Advances in Immunotherapy in Esophagogastric Cancer.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are rapidly transforming the care of patients with esophagogastric cancer. Particularly, anti-PD-1 therapy has demonstrated promising efficacy in metastatic and resectable disease. In this review, the authors discuss landmark clinical trials, highlight challenges and opportunities in this field, and propose potential directions for future work.

Rivoceranib, a VEGFR-2 inhibitor, monotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (ANGEL study): an international, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rivoceranib is an oral, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. ANGEL (NCT03042611) was a global, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study evaluating rivoceranib as 3rd-line or ≥4th-line therapy in patients with advanced/metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. METHODS: Patients had failed ≥2 lines of chemotherapy and were randomized 2:1 to rivoceranib 700 mg once daily or placebo with best supportive care. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) by blinded independent central review (BICR). RESULTS: In total, 460 patients (rivoceranib n = 308, placebo n = 152) were enrolled. OS was not statistically different for rivoceranib versus placebo (median 5.78 vs. 5.13 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.74-1.15; p = 0.4724). PFS by BICR (median 2.83 vs. 1.77 months; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.71; p < 0.0001), ORR (6.5% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.0119), and DCR (40.3 vs. 13.2%; p < 0.0001) were improved with rivoceranib versus placebo. In patients receiving ≥4th-line therapy, OS (median 6.34 vs. 4.73 months; p = 0.0192) and PFS by BICR (median 3.52 vs. 1.71 months; p < 0.0001) were improved with rivoceranib versus placebo. The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events with rivoceranib were hypertension (17.9%), anemia (10.4%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (9.4%), asthenia (8.5%), and proteinuria (7.5%). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not meet its primary OS endpoint. Compared to placebo, rivoceranib improved PFS, ORR, and DCR. Rivoceranib also improved OS in a prespecified patient subgroup receiving ≥4th-line therapy.

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (RATIONALE-306): a global, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The options for first-line treatment of advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma are scarce, and the outcomes remain poor. The anti-PD-1 antibody, tislelizumab, has shown antitumour activity in previously treated patients with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. We report interim analysis results from the RATIONALE-306 study, which aimed to assess tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: This global, randomised, double-blind, parallel-arm, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study was conducted at 162 medical centres across Asia, Europe, Oceania, and North America. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable, locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (regardless of PD-L1 expression), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable or evaluable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using permuted block randomisation (block size of four) and stratified by investigator-chosen chemotherapy, region, and previous definitive therapy, to tislelizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks on day 1, together with an investigator-chosen chemotherapy doublet, comprising a platinum agent (cisplatin 60-80 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1) plus a fluoropyrimidine (fluorouracil [750-800 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1-5] or capecitabine [1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14]) or paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1). Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Investigators, patients, and sponsor staff or designees were masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The efficacy analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients) and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03783442. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2018, and Nov 24, 2020, 869 patients were screened, of whom 649 were randomly assigned to tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (n=326) or placebo plus chemotherapy (n=323). Median age was 64·0 years (IQR 59·0-69·0), 563 (87%) of 649 participants were male, 86 (13%) were female, 486 (75%) were Asian, and 155 (24%) were White. 324 (99%) of 326 patients in the tislelizumab group and 321 (99%) of 323 in the placebo group received at least one dose of the study drug. As of data cutoff (Feb 28, 2022), median follow-up was 16·3 months (IQR 8·6-21·8) in the tislelizumab group and 9·8 months (IQR 5·8-19·0) in the placebo group, and 196 (60%) of 326 patients in the tislelizumab group versus 226 (70%) of 323 in the placebo group had died. Median overall survival in the tislelizumab group was 17·2 months (95% CI 15·8-20·1) and in the placebo group was 10·6 months (9·3-12·1; stratified hazard ratio 0·66 [95% CI 0·54-0·80]; one-sided p<0·0001). 313 (97%) of 324 patients in the tislelizumab group and 309 (96%) of 321 in the placebo group had treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (99 [31%] in the tislelizumab group vs 105 [33%] in the placebo group), decreased white blood cell count (35 [11%] vs 50 [16%]), and anaemia (47 [15%] vs 41 [13%]). Six deaths in the tislelizumab group (gastrointestinal and upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage [n=2], myocarditis [n=1], pulmonary tuberculosis [n=1], electrolyte imbalance [n=1], and respiratory failure [n=1]) and four deaths in the placebo group (pneumonia [n=1], septic shock [n=1], and unspecified death [n=2]) were determined to be treatment-related. INTERPRETATION: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma provided superior overall survival with a manageable safety profile versus placebo plus chemotherapy. Given that the interim analysis met its superiority boundary for the primary endpoint, as confirmed by the independent data monitoring committee, this Article represents the primary study analysis. FUNDING: BeiGene.

Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Cancers originating in the esophagus or esophagogastric junction constitute a major global health problem. Esophageal cancers are histologically classified as squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or adenocarcinoma, which differ in their etiology, pathology, tumor location, therapeutics, and prognosis. In contrast to esophageal adenocarcinoma, which usually affects the lower esophagus, esophageal SCC is more likely to localize at or higher than the tracheal bifurcation. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1, has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with locally advanced esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on the management of recurrent or metastatic disease.

Life-threatening "hyper-progression" on immunotherapy revealed as pseudo-progression in DNA mismatch repair deficiency: a case report.

Background: Distinguishing pseudo-progression from true progression on immunotherapy remains a clinical challenge. Clinical tools to aid in this task are currently lacking. DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status is a known predictive marker for anti-programmed death (PD)-1 therapy, but its role in helping to address this situation is not well-defined. Case Description: We report the first case, to our knowledge, of life-threatening hyper-progression which was later revealed to be pseudo-progression in a patient with a deficient MMR (dMMR) tumor. We describe a 62-year-old man with advanced dMMR gastric cancer who was being treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy. After three doses of pembrolizumab he exhibited signs and symptoms that met all applicable definitions of hyper-progression in the setting of acute life-threatening gastrointestinal hemorrhage, extensive radiographic progression of metastases, and increasing carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Comfort measures were considered given the appearance of hyper-progression. But partly given the patient's request, aggressive support was provided, including blood products, vasopressors, and splenic artery embolization. His condition improved, and subsequent scans revealed regression of his metastases and decreased CEA, confirming pseudo-progression. Pembrolizumab was restarted. The patient remains on pembrolizumab with minimal tumor burden more than one year later. Conclusions: This case demonstrates that life-threatening hyper-progression can represent pseudo-progression and suggests that MMR status could be important to consider in determining the aggressiveness of clinical management during apparent hyper-progression.

Risk stratification of postoperative cardiopulmonary toxicity after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer.

Purpose/objective: Postoperative toxicity for esophageal cancer impacts patient quality of life and potentially overall survival (OS). We studied whether patient and toxicity parameters post-chemoradiation therapy predict for post-surgical cardiopulmonary total toxicity burden (CPTTB) and whether CPTTB was associated with short and long-term outcomes. Materials/methods: Patients had biopsy-proven esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy. CPTTB was derived from total perioperative toxicity burden (Lin et al. JCO 2020). To develop a CPTTB risk score predictive for major CPTTB, recursive partitioning analysis was used. Results: From 3 institutions, 571 patients were included. Patients were treated with 3D (37%), IMRT (44%), and proton therapy (19%). 61 patients had major CPTTB (score ≥ 70). Increasing CPTTB was predictive of decreased OS (p<0.001), lengthier post-esophagectomy length of stay (LOS, p<0.001), and death or readmission within 60 days of surgery (DR60, p<0.001). Major CPTTB was also predictive of decreased OS (hazard ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval: 1.17-2.47, p=0.005). The RPA-based risk score included: age ≥ 65, grade ≥ 2 nausea or esophagitis attributed to chemoradiation, and grade ≥ 3 hematologic toxicity attributed to chemoradiation. Patients treated with 3D radiotherapy had inferior OS (p=0.010) and increased major CPTTB (18.5% vs. 6.1%, p<0.001). Conclusion: CPTTB predicts for OS, LOS, and DR60. Patients with 3D radiotherapy or age ≥ 65 years and chemoradiation toxicity are at highest risk for major CPTTB, predicting for higher short and long-term morbidity and mortality. Strategies to optimize medical management and reduce toxicity from chemoradiation should be strongly considered.

