Intrathecal topotecan with systemic checkpoint inhibitor therapy for gastroesophageal cancer with leptomeningeal involvement: two case reports and review of the literature.

Background: Leptomeningeal metastases (LM) in gastroesophageal (GE) malignancies are exceedingly rare. Historically, treatment for LM has included steroids, radiation, chemotherapy, and intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy. However, the outcomes in GE malignancies with LM remain poor. Unfortunately, clinical trials in GE malignancies have traditionally excluded those with LM, limiting advances in therapeutic strategies. Given that LM poses potentially devastating neurologic and psychologic sequelae, there is an urgent need for more effective treatments. Case Description: Patient 1 is a 44-year-old woman with localized esophageal adenocarcinoma who undergoes neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy. Seven months following surgery, she develops ataxia, weakness, and nausea/vomiting. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reveals intracranial disease that is subsequently successfully resected and then treated with gamma knife (GK) radiation. Pathology confirms metastases. Three months later she is found to have LM. She receives palliative whole brain radiation therapy as well as focal radiation to the spine. Following this she transitioned to concurrent IT topotecan plus intravenous (IV) ipilumumab/nivolumab with durable response beyond 14 months. Patient 2 is a 71-year-old man with de novo metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma with durable response to 5-fluorouracil plus irinotecan. Asymptomatic intracranial metastases are detected on surveillance scans 2 years after initial diagnosis for which he receives GK. Follow up MRI identifies new LM. As such, to treat the LM, he was transitioned to IT topotecan and IV pembrolizumab with good response for 6 months until death from a gastrointestinal bleed. Conclusions: We present two cases of LM in patients with GE adenocarcinoma who had longer survival than what has been reported. They were treated with combination IT topotecan and IV checkpoint inhibition. Further studies evaluating the central nervous system tumor immune-microenvironment can help expand our understanding of how this combination has worked well in our patients and how to care for others with similar scenarios.

Comparing 90-Day Postoperative Mortality After Neoadjuvant Proton-Based Versus Photon-Based Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.

Purpose: Evidence suggests that proton-beam therapy (PBT) results in less toxicity and postoperative complications compared to photon-based radiotherapy in patients who receive chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy for cancer. Ninety-day mortality (90DM) is an important measure of the postoperative (nononcologic) outcome as proxy of quality-of-care. We hypothesize that PBT could reduce 90DM compared to photon-based radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: From a single-center retrospective database patients treated with chemoradiotherapy before esophagectomy for cancer were selected (1998-2022). Univariable logistic regression was used to study the association of radiotherapy modality with 90DM. Three separate methods were applied to adjust for confounding bias, including multivariable logistic regression, propensity score matching, and inverse probability of treatment weighting. Stratified analysis for the age threshold that maximized the difference in 90DM (ie, ≥67 vs <67 years) was performed. Results: A total of 894 eligible patients were included and 90DM was 5/202 (2.5%) in the PBT versus 29/692 (4.2%) in the photon-based radiotherapy group (P = .262). After adjustment for age and tumor location, PBT versus photon-based radiotherapy was not significantly associated with 90DM (P = .491). The 90DM was not significantly different for PBT versus photon-based radiotherapy in the propensity score matching (P = .379) and inverse probability of treatment weighting cohort (P = .426). The stratified analysis revealed that in patients aged ≥67 years, PBT was associated with decreased 90DM (1.3% vs 8.8%; P = .026). Higher age significantly increased 90DM risk within the photon-based radiotherapy (8.8% vs 2.7%; P = .001), but not within the PBT group (1.3% vs 3.2%; P = .651). Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was observed in postoperative 90DM after esophagectomy for cancer between PBT and photon-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. However, among older patients a signal was observed that PBT may reduce 90DM risk.

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CheckMate 648): 29-month follow-up from a randomized, open-label, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab both demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the CheckMate 648 trial, leading to approvals of both nivolumab-containing regimens in many countries. We report longer-term follow-up data. METHODS: This open-label, phase III trial (NCT03143153) enrolled adults with previously untreated, unresectable, advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of ≥1% and then in the overall population. RESULTS: A total of 970 patients were randomly assigned. After 29 months of minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in OS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.46-0.76]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.65-0.93]) and with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48-0.80]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.77 [95% CI: 0.65-0.92]). In patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated PFS benefit versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.51-0.89]); PFS benefit was not observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 1.04 [95% CI: 0.79-1.36]). Among all treated patients (n = 936), Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 151 (49%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy), 105 (32%, nivolumab plus ipilimumab), and 110 (36%, chemotherapy) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful OS benefit versus chemotherapy with no new safety signals identified with longer follow-up, further supporting use as first-line standard treatment options for patients with advanced ESCC.

