scholarly journals Preventive HIPEC in combination with perioperative FLOT versus FLOT alone for resectable diffuse type gastric and gastroesophageal junction type II/III adenocarcinoma – the phase III “PREVENT”- (FLOT9) trial of the AIO /CAOGI /ACO

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thorsten O. Götze ◽  
Pompiliu Piso ◽  
Sylvie Lorenzen ◽  
Ulli S. Bankstahl ◽  
Claudia Pauligk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Western Hemisphere ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type Ii ◽  
Diffuse Type ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Peritoneal Seeding ◽  
Link Type

Abstract Background The main reason for treatment failure after curative surgical resection of gastric cancer is intra-abdominal spread, with 40–50% peritoneal seeding as primary localization of recurrence. Peritoneal relapse is seen in 60–70% of tumors of diffuse type, compared to only 20–30% of intestinal type. Hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal Chemoperfusion (HIPEC) is an increasingly used therapy method for patients with peritoneal metastases. The preventive use of HIPEC could represent an elegant approach for patients (pts) before macroscopic peritoneal seeding, since pts. with operable disease are fit and may have potential risk of microscopic involvement, thus having a theoretical chance of cure with HIPEC even without the need for cytoreduction. No results from a PCRT from the Western hemisphere have yet been published. Methods This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label study including a total of 200 pts. with localized and locally advanced diffuse or mixed type (Laurens’s classification) adenocarcinoma of the stomach and Type II/III GEJ. All enrolled pts. will have received 3–6 pre-operative cycles of biweekly FLOT (Docetaxel 50 mg/m2; Oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2; Leucovorin 200 mg/m2; 5-FU 2600 mg/m2, q2wk). Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive surgery only and postoperative FLOT (control arm) or surgery + intraoperative HIPEC (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 solution administered at a temperature of 42 °C for 90 min) and postoperative FLOT (experimental arm). Surgery is carried out as gastrectomy or transhiatal extended gastrectomy. Primary endpoint is PFS/DFS, major secondary endpoints are OS, rate of pts. with peritoneal relapse at 2 and 3 years, perioperative morbidity/mortality and quality of life. The trial starts with a safety run-in phase. After 20 pts. had curatively intended resection in Arm B, an interim safety analysis is performed. Recruitment has already started and first patient in was on January 18th, 2021. Discussion If the PREVENT concept proves to be effective, this could potentially lead to a new standard of therapy. On the contrary, if the outcome is negative, pts. with gastric cancer and no peritoneal involvement will not be treated with HIPEC during surgery. Trial registration The study is registered on June 25th, 2020 under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04447352; EudraCT: 2017-003832-35.

Preventive HIPEC in combination with perioperative FLOT versus FLOT alone for resectable diffuse type gastric and gastroesophageal junction type II/III adenocarcinoma: The phase III “PREVENT” trial of the AIO /CAOGI /ACO.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4149-TPS4149
Author(s):  
Thorsten Oliver Goetze ◽  
Pompiliu Piso ◽  
Sylvie Lorenzen ◽  
Ulli Simone Bankstahl ◽  
Marcin Ostrzyzek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Western Hemisphere ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Type Ii ◽  
Diffuse Type ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Peritoneal Seeding ◽  
Perioperative Morbidity

TPS4149 Background: The main reason for treatment failure after curative surgical resection of gastric cancer is intra-abdominal spread, with 40- 50% peritoneal seeding as primary localization of recurrence. Peritoneal relapse is seen in 60-70% of tumors of diffuse type, compared to only 20-30% of intestinal type. Hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal Chemoperfusion (HIPEC) is an increasingly used therapy method for patients with peritoneal metastases. The preventive use of HIPEC could represent an elegant approach for patients (pts) before macroscopic peritoneal seeding, since patients with operable disease are fit and may have potential risk of microscopic involvement, thus having a theoretical chance of cure with HIPEC even without the need for cytoreduction. No results from a PCRT from the Western hemisphere have yet been published. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label study including a total of 200 pts with localized and locally advanced diffuse and mixed type (Laurens`s classification) adenocarcinoma of the stomach and Type II/III GEJ (i.e. ≥cT3 any N or any T N positive). All enrolled pts will have received 3-6 pre-operative cycles of biweekly FLOT (Docetaxel 50 mg/m²; Oxaliplatin 85 mg/m²; Leucovorin 200 mg/m²; 5-FU 2600 mg/m², q2wk). Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive surgery only and postoperative FLOT (Arm A- Control arm) or surgery + intraoperative HIPEC (cisplatin 75mg/m2 solution administered at a temperature of 42°C for 90 minutes) and postoperative FLOT (Arm B- experimental arm). Surgery is carried out as gastrectomy or transhiatal extended gastrectomy. Primary endpoint is PFS/DFS, major secondary endpoints are OS, R0 resection rate, perioperative morbidity/mortality including VAS pain score and quality of life as assessed by EORTC QLQ C30 questionnaire. The trial starts with a safety run-in phase. After 20 patients had curatively intended resection in Arm B, an interim safety analysis is performed assessing feasibility, safety, and tolerability in Arm B. First patient was randomized on 18JAN2021. Currently one patient is recruited. EudraCT: 2017-003832-35; ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04447352. Clinical trial information: NCT04447352.

