Surgical outcome after docetaxel-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally-advanced gastric cancer

Efficacy and safety of perioperative therapy for locally resectable gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide, with over 1 million new cases per year, and the third leading cause of cancer-related death.

AIM

To determine the optimal perioperative treatment regimen for patients with locally resectable GC.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted, focusing on phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing perioperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in treating locally resectable GC. The R0 resection rate, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and incidence of grade 3 or higher nonsurgical severe adverse events (SAEs) associated with various perioperative regimens were analyzed. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare treatment regimens and rank their efficacy.

RESULTS

Thirty RCTs involving 8346 patients were included in this study. Neoadjuvant XELOX plus neoadjuvant radiotherapy and neoadjuvant CF were found to significantly improve the R0 resection rate compared with surgery alone, and the former had the highest probability of being the most effective option in this context. Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant FLOT was associated with the highest probability of being the best regimen for improving OS. Owing to limited data, no definitive ranking could be determined for DFS. Considering nonsurgical SAEs, FLO has emerged as the safest treatment regimen.

CONCLUSION

This study provides valuable insights for clinicians when selecting perioperative treatment regimens for patients with locally resectable GC. Further studies are required to validate these findings.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes following neoadjuvant therapy in upfront resectable gastric cancers compared to surgery alone in phase III randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common malignancy and the fourth most common cause of cancer mortality globally. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in upfront resectable gastric cancer is a subject of ongoing research. In recent meta-analyses, R0 resection rate and superior outcomes were not consistently observed in such regimens.

AIM

To describe the outcomes following phase III randomised control trials; comparing neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery against upfront surgery with and without adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancers.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science was searched from January 2002 to September 2022.

RESULTS

13 studies were included (3280 participants). R0 resection rates were in neoadjuvant therapy arms as compared to adjuvant therapy with odds ratio (OR) 1.55[95% CI: 1.13, 2.13](p=0.007) and compared to surgery alone OR 2.49[95% CI: 1.56, 3.96](p=0.0001). 3-year and 5-year progression-, event- and disease-free survival in neoadjuvant therapy as compared to adjuvant therapy were not significantly increased, 3-year OR 0.87[0.71, 1.07](p=0.19). Meanwhile, comparing neoadjuvant therapy to adjuvant therapy, 3-year overall survival (OS) hazard ratio was 0.88[95% CI: 0.70, 1.11](p=0.71) while 3- and 5-year OS OR was 1.18[95% CI: 0.90, 1.55], p=0.22 and 1.27[95% CI: 0.67, 2.42](p=0.47) respectively. Surgical complications were also more common with neoadjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant therapy yields higher rates of R0 resection. However, improved long-term survival was not seen as compared to adjuvant therapy. Large multi-centred randomised control trials with D2 lymphadenectomy should be performed to better evaluate the treatment modalities.

Optimising Multimodality Treatment of Resectable Oesophago-Gastric Adenocarcinoma

Simple Summary

Oesophageal (food pipe) and stomach cancers are amongst the hard-to-treat cancers that result in significant illness and deaths around the globe. Over the last few decades, there has been remarkable progress in the treatment of these cancers as a result of advances in diagnosis, surgical techniques, systemic therapy and radiotherapy. However, even if caught in the early stages, most patients with these cancers will unfortunately have their cancers come back, usually becoming widespread and difficult to treat. Therefore, optimising the early treatment strategy of these cancers is essential to improve the outcome and reduce the risk of recurrence. There are currently various geographically influenced standard of care management practices of early stomach and oesophageal cancers, ranging from using chemotherapy before and after surgery to the use of combined chemoradiotherapy before surgery and more recently the use of immunotherapy after surgery. However, it is not very clear if one strategy is significantly better than the others and there are some ongoing studies aiming to directly compare these treatment options. In addition, our understanding of the molecular and genetic features of these cancers can help improve our clinical practice and inform our choice of the best treatment strategy for the individual patient.

