Dataset Information

Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy DOX and XELOX Regimens for Patients with Resectable Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This paper is aimed at comparing the short-term efficacy of the combination of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (DOX) with the combination of oxaliplatin and capecitabine (XELOX) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of patients with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Methods

A total of 300 patients aged 20-60 years with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who were evaluated with cT3/4Nany were randomly assigned into 3 groups: DOX group (n = 100, treated with neoadjuvant DOX plus adjuvant XELOX), XELOX group (n = 100, treated with perioperative XELOX), and surgery group (n = 100, treated with adjuvant XELOX).

Results

A total of 93, 92, and 95 patients were enrolled in the DOX, XELOX, and surgery groups, respectively. The pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 16.1% in the DOX group and 4.3% in the XELOX group (P = 0.008). There were 56 (61.3%) patients in the DOX group who presented with surgical complications, 22 (23.9%) patients in the XELOX group, and 37 (38.9%) patients in the surgery group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in these three groups were neutropenia (32.3%, 30.4%, and 21.1%), leucopenia (21.5%, 22.8%, and 15.8%), nausea (15.1%, 16.3%, and 12.6%), and fatigue (10.8%, 7.6%, and 8.4%).

Conclusions

Neoadjuvant DOX is an effective and feasible regimen and might represent an option for young and middle-aged patients with locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

SUBMITTER: Tian Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8324337 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Gastric and gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancers carry a poor prognosis, and despite recent advancements, most patients die of their disease. Although immune checkpoint blockade became part of the standard-of-care for patients with metastatic G/GEJ cancers, its efficacy and impact on the tumor microenvironment (TME) in early disease remain largely unknown. We hypothesized higher efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in patients with nonmetastatic G/GEJ cancer. In the phase 2 PANDA trial, patients with previously untreated resectable G/GEJ tumors (n = 21) received neoadjuvant treatment with one cycle of atezolizumab monotherapy followed by four cycles of atezolizumab plus docetaxel, oxaliplatin and capecitabine. Treatment was well tolerated. There were grade 3 immune-related adverse events in two of 20 patients (10%) but no grade 4 or 5 immune-related adverse events, and all patients underwent resection without treatment-related delays, meeting the primary endpoint of safety and feasibility. Tissue was obtained at multiple time points, allowing analysis of the effects of single-agent anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and the subsequent combination with chemotherapy on the TME. Twenty of 21 patients underwent surgery and were evaluable for secondary pathologic response and survival endpoints, and 19 were evaluable for exploratory translational analyses. A major pathologic response (≤10% residual viable tumor) was observed in 14 of 20 (70%, 95% confidence interval 46-88%) patients, including 9 (45%, 95% confidence interval 23-68%) pathologic complete responses. At a median follow-up of 47 months, 13 of 14 responders were alive and disease-free, and five of six nonresponders had died as a result of recurrence. Notably, baseline anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)+CD8+ T cell infiltration was significantly higher in responders versus nonresponders, and comparison of TME alterations following anti-PD-L1 monotherapy versus the subsequent combination with chemotherapy showed an increased immune activation on single-agent PD-1/L1 axis blockade. On the basis of these data, monotherapy anti-PD-L1 before its combination with chemotherapy warrants further exploration and validation in a larger cohort of patients with nonmetastatic G/GEJ cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03448835 .

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown promising prospects in locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC) immunotherapy, but their efficacy in neoadjuvant settings remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of integrating programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors into neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) of GC/GEJC treatment.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and main oncology conference databases were systematically searched up to 19 November 2022, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus NACT were included. The main outcomes were pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (MPR), R0 resection rate, and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).ResultsA total of 753 patients from 20 prospective studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled pCR and MPR rates from studies reporting were 21.7% [95% confidence interval (CI), 18.1%-25.5%] and 44.0% (95% CI, 34.1%-53.8%), respectively. The pooled incidence rate of total TRAEs was 89.1% (95% CI, 82.7%-94.3%), and the incidence rate of grade 3 to 4 TRAEs was 34.4% (95% CI, 17.8%-66.5%). The pooled R0 resection rate was reported to be 98.9% (95% CI, 97.0%-99.9%). Subgroup analysis has not found significant differences in efficacy and safety among different PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Moreover, the efficacy in patients with positive PD-L1 expression (combined positive score ≥1) was comparable with that in the entire study population [pCR, 22.5% vs. 21.2% (p > 0.05); MPR, 48.6% vs. 43.7% (p > 0.05)].ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis found that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with NACT for locally advanced GC/GEJC were well tolerated and may confer therapeutic advantages. The integration of ICIs into NACT has shown the potential for application in any PD-L1 expression population.

