Tissue-resident memory features are linked to the magnitude of cytotoxic T cell responses in human lung cancer.

Therapies that boost the anti-tumor responses of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) have shown promise; however, clinical responses to the immunotherapeutic agents currently available vary considerably, and the molecular basis of this is unclear. We performed transcriptomic profiling of tumor-infiltrating CTLs from treatment-naive patients with lung cancer to define the molecular features associated with the robustness of anti-tumor immune responses. We observed considerable heterogeneity in the expression of molecules associated with activation of the T cell antigen receptor (TCR) and of immunological-checkpoint molecules such as 4-1BB, PD-1 and TIM-3. Tumors with a high density of CTLs showed enrichment for transcripts linked to tissue-resident memory cells (TRM cells), such as CD103, and CTLs from CD103hi tumors displayed features of enhanced cytotoxicity. A greater density of TRM cells in tumors was predictive of a better survival outcome in lung cancer, and this effect was independent of that conferred by CTL density. Here we define the 'molecular fingerprint' of tumor-infiltrating CTLs and identify potentially new targets for immunotherapy.

Survival with Cemiplimab in Recurrent Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent cervical cancer have a poor prognosis. Cemiplimab, the fully human programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)-blocking antibody approved to treat lung and skin cancers, has been shown to have preliminary clinical activity in this population. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had disease progression after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy, regardless of their programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive cemiplimab (350 mg every 3 weeks) or the investigator's choice of single-agent chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival. Progression-free survival and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 608 women were enrolled (304 in each group). In the overall trial population, median overall survival was longer in the cemiplimab group than in the chemotherapy group (12.0 months vs. 8.5 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.84; two-sided P<0.001). The overall survival benefit was consistent in both histologic subgroups (squamous-cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma [including adenosquamous carcinoma]). Progression-free survival was also longer in the cemiplimab group than in the chemotherapy group in the overall population (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.89; two-sided P<0.001). In the overall population, an objective response occurred in 16.4% (95% CI, 12.5 to 21.1) of the patients in the cemiplimab group, as compared with 6.3% (95% CI, 3.8 to 9.6) in the chemotherapy group. An objective response occurred in 18% (95% CI, 11 to 28) of the cemiplimab-treated patients with PD-L1 expression greater than or equal to 1% and in 11% (95% CI, 4 to 25) of those with PD-L1 expression of less than 1%. Overall, grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 45.0% of the patients who received cemiplimab and in 53.4% of those who received chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Survival was significantly longer with cemiplimab than with single-agent chemotherapy among patients with recurrent cervical cancer after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy. (Funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi; EMPOWER-Cervical 1/GOG-3016/ENGOT-cx9 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03257267.).

Incidence and Prediction of Unrelated Mortality After Successful Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Follow-up (FU) strategies after endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for Barrett's neoplasia do not consider the risk of mortality from causes other than esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to evaluate this risk during long-term FU, and to assess whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) can predict mortality. METHODS: We included all patients with successful EET from the nationwide Barrett registry in the Netherlands. Data were merged with National Statistics for accurate mortality data. We evaluated annual mortality rates (AMRs, per 1000 person-years) and standardized mortality ratio for other-cause mortality. Performance of the CCI was evaluated by discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: We included 1154 patients with a mean age of 64 years (±9). During median 59 months (p25-p75 37-91; total 6375 person-years), 154 patients (13%) died from other causes than EAC (AMR, 24.1; 95% CI, 20.5-28.2), most commonly non-EAC cancers (n = 58), cardiovascular (n = 31), or pulmonary diseases (n = 26). Four patients died from recurrent EAC (AMR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-1.4). Compared with the general Dutch population, mortality was significantly increased for patients in the lowest 3 age quartiles (ie, age <71 years). Validation of CCI in our population showed good discrimination (Concordance statistic, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84) and fair calibration. CONCLUSION: The other-cause mortality risk after successful EET was more than 40 times higher (48; 95% CI, 15-99) than the risk of EAC-related mortality. Our findings reveal that younger post-EET patients exhibit a significantly reduced life expectancy when compared with the general population. Furthermore, they emphasize the strong predictive ability of CCI for long-term mortality after EET. This straightforward scoring system can inform decisions regarding personalized FU, including appropriate cessation timing. (NL7039).

