Enteral versus parenteral nutrition in the conservative treatment of upper gastrointestinal fistula after surgery: a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, open-label, phase III study (NUTRILEAK study).

BACKGROUND: Postoperative upper gastrointestinal fistula (PUGIF) is a devastating complication, leading to high mortality (reaching up to 80%), increased length of hospital stay, reduced health-related quality of life and increased health costs. Nutritional support is a key component of therapy in such cases, which is related to the high prevalence of malnutrition. In the prophylactic setting, enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with a shorter hospital stay, a lower incidence of severe infectious complications, lower severity of complications and decreased cost compared to total parenteral nutrition (TPN) following major upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. There is little evidence available for the curative setting after fistula occurrence. We hypothesize that EN increases the 30-day fistula closure rate in PUGIF, allowing better health-related quality of life without increasing the morbidity or mortality. METHODS/DESIGN: The NUTRILEAK trial is a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, open-label phase III trial to assess the efficacy of EN (the experimental group) compared with TPN (the control group) in patients with PUGIF. The primary objective of the study is to compare EN versus TPN in the treatment of PUGIF (after esophagogastric resection including bariatric surgery, duodenojejunal resection or pancreatic resection with digestive tract violation) in terms of the 30-day fistula closure rate. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the 6-month postrandomization fistula closure rate, time of first fistula closure (in days), the medical- and surgical treatment-related complication rate at 6 months after randomization, the fistula-related complication rate at 6 months after randomization, the type and severity of early (30 days after randomization) and late fistula-related complications (over 30 days after randomization), 30-day and 6-month postrandomization mortality rate, nutritional status at day 30, day 60, day 90 and day 180 postrandomization, the mean length of hospital stay, the patient's health-related quality of life (by self-assessment questionnaire), oral feeding time and direct costs of treatment. A total of 321 patients will be enrolled. DISCUSSION: The two nutritional supports are already used in daily practice, but most surgeons are reluctant to use the enteral route in case of PUGIF. This study will be the first randomized trial testing the role of EN versus TPN in PUGIF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03742752. Registered on 14 November 2018.

NORAD01-GRECCAR16 multicenter phase III non-inferiority randomized trial comparing preoperative modified FOLFIRINOX without irradiation to radiochemotherapy for resectable locally advanced rectal cancer (intergroup FRENCH-GRECCAR- PRODIGE trial).

BACKGROUND: Preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) is recommended in France prior to total mesorectal excision in patients with mid or low locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) (cT3/T4 and/or N+) because it has been shown to improve local control. Preoperative RCT has also disadvantages including the absence of proven impact on metastatic recurrence and the risk of late side effects on bowel and genitourinary function. In patients with primarily resectable LARC, preoperative systemic chemotherapy without pelvic irradiation could be used as an alternative to RCT. METHODS: This study is a multicenter, open-label randomized, 2-arm phase III non-inferiority trial. Patients with mid or low resectable LARC (cT3N0 or cT1-T3N+ with circumferential resection margin [CRM] > 2 mm on pretreatment MRI) will be randomized to either modified FOLFIRINOX for 3 months or RCT (Cap50 intensified-modulated radiotherapy). All patients have restaging MRI after preoperative treatment. The primary endpoint is 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) from the time to randomization including progression during preoperative treatment. Secondary endpoints are treatment related toxicity, treatment compliance, R0 resection rate, sphincter saving surgery rate, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, loco-regional recurrence free survival, overall survival, bowel and sexual functions at diagnosis, quality of life, radiologic and pathologic response after preoperative treatment. The number of patients required is 574. DISCUSSION: The choice of modified FOLFIRINOX for preoperative chemotherapy is supported by recent and consistent data on safety and efficacy of this regimen on rectal cancer. The use of preoperative chemotherapy instead of RCT could be associated with pronounced advantages in terms of functional results and quality of life in cancer survivors. However and first of all, the non-inferiority of preoperative chemotherapy compared to RCT on oncologic outcome has to be validated. If this study demonstrates the non-inferiority of chemotherapy compared to RCT, this can lead to a crucial change in clinical practice in a large subset of rectal cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03875781 (March 15, 2019). Version 1.1.

Effect of prehabilitation in gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma: study protocol of a multicentric, randomised, control trial-the PREHAB study.

INTRODUCTION: Perioperative chemotherapy is the gold standard treatment of the resectable gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. However, 70% of patients cannot receive the complete sequence because of a postoperative complication or a decrease in functional and nutritional reserves. Recently, a new concept appeared in digestive surgery: prehabilitation. This interventional process consists of patient preparation, between surgical consultation and surgery, and is based on 3 components: (1) physical management, (2) nutritional care and (3) psychological care. Prehabilitation should decrease postoperative complications and improve nutritional and physical status during the preoperative and postoperative periods. Therefore, it is becoming essential to evaluate the effect of prehabilitation, compared to conventional care, on the percentage of patients reaching the complete oncological treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PREHAB trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy of prehabilitation compared to conventional care, in patients with gastro-oesophageal cancer with perioperative chemotherapy. This trial is a prospective, randomised, controlled, open-blind and interventional study in 4 centres. Patients (n=60 per group) will be randomly assigned for management with either prehabilitation or conventional care. The primary outcome is the percentage of patients reaching the complete oncological treatment decided in a multidisciplinary tumour board. The secondary outcomes are the postoperative morbidity, disease-free survival, overall survival, feasibility of the protocol, length of stay, variation of the functional reserve after the preoperative chemotherapy (defined by the VO2peak, ventilatory threshold and 6-min walk test), preoperative and postoperative nutritional status, preoperative anxiety, quality of life, 30-day and 90-day mortality and cumulative dose of cytotoxic treatment received. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by an independent medical ethics committee (IRB00008526, CPP Sud-Est VI, Clermont-Ferrand, France) and by the competent French authority (ANSM, Saint Denis, France) and registered on Clinicaltrial.gov. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02780921.