Abstract

Oesophago–gastric adenocarcinoma remains a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although there has been an enormous progress in the multimodality management of resectable oesophago–gastric adenocarcinoma, most patients still develop a recurrent disease that eventually becomes resistant to systemic therapy. Currently, there is no global consensus on the optimal multimodality approach and there are variations in accepted standards of care, ranging from preoperative chemoradiation to perioperative chemotherapy and, more recently, adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors. Ongoing clinical trials are aimed to directly compare multimodal treatment options as well as the additional benefit of targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Furthermore, our understanding of the molecular and genetic features of oesophago–gastric cancer has improved significantly over the last decade and these data may help inform the best approach for the individual patient, utilising biomarker selection and precision medicine.

Clinical effects of Apatinib combined with DOS neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for LAGC

Objective

To evaluate the clinical effects of apatinib combined with DOS regimen in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).

Methods

Eighty patients with LAGC admitted to Baoding first Central Hospital from January 2018 to October 2020 were randomly divided into two groups (n=40, respectively). The control group received DOS chemotherapy regimen alone. The experiment group additionally orally took apatinib mesylate tablets. The changes in CEA, CA19-9 and other tumor markers, RO resection rate, incidence of operative complications, adverse reactions, and other indicators were compared between the two groups.

Results

The overall response rate (ORR) of the experimental group was 72.5%, which was significantly better than that of the control group (50%) (p=0.03). After the treatment, the CEA and CA19-9 in the experiment group were significantly lower than those in the control group (p=0.00). The Ro resection rate was 77.5% in the experiment group and 57.5% in the control group (p=0.03). The operation time was shortened and amount of bleeding decreased in the experiment group, and the differences were statistically significant (p=0.00). The incidence of surgical complications in the experimental group was 17.5%, significantly lower than that in the control group (37.5%) (p=0.04).

Conclusion

Apatinib combined with DOS regimen is effective for patients with LAGC without significantly increasing adverse reactions. Meanwhile, tumor markers are reduced significantly. Besides, the Ro resection rate and the incidence of operative complications are obviously superior to the DOS neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen alone.

Comparison of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery vs. surgery alone for locally advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly used in advanced gastric cancer, but the effects on safety and survival are still controversial. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the overall survival and short-term surgical outcomes between neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NACS) and surgery alone (SA) for locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) were explored for relative studies from January 2000 to January 2021. The quality of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies was evaluated using the modified Jadad scoring system and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, respectively. The Review Manager software (version 5.3) was used to perform this meta-analysis. The overall survival was evaluated as the primary outcome, while perioperative indicators and post-operative complications were evaluated as the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty studies, including 1420 NACS cases and 1942 SA cases, were enrolled. The results showed that there were no significant differences in overall survival (P = 0.240), harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.200), total complications (P = 0.080), and 30-day post-operative mortality (P = 0.490) between the NACS and SA groups. However, the NACS group was associated with a longer operation time (P < 0.0001), a higher R0 resection rate (P = 0.003), less reoperation (P = 0.030), and less anastomotic leakage (P = 0.007) compared with SA group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with SA, NACS was considered safe and feasible for improved R0 resection rate as well as decreased reoperation and anastomotic leakage. While unbenefited overall survival indicated a less important effect of NACS on long-term oncological outcomes.

