Triplet versus doublet neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens for locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

Neoadjuvant therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in combination with chemotherapy vs . chemotherapy alone in HER2(-) locally advanced gastric cancer: A propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the efficacy between neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus chemotherapy vs . chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant triplet vs . doublet chemotherapeutic regimens in locally advanced gastric/esophagogastric junction cancer (LAGC).

METHODS

We included LAGC patients from 47 hospitals in China's National Cancer Information Database (NCID) from January 2019 to December 2022. Using propensity score matching (PSM), we retrospectively analyzed the efficacy between neoadjuvant ICIs plus chemotherapy vs . chemotherapy alone, and neoadjuvant triplet vs . doublet chemotherapeutic regimens. The primary study result was the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. The secondary study results were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 1205 LAGC patients were included. After PSM, the ICIs plus chemotherapy and the chemotherapy cohorts had 184 patients each, while the doublet and triplet chemotherapy cohorts had 246 patients each. The pCR rate (14.13% vs . 7.61%, χ2 = 4.039, P = 0.044), and the 2-year (77.60% vs . 61.02%, HR = 0.67, 95% con-fidence interval [CI] 0.43-0.98, P = 0.048) and 3-year (70.55% vs . 61.02%, HR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.32-0.93, P = 0.048) DFS rates in the ICIs plus chemotherapy cohort were improved compared to those in the chemotherapy cohort. No significant increase was observed in the OS rates at both 1 year and 2 years. The pCR rates, DFS rates at 1-3 years, and OS rates at 1-2 years did not differ significantly between the doublet and triplet cohorts, respectively. No differences were observed in postoperative complications between any of the group comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant ICIs plus chemotherapy improved the pCR rate and 2-3 years DFS rates of LAGC compared to chemotherapy alone, but whether short-term benefit could translate into long-term efficacy is unclear. The triplet regimen was not superior to the doublet regimen in terms of efficacy. The safety after surgery was similar between either ICIs plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy or the triplet and the doublet regimen.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Asian Patients With Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

Presently, surgery is the only treatment approach for gastric cancer and improving the prognosis of locally advanced gastric cancer is one of the key factors in promoting gastric cancer survival benefit. The MAGIC study was the first to demonstrate the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in European countries. In recent years, several clinical trials have provided evidence for the use of NAC in Asian patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. However, clinical practice guidelines vary between Asian and non-Asian populations. Optimal NAC regimens, proper target populations, and predictors of NAC outcomes in Asian patients are still under investigation. Herein, we summarized the current progress in the administration of NAC in Asian patients with gastric cancer.

The Role of Surgery in the Management of Gastric Cancer: State of the Art

Surgery still represents the mainstay of treatment of all stages of gastric cancer (GC). Surgical resections represent potentially curative options in the case of early GC with a low risk of node metastasis. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and indocyanine green fluorescence are novel techniques which may improve the employment of stomach-sparing procedures, ameliorating quality of life without compromising oncological radicality. Nonetheless, the diffusion of these techniques is limited in Western countries. Conversely, radical gastrectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodal treatment represents a valid option in the case of advanced GC. Differences between Eastern and Western recommendations still exist, and the optimal multimodal strategy is still a matter of investigation. Recent chemotherapy protocols have made surgery available for patients with oligometastatic disease. In this context, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy via HIPEC or PIPAC has emerged as an alternative weapon for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In conclusion, the surgical management of GC is still evolving together with the multimodal strategy. It is mandatory for surgeons to be conscious of the current evolution of the surgical management of GC in the era of multidisciplinary and tailored medicine.

Neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitor and apatinib combined with S-1 plus oxaliplatin for locally advanced gastric cancer patients: a multicentered, prospective, cohort study

PURPOSE

Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitor and apatinib have been utilized in metastatic gastric cancer patients. The current study aimed to further investigate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant S-1 plus oxaliplatin combined with PD-1 inhibitor and apatinib (SOXPA) in locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients.

