Gastroesophageal Cancer Patients Research Articles

Impact of pathogenic germline variants in HRR genes on gastroesophageal cancer in a large real-world Chinese population: A comprehensive study.

10588 Background: Genetic testing in gastroesophageal cancer has been limited to those with hereditary cancer syndromes, restricting understanding of the impact of germline variants in sporadic cancers. Our study expands this by exploring germline and somatic characteristics in a broad Chinese cohort, enhancing risk assessment and guiding treatment strategies in a wider population. Methods: From October 2017 to April 2023, we retrospectively analyzed 2596 Chinese gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) patients, including 2003 with gastric cancer (GC), 196 with gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC), and 397 with esophageal cancer (EC). A 520-gene panel including 62 genes associated with cancer predisposition, was employed for genomic profiling of paired tumor and white blood cell samples. The pathogenicity of germline variants was determined according to ACMG guidelines. Results: In this retrospective cohort, the proportion of patients carrying pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variants was 5.3% in GC, 5.6% in GEJC, and 5.0% in EC, respectively. Notably, genes associated with HRR exhibited the highest rates of P/LP germline mutations in GEC (94, 3.7%), with the majority occurring in non-BRCA HRR genes (77, 3.0%). The top five genes with the highest mutation rates were ATM, PALB2, FANCA, CHEK2, and RAD54L. Compared to the East Asian population without cancer in the genomAD database, a higher proportion of P/LP germline mutations were found in the CDH1(Inf [6.46-Inf], p < 0.001), PALB2 (5.60 [1.61-13.09], p = 0.002), SDHA (8.99 [1.29-99.42], p = 0.012), ATM (2.15 [1.08-4.09], p = 0.02), and CHEK2 (3.83 [1.06-13.32], p = 0.02) genes in GC. Similarly, significant increases in PALB2 (10.36 [2.32-37.28], p = 0.002) and ATM (4.42 [0.86-14.33], p = 0.036) were also observed in EC and GEJC. The HRR P/LP variant group exhibited a higher incidence of biallelic inactivation (loss of wildtype allele) compared to the B/LB variant group (24.7% vs 6.6%, p<0.001). Moreover, the similar trend was observed for the moderately/uncertainly penetrant gene ATM and FANCA (38.5% vs 0.6%, p < 0.001; 42.9% vs 9.8%, p = 0.025), which suggests that ATM and FANCA may be associated with a high risk. The HRR genes ATM(56 vs 61, p = 0.052), CDH1(33 vs 61, p = 0.003), and FANCI(48 vs 61, p = 0.041) with P/LP variants were associated with a younger age of onset. Carriers of HRR P/LP variants had less prevalent somatic TP53 variants in GC and GEC and higher HRD score compared to non-carriers (p=0.005). Conclusions: Our research delineates the germline P/LP variant landscape in Chinese GEC, revealing the significant role of HRR P/LP variants. The presence of P/LP variants in HRR genes in GEC is linked to distinct disease characteristics and progression, underscoring their importance in guiding personalized treatment approaches and risk evaluation.

Abstract 7521: Tumor NLRP3 inflammasome activity mediates resistance to Anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in advanced gastroesophageal cancer