SMARCA4 Mutations in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: An Observational Study via a Next-Generation Sequencing Panel.

BACKGROUND: The clinical impact of SMARCA4 mutations (SMARCA4ms) in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) remains underexplored. This study aimed to examine the association of SMARCA4ms with clinical outcomes and co-occurrence with other gene mutations identified through a next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel in GEA patients. METHODS: A total of 256 patients with metastatic or recurrent GEA who underwent NGS panel profiling at the MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2016 and 2022 were included. Comparative analyses were performed to assess clinical outcomes related to SMARCA4ms. The frequency and types of SMARCA4ms and their co-occurrence with other gene mutations were also examined. RESULTS: SMARCA4ms were identified in 19 patients (7.4%). These SMARCA4ms were significantly associated with non-signet ring cell subtype (p = 0.044) and PD-L1 positive expression (p = 0.046). No difference in survival between the SMARCA4m and SMARCA4-normal group was observed (p = 0.84). There were significant associations between SMARCA4ms and FANCA, IGF1R, KRAS, FANCL, and PTEN alterations. Notably, 15 of the 19 SMARCA4m cases involved SNV missense mutations, with frequent co-occurrences noted with TP53, KRAS, ARID1A, and ERBB2 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: These results serve as the first comprehensive examination of the relationship between SMARCA4ms and clinical outcomes in GEA.

Independent Stage Classification for Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma.

In gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma cases, a prognosis based on ypTNM staging could be affected by preoperative therapy. Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma and gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent preoperative therapy followed by surgical resection from 2006 through 2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database. To enable stage-by-stage OS comparisons, tumors were classified into four gross ypTNM groups: ypT1/2, N-negative; ypT1/2, N-positive; ypT3/4, N-negative; and ypT3/4, N-positive. Prognostic factors were examined, and an OS prediction nomogram was developed for patients with abdominal/lower esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma, representing GEJ cancers. We examined 25,463 patient records. When compared by gross ypTNM group, the abdominal/lower esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma groups had similar OS rates, differing from those of other esophageal or gastric cancers. Cox regression analysis of patients with GEJ cancers showed that preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with shorter OS than preoperative chemotherapy after adjustment for the ypTNM group (hazard ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.24-1.39, p < 0.001), likely owing to downstaging effects. The nomogram had a concordance index of 0.833 and a time-dependent area under the curve of 0.669. OS prediction in GEJ adenocarcinoma cases should include preoperative therapy regimens. Our OS prediction nomogram provided reasonable OS prediction for patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma, and future validation is needed.

A phase I trial of the pan-ERBB inhibitor neratinib combined with the MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with advanced cancer with EGFR mutation/amplification, HER2 mutation/amplification, HER3/4 mutation or KRAS mutation.

PURPOSE: Aberrant alterations of ERBB receptor tyrosine kinases lead to tumorigenesis. Single agent therapy targeting EGFR or HER2 has shown clinical successes, but drug resistance often develops due to aberrant or compensatory mechanisms. Herein, we sought to determine the feasibility and safety of neratinib and trametinib in patients with EGFR mutation/amplification, HER2 mutation/amplification, HER3/4 mutation and KRAS mutation. METHODS: Patients with actionable somatic mutations or amplifications in ERBB genes or actionable KRAS mutations were enrolled to receive neratinib and trametinib in this phase I dose escalation trial. The primary endpoint was determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetic analysis and preliminary anti-tumor efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled with a median age of 50.5 years and a median of 3 lines of prior therapy. Grade 3 treatment-related toxicities included: diarrhea (25%), vomiting (10%), nausea (5%), fatigue (5%) and malaise (5%). The MTD was dose level (DL) minus 1 (neratinib 160 mg daily with trametinib 1 mg, 5 days on and 2 days off) given 2 DLTs of grade 3 diarrhea in DL1 (neratinib 160 mg daily with trametinib 1 mg daily). The treatment-related toxicities of DL1 included: diarrhea (100%), nausea (55.6%) and rash (55.6%). Pharmacokinetic data showed trametinib clearance was significantly reduced leading to high drug exposures of trametinib. Two patients achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 4 months. CONCLUSION: Neratinib and trametinib combination was toxic and had limited clinical efficacy. This may be due to suboptimal drug dosing given drug-drug interactions. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: NCT03065387.

