Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 trial of mitomycin-C plus either short-term doxifluridine or long-term doxifluridine plus cisplatin after curative D2 gastrectomy (AMC0201)

High-throughput drug screening using a library of antibiotics targeting cancer cell lines that are resistant and sensitive to gemcitabine

Gemcitabine is a nucleoside analog widely used as an anticancer agent against several types of cancer. Although gemcitabine sometimes shows excellent effectiveness, cancer cells are often poorly responsive to or resistant to the drug. Recently, specific strains or dysbiosis of the human microbiome were correlated with drug reactivity and resistance acquisition. Therefore, we aimed to identify antibiotic compounds that can modulate the microbiome to enhance the responsiveness to gemcitabine. To achieve this, we confirmed the gemcitabine responsiveness based on public data and conducted drug screening on a set of 250 antibiotics compounds. Subsequently, we performed experiments to investigate whether the selected compounds could enhance the responsiveness to gemcitabine. First, we grouped a total of seven tumor cell lines into resistant and sensitive group based on the IC50 value (1 μM) of gemcitabine obtained from the public data. Second, we performed high-throughput screening with compound treatments, identifying seven compounds from the resistant group and five from the sensitive group based on dose dependency. Finally, the combination of the selected compound, puromycin dihydrochloride, with gemcitabine in gemcitabine-resistant cell lines resulted in extensive cell death and a significant increase in cytotoxic efficacy. Additionally, mRNA levels associated with cell viability and stemness were reduced. Through this study, we screened antibiotics to further improve the efficacy of existing anticancer drugs and overcome resistance. By combining existing anticancer agents and antibiotic substances, we hope to establish various drug combination therapies and ultimately improve cancer treatment efficacy.

Adjuvant treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer: an Asian perspective

Standard adjuvant treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) is regionally different. Whereas perioperative chemotherapy is the standard in Western populations, D2 gastrectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy has been the standard in East Asia. Recently, the pivotal phase 3 PRODIGY and RESOLVE studies have demonstrated survival benefits of adding neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy over up-front surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in Asian patients. Based on these results, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is considered one of the viable options for patients with LAGC. In this review, various aspects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy will be discussed for its optimal application in Asia. Candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be carefully chosen in consideration of the inaccurate aspects of radiological clinical staging and its potential benefit over up-front surgery followed by a decision on adjuvant chemotherapy according to the pathological stage. Efforts should continuously be made to optimally apply neoadjuvant chemotherapy to patients with LAGC, considering various factors, including a more accurate radiological assessment of the tumor burden and the optimization of post-operative chemotherapy. Future neoadjuvant trials involving novel agents for Asian patients should be designed based on proven Asian regimens rather than adopting Western regimens.

Doxifluridine versus Tegafur/Gimeracil/Oteracil (S-1) as adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with gastric cancer after gastrectomy: A propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Doxifluridine (DF), an oral 5-FU prodrug, has been used for various solid cancers due to its efficacy and low toxicity. We aim to evaluate the effect of DF as adjuvant monotherapy in advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 263 patients with advanced gastric cancer who underwent curative gastrectomy between January 2010 and December 2013 at our institute. Since previous randomized control trials have confirmed the efficacy of S-1 as adjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer, we analyzed the oncologic effect and patient compliance of the DF group compared to the S-1 group. After propensity score matching, 48 patients were included in each group.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival (OS) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) between DF and S-1 groups (5-year OS; 77.1% vs 75.0%; p = 0.729, 5-year DFS; 76.6% vs 73.9%; p = 0.748). The completion rates of the DF and S-1 groups were 60.4% and 72.9%, respectively (p = 0.194). The mean relative dose intensity of the DF and S-1 groups were 76.2% and 84.2%, respectively (p = 0.195). After multivariate analysis, the chemotherapy regimen was not a risk factor for OS and DFS, whereas relative dose intensity and pathologic stage were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the oncologic effect and patient compliance between DF and S-1 groups. DF could be an alternative option for adjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer. In addition, we confirmed that relative dose intensity is an important independent prognostic factor for survival.

PRODIGY: A Phase III Study of Neoadjuvant Docetaxel, Oxaliplatin, and S-1 Plus Surgery and Adjuvant S-1 Versus Surgery and Adjuvant S-1 for Resectable Advanced Gastric Cancer

Adjuvant chemotherapy after D2 gastrectomy is standard for resectable locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) in Asia. Based on positive findings for perioperative chemotherapy in European phase III studies, the phase III PRODIGY study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01515748) investigated whether neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) followed by surgery and adjuvant S-1 could improve outcomes versus standard treatment in Korean patients with resectable LAGC.

Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary management of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remains unstandardized worldwide. We performed a systemic review to summarize the advancements, regional differences, and current recommended multidisciplinary treatment strategies for LAGC.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases and Embase. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials which investigated survival of patients with LAGC who underwent gastrectomy with pre-/perioperative, postoperative chemotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy were included.

RESULTS

In total, we identified 11 studies of pre-/perioperative chemotherapy, 38 of postoperative chemotherapy, and 14 of chemoradiotherapy. In Europe and the USA, the current standard of care is perioperative chemotherapy for patients with LAGC using the regimen of 5-FU, folinic acid, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT). In Eastern Asia, upfront gastrectomy and postoperative chemotherapy is commonly used. The S-1 monotherapy or a regimen of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapOx) are used for patients with stage II disease, and the CapOx regimen or the S-1 plus docetaxel regimen are recommended for those with stage III Gastric cancer (GC). The addition of postoperative radiotherapy to peri- or postoperative chemotherapy is currently not recommended. Additionally, clinical trials testing targeted therapy and immunotherapy are increasingly performed worldwide.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent clinical trials showed a survival benefit of peri-over postoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. As such, this strategy may have a potential as a global standard for patients with LAGC. Outcome of the ongoing clinical trials is expected to establish the global standard of multidisciplinary treatment strategy in patients with LAGC.

Development and External Validation of a Nomogram to Predict Recurrence-Free Survival After R0 Resection for Stage II/III Gastric Cancer: An International Multicenter Study

Background: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy varies widely among patients with stage II/III gastric cancer (GC), and tools predicting outcomes for this patient subset are lacking. We aimed to develop and validate a nomogram to predict recurrence-free survival (RFS) and the benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical resection in patients with stage II/III GC.

Methods: Data on patients with stage II/III GC who underwent R0 resection from January 2010 to August 2014 at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital (FMUUH) (n = 1,240; training cohort) were analyzed by Cox regression to identify independent prognostic factors for RFS. A nomogram including these factors was internally and externally validated in FMUUH (n = 306) and a US cohort (n = 111), respectively.

Results: The multivariable analysis identified age, differentiation, tumor size, number of examined lymph nodes, pT stage, pN stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy as associated with RFS. A nomogram including the above 7 factors was significantly more accurate in predicting RFS compared with the 8^th AJCC-TNM staging system for patients in the training cohort. The risk of peritoneal metastasis was higher and survival after recurrence was significantly worse among patients calculated by the nomogram to be at high risk than those at low risk. The nomogram's predictive performance was confirmed in both the internal and external validation cohorts.

Conclusion: A novel nomogram is available as a web-based tool and accurately predicts long-term RFS for GC after radical resection. The tool can also be used to determine the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy by comparing scores with and without this intervention.

Primary results of a randomized two-by-two factorial phase II trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with two and four courses of cisplatin/S-1 and docetaxel/cisplatin/S-1 as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

AIM

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is promising to improve the survival of resectable gastric cancer. However, suitable regimen and treatment duration for NAC have not yet been established.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized phase II trial to compare two and four courses of neoadjuvant S-1/cisplatin (SC) and S-1/cisplatin/docetaxel(DCS) using a two-by-two factorial design for locally resectable advanced gastric cancer. Patients with M0 and either T4 or T3 in case of junctional cancer or scirrhous-type cancer received two or four courses of SC or DCS. Then, patients underwent D2 gastrectomy and adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy for 1 year. The primary endpoint was 3-year overall survival. The planned sample size was 120 eligible patients.

RESULTS

Between October 2011 and September 2014, 132 patients were assigned to CS (n = 66; 33 in 2-courses and 33 in 4-courses) and DCS (n = 66; 33 in 2-courses and 33 in 4-courses). The 3-year OS was 58.1% in CS and 60.0% in DCS with hazard ratio of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.48-1.34), while it was 53.1% in the two courses and 65.0% in the four courses with hazard ratio of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.43-1.22). In the survival analysis by duration in each regimen, the 3-year OS was 58.1% for both two and four courses in CS, while it was 48.5% for two courses of DCS and 71.9% for four courses of DCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering high 3-year OS, four courses DCS has a value to be tested in a future phase III study to confirm superiority of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer.

