FLOaTing toward new standards in locally advanced resectable gastroesophageal cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Fornaro L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6988033 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
FLOaTing toward new standards in locally advanced resectable gastroesophageal cancer.
Fornaro Lorenzo L Vivaldi Caterina C Calvetti Lorenzo L Cappetta Alessandro A Falcone Alfredo A Aprile Giuseppe G
Journal of thoracic disease 20191201 12
Similar Datasets
Project description:The authors of a recent pilot study incorporated novel concepts including total neoadjuvant therapy with induction triplet FOLFIRINOX then chemoradiotherapy before surgery, along with ctDNA minimal residual disease analyses demonstrating both feasibility of this approach as well as confirming prognostic value of ctDNA analysis before and after surgery.See related article by Wo et al., p. 6343.
| S-EPMC8639623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Over the last several decades, the incidence of adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) has been increasing in developed countries. Although complete surgical resection remains the cornerstone of treatment for resectable disease, long-term outcomes are poor and recurrence rates are high with surgery alone in patients presenting with locally advanced disease. Multimodal therapy has been shown to improve survival; however, the optimal therapeutic approach remains controversial, and practices vary across the world. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is generally used in the U.S., whereas perioperative chemotherapy without radiation is favored in most European countries. In this review, we discuss why the treatment of locally advanced GEJ tumors remains controversial, examine the evidence for various multimodal approaches, discuss their respective pros and cons, evaluate the role of radiation therapy, highlight some ongoing and planned clinical trials, and suggest areas that need further research.
| S-EPMC4319638 | biostudies-other
Project description:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is currently ranked fourth place of cancer related mortality. Only a minority of 10-20% of patients with PDAC have a primarily resectable disease, while 50-60% of the patients are diagnosed with irresectable disease. A certain group of patients is defined as "borderline resectable", which is mainly relied to contact of the tumor to major abdominal vessels. For preoperative evaluation of resectability CT and MRI is commonly used. Although CT-scanning, which is the standard preoperative imaging modality, has striking limitations concerning evaluation of lymph node status as well as vessel involvement and approximately 20% of the patients are staged incorrectly. A central part of modern therapy of locally advanced or not primarily resectable PDAC is neoadjuvant therapy. Especially neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to the FOLFIRINOX protocol resulted in high resection rates of initially not resectable patients. Furthermore, treatment with FOLFIRINOX was shown to be an independent predictor of improved prognosis and resection after neoadjuvant treatment with FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved survival. Neoadjuvant treatment was able to increases the rates of R0 resection, which depicts an independent prognostic factor and FOLFIRINOX outmatched other treatment regimes (e.g., gemcitabine-based radio-chemotherapy) concerning achievement of a R0 resection. While most evidence of neoadjuvant treatment of PDAC is conferred by retrospective analysis, there is growing data from randomized controlled trials, confirming the beneficial effects of neoadjuvant therapy on the prognosis of PDAC. Thus, patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced PDAC should be evaluated for neoadjuvant treatment. If there is no progression of the disease during neoadjuvant treatment exploration with the goal of R0 resection should be performed. If possible, patients should be included in well-designed randomized controlled trials at specialized pancreatic centers.
| S-EPMC6556697 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The optimal treatment strategy for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is not known. We compared overall survival (OS), local control (LC), metastasis free survival (MFS), and percent of patients who were able to undergo successful surgical resection for three treatment strategies.We retrospectively reviewed 115 sequentially treated cases of locally advanced (T4) or borderline resectable (T3 but unresectable) pancreatic cancer. Patients were treated with either chemotherapy alone (C), concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CRT), or chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). We compared survival between groups using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox-proportional hazards models.Median follow-up was 18.7 months. Fifty-six (49%) patients had locally advanced disease. Of the patients who received chemotherapy up-front, 82/92 (89%) received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. Of the patients receiving C alone, 11/65 (17%) were diagnosed with distant metastases or died before 3 months. The rate of successful surgical resection was 6/50 (12%) in patients treated with radiation therapy (CRT or CCRT). Median survival times for patients undergoing C, CRT, and CCRT were 13.9, 12.5, and 21.5 months respectively. Patients treated with CCRT experienced statistically significant improved OS and MFS compared to C alone (P=0.003 and P=0.012 respectively). There was no difference in LC between treatment groups. On multivariable analysis younger age (P=0.009), borderline resectable disease (P=0.035), successful surgery (P=0.002), and receiving chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation therapy (P=0.035) were all associated with improved OS.Treatment with CCRT is associated with improved median OS and MFS compared with C alone. This strategy may select for patients who are less likely to develop early metastases and therefore have a better prognosis.
| S-EPMC3635185 | biostudies-other
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC3844370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveThe poor oncologic outcomes associated with esophageal cancer (EC) are primarily due to its presentation at an advanced stage and patient comorbidities. While multimodal therapy improves overall outcomes, there is a lack of uniform practice in terms of perioperative management, partly because this is a rapidly evolving field in a heterogeneous patient population. With numerous recent studies incorporating precision medicine with radiographic, pathologic, and genomic biomarkers and with emerging trials using targeted therapies, it is necessary for providers who care for these patients to be familiar with the current and evolving treatment standards to optimize patient outcomes. The objective of this paper is to perform an updated review of the main historical and recently emerging studies that impact the perioperative management of patients with locally advanced, upfront-resectable EC.MethodsWe mined and reviewed PubMed and American Society of Clinical Oncology databases for pivotal works shaping the current perioperative treatment landscape in locally advanced EC.Key content and findingsEC are a vastly heterogeneous disease, and treatment options vary based on tumor anatomic location, histology, and patient comorbidities. Perioperative chemotherapy (CTX), chemoradiation (CRT), and, recently, immunotherapy have improved survival in patients with locally advanced disease. However, optimizing sequencing, de-escalating therapy, and incorporating novel targeted therapies in the perioperative setting are promising strategies that are under ongoing investigation to improve patient outcomes further.ConclusionsThere is an ongoing need to identify predictive biomarkers and novel treatment strategies to personalize perioperative approaches and optimize outcomes of patients with EC.
