Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Plus Chemoradiation as Preoperative Therapy for Resectable Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of a Large, Single-Institution Experience

Comparison of esophageal cancer survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus definitive chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer (EC); however, chemoradiotherapy without surgery has been recommended in specific cases. The aim of this meta-analysis is to analyse the survival between surgeries after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy in order to provide a theoretical basis for clinically individualised differential treatment. We conducted an initial search of MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Library, and Embase for English-only articles that compared treatment regimens and provided survival data. According to the final I2 value of the two survival indicators, the random effect model or fixed effect model was used to calculate the overall hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Cochrane's Q test was used to judge the heterogeneity of the studies, and a funnel plot was used to evaluate for publication bias. A sensitivity analysis was performed to verify the stability of the included studies. A total of 38 studies involving 29161 patients (neoadjuvant therapy: 15401, definitive chemoradiotherapy: 13760) were included in the analysis. The final pooled results (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.67-0.82) showed a statistically significant increase in overall survival with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Subgroup analyses were performed to determine the effects of heterogeneity, additional treatment regimens, study types, and geographic regions, as well as histologic differences, complications, and recurrence, on the overall results. For people with esophageal cancer that can be removed, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy combined with surgery improves survival compared to definitive chemoradiotherapy. However, more research is needed to confirm these results and help doctors make decisions about treatment.

Survival Outcomes in Patients with Resectable Gastric Cancer Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy

BACKGROUND

Perioperative chemotherapy has become the standard of care for locally advanced gastric cancer. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), including both chemotherapy and chemoradiation, is utilized in other gastrointestinal malignancies. We determined survival in a contemporary cohort of gastric cancer patients treated with TNT.

METHODS

Using a prospective institutional database, patients diagnosed with cT2-4 or cN+ gastric adenocarcinoma (January 2012 to June 2022) who underwent staging laparoscopy, received TNT, and underwent gastrectomy were identified. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were determined using standard statistical methods.

RESULTS

The study included 203 patients. The most common TNT sequence was induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (n = 186 [91.6%]). A total of 195 (96.1%) patients completed planned neoadjuvant treatments. Surgery included total gastrectomy in 108 (53.2%), extended (D1+/D2) lymphadenectomy in 193 (95.1%), and adjacent organ resection in 19 (9.4%) patients. Pathologic complete response (pCR) was achieved in 32 (15.8%) patients. The 5-year OS rate was 65.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 57.8-73.5%), and the 5-year DSS rate was 70.8% (95% CI 63.6-78.9%) in the study cohort. Among patients with pCR, the 5-year OS rate was 89.1% (95% CI 78.1-100.0%), and the 5-year DSS rate was 96.9% (95% CI 91-100%). Posttreatment pathologic N and M stages were the strongest prognostic indicators associated with both OS and DSS.

CONCLUSIONS

Total neoadjuvant therapy for resectable gastric cancer is associated with a high rate of treatment completion and promising survival outcomes. Prospective comparisons with perioperative treatment are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from TNT.

Great Debate: Chemoradiation Should be Added to Chemotherapy as a Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategy for Resectable Gastric Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Most patients with resectable gastric cancer present with locally advanced disease and warrant neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on level 1 evidence. However, the incremental benefit of adding radiation to chemotherapy as a neoadjuvant treatment strategy for these patients is less clear.

METHODS

While awaiting the results of two ongoing randomized clinical trials attempting to specifically address this question (TOPGEAR and CRITICS-II), this article presents the debate between two gastric cancer surgery experts supporting each side of the argument on the use or omission of neoadjuvant radiation in this setting.

RESULTS

On the one hand, neoadjuvant radiation may be better tolerated compared with modern triplet chemotherapy and may be associated with higher rates of major pathologic response. Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that radiation may offer a survival benefit when the tumor is located at the gastroesophageal junction or there is concern for a margin-positive resection. However, in the setting of adequate surgery, no survival benefit has been demonstrated by adding radiation to modern chemotherapy, likely reflecting the fact that death from gastric cancer is a result of distant recurrence, which is not addressed by local treatment such as radiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

While awaiting the results of the TOPGEAR and CRITICS-II trials, this discussion of current evidence can facilitate the refinement of an optimal neoadjuvant therapy strategy in patients with resectable gastric cancer.

Neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin plus capecitabine versus oxaliplatin plus capecitabine for patients with locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: long-term results of a phase III randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (DOX regimen) is rarely used in Eastern countries and its efficacy and safety in advanced gastric cancer have not been reported. In this open-label, randomized, controlled trial, the authors aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using the DOX and oxaliplatin plus capecitabine (XELOX) regimens, in comparison to surgery alone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three hundred patients younger than 60 years with potentially resectable advanced gastric cancer (cT3-4, Nany, M0) were enrolled in this randomized controlled clinical trial between November 2014 and June 2018. The primary endpoint of the study was the pathological complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary endpoints included 3-year overall survival (OS), 3-year disease-free survival.

RESULTS

In total, 280 patients (93 in the DOX group, 92 in the XELOX group, and 95 in the surgery group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. The DOX group demonstrated a significantly higher pCR rate compared to the XELOX group (16.1 vs. 4.3%, P =0.008). For patients with intestinal type, the DOX group exhibited significantly higher rates of both pCR and major pathological response compared to the XELOX group ( P =0.007, P <0.001). The 3-year OS rates of the DOX group, the XELOX group and the surgery group were 56.9, 44.6, and 34.7%, respectively. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 45.2, 40.2, and 28.4%, respectively. The neoadjuvant DOX regimen demonstrated a significant improvement in the 3-year OS of patients compared to the neoadjuvant XELOX regimen ( P =0.037).

CONCLUSION

The neoadjuvant DOX regimen has shown the potential to increase the pCR rate and improve the prognosis of patients with advanced gastric cancer who are under 60 years old.

