Catheter-guided anvil insertion for circular stapler esophagojejunal anastomosis: a novel technique in laparoscopic total gastrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates feasibility, safety, and short-term outcomes of employing the catheter-guided stapler anvil insertion technique for esophagojejunal anastomosis using a circular stapler during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From September 2021 to April 2023, the catheter-guided stapler anvil insertion technique was employed in 80 patients undergoing laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for esophagojejunal anastomosis. A modified D2 dissection, according to the en bloc technique, was performed in the patients. Subsequently, a longitudinal incision, approximately 2 cm in length, was made on the anterior wall of the esophagus, about 2 cm above the tumor. The transection line was pre-marked with blue dye along the esophagus's minor axis, and the tail of the anvil was capped with a 10-cm length of catheter (F14 d4.7 mm). The surgeon secures the head of anvil and carefully inserts it into the esophagus, ensuring that only a 5-cm segment of the catheter remains outside the esophagus. A linear cutter was employed to transect and seal the lower end of the esophagus. Subsequently, esophagojejunostomy was performed under laparoscopic guidance using a circular stapler. RESULTS: Among patients undergoing esophagojejunal anastomosis with the new technique, postoperative complications included pneumonia or pleural effusion in 14 patients (17.5%), anastomotic stenosis in 3 patients (3.75%), abdominal infection in 2 patients (2.5%), and intestinal obstruction in 1 patient (1.25%). No instances of anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, or deaths were recorded. All patients experiencing complications improved with conservative treatment, without the need for secondary surgery. CONCLUSION: The catheter-guided stapler anvil insertion technique is demonstrated to be a safe and effective method for esophagojejunostomy, potentially reducing the occurrence of anastomotic leakage.

Genomic and immune microenvironment features influencing chemoimmunotherapy response in gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC) exhibit poor prognosis. Chemoimmunotherapy offers promising clinical benefits; however, its efficacy and predictive biomarkers in a conversion therapy setting remain unclear. The authors aimed to retrospectively evaluate chemoimmunotherapy efficacy in a conversion therapy setting for GC patients with PM and establish a prediction model for assessing clinical benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of clinical outcomes encompassed 55 GC patients with PM who underwent chemoimmunotherapy in a conversion therapy setting. Baseline PM specimens were collected for genomic and transcriptomic profiling. Clinicopathological factors, gene signatures, and tumor immune microenvironment were evaluated to identify predictive markers and develop a prediction model. RESULTS: Chemoimmunotherapy achieved a 41.8% objective response rate and 72.4% R0 resection rate in GC patients with PM. Patients with conversion surgery showed better overall survival (OS) than those without the surgery (median OS: not reached vs 7.82 m, P <0.0001). Responders to chemoimmunotherapy showed higher ERBB2 and ERBB3 mutation frequencies, CTLA4 and HLA-DQB1 expression, and CD8+ T cell infiltration, but lower CDH1 mutation and naïve CD4+ T cell infiltration, compared to nonresponders. A prediction model was established integrating CDH1 and ERBB3 mutations, HLA-DQB1 expression, and naïve CD4+ T cell infiltration (AUC=0.918), which were further tested using an independent external cohort (AUC=0.785). CONCLUSION: This exploratory study comprehensively evaluated clinicopathological, genomic, and immune features and developed a novel prediction model, providing a rational basis for the selection of GC patients with PM for chemoimmunotherapy-involved conversion therapy.

