Addition of ramucirumab or merestinib to standard first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers are aggressive, rare, gastrointestinal malignancies with a poor prognosis; approximately half of patients with these cancers survive for less than 1 year after diagnosis with advanced disease. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab or merestinib in addition to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study at 81 hospitals across 18 countries. We enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, non-resectable, recurrent, or metastatic biliary tract adenocarcinoma, who were treatment-naive, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, estimated life expectancy of 3 months or more, and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1) to receive either intravenous ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles) or oral merestinib 80 mg or placebo (once daily) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient or investigator request for discontinuation. All participants received intravenous cisplatin 25 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles), for a maximum of eight cycles. Randomisation was done by an interactive web response system using a permuted block method (blocks of six) and was stratified by primary tumour site, geographical region, and presence of metastatic disease. Participants, investigators, and the study funder were masked to treatment assignment within the intravenous and oral groups. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (in the intention-to-treat population). The safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02711553, and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2016, and Aug 8, 2017, 450 patients were assessed for eligibility and 309 (69%) were enrolled and randomly assigned to ramucirumab (n=106), merestinib (n=102), or pooled placebo (n=101); 306 received at least one dose of study treatment. The median follow-up time for progression-free survival at data cutoff (Feb 16, 2018) was 10·9 months (IQR 8·1-14·1). Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (80% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ramucirumab group, 7·0 months (6·2-7·1) in the merestinib group, and 6·6 months (5·6-6·8) in the pooled placebo group (ramucirumab vs placebo hazard ratio 1·12 [80% CI 0·90-1·40], two-sided stratified p=0·48; merestinib vs placebo 0·92 [0·73-1·15], two-sided stratified p=0·64). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (51 [49%] of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group; 48 [47%] of 102 in the merestinib group; and 33 [33%] of 100 in the pooled placebo group), thrombocytopenia (36 [35%]; 19 [19%]; and 17 [17%]), and anaemia (28 [27%]; 16 [16%]; and 19 [19%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 53 (51%) patients in the ramucirumab group, 56 (55%) in the merestinib group, and 48 (48%) in the pooled placebo group. Treatment-related deaths (deemed related by the investigator) occurred in one (1%) of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group (cardiac arrest) and two (2%) of 102 patients in the merestinib group (pulmonary embolism [n=1] and sepsis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Adding ramucirumab or merestinib to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine was well tolerated, with no new safety signals, but neither improved progression-free survival in patients with molecularly unselected, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. The role of these targeted inhibitors remains investigational, highlighting the need for further understanding of biliary tract malignancies and the contribution of molecular selection. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Highlights from ASCO-GI 2021 from EORTC Gastrointestinal tract cancer group.

Last year the field of immunotherapy was finally introduced to GI oncology, with several changes in clinical practice such as advanced hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic colorectal MSI-H. At the virtual ASCO-GI symposium 2021, several large trial results have been reported, some leading to a change of practice. Furthermore, during ASCO-GI 2021, results from early phase trials have been presented, some with potential important implications for future treatments. We provide here an overview of these important results and their integration into routine clinical practice.

A phase 1a/1b trial of CSF-1R inhibitor LY3022855 in combination with durvalumab or tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Background LY3022855 is a recombinant, immunoglobulin, human monoclonal antibody targeting the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor. This phase 1 trial determined the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of LY3022855 in combination with durvalumab or tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid cancers who had received standard anti-cancer treatments. Methods In Part A (dose-escalation), patients received intravenous (IV) LY3022855 25/50/75/100 mg once weekly (QW) combined with durvalumab 750 mg once every two weeks (Q2W) IV or LY3022855 50 or 100 mg QW IV with tremelimumab 75/225/750 mg once every four weeks. In Part B (dose-expansion), patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or ovarian cancer (OC) received recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of LY3022855 from Part A and durvalumab 750 mg Q2W. Results Seventy-two patients were enrolled (median age 61 years): Part A = 33, Part B = 39. In Part A, maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and LY3022855 100 mg QW and durvalumab 750 mg Q2W was the RP2D. Four dose-limiting equivalent toxicities occurred in two patients from OC cohort. In Part A, maximum concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and serum concentration showed dose-dependent increase over two cycles of therapy. Overall rates of complete response, partial response, and disease control were 1.4%, 2.8%, and 33.3%. Treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies were observed in 21.2% of patients. Conclusions LY3022855 combined with durvalumab or tremelimumab in patients with advanced NSCLC or OC had limited clinical activity, was well tolerated. The RP2D was LY3022855 100 mg QW with durvalumab 750 mg Q2W. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02718911 (Registration Date: May 3, 2011).

Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma Modified by PET/CT: Results of Virtual Planning Study.

Background and Objectives: The treatment of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma consists of either perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Radiotherapy (RT) in the neoadjuvant setting is associated with a higher probability of resections with negative margins (R0) and better tumor regression rate, which might be enhanced by incrementing RT dose with potential impact on treatment results. This virtual planning study demonstrates the feasibility of increasing the dose to GEJ tumor and involved nodes using PET/CT imaging. Materials and Methods: 16 patients from the chemoradiotherapy arm of the phase II GastroPET study were treated by a prescribed dose of 45.0 Gray (Gy) in 25 fractions. PET/CT was performed before treatment. The prescribed dose was virtually boosted on PET/CT-positive areas to 54.0 Gy by 9 Gy in 5 fractions. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) were compared, and normal tissue complication (NTCP) modeling was performed for both dose schedules. Results: DVHs were exceeded in mean heart dose in one case for 45.0 Gy and two cases for 54.0 Gy, peritoneal space volume criterion V45Gy < 195 ccm in three cases for 54.0 Gy and V15Gy < 825 ccm in one case for both dose schedules. The left lung volume of 25 Gy isodose exceeded 10% in most cases for both schedules. The NTCP values for the heart, spine, liver, kidneys and intestines were zero for both schemes. An increase in NTCP value was for lungs (median 3.15% vs. 4.05% for 25 × 1.8 Gy and 25 + 5 × 1.8 Gy, respectively, p = 0.013) and peritoneal space (median values for 25 × 1.8 Gy and 25 + 5 × 1.8 Gy were 3.3% and 14.25%, respectively, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Boosting PET/CT-positive areas in RT of GEJ tumors is feasible, but prospective trials are needed.

Circulating T cell subsets are associated with clinical outcome of anti-VEGF-based 1st-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients: a prospective study with focus on primary tumor sidedness.

BACKGROUND: In a prospective study with long-term follow-up, we analyzed circulating T cell subsets in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the context of primary tumor sidedness, KRAS status, and clinical outcome. Our primary goal was to investigate whether baseline levels of circulating T cell subsets serve as a potential biomarker of clinical outcome of mCRC patients treated with an anti-VEGF-based regimen. METHODS: The study group consisted of 36 patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma who started first-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab for metastatic disease. We quantified T cell subsets including Tregs and CD8+ T cells in the peripheral blood prior to therapy initiation. Clinical outcome was evaluated as progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: 1) mCRC patients with KRAS wt tumors had higher proportions of circulating CD8+ cytotoxic T cells among all T cells but also higher measures of T regulatory (Treg) cells such as absolute count and a higher proportion of Tregs in the CD4+ subset. 2) A low proportion of circulating Tregs among CD4+ cells, and a high CD8:Treg ratio at initiation of VEGF-targeting therapy, were associated with favorable clinical outcome. 3) In a subset of patients with primarily right-sided mCRC, superior PFS and OS were observed when the CD8:Treg ratio was high. CONCLUSIONS: The baseline level of circulating immune cells predicts clinical outcome of 1st-line treatment with the anti-VEGF angio/immunomodulatory agent bevacizumab. Circulating immune biomarkers, namely the CD8:Treg ratio, identified patients in the right-sided mCRC subgroup with favorable outcome following treatment with 1st-line anti-VEGF treatment.

