-one clinical studies were identified: 15 randomized controlled trials and 6 prospective nonrandomized trials. The results of the randomized trials suggest that multimodal therapy-in the form of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in combination with radiation or chemotherapy alone, followed by surgery-is associated with better rates of local disease control and partial clinical response and, potentially, longer survival than is surgery alone. Immunotherapy is an emerging option for the treatment of patients with esophageal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of patients with resectable esophageal cancer is rapidly evolving. Although previous treatment options have had only limited benefits for patients, significant progress has been made during last 3 decades. The results of the available studies suggest that advances in the treatment of esophageal cancer have the potential to improve survival in these patients; however, questions remain regarding mechanisms of action, patient selection, and the use of personalized approaches that are based on genetics.

Chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy in patients with gastric cancer: protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The integration of chemotherapy and immunotherapy is continually making new advances in the field of gastric cancer treatment and has already become the new standard of care for the disease. However, few systematic reviews cover a wide array of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody types and therapeutic modalities (perioperative or systemic) in this domain. Our aim is to incorporate the most recent clinical studies on combination therapy for the treatment of gastric cancer into a systematic review. This will comprehensively assess the benefits and drawbacks for patients with gastric cancer and will guide future research in this area. Ultimately, this will provide evidence-based support for patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol for a systematic review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. We will conduct a search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases from database inception, all retrieved literature will be screened by two authors in two rounds. Inclusion criteria will be randomised clinical trials, reported in English, that compare immunotherapy-combined therapy with chemotherapy alone in the perioperative and systematic first-line treatment of gastric cancer. The primary outcomes will be progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes will include objective response rate (ORR), event-free survival (EFS), disease-free survival (DFS), pathologic complete response (pCR), major pathologic response (MPR), and the R0 resection rate. Heterogeneity and publication bias of included literature will be investigated. Where included literatures allow, we will conduct meta-analyses and subgroup analyses to further refine the pros and cons of combined therapy, providing evidence-based foundations for subsequent research.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This work is a review based on existing literature and no ethical review is required. Dissemination of the results will occur via academic journal publication, conference presentations, and multiple media platforms.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023477353.

Comprehensive integration of single-cell RNA and transcriptome RNA sequencing to establish a pyroptosis-related signature for improving prognostic prediction of gastric cancer

Cell pyroptosis, a Gasdermin-dependent programmed cell death characterized by inflammasome, plays a complex and dynamic role in Gastric cancer (GC), a serious threat to human health. Therefore, the value of pyroptosis-related genes (PRGs) as prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic indicators for patients needs to be exploited in GC. This study integrates single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) dataset GSE183904 with GC transcriptome data from the TCGA database, focusing on the expression and distribution of PRGs in GC at the single-cell level. The prognostic signature of PRGs was established by using Cox and LASSO analyses. The differences in long-term prognosis, immune infiltration, mutation profile, CD274 and response to chemotherapeutic drugs between the two groups were analyzed and evaluated. A tissue array was used to verify the expression of six PRGs, CD274, CD163 and FoxP3. C12orf75, VCAN, RGS2, MKNK2, SOCS3 and TNFAIP2 were successfully screened out to establish a signature to potently predict the survival time of GC patients. A webserver (https://pumc.shinyapps.io/GastricCancer/) for prognostic prediction in GC patients was developed based on this signature. High-risk score patients typically had worse prognoses, resistance to classical chemotherapy, and a more immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. VCAN, TNFAIP2 and SOCS3 were greatly elevated in the GC while RGS2 and MKNK2 were decreased in the tumor samples. Further, VCAN was positively related to the infiltrations of Tregs and M2 TAMs in GC TME and the CD274 in tumor cells. In summary, a potent pyroptosis-related signature was established to accurately forecast the survival time and treatment responsiveness of GC patients.

Preliminary report on the short-term efficacy and safety of SAPO-S1 therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer with a deep learning perspective

The neoadjuvant therapeutic effects of various chemotherapeutic drugs on gastric cancer have reached the corresponding plateau. Whether the combination of sindilizumab and albumin-bound paclitaxel+oxaliplatin+S-1 chemotherapy (SAPO-S1 therapy) regimen can bring better efficacy and observe the incidence of adverse reactions in the neoadjuvant treatment of Gastric Cancer (GC) may be the direction of our research. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of S1 chemotherapy regimen combined with multiple chemotherapy drugs sindilizumab (PD-1 inhibitor), albumin-bound paclitaxel and oxaliplatin) for neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced Gastric Cancer (LA-GC). The patients were given 4 cycles of sindilizumab combined with albumin paclitaxel+oxaliplatin+S-1 chemotherapy (SAPO-S1) before surgery. The R0 resection rate, surgical complications, pathologic complete response, complete pathologic response (pCR) the main pathological response rates (residual tumor cells≤10%, major pathological response) were observed. MPR and postoperative pathological tumor regression grade (TRG), using the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST1.1) to evaluate the efficacy of new adjuvant therapy and record the short-term adverse events (adverse event, AE) of patients after medication to evaluate safety. The overall response rate (ORR) was achieved to 53.3% and disease control rate (DCR) was achieved in 28 patients (93.3%), and the descending phase was achieved in 17 patients (56.7%). The tumor resolution grades of TRG 0, TRG 1, TRG 2 and TRG 3 were 16.7%, 13.3%, 43.3% and 16.7%, respectively. The pCR rate was 16.7%, the MPR rate was 30.0%, and the R0 resection rate was 90.0%. In addition, SAPO-S1 therapy has fewer side effects. Overall, SAPO-S1 therapy has a good therapeutic effect and safety in LA-GC.

Circumferential resection margin rates in esophageal cancer resection: oncological equivalency and comparable clinical outcomes between open versus minimally invasive techniques - a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Radical surgery for esophageal cancer requires macroscopic and microscopic clearance of all malignant tissue. A critical element of the procedure is achieving a negative circumferential margin (CRM) to minimize local recurrence. The utility of minimally invasive surgery poses challenges in replicating techniques developed in open surgery, particularly for hiatal dissection in esophago-gastrectomy. In this study, the technical approach and clinical and oncological outcomes for open and laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy are described with particular reference to CRM involvement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cohort study included all patients undergoing either open or laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy between January 2004 and June 2022 in a single tertiary center. A standard surgical technique for hiatal dissection of the esophago-gastric junction developed in open surgery was adapted for a laparoscopic approach. Clinical parameters, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, and mortality data were collected and analyzed by a Mann-Whitney U or Fisher's exact method.