| S-EPMC10323549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a lack of evidence on whether resectable locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients could benefit from neoadjuvant or adjuvant radiotherapy (RT).MethodsPatients with surgically diagnosed LAGC from 2004 to 2015 were retrieved from the SEER database. Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test were used to evaluate survival analysis between neoadjuvant and adjuvant RT. Univariate Cox regression was used to evaluate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 4790 LAGC patients who treated with surgery and RT were identified, including 3187 patients with intestinal subtype and 1603 patients with diffuse subtype. For patients with both intestinal and diffuse subtypes, median cancer-specific survival (mCSS) was better with adjuvant RT or neoadjuvant RT. Moreover, patients benefited more from adjuvant RT than neoadjuvant RT (intestinal subtype: mCSS 49 vs. 36 months, P < 0.001; diffuse subtype: mCSS 32 vs. 26 months, P = 0.050). Further analyses showed that patients with intestinal subtype and T1-2N+, T3N-, T3N+ subgroups, as well as patients with diffuse subtype and T1-2N+ and T3N+ subgroups benefited more from adjuvant RT than those with neoadjuvant RT. Patients in the diffuse subtype and T3N- subgroups also tended benifit from adjuvant RT and survive. There was no difference in survival between the T4N- and T4N + subgroups of the two subtypes. After propensity score matching, subgroup analysis identified an improved survival in favor of adjuvant RT in the age ≥65 years and female subgroups in diffuse subtypes and T4N+ patients.ConclusionsFor patients with resectable LAGC in the T1-2N+, T3N-, T3N+ clinical subgroups, adjuvant RT yields more benefits than neoadjuvant RT or no RT, which is worthy of prospective clinical trial.
| S-EPMC10864974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is no agreed upon standard of care for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) or locally-advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients regarding the benefit of chemotherapy or radiation alone or in combination.Patients and methodsWe completed a retrospective cohort analysis of BRPC and LAPC patients at a cancer center with expertise in multi-disciplinary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treatment over a 5-year period from 03/01/2014 to 03/01/2019 (cut-off date). The total evaluable newly diagnosed, treatment naïve, BRPC, and LAPC patients with adequate organ function and ability to obtain treatment after multidisciplinary review was 52 patients. After analysis, patients were evaluated for rates of resection, extent of resection (R0 or R1), median progression-free survival (mPFS), and median overall survival (mOS).ResultsPatients were treated with chemotherapy alone (gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel = 77% (20/26); FOLFIRINOX = 19% (5/26); single agent gemcitabine 3.8% (1/26)), or chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (gemcitabine +5 Gy × 5 weeks), or chemoradiation alone prior to re-staging and potential resection. Of the 29% (15/52) of patients who went on to surgical resection, 73% (11/15) achieved R0 resection. An R0 resection was achieved in 35% (9/26) of patients treated with chemotherapy alone, 7.6% (1/13) in a patient treated with chemotherapy followed by radiation, and 7.6% (1/13) with concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone. Chemotherapy alone achieved a mPFS of 16.4 months (p < 0.0025) and mOS of 26.2 months (p < 0.0001), chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation was 13.0 months and 14.9 months respectively, while concurrent chemoradiotherapy was 6.9 months and 7.3 months.Conclusions and relevanceBRPC and LAPC patients capable of surgery after only receiving neoadjuvant treatment with chemotherapy had higher rates of R0 resection with prolonged median PFS and OS compared with any patient needing combination chemotherapy with radiotherapy.
| S-EPMC10134275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the scarcity of data based on randomized trials, FOLFIRINOX is widely used in the management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC). We investigated the clinical outcomes of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in patients with BRPC and LAPC.MethodsThis single-center retrospective analysis included a total of 199 consecutive patients with BRPC or LAPC who received conventional or modified FOLFIRINOX between February 2013 and January 2017. An independent radiologist reviewed all baseline computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scans were reviewed for vascular invasion status.ResultsWith median follow-up duration of 40.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 36.7-43.8] in surviving patients, median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 10.6 (95% CI, 9.5-11.7) and 18.1 (95% CI, 16.0-20.3) months, respectively. The 1-year PFS rate was 66.0% (95% CI, 65.3-66.7%), and the 2-year OS rate was 37.2% (95% CI, 36.5-37.9%). PFS and OS did not differ between BRPC and LAPC groups [median PFS, 11.1 months (95% CI, 8.8-13.5) versus 10.1 months (95% CI, 8.4-11.8), p = 0.47; median OS, 18.4 months (95% CI, 16.1-20.8) versus 17.1 months (95% CI, 13.2-20.9), p = 0.50]. Curative-intent conversion surgery (R0/R1) was performed in 63 patients (31.7%). C•A 19-9 response, objective tumor response to FOLFIRINOX, and conversion surgery were independent prognostic factors for OS.ConclusionFOLFIRINOX was effective for management of BRPC and LAPC. Given the potential for cure, a significant proportion of patients can undergo conversion curative-intent surgery following FOLFIRINOX.
| S-EPMC7498966 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This SuperSeries is composed of the SubSeries listed below.
2023-12-10 | GSE244748 | GEO