SOX combined with sintilimab versus SOX alone in the perioperative management of locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of SOX combined with a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor compared with SOX alone in the perioperative management of locally advanced gastric cancer and to explore biomarkers that may predict response to anti-PD-1 therapy. METHODS: Data of patients with clinical stage T3-4aN0-3M0 (IIb-III) gastric cancer were reviewed to create a primary database. Patients treated with perioperative SOX combined with sintilimab were included in Group A, while those treated with SOX alone were included in Group B. After one-to-one propensity score matching, pathological response and short-term survival outcomes were compared between the two groups. In addition, potential efficacy-related biomarkers were analyzed. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2022, a total of 150 patients were included in the analysis, with 75 patients in each group. The rates of pathological complete response (21.3% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.001) and major pathological response (45.3% vs. 22.7%; P = 0.003) in Group A were statistically higher than those in Group B. There was no significant difference in 1-year overall survival (92.8% vs. 92.0%; P = 0.392) and disease-free survival (88.9% vs. 88.0%; P = 0.357) between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of Group A showed that the pathological complete response (40.6% vs. 8.6%; P = 0.002) and major pathological response (65.6% vs. 28.6%; P = 0.002) rates were significantly higher in programmed death ligand-1-positive patients with a combined positive score of ≥ 5. A pathological complete response was achieved in 42.9% patients (3/7) with mismatch repair deficiency. For the two patients confirmed as Epstein-Barr virus-positive, one patient achieved a pathological complete response and the other achieved a major pathological response. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of SOX combined with a PD-1 inhibitor may improve the pathological response rate of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, especially those with programmed death ligand-1 combined positive score ≥ 5, Epstein-Barr virus-positivity and mismatch repair deficiency. However, further prospective studies are still warranted to confirm the long-term survival benefit.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) plus systemic chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy alone in locally advanced gastric cancer after D2 radical resection: a randomized-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is a lack of an effective strategy for the prevention of peritoneal metastasis (PM) from locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This randomized-controlled study aimed to evaluate the outcome of D2 radical resection with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) plus systemic chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy alone in locally AGC patients. METHODS: All enrolled patients were randomly assigned to receive HIPEC plus systemic chemotherapy (HIPEC group) or systemic chemotherapy alone (non-HIPEC group) after radical gastrectomy. HIPEC was performed intraperitoneally with cisplatin (40 mg/m2) within 72 h after surgery, while systemic chemotherapy based on the SOX regimen (S-1 combined with oxaliplatin) was administered 4-6 weeks after radical surgery. Patterns of recurrence, adverse events, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were enrolled in the present study. The 3-year DFS rate was 73.8% in the HIPEC group, which was significantly higher than that in the non-HIPEC group (61.2%, P = 0.031). The 3-year OS rate was 73.9% in the HIPEC group and 77.6% in the non-HIPEC group, with no significant difference (P = 0.737). PM was the most common distant metastasis in both groups. The occurrence rate of PM in the HIPEC group was statistically lower than that in the non-HIPEC group (20.9% vs. 40.3%, P = 0.015). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 19 (14.2%) patients, and there was no significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Radical surgery followed by HIPEC combined with systemic chemotherapy is a safe and feasible strategy for locally AGC patients and could effectively improve DFS and reduce the occurrence of PM. However, more prospective randomized studies with a large sample size are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with www.medresman.org.cn as ChiCTR2200055966 on 10/12/2016.

Efficacy of chemotherapy combined with surgical resection for gastric cancer with synchronous ovarian metastasis: A propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian metastasis from gastric cancer (GC) is characterized by aggressive biological behavior and poor outcome. Currently, there is no standard treatment mode for such patients. Thus, we evaluated the efficacy of conversion therapy in patients with synchronous ovarian metastasis from GC in this study. METHODS: About 219 GC patients with ovarian metastasis in 2011-2020 were enrolled. Two groups were established based on the different treatment: the conversion therapy group (chemotherapy combined with surgical resection, CS group) and the non-conversion therapy group (NCS group). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to analyze the efficacy of different treatment modes on the prognosis of these patients. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were included according to PSM results, with 46 patients each in CS and NCS groups. The median overall survival (OS) in the CS group was notably better than that in the NCS group (p < 0.001). Twenty-six patients (56.52%) in the CS group achieved R0 resection, and they had a better prognosis (p = 0.003). Compared with patients who underwent simultaneous gastrectomy and ovarian metastasectomy (CSb group), those who underwent ovarian metastasectomy before systemic chemotherapy (CSa group) had a higher R0 resection rate (p = 0.016) and longer survival time (p = 0.002). A total of 38 patients (41.30%) across both groups received hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and these patients had a better survival (p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: The conversion therapy is safe and effective for patients with synchronous ovarian metastasis from GC and can improve their prognosis. However, our results need to be confirmed by more randomized controlled clinical studies.

