Prospective randomized trial of short-term neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

Surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer in the era of neoadjuvant therapies: something new?

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) represents a therapeutic challenge, particularly as it often involves adjacent organs. The necessity of neoadjuvant treatments for LAGC patients is still controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the factors affecting prognosis and survival in patients with LAGC with particular regard to the effect of neoadjuvant therapies.

METHODS

Between January 2005 and December 2018, the medical records of 113 patients with LAGC who underwent curative resection were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics, related complications, long-term survival, and prognostic factors were analyzed at uni- and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Postoperative mortality and morbidity rates of patients undergoing neo-adjuvant therapies were 2.3% and 43.2%, respectively. Whereas in patients undergoing upfront surgery were 4.6% and 26.1%, respectively. R0 resection was achieved 79.5% and in 73.9% of patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery, respectively (P<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that neoadjuvant therapy, completeness of resection (R0), number of lymph nodes retrieved, N status and the adoption of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors associated with longer survival. Five-year overall survival for NAC group and upfront surgery group was 46% and 32%, respectively (P=0.04). Five-year disease-free survival for NAC group and upfront surgery group was 38% and 25%, respectively (P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with LAGC undergoing surgery plus neoadjuvant therapy had a better OS and DFS with respect to patients treated with surgery alone.

Comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery vs. surgery alone for locally advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used in advanced gastric cancer, but the effects on safety and survival are still controversial. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the overall survival and short-term surgical outcomes between neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NACS) and surgery alone (SA) for locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) were explored for relative studies from January 2000 to January 2021. The quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies was evaluated using the modified Jadad scoring system and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, respectively. The Review Manager software (version 5.3) was used to perform this meta-analysis. The overall survival was evaluated as the primary outcome, while perioperative indicators and post-operative complications were evaluated as the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty studies, including 1420 NACS cases and 1942 SA cases, were enrolled. The results showed that there were no significant differences in overall survival (P = 0.240), harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.200), total complications (P = 0.080), and 30-day post-operative mortality (P = 0.490) between the NACS and SA groups. However, the NACS group was associated with a longer operation time (P < 0.0001), a higher R0 resection rate (P = 0.003), less reoperation (P = 0.030), and less anastomotic leakage (P = 0.007) compared with SA group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with SA, NACS was considered safe and feasible for improved R0 resection rate as well as decreased reoperation and anastomotic leakage. While unbenefited overall survival indicated a less important effect of NACS on long-term oncological outcomes.

A Machine Learning Model for Predicting a Major Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Gastric Cancer

Aims

To develop and validate a model for predicting major pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) based on a machine learning algorithm.

Method

A total of 221 patients who underwent NAC and radical gastrectomy between February 2013 and September 2020 were enrolled in this study. A total of 144 patients were assigned to the training cohort for model building, and 77 patients were assigned to the validation cohort. A major pathological response was defined as primary tumor regressing to ypT0 or T1. Radiomic features extracted from venous-phase computed tomography (CT) images were selected by machine learning algorithms to calculate a radscore. Together with other clinical variables selected by univariate analysis, the radscores were included in a binary logistic regression analysis to construct an integrated prediction model. The data obtained for the validation cohort were used to test the predictive accuracy of the model.

Result

A total of 27.6% (61/221) patients achieved a major pathological response. Five features of 572 radiomic features were selected to calculate the radscores. The final established model incorporates adenocarcinoma differentiation and radscores. The model showed satisfactory predictive accuracy with a C-index of 0.763 and good fitting between the validation data and the model in the calibration curve.

Conclusion

A prediction model incorporating adenocarcinoma differentiation and radscores was developed and validated. The model helps stratify patients according to their potential sensitivity to NAC and could serve as an individualized treatment strategy-making tool for AGC patients.

Nomogram for Predicting Survival in Advanced Gastric Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radical Surgery

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with subsequent radical surgery has become a popular treatment modality for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) worldwide. However, the survival benefit is still controversial, and prognostic factors remain undetermined.

AIM

To identify clinical parameters that are associated with the survival of AGC patients after NAC and radical surgery and to establish a nomogram integrating multiple factors to predict survival.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical profiles of 215 AGC patients who received NAC and radical resection, and clinical parameters concerning NAC, surgery, pathological findings, and adjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed using a Cox regression model to determine their impact on survival. Based on these factors, a nomogram was developed and validated.

RESULTS

The overall 1-year and 3-year survival rates were 85.8% and 55.6%, respectively. Younger age (<60 years old), increased examined lymph nodes (exLNs), successful R0 resection, the achievement of pathological complete response (pCR), and acceptance of adjuvant chemotherapy were positive predictors of survival. The C-index of the established nomogram was 0.785. The area under receiver operating curve (ROC) at 1/3 years of prediction was 0.694/0.736, respectively. The model showed an ideal calibration following internal bootstrap validation.