Surgery alone versus chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for stage I and II esophageal cancer: final analysis of randomized controlled phase III trial FFCD 9901.

PURPOSE: Although often investigated in locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC), the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) in early stages is unknown. The aim of this multicenter randomized phase III trial was to assess whether NCRT improves outcomes for patients with stage I or II EC. METHODS: The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were disease-free survival, postoperative morbidity, in-hospital mortality, R0 resection rate, and prognostic factor identification. From June 2000 to June 2009, 195 patients in 30 centers were randomly assigned to surgery alone (group S; n = 97) or NCRT followed by surgery (group CRT; n = 98). CRT protocol was 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks with two courses of concomitant chemotherapy composed of fluorouracil 800 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2). We report the long-term results of the final analysis, after a median follow-up of 93.6 months. RESULTS: Pretreatment disease was stage I in 19.0%, IIA in 53.3%, and IIB in 27.7% of patients. For group CRT compared with group S, R0 resection rate was 93.8% versus 92.1% (P = .749), with 3-year overall survival rate of 47.5% versus 53.0% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.40; P = .94) and postoperative mortality rate of 11.1% versus 3.4% (P = .049), respectively. Because interim analysis of the primary end point revealed an improbability of demonstrating the superiority of either treatment arm (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.59; P = .66), the trial was stopped for anticipated futility. CONCLUSION: Compared with surgery alone, NCRT with cisplatin plus fluorouracil does not improve R0 resection rate or survival but enhances postoperative mortality in patients with stage I or II EC.

Phase II/III multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating a strategy of primary surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy versus peri-operative chemotherapy for resectable gastric signet ring cell adenocarcinomas - PRODIGE 19 - FFCD1103 - ADCI002.

BACKGROUND: A dramatic increase in the incidence of the diffuse form of gastric adenocarcinomas and particularly signet ring cell carcinomas has been observed in Western countries. Evidence is accruing that signet ring cell carcinomas may have inherent chemo resistance leaving many clinicians unsure of the benefits of delaying surgery to pursue a neoadjuvant approach. METHODS/DESIGN: PRODIGE-19-FFCD1103-ADCI002 is a prospective multicentre controlled randomised phase II/III trial comparing current standard of care of perioperative chemotherapy (2x3 cycles of Epirubicin, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) with a strategy of primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (6 cycles of Epirubicin, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) in patients with a stage IB-III gastric signet ring cell tumour. The principal objective of the phase II study (84 patients) is to determine if the experimental arm (primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy) has sufficient interest in terms of percentage of living patients at 24 months to be evaluated in a phase III trial. If 7 or less patients in the experimental arm are alive at 24 months, phase III will not be initiated. The primary objective of phase III (230 additional patients) is to demonstrate superiority of the experimental arm in terms of overall survival. Secondary endpoints include overall survival at 36 months, disease free survival at 24 and 36 months, R0 resection rates, treatment tolerance, postoperative mortality and morbidity evaluated by Clavien-Dindo severity index, the prognostic impact of positive peritoneal cytology and the assessment of quality of life. An ancillary study will assess the emotional and cognitive impact of surgery and perioperative chemotherapy for both the patient and their partner. DISCUSSION: As inherent chemo resistance of signet ring cell tumours and delay in definitive surgery may favour tumour progression we hypothesise that a policy of primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy will improve overall survival compared to a standard perioperative chemotherapeutic strategy. This randomised phase II/III trial is the first dedicated to this histological subtype. Whilst the development of new biomarkers and targeted therapies are awaited, the results of this trial should further help in devising individualised protocols of patient care in a tumour group whose diversity increasingly demands assessment of alternative strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01717924.

Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy in esophageal cancer patients: a feasible and safe access for nutritional support during multimodal therapy.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy is not widely used in malnourished esophageal cancer (EC) patients because of concerns about its feasibility in frequently obstructive tumors, suitability of the stomach as an esophageal substitute, and potential for metastatic inoculation. A percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) could be an optimal alternative. METHODS: Experience with PRG among 1,205 consecutive patients presenting with EC from 2002 to 2011 in our department was retrospectively reviewed. PRG was mostly utilized for malnourished patients for whom neoadjuvant chemoradiation was scheduled. The rates of both successful placement and major related complications (Dindo-Clavien ≥III) were analyzed. A matched cohort analysis was constructed in patients who underwent esophagectomy with gastroplasty (n = 688) to evaluate the impact of PRG placement on the suitability of the gastric conduit and on postoperative course. For 78 resected patients with PRG (PRG group), 156 randomly selected controls without PRG (no PRG group) were matched 2:1 for gender, age, ASA grade, clinical TNM stage, and neoadjuvant treatment delivery. RESULTS: PRG placement was planned in 269 (22.3 %) patients mainly with locally advanced EC (63.8 %). PRG placement was feasible in 259 (96.3 %) patients. Sixty-day PRG-related mortality and major morbidity rates were 0 and 3.8 % respectively. For resected patients, the PRG and no PRG groups were comparable regarding perioperative characteristics, except for malnutrition, which was more frequent in the PRG group (P < 0.001). At the time of operation, PRG takedown and site closure were uncomplicated and the use of the stomach was possible in all 78 patients. Despite a higher malnutrition rate at presentation in the PRG group, rates of overall morbidity, and morbidity related to esophageal surgery, were similar between the two groups (P > 0.258). CONCLUSION: PRG is feasible, safe, and useful in nonselected patients with EC and does not compromise the suitability of the stomach as an esophageal substitute in patients deemed to be resectable.

Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid vs gemcitabine following pancreatic cancer resection: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Adjuvant fluorouracil has been shown to be of benefit for patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine is known to be the most effective agent in advanced disease as well as an effective agent in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether fluorouracil or gemcitabine is superior in terms of overall survival as adjuvant treatment following resection of pancreatic cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 trial, an open-label, phase 3, randomized controlled trial conducted in 159 pancreatic cancer centers in Europe, Australasia, Japan, and Canada. Included in ESPAC-3 version 2 were 1088 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who had undergone cancer resection; patients were randomized between July 2000 and January 2007 and underwent at least 2 years of follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either fluorouracil plus folinic acid (folinic acid, 20 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus injection, followed by fluorouracil, 425 mg/m(2) intravenous bolus injection given 1-5 days every 28 days) (n = 551) or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion once a week for 3 of every 4 weeks) (n = 537) for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was overall survival; secondary measures were toxicity, progression-free survival, and quality of life. RESULTS: Final analysis was carried out on an intention-to-treat basis after a median of 34.2 (interquartile range, 27.1-43.4) months' follow-up after 753 deaths (69%). Median survival was 23.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.1-25.0) months for patients treated with fluorouracil plus folinic acid and 23.6 (95% CI, 21.4-26.4) months for those treated with gemcitabine (chi(1)(2) = 0.7; P = .39; hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.81-1.08]). Seventy-seven patients (14%) receiving fluorouracil plus folinic acid had 97 treatment-related serious adverse events, compared with 40 patients (7.5%) receiving gemcitabine, who had 52 events (P < .001). There were no significant differences in either progression-free survival or global quality-of-life scores between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with the use of fluorouracil plus folinic acid, gemcitabine did not result in improved overall survival in patients with completely resected pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00058201.

Patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma nonresponder to radiochemotherapy: who will benefit from surgery?

BACKGROUND: In patients who are nonresponders to primary radiochemotherapy (RCT), prognosis is poor, leading mostly to palliation. Salvage surgery may have a survival benefit otherwise complete. Our aim was to identify predictors of R0 resection in these patients. METHODS: In 98 nonresponders with locally advanced infracarinal tumors, curative salvage surgery was attempted. Resection was R0 in 62.2% and incomplete in 37.8% of cases. Univariate and multivariate analyses included pre-RCT and post-RCT variables collected prospectively. RESULTS: Overall survival was higher in the R0 resection group (18.4 vs 8.6 months, P < .001). Independent predictors of R0 resection were tumor height 90 degrees , irrespective of tumor height (n = 23). Rates of R0 resection were 81%, 53%, and 39%, respectively (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Salvage esophagectomy should be systematically attempted in nonresponders with tumor height

Factors affecting postoperative course and survival after en bloc resection for esophageal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: To identify factors affecting postoperative course and survival after esophagectomy for cancer and reasons for improved survival over time. METHODS: Complete esophageal resection was attempted for middle and lower third esophageal carcinomas in 386 consecutive patients between January 1982 and January 2002. Two study periods were analyzed: 1982 to 1993 and 1994 to 2002. Prognostic factors were identified by multivariate analysis and the two periods compared. RESULTS: Hospital mortality rate decreased from 5.4% to 2.9% (p = 0.245). Both anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications rates decreased from 9.8% to 2.2% (p = 0.001) and 24.1% to 19.3% (p = 0.295), respectively. An increased proportion of patients had R0 resection in the latter period, 78.5% versus 67.0%, (p = 0.028). Five-year survival rate after R0 resection increased from 29% to 46% (p = 0.001), with a decreased recurrence rate from 65.8% to 44.3% (p = 0.002). Three favorable prognostic factors were identified: low pT stage, pN0 stage, and operation during the 1994 to 2002 study period. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term outcome and survival of patients with resected esophageal cancer have improved over time. Advances in perioperative technique, staging methods, and surgical management combined with higher patient selection and use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation may be responsible for this progress.