Perioperative chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer in Chile: from evidence to daily practice

Gastric cancer (GC) is a leading cause of cancer death in Chile. Although recommended in international guidelines since 2006, perioperative chemotherapy was not available to patients in the public health system in Chile until 2016. We conducted an observational study to assess the feasibility of this strategy in public hospitals in Chile (Observational Study of Perioperative Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer – PRECISO). Patients with locally advanced, operable GC were offered to receive preoperative chemotherapy with Epirubicin + Cisplatin + Capecitabine (ECX) for three cycles followed by curative surgery. Staging included abdominal CT scan and laparoscopy if peritoneal carcinomatosis was suspected. Postoperative ECX for three cycles was recommended. Between August 2010 and March 2013, 110 patients were screened and 61 enrolled. Median age was 62 years (23–76 years) and most patients had good performance status at baseline (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score (ECOG) 0: 42, ECOG 1: 19). Tumour site was proximal in 32 (52%) and medial and distal in 29 (48%) patients. All but four patients (n = 57, 93%) completed three cycles of preoperative chemotherapy. Fifty-six patients were operated and 54 (89%) had a curative resection. Thirty-three patients (54%) had pT0-2, and 18 (30%) had pN0 tumours, with two patients achieving a complete response. As of 20 December 2020, 39 patients died, 32 due to GC, one within 30 days of surgery, two due to intestinal obstruction at 5 and 3 months after surgery and four due to other causes. Five-year survival rate was 38%. We conclude that perioperative chemotherapy is feasible in public hospitals in Chile and should be offered to patients with locally advanced GC.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a cohort study using the propensity score matching method

Background

Until now, little is known about the benefit of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). This study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of the LTG versus the open total gastrectomy (OTG) approach after NACT treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods

This study involved a cohort of 145 patients with AGC who underwent total gastrectomy after NACT at our centre between April 2013 and August 2018 including 24 cases of LTG and 121 OTG. The baseline characteristics were matched based on 1:2 balanced propensity score-matching method.

Results

Sixty-nine marched cases were finally analysed (23 LTG vs. 46 OTG). All patients underwent R0 resection. Compared to the OTG group, the LTG group had a longer surgery duration (P<0.001), but a shorter incision length (P<0.001) and less intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) time after surgery (P=0.027). No statistical differences were observed in terms of blood loss, retrieved lymph nodes (LNs), resection margin, length of stay, postoperative pain intensity, and complications (P>0.05).

Conclusions

LTG had comparable safety and histological findings to OTG after NACT in the perioperative period; however, LTG is less invasive and patients can benefit from less IV-PCA use. Further research is needed to investigate long-term effects.

Keywords

Gastric cancer (GC); neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT); safety; laparoscopic technique.

Operative Results and Perioperative Morbidity After Intensified Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with FLOT for Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma Impact of Intensified Neoadjuvant Treatment

BACKGROUND

Perioperative treatment is the standard of care in Western Europe for locally advanced gastric cancer (GC) and adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). Intensified neoadjuvant treatment within the NeoFLOT trial proved to be safe and effective. Yet, the influence of such intensification with 6 cycles of FLOT in the neoadjuvant setting has not been analyzed regarding its possible impact on perioperative results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 537 patients were enrolled in this study; of whom, 132 had followed a standard neoadjuvant protocol (CTx), 356 had not received any neoadjuvant treatment (NoCTx), and 49 patients had undergone an intensified chemotherapy within the NeoFLOT trial (IntCTx) with 6 cycles of FLOT (5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel) every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

Our results reveal no significant difference in perioperative morbidity or mortality with regard to the neoadjuvant treatment. Postoperative bleeding and hematoma occurred less frequently in the IntCTx group compared to the NoCTx and the CTx groups (2.0% vs. 5.33% vs. 5.1%). Postoperative lymph fistulas were slightly more frequent in the IntCTx group (4.1% vs. 0.3% vs. 1.6%). Patients treated within the NeoFLOT trial had a higher risk for blood transfusions (OR 5.5; 95%-KI, 2.49-12.19), whereas patients without neoadjuvant therapy had the longest ICU stay (mean 8.3 vs. CTx 4.5 vs. IntCTx 6.7 days).

CONCLUSION

The results of the current study indicate that also an intensification of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 6 preoperative cycles of FLOT does not significantly increase perioperative complications. Thus, prolonged neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FLOT is safe for patients with locally advanced GC or GEJ tumors.