Keratin 6A Is Expressed at the Invasive Front and Enhances the Progression of Colorectal Cancer.

Keratins (KRTs) are intermediate filament proteins in epithelial cells, and they are important for cytoskeletal organization. KRT6A, classified as a type II KRT, is normally expressed in stratified squamous epithelium and squamous cell carcinomas. Little is known about the expression and role of KRT6A in adenocarcinomas. We investigated the clinicopathologic and molecular biological significance of KRT6A in colorectal adenocarcinoma. Immunostaining of colorectal adenocarcinoma cases treated at our institution demonstrated that KRT6A showed significantly stronger expression at the invasive front than that at the tumor center (P < .0001). The high KRT6A-expression cases (n = 47) tended to have a high budding grade associated with significantly worse prognoses. A multivariate analysis revealed that the KRT6A expression status was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P = .0004), disease-specific survival (P = .0097), and progression-free survival (P = .0033). The correlation between KRT6A and patient prognoses was also validated in an external cohort from a published data set. To determine the function of KRT6A in vitro, KRT6A was overexpressed in 3 colon cancer cell lines: DLD-1, SW620, and HCT 116. KRT6A overexpression increased migration and invasion in DLD-1 but did not in SW620 and HCT116. In 3-dimensional sphere-forming culture, KRT6A expression enhanced the irregular protrusion around the spheroid in DLD-1. Our findings in this study indicated that KRT6A expression is a valuable prognostic marker of colorectal cancer and KRT6A may be involved the molecular mechanism in the progression of invasive areas of colorectal cancer.

Trends in management and outcomes of colon cancer in the United States over 15 years: Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

Management of colon cancer has changed over the last few decades. We assessed the trends in management and outcomes using the US National Cancer Database (NCDB). A retrospective analysis of all patients with colonic adenocarcinoma between 2005 and 2019 was conducted. The cohort was divided into three equal time periods: Period 1 (2005-2009), Period 2 (2010-2014), and Period 3 (2015-2019) to examine treatment and outcomes trends. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS). The study included 923,275 patients. A significant increase in patients with stage IV disease was noted in Period 3 compared to Period 1 (47.9% vs. 27.9%, respectively), whereas a reciprocal reduction was seen in patients with locally advanced disease (stage II: 20.8%-12%; stage III: 14.5%-7.7%). Use of immunotherapy significantly increased from 0.3% to 7.6%. Mean 5-year OS increased (43.6 vs. 42.1 months) despite the increase in metastatic disease and longer time from diagnosis to definitive surgery (7 vs. 14 days). A reduction in 30-day readmission (5.1%-4.2%), 30- (3.9%-2.8%), and 90-day mortality (7.1%-5%) was seen. Laparoscopic and robotic surgery increased from 45.8% to 53.1% and 2.9% to 12.7%, respectively. Median postoperative length of hospital stay decreased by 2 days. Rate of positive resection margins (7.2%-6%) and median number of examined lymph nodes (14-16) also improved. Minimally invasive surgery and immunotherapy for colon cancer significantly increased in recent years. Patient outcomes including OS improved over time.