CONCLUSION

A nomogram predicting survival after NAC and surgery was established. Since this nomogram exhibited satisfactory and stable predictive power, it can be inferred that this is a practical tool for predicting AGC patient survival after NAC and radical surgery.

COMplot, A Graphical Presentation of Complication Profiles and Adverse Effects for the Curative Treatment of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: For the curative treatment of gastric cancer, several neoadjuvant, and adjuvant treatment-regimens are available which have shown to improve overall survival. No overview is available regarding toxicity and surgery related outcomes. Our aim was to construct a novel graphical method concerning adverse events (AEs) associated with multimodality treatment and perform a meta-analysis to compare different clinically relevant cytotoxic regimens with each other.

Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO databases were searched up to May 2019 for randomized controlled trials investigating curative treatment regimens for gastric cancer. To construct single and bidirectional bar-charts (COMplots), grade 1–2 and grade 3–5 AEs were extracted per cytotoxic regimen. For surgery-related outcomes a pre-specified set of complications was used. Thereafter, treatment-arms comparing the same regimens were combined in a single-arm random-effects meta-analysis and pooled-proportions were calculated with 95% confidence-intervals. Comparative meta-analyses were performed based on clinical relevance and compound similarity.

Results: In total 16 RCTs (n = 4,526 patients) were included investigating pre-operative-therapy and 39 RCTs investigating adjuvant-therapy (n = 13,732 patients). Pre-operative COMplots were created for among others; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin-oxaliplatin-docetaxel (FLOT), epirubicin-cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine (ECF), cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine (CF), and oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine (FOx). Pre-operative FLOT showed a minor increase in grade 1–2 and grade 3–4 AEs compared to pre-operative ECF, CF, and FOx. A pooled analysis of patients who had received pre-operative therapy compared to patients who underwent direct surgery did not reveal any significant difference in surgery related morbidity/mortality. When we compared three commonly used adjuvant regimens; S-1 had the lowest amount of grade 3–4 AEs compared to capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and 5-FU with radiotherapy (5-FU+RT).

Conclusion: COMplot provides a novel tool to visualize and compare treatment related AEs for gastric cancer. Based on our comparisons, pre-operative FLOT had a manageable toxicity profile compared to other pre-operative doublet or triplet regimens. We found no evidence indicating surgical outcomes might be hampered by pre-operative therapy. Adjuvant S-1 had a more favorable toxicity profile compared to CAPOX and 5-FU+RT.

The Efficacy and Safety of (Neo)Adjuvant Therapy for Gastric Cancer: A Network Meta-analysis

Background: Alternatives in treatment-strategies exist for resectable gastric cancer. Our aims were: (1) to assess the benefit of perioperative, neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment-strategies and (2) to determine the optimal adjuvant regimen for gastric cancer treated with curative intent. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ASCO/ESMO conferences were searched up to August 2017 for randomized-controlled-trials on the curative treatment of resectable gastric cancer. We performed two network-meta-analyses (NMA). NMA-1 compared perioperative, neoadjuvant and adjuvant strategies only if there was a direct comparison. NMA-2 compared different adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy regimens, after curative resection. Overall-survival (OS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were analyzed using random-effects NMA on the hazard ratio (HR)-scale and calculated as combined HRs and 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Results: NMA-1 consisted of 9 direct comparisons between strategies for OS (14 studies, n = 4187 patients). NMA-2 consisted of 16 direct comparisons between adjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiotherapy regimens for OS (37 studies, n = 10,761) and 14 for DFS (30 studies, n = 9714 patients). Compared to taxane-based-perioperative-chemotherapy, surgery-alone (HR = 0.58, 95% CrI = 0.38⁻0.91) and perioperative-chemotherapy regimens without a taxane (HR = 0.79, 95% CrI = 0.58⁻1.15) were inferior in OS. After curative-resection, the doublet oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine (for one-year) was the most efficacious adjuvant regimen in OS (HR = 0.47, 95% CrI = 0.28⁻0.80). Conclusions: For resectable gastric cancer, (1) taxane-based perioperative-chemotherapy was the most promising treatment strategy; and (2) adjuvant oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine was the most promising regimen after curative resection. More research is warranted to confirm or reproach these findings.

Postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To investigate the postoperative morbidity and mortality for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) plus surgery compared with surgery alone.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched to capture the incidence of any postoperative complications, pulmonary complications, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infections, and postoperative mortality in randomized clinical trials comparing NAC plus surgery with surgery alone. The meta-analyses were performed with a random effects model.