Perioperative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer - results from a tertiary-care hospital in Germany

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant/perioperative chemotherapy is the recommended treatment for advanced stages of gastric cancer (> T2, N+) before tumour resection in many European guidelines. However, there is no consensus as to whether perioperative chemotherapy is as effective in distal as in proximal tumours, in addition to a relevant uncertainty concerning appropriate treatment modalities for elderly patients.

AIM

To investigate the role of perioperative chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer in patients from a German tertiary clinic with respect to efficacy, localisation, and age.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 158 patients from our clinic with adenocarcinoma of the stomach or the gastroesophageal junction who underwent resection between 2008 and 2016. The data were evaluated particularly in relation to patient age, tumour site, and perioperative therapy.

RESULTS

Administration of perioperative chemotherapy did not lead to a significant survival advantage in our study population. The 5-year survival rates were 40% for patients who received perioperative chemotherapy and 29% for the group without perioperative chemotherapy (P = 0.125). Our patients were on average distinctly older than patients in most of the published randomised controlled trials. Patients elder than 75 years received perioperative chemotherapy far less frequently. Patients with a proximal tumour received perioperative chemotherapy much more often.

CONCLUSION

This analysis reconfirms our previous data concerning the effectiveness of perioperative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. There is reasonable doubt that the quality of the existing randomized controlled trials is sufficient to generally justify perioperative chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer independent of tumour localization or age.

Neoadjuvant therapy strategies for advanced gastric cancer: Current innovations and future challenges

Gastric cancer, which has a high incidence and poor prognosis, remains a therapeutic challenge. Recently, neoadjuvant therapy has attracted increasing attention due to high recurrence rate and low survival rate after resection in most patients with advanced stage. Clinical trials show that neoadjuvant approaches confer a significant survival advantage for resectable locally advanced gastric cancer. The specific advantages of chemoradiotherapy compared with chemotherapy have not been clarified; optimal regimens and cycles, particularly in the preoperative setting, should be studied further; and trials aimed at determining the role of targeted and immunological therapies should be conducted.

Graded histologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an optimal criterion for treatment change in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer

Background

The necessity for changing the postoperative therapy regimen for locally advanced gastric cancer after ineffective neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery is unclear because there are no criteria to determine which patients can benefit from this treatment. We assessed whether graded histologic regression of <50% could be the criterion for regimen modification.

Methods

The study was designed as a matched-pair case-control investigation to minimize intergroup heterogeneity. Patients were stratified into two groups in which they either continued in the same course of treatment or changed the regimen to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Results

Thirty-six patients were stratified into two groups. The adjuvant chemotherapy regimen of 12 patients was changed, while 24 patients continued on the same regimen. During an average follow-up period of 36 months, there was no difference observed in overall survival in the two groups (median, 24.0 vs. 31.0 months, P=0.863). In a subgroup analysis, however, patients in the changed regimen group with ypTNM stage III disease tended to have superior overall survival, though this effect was not significant (median, 23.0 vs. 14.0 months, P=0.123). Post-therapy nodal status was associated with overall survival in the multivariate analysis (P=0.014, HR 12.503, 95% CI: 1.664-93.919). Most adverse events were categorized as grade 1 or 2, and all treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusions

Changing treatment based on a graded histologic regression of <50% after neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not prolong overall survival in patients with gastric cancer. However, changing the adjuvant regimen did reveal a trend towards improved overall survival in the ypTNM stage III subgroup, which merits further investigation using a larger sample size.

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

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

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Discussion

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

Trial registration

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

The influence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on gastric cancer patients' postoperative infectious complications: What is the negative role played by the intestinal barrier dysfunction?