RESULTS

Overall 447 patients underwent an esophago-gastrectomy in the study with 219 open and 228 laparoscopic procedures. The CRM involvement was 18.8% in open surgery and 13.6% in laparoscopic surgery. The 90-day-mortality for open surgery was 4.1 compared with 2.2% for laparoscopic procedures. Median Intensive care unit (ITU), inpatient LOS and 30-day readmission rates were shorter for laparoscopic compared with open esophago-gastrectomy (ITU: 5 versus 8 days, P= 0.0004; LOS: 14 versus 20 days, P= 0.022; 30-day re-admission 7.46 versus 10.50%). Postoperative complication rates were comparable across both cohorts. The rates of starting adjuvant chemotherapy were 51.8 after open and 74.4% in laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

This study presents a standardized surgical approach to hiatal dissection for esophageal cancer. The authors present equivalence between open and laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy in clinical, oncological, and survival outcomes with similar rates of CRM involvement. The authors also observe a significantly shorter hospital length of stay with the minimally invasive approach.

The safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy following laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a multicentre real-world clinical study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remain controversial.

METHODS

Patients with LAGC who received either nICT or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) at 3 tertiary referral teaching hospitals in China between January 2016 and October 2022 were analyzed. After propensity-score matching (PSM), comparing the radiological response, pathological response rate, perioperative outcomes, and early recurrence between the two groups.

RESULTS

After PSM, 585 patients were included, with 195 and 390 patients comprising the nICT and nCT groups, respectively. The nICT group exhibited a higher objective response rate (79.5% vs. 59.0%; P <0.001), pathological complete response rate (14.36% vs. 6.41%; P =0.002) and major pathological response rate (39.49% vs. 26.15%; P =0.001) compared with the nCT group. The incidence of surgical complications (17.44% vs. 16.15%, P =0.694) and the proportion of perioperative textbook outcomes (80.0% vs. 81.0%; P =0.767) were similar in both groups. The nICT group had a significantly lower proportion of early recurrence than the nCT group (29.7% vs. 40.8%; P =0.047). Furthermore, the multivariable logistic analysis revealed that immunotherapy was an independent protective factor against early recurrence [odds ratio 0.62 (95% CI 0.41-0.92); P =0.018]. No significant difference was found in neoadjuvant therapy drug toxicity between the two groups (51.79% vs. 45.38%; P =0.143).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with nCT, nICT is safe and effective, which significantly enhanced objective and pathological response rates and reduced the risk for early recurrence among patients with LAGC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov.

The Comparison of FLOT and DCF Regimens as Perioperative Treatment for Gastric Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Locoregional gastric cancer is a still serious problem and perioperative treatments may improve the success of management. Different regimens were examined. The present study purposed to compare the efficacy of fluorouracil-leucovorin-oxaliplatin-docetaxel (FLOT) and docetaxel-cisplatin-fluorouracil (DCF) regimens.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter study assessed the patients with locoregional gastric cancer. There are 240 patients (137 DCF, 103 FLOT). Survival rates were compared.

RESULTS

Demographic features were similar between the two groups, but the time period was different. The FLOT group had 7.8% pathological complete response, while the DCF group did not. Disease-free survival was longer in the FLOT than in the DCF group (median not reached - 13.94 months, respectively). Median overall survival was similar (30.9 vs. 37.8 months), but median follow-up affected the analysis. Survival for 36 months was 63% for the FLOT group and 40% for the DCF group (log-rank; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

FLOT regimen was superior to DCF regimen for response and survival rates. DCF is a historical approach. Long-term follow-up period is needed for FLOT treatment.

Updates in Translational Science for Esophageal and Gastric Cancers

In this article, the authors summarize the current state of translational science for esophageal and gastric cancers. The available targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and recently discovered molecular targets are reviewed. The authors introduce circulating tumor deoxyribonucleic acid and its promise as a biomarker to detect disease recurrence. The authors present patient-derived organoids as a new model for studying carcinogenesis and treatment responses. Finally, we discuss the implications of organoid models for precision oncology and describe exciting new work applying gene editing technology to organoids and studying tumor-microenvironment interactions using 3-dimensional co-culture systems.

Advances in diagnosis and management of cancer of the esophagus

Esophageal cancer is the seventh most common malignancy worldwide, with over 470 000 new cases diagnosed each year. Two distinct histological subtypes predominate, and should be considered biologically separate disease entities.1 These subtypes are esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Outcomes remain poor regardless of subtype, with most patients presenting with late stage disease.2 Novel strategies to improve early detection of the respective precursor lesions, squamous dysplasia, and Barrett's esophagus offer the potential to improve outcomes. The introduction of a limited number of biologic agents, as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors, is resulting in improvements in the systemic treatment of locally advanced and metastatic esophageal cancer. These developments, coupled with improvements in minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic treatment approaches, as well as adaptive and precision radiotherapy technologies, offer the potential to improve outcomes still further. This review summarizes the latest advances in the diagnosis and management of esophageal cancer, and the developments in understanding of the biology of this disease.

Management of Microsatellite Instability High (MSI-H) Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal cancer is a major cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Treatment of both early stage and advanced disease remains highly reliant on cytotoxic chemotherapy. About 4-24% of gastroesophageal cancers are microsatellite instability high (MSI-H). The MSI-H subtype is associated with favorable prognosis, resistance to cytotoxic chemotherapy, and sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Recent studies have demonstrated promising activity of ICIs in the MSI-H subtype, resulting in fundamental changes in the management of MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE

In this review, we discuss the prevalence, characteristics, prognosis, and management of MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, with a focus on recent and ongoing studies that have changed the landscape of treatment for the MSI-H subtype. We also discuss current challenges in the management of resectable and advanced MSI-H gastroesophageal cancer, including the need for more accurate biomarkers of response to ICI therapy.

Top Gastric Cancer Articles from 2022 and 2023 to Inform Your Cancer Practice

BACKGROUND

The multimodality management of patients with gastroesophageal cancers is rapidly evolving, with the introduction of new therapies against potential molecular targets paving the way to personalized medicine for patients with both resectable and metastatic disease. Over the past 2 years, several important studies evaluating these new targeted therapies, as well as minimally invasive surgical approaches to gastric cancer, have been published.

METHODS

This review article summarizes the top studies published in gastric cancer over the past 2 years that are fundamentally changing our practice approach to gastric cancer patients.

