ABSTRACT
AIM: To assess the appropriateness of systemic oncological treatments (SOT) provided to patients diagnosed with advanced esophageal cancer (EC) across a group of participating hospitals. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective cohort study in five Spanish hospitals including newly confirmed advanced EC cases between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2016, with a 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: We identified 157 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria (median age: 65 years, 85.9% males). Most patients, 125 (79.6%) were treated at least with one active treatment, and 33% received two or more lines of SOT. The 1-, 2- and 5-year overall survival rates were 30.3% [95%CI: 23.8, 38.7], 14.0% [95%CI: 9.3, 21.0], and 7.1% [95% CI: 3.8, 13.1] respectively, and the median survival time 8 months (95% CI: 6, 19) for stages IIIb IIIc and 7 months (95% CI: 5, 9) for stage IV. Clinical stage, receiving more than one line of SOT, and treatment with radiotherapy accelerated the time to death (0.4, 0.9-, and 0.8-times shorter survival respectively, p < 0.05). Better performance status (ECOG < 2) extended survival time by 2.2 times (p = 0.04). Age < 65 years (OR 9.4, 95% CI 3.2, 31.4, p < 0.001), and being treated in one particular hospital (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.0, 0.8, p < 0.01) were associated with the administration of two or more lines of SOT. Altogether, 18.9% and 9.0% of patients received chemotherapy in the last four and two weeks of life, respectively. Moreover, 2.5% of patients were prescribed a new line of chemotherapy during the last month of life. The proportion of all patients who did not have access to palliative care reached 29.3%, and among those who had access to it, 34.2% initiated it in the last month of life. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of advanced EC patients receive many treatments not based on sound evidence and they do not benefit enough from palliative care services. The most accepted appropriateness indicators point out that some of the analyzed patients could have been overtreated. This study provides important insights into the quality of care provided to advanced EC, and furthermore, for giving valuable insight and opportunities for improvement.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Humans , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Male , Female , Aged , Spain , Middle Aged , Survival Rate , Aged, 80 and over , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Neoplasm Staging , Adult , Follow-Up StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The optimal chemotherapy backbone for HER2-negative advanced esophagogastric cancer, either in combination with targeted therapies or as a comparator in clinical trials, is uncertain. The subtle yet crucial differences in platinum-based regimens' safety and synergy with combination treatments need consideration. METHODS: We analyzed cases from the AGAMENON-SEOM Spanish registry of HER2-negative advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma treated with platinum and fluoropyrimidine from 2008 to 2021. This study focused exclusively on patients receiving one of the four regimens: FOLFOX (5-FU and oxaliplatin), CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin), CP (capecitabine and cisplatin) and FP (5-FU and cisplatin). The aim was to determine the most effective and tolerable platinum and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimen and to identify any prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 1293 patients, 36% received either FOLFOX (n = 468) or CAPOX (n = 466), 20% CP (n = 252), and 8% FP (n = 107). FOLFOX significantly increased PFS (progression free survival) compared to CP, with a hazard ratio of 0.73 (95% CI 0.58-0.92, p = 0.009). The duration of treatment was similar across all groups. Survival outcomes among regimens were similar, but analysis revealed worse ECOG-PS (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status), > 2 metastatic sites, bone metastases, hypoalbuminemia, higher NLR (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio), and CP regimen as predictors of poor PFS. Fatigue was common in all treatments, with the highest incidence in FOLFOX (77%), followed by FP (72%), CAPOX (68%), and CP (60%). Other notable toxicities included neuropathy (FOLFOX 69%, CAPOX 62%), neutropenia (FOLFOX 52%, FP 55%), hand-foot syndrome in CP (46%), and thromboembolic events (FP 12%, CP 11%). CONCLUSIONS: FOLFOX shown better PFS than CP. Adverse effects varied: neuropathy was more common with oxaliplatin, while thromboembolism was more frequent with cisplatin.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Capecitabine , Cisplatin , Esophageal Neoplasms , Fluorouracil , Leucovorin , Oxaliplatin , Receptor, ErbB-2 , Registries , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Fluorouracil/therapeutic use , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Esophageal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Capecitabine/therapeutic use , Capecitabine/administration & dosage , Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism , Leucovorin/therapeutic use , Leucovorin/administration & dosage , Leucovorin/adverse effects , Oxaliplatin/therapeutic use , Oxaliplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Adult , Organoplatinum Compounds/therapeutic use , Organoplatinum Compounds/administration & dosage , Progression-Free Survival , Esophagogastric Junction/pathology , Aged, 80 and over , SpainABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The choice of chemotherapy in HER2-negative gastric cancer is based on centre's preferences and adverse effects profile. No schedule is currently accepted as standard, nor are there any factors to predict response, other than HER2 status. We seek to evaluate whether Lauren type influences the efficacy of various chemotherapies and on patient overall survival (OS). METHODS: We have conducted a multicenter study in 31 hospitals. The eligibility criteria include diagnosis of stomach or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, HER2 negativity, and chemotherapy containing 2-3 drugs. Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for confounding factors, with tests of 'treatment-by-histology' interaction, was used to estimate treatment effect. RESULTS: Our registry contains 1303 tumours analysable for OS end points and 730 evaluable for overall response rate (ORR). A decrease in ORR was detected in the presence of a diffuse component: odds ratio 0.719 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.525-0.987), P=0.039. Anthracycline- or docetaxel-containing schedules increased ORR only in the intestinal type. The diffuse type displayed increased mortality with hazard ratio (HR) of 1.201 (95% CI, 1.054-1.368), P=0.0056. Patients receiving chemotherapy with docetaxel exhibited increased OS limited to the intestinal type: HR 0.65 (95% CI, 0.49-0.87), P=0.024, with no increment in OS for the subset having a diffuse component. With respect to progression-free survival (PFS), a significant interaction was seen in the effect of docetaxel-containing schedules, with better PFS limited to the intestinal type subgroup, in the comparison against any other schedule: HR 0.65 (95% CI, 0.50-0.85), P=0.015, and against anthracycline-based regimens: HR 0.64 (95% CI, 0.46-0.88), P=0.046. CONCLUSIONS: As a conclusion, in this registry, Lauren classification tumour subtypes predicted survival and responded differently to chemotherapy. Future clinical trials should stratify effect estimations based on histology.