Phase I study of orally administered S-1 in combination with epirubicin and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors and chemotherapy-naïve advanced or metastatic esophagogastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase I study investigated the safety and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 when combined with epirubicin and oxaliplatin (EOS). METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with advanced or metastatic solid tumors were enrolled in a 3 + 3 design with S-1 dose escalation (two planned cohorts) performed according to the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). On day 1 of each 21-day cycle, patients received epirubicin 50 mg/m2 followed by oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 (maximum 8 cycles) and then S-1 [20 mg/m2 (cohort 1) or 25 mg/m2 (cohort 2), twice daily]: first dose, evening of day 1; subsequent administration on days 2-14, twice daily; last dose, morning of day 15 (unlimited number of S-1 cycles). After protocol amendment, enrollment in a third cohort was restricted to patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced or metastatic esophagogastric cancer. RESULTS: DLT was reported for two of the five patients in cohort 2, defining 20 mg/m2 twice daily as the MTD of S-1 combined with epirubicin and oxaliplatin in heavily pretreated patients. Thirteen patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced or metastatic esophagogastric cancer were subsequently enrolled and treated at an S-1 dose level of 25 mg/m2 twice daily; no DLTs were reported; median overall survival was 13.1 months. Of the 11 evaluable patients, three (27 %) had partial responses and seven (64 %) had stable disease. The safety profile was in line with expectations. CONCLUSIONS: The promising activity of EOS (S-1 dose level, 25 mg/m2 twice daily) and acceptable safety profile support further clinical development of this combination for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic esophagogastric cancer.

Insights into next developments in advanced gastric cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of the review is to delineate novel approaches for biology-based treatment in advanced gastric cancer. We reviewed the latest translational and clinical research articles and congress presentations. RECENT FINDINGS: A new molecular classification of gastric cancer based on histology, genetic and proteomic alterations has evolved. It provides a roadmap for development of new drugs and combinations and for patient stratification. Anti-HER2 treatment, which is an effective strategy in metastatic gastric cancer, is now also being studied in the perioperative setting. However, resistance mechanisms in advanced disease are poorly understood and optimal patient selection remains challenging. Targeting angiogenesis is an emerging concept in the management of advanced gastric cancer, and ramucirumab has prolonged survival in the second line either as a monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel. Biomarkers for selecting patients who benefit from ramucirumab are still lacking. Immune checkpoint blockade and inhibition of cancer stemness targets are other emerging directions for the medical treatment of gastric cancer. Large-scale international studies are ongoing. SUMMARY: Promising biology-based treatment strategies are evolving. But tumor heterogeneity which is an inherent feature of gastric cancer challenges the development of molecularly targeted and personalized treatment strategies.