Evidence has shown that neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is correlated with patients’ overall postoperative complications. But investigations on relationship between NACT and postoperative infectious complications, which is closely linked to intestinal barrier damage, were scanty. Accordingly, 90 patients with advanced gastric cancer were included in this study. The differences in postoperative infectious complications were determined between NACT group in which patients received NACT before surgery and SURG group in which received surgical treatment immediately after diagnosis. The damage of mechanical structure of intestinal barrier was assessed by hematoxylin and eosin staining, transmission electron microscopy, and immunohistochemistry. Mucosal microbiota changes were determined by using a 16S rRNA gene sequencing approach. Results showed that the incidence of postoperative infectious complications were significantly higher in the NACT group. Tight junctions were disrupted, and claudin-1, ZO-1 and occludin were down-regulated in patients with infectious complications in overall compared with those without. And similarly, the patients in the NACT group also showed damaged intestinal barrier compared with those in SURG group. Besides, the total diversity of mucosal related bacteria was decreased and relative abundance of some probiotics, such as Bifidobacterium, Faecalibacterium and Ruminococcus, was reduced in the NACT group as well. In conclusion, our study identifies a higher incidence of postoperative infection in gastric cancer patients who underwent NACT treatment, and these changes might be caused by a significant damage in the intestinal barrier as well as reduced probiotics.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer. Is it a must or a fake?

AIM

To investigate the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) effect on the survival of patients with proper stomach cancer submitted to D2 gastrectomy.

METHODS

We proceeded to a review of the literature with PubMed, Embase, ASCO and ESMO meeting abstracts as well as computerized use of the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NAC followed by surgery (NAC + S) with surgery alone (SA) for gastric cancer (GC). The primary outcome was the overall survival rate. Secondary outcomes were the site of the primary tumor, extension of node dissection according to Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (JGCA) performed in both arms, disease-specific (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates, clinical and pathological response rates and resectability rates after perioperative treatment.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 16 randomized controlled trials comparing NAC + S (n = 1089) with SA (n = 973) published in the period from January 1993 - March 2017. Only 6 of these studies were well-designed, structured trials in which the type of lymph node (LN) dissection performed or at least suggested in the trial protocol was reported. Two out of three of the RCTs with D2 lymphadenectomy performed in almost all cases failed to show survival benefit in the NAC arm. In the third RCT, the survival rate was not even reported, and the primary end points were the clinical outcomes of surgery with and without NAC. In the remaining three RCTs, D2 lymph node dissection was performed in less than 50% of cases or only recommended in the “Study Treatment” protocol without any description in the results of the procedure really perfomed. In one of the two studies, the benefit of NAC was evident only for esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancers. In the second study, there was no overall survival benefit of NAC. In the last trial, which documented a survival benefit for the NAC arm, the chemotherapy effect was mostly evident for EGJ cancer, and more than one-fourth of patients did not have a proper stomach cancer. Additionally, several patients did not receive resectional surgery. Furthermore, the survival rates of international reference centers that provide adequate surgery for homogeneous stomach cancer patients’ populations are even higher than the survival rates reported after NAC followed by incomplete surgery.

CONCLUSION

NAC for GC has been rapidly introduced in international western guidelines without an evidence-based medicine-related demonstration of its efficacy for a homogeneous population of patients with only stomach tumors submitted to adequate surgery following JGCA guidelines with extended (D2) LN dissection. Additional larger sample-size multicentre RCTs comparing the newer NAC regimens including molecular therapies followed by adequate extended surgery with surgery alone are needed.

Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma: Is More Chemotherapy Better?

OPINION STATEMENT

Two cycles of neoadjuvant cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine (CF) and 6 cycles of perioperative CF with or without epirubicin are an evidence-based approach in operable esophageal and esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinomas. Three-drug regimens with anthracycline or taxane are associated with significantly higher tumor regression rates, with an expected increase in toxicity. In order to achieve an R0 resection and consequently a survival advantage, in selected patients having a risk of a threatened margin or incomplete resection, chemotherapy might be continued beyond 2 cycles if a response has been demonstrated. In metastatic setting, multidrug combination regimens have demonstrated a significant survival benefit when compared to single-agent regimes. A three-drug regimen should be considered for fit patients and/or when a response is required for symptom control. The expected increase in toxicity needs to be carefully considered and discussed with patients. The choice to use a taxane in first-line setting may limit the options of second-line treatment to irinotecan-containing regimens and also precludes the use of anthracyclines in the first line. For this reason, we prefer to reserve taxane-based therapy for the second-line setting.