METHODS

This two-centered, prospective, cohort study analyzed 30 resectable LAGC patients receiving SOXPA as neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Two (6.7%), 18 (60.0%), and 10 (33.3%) patients achieved complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and stable disease (SD), separately. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 66.7% and 100.0%, respectively. The R0 resection rate was 93.3%. Beyond that, 6 (20.0%), 18 (60.0%), and 6 (20.0%) patients achieved grade 1, 2, and 3 pathological responses. The pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 20%. The 1-year and 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 96.6% and 77.7% respectively; meanwhile, the 1-year and 2-year overall survival (OS) rates were 96.6% and 90.1%, separately. What's more, better clinical response (P = 0.046); achievement of ORR (P = 0.014), and better pathological response (P = 0.020) were correlated with longer DFS. Besides, ORR achievement was linked with longer OS (P = 0.040). Most adverse events were relatively mild and manageable. Grade 3 adverse events included leukopenia, anemia, neutropenia, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, nausea and vomiting. No grade 4 adverse events were witnessed.

CONCLUSION

SOXPA as neoadjuvant therapy achieves a satisfying clinical response, pathological response, survival profile, and tolerable safety in LAGC patients.

Outcomes After Surgical Palliation of Patients With Gastric Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is an option for symptom palliation in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. Operative outcomes after palliative interventions are largely unknown. Herein, we assess the trends of surgical palliation use for patients with gastric cancer and describe outcomes of patients undergoing surgical palliation compared to nonsurgical palliation.

METHODS

Patients with clinical Stage IV gastric cancer in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015) who received surgical or nonsurgical palliation were selected. We identified factors associated with palliative surgery. Survival differences were assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazard regression, and log rank test.

RESULTS

Six thousand eight hundred twenty nine patients received palliative care for gastric cancer. Most patients (87%, n = 5944) received nonsurgical palliation: 29% radiation therapy, 57% systemic treatment, and 14% pain management. The number of patients receiving palliative care increased between 2004 and 2015; however, use of surgical palliation declined significantly (22% in 2004, 8% in 2015; P < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) for the cohort was 5.65 mo (95% confidence interval 5.45-5.85); 1-year and 2-year OS were 24% and 9%, respectively. Older age at diagnosis and diagnosis between 2004 and 2006 were significantly associated with undergoing surgical palliation. Patients who underwent surgical palliation had significantly shorter median OS and a 20% higher hazard of mortality than those who received nonsurgical palliation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with metastatic gastric cancer experience very short survival. While palliative surgery is used infrequently, the observed association with shorter median OS underscores the importance of careful patient selection. Palliative surgery should be offered judiciously and expectations about outcomes clearly established.

Distal Gastrectomy for Symptomatic Stage IV Gastric Cancer Contributes to Prognosis with Acceptable Safety Compared to Gastrojejunostomy

Simple Summary

For symptomatic stage IV gastric cancer involving major symptoms such as bleeding or obstruction, palliative surgery may be considered an option to relieve symptoms. Palliative gastrectomy or gastrojejunostomy is selected depending on the resectability of the primary tumor and/or surgical risk. However, treatment policies differ depending on the institution as to whether gastrectomy or gastrojejunostomy should be performed for symptomatic stage IV gastric cancer. We considered that gastrectomy might contribute more to prognosis than gastrojejunostomy for gastric cancer located in the middle or lower-third region where total gastrectomy can be avoided. Here, we compare the prognosis of gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy for symptomatic stage IV gastric cancer. We demonstrate that distal gastrectomy for symptomatic stage IV gastric cancer located in the middle or lower-third regions contributes to prognosis with acceptable safety when compared to gastrojejunostomy.

Abstract

Background: The prognostic prolongation effect of reduction surgery for asymptomatic stage IV gastric cancer (GC) is unfavorable; however, its prognostic effect for symptomatic stage IV GC remains unclear. We aimed to compare the prognosis of gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy for symptomatic stage IV GC. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study analyzed record-based data of patients undergoing palliative surgery for symptomatic stage IV GC in the middle or lower-third regions between January 2015 and December 2019. Patients were divided into distal gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy groups. We compared clinicopathological features and outcomes after propensity score matching (PSM). Results: Among the 126 patients studied, 46 and 80 underwent distal gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy, respectively. There was no difference in postoperative complications between the groups. Regarding prognostic factors, surgical procedures and postoperative chemotherapy were significantly different in multivariate analysis. Each group was further subdivided into groups with and without postoperative chemotherapy. After PSM, the data of 21 well-matched patients with postoperative chemotherapy and 8 without postoperative chemotherapy were evaluated. Overall survival was significantly longer in the distal gastrectomy group (p = 0.007 [group with postoperative chemotherapy], p = 0.02 [group without postoperative chemotherapy]). Conclusions: Distal gastrectomy for symptomatic stage IV GC contributes to prognosis with acceptable safety compared to gastrojejunostomy.