Understanding Suboptimal Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), as a novel class of anticancer therapy, can be more efficacious and less toxic than chemotherapy, but their clinical success is confined to certain tumor types. Elucidating their targets, mechanisms and scope of action, and potential synergism with chemotherapy and/or targeted therapies are critical to widen their clinical indications. Treatment response to an ICI targeting programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1) is sought to be understood here by conducting a preplanned correlative analysis of a phase II clinical trial in patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA). The cytolytic capacity of circulating immune cells in cancer patients using a novel ex vivo cytotoxicity assay is evaluated, and the utility of circulating biomarkers is investigated to predict and monitor the treatment effect of anti-PD-1. Baseline expression of Bim and NKG7 and upregulation of CX3CR1 in circulating T cells are associated with the clinical benefit of anti-PD-1 in patients with SBA. Overall, these findings suggest that the frequency and cytolytic capacity of circulating, effector immune cells may differentiate clinical response to ICIs, providing a strong rationale to support immune monitoring using patient peripheral blood.

Defactinib, Pembrolizumab, and Gemcitabine in Patients with Advanced Treatment Refractory Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase I Dose Escalation and Expansion Study.

PURPOSE: Targeting focal adhesion kinase (FAK) renders checkpoint immunotherapy effective in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) mouse model. Defactinib is a highly potent oral FAK inhibitor that has a tolerable safety profile. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I study with dose escalation and expansion phases. In dose escalation, patients with refractory solid tumors were treated at five escalating dose levels of defactinib and gemcitabine to identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D). In expansion phase, patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed on frontline treatment (refractory cohort) or had stable disease (SD) after at least 4 months of standard gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (maintenance cohort) were treated at RP2D. Pre- and posttreatment tumor biopsies were performed to evaluate tumor immunity. RESULTS: The triple drug combination was well-tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. Among 20 treated patients with refractory PDAC, the disease control rate (DCR) was 80%, with one partial response (PR) and 15 SDs, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.6 and 7.8 months, respectively. Among 10 evaluable patients in the maintenance cohort, DCR was 70% with one PR and six SDs. Three patients with SD came off study due to treatment- or disease-related complications. The median PFS and OS on study treatment were 5.0 and 8.3 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of defactinib, pembrolizumab, and gemcitabine was well-tolerated and safe, had promising preliminary efficacy, and showed biomarker activity in infiltrative T lymphocytes. Efficacy of this strategy may require incorporation of more potent chemotherapy in future studies.

Association of PD-L1 Expression and Other Variables With Benefit From Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 17 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Approval by the US Food and Drug Administration of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for advanced gastroesophageal cancer (aGEC) irrespective of PD-L1 status has generated controversy. Exploratory analyses from individual trials indicate a lack of meaningful benefit from ICI in patients with absent or low PD-L1 expression; however, analysis of a single variable while ignoring others may not consider the instability inherent in exploratory analyses. Objective: To systematically examine the predictive value of tissue-based PD-L1 status compared with that of other variables for ICI benefit in aGEC to assess its stability. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register (2000-2022). Study Selection, Data Extraction, and Synthesis: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included of adults with aGEC (adenocarcinoma [AC] or squamous cell carcinoma [SCC]) randomized to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1-containing treatment vs standard of care (SOC). Study screening, data abstraction, and bias assessment were completed independently by 2 reviewers. Of 5752 records screened, 26 were assessed for eligibility; 17 trials were included in the analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified primary end point was overall survival. The mean hazard ratio (HR) for ICI vs SOC was calculated (random-effects model). Predictive values were quantified by calculating the ratio of mean HRs between 2 levels of each variable. Results: In all, 17 RCTs (9 first line, 8 after first line) at low risk of bias and 14 predictive variables were included, totaling 11 166 participants (5067 with SCC, 6099 with ACC; 77.6% were male and 22.4% were female; 59.5% of patients were younger than 65 years, 40.5% were 65 years or older). Among patients with SCCs, PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) was the strongest predictor of ICI benefit (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.53-0.68] for high TPS; and HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.75-0.95] for low TPS), yielding a predictive value of 41.0% favoring high TPS (vs ≤16.0% for other variables). Among patients with AC, PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) was the strongest predictor (after microsatellite instability high status) of ICI benefit (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.66-0.81] for high CPS; and HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.84-1.07] for low CPS), yielding a predictive value of 29.4% favoring CPS-high (vs ≤12.9% for other variables). Head-to-head analyses of trials containing both levels of a variable and/or having similar design generally yielded consistent results. Conclusions and Relevance: Tissue-based PD-L1 expression, more than any variable other than microsatellite instability-high, identified varying degrees of benefit from ICI-containing therapy vs SOC among patients with aGEC in 17 RCTs.