Abstract The addition of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy to the therapeutic armamentarium of advanced gastroesophageal (GE) cancer patients has resulted in modest improvements in clinical outcomes for a subset of patients. More robust predictive biomarkers to guide patient management and to select optimal combination immunotherapy strategies for the individual patient are needed. Our previous studies indicate that the tumor-intrinsic NLRP3 inflammasome-HSP70 signaling axis promotes the recruitment of granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (PMN-MDSCs) and drives resistance to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. The KEYLargo phase II clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of pembrolizumab (pembro) in combination with capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CAPOX) in HER2-negative advanced GE cancer patients. An 8-day lead-in period of pembro monotherapy in 36 advanced GE cancer patients allowed for the acquisition of blood and tumor tissue specimens to determine which immune-mediated alterations within the tumor microenvironment correlated with resistance to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. Baseline and on-treatment specimens were collected for HSP70 ELISA, immunofluorescence microscopy, spatial transcriptomics, NLRP3 FISH, IHC, and NLRP3-ASC proximity ligation assays (PLA) to measure NLRP3 pathway activity levels. All data was correlated with best objective response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells and PMN-MDSCs were increased in responders and non-responders, respectively. While PD-L1 CPS failed to associate with response, elevated baseline NLRP3 PLA activity correlated with increased tumor-infiltrating PMN-MDSCs (P = 0.001) and resistance to pembro/CAPOX therapy (P = 0.01). Only non-responding tumors exhibited an increase in NLRP3 PLA activity and NLRP3 amplification. Transcriptional studies revealed tumors with enhanced NLRP3 activity to exhibit decreased expression of the NLRC5 transactivator, MHC class I antigen presentation genes, and an increase in the NK cell negative regulator, HLA-G. Baseline plasma HSP70 levels correlated with tumor NLRP3 activity (P = 0.043) and with resistance to pembro/CAPOX therapy (P = 0.001). Elevated baseline NLRP3 PLA activity and amplification were associated with diminished PFS (P = 0.008) and OS (P = 0.009). In additional studies, pharmacologic inhibition of the NLRP3 inflammasome suppressed PMN-MDSC recruitment, upregulated MHC class I, and reversed anti-PD-1 resistance in an orthotopic model of GE cancer. Together, these findings implicate tumor-intrinsic NLRP3-HSP70 signaling as an important mediator of anti-PD-1 resistance in advanced GE cancer. The NLRP3-HSP70 pathway is a promising source of therapeutic targets and biomarkers capable of improving treatment outcomes for this patient population. Additional clinical studies are warranted. Citation Format: Nagendra Yarla, Kaylee Howell, Y-Van Nguyen, Donna Niedwiecki, Hope Uronis, John Strickler, Nicholas C. DeVito, Bala Theivanthiran, Brent A. Hanks. Tumor NLRP3 inflammasome activity mediates resistance to Anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in advanced gastroesophageal cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 7521.

Unveiling proteomic diversity: A quantitative study of antibody drug conjugate and chemotherapy targets in gastroesophageal cancer.

261 Background: Gastroesophageal cancer (GEC), is a significant global health concern with a 5-year relative survival of 7% for metastatic GEC. Standard treatments often include surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, but their effectiveness can be limited. Chemotherapy is frequently utilized in the treatment of GEC, although no biomarkers for chemotherapy are used in the selection of the chemo agent. There are several well-known biomarkers of resistance and sensitivity for various chemo agents. We used targeted proteomics to quantify protein expression levels of several protein biomarkers associated with chemotherapy efficiency in 125 GEC patients. These include resistance markers for platinum agents (ERCC1), and tubulin inhibitors (TUBB3). It also includes sensitivity markers for irinotecan/topotecan (Topo1), and doxorubicin/etoposide (Topo2A). We also assessed the protein levels of several antibodies-drug conjugate markers (EGFR, Her2, Trop2, FR-alpha, Mesothelin, Axl, CLDN18.2, and Nectin-4). Methods: FFPE tumor tissues from 125 clinical GC patients were microdissected and solubilized for mass spectrometry-based targeted proteomic analysis in our CLIA-certified laboratory. 72 proteins were quantified from 2-3 sections of FFPE tissue. Results: 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU), taxanes, and platinum agents (such as carboplatin) are among the chemotherapy agents that are frequently used to treat GEC. TYMP, a sensitivity marker for 5-FU, was expressed in 32% of GEC cases. ERCC1, a resistance marker for platinum drugs, was expressed at 34%. Additionally, 48% of GEC exhibited TUBB3, a resistance marker for paclitaxel and docetaxel. Topoisomerase 1 (Topo1) is the target for irinotecan or topotecan, and is also the target for some ADCs (e.g. trastuzumab deruxtecan, sacituzumab govitecan etc.). Topo1 was expressed in 92% of GEC with a 10x range (415 - 4195 amol/μg). Another topoisomerase, Topo2A, targetable by etoposide, epirubicin, and doxorubicin, was expressed in 59% of GEC with 19x range (402-7804 amol/μg). ADC targets, such as EGFR (82% detected with 184x range of distribution), Her3 (18%, 4x), AXL (18%,7x), MET (27%, 19x), and Trop2 (50%, 57x) showed a wide range of protein expression. With a 56x range (318 - 17786 amol/μg), Her2 was found in 46% of GEC, of which 12% of GEC had overexpression of Her2 (>740 amol/μg), suggesting that the majority of GEC has low levels of Her2 (318-690 amol/μg), which is potentially targetable by newer anti-Her2 agents. Conclusions: Every cancer is different, and the ability to quantitate simultaneously 72 protein biomarkers from 2-3 FFPE sections provides a wealth of actionable information that, when combined with other multi-omics biomarker data, will help guide clinical treatment or patient stratification for clinical trials.