Project description:This study compares neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with perioperative chemotherapy (pCT) for patients with resectable esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma in terms of toxicity, postoperative complications, pathologic response, and survival.This study retrospectively analyzed and compared 313 patients with resectable esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with either nCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel 41.4 Gy, n = 176) or pCT (epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine, n = 137).The baseline and tumor characteristics were similar in both groups. The ability to deliver all planned preoperative cycles was greater in the nCRT group (92.0 vs. 76.6%). Whereas nCRT was associated with a higher rate of grades 3 and 4 esophagitis, pCT was associated with a higher rate of grades 3 and 4 thromboembolic events, febrile neutropenia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, cardiac complications, and electrolyte imbalances. Two patients in the pCT group died during neoadjuvant treatment due to febrile neutropenia. More postoperative cardiac complications occurred in the nCRT group. All other postoperative complications and the in-hospital mortality rate (nCRT, 4.7%; pCT, 2.3%) were comparable. The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 15.1% after nCRT and 6.9% after pCT. Radicality of surgery was comparable (R0: 93.0 vs. 91.6%). The median overall survival was 35 months after nCRT versus 36 months after pCT.For patients with esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma, chemoradiotherapy with paclitaxel, carboplatin and concurrent radiotherapy, and perioperative chemotherapy with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabin lead to equal oncologic outcomes in terms of radical resection rates, lymphadenectomy, patterns of recurrent disease, and (disease-free) survival. However, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is associated with a considerably lower level of severe adverse events and should therefore be the preferred protocol until a well-powered randomized controlled trial provides different insights.

Project description:BackgroundNeoadjuvant therapy for resectable gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction tumors is progressing slowly. Although immunotherapy for advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction tumors has made great progress, the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for locally resectable gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction tumors have not been clearly demonstrated. Here, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and advance the current research.MethodsOriginal articles describing the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction tumors published up until October 15, 2023 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and other major databases. The odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for heterogeneity and subgroup analysis.ResultsA total of 1074 patients from 33 studies were included. The effectiveness of neoadjuvant immunotherapy was mainly evaluated using pathological complete remission (PCR), major pathological remission (MPR), and tumor regression grade (TRG). Among the included patients, 1015 underwent surgical treatment and 847 achieved R0 resection. Of the patients treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy, 24% (95% CI: 19%-28%) achieved PCR and 49% (95% CI: 38%-61%) achieved MPR. Safety was assessed by a surgical resection rate of 0.89 (95% CI: 85%-93%), incidence of ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of 28% (95% CI: 17%-40%), and incidence of ≥ 3 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of 19% (95% CI: 11%-27%).ConclusionNeoadjuvant immunotherapy, especially neoadjuvant dual-immunotherapy combinations, is effective and safe for resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction tumors in the short term. Nevertheless, further multicenter randomized trials are required to demonstrate which combination model is more beneficial.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=358752, identifier CRD42022358752.

Project description:BackgroundPlatinum and fluoropyrimidine combinations typically comprise first-line (1L) therapy in advanced gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEA), although controversy exists regarding the use of 5doublet versus triplet cytotoxic regimens. Historically, second-line (2L) and third-line or later (3L+) therapy has been fragmented. Recent trials have increased the need for optimal treatment sequencing in advanced G/GEA.Materials and methodsWe conducted a systematic search of peer-reviewed manuscripts of randomized clinical trials examining 1L, 2L, and 3L+ therapy for advanced G/GEA published from 2009 through November 19, 2019. When available, overall survival, progression-free survival, time to progression, overall response rate, and toxicity were extracted from each and compared descriptively.ResultsIn 1L therapy, chemotherapy triplets demonstrated variable efficacy improvements with invariable increased toxicity compared with platinum/fluoropyrimidine doublets. Currently, the only published report of positive outcomes using biologics in 1L describes adding trastuzumab in HER2-overexpressing advanced G/GEA. In 2L, doublet chemotherapy regimens are not uniformly more efficacious than single-agent taxanes or irinotecan, and ramucirumab has demonstrated improved outcomes both as monotherapy and in combination.ConclusionFor advanced G/GEA, review of trial results from 2009-2019 support 1L therapy with platinum and fluoropyrimidine and sequencing with taxanes or irinotecan in combination with biologics as effective 2L options. Escalating to a triplet may add some efficacy at the expense of added toxicity.Implications for practiceThe rapidly changing treatment landscape for advanced gastric cancer includes increasing options for refractory disease. With multiple first-line platinum-based regimens, identification of those with the best benefit-to-risk ratio may provide guidance on treatment sequencing strategies. This article presents findings from the published literature of randomized controlled trials that included a first-line platinum/fluoropyrimidine combination and, for second-line trials, patients with platinum/fluoropyrimidine-refractory disease. This guiding summary could be a tool for clinicians to identify the optimal first-line regimen(s) followed by a strategy for subsequent regimens.