Impact of PD-1 Blockade in Nonresponders: Pitfalls and Promise.

Exploratory analysis of a phase III trial in esophageal cancer found that the patients who most contributed to an overall survival benefit from PD-1 blockade were not responders, but non-responders. The analysis has limitations but may have implications for investigating the optimal timing of immunotherapy relative to other treatments. See related article by Okada et al., p. 3277.

Pembrolizumab in Combination with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with Resectable Adenocarcinoma of the Gastroesophageal Junction.

PURPOSE: This phase Ib/2 trial investigated pembrolizumab-containing trimodality therapy in patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma (cT1-3NanyM0) received neoadjuvant pembrolizumab-containing chemoradiation (CROSS regimen) followed by surgical resection and adjuvant pembrolizumab. The primary endpoints were tolerability in the first 16 patients and pathologic complete response [pCR (ypT0N0)]. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An independent propensity-score-matched cohort (treated with CROSS without immunotherapy) was used for comparison. Exploratory analyses included immune biomarkers in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and plasma. RESULTS: We enrolled 31 eligible patients, of whom 29 received all expected doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab and 28 underwent R0 resection. Safety endpoints were met. The primary efficacy endpoint was not met [7/31 (22.6%) achieved pCR]. Patients with high [i.e., combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10] baseline expression of programmed death (PD)-L1 in the TME had a significantly higher pCR rate than those with low expression [50.0% (4/8) vs. 13.6% (3/22); P = 0.046]. Patients with high PD-L1 expression also experienced longer PFS and OS than propensity-score-matched patients. Among trial patients with PD-L1 CPS < 10, unprespecified analysis explored whether extracellular vesicles (EV) could identify further responders: an elevated plasma level of PD-L1-expressing EVs was significantly associated with higher pCR. CONCLUSIONS: Adding pembrolizumab to trimodality therapy showed acceptable tolerability but did not meet the pre-specified pCR endpoint. Exploratory analyses suggested that high PD-L1 expression in the TME and/or on EVs may identify patients most likely to achieve tumor response.

Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.

Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine with platinum-based chemotherapy has become the standard of care for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal (GEJ) cancer. Trials in colon cancer show that induction chemotherapy followed by maintenance chemotherapy is an efficacious strategy to maximize clinical response while minimizing toxicity. The current retrospective study aims to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of maintenance versus continuous treatment in advanced GEJ malignancy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with fluoropyrimidine and platinum chemotherapy between 2007-2017 was performed. Patients who achieved at least stable disease after initial induction treatment were included. After 16 weeks of induction chemotherapy, patients were categorized into the continuous group if induction chemotherapy was continued and the maintenance group if chemotherapy was switched to maintenance fluoropyrimidine monotherapy or observed off treatment. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. RESULTS: In total, 90 patients met the criteria, 48 received continuous therapy, and 42 received maintenance. Baseline characteristics were comparable. No difference in PFS (9.9 vs 8.4 months p = .28) or in OS (16.1 vs 21.3 months p = .75) was observed, including after controlling for the best response on induction therapy and other variables. In patients on continuous induction therapy, there was a higher prevalence of grade three neuropathy (42.6% vs 9.8% p = .001) and neutropenic fever (13% vs 0% p =.03). CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance therapy following induction fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based therapy is associated with an improved toxicity profile and appears to have comparable efficacy to continuous treatment in metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer.