RESULTS

First, the long-term safety and efficacy of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy as compared with open gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer was confirmed with the publication of the 5-year outcomes of the CLASS-01 and KLASS-02 randomized clinical trials. In addition, several important studies of perioperative immunotherapy for patients with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancers are ongoing, and in 2022, an interim analysis of the DANTE trial and the final results of the GERCOR NEONIPIGA study were reported. Lastly, the KEYNOTE-859 and SPOTLIGHT trials address an unmet need for additional targeted therapies for patients with previously untreated, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-negative, unresectable or metastatic gastroesophageal cancers, incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeting Claudin-18 isoform 2 (CLDN18.2) with the monoclonal antibody zolbetuximab, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This article summarizes the findings and implications of several important studies published over the past 2 years that are fundamentally changing the way we treat patients with gastroesophageal cancer.

Immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant treatment of gastrointestinal tumors: is the time ripe?

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) revolutionized the management of mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Based on notable results observed in the metastatic setting, several clinical trials investigated ICIs as neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for localized dMMR/MSI-H GI cancers, achieving striking results in terms of clinical and pathological responses and creating the opportunity to spare patients from neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and even surgical resection. Nevertheless, these impressive findings are mainly derived from small proof of concept phase II studies and there are still several open questions to address. Moreover, dMMR/MSI-H represents a limited subgroup accounting for less than 10% of GI cancers. Consequently, many efforts have been produced to investigate neoadjuvant ICIs also in mismatch repair-proficient/microsatellite stable (MSS) cancers, considering the potential synergistic effect in combining immune-targeted agents with standard therapies such as chemo and/or radiotherapy. However, results for combining ICIs to the standard of care in the unselected population are still unsatisfactory, without improvements in event-free survival in esophago-gastric adenocarcinoma for the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy, and sometimes limited benefit in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Therefore, a major challenge will be to identify among the heterogenous spectrum of this disease, those patients that could take advantage of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and deliver the most effective treatment. In this review we discuss the rationale of NAT in GI malignancies, summarize the available evidence regarding the completed trials that evaluated this treatment strategy in both MSI-H and MSS tumors. Finally, we discuss ongoing studies and future perspectives to render neoadjuvant immunotherapy another arrow in the quiver for the treatment of locally advanced GI tumors.

Akkermansia muciniphila improves gastric cancer treatment by modulating the immune microenvironment

Background: Gut microbiota is pivotal in tumor occurrence and development, and there is a close relationship between Akkermansia muciniphila (AKK) and cancer immunotherapy. Methods: The effects of AKK and its outer membrane proteins on gastric cancer (GC) were evaluated in vitro and in vivo using cell counting kit-8 assay, flow cytometry, western blotting, ELISA, immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence. Results: AKK outer membrane protein facilitated apoptosis of GC cells and exerted an immunostimulatory effect (by promoting M1 polarization of macrophages, enhancing expression of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-related cytokines and suppressing that of Treg-related cytokines). Additionally, AKK and its formulation could inhibit tumor growth of GC and enhance the infiltration of immune cells in tumor tissues. Conclusion: AKK could improve GC treatment by modulating the immune microenvironment.

Safety and efficacy of a programmed cell death 1 inhibitor combined with oxaliplatin plus S-1 in patients with Borrmann large type III and IV gastric cancers

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common and the fourth most lethal malignant tumour in the world. Most patients are already in the advanced stage when they are diagnosed, which also leads to poor overall survival. The effect of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced GC is unsatisfactory with a high rate of distant metastasis and local recurrence.

AIM

To investigate the safety and efficacy of a programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor combined with oxaliplatin and S-1 (SOX) in the treatment of Borrmann large type III and IV GCs.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis (IRB-2022-371) was performed on 89 patients with Borrmann large type III and IV GCs who received neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) from January 2020 to December 2021. According to the different neoadjuvant treatment regimens, the patients were divided into the SOX group (61 patients) and the PD-1 + SOX (P-SOX) group (28 patients).

RESULTS

The pathological response (tumor regression grade 0/1) in the P-SOX group was significantly higher than that in the SOX group (42.86% vs 18.03%, P = 0.013). The incidence of ypN0 in the P-SOX group was higher than that in the SOX group (39.29% vs 19.67%, P = 0.05). The use of PD-1 inhibitors was an independent factor affecting tumor regression grade. Meanwhile, the use of PD-1 did not increase postoperative complications or the adverse effects of NAT.

CONCLUSION

A PD-1 inhibitor combined with SOX could significantly improve the rate of tumour regression during NAT for patients with Borrmann large type III and IV GCs.

Chemotherapy Plus Atezolizumab Pre- and Post-Resection in Localized Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinomas: A Phase I/II Single-Arm Study

Efforts to improve the prognosis for patients with locally advanced esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma have focused on neoadjuvant approaches to increase the pathological complete response (pathCR) rate, improve surgical resection, and prolong event-free and overall survival (OS). Building on the recent evidence that PD-1 inhibition plus chemotherapy improves the OS of patients with metastatic GEJ adenocarcinoma, we evaluated whether the application of this strategy in the neoadjuvant setting would improve the pathological response. This single-center phase I/II trial evaluated the safety, toxicity, and efficacy of neoadjuvant atezolizumab with oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (modified FOLFOX) followed by esophagectomy followed by atezolizumab. The primary objective goal was to achieve 20% pathCR. From the twenty enrolled patients, eighteen underwent resection and two (10%, 95% CI: 1.24-31.7%) achieved pathCR. After a median follow-up duration of 40.7 months, 11 patients had disease recurrence and 10 had died. The median disease-free and OS were 28.8 (95% CI: 14.7, NA) and 38.6 months (95% CI: 30.5, NA), respectively. No treatment-related adverse events led to death. Although modified FOLFOX plus atezolizumab did not achieve the expected pathCR, an acceptable safety profile was observed. Our results support the continued development of a more refined strategy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus perioperative immunotherapy/targeted agents) with molecular/immune profiling in parallel.

Immunotherapy in Esophagogastric Cancer: Treatment Landscape, Challenges, and New Directions

BACKGROUND

Cancers of the upper gastrointestinal tract represent a lethal disease entity comprising the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, and stomach. The backbone of therapy in esophagogastric cancers has predominantly been chemotherapy-based. However, over the last decade, with the debut of immune checkpoint inhibitors, sophisticated molecular testing, and a more comprehensive understanding of the tumor microenvironment, immunotherapy has been incorporated into the treatment of localized and advanced esophagogastric cancers with promising results.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to review the unique tumor microenvironment and role of immunotherapy in esophagogastric cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of clinical and translational research for immunotherapy in esophagogastric cancers.