Understanding the association between clinical staging accuracy, treatment response, and survival among gastric cancer patients through Bayesian analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) improves survival among patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (GC), but it remains unclear whether its benefit is contingent on treatment response.

METHODS

This is a national cohort study of stage Ib-III GC patients in the National Cancer Data Base (2006-2015) treated with upfront resection or NAT followed by surgery. Bayesian analysis was used for NAT patients to ascertain staging concordance and to account for down-staging. We used multivariable Cox regression to evaluate the association between staging concordance, treatment, response to NAT, and survival.

RESULTS

The cohort included 13 340 patients treated at 1124 hospitals. Staging concordance ranged from 86.1% for cT3-4N+ to 34.7% for cT2N0 patients. Relative to accurately staged patients treated with upfront surgery, NAT was associated with a decreased risk of death if there was disease down-staging among those with cT1-2N+ (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.43 [0.30-0.61]), cT3-4N0 (HR: 0.69 [0.54-0.88]), and cT3-4N+ (HR: 0.51 [0.48-0.58]) tumors, and in the absence of down-staging among cT3-4N+ patients (HR: 0.83 [0.74-0.92]). Conversely, NAT without down-staging increased the risk of death among those with intermediate-stage disease.

CONCLUSIONS

NAT is associated with improved survival for GC, but it seems to be contingent on treatment response among patients with intermediate-stage disease.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Where Are We at?

Simple Summary

More than 50% of gastric cancer are at least locally advanced at presentation. For such patients, a multimodal approach rather than mere surgical resection leads to better long-term prognosis. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is one of the common treatment strategies for local advanced gastric cancer. Based on the experience and evidence from esophago-gastric cancers, the incorporation of systemic and locoregional therapy has shown superior disease control and reduced local recurrence. However, the optimal chemotherapy regimen, patient selection, technical consideration and potential biomarkers are still under investigation. Furthermore, the comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with neoadjuvant/perioperative chemotherapy is also an important issue to be answered. In the review article, we addressed the current available evidence to provide a comprehensive understanding and the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer. Future studies and ongoing trials will be necessary to determine the best candidate and the role of newer systemic and radiation therapies in such patients. NCRT is a feasible treatment option for LAGC, with the ability to achieve favorable disease control and enable higher radical resection rates over those afforded by perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone. Large clinical trials examining the comparative efficacy of NCRT and NCT are underway. The discrepancy between the satisfactory pCR rates associated with NCRT and the nonsignificant association between NCRT and survival warrants further exploration. Furthermore, newer therapies such as immunotherapy and adaptive radiotherapy may be implemented in con-junction with NCRT, and the development of useful biomarkers may ultimately lead to the de-velopment of personalized treatments for LAGC. These research directions may lead to the dis-covery of the optimal approach to administering NCRT to patients with LAGC. They may also aid in the determination of the optimal candidates for undergoing NCRT.

Abstract

Locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) has a poor prognosis with surgical resection alone, and neoadjuvant treatment has been recommended to improve surgical and oncological outcomes. Although neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been established to be effective for LAGC, the role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) remains under investigation. Clinical experience and research evidence on esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma (e.g., cardia gastric cancers) indicate that the likelihood of achieving sustainable local control is higher through NCRT than through resection alone. Furthermore, NCRT also has an acceptable treatment-related toxicity and adverse event profile. In particular, it increases the likelihood of achieving an R0 resection and a pathological complete response (pCR). Moreover, NCRT results in higher overall and recurrence-free survival rates than surgery alone; however, evidence on the survival benefits of NCRT versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) remains conflicting. For noncardia gastric cancer, the efficacy of NCRT has mostly been reported in retrospective studies, and several large clinical trials are ongoing. Consequently, NCRT might play a more essential role in unresectable LAGC, for which NCT alone may not be adequate to attain disease control. The continual improvements in systemic treatments, radiotherapy techniques, and emerging biomarkers can also lead to improved personalized therapy for NCRT. To elucidate the contributions of NCRT to gastric cancer treatment in the future, the efficacy, potential toxicity, predictive biomarkers, and clinical considerations for implementing NCRT in different types of LAGC were reviewed.

Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Plus Chemoradiation as Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Multi-institutional Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We compare neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus chemoradiation (CRT) for patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GA).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The optimal neoadjuvant therapy regimen for resectable GA is not defined.

METHODS

Utilizing data from 2 high-volume cancer centers, we analyzed patients who underwent surgery for localized GA from 1/1/2000-12/31/2017. Standard CT regimens were used according to treatment period. We compared propensity matched cohorts based on age, sex, race, histology, and clinical stage.

RESULTS

Four-hundred five patients (age 62 ± 12 year, 58% male, 56% White) were analyzed. 231 (57%) received CRT and 174 (43%) received CT. Groups differed based on histopathologic characteristics including preoperative stage (p = 0.013). To control for these differences, propensity matched cohorts of 113 CT and 113 CRT patients were compared. CRT had similar frequencies of microscopically negative resections to CT (93% vs 91%, p = 0.81), but higher rates of complete pathologic response (15% vs 4%, p = 0.003) and lower pathologic stage (p = 0.002). Completion of intended perioperative therapy occurred in 63% of CT and 91% of CRT patients (p < 0.001). Median DFS was 45mo (95%CI: 20-70) in the CT group and 113mo (95%CI: 75-151) in the CRT group (p = 0.018). Median OS was 53mo (95%CI: 30-77) versus 120mo (95%CI: 101-138); p = 0.015.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multi-institutional comparison of neoadjuvant CT and CRT for resectable GA, CRT is associated with higher rates of completed perioperative therapy, higher rates of complete pathologic response, lower pathologic stage, and improved survival.Level of Evidence: Level III.