Safety and activity of alisertib, an investigational aurora kinase A inhibitor, in patients with breast cancer, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a five-arm phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Alisertib is an investigational, oral, selective inhibitor of aurora kinase A. We aimed to investigate the safety and activity of single-agent alisertib in patients with predefined types of advanced solid tumours. METHODS: We did a multicentre phase 1/2 study at 40 centres in four countries (Czech Republic, France, Poland, and the USA). Here, we report results from phase 2; enrolment for the study began on Feb 16, 2010, and ended on May 3, 2013. Adult patients were eligible for the study if they had either breast cancer, small-cell lung cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma that had relapsed or was refractory to chemotherapy. Patients had to have undergone two or fewer previous cytotoxic regimens (four or fewer for breast cancer patients), not including adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatments. Enrolment followed a two-stage design: to proceed to the second stage, two or more objective responses were needed in the first 20 response-assessable patients in each of the five tumour cohorts. Alisertib was administered orally in 21-day cycles at the recommended phase 2 dose of 50 mg twice daily for 7 days followed by a break of 14 days. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response, assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the response-assessable population (ie, patients with measurable disease who received at least one dose of alisertib and had undergone at least one post-baseline tumour assessment). This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01045421. FINDINGS: By May 31, 2013, 249 patients had been treated, 53 with breast cancer, 60 with small-cell lung cancer, 26 with non-small-cell lung cancer, 55 with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and 55 with gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Among response-assessable patients, an objective response was noted in nine (18%, 95% CI 9-32) of 49 women with breast cancer, ten (21%, 10-35) of 48 participants with small-cell lung cancer, one (4%, 0-22) of 23 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, four (9%, 2-21) of 45 people with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma, and four (9%, 2-20) of 47 individuals with gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma; all were partial responses. Adverse events were similar across tumour types. The most frequent drug-related grade 3-4 adverse events included neutropenia (n=107 [43%]), leukopenia (53 [21%]), and anaemia (26 [10%]). Serious drug-related adverse events were reported in 108 (43%) patients. INTERPRETATION: These data support further clinical assessment of alisertib in patients with solid tumours, particularly those with breast cancer and small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis is an important therapeutic target in colorectal carcinoma. Ramucirumab is a human IgG-1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGF receptor 2. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI (leucovorin, fluorouracil, and irinotecan) for metastatic colorectal cancer in patients with disease progression during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine. METHODS: Between Dec 14, 2010, and Aug 23, 2013, we enrolled patients into the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 RAISE trial. Eligible patients had disease progression during or within 6 months of the last dose of first-line therapy. Patients were randomised (1:1) via a centralised, interactive voice-response system to receive 8 mg/kg intravenous ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI or matching placebo plus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or death. Randomisation was stratified by region, KRAS mutation status, and time to disease progression after starting first-line treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01183780.ld FINDINGS: We enrolled 1072 patients (536 in each group). Median overall survival was 13·3 months (95% CI 12·4-14·5) for patients in the ramucirumab group versus 11·7 months (10·8-12·7) for the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·844 95% CI 0·730-0·976; log-rank p=0·0219). Survival benefit was consistent across subgroups of patients who received ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI. Grade 3 or worse adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (203 [38%] of 529 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 123 [23%] of 528 in the placebo group, with febrile neutropenia incidence of 18 [3%] vs 13 [2%]), hypertension (59 [11%] vs 15 [3%]), diarrhoea (57 [11%] vs 51 [10%]), and fatigue (61 [12%] vs 41 [8%]). INTERPRETATION: Ramucirumab plus FOLFIRI significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo plus FOLFIRI as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. No unexpected adverse events were identified and toxic effects were manageable. FUNDING: Eli Lilly.

Bevacizumab with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin versus bevacizumab with capecitabine and oxaliplatin for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: results of a large registry-based cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data from the Czech national registry were analysed retrospectively to describe treatment outcomes for capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) regimen with bevacizumab versus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen with bevacizumab in the first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: A national registry containing anonymised individual data on patients treated with targeted therapies was used as a data source. In total, 2,191 mCRC patients who received a first-line therapy with bevacizumab combined with either FOLFOX regimen (n = 1,218, 55.6%) or XELOX regimen (n = 973, 44.4%) were included in the present analysis. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in survival was observed between the two groups, with median overall survival (OS) of 27.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.6-29.5 months) and 30.6 months (95% CI 27.8-33.4 months) for FOLFOX/bevacizumab and XELOX/bevacizumab, respectively (p = 0.281). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.4 months (95% CI 10.7-12.1 months) for FOLFOX/bevacizumab and 11.5 months (95% CI 10.8-12.3 months) for XELOX/bevacizumab (p = 0.337). The number of metastatic sites was identified as the most significant predictor of PFS and, together with the presence/absence of metastatic disease at diagnosis, also for OS. CONCLUSIONS: According to this large registry-based analysis, XELOX and FOLFOX regimens have similar effectiveness for use in combination with bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of mCRC. Multiple metastatic sites and the presence of metastatic disease at diagnosis were the strongest negative predictors of OS regardless of backbone chemotherapy regimen.

