Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of peritoneal metastasis of gastric origin treated with a hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy procedure in the PERISCOPE I trial.

INTRODUCTION: The PERISCOPE I (Treatment of PERItoneal dissemination in Stomach Cancer patients with cytOreductive surgery and hyPErthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy) study was conducted to investigate the safety and feasibility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination. In this study, tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of the patients treated in the PERISCOPE I trial were investigated. METHODS: Patients who had undergone the full study protocol were selected; that is, preoperative systemic chemotherapy, followed by a surgical procedure consisting of a (sub)total gastrectomy, cytoreductive surgery, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin (460 mg/m2 ) and docetaxel (in escalating doses). RESULTS: Twenty-five PERISCOPE I patients underwent the full study protocol. Most patients had an ypT3-4 tumor (96%) and the diffuse-type histology was predominant (64%). Seven patients (28%) had a microscopically irradical (R1) resection. In all patients, a complete cytoreduction was achieved. Median follow-up was 37 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34-39) months. Disease recurrence was detected in 17 patients (68%). Median disease-free and overall survival were 12 and 15 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this series of gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination who underwent HIPEC surgery, unfavorable tumor characteristics were common. Survival might be encouraging but disease recurrence was frequent. The efficacy of an HIPEC procedure in improving prognosis is currently being investigated in the PERISCOPE II trial.

Molecular profiles of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancers to develop personalized treatment strategies.

Identification of molecular predictive markers of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation could aid clinical decision-making in patients with localized oesophageal cancer. Therefore, we subjected pretreatment biopsies of 75 adenocarcinoma (OAC) and 16 squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) patients to targeted next-generation DNA sequencing, as well as biopsies of 85 OAC and 20 OSCC patients to promoter methylation analysis of eight GI-specific genes, and subsequently searched for associations with histopathological response and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Thereby, we found that in OAC, CSMD1 deletion (8%) and ETV4 amplification (5%) were associated with a favourable histopathological response, whereas SMURF1 amplification (5%) and SMARCA4 mutation (7%) were associated with an unfavourable histopathological response. KRAS (15%) and GATA4 (7%) amplification were associated with shorter OS. In OSCC, TP63 amplification (25%) and TFPI2 (10%) gene promoter methylation were associated with an unfavourable histopathological response and shorter DFS (TP63) and OS (TFPI2), whereas CDKN2A deletion (38%) was associated with prolonged OS. In conclusion, this study identified candidate genetic biomarkers associated with response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with localized oesophageal cancer.

A population-based study on intestinal and diffuse type adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and stomach in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2015.

AIM: To investigate the nationwide time trends in incidence and survival of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas according to the Laurén classification (intestinal, diffuse and mixed type). METHODS: All patients diagnosed in the Netherlands with oesophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma between 1989 and 2015 were included. A syntax was developed to determine the histological subtype based on pathology reports as archived in the Dutch pathology registry. These reports were linked to individual data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Relative survival was used to assess survival. RESULTS: The histological subtype could be determined in 18.691 (84.1%) oesophageal and in 32.312 (83.5%) gastric adenocarcinomas. Among these, 79% were intestinal and 21% diffuse type in oesophageal cancers, compared to 55% intestinal and 44% diffuse type in gastric cancers. Relative median survival of intestinal type tumours was longer than that of diffuse type tumours, that is, 12.1 versus 9.4 months for oesophageal carcinomas, and 10.1 versus 7.6 months for gastric carcinomas, respectively. Between 1989 and 2015, the relative median survival of non-metastatic intestinal and diffuse type oesophageal adenocarcinoma improved from 12.0 to 30.0 months, and from 12.0 to 19.2 months, respectively. The same was true for intestinal type gastric carcinoma (from 22.8 to 27.6 months) but for diffuse type gastric carcinoma, the increase was less (from 16.8 to 18.0 months). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, histological subtypes of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas differed in incidence and survival times. These findings may call for a differentiated treatment approach.