Therapeutic Advances in the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Cancers.

Gastroesophageal cancers are a group of aggressive malignancies that are inherently heterogeneous with poor prognosis. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, esophageal adenocarcinoma, gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, and gastric adenocarcinoma all have distinct underlying molecular biology, which can impact available targets and treatment response. Multimodality therapy is needed in the localized setting and treatment decisions require multidisciplinary discussions. Systemic therapies for treatment of advanced/metastatic disease should be biomarker-driven, when appropriate. Current FDA approved treatments include HER2-targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy. However, novel therapeutic targets are under development and future treatments will be personalized based on molecular profiling. Herein, we review the current treatment approaches and discuss promising advances in targeted therapies for gastroesophageal cancers.

Clinical Impact of Positive Surgical Margins in Gastric Adenocarcinoma in the Era of Preoperative Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Microscopically positive (R1) surgical margins after gastrectomy increase gastric cancer recurrence risk, but optimal management after R1 gastrectomy is controversial. We sought to identify the impact of R1 margins on recurrence patterns and survival in the era of preoperative therapy for gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma during 1998-2017 at a major cancer center were enrolled. Clinicopathologic factors associated with positive margins were examined, and incidence, sites, and timing of recurrence and survival outcomes were compared between patients with positive and negative margins. RESULTS: Of 688 patients, 432 (63%) received preoperative therapy. Thirty-four patients (5%) had R1 margins. Compared with patients with negative margins, patients with R1 margins more frequently had aggressive clinicopathologic features, such as linitis plastica (odds ratio [OR] 7.79, p < 0.001) and failure to achieve cT downstaging with preoperative treatment (OR 5.20, p = 0.005). The 5 year overall survival (OS) rate was lower in patients with R1 margins (6% vs 60%; p < 0.001), and R1 margins independently predicted worse OS (hazard ratio 2.37, 95% CI 1.51-3.75, p < 0.001). Most patients with R1 margins (58%) experienced peritoneal recurrence, and locoregional recurrence was relatively rare in this group (14%). Median time to recurrence was 8.5 months for peritoneal dissemination and 15.7 months for locoregional recurrence. CONCLUSION: R1 margins after gastrectomy were associated with aggressive tumor biology, high incidence of peritoneal recurrence after a short interval, and poor OS. In patients with R1 margins, re-resection to achieve microscopically negative margins has to be considered with caution.

Localized Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma in the Elderly: Is Age a Factor Associated with Suboptimal Treatment?

INTRODUCTION: Gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is relatively common in elderly patients as the incidence increases with age. However, the optimal treatment approach is not well established in this group of patients. The aim of this study is to review our experience for localized gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma in patients aged ≥80 years and to assess association between patient characteristics, clinical factors, and overall survival (OS) in order to optimize the therapeutic approaches for this population. METHODS: Patients ≥80 years old treated for localized gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were retrospectively analyzed. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were applied to assess the association between patient characteristics and OS. Factors that were significant in the multivariate model were included in the final reduced model. RESULTS: 127 patients ≥80 years old, were included in this study with median age of 83 years. The median follow-up time was 3.2 years, and median OS was 2.5 years (95% CI: 2.0-3.1 years). Independent prognostic factors for OS were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) (p = 0.003), baseline clinical stage (p = 0.01), and surgery (p = 0.001). ECOG PS, tumor location, baseline stage, tumor grade, and surgery were included in the final reduced model. CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment can improve survival in elderly patients. Therapeutic decisions should be based on the patients' general condition rather that age alone.

Adjuvant Therapies for Esophageal Cancer.

Esophageal cancer is the sixth most common cause of cancer mortality worldwide and is considered a major worldwide health challenge. Most patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer require extensive workup and management strategies. Multiple clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the role of chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and recently immunotherapy before or after surgery in the setting of localized esophageal cancer. Trimodality approaches, including preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgery or perioperative chemotherapy, have been widely accepted for treating localized esophageal cancer. However, the addition of immunotherapy to the current trimodality approach produced an advantage in disease-free survival. Our review will focus on the existing data on adjuvant therapies for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas.

First-in-Human Phase I/II ICONIC Trial of the ICOS Agonist Vopratelimab Alone and with Nivolumab: ICOS-High CD4 T-Cell Populations and Predictors of Response.