Untargeted serum metabolomics reveals potential biomarkers and metabolic pathways associated with the progression of gastroesophageal cancer

BackgroundPrevious metabolic studies in upper digestive cancer have mostly been limited to cross-sectional study designs, which hinders the ability to effectively predict outcomes in the early stage of cancer. This study aims to identify key metabolites and metabolic pathways associated with the multistage progression of epithelial cancer and to explore their predictive value for gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) formation and for the early screening of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).MethodsA case-cohort study within the 7-year prospective Esophageal Cancer Screening Cohort of Shandong Province included 77 GEC cases and 77 sub-cohort individuals. Untargeted metabolic analysis was performed in serum samples. Metabolites, with FDR q value < 0.05 and variable importance in projection (VIP) > 1, were selected as differential metabolites to predict GEC formation using Random Forest (RF) models. Subsequently, we evaluated the predictive performance of these differential metabolites for the early screening of ESCC.ResultsWe found a distinct metabolic profile alteration in GEC cases compared to the sub-cohort, and identified eight differential metabolites. Pathway analyses showed dysregulation in D-glutamine and D-glutamate metabolism, nitrogen metabolism, primary bile acid biosynthesis, and steroid hormone biosynthesis in GEC patients. A panel of eight differential metabolites showed good predictive performance for GEC formation, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.893 (95% CI = 0.816–0.951). Furthermore, four of the GEC pathological progression-related metabolites were validated in the early screening of ESCC, with an AUC of 0.761 (95% CI = 0.716–0.805).ConclusionsThese findings indicated a panel of metabolites might be an alternative approach to predict GEC formation, and therefore have the potential to mitigate the risk of cancer progression at the early stage of GEC.

Efficacy and safety of PD‑1/PD‑L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric or gastro‑esophageal junction cancer: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.

Although the efficacy and safety of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor combined with chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone has been analyzed, there have been no in-depth studies on the outcomes of patients with PD-L1 positive advanced gastric or gastro-esophageal junction cancer patients (GC/GEJC). This systematic review and meta-analysis focused on comparing the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors vs. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy in PD-L1 positive advanced GC/GEJC patients, aiming to provide more precise guidance for the clinical treatment of GC/GEJC. In this meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from the establishment of the database till June 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which control patients underwent chemotherapy and experimental group patients underwent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors or PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy were included in this investigation. Investigations without complete information, studies from which information could not be extracted, duplicate articles, animal studies, review articles, and systematic reviews were excluded. The pooled results suggested that chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced GC/GEJC, while progression free-survival (PFS) with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone or in combination with chemotherapy were all improved compared with chemotherapy alone. However, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors did not significantly increase objective response rates (ORR) in PD-L1-positive patients compared with chemotherapy, but in combination with chemotherapy, they did improve ORR. The pooled results also showed that patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors had higher stable disease (SD) and progressive disease (PD) rates compared to chemotherapy in PD-L1-positive patients. Additionally, in PD-L1-positive patients, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone or combined with chemotherapy increased OS compared with chemotherapy alone. However, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors only prolonged PFS compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with a combined positive score (CPS; 100% of cells were required to be positively stained) for PD-L1, but when combined with chemotherapy, OS and PFS were prolonged in all PD-L1-positive patients compared with chemotherapy alone. Finally, the pooled results showed that the incidence of adverse events of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in PD-L1-zpositive patients was significantly lower than that in patients treated with chemotherapy alone. In conclusion, single agent of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor alone or combined with chemotherapy significantly prolongs the survival of patients compared with chemotherapy alone, with fewer adverse effects. However, the degree of CPS may affect efficacy, thus further investigation is required.