RESULTS

This article will explore the unique tumor microenvironment in gastroesophageal cancers, the role of immunotherapy in localized and advanced disease, challenges in management, and new therapeutic approaches in clinical trials.

CONCLUSION

With further exploration into targeted therapy and immunotherapy, we anticipate the emergence of novel treatments that will improve survival and quality of life in patients with esophagogastric cancers.

Safety and feasibility of minimally invasive gastrectomy after neoadjuvant immunotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis in China

Background

The effect of neoadjuvant immunotherapy on minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare short-term outcomes between MIG after neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy (NICT-MIG) and MIG after neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (NCT-MIG), and determine risk factors for post-operative complications (POCs).

Methods

This retrospective study included clinicopathologic data from 193 patients who underwent NCT-MIG or NICT-MIG between January 2020 and February 2023 in the Department of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital First Medical Center (Beijing, China). Propensity score-matched analysis at a ratio of 1:2 was performed to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables and short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

The baseline characteristics were comparable between 49 patients in the NICT-MIG group and 86 patients in the NCT-MIG group after propensity score matching. Objective and pathologic complete response rates were significantly higher in the NICT-MIG group than in the NCT-MIG group (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of treat-related adverse events, intraoperative bleeding, operation time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, time to the first flatus, post-operative duration of hospitalization, overall morbidity, and severe morbidity were comparable between the NCT-MIG and NICT-MIG groups (P > 0.05). By multivariate logistic analysis, estimated blood loss of >200 mL (P = 0.010) and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) score of <45 (P = 0.003) were independent risk factors for POCs after MIG following neoadjuvant therapy.

Conclusions

Safety and feasibility of NICT were comparable to those of NCT in patients undergoing MIG for LAGC. Patients with an estimated blood loss of >200 mL or a PNI score of <45 should be carefully evaluated for increased POCs risk.

Perioperative Atezolizumab Plus Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin, and Docetaxel for Resectable Esophagogastric Cancer: Interim Results From the Randomized, Multicenter, Phase II/III DANTE/IKF-s633 Trial

PURPOSE

This trial evaluates the addition of the PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab (ATZ) to standard-of-care fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) as a perioperative treatment for patients with resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGA).

METHODS

DANTE started as multicenter, randomized phase II trial, which was subsequently converted to a phase III trial. Here, we present the results of the phase II proportion, focusing on surgical pathology and safety outcomes on an exploratory basis. Patients with resectable EGA (≥cT2 or cN+) were assigned to either four preoperative and postoperative cycles of FLOT combined with ATZ, followed by eight cycles of ATZ maintenance (arm A) or FLOT alone (arm B).

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-five patients were randomly assigned (A, 146; B, 149) with balanced baseline characteristics between arms. Twenty-three patients (8%) had tumors with microsatellite instability (MSI), and 58% patients had tumors with a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of ≥1. Surgical morbidity (A, 45%; B, 42%) and 60-day mortality (A, 3%; B, 2%) were comparable between arms. Downstaging favored arm A versus arm B (ypT0, 23% v 15% [one-sided P = .044]; ypT0-T2, 61% v 48% [one-sided P = .015]; ypN0, 68% v 54% [one-sided P = .012]). Histopathologic complete regression rates (pathologic complete response or TRG1a) were higher after FLOT plus ATZ (A, 24%; B, 15%; one-sided P = .032), and the difference was more pronounced in the PD-L1 CPS ≥10 (A, 33%; B, 12%) and MSI (A, 63%; B, 27%) subpopulations. Complete margin-free (R0) resection rates were relatively high in both arms (A, 96%; B, 95%). The incidence and severity of adverse events were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of the exploratory nature of the data, the addition of ATZ to perioperative FLOT is safe and improved postoperative stage and histopathologic regression.

The Evolving Landscape of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Gastroesophageal Cancer

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

Evolving perspectives regarding the role of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in gastric cancer immunotherapy

Gastric cancer (GC) is an increasing global health problem and is one of the leading cancers worldwide. Traditional therapies, such as radiation and chemotherapy, have made limited progress in enhancing their efficacy for advanced GC. The development of immunotherapy for advanced GC has considerably improved with a deeper understanding of the tumor microenvironment. Immunotherapy using checkpoint inhibitors is a new therapeutic option that has made substantial advances in the treatment of other malignancies and is increasingly used in other clinical oncology treatments. Particularly, therapeutic antibodies targeting the programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway have been effectively used in the clinical treatment of cancer. Monoclonal antibodies blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway have been developed for cancer immunotherapy to enhance T cell function to restore the immune response and represent a breakthrough in the treatment of GC. This review provides an outline of the progress of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade therapy and its expression characteristics and clinical application in advanced GC.

Immunotherapy in Gastrointestinal Cancers

Immunotherapy has revolutionised cancer treatment over the past decade. Long-term durable responses can be achieved in some cancer patient populations that were previously facing terminal disease. In this chapter, we summarise current phase 3 clinical trial evidence for the use of immunotherapy in gastrointestinal cancers (oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, oesophago-gastric adenocarcinoma, pancreatic cancer, biliary cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, colorectal cancer, and squamous cell cancer of the anus). We discuss meaningful biomarkers used in clinical trials to select patients most likely to benefit from immunotherapy, such as mismatch-repair deficiency (MMRd)/microsatellite instability (MSI) and programmed-death-ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) expression. Clinical questions are arising regarding the role of immunotherapy in the adjuvant/perioperative setting, optimal timing of surgery in patients who respond to immunotherapy, and toxicities specific to patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. We outline the current landscape and future horizon of immunotherapy in gastrointestinal cancers, such as strategies to increase effectiveness of checkpoint blockade through combinations with other checkpoint inhibitors, cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted agents, radiotherapy, CAR-T therapy, and cancer vaccines.

DNA mismatch repair deficiency and outcomes of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer treated with preoperative docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 plus surgery and postoperative S-1 or surgery plus postoperative S-1: a sub-analysis of the phase 3 PRODIGY trial

BACKGROUND

The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients with DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (D-MMR) is controversial due to concerns about its potential detrimental effect. The PRODIGY trial showed the survival benefit of adding preoperative docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) to surgery plus postoperative S-1 for LAGC patients. In this sub-analysis, we evaluated the benefit of preoperative DOS according to MMR status.