A phase Ib/II, multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation, and dose-expansion study evaluating trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd, DS-8201) monotherapy and combinations in patients with HER2-overexpressing gastric cancer (DESTINY-Gastric03).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS261-TPS261
Author(s):  
Yelena Y. Janjigian ◽  
Natasha Viglianti ◽  
Feng Liu ◽  
Ariadna Mendoza-Naranjo ◽  
Liz Croydon
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Topoisomerase I ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Her2 Status ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase 1B

TPS261 Background: For patients (pts) with HER2-overexpressing metastatic gastric cancer, trastuzumab + chemotherapy is a standard first-line option but provides only a modest overall survival (OS) benefit vs chemotherapy. T-DXd is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of an anti-HER2 antibody, cleavable tetrapeptide-based linker, and a membrane-permeable topoisomerase I inhibitor payload. Results from a phase 1 trial showed promising antitumor activity (confirmed objective response rate [ORR], 43.2%) in pts with heavily pretreated HER2+ metastatic gastric cancer who received T-DXd (5.4 or 6.4 mg/kg; Shitara K, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:827-836). Here we describe the phase 1b/2 DESTINY-Gastric03 trial (NCT04379596) evaluating T-DXd monotherapy and combinations in pts with HER2-overexpressing gastric cancer. Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter, 2-part, phase 1b/2 study in pts with HER2-overexpressing (immunohistochemistry [IHC] 3+ or IHC 2+/in situ hybridization positive) locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer. In part 1 (dose escalation), pts who had received prior trastuzumab-containing therapy will be assigned to 1 of 5 arms: (1) T-DXd + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU); (2) T-DXd + capecitabine (C); (3) T-DXd + durvalumab; (4) T-DXd + 5-FU or C + oxaliplatin (Ox); or (5) T-DXd + 5-FU or C + durvalumab. In part 2 (dose expansion), pts with no prior treatment for metastatic disease will be randomized across 4 arms: (1) T-DXd; (2) trastuzumab + 5-FU or C + Ox or cisplatin; (3) T-DXd + 5-FU or C ± Ox; or (4) T-DXd + 5-FU or C + durvalumab. In part 2, pts will be stratified by HER2 status. Primary endpoints are safety, determination of recommended phase 2 doses (part 1), and investigator-assessed confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 (part 2). Secondary endpoints include confirmed ORR (part 1), disease control rate, duration of response, progression-free survival (all per investigator), OS, safety (part 2), pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. Clinical trial information: NCT04379596.

scholarly journals RACE-trial: neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced, potentially resectable adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction - a randomized phase III joint study of the AIO, ARO and DGAV

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Lorenzen ◽  
Alexander Biederstädt ◽  
Ulrich Ronellenfitsch ◽  
Christoph Reißfelder ◽  
Stefan Mönig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Preoperative Chemotherapy ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy ◽  
Perioperative Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Link Type