Phase II study of docetaxel, cisplatin and capecitabine as preoperative chemotherapy in resectable gastric cancer

AIM

To investigate the feasibility of preoperative docetaxel, cisplatin and capecitabine (DCC) in patients with resectable gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with resectable gastric cancer fulfilling the inclusion criteria, were treated with 4 cycles of docetaxel (60 mg/m²), cisplatin (60 mg/m²) and capecitabine (1.875 mg/m² orally on day 1-14, two daily doses) repeated every three weeks, followed by surgery. Primary end point was the feasibility and toxicity/safety profile of DCC, secondary endpoints were pathological complete resection rate and pathological complete response (pCR) rate.

RESULTS

All of the patients (51) were assessable for the feasibility and safety of the regimen. The entire preoperative regimen was completed by 68.6% of the patients. Grade III/IV febrile neutropenia occurred in 10% of all courses. Three patients died due to treatment related toxicity (5.9%), one of them (also) because of refusing further treatment for toxicity. Of the 45 patients who were evaluable for secondary endpoints, four developed metastatic disease and 76.5% received a curative resection. In 3 patients a pCR was seen (5.9%), two patients underwent a R1 resection (3.9%).

CONCLUSION

Four courses of DCC as a preoperative regimen for patients with primarily resectable gastric cancer is highly demanding. The high occurrence of febrile neutropenia is of concern. To decrease the occurrence of febrile neutropenia the prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) should be explored. A curative resection rate of 76.5% is acceptable. The use of DCC without G-CSF support as preoperative regimen in resectable gastric cancer is debatable.

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

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

Investigation of the potential role of preoperative chemotherapy in treatment for gastric cancer with outlet obstruction

Preoperative chemotherapy is currently recognized as the recommended treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Whether there is a role of preoperative chemotherapy in the treatment for advanced gastric cancer with gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is unknown. In order to explore the potential feasibility of preoperative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer with GOO, and to encourage the probe into optimal treatment strategies for advanced gastric cancer with GOO in the current era of preoperative chemotherapy prevailing, a systematic literature search was conducted with a multistage process. The characteristics of the retrieved publications were summarized and the essential information was extracted. Only 11 studies associated with preoperative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer with GOO were identified. Among them, 9 were case reports, while the other 2 were research reports of retrospective studies. None were of prospective studies. The paucity of the literature in this field is a marked finding of the present study, which reports the emerging attempts at preoperative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer patients with GOO, as no high-quality data are available. The definite role of chemotherapy as an initial treatment for advanced gastric cancer patients with GOO remains unclear. Clinical trials are expected to be conducted in order to explore the feasibility, safety and efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer patients with GOO.

A clinical exploration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil potassium capsules combined with oxaliplatin for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Advanced gastric cancer refers to tumor invasion into the gastric muscularis propria or even the layer beyond, and has low early gastric cancer diagnosis rate.

PURPOSE

To determine the clinical efficacy and side effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil potassium capsules (TGOP) combined with oxaliplatin (SOX regimen) in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

We evaluated 25 patients with advanced gastric cancer who were admitted and treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy with the SOX regimen (intravenous injection of 130 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin on day 1 followed by oral administration of 60 mg TGOP twice daily on days 1-14), every 3 weeks. The clinical efficacy and side effects of the SOX regimen were evaluated after two courses of treatment, before surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 25 patients enrolled in this study, 23 completed two courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and of these, 12 achieved downstaging as determined by the clinical TNM stage, resulting in a total response rate of 52.2%. The 23 patients underwent surgery, with 22 receiving radical resection (95.7%). Among these 23 patients, R0 resection was achieved in 16 (69.6%) and pathological complete remission was observed in one.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with TGOP combined with oxaliplatin was effective for advanced gastric cancer and had tolerable side effects.