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.

Multimodality management of locally advanced gastric cancer-the timing and extent of surgery

The optimal treatment for patients with locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma is multimodal. Surgery is the cornerstone of therapeutic strategies with curative intent. The addition of chemotherapy or chemoradiation decreases rate of recurrence and prolongs survival. Guidelines differ between countries and there is no universal standard of care. Modern studies of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer showed that adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival over surgery alone in Asia. These studies could not be replicated in Europe. Peri-operative chemotherapy strategies, conversely, have been effective in Europe for improving overall and disease free survival. Adjuvant chemoradiation has also demonstrated improved survival when compared to surgery alone, but studies comparing chemotherapy with chemoradiation have not shown significant difference. Trials are ongoing to examine the role of chemoradiation in a neoadjuvant fashion. A D2 extent of lymphadenectomy improves cancer related survival for those who do not undergo distal pancreatectomy/splenectomy. Survival is also associated not only with the extent but also the number of lymph nodes examined. There are ongoing trials related to immunotherapy and targeted therapies, which may also impact or change the treatment paradigm for locally advanced gastric cancer.

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.

CRITICS-II: a multicentre randomised phase II trial of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in resectable gastric cancer

Background

Although radical surgery remains the cornerstone of cure in resectable gastric cancer, survival remains poor. Current evidence-based (neo)adjuvant strategies have shown to improve outcome, including perioperative chemotherapy, postoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. However, these regimens suffer from poor patient compliance, particularly in the postoperative phase of treatment. The CRITICS-II trial aims to optimize preoperative treatment by comparing three treatment regimens: (1) chemotherapy, (2) chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and (3) chemoradiotherapy.

Methods

In this multicentre phase II non-comparative study, patients with clinical stage IB-IIIC (TNM 8th edition) resectable gastric adenocarcinoma are randomised between: (1) 4 cycles of docetaxel+oxaliplatin+capecitabine (DOC), (2) 2 cycles of DOC followed by chemoradiotherapy (45Gy in combination with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin) or (3) chemoradiotherapy. Primary endpoint is event-free survival, 1 year after randomisation (events are local and/or regional recurrence or progression, distant recurrence, or death from any cause). Secondary endpoints include: toxicity, surgical outcomes, percentage radical (R0) resections, pathological tumour response, disease recurrence, overall survival, and health related quality of life. Exploratory endpoints include translational studies on predictive and prognostic biomarkers.

Discussion

The aim of this study is to select the most promising among three preoperative treatment arms in patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. This treatment regimen will subsequently be compared with the standard therapy in a phase III trial.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov NCT02931890; registered 13 October 2016. Date of first enrolment: 21 December 2017.

Phase 2 study of adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, capecitabine, and cisplatin in patients with curatively resected stage IIIB-IV gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative chemotherapy with S-1 or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin is a standard treatment for resectable gastric cancer (GC). However, survival outcomes of stage IIIB-IV (M0) GC cases are still poor. We investigated the efficacy and safety of docetaxel, capecitabine, and cisplatin (DXP) in patients with stage IIIB-IV GC.

METHODS

This was a single-arm phase 2 study that included patients with stage IIIB-IV GC who underwent D2 gastrectomy. Patients received six cycles of docetaxel [60 mg/m² on day 1 (D1)], capecitabine (1,875 mg/m²/day on D1-14), and cisplatin (60 mg/m² on D1) every 3 weeks. The primary end-point was recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

A total of 46 GC patients between January 2007 and August 2008 were included. After a median follow-up of 56.1 months (range 52.2-64.1), the median RFS and overall survival (OS) were 26.9 months (95 % CI 7.5-46.4) and 43.9 months (95 % CI 29.2-58.7), respectively. The 5-year RFS and OS rates were 39.1 and 41.3 %, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (40 %), anorexia (22 %), and febrile neutropenia (15 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant DXP is feasible and effective for patients with stage IIIB-IV GC. A phase 3 study comparing triplet and doublet regimens for these patients is ongoing.