Abstract Background Despite obvious advances over the last decades, locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) still carry a dismal prognosis with overall 5-year survival rates of less than 50% even when using modern optimized treatment protocols such as perioperative chemotherapy based on the FLOT regimen or radiochemotherapy. Therefore the question remains whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy is eliciting the best results in patients with GEJ cancer. Hence, an adequately powered multicentre trial comparing both therapeutic strategies is clearly warranted. Methods The RACE trial is a an investigator initiated multicenter, prospective, randomized, stratified phase III clinical trial and seeks to investigate the role of preoperative induction chemotherapy (2 cycles of FLOT: 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel) with subsequent preoperative radiochemotherapy (oxaliplatin weekly, 5-FU plus concurrent fractioned radiotherapy to a dose of 45 Gy) compared to preoperative chemotherapy alone (4 cycles of FLOT), both followed by resection and postoperative completion of chemotherapy (4 cycles of FLOT), in the treatment of locally advanced, potentially resectable adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction. Patients with cT3–4, any N, M0 or cT2 N+, M0 adenocarcinoma of the GEJ are eligible for inclusion. The RACE trial aims to enrol 340 patients to be allocated to both treatment arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified by tumour site. The primary endpoint of the trial is progression-free survival assessed with follow-up of maximum 60 months. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, R0 resection rate, number of harvested lymph nodes, site of tumour relapse, perioperative morbidity and mortality, safety and toxicity and quality of life. Discussion The RACE trial compares induction chemotherapy with FLOT followed by preoperative oxaliplatin and 5-Fluorouracil-based chemoradiation versus preoperative chemotherapy with FLOT alone, both followed by surgery and postoperative completion of FLOT chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced, non-metastatic adenocarcinoma of the GEJ. The trial aims to show superiority of the combined chemotherapy/radiochemotherapy treatment, assessed by progression-free survival, over perioperative chemotherapy alone. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04375605; Registered 4th May 2020;

Irinotecan versus best supportive care (BSC) as second-line therapy in gastric cancer: A randomized phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4540-4540 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. C. Thuss-Patience ◽  
A. Kretzschmar ◽  
T. Deist ◽  
A. Hinke ◽  
D. Bichev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Logrank Test ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

4540 Background: Up to now the value of 2nd-line therapy for metastatic gastric cancer is unclear. So far there are no randomized phase III data comparing 2nd-line chemotherapy to BSC. Irinotecan has proven activity in 1st-line therapy. In this randomized phase III study we compared irinotecan to BSC to evaluate the value of 2nd- line chemotherapy for gastric cancer. Methods: Prospective multicenter randomized phase III study, open label. Eligibility: Metastatic or locally advanced gastro-esophageal junction or gastric adenocarcinoma. Objective tumor progession (PD) within 6 months after 1st- line chemotherapy. ECOG PS 0–2. Statistics: Primary endpoint: Overall survival (OS). Hypothesis: H1: OS(Irinotecan)>OS(BSC). Calculated number of pts needed (power 80%, alpha error 5%): 60 pts per arm. Stratification for a) PD less versus (vs) more than 3 months after 1st line chemotherapy, b) ECOG PS 0/1 vs 2. Treatment: Arm A: Irinotecan 250mg/m2 q3w (1st cycle) to be increased to 350 mg/m2, depending on toxicity. Arm B: BSC Results: Between Oct 2002 and Dec 2006 40 pts were randomized. The study was closed prematurely due to poor accrual. Arm A:21 pts, arm B 19 pts. Median age A: 58 yrs (43–73), B: 55 yrs (35–72); PD less vs more than 3 months after 1st-line chemotherapy: A: 18 / 3, B: 17 / 2pts. ECOG PS 0/1 vs 2: A: 17/ 4, B: 14/ 5pts. Pre-treatment with cisplatin: A: 21, B:19 pts. Arm A: 68 cycles administered in 21 pts. Toxicity: (main CTC grade 3/ 4): Nausea 1 pt, vomiting 1 pt, diarrhoea: 5 pts, neutropenic fever: 2 pts, data incomplete 6 pts. In 37% of 19 evaluable pts irinotecan dose was escalated to 350mg/m2. Response (19 pts evaluable): No objective responses, SD 58%, PD 42%. Improvement of tumor related symptoms: 44% of pts in arm A, 5% in arm B. Survival: (evaluable pts arm A 21, arm B 18): median survival arm A: 123 days (95%CI 95–216), arm B 72.5 days (95%CI 41–106); OS: HR=2.85 (95%CI 1.41–5.79), Logrank test (two-sided): p=0.0027. Conclusions: To our knowledge this is the first randomized phase III study investigating 2nd- line chemotherapy in gastric cancer. Irinotecan as 2nd-line chemotherapy significantly prolongs overall survival compared to BSC. 2nd-line chemotherapy can now be considered as a proven option in gastric cancer. [Table: see text]

A single-arm, phase II feasibility study of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy in potentially resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 96-96
Author(s):  
M. Ryu ◽  
Y. Choi ◽  
B. Kim ◽  
Y. Park ◽  
H. Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Grade 3