RESULTS

Nine relevant studies were included. Comparing NAC with surgery alone, there were no increases in any postoperative complications, pulmonary complications, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infections, or postoperative mortality attributable to NAC. Sensitivity analysis suggested a possible increased risk of any postoperative complications compared with surgery alone: the risk difference 0.056 (95% confidence interval -0.032 to 0.145). Severe complications such as anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications were similar in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC for gastric cancer does not increase the risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality compared with surgery alone.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gastric and esophago-gastric cancer. Meta-analysis of randomized trials

INTRODUCTION

Even in after curative surgery and adequate linfoadenectomy the survival of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains poor. At present some data have been published on the effects of NACT and perioperative chemotherapy on AGC and Esophago-gastric cancer (EGC) but not definitive ones. The present meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) on the AGC and EGC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of NACT + surgery vs. Surgery in patients with AGC and EGC was performed.

RESULTS

15 RCTs have been included (2001 patients: 977 into NACT + surgery arm and 1024 into control arm). NACT + Surgery reduces the overall mortality at 1, 3 and 5-year in cumulative analysis (RR = 0.78; 0.81; 0.88 respectively), at 1, 2, 3 and 5-years in EGC (RR = 0.79; 0.83; 0.84; 0.91 respectively) and at 3 and 5-years in AGC (RR = 0.74; 0.82 respectively). Morbidity and perioperative mortality rate are not influenced by NACT. Recurrence rate is reduced by NACT + surgery in EGC (RR = 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

NACT reduces the mortality in gastric and esophago-gastric cancer. Morbidity and perioperative mortality are not influenced by NACT. The overall recurrence rate is reduced by NACT in esophago-gastric cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer. Is it a must or a fake?

AIM

To investigate the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) effect on the survival of patients with proper stomach cancer submitted to D2 gastrectomy.

METHODS

We proceeded to a review of the literature with PubMed, Embase, ASCO and ESMO meeting abstracts as well as computerized use of the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NAC followed by surgery (NAC + S) with surgery alone (SA) for gastric cancer (GC). The primary outcome was the overall survival rate. Secondary outcomes were the site of the primary tumor, extension of node dissection according to Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (JGCA) performed in both arms, disease-specific (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates, clinical and pathological response rates and resectability rates after perioperative treatment.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing NAC + S (n = 1089) with SA (n = 973) published in the period from January 1993 - March 2017. Only 6 of these studies were well-designed, structured trials in which the type of lymph node (LN) dissection performed or at least suggested in the trial protocol was reported. Two out of three of the RCTs with D2 lymphadenectomy performed in almost all cases failed to show survival benefit in the NAC arm. In the third RCT, the survival rate was not even reported, and the primary end points were the clinical outcomes of surgery with and without NAC. In the remaining three RCTs, D2 lymph node dissection was performed in less than 50% of cases or only recommended in the “Study Treatment” protocol without any description in the results of the procedure really perfomed. In one of the two studies, the benefit of NAC was evident only for esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancers. In the second study, there was no overall survival benefit of NAC. In the last trial, which documented a survival benefit for the NAC arm, the chemotherapy effect was mostly evident for EGJ cancer, and more than one-fourth of patients did not have a proper stomach cancer. Additionally, several patients did not receive resectional surgery. Furthermore, the survival rates of international reference centers that provide adequate surgery for homogeneous stomach cancer patients’ populations are even higher than the survival rates reported after NAC followed by incomplete surgery.

CONCLUSION

NAC for GC has been rapidly introduced in international western guidelines without an evidence-based medicine-related demonstration of its efficacy for a homogeneous population of patients with only stomach tumors submitted to adequate surgery following JGCA guidelines with extended (D2) LN dissection. Additional larger sample-size multicentre RCTs comparing the newer NAC regimens including molecular therapies followed by adequate extended surgery with surgery alone are needed.

Survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable cancer of the gastric and gastroesophageal junction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of the present meta-analysis was to estimate the magnitude of survival benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) in resectable cancer of the gastric and gastroesophageal junction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Knowledge, Chinese biomedical literature database, Chinese Scientific Journals full-text database of retrieved articles from their inception to 2013. Two reviewers independently retrieved study and data extraction of included studies. Results regarding the overall survival and progression-free survival in the meta-analysis were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Twelve randomized control trials (n=1755) were eligible for final meta-analysis. NAT was associated with a statistically significant benefit in terms of overall survival (HR=0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.93, P=0.01), progression-free survival (HR=0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.87, P=0.0003), 5-year survival rate [relative risk (RR)=1.36; 95% CI, 1.10-1.67, P=0.0004], and curative resection rate (RR=1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20, P=0.009). Five-year survival rate increased from 30% to 42% with NAT. No significant difference with regards to overall postoperative complications rate (RR=1.08; 95% CI, 0.92-1.27, P=0.28) was found between 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

There is convincing evidence for a survival benefit of NAT over surgery alone in patient with cancer of the gastric and gastroesophageal junction.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.