Early onset pancreatic cancer-exploring contemporary treatment and outcomes using real-world data.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer incidence is increasing in younger populations. Differences between early onset pancreatic cancer (EOPC) and later onset pancreatic cancer (LOPC), and how these should inform management warrant exploration in the contemporary setting. METHODS: A prospectively collected multi-site dataset on consecutive pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients was interrogated. Patient, tumour, treatment, and outcome data were extracted for EOPC (≤50 years old) vs LOPC (>50 years old). RESULTS: Of 1683 patients diagnosed between 2016 and 2022, 112 (6.7%) were EOPC. EOPC more frequently had the tail of pancreas tumours, earlier stage disease, surgical resection, and trended towards increased receipt of chemotherapy in the curative setting compared to LOPC. EOPC more frequently received 1st line chemotherapy, 2nd line chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy than LOPC in the palliative setting. Recurrence-free survival was improved for the tail of pancreas EOPC vs LOPC in the resected setting; overall survival was superior for EOPC compared to LOPC across the resected, locally advanced unresectable and metastatic settings. CONCLUSIONS: EOPC remains a small proportion of pancreatic cancer diagnoses. The more favourable outcomes in EOPC suggest these younger patients are overall deriving benefits from increased treatment in the curative setting and increased therapy in the palliative setting.

Efficacy and safety of surufatinib plus toripalimab, a chemotherapy-free regimen, in patients with advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, or biliary tract cancer.

BACKGROUND: The programmed death 1 inhibitor toripalimab plus the angio-immuno kinase inhibitor surufatinib showed a tolerable safety profile and preliminary efficacy in patients with advanced solid tumors in a phase I study. METHODS: This open-label, multi-cohort study in China enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors who had failed or were intolerable to standard treatment into tumor-specific cohorts. Patients received surufatinib (250 mg orally, once daily) plus toripalimab (240 mg intravenously, once every three weeks). Results for three cohorts (gastric/gastroesophageal junction [GC/GEJ] adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [ESCC], and biliary tract carcinoma [BTC]) are reported here. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS: Between December 17, 2019, and January 29, 2021, 60 patients were enrolled (GC/GEJ, n = 20; ESCC, n = 20; BTC, n = 20). At data cutoff (February 28, 2023), ORRs were 31.6%, 30.0%, and 11.1%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 4.1, 2.7, and 2.9 months, respectively. Median overall survival was 13.7, 10.4, and 7.0 months, respectively. Overall, grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 28 (46.7%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Surufatinib plus toripalimab showed promising antitumor activity and a tolerable safety profile in immunotherapy-naïve patients with GC/GEJ adenocarcinoma, ESCC, or BTC. These findings warrant further study in larger randomized trials comparing surufatinib plus toripalimab with standard therapies in these tumors. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT04169672.

The optimal threshold of PD-L1 combined positive score to predict the benefit of PD-1 antibody plus chemotherapy for patients with HER2-negative gastric adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with chemotherapy have become the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEACs). This study aims to figure out the optimal combined positive score (CPS) cutoff value. METHODS: We searched for randomized phase III trials to investigate the efficacy of ICIs plus chemotherapy for metastatic GEACs compared with chemotherapy alone. Pooled analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) based on PD-L1 expression were performed. RESULTS: A total of six trials (KEYNOTE-062, KEYNOTE-590, KEYNOTE-859, ATTRACTION-04, CheckMate 649, and ORIENT-16) were included, comprising 5,242 patients. ICIs plus chemotherapy significantly improved OS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.72-0.86 in global patients; HR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.98 in Asian patients) and PFS (HR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.68-0.82 in global patients; HR: 0.64, 95% CI 0.56-0.73 in Asian patients) compared with chemotherapy alone. The differences in OS (ratio of HR: 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.40; predictive value: - 5.1%) and PFS (ratio of HR: 1.16, 95% CI 0.98-1.36; predictive value: - 13.5%) were not statistically significant between the global and Asian patients. Subgroup analyses indicated that the optimal CPS threshold was at ≥ 5 for OS and ≥ 10 for PFS with the highest predictive values. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit derived from ICIs plus chemotherapy is similar between Asian and global GEAC patients. However, those with a PD-L1 CPS < 5 or CPS < 10 may not have significant benefits from ICIs therapy. Therefore, it is advisable to routinely assess PD-L1 expression in GEAC patients considered for ICIs treatment.