Proximal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction vs total gastrectomy in gastric and gastro-esophageal junction cancer patients — a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021291500)

BackgroundIn Germany and Western Europe, gastroesophageal junction cancer (AEG) and proximal gastric cancer are currently treated with (transhiatal-extended) total gastrectomy (TG) according to the latest treatment guidelines. TG leads to a severe and long-lasting impairment of postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the treated patients. Recent studies have suggested that HRQoL of these patients could be improved by proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (PG-DTR) without compromising oncologic safety. Our aim is therefore to conduct a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial comparing PG-DTR with TG in AEG II/III and gastric cancer patients with overall survival as primary endpoint and HRQoL as key secondary endpoint.MethodsThis protocol is written with reference to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P 2015) statement. We will conduct searches in the electronic databases MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library. We will also check references of relevant studies and perform a cited reference research. Titles and abstracts of the records identified by the searches will be screened, and full texts of all potentially relevant articles will be obtained. We will consider randomized trials and non-randomized studies. The selection of studies, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias of the included studies will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan 5.4 (Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4, The Cochrane Collaboration).DiscussionThis systematic review will identify the current study pool concerning the comparison of TG and PG-DTR and help to finally refine the research questions and to allow an evidence-based trial design of the planned multicenter randomized-controlled trial.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this systematic review. Study findings will be shared by publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021291500.

Eligibility of patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer for biology-guided radiotherapy in a retrospective cohort.

e16100 Background: Biology-guided radiotherapy (BgRT) is a novel radiotherapy modality that uses real-time positron emission tomography (PET) to guide radiotherapy beamlets. The FDA recently cleared BgRT for clinical use for tumors in lung and bone using 18F FDG radiotracer. We sought to identify esophageal cancer (EC) and gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC) patients who may be BgRT candidates based on diagnostic FDG PET/CT imaging. Methods: Through IRB-approved extraction of patient medical record data from an institutional repository of prospectively maintained data, we verified a database of EC and GEJC patients diagnosed at a US tertiary care center between 01/01/2006 and 12/31/2013. When insufficient diagnostic clinical information was present, patients were excluded. Patient and tumor qualities were quantified and subjected to parameters of tumor diameter (≥2cm, &lt;5cm) and maximum standardized uptake value (≥6) to observe potential characteristics of a patient population eligible for this novel BgRT mechanism. Results: Thirty patients met tumor size and FDG uptake criteria for BgRT therapy out of an overall patient cohort of 90 patients. A significantly greater proportion of patients within the BgRT-eligible cohort presented with esophageal tumors (83.3%) compared to non-eligible patients (58.3%, P=0.0177). Otherwise, there was no significant variation of patient sex, race, tumor histology, tumor stage, comorbidity score, and pre-treatment weight loss between patients eligible and not eligible for BgRT therapy. Conclusions: After applying current boundaries of tumor size and radiotracer uptake for effective BgRT intervention, we observed broad applicability of the novel treatment modality across EC/ GEJC patients of varying characteristics and tumor qualities. The high eligibility of patients with tumors located within the esophagus supports further investigation of BgRT in their management. [Table: see text]

Efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced gastroesophageal cancer based on characteristics: a meta-analysis.

Objective: Evaluate the potency of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies in advanced gastroesophageal cancer patients with different clinical features. Methods: Randomized, controlled trials comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies with chemotherapy in individuals with gastroesophageal cancer were retrieved. Results: 15trials involving 9194 individuals were included. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors significantly improved overall survival (OS) but not progression-free survival. Significantly improved OS was observed in PD-L1 combined positive score ≥1, primary esophageal cancer, primary gastric cancer and Asian patients. Subgroup analysis revealed significant OS benefit achieved for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, but not for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Conclusion: PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors improved OS in advanced gastroesophageal carcinoma, especially in patients with esophageal cancer. Race, primary tumor sites and PD-L1 combined positive score can be used to predict the potency of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Prognostic value of [18F]FDG PET/CT on treatment response and progression-free survival of gastroesophageal cancer patients undergoing perioperative FLOT chemotherapy