Prediction of Peritoneal Cancer Index and Prognosis in Peritoneal Metastasis of Gastric Cancer Using NLR-PLR-DDI Score: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The peritoneal cancer index (PCI) is used to evaluate the peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. A higher value indicates more widespread and/or larger tumors in the peritoneal cavity. The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) are representative blood markers of systemic inflammatory responses, and D-dimer (DDI) is the final stable product of fibrin. This study explores the association of NLR, PLR, and DDI with PCI and assesses the clinical utility of a new blood score combining the NLR, PLR, and DDI (NPD score) for PCI and the prognosis prediction of gastric cancer. METHODS: This was a single-center, nonrandomized, retrospective, cohort study. We evaluated the risk factors for high PCI (≥15) using univariate and multivariate analyses. According to the findings of the ROC analysis, we determined the cut-off values of NLR, PLR and DDI and created the NPD score. The patients were grouped into high-risk and low-risk groups based on their NPD score (<2 and ≥2, respectively). RESULTS: Univariate and multivariate analysis demonstrated that the NLR, PLR, and DDI were independent risk factors for high PCI (P < 0.05). The NPD score of the high-risk group was ≥2, and the NPD score of the low-risk group was <2. The median survival time was 14.2 in the high-risk group and 25.6 in the low-risk group. The NPD score was significantly higher in the high-PCI group than that in the low-PCI group. The survival of the high-risk group was significantly worse than that of the low-risk group (P = 0.003). NPD score decrease was an independent predictive factor for PCI decrease. CONCLUSION: NLR, PLR, and DDI are potential independent risk factors for high PCI in patients with peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. The NPD scoring system can help in predicting PCI and the prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer.

Neoadjuvant systemic and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy combined with cytoreductive surgery for gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal metastasis: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is no currently available treatment for peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. This phase II study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) combined with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for the treatment of these patients. METHODS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy comprised two cycles of HIPEC and four cycles of S-1 plus paclitaxel. HIPEC was administered intraperitoneally with paclitaxel (75 mg/m2). For systemic chemotherapy, paclitaxel was administered intravenously(150 mg/m2) on day 1, and S-1 was administered orally(80 mg/m2/day)on days 1-14 of a 3-week cycle. Another two cycles of HIPEC and four cycles of S-1 plus paclitaxel were administered after second diagnostic staging laparoscopy or CRS. The primary endpoints were treatment efficiency and safety; the secondary endpoint was 3-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled and 38 patients have been analyzed. Of these, 18 (47.4%) patients received neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy, HIPEC and CRS (conversion therapy group), while 20 patients received only chemotherapy and HIPEC (palliative chemotherapy group). Median OS was markedly improved in the conversion therapy group (21.1 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.7-25.6 months) in comparison with the palliative chemotherapy group(10.8 months, 95%CI 7.3-14.2 months, p = 0.002). After neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy and HIPEC, a second laparoscopic exploration was performed, and the prognosis of patients with low peritoneal cancer index (PCI) (PCI < 6) was significantly better than that of patients with high PCI (PCI ≥ 6)(20.1 vs.11.3 months, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy and HIPEC combined with CRS is safe and feasible, and could potentially improve the prognosis of gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal metastasis. However, further clinical trials are still warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02549911 . Trial registration date: 15/09/2015.

Treatment of Synchronous Liver Metastases from Gastric Cancer: A Single-Center Study.

OBJECTIVE: The therapeutic effects of surgical resection in gastric cancer with liver metastasis remain largely unclear. We sought to examine surgical resection combined with chemotherapy for survival benefit in cases of synchronous liver metastases from gastric cancer (LMGC), and to identify factors affecting patient prognosis. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with synchronous LMGC between January 2010 and December 2015 were enrolled in this study. The effects of gastrectomy and metastasectomy combined with chemotherapy (surgical resection group) and palliative chemotherapy (palliative chemotherapy group) on survival were comparatively assessed. RESULTS: Of the 132 included cases, 57 (43.2%) and 75 (56.8%) were treated with surgical resection/chemotherapy and palliative chemotherapy, respectively. Overall survival (OS) was markedly prolonged in the surgical resection group compared with the palliative chemotherapy group (33.6 vs 12.4 months, P<0.001). In patients who underwent surgical resection, R0 resection resulted in prolonged OS in comparison with the non-R0 resection subgroup (45.1 vs 13.5 months, P<0.001). Surgical resection (hazard ratio [HR]=0.453; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.276-0.813; P=0.009) and solitary liver metastasis (HR=0.540; 95% CI 0.315-0.796; P =0.043) were independent predictors of OS. CONCLUSION: Patients with synchronous LMGC might benefit from radical surgical resection combined with appropriate chemotherapy. Additional well-designed prospective studies are required to verify the above findings.