PURPOSE: The first-in-human phase I/II ICONIC trial evaluated an investigational inducible costimulator (ICOS) agonist, vopratelimab, alone and in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In phase I, patients were treated with escalating doses of intravenous vopratelimab alone or with nivolumab. Primary objectives were safety, tolerability, MTD, and recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Phase II enriched for ICOS-positive (ICOS+) tumors; patients were treated with vopratelimab at the monotherapy RP2D alone or with nivolumab. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and predictive biomarkers of response to vopratelimab were assessed. RESULTS: ICONIC enrolled 201 patients. Vopratelimab alone and with nivolumab was well tolerated; phase I established 0.3 mg/kg every 3 weeks as the vopratelimab RP2D. Vopratelimab resulted in modest objective response rates of 1.4% and with nivolumab of 2.3%. The prospective selection for ICOS+ tumors did not enrich for responses. A vopratelimab-specific peripheral blood pharmacodynamic biomarker, ICOS-high (ICOS-hi) CD4 T cells, was identified in a subset of patients who demonstrated greater clinical benefit versus those with no emergence of these cells [overall survival (OS), P = 0.0025]. A potential genomic predictive biomarker of ICOS-hi CD4 T-cell emergence was identified that demonstrated improvement in clinical outcomes, including OS (P = 0.0062). CONCLUSIONS: Vopratelimab demonstrated a favorable safety profile alone and in combination with nivolumab. Efficacy was observed only in a subset of patients with a vopratelimab-specific pharmacodynamic biomarker. A potential predictive biomarker of response was identified, which is being prospectively evaluated in a randomized phase II non-small cell lung cancer trial. See related commentary by Lee and Fong, p. 3633.

Salvage Esophagectomy Definition Influences Comparative Outcomes in Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancers.

BACKGROUND: In retrospective studies the definition of salvage esophagectomy has been inconsistent and is a source of bias. We sought to describe how variability in the definition of salvage affects comparative outcomes of trimodality therapy (TMT) and bimodality therapy (BMT). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who completed chemoradiation therapy (CRT) from 2002 to 2017 were identified. TMT included patients who had a planned esophagectomy after CRT. BMT included patients treated with CRT only plus salvage esophagectomy, variably defined as an esophagectomy occurring (A) 3 months after CRT; (B) 3 months after CRT, excluding delayed recovery; (C) 3 months after CRT, excluding delayed workup; or (D) 6 months after CRT. Long-term survival outcomes between the TMT and BMT groups were compared for each definition of salvage esophagectomy. Time to surgery was included a priori in a multivariable model for overall survival. RESULTS: Of 143 patients, 90 (63%) underwent esophagectomy and 53 (37%) received CRT only. Although the total patients remained the same, the composition of the TMT and BMT groups varied by salvage definitions A through D. Various definitions resulted in different 5-year survival rates for TMT vs BMT groups: (A) 56% vs 39%, (B) 61% vs 34%, (C) 50% vs 42%, and (D) 51% vs 39%. In a Cox multivariable analysis age and proximal/middle esophageal tumors were associated with worse postoperative survival, but time to surgery was not. CONCLUSIONS: Slight variations in the definition of salvage esophagectomy can influence the interpretation of TMT and BMT outcomes. Future studies should consistently define treatment groups.

Preoperatively Treated Diffuse-Type Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Glucose vs. Other Energy Sources Substantially Influence Prognosis and Therapy Response.

Diffuse type of gastric adenocarcinoma (dGAC) generally confers a poor prognosis compared to intestinal type. Some dGACs are not avid on fluorine-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET (FDG-PET) while others seem to consume glucose avidly. We analyzed the outcomes based on the avidity (high with standardized uptake value (SUV) > 3.5 or low with SUV ≤ 3.5) of the primary on baseline FDG-PET. We retrospectively selected 111 localized dGAC patients who had baseline FDG-PET (all were treated with preoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiation). FDG-PET avidity was compared with overall survival (OS) and response to therapy. The mean age was 59.4 years and with many females (47.7%). The high-SUV group (58 (52.3%) patients) and the low-SUV group (53 (47.7%) patients) were equally divided. While the median OS for all patients was 49.5 months (95% CI: 38.5-98.8 months), it was 98.0 months (95% CI: 49.5-NE months) for the low-SUV group and 36.0 months for the high-SUV (p = 0.003). While the median DFS for all patients was 38.2 months (95%CI: 27.7-97.6 months), it was 98.0 (95% CI: 36.9-NE months) months for the low-SUV group was and only 27.0 months (95% CI: 15.2-63.2 months) for the high-SUV group (p = 0.005). Clinical responses before surgery were more common in the low-SUV group but overall we observed only 4 pathologic complete responses in 111 patients. Our unique data suggest that if dGACs used glucose as an energy source then the prognosis was very poor while non-glucose sources improved prognosis. Multi-platform (including metabolomics) profiling of dGACs would yield useful biologic understanding.