PurposeTo evaluate the prognostic role of [18F]FDG PET/CT metabolic parameters in gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEJAC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. MethodIn this retrospective study, 31 patients with biopsy-proven GC or GEJAC were included between August 2016 and March 2020. [18F]FDG PET/CT was performed before the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Primary tumours’ semi-quantitative metabolic parameters were extracted. All patients received a perioperative FLOT regimen thereafter. Post-chemotherapy [18F]FDG PET/CT was performed in most patients (17/31). All patients underwent surgical resection. Histopathology response to treatment and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated. Two-sided p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. ResultsThirty-one patients (mean age = 62 ± 8), including 21 GC and 10 GEJAC patients, were evaluated. 20/31(65%) patients were histopathology responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, including twelve complete and eight partial responders. During the median follow-up of 42.0 months, nine patients experienced recurrence. The median PFS was 60(95% CI:32.9–87.1) months. Pre-neoadjuvant chemotherapy SULpeak was significantly correlated with pathological response to treatment (p-value = 0.03;odds ratio = 16.75). In survival analysis, SUVmax (p-value = 0.01;hazard ratio[HR] = 1.55), SUVmean (p-value = 0.04;HR = 2.73), SULpeak (p-value < 0.001;HR = 1.91) and SULmean (p-value = 0.04;HR = 4.22) in the post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy pre-operative [18F]FDG PET/CT showed significant correlation with PFS. Additionally, aspects of staging were significantly correlated with PFS (p-value = 0.01;HR = 2.21). ConclusionsPre-neoadjuvant chemotherapy [18F]FDG PET/CT parameters, especially SULpeak, could predict the pathological response to treatment in GC and GEJAC patients. Additionally, in survival analysis, post-chemotherapy metabolic parameters significantly correlated with PFS. Thus, performing [18F]FDG PET/CT before chemotherapy may help to identify patients at risk for inadequate response to perioperative FLOT and, after chemotherapy, may predict clinical outcomes.

Sex differences in treatment allocation and survival of potentially curable gastroesophageal cancer: A population-based study

BackgroundAlthough curative treatment options are identical for male and female gastroesophageal cancer patients, access to care and survival may vary. This study aimed to compare treatment allocation and survival between male and female patients with potentially curable gastroesophageal cancer. MethodsNationwide cohort study including all patients with potentially curable gastroesophageal squamous cell or adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2018 registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The main outcome, treatment allocation, was compared between male and female patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC). Additionally, 5-year relative survival with relative excess risk (RER), that is, adjusted for the normal life expectancy, was compared. ResultsAmong 27,496 patients (68.8% men), most were allocated to curative treatment (62.8%), although rates dropped to 45.6%>70 years. Curative treatment rates were comparable among younger male and female patients (≤70 years) with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, while older females with EAC were less frequently allocated to curative treatment than males (OR = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73–0.99).For those allocated to curative treatment, relative survival was superior for female patients with EAC (RER = 0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.96) and ESCC (RER = 0.82, 95% CI 0.75–0.91), and comparable for males and females with GAC (RER = 1.02, 95% CI 0.94–1.11). ConclusionsWhile curative treatment rates were comparable between younger male and female patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, treatment disparities were present between older patients. When treated, the survival of females with EAC and ESCC was superior to males. The treatment and survival gaps between male and female patients with gastroesophageal cancer warrant further exploration and could potentially improve treatment strategies and survival.

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing proximal gastrectomy with double-tract-reconstruction and total gastrectomy in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients: Still no sufficient evidence for clinical decision-making.

To compare proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction and total gastrectomy in patients with gastroesophageal junction (AEG II-III) and gastric cancer. We conducted systematic searches in Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until December 20, 2021 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021291500). Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool and the ROBINS-I tool, as applicable. Evidence was rated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 13 non-RCTs with 1,317 patients (715 patients with total gastrectomy and 602 patients with proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction) were included. Patients treated by total gastrectomy had a significantly higher proportion of advanced cancer stages International Union Against Cancer IB-III (odds ratio: 0.68, 95% confidence interval: 0.51-0.91, P= .01). This heterogeneity biases the observed improved overall survival of patients after proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (odds ratio: 0.67, 95% confidence interval: 0.44-1.01, P= .05). Both procedures were comparably efficient regarding perioperative parameters. Postoperative/preoperative bodyweight ratio (mean difference: 3.56, 95% confidence interval: 1.32-5.79, P= .002), postoperative/preoperative serum-hemoglobin ratio (mean difference 3.73, 95% confidence interval: 1.59-5.88, P < .001), and postoperative serum vitamin B12 levels (mean difference 42.46, 95% confidence interval: 6.37-78.55, P= .02) were superior after proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction, while postoperative/preoperative serum-albumin ratio (mean difference 1.24, 95% confidence interval: -4.76 to 7.24, P= .69) and postoperative/preoperative serum total protein ratio (mean difference 1.12, 95% confidence interval: -2.77 to 5.00, P= .57) were not different. Health-related quality of life data were reported in only 2 studies, which found no significant advantages for proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction. Proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction offers advantages in postoperative nutritional parameters compared to total gastrectomy (GRADE: moderate quality of evidence). Oncological effectiveness of proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction cannot be assessed (GRADE: very low quality of evidence). Further thoroughly planned randomized controlled trials in Western patient cohorts are necessary to improve treatment for gastric cancer patients.