Current situation and trend of research for drug resistance in gastric cancer

Drug resistance of gastric cancer cells is one of the main reasons that lead to failure of chemotherapy in gastric cancer. Gastric cancer cells can be resistant to chemotherapeutic drugs and targeted drugs, which leads to poor therapeutic effects. Although the mechanisms of drug resistance of gastric cancer cells have long been investigated, no effective drug that can reverse the drug resistance of gastric cancer cells has been found. Therefore, it is important to reverse the drug resistance of gastric cancer cells to improve the prognosis of gastric cancer. In this paper, we review the mechanisms of drug resistance of gastric cancer cells to chemotherapeutic drugs and targeted drugs, summarize current situation for research of drug resistance of gastric cancer cells, and discuss the future development direction in this field.

Current adjuvant treatment modalities for gastric cancer: From history to the future

The discrepancy between the surgical technique and the type of adjuvant chemotherapy used in clinical trials and patient outcomes in terms of overall survival rates has led to the generation of different adjuvant treatment protocols in distinct parts of the world. The adjuvant treatment recommendation is generally chemoradiotherapy in the United States, perioperative chemotherapy in the United Kingdom and parts of Europe, and chemotherapy in Asia. These options mainly rely on the United States Intergroup-0116, United Kingdom British Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy, and the Asian Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial of S-1 for Gastric Cancer and Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin Adjuvant Study in Stomach Cancer trials. However, the benefits were evident for only certain patients, which were not very homogeneous regarding the type of surgery, chemotherapy regimens, and stage of disease. Whether the dissimilarities in survival are attributable to surgical technique or intrinsic biological differences is a subject of debate. Regardless of the extent of surgery, multimodal therapy may offer modest survival advantage at least for diseases with lymph node involvement. Moreover, in the era of individualized treatment for most of the other cancer types, identification of special subgroups comprising those who will derive more or no benefit from adjuvant therapy merits further investigation. The aim of this review is to reveal the historical evolution and future reflections of adjuvant treatment modalities for resected gastric cancer patients.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant options in resectable gastric cancer: is there an optimal treatment approach?

Gastric cancer is one of the most prevalent and deadliest forms of cancer worldwide. Even though neoadjuvant, perioperative, and adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy may improve outcomes compared with surgery alone, the optimal combination of treatment modalities remains controversial. While European and North American trials established perioperative chemotherapy and adjuvant chemoradiation regimens for gastric cancer, Asian countries have focused on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. This review summarizes results from contemporary randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses to elucidate the relative merits of each treatment approach.

A phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 and cisplatin for stage III gastric cancer: KUGC03

OBJECTIVES

A multi-center phase II study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with S-1 plus cisplatin for advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

The eligibility criteria were clinical T3/T4 or N2, not Stage IV. Patients received two 35-day cycles of S-1 plus cisplatin, and then underwent D2 gastrectomy. The primary endpoint was 3-year progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were ratio of R0 resection, response rate, adverse events, and overall survival. A sample size of 49 was determined to have 80% power for detecting 15% improvement in the 3-year PFS over 55% at a one-sided alpha of 0.1.

RESULTS

Among 53 patients enrolled, 44 patients completed two cycles of NAC (83%), and 48 patients underwent R0 resection (91%). Postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients (26%). A pathological response was confirmed in 24 patients (45%), including four complete responses. The 3-year PFS was 50.7%, while the 3-year OS was 74.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the observed 3-year PFS rate was worse than expected, NAC with S1 plus cisplatin was safe and led to a high rate of R0 resection. A randomized controlled trial is needed to make conclusions about the effectiveness of NAC in Japanese patients undergoing D2 resection.

Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers

BACKGROUND

Feeding tube placement is common among patients undergoing gastrectomy, and national guidelines currently recommend consideration of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) for all patients undergoing resection for gastric cancer. However, data are limited regarding the safety of FJT placement at the time of gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

The 2005-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were queried to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Subjects were classified by the concomitant placement of an FJT. Groups were then propensity matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcomes of interest were overall 30-d overall complications and mortality. Secondary end points included major complications, surgical site infection, and early reoperation.