Clinical outcomes and biomarker exploration of first-line PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy in patients with low PD-L1-expressing of gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The beneficial effects of first-line programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors plus chemotherapy in patients with low programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-expressing advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma are controversial. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with G/GEJ adenocarcinoma who had undergone first-line treatment with PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy between October 2017 and May 2022. The primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). SPSS software V27.0 was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Of 345 enrolled patients, 290 had measurable lesions. The overall ORR was 59.3%. PD-L1 status was available in 171 patients, and 67.8% of them were considered as low PD-L1 expression level (combined positive score (CPS) < 5). Patients with PD-L1 CPS < 5 showed a lower response rate (51.1% vs 70.8%, P = 0.024) and a worse PFS (P = 0.009) compared to those with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5. In the PD-L1 low-expression cohort, patients with non-diffuse type, GEJ cancer, synchronous metastasis, distant lymph node metastasis, liver metastasis, non-peritoneal metastasis, and HER2 positive were significantly associated with higher response rates to PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy (P < 0.05). The presence of peritoneal metastasis (P = 0.028) and diffuse type (P = 0.046) were identified as independent predictors of poor PFS in multivariate analysis of the PD-L1 CPS < 5 subgroup. When evaluated for correlation with overall survival (OS) in the PD-L1 low-expression subgroup, peritoneal metastasis was found to be the only independent prognostic factor of an increased risk of death (hazard ratio: 2.31, 95% CI 1.09-4.90; P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 is significantly associated with improved response and extended PFS in G/GEJ cancer patients treated with a combination of PD-1 inhibitors and chemotherapy. Specific subgroups within the low PD-L1-expressing population, such as those with non-diffuse-type tumors and without peritoneal metastases, may also benefit from immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy.

Adjuvant Chemoradiation in Resected Biliary Adenocarcinoma: Evaluation of SWOG S0809 with a Large National Database.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of evidence supporting the use of adjuvant radiation therapy in resected biliary cancer. Supporting evidence for use comes mainly from the small SWOG S0809 trial, which demonstrated an overall median survival of 35 months. We aimed to use a large national database to evaluate the use of adjuvant chemoradiation in resected extrahepatic bile duct and gallbladder cancer. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, we selected patients from 2004 to 2017 with pT2-4, pN0-1, M0 extrahepatic bile duct or gallbladder adenocarcinoma with either R0 or R1 resection margins, and examined factors associated with overall survival (OS). We examined OS in a cohort of patients mimicking the SWOG S0809 protocol as a large validation cohort. Lastly, we compared patients who received chemotherapy only with patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation using entropy balancing propensity score matching. RESULTS: Overall, 4997 patients with gallbladder or extrahepatic bile duct adenocarcinoma with available survival information meeting the SWOG S0809 criteria were selected, 469 of whom received both adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Median OS in patients undergoing chemoradiation was 36.9 months, and was not different between primary sites (p = 0.841). In a propensity score matched cohort, receipt of adjuvant chemoradiation had a survival benefit compared with adjuvant chemotherapy only (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.95; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Using a large national database, we support the findings of SWOG S0809 with a similar median OS in patients receiving chemoradiation. These data further support the consideration of adjuvant multimodal therapy in resected biliary cancers.

