Implementation of perioperative FLOT compared to ECX/EOX chemotherapy regimens in resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinomas: an analysis of real-world data

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Perioperative 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) is recommended in resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinoma based on randomised trials. However, the effectiveness of FLOT in routine clinical practice remains unknown as randomised trials are subject to selection bias limiting their generalisability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of FLOT in real-world patients.

METHODS

Retrospectively collected data were analysed in consecutive patients treated before or after the implementation of FLOT. The primary endpoint was complete pathological response (pCR) and secondary endpoints were margin-free resection (R0), overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) tolerability of chemotherapy and surgical complications.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time for patients treated with FLOT (n = 205) was 37.7 versus 47.0 months for epirubicin, cis- or oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (ECX/EOX, n = 186). Surgical resection was performed in 88.0% versus 92.0%; pCR were observed in 3.8% versus 2.4%; and R0 resections were achieved in 78.0% versus 86.0% (p = 0.03) in the ECX/EOX and FLOT cohorts, respectively. Survival analysis indicated no significant difference in RFS (p = 0.17) or OS (p = 0.37) between the cohorts with a trend towards increased OS in performance status 0 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-1.04). More patients treated with ECX/EOX completed chemotherapy (39% vs. 28%, p = 0.02). Febrile neutropenia was more common in the FLOT cohort (3.8% vs. 11%, p = 0.0086). 90-days mortality (1.2% vs. 0%) and frequency of anastomotic leakage (8% vs. 6%) were equal and low.

INTERPRETATION

Patients receiving FLOT did not demonstrate improved pCR, RFS or OS. However, R0 rate was improved and patients in good PS trended towards improved OS.

A Pilot Study of Perioperative Cisplatin-Capecitabine Chemotherapy With Preoperative Chemoradiation for Resectable Gastric Cancers

OBJECTIVES

The standard of care for resectable gastric cancers (GCs) includes perioperative chemotherapy (CT) or postoperative chemo/chemoradiotherapy (CRT) strategies. Poor treatment compliance postsurgery suggests that intensified surgical adjuvant treatment is more likely deliverable preceding surgery and, therefore, the safety and efficacy of perioperative cisplatin-capecitabine (CX) with preoperative chemoradiation (preopCRT) were ascertained.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2017 and December 2018, 28 potentially resectable locally advanced GC patients were offered neoadjuvant CT-2 cycles of CX at 3-weekly intervals, followed by preopCRT 45 Gy/25 fractions/5 weeks and concurrent capecitabine, followed by surgical resection and 3 adjuvant cycles of CX.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant CT was commenced in 28 patients (100%), preopCRT in 18 patients (64%), and surgery performed in 13 patients (46%). At each treatment step, decreasing patient numbers were due mainly to disease progression (12 [43%]) or other reasons, including (3 [11%]) from treatment-related toxicity. The R0 resection rate was 92% (12/13); a median of 18 nodes was obtained after D2 nodal clearance in 92% (12/13). There were 20%/4%/4% grade 3/4/5 toxicities. The median radiotherapy dose/duration was 45 Gy/5.4 weeks. Adjuvant CT was started in 11 patients (39%) and the third cycle was received by 7 patients (25%). No tumor (ypT0N0) was noted in 23% of the operated patients (3/13), or 11% of the intention-to-treat population (3/28). The median, 1-year, and 2-year survivals were 12 months, 53%, and 32%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensified preoperative treatment is doable in relatively unselected advanced GC patients in real-world settings of a public-sector hospital from a low-middle-income country. Disease progression during preoperative therapy allows patients destined for early clinical evidence of disease dissemination to avoid futile surgery, as opposed to a surgery-first strategy, without an overt increase in surgical morbidity or mortality, with encouraging R0 resection rates.

Frailty screening for predicting rapid functional decline, rapid progressive disease, and shorter overall survival in older patients with gastrointestinal cancer receiving palliative chemotherapy - a prospective, clinical study

