Role of Immunotherapy in Gastroesophageal Cancers-Advances, Challenges and Future Strategies

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal cancers (GECs) carry considerable morbidity and mortality, and demonstrate geographical histological variances in addition to molecular heterogeneity. Consequently, the immunogenicity of the different subtypes, which can predict the likelihood of immunotherapy response, can vary. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has transformed the treatment of many cancer types over the past decade but has been slower to gain a foothold in the treatment paradigm of GECs.

METHODS

This article reviews the existing evidence and use approvals for immunotherapies and immune-based treatments in GECs, in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant and metastatic disease settings. The challenges of and limitations to ICI application in current clinical practice are examined. Ongoing clinical trials and future directions of research are also considered.

CONCLUSION

ICI therapy has become an established treatment option within GECs, both perioperatively and in advanced disease. However, nuances in terms of its use are not yet fully understood. Ongoing research proposes to broaden the application of immunotherapies in GECs with the potential to continue to improve outcomes.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

Background

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

Materials and methods

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

Results

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

Conclusion

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Evaluation of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in Chinese surgically resectable gastric cancer: a pilot study by meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of immunochemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been increasing and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the first-line treatment for advanced GC. However, few studies with small sample sizes have examined this treatment regimen to assess its effectiveness and safety in the neoadjuvant treatment phase of resectable local advanced GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science for clinical trials on neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (nICT) in advanced GC. The primary outcomes were effectiveness [evaluated by major pathological response (MPR) and pathological complete response (pCR)] and safety [assessed by grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and postoperative complications]. A meta-analysis of non-comparative binary results was performed to aggregate the primary outcomes. Direct comparative analysis was used to compare pooled results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) with nICT. The outcomes emerged as risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Five articles with 206 patients were included, and all of them were from the Chinese population. The pooled pCR and MPR rates were 26.5% (95% CI: 21.3%-33.3%) and 49.0% (95% CI: 42.3%-55.9%), while grade 3-4 TRAEs and post-operative complication rates were 20.0% (95% CI: 9.1%-39.8%) and 30.1% (95% CI: 23.1%-37.9%), respectively. Direct comparison showed that with the exception of grade 3-4 TRAEs and postoperative complications, all outcomes including pCR, MPR, and R0 resection rate favoured nICT to nCT.

CONCLUSION

nICT is a promising strategy for use as an advisable neoadjuvant treatment for patients with advanced GC in Chinese population. However, more phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be required to further consolidate the efficacy and safety of this regimen.

Current progress and challenges of immunotherapy in gastric cancer: A focus on CAR-T cells therapeutic approach

Gastric cancer (GC) is a severe malignancy, accounting for the third most common cancer death worldwide. Despite the development of chemo-radiation therapy, there has not been sufficient survival advantage in patients with GC who were treated by these methods. GC immunogenicity is hampered by a highly immunosuppressive microenvironment; therefore, further understanding of the molecular biology of GC is the potential to achieve new therapeutic strategies in GC therapy, including specific immunotherapy. Current immunotherapies are mainly based on cytokines, immune checkpoints, monoclonal antibodies (mAb), bispecific antibodies (BisAbs), antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR). Immunotherapy has made significant progress in the treatment of GC, so that studies show that nivolumab as a programmed death 1 (PD1) inhibitor has proper safety and effectiveness as a third-line treatment for GC patients. Multiple monoclonal antibodies like ramucirumab and claudiximab were effective in treating GC patients, especially in combination with other treatments. Despite the challenges of CAR therapy in solid tumors, CAR therapy targets various GC cells targets; among them, intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1 CAR-T cell and CLDN18.2 CAR-T cell have shown promising results. Although responses to all these treatments are encouraging and in some cases, durable, these successes are not seen in all treated patients. The present review represents the development of various immunotherapies especially CAR-T cell therapy, its current use, clinical data in GC, and their limitations.

Neoadjuvant Therapy with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown great promise in treating late-stage gastric cancer, but their efficacy in the neoadjuvant setting has not been studied in large cohorts. Here, we explored the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant ICI-based therapy in locally advanced gastric cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included studies containing patients with locally advanced gastric/gastroesophageal cancer who received ICI-based neoadjuvant therapy. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and abstracts from major international oncology conferences. We performed this meta-analysis using the META package in R.3.6.1.

RESULTS

Twenty-one prospective phase I/II studies comprising 687 patients were identified. The pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 0.21 (95% CI 0.18-0.24), major pathological response (MPR) rate was 0.41 (95% CI 0.31-0.52), and R0 resection rate was 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96). The efficacy was highest with ICI plus radiochemotherapy, lowest with ICI alone, and in the middle with ICI and chemotherapy ± anti-angiogenesis. dMMR/MSI-H and PD-L1-high patients benefited more than pMMR/MSS and PD-L1-low patients. Grade 3 or higher toxicity rate was 0.23 (95% CI 0.13-0.38). These results exceeded those in trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, where the rate of pCR was 0.08 (95% CI 0.06-0.11), MPR was 0.22 (95% CI 0.19-0.26), R0 section was 0.84 (95% CI 0.80-0.87), and overall grade 3 or higher toxicity was 0.28 (95% CI 0.13-0.47) in 4800 patients across 21 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the integrated results show promising efficacy and safety of ICI-based neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer and support further investigation in large multicenter randomized trials.

Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Gastrointestinal Cancers - The New Standard of Care?