Perioperative chemotherapy more of a benefit for overall survival than adjuvant chemotherapy for operable gastric cancer: an updated Meta-analysis

To clarify the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on the survival outcomes of operable gastric cancers, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized clinical trials published until June 2014 that compared NAC-containing strategies with NAC-free strategies in patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach or the esophagogastric junction, who had undergone potentially curative resection. The adjusted pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) was insignificant when comparing the NAC-containing arm with the NAC-free arm. Subgroup analysis showed that the OS of the treatment arm that involved both adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) and NAC was significantly improved over the control arm (AC only) (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.35-0.67; P < 0.001). While NAC alone plus surgery did not show any survival benefit over surgery alone. Perioperative chemotherapy (PC) also showed a significant increase in PFS and a significant reduction in distant metastasis compared to surgery alone. Therefore, in patients with resectable gastric cancer, NAC alone is not enough and AC alone is not good enough to definitely improve their OS. Collectively, PC combined with surgery could maximize the survival benefit for patients with resectable gastric cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Perioperative therapy for locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer: current controversies and consensus of care

Gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) remains a challenging problem in oncology. Anatomically, GEC is comprised of distal gastric adenocarcinoma (GC), classically associated with Helicobacter Pylori, while proximal esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGJ AC) has increased significantly in incidence over the past years. Despite contrasting etiologies, histologies, and molecular phenotypes of distal and proximal GEC, in many cases perioperative (and metastatic) treatment strategies converge to similar approaches. For patients undergoing curative intent surgery, advances in perioperative chemotherapy and/or chemoradiotherapy, either before and/or after surgery, have demonstrated improved survivals compared to surgery alone. This review focuses on how the 'boundary' of the Z-line and/or the anatomical distinction of 'proximal' (EGJ) vs. 'distal' (GC) cancer has led to diverse inclusion/exclusion criteria for clinical trial enrollment, embodying various combinations of chemotherapy and radiation before and/or after surgery. Supporting evidence of each of these approaches consequently has led to a number of varying practices by geographical region and Institution/Physician, based on differing experience, preference, and clinical circumstance. Adequate direct comparison of these approaches is lacking currently, but data from a number of concerted efforts should be available in the next years to further direct best standards of care. Introduction of biologically targeted agents, namely anti-angiogenics and anti-HER family therapeutics are being evaluated to determine whether further therapeutic gains can be realized over classic cytotoxic chemotherapy alone (with/without radiotherapy). To date, novel molecularly targeted agents have yet to demonstrate benefit in this setting. In the following comprehensive review we will address the intricacies of perioperative treatment of locally advanced GEC, with focus on clinical trials supporting the diverse set of perioperative multidisciplinary approaches.

Feasibility of perioperative chemotherapy with infusional 5-FU, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with (FLOT) or without (FLO) docetaxel in elderly patients with locally advanced esophagogastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this exploratory subgroup analysis of the fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, docetaxel (FLOT)65+ trial was to determine tolerability and feasibility of perioperative chemotherapy in elderly, potentially operable esophagogastric cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥65 with locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma were randomized to perioperative chemotherapy consisting of four pre- and four postoperative cycles of infusional 5-FU, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FLO) without or with docetaxel 50 mg m(-)(2) (FLOT), every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients with a median age of 70 years were randomized and 43 patients started preoperative chemotherapy (FLO, 22; FLOT, 21). Thirty-eight (86.4%) patients completed four cycles of preoperative chemotherapy and 32 (74.4%) proceeded to surgery, with 67.4% R0 resections on intent-to-treat analysis (90.1% of the 32 patients who underwent resection). Median overall survival was not reached and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 17.3 months. Compared with the FLO group, the FLOT group showed a trend towards an improved median PFS (21.1 vs 12.0 months; P=0.09), however, associated with increased chemotherapy related toxicity. No perioperative mortality was observed. Postoperative morbidity was observed in 46.9% of patients (FLO, 35.3%; FLOT, 60%).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant FLO or FLOT may offer a reasonable chance of curative surgery in elderly patients with locally advanced resectable gastroesophageal cancer. However, the increase in side effects with the FLOT regimen and postoperative morbidity should be carefully considered when an intensive chemotherapy regimen is planned.