METHODS

Among patients enrolled in the PRODIGY trial treated with either preoperative DOS followed by surgery and postoperative S-1 (CSC arm), or surgery and postoperative S-1 (SC arm) at Asan Medical Center (n = 249), those in the full analysis set with available tissue to assess MMR status were included in the present analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 231 patients (CSC arm, n = 108; SC arm, n = 123) were included (median age, 58 years [range, 27-75]), and 21 patients (CSC arm, n = 8 [7.4%]; SC arm, n = 13 [10.6%]) had D-MMR tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival tended to be superior in the CSC arm than in the SC arm among D-MMR patients (HR 0.48 [95% CI 0.09-2.50]; log-rank P = 0.37 and HR 0.55 [95% CI 0.11-2.86]; log-rank P = 0.46, respectively), as well as among proficient MMR (P-MMR) patients (HR 0.68 [95% CI 0.46-1.03]; log-rank P = 0.07 and HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.49-1.14]; log-rank P = 0.17, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative DOS followed by surgery and postoperative S-1 may be considered a treatment option for LAGC patients regardless of MMR status.

Tumour microenvironment influences response to treatment in oesophageal adenocarcinoma

The poor treatment response of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) leads to low survival rates. Its increasing incidence makes finding more effective treatment a priority. Recent treatment improvements can be attributed to the inclusion of the tumour microenvironment (TME) and immune infiltrates in treatment decisions. OAC TME is largely immunosuppressed and reflects treatment resistance as patients with inflamed TME have better outcomes. Priming the tumour with the appropriate neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy treatment could lead to higher immune infiltrations and higher expression of immune checkpoints, such as PD-1/PDL-1, CTLA4 or emerging new targets: LAG-3, TIM-3, TIGIT or ICOS. Multiple trials support the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to the current standard of care. However, results vary, supporting the need for better response biomarkers based on TME composition. This review explores what is known about OAC TME, the clinical significance of the various cell populations infiltrating it and the emerging therapeutical combination with a focus on immune checkpoints inhibitors.

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.

Retrospective Analysis of Real-Life Data Evaluating the Optimal Time Between Gastrectomy and Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Resected Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE

Although adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) increases survival in early-stage gastric cancer, the effect of the time between gastrectomy and the initiation of AC on survival has not been clearly demonstrated. This study aimed to examine the effect of AC timing on survival.

METHODS

The data of patients who received AC in the postoperative period with the diagnosis of stage II and stage III gastric cancer were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were separated into two groups based on a 4-week cut-off value between the date of gastrectomy and the initiation of AC.

RESULTS

There were 151 patients enrolled in the study. It was determined that 63 (41.7%) patients started AC in the first 4 weeks and 88 (58.3%) patients after the first 4 weeks. Patients who received AC during the first 4 weeks had a median recurrence-free survival (RFS) of 46 months, while those who received AC after 4 weeks had a median RFS of 29 months (p = 0.039). The median overall survival (OS) for patients administered AC in the first 4 weeks was 65 months, compared to 45 months for those administered AC after 4 weeks (p = 0.036). The early time interval from surgery to AC resulted as an independent prognostic factor for both OS and RFS.

CONCLUSION

The optimal time to start AC in patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative resection is unknown. This study reported that an interval shorter than 4 weeks was an independent prognostic risk factor for both OS and RFS.

SOX combined with sintilimab versus SOX alone in the perioperative management of locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of SOX combined with a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor compared with SOX alone in the perioperative management of locally advanced gastric cancer and to explore biomarkers that may predict response to anti-PD-1 therapy.

METHODS

Data of patients with clinical stage T3-4aN0-3M0 (IIb-III) gastric cancer were reviewed to create a primary database. Patients treated with perioperative SOX combined with sintilimab were included in Group A, while those treated with SOX alone were included in Group B. After one-to-one propensity score matching, pathological response and short-term survival outcomes were compared between the two groups. In addition, potential efficacy-related biomarkers were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between January 2018 and December 2022, a total of 150 patients were included in the analysis, with 75 patients in each group. The rates of pathological complete response (21.3% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.001) and major pathological response (45.3% vs. 22.7%; P = 0.003) in Group A were statistically higher than those in Group B. There was no significant difference in 1-year overall survival (92.8% vs. 92.0%; P = 0.392) and disease-free survival (88.9% vs. 88.0%; P = 0.357) between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of Group A showed that the pathological complete response (40.6% vs. 8.6%; P = 0.002) and major pathological response (65.6% vs. 28.6%; P = 0.002) rates were significantly higher in programmed death ligand-1-positive patients with a combined positive score of ≥ 5. A pathological complete response was achieved in 42.9% patients (3/7) with mismatch repair deficiency. For the two patients confirmed as Epstein-Barr virus-positive, one patient achieved a pathological complete response and the other achieved a major pathological response.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of SOX combined with a PD-1 inhibitor may improve the pathological response rate of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, especially those with programmed death ligand-1 combined positive score ≥ 5, Epstein-Barr virus-positivity and mismatch repair deficiency. However, further prospective studies are still warranted to confirm the long-term survival benefit.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in the European Multicenter ENSURE Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare clinicopathologic, oncologic, and health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes following neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) and chemotherapy (nCT) in the ENSURE international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND

nCT and nCRT are the standards of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC) treated with curative intent. However, no published randomized controlled trial to date has demonstrated the superiority of either approach.

METHODS

ENSURE is an international multicenter study of consecutive patients undergoing surgery for LAEC (2009-2015) across 20 high-volume centers (NCT03461341). The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS), secondary outcomes included histopathologic response, recurrence pattern, oncologic outcome, and HRQL in survivorship.

RESULTS

A total of 2211 patients were studied (48% nCT, 52% nCRT). pCR was observed in 4.9% and 14.7% ( P <0.001), with R0 in 78.2% and 94.2% ( P <0.001) post nCT and nCRT, respectively. Postoperative morbidity was equivalent, but in-hospital mortality was independently increased [hazard ratio (HR)=2.73, 95% CI: 1.43-5.21, P= 0.002] following nCRT versus nCT. Probability of local recurrence was reduced (odds ratio=0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.93, P =0.012), and distant recurrence-free survival time reduced (HR=1.18, 95% CI: 1.02-1.37, P =0.023) after nCRT versus nCT, with no difference in OS among all patients (HR=1.10, 95% CI: 0.98-1.25, P =0.113). On subgroup analysis, patients who underwent R0 resection following nCT as compared with nCRT had improved OS (median: 60.7 months, 95% CI: 49.5-71.8 vs 40.8 months, 95% CI: 42.8-53.4, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this European multicenter study, nCRT compared with nCT was associated with reduced probability of local recurrence but reduced distant recurrence-free survival for patients with LAEC, without differences in OS. These data support tailored patient-specific decision-making in the overall approach to achieving optimum outcomes in LAEC.