OBJECTIVES

A growing number of older patients with cancer require well-founded clinical decision-making. Frailty screening is suggested as a service to improve outcomes in vulnerable older patients with cancer. This prospective study examined the value of frailty screening to predict rapid functional decline, rapid progressive disease (PD) and shorter overall survival (OS) in older patients with gastrointestinal cancer receiving palliative chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged ≥70 years were screened for frailty in an oncologic department after clinical decision but before starting palliative chemotherapy. Screening was repeated at first response evaluation after approximately two months of chemotherapy. Frailty screening tools included performance status (PS), Charlson Comorbidity Index, G-8 using two different cut-offs (G8₁₄,G8₁₁), VES-13, Timed-Up-and-Go, Handgrip strength and falls.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients were included, median age was 75.5 (70-88) years and 65.9% were male. The frequency of frailty varied from 14% to 74% according to the chosen frailty tool. In multivariate analysis G8₁₄ predicted OS (HR 1.5; 95%CI 1.0-2.4), whereas G8₁₁ predicted PD (OR 2.4; 1.1-5.6) and OS (HR 2.1; 1.4-2.9). VES-13 predicted functional decline (OR 3.5; 1.0-11.6), PD (OR 3.5; 1.5-8.4) and OS (HR 1.7; 1.2-2.4). Timed-Up-and-Go predicted OS (HR 1.8; 1.1-2.7). Handgrip strength and falls predicted functional decline (OR 4.5; 1.1-19 and OR 6.1; 1.4-25.8, respectively). PS predicted PD (OR 6.2; 2.6-14.7) and OS (HR 2.2; 1.5-3.2).

CONCLUSION

VES-13 was useful for predicting all three endpoints of interest. Frailty tools covering domains of functioning and nutrition are suggested for older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer.

Blood-based Markers in the Prognostic Prediction of Esophagogastric Junction Cancer

Esophagogastric junction cancer poses a great threat to human beings both in western countries and East Asia, especially in China and Japan, and its incidence has increased during recent decades. The 5-year survival rate of esophagogastric junction cancer is quite poor compared with that of other gastric cancer sites. Until now, the traditional TNM staging system has been widely used in clinical practice for prognosis. However, the TNM system is based on pathology after surgical resection or radiology using CT and MRI, not on blood markers. Evidently, some research has been reported concentrated on the prognostic value of blood-based markers with the character of non-invasive and non-radioactive in EJA. Hematologic, biochemical and coagulation parameters could be obtained from clinical data and utilized to analyze their prognostic values. Tumor-associated antigens, microRNAs and circulating tumor cells have also been reported in EJC prognosis. In this article, we review research focused on blood-based markers to evaluate their prognostic value in esophagogastric junction cancer, especially its main subtype adenocarcinoma.

Early response evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy with PET/MRI to predict resectability in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction

STUDY DESIGN AND PURPOSE

Positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a new modality that has showed promising results for various clinical indications. Currently, evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy (NT) among patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction has primarily been reserved for PET/computed tomography. Our aim was to evaluate if early response evaluation by PET/MRI is a feasible method to predict resectability.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with untreated adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (Siewert types I/II) and fit for NT with no contraindications for PET/MRI were considered eligible. A baseline scan was performed prior to NT induction and an evaluation scan 3 weeks later. For histopathological response evaluation, the Mandard tumor regression grade score was applied. Response on PET/MRI was evaluated with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1), and change in ADC and SUV_max values.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were enrolled, and 22 completed both scans and proceeded to final analyses. Seventeen patients were found resectable versus five who were found unresectable. PET/MRI response evaluation had a sensitivity 94%, specificity 80%, and AUC = 0.95 when predicting resectability in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction. No association with histopathological response (tumor regression grade) was found nor was RECIST correlated with resectability.

CONCLUSION

Response evaluation using PET/MRI was a feasible method to predict resectability in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction in this pilot study. However, larger studies are warranted to justify the use of the modality for this indication.

Perioperative ECX chemotherapy in older adults with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin and 5-FU or capecitabine (ECF/X) chemotherapy is recognised as a standard of care for patients with resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma; however, there is limited evidence regarding its use in older patients. The aims of this study were to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of perioperative ECX chemotherapy in patients aged ≥70 years-old (group 1) compared with a younger population (group 2), and to assess differences in the histology of these groups.

METHODS

212 patients in our centre were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for potentially resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma between February 2009 and January 2014. Seventy patients (33.0%) were aged ≥70 years-old and 142 (67.0%) patients were aged under 70 years-old.

RESULTS

In group 1, 57 (81.4%) of patients underwent intended radical oesophagectomy or gastrectomy compared with 106 (74.6%) in group 2 (p = 0.271). The median overall survival was 35.3 months in group 1 and 30.1 months in group 2, respectively (p = 0.281). The rates of grade 3 to 4 non-haematological toxicity in groups 1 and 2 were 38.6% and 26.8%, respectively (p = 0.079). There was no difference in groups 1 and 2 regarding: pT stage, tumour grade, circumferential resection margin involvement, tumour regression grade, vascular invasion, lymphatic invasion and perineural invasion. 74.4% patients in group 2 were node-positive following chemotherapy and surgery compared with 48% in group 1 (p = 0.0015).