RESULTS

In total, 2980 subjects underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer, among whom 715 (24%) also had an FJT placed. Patients who had an FJT placed were more likely to be male (61.6% versus 56.6%, P = 0.02), have recent weight loss (21.0% versus 14.8%, P < 0.01), and have undergone recent chemotherapy (7.9% versus 4.2%, P < 0.01) and radiation therapy (4.2% versus 1.3%, P < 0.01). They were also more likely to have undergone total (compared with partial) gastrectomy (66.6% versus 28.6%, P < 0.01) and have concomitant resection of an adjacent organ (40.4 versus 24.1%, P < 0.01). After adjustment with propensity matching, however, all baseline characteristics and treatment variables were highly similar. Between groups, there were no statistically significant differences in 30-d overall complications (38.8% versus 36.1%, P = 0.32) or mortality (5.8 versus 3.7%, P = 0.08). There were also no differences in major complications, surgical site infection, or early reoperation. Operative time was slightly longer among patients with feeding tubes placed (median, 248 versus 233 min, P = 0.01), but otherwise there were no significant differences in any outcomes between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant placement of FJT at the time of gastrectomy may result in slightly increased operative times but does not appear to lead to increased perioperative morbidity or mortality. Further investigation is needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from FJT placement.

Intraoperatively assessed macroscopic serosal changes in patients with curatively resected advanced gastric cancer: clinical implications for prognosis and peritoneal recurrence

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to validate the prognostic relevance of macroscopic serosal changes in patients with resected gastric cancer. Prospectively collected databases of two multicenter randomized phase III trials of adjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed.

METHODS

For this study, 655 patients in the control groups of AMC 0101 and 0201 trials were selected. Macroscopic serosal changes were determined according to disruptions in serosal continuity, such as changes in color or nodular texture by the operating surgeon. Correlations with recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and time to peritoneal recurrence were analyzed.

RESULTS

Macroscopic serosal changes were identified intraoperatively in 432 patients (66 %) and found to be significantly associated with multifocal or diffuse involvement (p = 0.001), Borrmann type 4 (p = 0.005), advanced pathologic T (p < 0.001), N (p < 0.001), overall stage (p < 0.001), and total gastrectomy (p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, which included prognostic factors of localized gastric cancer, macroscopic serosal changes were significantly associated with poor RFS [hazard ratio (HR) 2.0; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.4-2.7; p < 0.001] and OS (HR 2.1; 95 % CI 1.5-3.0; p < 0.001). The changes also were significantly related to shorter time to peritoneal recurrence (HR 2.9; 95 % CI 1.7-5.0; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperatively assessed macroscopic serosal changes confer a poor prognosis and increased peritoneal recurrence for patients with curatively resected gastric cancer. Macroscopic assessment of serosal changes may be a useful indicator that allows better risk stratification of patients with resected gastric cancer in terms of prognosis and peritoneal recurrence.

Multimodality treatment of potentially curative gastric cancer: geographical variations and future prospects

After much controversy, multimodality therapy is now accepted worldwide as the gold standard for treatment of resectable bulky localized gastric cancer. There is significant regional variation in the style of multimodality treatment with adjuvant chemoradiation the North American standard, neoadjuvant chemotherapy preferred in Europe and Australasia, whilst adjuvant chemotherapy is preferred in Asia. With further standardization of surgery and D1+/D2 resections increasingly accepted world wide, and in particular in the West, as the surgical standard of care for potentially curable disease, it is timely to reassess the multimodality regimes being used. The challenge in the use of multimodality therapy is how current outcomes can be standardized and improved further. Recent studies indicate that mere intensification of the regime in time, dosage or addition of further agents does not improve localized gastric cancer outcomes. More novel strategies including early commencement of adjuvant therapies, intra-peritoneal chemotherapy or assessing neoadjuvant response with positron emission tomography scanning may give improvements in outcomes. The introduction of targeted therapies means that the adjuvant use of biological agents needs to be explored. By proper assessment of the patient's co-morbidities, full tumour staging, and a better understanding of the tumour's molecular pathology, multimodality therapy for gastric adenocarcinoma may be individualized to optimize the likelihood of cure.

What make differences in the outcome of adjuvant treatments for resected gastric cancer?

