Brain metastases in patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer is associated with proximally located adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases.

BACKGROUND: As cancer patients are surviving longer, more patients manifest brain metastases (BRMs). However, the rate of BRMs from upper gastrointestinal cancer is unclear. We therefore evaluated the frequency and prognostic effect of BRMs in this setting. METHODS: We analyzed records of 2348 patients who were treated between January 2002 and December 2016 for upper gastrointestinal cancer, including esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (EAC; proximal EAC, Siewert types I and II), esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC; Siewert type III and stomach cancer) in our Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Database. Frequency, risk factors, and survival after BRMs were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 2348 patients, 68 (2.9%) had BRMs upon follow-up. The BRM rates were as follows: proximal EAC, 4.8%; Siewert type I, 5.9%; Siewert type II, 2.2%; Siewert type III, 0.7%; ESCC: 1.2%; and stomach cancer, 0%. Among EAC patients, Siewert type I and lymph node metastases were independent the risk factors for BRMs in the multivariable analysis. The median overall survival (OS) in the 68 patients with BRMs was only 1.16 years (95% CI 0.78-1.61). However, OS for patients who had a solitary BRM, who had BRM but no other distant metastasis, or who underwent surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery favorable. CONCLUSION: Patients with proximally located adenocarcinoma, or with lymph node metastases are at a higher risk for BRMs and patients fare better after treatment of isolated BRM.

Low metabolic activity in primary gastric adenocarcinoma is associated with resistance to chemoradiation and the presence of signet ring cells.

PURPOSES: Preoperative chemoradiation is a potential treatment option for localized gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC). Currently, the response to chemoradiation cannot be predicted. We analyzed the pretreatment maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) on positron emission tomography/computed tomography as potential predictors of the response to chemoradiation. METHODS: We analyzed the SUVmax and TLG data from 59 GAC patients who received preoperative chemoradiation. We used logistic regression models to predict a pathologic complete response (pCR) and Kaplan-Meier curves to determine overall survival among patients with high and low SUVmax or TLG. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (49%) had Siewert type III adenocarcinoma and 30 (51%) had tumors located in the lower stomach. Forty-one patients had poorly differentiated GAC, and 26 had signet ring cells. The median SUVmax was 7.3 (0-28.2) and the median TLG was 56.6 (0-1881.5). Patients with signet ring cells had a low pCR rate, as well as a low SUVmax and TLG. In the multivariable logistic regression model, high SUVmax was a predictor of pCR (odds ratio = 11.1, 95% confidence interval = 2.12-50.0, p = 0.004). Overall survival was not associated with the SUVmax (log-rank p = 0.69) or TLG (log-rank p = 0.85) CONCLUSION: A high SUVmax was associated with sensitivity to chemoradiation and pCR in GAC, and signet ring cells seemed to confer resistance.

Recurrence Risk Stratification After Preoperative Chemoradiation of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To discern recurrence risk stratification and investigate its influence on postoperative surveillance in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). BACKGROUND: Reports documenting recurrence risk stratification in EAC after neoadjuvant CRT are scarce. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2014, 601 patients with EAC who underwent neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy were included for analysis. The pattern, site, timing, and frequency of the first recurrence and potential prognostic factors for developing recurrences were analyzed. This cohort was used as the training set to propose a recurrence risk stratification system, and the stratification was further validated in another cohort of 172 patients. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients (25.0%) achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant CRT and the rest were defined as the non-pCR group (n = 451) in the training cohort. After a median follow-up of 63.6 months, the pCR group demonstrated a significantly lower locoregional (4.7% vs 19.1%) and distant recurrence rate (22.0% vs.44.6%) than the non-pCR group (P < 0.001). Based on independent prognostic factors, patients were stratified into 4 recurrence risk categories: pCR with clinical stage I/II, pCR with clinical stage III, non-pCR with pN0, and non-pCR with pN+, with corresponding 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of 88.7%, 65.8%, 55.3%, and 33.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). The risk stratification was reproducible in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: We proposed a recurrence risk stratification system for EAC patients based on pathologic response and pretreatment clinical stage. Risk-based postoperative surveillance strategies could be developed for different risk categories.