96 Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility and safety of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy in patients with potentially resectable adenocarcinoma of stomach or gastroesophageal junction. Methods: Forty-one patients with clinical stage T3-4N0M0 or T2-4N+M0 determined by CT, endoscopic ultrasonography, and laparoscopy were enrolled between DEC 2008 and MAR 2010. Gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection was conducted after 3 cycles of DOS chemotherapy. DOS chemotherapy consists of docetaxel 50 mg/m2 iv (day1), oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 iv (day1), and S-1 40 mg/m2 po bid (days1-14) at 3 weeks interval. After curative gastrectomy, the patients were given 1 year of adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 (40 mg/m2 D1-28, every 6 weeks). Results: All patients finished the planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty-three (56%) patients achieved a partial response, and the remaining 18 patients had stable disease by CT scan after 3 cycles of DOS chemotherapy. No disease progression was observed during the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A median 4.7 weeks (range, 4.0-7.6) after the start of the 3rd cycle of DOS chemotherapy, 39 (95%) patients underwent R0 resection with no pathologic residual disease in 4 (10%) patients. Hematologic toxicities were common including grade 4 neutropenia (32%), grade 3 thrombocytopenia (17%), and febrile neutropenia (10%). However, hematologic toxicities were generally transient and manageable. There were no grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicities with frequency > 5% of patients. With all toxicities taken together, 21 (51%) patients experienced grade 3 or 4 toxicities (except grade 3 neutropenia). There was no treatment-related death, and surgical complications included only mild wound problem in 4 (10%) patients. Conclusions: In this study, neoadjuvant DOS chemotherapy could induce a sufficient down-staging and R0 resection of locally advanced gastric cancer with mild and manageable toxicities. A phase III randomized trial is planned for evaluating the benefit of neoadjuvant DOS chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. [Table: see text]

KEYNOTE-062: Phase III study of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) alone or in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS185-TPS185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Tabernero ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Charles S. Fuchs ◽  
Atsushi Ohtsu ◽  
Uma Kher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
End Points ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

TPS185 Background: Pembrolizumab (pembro) is a monoclonal antibody against PD-1 designed to block its interaction with PD-L1 and PD-L2 and permit an antitumor immune response. In KEYNOTE-012, pembro showed a 22% ORR (RECIST v1.1, central review) and a manageable safety profile in patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer. The randomized, phase 3 KEYNOTE-062 study (NCT02494583) is designed to compare the efficacy and safety of pembro alone or in combination with cisplatin + a fluoropyrimidine with those of cisplatin + a fluoropyrimidine as first-line therapy for PD-L1+/HER2– advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include age ≥ 18 y, locally advanced or metastatic PD-L1+/HER2– gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, ECOG PS 0-1, no active autoimmune disease or brain metastases, and no prior therapy for advanced disease. Pts are randomized 1:1:1 to pembro 200 mg Q3W (arm 1), pembro + cisplatin 80 mg/m2 Q3W + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 800 mg/m2 on days 1-5 of each Q3W cycle (arm 2), or placebo Q3W + cisplatin + 5-FU (arm 3); 5-FU may be replaced with capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 of each cycle. Randomization is stratified by region (Europe/North America/Australia vs Asia vs rest of world), disease status (locally advanced vs metastatic), and chosen fluoropyrimidine (5-FU vs capecitabine). Arm 1 is open label; in arms 2 and 3, assignment to pembro vs placebo is double blind. In all arms, treatment will continue for 35 cycles or until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or pt/investigator decision. Response will be evaluated every 6 wk per RECIST v1.1 by central review and per RECIST adapted for immunotherapy response patterns; eligible pts may continue treatment beyond initial RECIST-defined progression. AEs will be assessed throughout treatment and for 30 d thereafter (90 d for serious AEs) and graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. Pts will be followed for survival every 3 mo. OS and PFS per RECIST v1.1 are the primary study end points; secondary end points include ORR and duration of response. Enrollment in KEYNOTE-062 is ongoing and will continue until ~750 pts have enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT02494583.

Phase III study of first-line zolbetuximab + CAPOX versus placebo + CAPOX in Claudin 18.2+/HER2−advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: GLOW.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4648-TPS4648
Author(s):  
Manish A. Shah ◽  
Jaffer A. Ajani ◽  
Salah-Eddin Al-Batran ◽  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Daniel Catenacci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Her2 Status ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Junction Protein