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.

Gastric Cancer: Molecular Mechanisms, Novel Targets, and Immunotherapies: From Bench to Clinical Therapeutics

Gastric cancer is a global health concern, ranking fifth in cancer diagnoses and fourth in cancer-related deaths worldwide. Despite recent advancements in diagnosis, most cases are detected at advanced stages, resulting in poor outcomes. However, recent breakthroughs in genome analysis have identified biomarkers that hold positive clinical significance for GC treatment. These biomarkers and classifications offer the potential for more precise diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for GC patients. In this review, we explore the classification and molecular pathways in this disease, highlighting potential biomarkers that have emerged in recent studies including targeted therapies and immunotherapies. These advancements provide a promising direction for improving the management of GC.

Pembrolizumab and trastuzumab in combination with FLOT in the perioperative treatment of HER2-positive, localized esophagogastric adenocarcinoma-a phase II trial of the AIO study group (AIO STO 0321)

Background

Esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGA) presents a substantial global health challenge as the number of cases continues to rise. The current standard approach for treating localized EGA involves a combination of triplet chemotherapy, which consists of a platinum compound, a fluoropyrimidine, and a taxane (known as FLOT), followed by surgery. In cases of metastatic EGA with HER2-positive status or in certain studies with localized EGA, the use of HER2-targeted antibodies such as trastuzumab has shown improved responses. Recently, the addition of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors, such as pembrolizumab, when combined with 5-FU, platinum-based chemotherapy, and trastuzumab, has demonstrated significant enhancements in response rates for HER2-positive metastatic EGA. However, there is currently insufficient evidence regarding this treatment approach in localized HER2-positive disease.

Methods

The PHERFLOT study is an open-label, single-arm, multicenter, exploratory phase II trial designed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of perioperative pembrolizumab, FLOT, and trastuzumab in patients with previously untreated localized HER2-positive EGA. In total, 30 patients will be recruited. The co-primary end points are pathological complete response rate and disease-free survival rate after 2 years. Secondary objectives include safety and tolerability, efficacy in terms of progression-free survival and objective response rate and translational markers, such as blood-based signatures (e.g., immune repertoire changes or emergence of anti-HER2 resistance variants) or microbiota signatures that may correlate with immune activation and therapy response.

Discussion

Recent evidence from phase II clinical trials demonstrated improved efficacy through the addition of trastuzumab to perioperative FLOT. Furthermore, in advanced or metastatic EGA, the combination of trastuzumab, FLOT, and the PD1-inhibitor pembrolizumab significantly improved treatment response. The PHERFLOT study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of this treatment approach in HER2-positive-localized EGA, potentially identifying a promising new perioperative regimen for localized EGA, which then needs to be confirmed within a randomized trial. Furthermore, the accompanying translational program of the study might help to improve the stratification of suitable patients and to identify potential translational targets for future clinical trials.

Clinical trial registration

https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT05504720.

The oesophageal adenocarcinoma tumour immune microenvironment dictates outcomes with different modalities of neoadjuvant therapy - results from the AGITG DOCTOR trial and the cancer evolution biobank

A plateau in treatment effect can be seen for the current 'one-size-fits-all' approach to oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) management using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) or chemotherapy (nCT). In OAC, the tumour microenvironment (TME) is largely immunosuppressed, however a subgroup of patients with an immune-inflamed TME exist and show improved outcomes. We aimed to understand the overall immune-based mechanisms underlying treatment responses and patient outcomes in OAC, and in relation to neoadjuvant therapy modality. This study included 107 patients; 68 patients were enrolled in the Australian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group sponsored DOCTOR Trial, and 38 patients were included from the Cancer Evolution Biobank. Matched pre-treatment and post-treatment tumour biopsies were used to perform multi-modality analysis of the OAC TME including NanoString mRNA expression analysis, multiplex and single colour immunohistochemistry (IHC), and peripheral blood mononuclear cell analysis of tumour-antigen specific T cell responses. Patients with the best clinicopathological outcomes and survival had an immune-inflamed TME enriched with anti-tumour immune cells and pathways. Those with the worst survival showed a myeloid T regulatory cell enriched TME, with decreased CD8+ cell infiltration and increased pro-tumour immune cells. Multiplex IHC analysis identified that high intra-tumoural infiltration of CD8+ cells, and low infiltration with CD163+ cells was associated with improved survival. High tumour core CD8+ T cell infiltration, and a low tumour margin infiltration of CD163+ cells was also associated with improved survival. nCRT showed improved survival compared with nCT for patients with low CD8+, or high CD163+ cell infiltration. Poly-functional T cell responses were seen with tumour-antigen specific T cells. Overall, our study supports the development of personalised therapeutic approaches based on the immune microenvironment in OAC. Patients with an immune-inflamed TME show favourable outcomes regardless of treatment modality. However, in those with an immunosuppressed TME with CD163+ cell infiltration, treatment with nCRT can improve outcomes. Our findings support previous studies into the TME of OAC and with more research, immune based biomarker selection of treatment modality may lead in improved outcomes in this deadly disease.

Randomized phase II study comparing neoadjuvant 5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin/docetaxel versus docetaxel/oxaliplatin/S-1 for patients with type 4 or large type 3 gastric cancer

Macroscopic type 4 and large type 3 gastric cancer, mostly overlapping with scirrhous or linitis plastica type, exhibit a highly invasive nature and show unfavorable prognosis after curative surgery, even with adjuvant chemotherapy. A randomized phase III trial (JCOG0501) failed to demonstrate a survival advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 plus cisplatin for this population. The current authors initiated a randomized phase II study comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin/docetaxel versus docetaxel/oxaliplatin/S-1 for type 4 and large type 3 gastric cancer. 76 patients are planned to be enrolled over two years. The primary end point is the proportion of patients with a pathological response (grade 1b or higher) and secondary end points include overall survival and adverse events. Clinical Trial Registration: jRCTs031230231 (rctportal.niph.go.jp).

Safety and Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy in Gastric Cancer Patients with a PD-L1 Positive Status: A Case Report

INTRODUCTION

The landscape of gastric cancer treatment has changed owing to the widespread use of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Autophagy, involved in regulating the immune system, is a potential trigger of immunity in tumors. This study aims to find molecular-based evidence for the effectiveness of FLOT chemotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in gastric cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three patients with advanced gastric cancer received FLOT neoadjuvant chemotherapy with immunotherapy and surgery. IHC was used to determine the PD-L1 status. Real-time PCR was used to analyze expression patterns of transcriptional growth factors, AKT/mTOR signaling components, PD-1, PD-L1, PD-L2 and LC3B. The LC3B content was measured via Western blotting analysis.