Elevated Pretreatment CEA and CA19-9 Levels are Related to Early Treatment Failure in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Chemoradiotherapy and surgery are the basis of the potentially curative treatment for esophageal cancer. Approximately 1 in 5 patients, however, do not benefit from this intensive treatment due to early treatment failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 at diagnosis, in relation to survival and early treatment failure (disease recurrence or death within 1 year after surgery). METHODS: Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma scheduled for chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery between 1998 and 2014 were selected from a retrospectively collected database if both CEA and CA19-9 levels were measured before the start of treatment. RESULTS: Pretreatment CEA and CA19-9 levels were known in 102 patients. Median overall survival differed (P<0.001) between patients with normal levels of both CEA and CA19-9 (n=59; 51 mo), patients with elevated CEA only (n=13; 43 mo), patients with elevated CA19-9 only (n=19; 24 mo), and those with elevated levels of both CEA and CA19-9 (n=11; 11 mo). Elevation of both CEA and CA19-9 was associated with early treatment failure (odds ratio: 10.4; 95% confidence interval: 2.4-45.5, P=0.002). Median time to tumor recurrence was 34 months in patients with normal CEA and CA19-9 levels, and 7 months in those with elevated levels of both (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment elevated CEA and CA19-9 levels were significantly associated with early treatment failure and decreased overall survival in this esophageal adenocarcinoma patient cohort treated with curative intent. Until prospective validation, CEA and CA19-9 might play a role in identifying high-risk patients before the start of intensive locoregional therapy.

Advanced Age is Not a Contraindication for Treatment With Curative Intent in Esophageal Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare long-term outcomes between younger and older (70 y and above) esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional recurrence-free interval were compared between older (70 y and above) and younger (below 70 y) esophageal cancer patients treated between 1998 and 2013. Treatment consisted of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with surgery or definitive chemoradiotherapy: 36 to 50.4 Gy in 18 to 28 fractions combined with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin or carboplatin/paclitaxel. RESULTS: The study comprised 253 patients, of whom 76 were 70 years and older. Median age was 64 years (range, 41 to 83). Most patients had stage II-IIIA disease (83%). Planned treatment was neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with surgery for 169 patients (41 patients aged 70 y and older) and definitive chemoradiotherapy for 84 patients (31 patients aged 70 y and older). The compliance to radiotherapy was 92%, with no difference between older and younger patients. In 33 patients (13 patients aged 70 y and older) planned surgery was not performed. Median follow-up was 4.9 years. Three-year OS was 42%. The multivariable analysis showed no statistical difference in OS or in DFS comparing older and younger patients: OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.28), DFS (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.60-1.25). Elderly showed a longer locoregional recurrence-free interval; HR, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.30-0.92; P=0.02) and a higher pathologic complete response rate (50% vs. 25%; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes of older esophageal cancer patients (70 y and above) selected for treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery or definitive chemoradiotherapy were comparable with the outcomes of their younger counterparts. Advanced age alone should not be a contraindication for potentially curative chemoradiotherapy-based treatment in esophageal cancer patients.

The prognostic and potentially predictive value of the Laurén classification in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

AIM: To investigate the histological subtypes of oesophageal adenocarcinoma according to the Laurén classification (intestinal/diffuse/mixed) in relation to tumour response to neoadjuvant treatment, and in relation to patients' survival after potentially curative treatment. METHODS: Data were collected from all oesophageal adenocarcinoma patients who underwent potentially curative treatment in our institute between 1998 and 2014. Treatment consisted of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (36-50 Gy) followed by an oesophagectomy or definitive chemoradiotherapy (50-50.4 Gy). Clinical data were collected from patient records. All endoscopic biopsies and surgical resection specimens were reassessed to determine the histological subtype (intestinal, diffuse or mixed) and the Mandard tumour regression grade (TRG). The impact of the histological subtypes on survival was determined using a Cox model. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 68 months. Diffuse and mixed type cancers accounted for 25% of oesophageal adenocarcinomas. Median overall survival differed significantly between patients with intestinal (n = 121, 39 months), diffuse (n = 28, 18 months) or mixed type (n = 11, 25 months) carcinomas (log rank, p = 0.023). In multivariable analysis, the diffuse type was associated with shorter survival (diffuse versus intestinal: hazard ratios 2.06, p = 0.006). A pathologically (near) complete response (TRG 1 or 2) was seen less frequently in diffuse type than in intestinal type carcinomas (24% versus 60%; p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with diffuse type oesophageal adenocarcinomas had a significantly worse prognosis than those with intestinal type carcinomas. Intestinal type carcinomas showed a better response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy than diffuse type carcinomas. These differences call for the exploration of differentiated approaches in the potentially curative treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinomas.

