FLOT or CROSS for gastroesophageal junction cancersâ€"is the debate over yet?

In the last two decades, the incidence of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinomas (AC) has increased, in part due to the increasing prevalence of obesity and untreated gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Esophageal and GEJ cancers have become one of the leading causes of cancer deaths worldwide due to its aggressive nature. While the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced gastroesophageal cancers (GECs) remains surgery, several studies have now shown that multimodality approach yields better outcomes. GEJ cancers have historically been included both in esophageal cancer as well as gastric cancer trials. Therefore, both approaches, neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) or perioperative chemotherapy are considered standard treatment options. thereon the same token, there yet remains a debate for the 'gold standard' treatment of locally advanced GEJ cancers. The landmark trials, fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel (FLOT) and ChemoRadiotherapy for Oesophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study (CROSS), have shown similar improvements in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for patients with resectable locoregional GEJ cancers. In this review, the authors attempt to highlight the historical evolution of current standard treatments and provide a sneak peek into the future of treatment of GEJ cancers. Several factors must be borne in mind when making the optimal choice for a patient. Some of these include surgical candidacy, tolerance to chemotherapy, eligibility for radiation (RT) as well as institutional preferences.

Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Smart Virtual Assistant in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Proof of Concept

Aim

The first prototype of the “Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Smart Virtual Assistant” is presented, aimed to (i) Automated classification of clinical stage starting from different free-text diagnostic reports; (ii) Resolution of inconsistencies by identifying controversial cases drawing the clinician’s attention to particular cases worthy for multi-disciplinary discussion; (iii) Support environment for education and knowledge transfer to junior staff; (iv) Integrated data-driven decision making and standardized language and interpretation.

Patients and Method

Data from patients affected by Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer (LACC), FIGO stage IB2-IVa, treated between 2015 and 2018 were extracted. Magnetic Resonance (MR), Gynecologic examination under general anesthesia (EAU), and Positron Emission Tomography–Computed Tomography (PET-CT) performed at the time of diagnosis were the items from the Electronic Health Records (eHRs) considered for analysis. An automated extraction of eHR that capture the patient’s data before the diagnosis and then, through Natural Language Processing (NLP), analysis and categorization of all data to transform source information into structured data has been performed.

Results

In the first round, the system has been used to retrieve all the eHR for the 96 patients with LACC. The system has been able to classify all patients belonging to the training set and - through the NLP procedures - the clinical features were analyzed and classified for each patient. A second important result was the setup of a predictive model to evaluate the patient’s staging (accuracy of 94%). Lastly, we created a user-oriented operational tool targeting the MTB who are confronted with the challenge of large volumes of patients to be diagnosed in the most accurate way.

Conclusion

This is the first proof of concept concerning the possibility of creating a smart virtual assistant for the MTB. A significant benefit could come from the integration of these automated methods in the collaborative, crucial decision stages.

Para-Aortic Nodal Radiation in the Definitive Management of Node-Positive Cervical Cancer

Objectives

To investigate the safety and outcomes of elective para-aortic (PA) nodal irradiation utilizing modern treatment techniques for patients with node positive cervical cancer.

Methods

Patients with pelvic lymph node positive cervical cancer who received radiation were included. All patients received radiation therapy (RT) to either a traditional pelvic field or an extended field to electively cover the PA nodes. Factors associated with survival were identified using a Cox proportional hazards model, and toxicities between groups were compared with a chi-square test.

Results

96 patients were identified with a mean follow up of 40 months. The incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 toxicity was 31% in the elective PA nodal RT group and 15% in the pelvic field group (Chi-square p = 0.067. There was no significant difference in rates of grade ≥ 3 acute or late toxicities between the two groups (p>0.05). The KM estimated 5-year OS was not statistically different for those receiving elective PA nodal irradiation compared to a pelvic only field, 54% vs. 73% respectively (log-rank p = 0.11).

Conclusions

Elective PA nodal RT can safely be delivered utilizing modern planning techniques without a significant increase in severe (grade ≥ 3) acute or late toxicities, at the cost of a possible small increase in non-severe (grade 2) acute toxicities. In this series there was no survival benefit observed with the receipt of elective PA nodal RT, however, this benefit may have been obscured by the higher risk features of this population. While prospective randomized trials utilizing a risk adapted approach to elective PA nodal coverage are the only way to fully evaluate the benefit of elective PA nodal coverage, these trials are unlikely to be performed and instead we must rely on interpretation of results of risk adapted approaches like those used in ongoing clinical trials and retrospective data.

Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation With and Without Systemic Chemotherapy in Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Introduction: Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly being used for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma. While there is evidence supporting neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy as well as chemoradiation, more evidence is needed to determine whether systemic chemotherapy with chemoradiation offers benefits over chemoradiation alone. This study compares the outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy with and without systemic chemotherapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers.

Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma who completed neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy with and without systemic chemotherapy prior to surgical resection. 149 patients met inclusion criteria, with 75 having resectable cancer and 74 having borderline resectable cancer. Outcomes included recurrence free and overall survival rates at 6, 12, and 36 months.

Results: In resectable pancreatic carcinoma, 72% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone achieved 1 year recurrence free survival compared to 78% of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation (p = 0.55). 28% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone had 3 years recurrence free survival compared to 31% of patients who received systemic and chemoradiation therapy (p = 0.75). In both treatment groups, 92% of patients lived past 1 year (p = 0.92), and 44% of patients survived at least 3 years (p = 0.95). In borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma, 50% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone achieved 1 year recurrence free survival compared to 70% of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation (p = 0.079). The 3 years recurrence free survival was 26 and 29% for the chemoradiation alone group and the systemic chemotherapy plus chemoradiation group, respectively (p = 0.85). There was no significant difference in 1 year overall survival: 85% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone survived compared to 92% of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation (p = 0.32). Both groups had 41% 3 years overall survival (p = 0.96).

Discussion: In resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, there was no significant difference in overall or recurrence free survival between patients treated with chemoradiation with and without systemic chemotherapy. Our findings suggest that systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy with chemoradiation and chemoradiation alone are efficacious treatments for localized pancreatic carcinoma. This brings into question whether more effective systemic chemotherapy is necessary to increase survival benefit.

Treatment disparities affect outcomes for patients with stage I esophageal cancer: a national cancer data base analysis

Background

To examine patterns of care and outcomes for patients with stage I esophageal cancer (EC) in the United States.

Methods

We identified patients in the National Cancer Data Base diagnosed with stage I EC from 2004 to 2012 and grouped them by primary treatment: esophagectomy (Eso), local excision (LE), concurrent chemoradiation (CRT), or observation (Obs). Multinomial logistic regression was used to predict receipt of treatments. Overall survival (OS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods adjusted for inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Cox proportional hazard regressions.

Results

Of 5,480 patients, 2,312 (42%) underwent Eso, 1,250 (23%) LE, 758 (14%) CRT, and 1,160 (21%) Obs. LE use increased over time from 17% to 29% while Obs declined from 26% to 19%. Patients least likely to undergo surgery were older, had greater comorbidity, were uninsured, were treated at non-academic centers, and were Black. The rate of surgery for Black patients was half of that for White patients (33% vs. 67%). Postoperative mortality rates were higher after Eso vs. LE at 30 days (2.9% vs. 0.5%; P<0.001) and at 90 days (5.5% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001). Five-year OS was 59% with Eso, 63% LE, 29% CRT, and 31% Obs (P<0.001). On multivariate analysis, outcomes were best after LE [vs. Eso: hazard ratio (HR) =1.15, 95% CI: 1.01-1.30, P=0.037; CRT: HR =2.41, 95% CI: 2.09-2.78, P<0.001; Obs: HR =3.79, 95% CI: 3.33-4.32, P<0.001).

Conclusions

Disparities are evident in the care of patients with stage I EC throughout the United States. LE was associated with favorable outcomes compared to Eso, CRT, and Obs.

Clinical tools to predict outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation: are we there yet?

Definitive chemoradiation (CRT) is a well-established treatment for esophageal cancer, but disease recurrence is common and many patients do not achieve initial remission with CRT alone. Predictors of outcome with CRT are needed to guide prognosis and further treatment decisions, in particular the need for post-CRT surgery. We review the role of baseline clinical factors, such as histology and tumor bulk, in predicting response to CRT. Post-CRT assessments, particularly PET imaging, may provide further information about the likelihood of complete response and survival, but the predictive power of clinical assessments remains limited. Emerging research on biomarkers holds promise for more tailored and accurate prediction of outcome with definitive CRT.