Treatment of resectable gastric cancer

Stomach cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide, despite its declining overall incidence. Although there are differences in incidence, etiology and pathological factors, most studies do not separately analyze cardia and noncardia gastric cancer. Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment for advanced, resectable gastric cancer, but locoregional relapse rate is high with a consequently poor prognosis. To improve survival, several preoperative and postoperative treatment strategies have been investigated. Whereas perioperative chemotherapy and postoperative chemoradiation (CRT) are considered standard therapy in the Western world, in Asia postoperative monochemotherapy with S-1 is often used. Several other therapeutic options, although generally not accepted as standard treatment, are postoperative combination chemotherapy, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and preoperative radiotherapy and CRT. Postoperative combination chemotherapy does show a statistically significant but clinically equivocal survival advantage in several meta-analyses. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is mainly performed in Asia and is associated with a higher postoperative complication rate. Based on the currently available data, the use of postoperative radiotherapy alone and the use of intraoperative radiotherapy should not be advised in the treatment of resectable gastric cancer. Western randomized trials on gastric cancer are often hampered by slow or incomplete accrual. Reduction of toxicity for preoperative and especially postoperative treatment is essential for the ongoing improvement of gastric cancer care.

Chemotherapy for operable gastric cancer: current perspectives

The majority of gastric cancer patients present with advanced, incurable disease and only a minority have localised disease that is suitable for radical treatment. A benefit has generally been demonstrated from adding chemotherapy to surgery for early disease though there are marked differences in how this is done globally. Whilst a perioperative approach, with chemotherapy given before and after gastric surgery is commonly used in the Europe and Australia most patients with operable gastric cancer in North America are treated with surgery and postoperative chemoradiation. In contrast, in East Asia, adjuvant fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy alone is used following D2 gastric resection surgery. However, despite the multimodality treatments, outcomes remain suboptimal as the majority of those treated for localised disease eventually relapse with incurable loco-regional or distant metastases. At the current time, an unmet need exists to further understand the biology of this aggressive disease and develop more efficacious therapies that can improve outcomes from this aggressive disease.

Management and outcome of gastric carcinoma in Zaria, Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the world. The objective of this study was to present the clinical evaluation, treatment and outcome of 179 patients with gastric carcinoma in Zaria, Nigeria.

METHODS

Patients managed for histologically diagnosed gastric carcinoma were reviewed. The extent of surgical intervention was based on pre-operative and intra-operative staging balanced against the age and overall fitness of the patient. Mortality, morbidity and patient's survival were monitored.

RESULTS

There were 179 patients, with a male to female ratio of 1.4:1. Their mean age was 51 ± 6.3. Ten (5.6%) patients presented with early gastric cancer. Overall, 155(86.6%) patients had surgical intervention including gastric resection in 87 (56.1%). Of the gastrectomies , 28.7% were curative (R0). Postoperative complications were seen in 43(27.7%) patients. Postoperative mortality in 25(16.1%) patients was significantly associated with peritoneal metastasis (p<0.001), preoperative comorbidity (p<0.01) and age more than 60 years (p<0.03). The overall median survival was 13.6 months while 70.1% and 21.8% of patients that underwent gastrectomy survived for 1 and 5 years respectively.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of gastric cancer should be based on a reasonable choice of operation that must consider not only the survival benefits but also the surgical risks and postoperative quality of life.