Prognostic value of patient-reported quality of life for survival in oesophagogastric cancer: analysis from the population-based POCOP study.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence of trials demonstrates that patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at diagnosis is prognostic for overall survival (OS) in oesophagogastric cancer. However, real-world data are lacking. Moreover, differences in disease stages and tumour-specific symptoms are usually not taken into consideration. The aim of this population-based study was to assess the prognostic value of HRQoL, including tumour-specific scales, on OS in patients with potentially curable and advanced oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: Data were derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the patient reported outcome registry (POCOP). Patients included in POCOP between 2016 and 2018 were stratified for potentially curable (cT1-4aNallM0) or advanced (cT4b or cM1) disease. HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the tumour-specific OG25 module. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the impact of HRQoL, sociodemographic and clinical factors (including treatment) on OS. RESULTS: In total, 924 patients were included. Median OS was 38.9 months in potentially curable patients (n = 795) and 10.6 months in patients with advanced disease (n = 129). Global Health Status was independently associated with OS in potentially curable patients (HR 0.89, 99%CI 0.82-0.97), together with several other HRQoL items: appetite loss, dysphagia, eating restrictions, odynophagia, and body image. In advanced disease, the Summary Score was the strongest independent prognostic factor (HR 0.75, 99%CI 0.59-0.94), followed by fatigue, pain, insomnia and role functioning. CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, HRQoL was prognostic for OS in patients with potentially curable and advanced oesophagogastric cancer. Several HRQoL domains, including the Summary Score and several OG25 items, could be used to develop or update prognostic models.

Communicating treatment risks and benefits to cancer patients: a systematic review of communication methods.

PURPOSE: Cancer patients are increasingly involved in decision-making processes. Hence, clinicians need to inform patients about the risks and benefits of different treatment options in order for patients to make well informed decisions. The aim of this review is to determine the effects of methods of communicating prognostic information about (1) disease progression (survival, progression, recurrence and remission), (2) side effects and complications and (3) health-related quality of life (HRQL) on cognitive, affective and behavioral outcomes in cancer patients. METHODS: A literature search was performed to select articles that were published up to  November 2019 and that examined verbal and/or visual risk communication interventions in an oncological clinical setting. RESULTS: The search yielded 14,875 studies; 28 studies were ultimately included. For disease progression information, we found that framing affects treatment choice. Furthermore, limiting the amount of progression information in a graphical display could benefit patients' understanding of risks and benefits. For prognostic information about side effects and complications, precise and defined risk information was better understood than information presented in words. When displaying HRQL data, no consensus was found on which graph type to use. CONCLUSION: Great heterogeneity in the results and methodology and in the compared communication formats precluded us from drawing any further conclusions. Practical implications for clinicians are to consider the effects that different types of framing might have on the patient and to not rely exclusively on words to describe risks, but rather include at least some form of numbers or visualization.

Recurrence after preoperative chemotherapy and surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: In most western European countries perioperative chemotherapy is a part of standard curative treatment for gastric cancer. Nevertheless, recurrence rates remain high after multimodality treatment. This study examines patterns of recurrence in patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy with surgery for gastric cancer in a real-world setting. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2015 who underwent at least preoperative chemotherapy and a gastrectomy with curative intent (cT1N+/cT2-4a,X; any cN; cM0) in 18 Dutch hospitals were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional data on chemotherapy and recurrence were collected from medical records. Rates, patterns, and timing of recurrence were examined. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to determine prognostic factors for recurrence. RESULTS: 408 patients were identified. After a median follow-up of 27.8 months, 36.8% of the gastric cancer patients had a recurrence of which the majority (88.8%) had distant metastasis. The 1-year recurrence-free survival was 71.8%. The risk of recurrence was higher in patients with an ypN+ stage (HR 4.92, 95% CI 3.35-7.24), partial or no tumor regression (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.22-5.64), 3 instead of ≥ 6 chemotherapy cycles (HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.99-4.63), R1 resection (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02-2.26), and < 15 resected lymph nodes (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.14-2.37). CONCLUSION: A considerable amount of gastric cancer patients who were treated with curative intent developed a recurrence despite surgery and perioperative treatment. The majority developed distant metastases, therefore, multimodality treatment approaches should be focused on the prevention of distant rather than locoregional recurrences to improve survival.

A meta-analysis on salvage surgery as a potentially curative procedure in patients with isolated local recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer after chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Isolated local recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer (EC) after curative intended definitive (dCRT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with initially omitted surgery, is a potential indication for salvage surgery. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of salvage surgery in these patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was performed using databases of PubMed/Medline. All included studies were performed in patients with persistent or recurrent EC after initial treatment with dCRT or nCRT, between 2007 and 2017. Survival analysis was performed with an inverse-variance weighting method. RESULTS: Of the 278 identified studies, 28 were eligible, including a total of 1076 patients. Postoperative complications after salvage esophagectomy were significantly more common among patients with isolated persistent than in those with locoregional recurrent EC, including respiratory (36.6% versus 22.7%; difference in proportion 10.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) [3.1; 18.7]) and cardiovascular complications (10.4% versus 4.5%; difference in proportion 5.9 with 95% CI [1.5; 10.2]). The pooled estimated 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.6% [1.6; 3.6] and 8.0% [6.3; 9.8], respectively. The pooled estimated 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 39.0% (95% CI: [35.8; 42.2]) and 19.4% [95% CI:16.5; 22.4], respectively. Patients with isolated persistent or recurrent EC after initial CRT had similar 5-year OS (14.0% versus 19.7%, difference in proportion -5.7, 95% CI [-13.7; 2.3]). CONCLUSIONS: Salvage surgery is a potentially curative procedure in patients with locally recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer and can be performed safely after definitive or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy when surgery was initially omitted.