Overall Volume of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery Positively Impacts Gastric Cancer Outcomes at Centers with Low Gastrectomy Volume.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between hospital volume and surgical mortality is well documented. However, complete centralization of surgical care is not always feasible. The present study investigates how overall volume of upper gastrointestinal surgery at hospitals influences patient outcomes following resection for gastric adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: National Cancer Database (2010-2019) patients with pathologic stage 1-3 gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent gastrectomy were identified. Three cohorts were created: low-volume hospitals (LVH) for both gastrectomy and overall upper gastrointestinal operations, mixed-volume hospital (MVH) for low-volume gastrectomy but high-volume overall upper gastrointestinal operations, and high-volume gastrectomy hospitals (HVH). Chi-squared tests were used to analyze sociodemographic factors and surgical outcomes and Kaplan-Meier method for survival analysis. RESULTS: In total, 26,398 patients were identified (LVH: 20,099; MVH: 539; HVH: 5,760). The 5-year survival was equivalent between MVH and HVH for all stages of disease (MVH: 56.0%, HVH 55.6%; p = 0.9866) and when stratified into early (MVH: 69.9%, HVH: 65.4%; p = 0.1998) and late stages (MVH: 24.7%, HVH: 32.0%; p = 0.1480), while LVH had worse survival. After matching patients, postoperative outcomes were worse for LVH, but there was no difference between MVH and HVH in terms of adequate lymphadenectomy, margin status, readmission rates, and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite lower gastrectomy volume for cancer, postoperative gastrectomy outcomes at centers that perform a high number of upper gastrointestinal cancer surgeries were similar to hospitals with high gastrectomy volume. These hospitals offer a blueprint for providing equivalent outcomes to high volume centers while enhancing availability of quality cancer care.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Radiotherapy for Resected Pancreatic Cancer After Multiagent Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy is associated with improved pancreatic cancer survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. However, whether adjuvant treatment should include radiotherapy is unclear in this setting. METHODS: This study queried the National Cancer Database for pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients who underwent curative resection after multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2010 and 2019 and received adjuvant treatment. Adjuvant chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (external beam, 45-50.4 gray) was compared with adjuvant chemotherapy alone. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression was used to assess survival associations. Analyses were repeated in a propensity score-matched subgroup. RESULTS: Of 1983 patients who received adjuvant treatment after multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection, 1502 (75.7%) received adjuvant chemotherapy alone and 481 (24.3%) received concomitant adjuvant radiotherapy (chemoradiotherapy). The patients treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy were younger, were treated at non-academic facilities more often, and had higher rates of lymph node metastasis (ypN1-2), positive resection margins (R1), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI+). The median survival was shorter for the chemoradiotherapy-treated patients according to the unadjusted analysis (26.8 vs 33.2 months; p = 0.0017). After adjustment for confounders, chemoradiotherapy was associated with better outcomes in the multivariable model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.93; p = 0.008). The association between chemoradiotherapy and improved outcomes was stronger for the patients with grade III tumors (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74) or LVI+ tumors (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.75). In a subgroup of 396 propensity-matched patients, chemoradiotherapy was associated with a survival benefit only for the patients with LVI+ or grade III tumors. CONCLUSION: After multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection for pancreatic cancer, additional adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy alone is associated with improved survival for patients with LVI+ or grade III tumors.

Extent of Resection and Long-Term Outcomes for Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: a SEER Database Analysis of Mucinous and non-Mucinous Histologies.