RESULTS

The combination of FLOT neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy was found to be efficient in patients with a PD-L1-positive status. Gastric tumors with a PD-L1-positive status exhibited autophagy activation and decreased PD-1 expression.

CONCLUSIONS

FLOT chemotherapy combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors showed high efficacy in gastric cancer patients with a positive PD-L1 status. Autophagy was involved in activating the tumor immunity. Further research is needed to clarify the mechanism of effective anticancer treatment.

Prognostic Value of T-Cell Density in the Tumor Center and Outer Margins in Gastric Cancer

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are associated with the survival of gastric cancer patients. T-cell densities in the tumor and its periphery were previously identified as prognostic T-cell markers for resectable gastric cancer. Immunohistochemistry for 5 T-cell markers, CD3, CD45RO, CD8, FOXP3, and granzyme B was performed on serial sections of N = 251 surgical resection specimens of patients treated with surgery only in the D1/D2 trial. Positive T cells were digitally quantified into tiles of 0.25 mm2 across 3 regions: the tumor center (TC), the inner invasive margin, and the outer invasive margin (OIM). A classification and regression tree model was employed to identify the optimal combination of median T-cell densities per region with cancer-specific survival (CSS) as the outcome. All statistical tests were 2-sided. CD8OIM was identified as the most dominant prognostic factor, followed by FOXP3TC, resulting in a decision tree containing 3 prognostically distinct subgroups with high (Hi) or low (Lo) density of the markers: CD8OIMHi, CD8OIMLo/FOXP3TCHi, and CD8OIMLo/FOXP3TCLo. In a multivariable Cox regression analysis, which included pathological T and N stages, Lauren histologic types, EBV status, microsatellite instability, and type of surgery, the immune subgroups were independent predictors for CSS. CSS was lower for CD8OIMLo/FOXP3TCHi (HR: 5.02; 95% CI: 2.03-12.42) and for CD8OIMLo/FOXP3TCLo (HR: 7.99; 95% CI: 3.22-19.86), compared with CD8OIMHi (P < .0001). The location and density of both CD8+ and FOXP3+ T cells in resectable gastric cancer are independently associated with survival. The combination of CD8OIM and FOXP3TC T-cell densities is a promising stratification factor that should be validated in independent studies.

The Present and Future of Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer is a highly prevalent and lethal disease worldwide. Given the insidious nature of the presenting symptoms, patients are frequently diagnosed with advanced, unresectable disease. However, many patients will present with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC), which is often defined as the primary tumor extending beyond the muscularis propria (cT3-T4) or having nodal metastases (cN+) disease and without distant metastases (cM0). LAGC is typically treated with surgical resection and perioperative chemotherapy. The treatment of LAGC remains a challenge, given the heterogeneity of this disease, and the optimal multimodal treatment regimen may be different for different LAGC subtypes. However, many promising treatments are on the horizon based on knowledge of molecular subtypes and key biomarkers of LAGC, such as microsatellite instability, HER2, Claudin 18.2, FGFR2, and PD-L1. This review will expand upon the discussion of current standard neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies for LAGC and explore the ongoing and future clinical trials for novel therapies, with information obtained from searches in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov.

Role of Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Management of Gastroesophageal Cancers

PURPOSE

This article reviews the essential clinical trials that have led to these immunotherapy approvals and explores the use of predictive biomarkers, such as PD-L1 expression and MSI status, to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from immunotherapies.

METHODS

This case review series describe findings from different clinical trials and contribute to the evolving understanding of the role of CPIs in managing advanced gastroesophageal cancers and may lead to improved treatment options and patient outcomes. Ongoing clinical trials also hold promise for expanding treatment options and improving patient outcomes in the future.

METHODS

The systematic review followed the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The protocol has not been registered. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify relevant clinical trials and studies that describe the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in managing advanced gastroesophageal cancers. Electronic database (PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov, Society of Immunotherapy of Cancer, Aliment Pharmacology & Therapeutics, BMC cancer, Molecular Cancer Research, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, American Association for Cancer Research, Science, Nature, Cancer Discovery, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Advanced Immunology, Oncotarget, Nature Medicine, Nature Genetics, Gut, Pathology and Oncology Research, Journal of Clinical Oncology, The New England Journal of Medicine, Gastrointestinal oncology, JAMA Oncology, Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Current Oncology, Annals of Oncology, The Lancet, JCO Oncology Practice, Future Oncology, Gastric Cancer, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, American Journal of Gastroenterology, Gastroenterology, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, International Journal of Epidemiology, Helicobacter, Gastroenterology Review) were searched using a combination of relevant keywords and MESH terms. The search encompassed articles published up to 5/2023. Additionally, manual searches of reference lists of selected articles and pertinent review papers were conducted to ensure comprehensive coverage of relevant studies. Studies were included if they provided insights into clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of CPIs in treating advanced gastroesophageal cancers. Relevant case reviews and trials exploring combination therapies involving CPIs were also considered. Articles discussed in the utilization of predictive biomarkers were included to assess their impact on treatment outcomes. Data from selected studies were extracted to inform the narrative review. Key findings were summarized, including clinical trial designs, patient populations, treatment regimens, response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events. The role of predictive biomarkers, particularly PD-L1 expression and MSI status, in identifying patients likely to benefit from CPIs was critically evaluated based on study results. Ongoing clinical trials investigating novel combination strategies and exploring the broader scope of CPIs in gastroesophageal cancers were also highlighted. The collected data were synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview of the crucial clinical trials that have contributed to the approval of CPIs for advanced gastroesophageal cancers. The role of CPIs in different lines of therapy, including first-line regimens, was discussed. Furthermore, the evolving landscape of predictive biomarkers was examined, emphasizing their potential significance in optimizing patient selection for CPI therapy. Ongoing clinical trials were reviewed to underscore the continuous efforts in expanding treatment options and improving patient outcomes in the future.

Microsatellite instability and sex-specific differences of survival in gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy without and with taxane: An observational study in real world patients

PURPOSE

To investigate the prognostic role of microsatellite instability (MSI) in association with sex of patients treated with platinum/fluoropyrimidine neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CTx) with or without a taxane-containing compound.