European clinical practice guidelines for the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of oligometastatic esophagogastric cancer (OMEC-4).

INTRODUCTION: The OligoMetastatic Esophagogastric Cancer (OMEC) project aims to provide clinical practice guidelines for the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of esophagogastric oligometastatic disease (OMD). METHODS: Guidelines were developed according to AGREE II and GRADE principles. Guidelines were based on a systematic review (OMEC-1), clinical case discussions (OMEC-2), and a Delphi consensus study (OMEC-3) by 49 European expert centers for esophagogastric cancer. OMEC identified patients for whom the term OMD is considered or could be considered. Disease-free interval (DFI) was defined as the time between primary tumor treatment and detection of OMD. RESULTS: Moderate to high quality of evidence was found (i.e. 1 randomized and 4 non-randomized phase II trials) resulting in moderate recommendations. OMD is considered in esophagogastric cancer patients with 1 organ with ≤ 3 metastases or 1 involved extra-regional lymph node station. In addition, OMD continues to be considered in patients with OMD without progression in number of metastases after systemic therapy. 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is recommended for baseline staging and for restaging after systemic therapy when local treatment is considered. For patients with synchronous OMD or metachronous OMD and a DFI ≤ 2 years, recommended treatment consists of systemic therapy followed by restaging to assess suitability for local treatment. For patients with metachronous OMD and DFI > 2 years, upfront local treatment is additionally recommended. DISCUSSION: These multidisciplinary European clinical practice guidelines for the uniform definition, diagnosis and treatment of esophagogastric OMD can be used to standardize inclusion criteria in future clinical trials and to reduce variation in treatment.

[Vitamin D: Its physiology, pathophysiology and significance in etiopathogenesis of malignant diseases]. / Vitamin D - jeho fyziologie, patofyziologie a význam v etiopatogenezi nádorových onemocnení

Vitamin D is an endogenous product of mammalian organisms from which an active agent of a steroid hormone nature is synthesized. These hormones participate in a variety of key metabolic processes in every nuclear cell, whether on endocrine, paracrine and autocrine or subcellular level. Vitamin D represents a very interesting molecule which participates in a great deal of body processes. This review summarizes the findings about the metabolism of vitamin D focusing on pathophysiology of malignant diseases.

Early-Onset Cancer in the Gastrointestinal Tract Is on the Rise-Evidence and Implications.

Epidemiologic data indicate a significant increase in the incidence of colorectal cancer in younger populations in the past three decades. Moreover, recent evidence also demonstrates a similar trend in gastric, pancreatic, and biliary tract cancers. A majority of these early-onset cases are sporadic and lack hereditary or familial background, implying a potential key role for behavioral, lifestyle, nutritional, microbial, and environmental factors. This review explores the current data on early-onset gastrointestinal cancer, exploring the etiology, unique treatment considerations for this population, future challenges, as well as implications for research and practice. SIGNIFICANCE: The worrisome trend of an increasing incidence of early-onset gastrointestinal cancers appears to be correlated with nonhereditary etiologies in which behavioral, lifestyle, nutritional, microbial, and environmental factors, as well as host mechanisms, may play a key role. Further epidemiologic and pathogenetic research is urgently needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms and to develop preventive strategies and tailored early detection. Young patients with gastrointestinal cancer face unique challenges and unmet needs. These must be addressed in the future management of the disease to minimize treatment-related somatic morbidity and prevent psychosocial sequelae.

Definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer: A Delphi consensus study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Local treatment improves the outcomes for oligometastatic disease (OMD, i.e. an intermediate state between locoregional and widespread disseminated disease). However, consensus about the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: In total, 65 specialists in the multidisciplinary treatment for oesophagogastric cancer from 49 expert centres across 16 European countries were requested to participate in this Delphi study. The consensus finding process consisted of a starting meeting, 2 online Delphi questionnaire rounds and an online consensus meeting. Input for Delphi questionnaires consisted of (1) a systematic review on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer and (2) a discussion of real-life clinical cases by multidisciplinary teams. Experts were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. The agreement was scored to be either absent/poor (<50%), fair (50%-75%) or consensus (≥75%). RESULTS: A total of 48 experts participated in the starting meeting, both Delphi rounds, and the consensus meeting (overall response rate: 71%). OMD was considered in patients with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer limited to 1 organ with ≤3 metastases or 1 extra-regional lymph node station (consensus). In addition, OMD was considered in patients without progression at restaging after systemic therapy (consensus). For patients with synchronous or metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval ≤2 years, systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment was considered as treatment (consensus). For metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval >2 years, either upfront local treatment or systemic treatment followed by restaging was considered as treatment (fair agreement). CONCLUSION: The OMEC project has resulted in a multidisciplinary European consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer. This can be used to standardise inclusion criteria for future clinical trials.

Recent progress and current challenges of immunotherapy in advanced/metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

The new era of immunotherapy is successfully implemented in the treatment of metastatic/locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (EGAC), as it has been investigated in combinations with/without chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (Her2)-positive and Her2-negative tumors. Recent approvals of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) enrich the therapeutic landscape in nearly every therapeutic line. Based on CHECKMATE-649, the combination of nivolumab and chemotherapy in first-line therapy of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-L1)-positive patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC), esophageal cancer (EC), and gastric cancer (GC) was approved in Europe for PD-L1 combined positivity score (CPS) ≥ 5 patients and independently from PD-L1 score in the USA and Asia. Based on KEYNOTE-590, patients with advanced GEJC and EC qualify for the combination of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in Europe (CPS ≥ 10) and the USA. For Her2-positive patients, trastuzumab with first-line chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab has beneficial response rates and resulted in approval in the USA (KEYNOTE-811). In third-line therapy, superior overall survival (OS) was achieved by the administration of nivolumab (approval in Japan, ATTRACTION-02), and pembrolizumab shows a positive effect on the duration of response (KEYNOTE-059). Questions of resistance to immunotherapy or the role of gender in response to ICI need to be clarified. This review provides an overview of the current approvals of ICI in advanced EGAC and reflects results of relevant phase II/III trials with focus on possible biomarkers, including PD-L1 CPS and microsatellite-instability (MSI) status.

Highlights from the 2022 ASCO gastrointestinal cancer symposium: An overview by the EORTC gastrointestinal tract cancer group.

Recently, we have witnessed impressive diagnostic and therapeutic changes for gastrointestinal cancer patients. New challenges brought by the COVID-19 pandemic have led us to re-evaluate our work priorities. Thanks to the commendable resilience of both investigators and patients, however, clinical research never stopped. In addition to conducting cutting-edge research and serving patients' needs, as EORTC Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Group, we are committed to pursuing educational initiatives beneficial to the entire European oncology community and beyond. In this regard, we have been providing critical discussions of new data from major international meetings. In this article, we discuss results of important selected studies presented at the 2022 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancer Symposium, putting them in perspectives and highlighting potential implications for routine practice. With the number of in-person attendees and practice-changing/informing trials presented, this meeting represented a milestone in the return to normality as well as in the fight against cancer.

European-Australasian consensus on the management of advanced gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer: current practice and new directions.