BACKGROUND: Mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinomas (MAA) and non-mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinomas (NMAA) demonstrate differences in rates and patterns of recurrence, which may inform the appropriate extent of surgical resection (i.e., appendectomy versus colectomy). The impact of extent of resection on disease-specific survival (DSS) for each histologic subtype was assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected, non-metastatic MAA and NMAA were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000-2020). Multivariable models were created to examine predictors of colectomy for each histologic subtype. DSS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and examined using Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Among 4674 patients (MAA: n = 1990, 42.6%; NMAA: n = 2684, 57.4%), the majority (67.8%) underwent colectomy. Among colectomy patients, the rate of nodal positivity increased with higher T-stage (MAA: T1: 4.6%, T2: 4.0%, T3: 17.1%, T4: 21.6%, p < 0.001; NMAA: T1: 6.8%, T2: 11.4%, T3: 25.6%, T4: 43.8%, p < 0.001) and higher tumor grade (MAA: well differentiated: 7.7%, moderately differentiated: 19.2%, and poorly differentiated: 31.3%; NMAA: well differentiated: 9.0%, moderately differentiated: 20.5%, and 44.4%; p < 0.001). Nodal positivity was more frequently observed in NMAA (27.6% versus 16.4%, p < 0.001). Utilization of colectomy was associated with improved DSS for NMAA patients with T2 (log rank p = 0.095) and T3 (log rank p = 0.018) tumors as well as moderately differentiated histology (log rank p = 0.006). Utilization of colectomy was not associated with improved DSS for MAA patients, which was confirmed in a multivariable model for T-stage, grade, and use of adjuvant chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-1.22]. CONCLUSIONS: Colectomy was associated with improved DSS for patients with NMAA but not MAA. Colectomy for MAA may not be required.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Improve Survival in cT2N0M0 Gastric Adenocarcinoma Patients: A Multicenter Propensity Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: According to current international guidelines, stage cT2N0M0 gastric adenocarcinoma warrants preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery. However, upfront surgery is often preferred in clinical practice, depending on patient clinical status and local treatment preferences. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of cT2N0M0 patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed among 32 centers, including gastric adenocarcinoma patients operated between January 2007 and December 2017. Patients with cT2N0M0 stage were divided into upfront surgery (S) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS) groups. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to compensate for baseline differences between the groups. RESULTS: Among the 202 patients diagnosed with cT2N0M0 stage, 68 (33.7%) were in the CS group and 134 (66.3%) were in the S group. CS patients were younger (mean age 62.7 ± 12.8 vs. 69.8 ± 12.1 years for S patients; p < 0.001) and had a better health status (World Health Organization performance status = 0 in 60.3% of CS patients vs. 34.5% of S patients; p = 0.006). During follow-up, recurrence occurred in 27.2% and 19.6% of CS and S patients, respectively, after IPTW (p = 0.32). Five-year OS was similar between CS and S patients (78.9% vs. 68.3%; p = 0.42), as was 5-year DFS (70.4% vs. 68.5%; p = 0.96). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with neither OS nor DFS in multivariable analysis after IPTW. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cT2N0M0 gastric adenocarcinoma did not present a survival or recurrence benefit if treated with perioperative chemotherapy followed by surgery as opposed to surgery alone.

Results of a Randomized Clinical Study of Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine Plus S-1 as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (RCT, CSGO-HBP-015).

BACKGROUND: The optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimen for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains uncertain. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA) and gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS), in patients with resectable/borderline-resectable (R/BR) PDAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment-naïve patients with R/BR-PDAC were enrolled and randomly allocated. They received two cycles (2 months) of each standard protocol, followed by radical surgery for those without tumor progression in general hospitals belonging to our intergroup. The primary endpoint was to determine the superior regimen on the basis of achieving a 10% increase in the rate of patients with progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years from allocation. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were enrolled, with 94 patients randomly assigned to the GS arm (N = 46) or GA arm (N = 48). The 2-year PFS rates did not show the stipulated difference [GA, 31% (24-38%)/GS, 26% (18-33%)], but the Kaplan-Myer analysis showed significance (median PFS, GA/GS 14 months/9 months, P = 0.048; HR 0.71). Secondary endpoint comparisons yielded the following results (GA/GS arm, P-value): rates of severe adverse events during NAC, 73%/78%, P = 0.55; completion rates of the stipulated NAC, 92%/83%, P = 0.71; resection rates, 85%/72%, P = 0.10; average tumor marker (CA19-9) reduction rates, -50%/-21%, P = 0.01; average numbers of lymph node metastasis, 1.7/3.2, P = 0.04; and median overall survival times, 42/22 months, P = 0.26. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that GA and GS are viable neoadjuvant treatment regimens in R/BR-PDAC. Although the GA group exhibited a favorable PFS outcome, the primary endpoint was not achieved.