Rapidly Evolving Treatment Landscape for Metastatic Esophagogastric Carcinoma: Review of Recent Data.

Esophagogastric cancer (EGC) is a heterogeneous group of malignancies that collectively represent the 2nd leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. While surgery in combination with chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy represents the primary curative treatment for early stage disease, survival outcomes for the majority of patients with later-stage disease remain poor. Cytotoxic chemotherapy with platinum doublets such as 5-FU/leucovorin/oxaliplatin is the mainstay of treatment with incremental benefits provided by targeted therapy (trastuzumab, trastuzumab deruxtecan, ramucirumab) and immunotherapy (pembrolizumab, nivolumab). In this article, we provide an updated review and perspectives on the management of advanced EGC. We examine the distinct epidemiological, etiological and molecular features of each disease entity comprising EGC. After reviewing the critical studies that established conventional systemic cytotoxic and targeted therapeutics, we elaborate on recent promising and complex data with immune checkpoint inhibition focusing on implications of tumor histology and PD-L1 expression in the tumor microenvironment. We also highlight novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to build on these recent advances.

Narrative review of pembrolizumab for the treatment of esophageal cancer: evidence and outlook.

OBJECTIVE: Based on the current evidence, review the efficacy and safety profile of pembrolizumab, along with its shortcomings, in an effort to define future research directions. BACKGROUND: The survival outcome of esophageal cancer (EC) is poor, especially in patients with advanced stage. Palliative surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy have limited efficacy in prolonging the survival time. Currently, immunotherapies, including adoptive cell therapy-based, antibody-based, and vaccine-based therapies, are attracting considerable attention. The mechanism of immunotherapy lies in the modification of immune response and prevention of immune escape. Immunomodulatory agents can block the programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway, thereby allowing lymphocytes to attack tumor cells. This class of drugs has the potential to treat a variety of tumors and may substantially improve overall survival (OS) in some patients. Multiple clinical trials have shown that pembrolizumab has good efficacy and safety, enhances the EC treatment paradigm, and has even become the first-line treatment of choice for patients with PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic EC. METHODS: We reviewed the results of clinical trials of pembrolizumab for EC and gastroesophageal cancer presented at Embase, PubMed, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meetings, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab has good efficacy and tolerability profiles, and has emerged as a second-line option for the treatment of PD-L1-positive locally advanced or metastatic ESCC. Pembrolizumab has many promising applications, and further investigations into its mechanisms should be conducted.

Induction versus no induction chemotherapy before neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery in oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicentre randomised phase II trial (NCCTG N0849 [Alliance]).

AIM: report primary results from the first multicentre randomised trial evaluating induction chemotherapy prior to trimodality therapy in patients with oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Notably, recent data from a single-institution randomised trial reported that induction chemotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with well/moderately differentiated tumours. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial (28 centres in the U.S. NCI-sponsored North Central Cancer Treatment Group [Alliance]), trimodality-eligible patients (T3-4N0, TanyN+) were randomised to receive induction (docetaxel, oxaliplatin, capecitabine; Arm A) or no induction chemotherapy (Arm B) followed by oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil/radiation and subsequent surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of pathologic complete response (pathCR). Secondary/exploratory endpoints were OS and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Of 55 patients evaluable for the primary endpoint, the pathCR rate was 28.6% (8/28) in A versus 40.7% (11/27) in B (P = .34). Given interim results indicating futility, accrual was terminated, but patients were followed. After a median follow-up of 60.4 months, a longer median OS in Arm A versus B was unexpectedly observed (3-year rates 57.1% versus 41.7%, respectively) driven by longer DFS after margin-free surgery. In posthoc analysis, induction (versus no induction) chemotherapy was associated with significantly longer OS and DFS among patients with well/moderately differentiated tumours, but not among patients with poorly/undifferentiated tumours (Pinteraction = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Adding induction chemotherapy prior to trimodality therapy did not improve the primary endpoint, pathCR. However, induction chemotherapy was associated with longer median OS, particularly among patients with well/moderately differentiated tumours. These findings may inform further development of curative-intent trials in this disease.