Real life experience of patients with locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a Turkish oncology group study.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and gastric cancer (GC) was shown to improve survival in recent studies. We aimed to share our real-life experience of patients who received NACT to compare the efficacy and toxicity profile of different chemotherapy regimens in our country. This retrospective multicentre study included locally advanced GC and GEJ cancer patients who received NACT between 2007 and 2021. Relation between CT regimens and pathological evaluation were analysed. A total of 794 patients from 45 oncology centers in Turkey were included. Median age at the time of diagnosis was 60 (range: 18-86). Most frequent NACT regimens used were FLOT (65.4%), DCF (17.4%) and ECF (8.1%), respectively. In the total study group, pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 7.2%, R0 resection rate 86.4%, and D2 dissection rate was 66.8%. Rate of pCR and near-CR (24%), and R0 resection (84%) were numerically higher in FLOT arm (p > 0.05). Patients who received FLOT had also higher chemotherapy-related toxicity rate compared to patients who received other regimens (p > 0.05). Median follow-up time was 16 months (range: 1-154 months). Estimated median overall survival (OS) was 58.4months (95% CI: 35.2-85.7) and disease-free survival (DFS) was 50.7 months (95% CI: 25.4-75.9). The highest 3-year estimated OS rate was also shown in FLOT arm (68%). We still do not know which NACT regimen is the best choice for daily practice.  Clinicians should tailor treatment regimens according to patients' multifactorial status and comorbidities for to obtain best outcomes. Longer follow-up period needs to validate our results.

Efficacy analyses of axitinib and nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma after failure of targeted therapy: which is better?

PURPOSE: The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of axitinib and nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) previously treated with targeted therapy. METHODS: A total of 79 patients were enrolled (39 patients in axitinib group, 40 patients in nivolumab group). Survival outcomes of patients, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. The associations between potential prognostic variables and OS were evaluated in univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: The median PFS and OS of all cohort were 8.1 and 36.6 months, respectively. Higher PFS and OS were evaluated in axitinib group than nivolumab group (PFS: 9.4 months vs 6.3 months, p=0.386; OS: 38.2 months vs 36.6 months, p=0.671, respectively). Patients treated with axitinib had numerically higher objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) than those treated with nivolumab (ORR: 43.6% vs 27.6%, p=0.157, DCR: 74.4% vs 62.5%, p=0.157, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that the independent predictors of OS were higher tumor grade (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.178, p=0.004), worse response to axitinib and nivolumab (HR:4.902, p=0.011), the presence of lung metastasis (HR:15.637, p=0.002) and the presence of liver metastasis (HR:12.010, p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Comparable survival outcomes were detected in the axitinib and nivolumab groups. However, head to head comparisons are needed to highlight the relative efficacy of these therapies in mRCC.