Treatment of Peritoneal Dissemination in Stomach Cancer Patients With Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): Rationale and Design of the PERISCOPE Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis have a very poor prognosis; median survival is 3 to 4 months. Palliative systemic chemotherapy is currently the only treatment available in the Netherlands. Intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has an established role in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis originating from colorectal cancer, appendiceal cancer, and pseudomyxoma peritonei; its role in gastric cancer is uncertain. Currently, there is no consensus on the choice of chemotherapeutic agents used in HIPEC for gastric cancer. OBJECTIVE: The main objectives of this study are (1) to investigate the safety, tolerability, and feasibility of gastrectomy combined with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC after systemic chemotherapy, as a primary treatment option for patients with advanced gastric cancer with tumor positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal carcinomatosis; and (2) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of intraperitoneal docetaxel in combination with a fixed dose of intraperitoneal oxaliplatin. METHODS: The PERISCOPE study is a multicenter, open label, phase I-II dose-escalation study. The MTD of docetaxel will be studied using a 3+3 design. Patients with locally advanced (cT3-cT4) gastric adenocarcinoma are eligible for inclusion if the primary gastric tumor is considered resectable, tumor positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal carcinomatosis is confirmed by diagnostic laparoscopy/ laparotomy, and prior systemic chemotherapy was without disease progression. At laparotomy, cytoreductive surgery (complete removal of all macroscopically visible tumor deposits) and a total or partial gastrectomy with a D2 lymph node dissection is performed. An open HIPEC technique is used with 460mg/m2 hyperthermic oxaliplatin for 30 minutes (41°C to 42°C) followed by normothermic docetaxel for 90 minutes (37°C) in a dose that will be escalated per 3 patients (0, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150 mg/m2). The primary endpoint is treatment related toxicity. RESULTS: Patient accrual is ongoing and the first results are expected in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: The PERISCOPE study will determine the safety, tolerability, and feasibility of gastrectomy combined with cytoreduction and HIPEC using oxaliplatin in combination with docetaxel after systemic chemotherapy as primary treatment option for gastric cancer patients with tumor positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal carcinomatosis. This study will provide pharmacokinetic data on the intraperitoneal administration of oxaliplatin and docetaxel, including the MTD of intraperitoneal-administered docetaxel. These data are a prerequisite for the safe conduct of future HIPEC studies in patients with gastric cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registration (NTR): NTR4250; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/ rctview.asp?TC=4250 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6rWJONgkt).

First Experience with Three-Dimensional Thoracolaparoscopy in Esophageal Cancer Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic techniques are rapidly gaining interest in esophageal cancer surgery due to lower pulmonary complication rates and faster postoperative recovery. Conventional two-dimensional endoscopic surgery has two main limitations: lack of depth perception and limited dexterity due to the use of rigid instruments. Theoretically, three-dimensional (3D) endoscopy can overcome these limitations, but to date, its use has not been reported in the context of esophageal cancer surgery. We studied our first series of 3D thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomies to document the safety and feasibility of implementing this technique. METHODS: Patients who underwent a thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy using a glasses-based 3D system with a 100° angulating camera tip were included. Continuity of the digestive tract was restored with gastric tube reconstruction and a cervical anastomosis. RESULTS: All 13 resections were completed thoracolaparoscopically. Median duration of surgery was 360 minutes (range: 245-590 minutes), and median blood loss was 170 mL (range: 50-230 mL). A median of 20 lymph nodes was resected, and all resections were microscopically radical. Median hospital stay was 9 days. Two patients developed pneumonia (15%), and three patients experienced an anastomotic leakage (23%). All postoperative complications were managed on the ward. CONCLUSION: In this series, the newest generation glasses-based 3D systems proved safe and useful for the thoracolaparoscopic resection of esophageal cancer. Besides better visualization, dexterity seemed to be improved using the 100° flexible 3D camera. Implementation was without significant problems, and the first results are promising.