After a long history of Dark Age of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer, definite evidences of survival benefit from adjuvant treatment have been reported since 2000s. These survival benefits are likely attributed to something new approach different from pervious studies. In 2001, South West Oncology Group INT0116 trial yielded survival benefit in curatively resected gastric cancer patients with postoperative chemoradiotherapy [5-fluorouracil (5-FU) + Leucovorin + radiotherapy], followed by positive result by MAGIC Trial, employing peri-operative(pre- and postoperative chemotherapy with Epirubicin, cisplatin (CDDP), 5-fluorouracil (ECF) regimen in patients with curative resection. A novel drug [S1: ACTS-GC (Adjuvant chemotherapy trial of TS-1 for gastric cancer) in 2007], or new drug combination chemotherapys [CDDP + 5-FU: FNCLCC/FFCD (Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte contre le cancer/Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive) in 2011, Capecitabine + Oxaliplatin: CLASSIC in 2012] also produced positive results in terms of improved prognosis. Neoadjuvant or perioperative chemotherapy, novel anti-cancer drugs, and chemoradiotherapy might be the key words to develop further improvement in the adjuvant treatment of resectable gastric cancer. Moreover, it is not new but still true to stress the importance of D2 surgery as the baseline treatment in order to minimize the amount of residual tumor after surgery.

Management of gastric cancer in Asia: resource-stratified guidelines

Gastric cancer is the fourth most common cancer globally, and is the second most common cause of death from cancer worldwide. About three-quarters of newly diagnosed cases in 2008 were from Asian countries. With a high mortality-to-incidence ratio, management of gastric cancer is challenging. We discuss evidence for optimum management of gastric cancer in aspects of screening and early detection, diagnosis, and staging; endoscopic and surgical intervention; and the concepts of perioperative, postoperative, and palliative chemotherapy and use of molecularly targeted therapy. Recommendations are formulated on the basis of the framework provided by the Breast Health Global Initiative, using the categories of basic, limited, enhanced, and maximum level. We aim to provide a stepwise strategy for management of gastric cancer applicable to different levels of health-care resources in Asian countries.

Enhanced efficacy of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: results from a phase 3 randomized trial (AMC0101)

PURPOSE

To improve the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy with mitomycin-C and fluoropyrimidine (Mf) in gastric cancer, we designed a new regimen (iceMFP) and investigated in a phase III study.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 640 patients with resectable and macroscopically recognizable serosa-invading gastric cancer to Mf or iceMFP group during operation. The Mf consisted of intravenous mitomycin-C (20 mg/m(2)) at 3-6 weeks after surgery and oral doxifluridine (460-600 mg/m(2)/day) starting 4 weeks after the administration of mitomycin-C and continuing for 3 months. The iceMFP consisted of intraoperative intraperitoneal cisplatin (100 mg), intravenous mitomycin-C (15 mg/m(2)) on postoperative day 1, followed by oral doxifluridine for 12 months, and six monthly intravenous cisplatin (60 mg/m(2)). The primary endpoint was 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

A total of 521 patients (258 in Mf, 263 in iceMFP) were eligible for analysis after excluding patients with stage I disease, distant metastasis, or R1 resection. With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the iceMFP group had a higher RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.90; p = 0.006; 3-year RFS 60 % vs. 50 %) and overall survival (HR 0.71; 95 % CI 0.53-0.95; p = 0.02; 3-year overall survival, 71 vs. 60 %) compared with the Mf group. This was confirmed at extension analysis after a median 6.6 years of follow-up. Both regimens were well tolerated with no differences in surgical complications.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of adjuvant Mf was significantly improved by the additional therapeutic strategies of iceMFP. Considering negative results of AMC0201, these suggest that early initiation of chemotherapy and/or intraperitoneal cisplatin played a distinct role in the improved efficacy.

A phase II study of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy in potentially resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Adjuvant chemotherapy trial of TS-1 for gastric cancer study demonstrated that postoperative S-1 chemotherapy for 1 year improved overall survival of locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients. The goals of this study were to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy.

METHODS

In this single-center, open-label, phase II study, patients with potentially resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were eligible. For neoadjuvant chemotherapy, docetaxel 50 mg/m(2) on day (D) 1, oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) on D1, and S-1 40 mg/m(2) bid orally on D1-14 were administrated every 3 weeks for three cycles. After DOS chemotherapy, gastrectomy was performed, and then, adjuvant S-1 40 mg/m(2) bid was given on D1-28 every 6 weeks for 1 year. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who did not experience grade 3 or 4 toxicities (except grade 3 neutropenia) and R0 resection rates.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients were enrolled. All patients completed three planned cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy without disease progression. Eighteen patients (43.9 %) did not experience any grade 3-4 toxicity (except grade 3 neutropenia) during the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All patients underwent surgery, and R0 resection was achieved in 40 patients (97.6 %).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant DOS chemotherapy could be performed safely with a high R0 resection rate in LAGC patients. A phase III trial is currently underway.