METHODS

Of the 505 retrospectively analyzed patients with gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, 411 patients were treated without taxane and 94 patients with a taxane-containing compound. MSI was determined using standard assays.

RESULTS

Females demonstrated a better overall survival (OS) than males in the non-taxane group (HR, 0.59; 95% CI 0.41-0.86; p = 0.005), whereas no significant difference was found in the taxane group (HR 1.22; 95% CI 0.55-2.73, p = 0.630). MSI-High (-H) was associated with a better prognosis in both groups (without taxane: HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.33-0.97; p = 0.038; with taxane: HR 0.28; 95% CI 0.04-2.02, p = 0.204). In the non-taxane group, female MSI-H patients showed the best OS (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05-0.73; p = 0.016), followed by the female microsatellite stable (MSS) (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = 0.040) and the male MSI-H group (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.42-1.37, p = 0.760) taken the male MSS group as reference. In the taxane group, female and male MSI-H patients demonstrated the best OS (female MSI-H: HR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00-240.46; male MSI-H: HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.61-3.63, p = 0.438), whereas the female MSS group showed a decreased OS (HR 1.39 95% CI 0.62-3.12, p = 0.420) compared to male MSS patients.

CONCLUSION

OS in gastric/gastroesophageal cancer after CTx might depend on sex and MSI status and may differ between patients treated with or without a taxane compound in the chemotherapeutic regimen.

Survival impact of microsatellite instability in stage II gastric cancer patients who received S-1 adjuvant monotherapy after curative resection

Adjuvant S-1 monotherapy is the standard of care for stage II gastric cancer (GC) after curative resection in Japan, but its efficacy for microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors has remained unknown. Among a multi-institutional cohort of patients with stage II GC who underwent R0 resection followed by S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy between February 2008 and December 2018, we assessed MSI status with an MSI-IVD Kit (Falco). MSI status was assessable for 184 (88.5%) of the 208 enrolled patients, with MSI-H being identified in 24 (13.0%) individuals. Although neither relapse-free survival (RFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.00, p = 0.997) nor overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.66, p = 0.488) differed between MSI-H versus microsatellite-stable (MSS) patients, MSI-H patients showed a nonsignificant but better RFS (HR = 0.34, p = 0.064) and OS (HR = 0.22, p = 0.057) than did MSS patients after adjustment for background characteristics by propensity score (PS) analysis. Gene expression analysis in the PS-matched cohort suggested that recurrence was associated with the immunosuppressive microenvironment in MSI-H tumors but with expression of cancer/testis antigen genes in MSS tumors. Our data reveal a better adjusted survival for MSI-H versus MSS stage II GC treated with S-1 adjuvant therapy, and they suggest that mechanisms of recurrence differ between MSI-H and MSS tumors.

Perioperative TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer: APOLLO-11 study

BACKGROUND

We investigated the feasibility of perioperative chemotherapy with S-1 and leucovorin (TAS-118) plus oxaliplatin in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with clinical T3-4N1-3M0 gastric cancer received four courses of TAS-118 (40-60 mg/body, orally, twice daily for seven days) plus oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2, intravenously, day one) every two weeks preoperatively followed by gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy, followed by postoperative chemotherapy with either 12 courses of TAS-118 monotherapy (Step 1) or eight courses of TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin (Step 2). The primary endpoints were completion rates of preoperative chemotherapy with TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin and postoperative chemotherapy with TAS-118 monotherapy (Step 1) or TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin (Step 2).

RESULTS

Among 45 patients enrolled, the preoperative chemotherapy completion rate was 88.9% (90% CI 78.0-95.5). Major grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea (17.8%) and neutropenia (8.9%). The R0 resection rate was 95.6% (90% CI 86.7-99.2). Complete pathological response was achieved in 6 patients (13.3%). Dose-limiting toxicity was not observed in 31 patients receiving postoperative chemotherapy (Step 1, n = 11; Step 2, n = 20), and completion rates were 90.9% (95% CI 63.6-99.5) for Step 1 and 80.0% (95% CI 59.9-92.9) for Step 2. No more than 10% of grade ≥ 3 AEs were observed in  patients receiving Step 1. Hypokalaemia and neutropenia occurred in 3 and 2 patients, respectively, receiving Step 2. The 3-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 66.7% (95% CI 50.9-78.4) and 84.4% (95% CI 70.1-92.3), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative chemotherapy with TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin with D2 gastrectomy is feasible.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, including esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, gastric, duodenal and distal small bowel, biliary tract, pancreatic, colon, rectal, and anal cancer, comprise a heterogeneous group of malignancies that impose a significant global burden. Immunotherapy has transformed the treatment landscape for several GI cancers, offering some patients durable responses and prolonged survival. Specifically, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), either as monotherapies or in combination regimens, have gained tissue site-specific regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic disease and in the resectable setting. Indications for ICIs in GI cancer, however, have differing biomarker and histology requirements depending on the anatomic site of origin. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles compared with other systemic treatments that have long been the mainstay for GI cancer, such as chemotherapy. With the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of GI cancer. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the expert panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using ICIs to treat GI cancers, with topics including biomarker testing, therapy selection, and patient education and quality of life considerations, among others.

Gastric cancer treatment: recent progress and future perspectives

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Most patients are diagnosed at advanced stages due to the subtle symptoms of earlier disease and the low rate of regular screening. Systemic therapies for GC, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy, have evolved significantly in the past few years. For resectable GC, perioperative chemotherapy has become the standard treatment. Ongoing investigations are exploring the potential benefits of targeted therapy or immunotherapy in the perioperative or adjuvant setting. For metastatic disease, there have been notable advancements in immunotherapy and biomarker-directed therapies recently. Classification based on molecular biomarkers, such as programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), microsatellite instability (MSI), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), provides an opportunity to differentiate patients who may benefit from immunotherapy or targeted therapy. Molecular diagnostic techniques have facilitated the characterization of GC genetic profiles and the identification of new potential molecular targets. This review systematically summarizes the main research progress in systemic treatment for GC, discusses current individualized strategies and presents future perspectives.

Advances in translational therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer

Translational therapy refers to a combination of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer who are initially unable to undergo R0 resection. This treatment can achieve partial or complete remission of the unresectable tumors to meet the criteria for R0 resection, thus enabling the patients to prolong their survival time and improve their quality of life. In gastric cancer, translational therapy has been tried and improved. At present, there are a large number of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer in China, and the selection of suitable patients for translational therapy to prolong objective survival and improve survival quality is one of the hot spots in the field of gastric cancer research.