A practical approach for PD-L1 evaluation in gastroesophageal cancer.

PD-L1 is an established predictive immunohistochemical biomarker of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. At present, PD-L1 is routinely assessed on biopsy samples of advanced gastroesophageal cancer patients before initiating first-line treatment. However, PD-L1 is still a suboptimal biomarker, due to changing cut-off values and scoring systems, interobserver and interlaboratory variability.This practical illustrated review discusses the range of staining patterns of PD-L1 and the potential pitfalls and challenges that can be encountered when evaluating PD-L1, focusing on gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (G/GEA) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Two decades of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer surgery.

Diagnosis and treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer have undergone many critical changes during the last two decades. We addressed the question of how clinical reality outside of clinical trials has changed for gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients in a European center for upper gastrointestinal surgery. In this retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy for gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma between 1996 and 2017 in a tertiary upper gastrointestinal center were included. The time was divided into a) before (1996-2006) (pre-CTx) and b) after (2006-2017) (CTx) the MAGIC trial. Data were comprehensively analyzed for demographics, tumor stage, perioperative treatment, surgery, histopathology, and survival rates (SR). 737 patients (32% female) underwent gastrectomy, 255 patients in the pre-CTx era and 482 patients in the CTx era. The median age was 65years and the median follow-up was 27.5months for surviving patients. Around 16.9% of patients received neoadjuvant treatment in the pre-CTx era versus 46.3% in the CTx era. The 3-year survival rate (3-YSR) was 46.4% in the pre-CTx and 60.9% in the CTx era (p < 0.001). For pretreated patients, 3-YSR was 39.0% (pre-CTx) versus 55.3% (CTx) (p = 0.168). Survival rate (SR) for locally advanced tumor stages (cT3/cT4) was higher when neoadjuvant therapy was administered (3-YSR: 56.7% vs 40.6%; p = 0.022). There were no significant differences according to sex (p = 0.357), age (p = 0.379), pT category (p = 0.817), pN stage (p = 0.074), cM stage (p = 0.112), Laurén classification (p = 0.158), and SRs (3-YSR: 60.3% vs 59.4%; p = 0.898) between the MAGIC and FLOT regimens. Survival rates have dramatically improved for gastric cancer patients during the last two decades. MAGIC and FLOT regimens showed similar results in the postsurgical follow-up.

Recent Advances in the Systemic Treatment of Localized Gastroesophageal Cancer.

The overall survival expectancy of localized gastroesophageal cancer patients still remains under 5 years despite advances in neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategies in recent years. For almost a decade, immunotherapy has been successfully implemented as a first-line treatment for various oncological diseases in advanced stages. In the case of advanced gastroesophageal cancer, 2021 witnessed several approvals of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies by different authorities. Although it is still a debate whether this treatment should be restricted to a certain subgroup of patients based on biomarker selection, immunotherapy agents are making remarkable steps in resectable settings as well. The Checkmate-577 study demonstrated significant benefits of nivolumab as an adjuvant treatment for resectable esophageal and gastroesophageal junction tumors and thereby obtained approvals both from U.S. American and European authorities. First results of further potential practice-changing clinical trials are expected in 2023, which might change the treatment armamentarium for resectable gastroesophageal cancers significantly. This review aims to demonstrate the advances of immunotherapy and targeted therapies in treatment of localized gastric, gastroesophageal junction and esophageal tumors and gives a short summary on promising ongoing clinical trials.

Assessing the Effects of a Perioperative Nutritional Support and Counseling in Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Comparative Study with Historical Controls.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of perioperative nutritional therapy care in gastrointestinal (esophageal, gastric, gastroesophageal) cancer patients on nutritional status and disease progression (complications, hospitalization, mortality). We considered 62 gastrointestinal cancer patients treated at the Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), University Hospital Bonn, Germany (August 2017-July 2019). Of these, 42 patients (as intervention group: IG) received pre- and postoperative nutritional support with counseling, while 20 patients (as historical control group CG) received only postoperative nutritional therapy. Several clinical parameters, such as Body Mass Index (BMI), nutritional risk screening (NRS), phase angle, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and mortality, were determined. There were significantly fewer patients with gastric cancer/CDH1 gene mutation and more with esophageal cancer in IG (p = 0.001). Significantly more patients received neoadjuvant therapy in IG (p = 0.036). No significant differences were found between the groups regarding BMI, NRS, complications, length of hospital stay, and mortality. However, the comparison of post- and preoperative parameters in IG showed a tendency to lose 1.74 kg of weight (p = 0.046), a decrease in phase angle by 0.59° (p = 0.004), and an increase in NRS of 1.34 points (p < 0.001). Contrary to prior reports, we found no significant effect of perioperative nutritional therapy care in gastrointestinal cancer patients; however, the small cohort size and infrequent standardization in nutritional status may possibly account for the variance. Considering that oncological pathways and metabolic nutritional pathways are interrelated, dividing patients into subgroups to provide a personalized nutritional approach may help in improving their treatment.