The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) offers novel treatment possibilities for solid cancers, with the crucial benefit of providing higher cure rates. These agents have become part of standard treatments in the metastatic and adjuvant setting for select cancers, such as melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or urological malignancies. Currently, there is ample clinical interest in employing ICI in a neoadjuvant setting with a curative intent. This approach is especially supported by the scientific rationale that ICI primarily stimulate the host immune system to eradicate tumor cells, rather than being inherently cytotoxic. Aside from tumor downstaging, neoadjuvant immunotherapy offers the potential of an in situ cancer vaccination, leading to a systemic adjuvant immunological effect after tumor resection. Moreover, preclinical data clearly demonstrate a synergistic effect of ICI with radiotherapy (RT), chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or chemotherapy (ChT). This review harmonizes preclinical concepts with real world data (RWD) in the field of neoadjuvant ICI in gastrointestinal (GI) cancers and discusses their limitations. We believe this is a crucial approach, since up to now, neoadjuvant strategies have been primarily developed by clinicians, whereas the advances in immunotherapy primarily originate from preclinical research. Currently there is limited published data on neoadjuvant ICI in GI cancers, even though neoadjuvant treatments including RT, CRT or ChT are frequently employed in locally advanced/oligometastatic GI cancers (i.e. rectal, pancreatic, esophagus, stomach, etc.). Utilizing established therapies in combination with ICI provides an abundance of opportunities for innovative treatment regimens to further improve survival rates.

Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma in older adults: A comprehensive narrative review of management by the Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology

Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is a disease of older adults with very poor survival rates. Its incidence has risen dramatically across the world in recent decades. Current treatment approaches for older adults are based largely on extrapolated evidence from clinical trials conducted in younger and fitter participants than those more commonly encountered in clinical practice. Understanding how to apply available evidence to our patients in the clinic setting is essential given the high morbidity of both curative and palliative treatment. This review aims to use available data to inform the management of an older adult with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Comparison of Perioperative Chemotherapy versus Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Operable Stomach Cancer: A Western Canadian Province Experience

Background: The standard approaches for resectable stomach cancer are postoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCR) or perioperative chemotherapy (PC). Limited evidence is available regarding the superiority of one of the two approaches. We aimed to compare the survival of patients with operable stomach cancer who were treated with PC or PCR. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with operable stomach cancer diagnosed between 2005–2015 in the province of Saskatchewan were identified and, based on type of treatment, were placed into PCR and PC groups. A Cox proportional multivariate analysis was performed to assess independent prognostic variables, including survival advantage of PC over PCR. Results: A total of 88 eligible patients with a median age of 66 (56–71) and a male to female ratio of 1:0.44 were identified. Seventy-three (83%) patients had pathologically node positive disease. Sixty-seven (76%) patients received PCR, while 21 (24%) patients received PC. The median overall survival of the whole group was 34 months, with 38 months (95% CI 24.6–51.3) in the PCR group vs. 30 months (14.3–45.7) in the PC group (p = 0.29). Median relapse-free survival was 34 months (20.7–47.3) in the PCR group vs. 23 months (6.7–39.3) in the PC group (p = 0.20). Toxicities were comparable. On multivariate analysis, T ≥ 3 tumor (HR, 3.57 (1.39–8.56)), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (LNR) > 2.8 (HR, 1.85 (1.05–3.25)), and positive resection margins (HR, 1.89 (1.06–3.37)) were independently correlated with inferior survival. Conclusions: This well-designed population based cohort study suggests a lack of survival benefit of PC over PCR. Both treatment options remain viable approaches for resectable stomach cancer.

Optimization of perioperative approaches for advanced and late stages of gastric cancer: clinical proposal based on literature evidence, personal experience, and ongoing trials and research

BACKGROUND

The high incidence of gastric cancer (GC) and paradoxical high prevalence of advanced stage GC, amounting to around 2/3 at time of diagnosis, have urged doctors and researchers around the world not only to ameliorate the detection rate of GC at early stages but also to optimize the clinical management of GC at advanced stages.

CONTENT

We hereby recommend a more goal-oriented multimodality approach with objectives to increase survival rate and improve survival status. Based on precision and accurate clinical staging at diagnosis, we suggest that advanced stage GC (AGC) patients should be channeled into different treatment plans according to their disease status where they can be subjected to comprehensive measures involving chemo, radio, immunological, or target therapies depending on the pathophysiological behavior of their tumor. Patients assessed as potentially resectable cT4N + M0 can undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy with intent of tumor downsizing and downgrading followed by surgery with intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to decrease the incidence of peritoneal dissemination due to surgical trauma and adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation in cases of bulky nodal metastasis. In cases with distal metastasis, conversion therapy is recommended with the possibility of surgery of curative intent in case of favorable response. The options of alternate treatment options such as trans-catheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for limited liver lesions or neoadjuvant intraperitoneal plus systemic chemotherapy (NIPS) for peritoneal carcinomatosis have to be negotiated. With surgery as the cornerstone for cancer treatment, there is acknowledgment of the significance of perioperative comprehensive approaches but there has not been some consensus guiding clinical application. Henceforth, in this review, based on past literature, current guidelines and ongoing clinical trials, we have shared a proposal of the current treatment modalities in practice for the advanced stages of gastric cancer.

CONCLUSION

Even though surgery is the golden standard of radical cancer treatment, clinical reality shows that without proper perioperative management, patients undergoing radical resections manifest high rates of recurrence and metastasis. Hence, in this review, we have outlined a clinical agenda to optimize the management of advanced stage GC with objective to improve survival outcome and quality of life of patients.