Concurrent lymphovascular and perineural invasion after preoperative therapy for gastric adenocarcinoma is associated with decreased survival.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the impact of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and perineural invasion (PNI) on survival outcomes in gastric cancer patients treated with preoperative therapy. METHODS: Patients with gastric cancer treated with preoperative therapy and potentially curative resection were stratified according to the presence of LVI, PNI, or both. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the impact on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The study included 281 patients, of whom 93 (33%) had LVI, 69 (25%) had PNI, 51 (18%) had both LVI and PNI, and 170 (61%) had neither. LVI and PNI were each associated with higher ypT and ypN categories and more positive lymph nodes (all p < .001), associations that were emphasized with both factors present. On multivariable analyses, ypN (p < .001) and concurrent LVI/PNI (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.55-4.45; p = .001) were predictive of OS and DFS (ypN: p < .001; both LVI/PNI: HR: 2.27; 95% CI: 1.34-3.82; p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Gastric cancer patients with concurrent LVI and PNI after preoperative therapy have more advanced disease and worse survival outcomes than patients with neither or only one of these factors.

Single-cell dissection of intratumoral heterogeneity and lineage diversity in metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma.

Intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH) is a fundamental property of cancer; however, the origins of ITH remain poorly understood. We performed single-cell transcriptome profiling of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from 15 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), constructed a map of 45,048 PC cells, profiled the transcriptome states of tumor cell populations, incisively explored ITH of malignant PC cells and identified significant correlates with patient survival. The links between tumor cell lineage/state compositions and ITH were illustrated at transcriptomic, genotypic, molecular and phenotypic levels. We uncovered the diversity in tumor cell lineage/state compositions in PC specimens and defined it as a key contributor to ITH. Single-cell analysis of ITH classified PC specimens into two subtypes that were prognostically independent of clinical variables, and a 12-gene prognostic signature was derived and validated in multiple large-scale GAC cohorts. The prognostic signature appears fundamental to GAC carcinogenesis and progression and could be practical for patient stratification.

Integrated genomic profiling and modelling for risk stratification in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Prognosis of patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (mEGAC) is poor and molecular determinants of shorter or longer overall survivors are lacking. Our objective was to identify molecular features and develop a prognostic model by profiling the genomic features of patients with mEGAC with widely varying outcomes. DESIGN: We profiled 40 untreated mEGACs (20 shorter survivors <13 months and 20 longer survivors >36 months) with whole-exome sequencing (WES) and RNA sequencing and performed an integrated analysis of exome, transcriptome, immune profile and pathological phenotypes to identify the molecular determinants, developing an integrated model for prognosis and comparison with The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cohorts. RESULTS: KMT2C alterations were exclusively observed in shorter survivors together with high level of intratumour heterogeneity and complex clonal architectures, whereas the APOBEC mutational signatures were significantly enriched in longer survivors. Notably, the loss of heterozygosity in chromosome 4 (Chr4) was associated with shorter survival and 'cold' immune phenotype characterised by decreased B, CD8, natural killer cells and interferon-gamma responses. Unsupervised transcriptomic clustering revealed a shorter survivor subtype with distinct expression features (eg, upregulated druggable targets JAK2, MAP3K13 and MECOM). An integrated model was then built based on clinical variables and the identified molecular determinants, which significantly segregated shorter and longer survivors. All the above features and the integrated model have been validated independently in multiple TCGA cohorts. CONCLUSION: This study discovered novel molecular features prognosticating overall survival in patients with mEGAC and identified potential novel targets in shorter survivors.