Integrating patient-reported-outcomes into prognostication in gastroesophageal cancer: Results of a population-based retrospective cohort analysis.

320 Background: Patient reported outcomes (PRO) measures are accurate self-reflections of an individual’s physical functioning and emotional well-being. The prognostic value is unknown in gastroesophageal (GE) cancer patients (pts). The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) is a simple and validated 10-item PRO tool which uses a 0 to 10 rating of ten common symptoms (total rating 0-100). In this study, we examined the association between the ESAS score and overall survival (OS) in pts with localized and metastatic GE adenocarcinoma (GEA). Methods: This study is based on the retrospective cohort database of pts with localized (stage I-III) and metastatic GEA. We included pts who were diagnosed with GEA between 2011 and 2021 and completed at least 1 baseline ESAS prior to the treatment. Pts were grouped into 3 cohorts based as follows: High symptom burden (SB) ESAS score ≥ 26, Moderate SB (11-25) or low SB (0-10). OS was defined as time from the first visit date to death. OS was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and significance was set at 2-sided P &lt; 0.05. Univariate statistical analyses were used to examine the relationships between OS and multiple variables in the presentation. Results: 233 pts met the inclusion criteria: median age was 60.8y [51.4, 69.4]; 58% of pts were ECOG PS 1; 81% were non-Asian and 18.9% Asian; 67.4% of pts were male and 32.6% female. In terms of tumor location, gastric represented 47.2% of pts, GEJ 40.8% and esophageal 12.0% primaries; 43.7% pts were stage I-III, while 56.3% were de-novo metastatic pts. Median OS in Low, Mod, High SB pts cohorts were 22.7m, 17.6mm, &amp; 14.6m, respectively (p &lt; 0.036). Although worse OS and worse ESAS levels were not statistically significant in the localized pts (p, 505) and metastatic subgroup (p 0,092), there was a numerical tendency, especially in the metastatic pts. In the univariate analysis, there was a significant association between OS and high-symptom burden (Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.64 (95% CI, 1.12-2.38; p = 0.0104), ECOG ≥2 (HR= 2.79 (95% CI, 1.62-4.79; p = 0.0002) and metastatic pts (HR= 3.50 (95% CI, 2.51-4.86, p&lt;0.0001). Conclusions: Higher SB based on ESAS was associated with poorer OS among GEA pts. ESAS is a reliable tool that carries a prognostic significance that could be used in practice.[Table: see text]

Association of inflammatory markers with survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy as first line treatment.

The emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors has changed the landscape of first-line treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Currently, the prognostic significance of inflammatory markers in first-line immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy for gastric cancer is currently unclear. This study aimed to identify inflammatory markers with potential to predict treatment outcome in advanced gastric cancer patients receiving immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy. This retrospective study enrolled untreated advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-esophageal junction cancer patients from 5 clinical trials (the clinical trial cohort) and the real world (the real-word cohort). Inflammatory markers included in the analysis included neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammation index (SII), and derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to identify optimal cut-off values. The prognostic potential of the markers was determined using Kaplan-Meier analysis, univariate and multivariate Cox-regression analyses in the clinical trial cohort and the findings were validated in the real-world cohort. In the clinical trial cohort (n=45), MLR, PLR and SII were associated with PFS but not OS (All P<0.05), while dNLR was not correlated with PFS or OS. Only NLR was associated with PFS and OS and identified as an independent prognostic predictor in the univariate and multivariate analyses. The prognostic value of NLR was validated in the real-world cohort (n=55). NLR was a strong predictor of PFS and OS in patients with advanced gastric cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy. Further prospective studies are required to validate our results.

Safety and Efficacy of a First-Line Chemotherapy Tailored by G8 Score in Elderly Metastatic or Locally Advanced Gastric and Gastro-Esophageal Cancer Patients: A Real-World Analysis.