Gastric carcinoma and gastro-oesophageal junction (GC/GEJ) carcinoma remain a significant global problem, with patients presenting with symptoms often found to have advanced or metastatic disease. Treatment options for these patients have broadened in recent years with new chemotherapy agents, agents targeting angiogenic pathways and the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Most initial advances have occurred in the refractory setting, where it is important to balance treatment benefits versus toxicity and patient quality of life. In the first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic GC/GEJ, platinum- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy protocols remain the backbone of therapy (with or without HER2-targeted therapy), with the FOLFIRI regimen offering an alternative in patients deemed unsuitable for a platinum agent. Microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient cancers have been shown to benefit most from ICIs. In unselected patients previously treated with doublet or triplet platinum- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy and second-line chemotherapy with irinotecan or taxanes have formed the backbone of therapy with or without the addition of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 inhibitor ramucirumab in addition to paclitaxel. Beyond this, efficacy has been demonstrated with oral trifluridine/tipiracil and with single-agent nivolumab, in selected refractory patients. In this review, we highlight the positive evidence from key trials that have led to our current practice algorithm, with particular focus on the refractory advanced disease setting, discussing the areas of active research and highlighting the factors, including biomarkers and the influence of ethnicity, that contribute to therapeutic decision-making.

Definitions and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer according to multidisciplinary tumour boards in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Consensus about the definition and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the definition and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer across multidisciplinary tumour boards (MDTs) in Europe. MATERIAL AND METHODS: European expert centers (n = 49) were requested to discuss 15 real-life cases in their MDT with at least a medical, surgical, and radiation oncologist present. The cases varied in terms of location and number of metastases, histology, timing of detection (i.e. synchronous versus metachronous), primary tumour treatment status, and response to systemic therapy. The primary outcome was the agreement in the definition of oligometastatic disease at diagnosis and after systemic therapy. The secondary outcome was the agreement in treatment strategies. Treatment strategies for oligometastatic disease were categorised into upfront local treatment (i.e. metastasectomy or stereotactic radiotherapy), systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment or systemic therapy alone. The agreement across MDTs was scored to be either absent/poor (<50%), fair (50%-75%), or consensus (≥75%). RESULTS: A total of 47 MDTs across 16 countries fully discussed the cases (96%). Oligometastatic disease was considered in patients with 1-2 metastases in either the liver, lung, retroperitoneal lymph nodes, adrenal gland, soft tissue or bone (consensus). At follow-up, oligometastatic disease was considered after a median of 18 weeks of systemic therapy when no progression or progression in size only of the oligometastatic lesion(s) was seen (consensus). If at restaging after a median of 18 weeks of systemic therapy the number of lesions progressed, this was not considered as oligometastatic disease (fair agreement). There was no consensus on treatment strategies for oligometastatic disease. CONCLUSION: A broad consensus on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer was found among MDTs of oesophagogastric cancer expert centres in Europe. However, high practice variability in treatment strategies exists.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Evaluation of Early Clinical Response, Pathological Complete Response Rates, and Addition of Platinum Salts Benefit Based on Real-World Evidence.

Pathological complete response (pCR) achievement is undoubtedly the essential goal of neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer, directly affecting survival endpoints. This retrospective study of 237 triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients with a median follow-up of 36 months evaluated the role of adding platinum salts into standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). After the initial four standard NACT cycles, early clinical response (ECR) was assessed and used to identify tumors and patients generally sensitive to NACT. BRCA1/2 mutation, smaller unifocal tumors, and Ki-67 ≥ 65% were independent predictors of ECR. The total pCR rate was 41%, the achievement of pCR was strongly associated with ECR (OR = 15.1, p < 0.001). According to multivariable analysis, the significant benefit of platinum NACT was observed in early responders ≥45 years, Ki-67 ≥ 65% and persisted lymph node involvement regardless of BRCA1/2 status. Early responders with pCR had a longer time to death (HR = 0.28, p < 0.001) and relapse (HR = 0.26, p < 0.001). The pCR was achieved in only 7% of non-responders. However, platinum salts favored non-responders' survival outcomes without statistical significance. Toxicity was significantly often observed in patients with platinum NACT (p = 0.003) but not for grade 3/4 (p = 0.155). These results based on real-world evidence point to the usability of ECR in NACT management, especially focusing on the benefit of platinum salts.