Adjuvant Gemcitabine Versus Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: The Randomized Multicenter Phase II NEPAFOX Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although addition of adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard, the prognosis of pancreatic cancers still remains poor. The NEPAFOX trial evaluated perioperative treatment with FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter phase II trial randomized patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer without metastases into arm (A,) upfront surgery plus adjuvant gemcitabine, or arm (B,) perioperative FOLFIRINOX. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Owing to poor accrual, recruitment was prematurely stopped after randomization of 40 of the planned 126 patients (A: 21, B: 19). Overall, approximately three-quarters were classified as primarily resectable (A: 16, B: 15), and the remaining patients were classified as borderline resectable (A: 5, B: 4). Of the 12 evaluable patients, 3 achieved partial response under neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Of the 21 patients in arm A and 19 patients in arm B, 17 and 7 underwent curative surgery, and R0-resection was achieved in 77% and 71%, respectively. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 72% in arm A and 46% in arm B, whereas non-surgical toxicity was comparable in both arms. Median RFS/PFS was almost doubled in arm B (14.1 months) compared with arm A (8.4 months) in the population with surgical resection, whereas median OS was comparable between both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Although the analysis was only descriptive owing to small patient numbers, no safety issues regarding surgical complications were observed in the perioperative FOLFIRINOX arm. Thus, considering the small number of patients, perioperative treatment approach appears feasible and potentially effective in well-selected cohorts of patients. In pancreatic cancer, patient selection before initiation of neoadjuvant therapy appears to be critical.

Ten-Year Follow-Up of Lung Cancer Patients with Resected Stage IA Invasive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess 10-year follow-up outcomes after surgical resection in patients with stage IA invasive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on postoperative pathological diagnosis. METHODS: Patients with stage IA invasive NSCLC who underwent resection between December 2008 and December 2013 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into the pure-ground glass opacity (pGGO), mixed-ground glass opacity (mGGO), and solid groups based on consolidation to tumor ratio (CTR). Postoperative survival and risk of recurrence and developing secondary primary lung cancer were analyzed in each group. RESULTS: Among the 645 stage IA invasive NSCLC, the 10-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival rate was 79.38% and 77.44%, respectively. The 10-year overall survival for pGGO, mGGO, and solid group of patients was 95.08%, 86.21%, and 72.39%, respectively. The respective recurrence-free survival rate was 100%, 89.82%, and 65.83%. Multivariable Cox regression analysis associated tumor size and GGO components with recurrence and younger age, and tumors with GGO components were associated with longer overall survival. The cumulative incidence curve indicated no recurrence of GGO lung cancer ≥ 5 years postoperatively. Our cohort indicated that the number and stations of dissected lymph node did not influence long-term prognosis of IA invasive NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence of invasive stage IA NSCLC with GGO was more prevalent in patients with tumor size >1 cm and CTR > 0.5, occurring within 5 years after surgery. This will provide important evidence for follow-up strategies in these patients.

Influence of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy-Chemotherapy on Perioperative Outcomes in Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the perioperative outcomes for patients who had locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) and chemotherapy versus a matched cohort of patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone. METHODS: A single-center non-randomized phase 2 trial was undertaken with locally advanced (cT3-4 and/or N+) EAC, and 49 patients completed neoadjuvant avelumab + docetaxel, cisplatin, 5FU (DCF) and esophagectomy between February 2018 and February 2020. These patients were matched with contemporary patients (January 2018 to June 2020) who met the inclusion criteria but received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (NAC) with a comparable docetaxel-based therapy. The postoperative outcomes then were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: For this study, 99 patients with locally advanced EAC underwent esophagectomy and met the enrolment criteria. Of these patients, 50 received NAC alone and 49 received IO + NAC. Baseline characteristics such as age, gender, and clinical stage were comparable between the two groups. Operative approach and rate of minimally invasive esophagectomy (~ 60%) were similar in the two groups. For the NAC-alone and IO + NAC groups, the respective overall and major complication rates were similar between the two groups (50% vs. 51% [p = 0.91] and 20% vs. 26% [p = 0.44], respectively), with concordant rates for anastomotic leak (6 [12%] vs. 6 [12%]; p = 0.86) and respiratory complications (13 [26%] vs. 11 [22%]; p = 0.68). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of hospital length of stay or 30- and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSION: The addition of immunotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma does not appear to alter perioperative short-term outcomes significantly after esophagectomy.