Introduction: Gastric (GC) and gastro-esophageal cancer (GEC) are common neoplasms in the elderly. However, in clinical practice, the correct strategy for elderly patients who might benefit from chemotherapy (CT) is unknown. Prospective data are still poor. In this context, we performed a retrospective analysis of GC patients aged ≥75 years and treated at our institutions. Material and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 90 patients with confirmed metastatic GC or GEC, treated with an upfront CT. Inclusion criteria were patients aged ≥75 years, PS 0–2, normal bone marrow/liver/renal function and no major comorbidities. All patients received a G8 score, and some patients with G8 ≤14 received a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). The primary goal was to perform a safety evaluation based on the incidence of adverse events (AE), and the secondary goal was to determine the efficacy (PFS and OS). The chi-square test and the Kaplan–Meier method were used to estimate the outcomes. The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: Toxicity rates were quite low: G1/G2 (51.1%) and G3/G4 (25.5%). No toxic deaths were reported. The median PFS was 6.21 months and the median OS 11 months. The G8 score and PS ECOG significantly influenced both PFS and OS. A statistically significant correlation among G8, weight loss, hypoalbuminemia and risk of G3/G4 adverse events was also found. Conclusion: Our research on selected elderly patients did not detect broad differences of efficacy and tolerability compared to a young population. Our study, although retrospective and small-sized, showed that G8 score might be an accurate tool to identify elderly GC/GEC patients who could be safely treated with CT, further recognizing patients who could receive a doublet CT and who may require a single agent chemotherapy or a baseline dose reduction.

589. HOW COULD PATIENTS SUPPORT SURGEONS? ANALYSIS OF PATIENT'S SKILLS BEFORE AND AFTER OESOPHAGOGASTRIC SURGERY AND IMPACT ON QUALITY OF LIFE

Abstract The role of hospital case volume and surgeon expertise in improving results after esophagectomy is well known. However, health-professionals expertise and hospital volume are not enough. Prehabilitation trials outlined that patient involvement is mandatory to improve adherence to therapeutic programs. This study aims to identify what are patient’s modalities of dealing with postoperative course, supporting surgical outcomes with a psychological intervention and to evaluate his effect in the medium-term postoperative period. Literature analysis was conducted to identify specific patient’s skills supporting the postoperative course. Sixteen peculiar dimensions were identified, considering four patients skills applied to clinical, daily activities, family and work areas. Patients textual data were collected by a sixteen-questions interview. Methodology for the Analysis of Computerized Text Data was used to identify discursive repertoires used by esophageal cancer patients. These textual data let construct a closed-ended questionnaire used to assess patient’s skills in the early postoperative course. A psychological intervention aimed at enhancing competencies was conducted. Skills were re-assessed and quality of life (QOL) data were collected 9-months after intervention. In this study 28 consecutive gastroesophageal cancer patients were enrolled within a larger group of patients undergone major surgery for gastrointestinal tumours. Low/medium/high levels were detected for each of the four skills. Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed that three of the four skills levels increased after the supportive intervention. Analysis revealed no differences in relation to diagnosis, oncological treatment and demographic variables. Compared to other patients, skills levels showed no differences in gastroesophageal patients. Furthermore, quality of life at 9-months after esophagectomy was comparable to date reported in current literature in the medium-long term period after surgery for digestive tract cancer. In these preliminary data, even with poorer prognosis, gastroesophageal patients deal with major surgery side effects using the same skills levels used by other gastrointestinal cancer patients. Results show that skills evaluation during hospital stay can reveal the lacking modalities of dealing with the postoperative problems due to patients’ wrong beliefs about surgical results and physical recovery. When aimed at improving surgical outcomes and based on surgeon’s indications, even patients can support surgical outcomes.

Immunotherapy for Gastroesophageal Tumors: Is there still Hope for Efficacy?

Immunotherapy represents one of the biggest breakthroughs of the 21st century and redefined modern cancer treatment. Despite this new approach changing the treatment paradigm in various cancer entities, including lung and head-and-neck cancer, the efficacy of these treatment regimens varies in different patient subgroups, and so far, these treatment regimens have failed to meet the high expectations of gastroesophageal cancer patients. This review discusses new treatment approaches concerning immunotherapy in gastroesophageal cancer patients and sheds some light on ongoing trials and new treatment combinations.