Tumor Regression Grade in Gastric Cancer After Preoperative Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The Cancer Staging Manual, 8th edition, now includes post-neoadjuvant therapy (ypTNM) staging for gastric cancer patients. Our purpose was to determine whether the tumor regression grade (TRG) of the primary tumor is useful for predicting the survival of these patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of an institutional database and identified patients with clinically non-metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation therapy before gastrectomy. Pathology reports were reviewed, and TRG was classified as follows: 0 (complete response), 1 (viable tumor cells ≤ 1-2%), 2 (viable cells ≤ 50%), or 3 (viable cells > 50%). RESULTS: Of the 356 patients identified, including 80 (23%) with a gastroesophageal junction tumor, 268 (75%) had undergone preoperative chemoradiation therapy. Fifty-six (16%) had TRG 0, 57 (16%) TRG 1, 128 (36%) TRG 2, and 115 (32%) TRG 3. No association between TRG and pretreatment factors was identified, except for signet-ring cell histologic type and tumor location. A higher TRG was associated with more advanced ypT and ypN categories (both p < 0.001), ypM1 (p = 0.004), and R1 resection (p = 0.052). The median overall survival (OS) duration was 6.6 years, and the 5-year OS rate was 54.1%. TRG 3 was associated with a shorter OS duration than were other TRG scores (p = 0.015), while the OS did not differ significantly among the TRG 0-2 groups (p = 0.803). On multivariable analysis, TRG was not associated with OS after adjustment for ypN status. CONCLUSION: In gastric cancer patients who underwent preoperative therapy, TRG 3 was associated with advanced ypStage and R1 resection. Patients with TRG 3 had a shorter OS duration because of associated advanced ypStage, particularly ypN+ status.

Frequency and Implications of Paratracheal Lymph Node Metastases in Resectable Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the frequency of paratracheal lymph nodes (LN) metastases and their prognostic influence. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Paratracheal LNs are considered regional nodes in the esophageal cancer classification, but their metastatic rate and influence on survival remain unclear. METHODS: One thousand one hundred ninety-nine patients with resectable esophageal or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (EAC) (January 2002 and December 2016) in our Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Database were analyzed. Paratracheal LNs were defined as1R, 1L, 2R, 2L, 4R, and 4L, according to the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer classification. RESULTS: Of 1199 patients, 73 (6.1%) had positive paratracheal LNs at diagnosis. The median overall survival (OS) of 73 patients with initial paratracheal LN involvement was 2.10 years (range 0.01-10.1, 5-yrs OS 24.2%). Of 1071 patients who were eligible for recurrence evaluation, 70 patients (6.5%) developed paratracheal LN metastases as the first recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 1.28 years (range 0.28-5.96 yrs) and the median OS following recurrence was only 0.95 year (range 0.03-7.88). OS in 35 patients who had only paratracheal LN recurrence was significantly longer than in patients who had other recurrences (median OS 2.26 vs 0.51 yrs, 5-yrs OS; 26.8% vs 0%, P < 0.0001). Higher T stage (T3/T4) was an independently risk factor for paratracheal LN recurrence (odds ratio 5.10, 95% confidence interval 1.46-17.89). We segregated patients in 3 groups based on the distance of tumor's proximal edge to esophagogastric junction (low; ≤2 cm, medium; 2.0-7.0 cm, and high; >7.0 cm). Paratracheal LN metastases were more frequent with the proximal tumors (low, 4.2%; medium, 12.0%; high, 30.3%; Cochran-Armitage Trend test, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Paratracheal LN metastases were associated with a shorter survival in resectable EAC patients. Alternate approaches to prolong survival of this group of patients are warranted.

Cancer associated macrophage-like cells and prognosis of esophageal cancer after chemoradiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Cancer Associated Macrophage-Like cells (CAMLs) are polynucleated circulating stromal cells found in the bloodstream of numerous solid-tumor malignancies. Variations within CAML size have been associated with poorer progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a variety of cancers; however, no study has evaluated their clinical significance in esophageal cancer (EC). METHODS: To examine this significance, we ran a 2 year prospective pilot study consisting of newly diagnosed stage I-III EC patients (n = 32) receiving chemoradiotherapy (CRT). CAML sizes were sequentially monitored prior to CRT (BL), ~ 2 weeks into treatment (T1), and at the first available sample after the completion of CRT (T2). RESULTS: We found CAMLs in 88% (n = 28/32) of all patient samples throughout the trial, with a sensitivity of 76% (n = 22/29) in pre-treatment screening samples. Improved 2 year PFS and OS was found in patients with CAMLs < 50 µm by the completion of CRT over patients with CAMLs ≥ 50 µm; PFS (HR = 12.0, 95% CI = 2.7-54.1, p = 0.004) and OS (HR = 9.0, 95%CI = 1.9-43.5, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Tracking CAML sizes throughout CRT as a minimally invasive biomarker may serve as a prognostic tool in mapping EC progression, and further studies are warranted to determine if presence of these cells prior to treatment suggest diagnostic value for at-risk populations.