TPS4648 Background: Gastric cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Capecitabine + oxaliplatin (CAPOX) is a standard first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Claudin (CLDN)18.2 has emerged as a promising targetable biomarker. In healthy tissue, CLDN18.2, a tight junction protein, is confined to gastric mucosa (ie, cells in the pit and base regions of gastric glands). Upon malignant transformation, structural loss in gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma cells may allow antibodies more access to previously unavailable CLDN18.2. Zolbetuximab is a chimeric IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to CLDN18.2 and mediates cell death through antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. Results of a phase 2 study (NCT01630083) showed prolonged survival of patients with CLDN18.2-positive (CLDN18.2+) advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with zolbetuximab + epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (EOX) vs EOX alone. Methods: This phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT03653507) will enroll ~500 adult patients from global sites. Patients are required to have CLDN18.2+/HER2− locally advanced unresectable or metastatic G or GEJ adenocarcinoma that is radiographically evaluable per RECIST v1.1. Patients are not permitted to have received prior treatment with chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic G or GEJ adenocarcinoma. Patients will be randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either zolbetuximab plus CAPOX or placebo plus CAPOX. Randomization will be stratified by region (Asia vs non-Asia), number of metastatic sites (0 to 2 vs ≥3), and prior gastrectomy (yes vs no). Zolbetuximab will be administered at a loading dose of 800 mg/m2 IV on Cycle 1 Day 1 followed by 600 mg/m2 IV every 3 weeks. Central testing of tumor tissue will determine CLDN18.2 and HER2 status (if unknown); patients will be considered CLDN18.2+ if ≥75% of tumor cells demonstrate moderate-to-strong membranous immunohistochemical staining. The primary objective is to compare progression-free survival between treatment arms. Secondary endpoints are overall survival; objective response rate; duration of response; and the safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of zolbetuximab. As of January 31, 2020, 127 sites were active and open to enrollment. Clinical trial information: NCT03653507 .

Controversies in the Treatment of Local and Locally Advanced Gastric and Esophageal Cancers

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (16) ◽  
pp. 1754-1759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirdre J. Cohen ◽  
Lawrence Leichman
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Postoperative Treatment ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Gastric Adenocarcinomas ◽  
Operative Specimen ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Despite overall progress in the therapy of local and locally advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinomas, death as a result of these tumors remains a common outcome. Most randomized phase III trials on which level-one evidence has been built have included the heterogeneous histologies and locations associated with these tumors. However, the different etiologies, molecular biology, and recurrence patterns associated with gastroesophageal malignancies suggest the need to split rather than lump. Biologic and response differences exist between squamous and adenocarcinomas, as well as diffuse and intestinal histologies. This may be a cause behind conflicting outcomes in similar trials. The accepted standard of chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers is based on a few positive trials, with the best chemotherapy and total dose of radiation remaining controversial. In the West, the staging evaluations of locally advanced gastric cancer are not uniform. Yet, these evaluations will inform the results of preoperative and perioperative treatments. Although postoperative chemoradiotherapy for gastric cancer has been an accepted treatment option for the last decade, more recent studies have called into question the need for radiotherapy. In perioperative strategies, it has yet to be determined whether histologic or molecular changes in the operative specimen should inform postoperative treatment. An appropriate place for targeted therapy needs to be found in preoperative and postoperative treatment regimens. Finally, because so much is lost when trials are forced to close for lack of accrual, it is imperative to build multidisciplinary consensus before they are launched.

Unanswered Questions in the Management of Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: An Overview from the Medical Oncologist's Perspective

2013 ◽  
pp. e155-e159
Author(s):  
Manish A. Shah
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Perioperative Chemotherapy ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Multiple Treatment ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma

Patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma have multiple treatment options; however, are victims of lack of consensus and wide variation in treatment, sometimes within the same hospital. While there is a consensus that surgery alone is inadequate for locally advanced disease, locoregional treatment has become the point for debate. Only in 2010 was the reclassification of GEJ cancers as esophageal cancers. Treatment options remain as varied as the classification of GEJ cancers: preoperative chemoradiotherapy, definitive chemoradiation, perioperative chemotherapy, and resection followed by postoperative chemoradiation. Several studies have examined the varying treatment paradigms; however, many fall short due to methodology or sample size. The MAGIC study determined perioperative chemotherapy to be an acceptable standard treatment option for patients with gastric cancer, althouth a significant portion of enrolled patients had distal esophageal and GEJ adenocarcinoma. The CROSS study concluded combination chemotherapy and radiation before resection beneficial. Preoperative therapy in cases of GEJ is beneficial for survival, but not as much impact is seen as in esophageal SCC, which exhibits an increased sensitivity to CRT. There is concurrence with two phase III studies from Japan and Korea on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer. However, the applicability of these studies to GEJ adenocarcinoma remains a question, especially with the significantly different epidemiology of increased proximal and GEJ tumors in the West compared to Asia. To move forward with this increasingly prevalent disease, we will need to do more than understand the multiple treatment paradigms—we will need to select a strategy and examine it.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document