Randomized clinical trial on D2 lymphadenectomy versus D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision in patients undergoing gastrectomy for cancer (DCGC01 study).

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision for gastric cancer improves survival compared with just D2 lymphadenectomy. METHODS: Between September 2014 and June 2018, patients with advanced gastric cancer were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy or D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision gastrectomy. The modified intention-to-treat population was defined as patients who had pathologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinoma (pT1 N1-3 M0 and pT2-4 N0-3 M0). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints were the recurrence pattern and overall survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up of patients in the D2 lymphadenectomy group (169 patients) and patients in the D2 lymphadenectomy +complete mesogastric excision group (169 patients) was 55 (interquartile range 37-60) months and 51 (interquartile range 40-60) months respectively. Recurrence occurred in 50 patients in the D2 lymphadenectomy group (29.6%) versus 33 patients in the D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision group (19.5%) (P = 0.032). The 3-year disease-free survival was 75.5% (95% c.i. 68.3% to 81.3%) in the D2 lymphadenectomy group versus 85.0% (95% c.i. 78.7% to 89.6%) in the D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision group (log rank P = 0.042). The HR for recurrence in the D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision group versus the D2 lymphadenectomy group was 0.64 (95% c.i. 0.41 to 0.99) by Cox regression (P = 0.045). The 3-year overall survival rate was 77.5% (95% c.i. 70.4% to 83.1%) in the D2 lymphadenectomy group versus 85.8% (95% c.i. 79.6% to 90.2%) in the D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision group (log rank P = 0.058). The HR for death in the D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision group versus the D2 lymphadenectomy group was 0.64 (95% c.i. 0.41 to 1.02) (P = 0.058). CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional D2 dissection, D2 lymphadenectomy + complete mesogastric excision is associated with better disease-free survival, but there is no statistically significant difference in overall survival. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01978444 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Adjuvant chemotherapy for adenocarcinoma arising from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia: multicentre ADENO-IPMN study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical impact of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection for adenocarcinoma arising from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia is unclear. The aim of this study was to identify factors related to receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy and its impact on recurrence and survival. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective study of patients undergoing pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma arising from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia between January 2010 and December 2020 at 18 centres. Recurrence and survival outcomes for patients who did and did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy were compared using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of 459 patients who underwent pancreatic resection, 275 (59.9%) received adjuvant chemotherapy (gemcitabine 51.3%, gemcitabine-capecitabine 21.8%, FOLFIRINOX 8.0%, other 18.9%). Median follow-up was 78 months. The overall recurrence rate was 45.5% and the median time to recurrence was 33 months. In univariable analysis in the matched cohort, adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with reduced overall (P = 0.713), locoregional (P = 0.283) or systemic (P = 0.592) recurrence, disease-free survival (P = 0.284) or overall survival (P = 0.455). Adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with reduced site-specific recurrence. In multivariable analysis, there was no association between adjuvant chemotherapy and overall recurrence (HR 0.89, 95% c.i. 0.57 to 1.40), disease-free survival (HR 0.86, 0.59 to 1.30) or overall survival (HR 0.77, 0.50 to 1.20). Adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with reduced recurrence in any high-risk subgroup (for example, lymph node-positive, higher AJCC stage, poor differentiation). No particular chemotherapy regimen resulted in superior outcomes. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy following resection of adenocarcinoma arising from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia does not appear to influence recurrence rates, recurrence patterns or survival.