DISCUSSION

Selected older adults with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma treated with perioperative ECX chemotherapy have similar overall survival and likelihood of having radical surgery as younger patients.

Perioperative chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer - what is the evidence?

The UK MAGIC trial published in 2006 was the first RCT to identify improved long-term survival rates using preoperative chemotherapy for resectable gastric or gastroesophageal cancer. Overnight, the treatment regimen impacted European guidelines. However, the majority of patients underwent limited lymph node dissection, and analyses of the rates of curative resection, downsizing and downstaging were not by intention to treat, rightfully raising concerns about their validity. For the subset of true gastric cancers, meta-analyses may even question the claims of improved long-term survival rates by present-day regimens. A rhetorical question can be posed as to whether downstaging and improved survival rates by preoperative (radio)-chemotherapy for cancers of the distal esophagus or gastric cardia, has confounded our conclusions on the (lack of) effect of present-day regimens of perioperative chemotherapy for true gastric cancers, let alone in a situation with proper lymph node dissection. At present, a plea can be made to move one step back and revert to an RCT with a surgery alone arm. Inclusion criteria and analyses of future RCTs must stratify on tumor location and the Lauren type and embrace the newly developed scheme of sub-classification of gastric cancers based on extensive molecular profiling as reported in the seminal Cancer Genome Atlas Study.

Perioperative chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis comparing toxicity, pathologic outcome, and survival

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate toxicity, pathologic outcome, and survival after perioperative chemotherapy (pCT) compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery for patients with resectable esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with resectable esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma who underwent pCT (epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine) or nCRT (paclitaxel, carboplatin, and 41.4 Gy) followed by surgery in a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands were compared. Propensity score matching was applied to create comparable groups.

RESULTS

Of 193 eligible patients, 21 were discarded after propensity score matching; 86 and 86 patients who underwent pCT and nCRT, respectively, remained. Grade ≥3 thromboembolic events occurred only in the pCT group (19% vs. 0%, P < 0.001), whereas grade ≥3 leukopenia occurred more frequently in the nCRT group (14% vs. 4%, P = 0.015). No significant differences regarding postoperative morbidity and mortality were found. Pathologic complete response was more frequently observed with nCRT (18% vs. 11%, P < 0.001), without significantly improving radicality rates (95% vs. 89%, P = 0.149). Both strategies resulted in comparable 3-year progression-free survival (pCT vs. nCRT: 46% vs. 55%, P = 0.344) and overall survival rates (49% vs. 50%, P = 0.934). At 3-year follow-up, fewer locoregional disease progression occurred in the nCRT group (19% vs. 37%, P = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to perioperative chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy achieves higher pathologic response rates and a lower risk of locoregional disease progression, without improving survival.

Trends in upper gastro-intestinal cancer among the elderly in Denmark, 1980-2012

BACKGROUND

Upper gastro-intestinal cancer (UGIC) includes malignancies in esophagus, stomach and small intestine, and represents some of the most frequent malignancies worldwide. The aim of the present analysis was to describe incidence, mortality and survival in UGIC patients in Denmark from 1980 to 2012 according to differences in age and time periods.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

UGIC was defined as ICD-10 codes C15-C17. Data derived from the NORDCAN database with comparable data on cancer incidence mortality, prevalence and relative survival in the Nordic countries, where the Danish data were delivered from the Danish Cancer Registry and the Danish Cause of Death Registry with follow-up for death or emigration until the end of 2013.

RESULTS

The proportion of male patients over the age of 70 years diagnosed with esophageal cancer was constant over time (around 42%) but increased in females to 49% in 2012. Incidence rates increased with time and continued to rise in all ages. Mortality rates were clearly separated by age groups with increasing mortality rates by increasing age group for both sexes. Relative survival increased slowly over time in all age groups. The proportion of older male and female patients with stomach cancer increased to 50% and 54%, respectively, in 2012. Incidence rates decreased steadily with time, especially from 1980 to 1990 but continued to decrease in all age groups. Mortality rates decreased considerably from 1980 to 90 and have been almost constant during the last decade for both women and men. Relative survival increased modest over time in both genders and all age groups. In 2012, only 1471 persons were alive after a diagnosis of stomach cancer.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for clinical trials focusing on patients over the age of 70 years with co-existing comorbidity.