The newly proposed clinical and post-neoadjuvant treatment staging classifications for gastric adenocarcinoma for the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging.

PURPOSE: New stage grouping classifications for clinical (cStage) and post-neoadjuvant treatment (ypStage) stage for gastric adenocarcinoma have been proposed for the eighth edition of the AJCC manual. This article summarizes the analysis for these stages. METHODS: Gastric adenocarcinoma patients diagnosed in 2004-2009 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The cStage cohort included both surgical and nonsurgical cases, and the ypStage cohort included only patients who had chemotherapy or radiation therapy before surgery. Survival differences between the stage groups were determined by the log-rank test and prognostic accuracy was assessed by concordance index. Analysis was performed using SAS 9.4 (SAS, Cary, NC, USA). RESULTS: Five strata for cStage and four strata for ypStage were developed. The 5-year survival rates for cStages were 56.77%, 47.39%, 33.1%, 25.9%, and 5.0% for stages I, IIa, IIb, III, and IV, respectively, and the rates for ypStage were 74.2%, 46.3%, 19.2%, and 11.6% for stages I, II, III, and IV, respectively. The log-rank test showed that survival differences were well stratified and stage groupings were ordered and distinct (p < 0.0001). The proposed cStage and ypStage classification was sensitive and specific and had high prognostic accuracy (cStage: c index = 0.81, 95% CI, 0.79-0.83; ypStage: c index = 0.80, 95% CI, 0.73-0.87). CONCLUSION: The proposed eighth edition establishes two new staging schemata that provide essential prognostic data for patients before treatment and for patients who have undergone surgery following neoadjuvant therapy. These additions are a significant advance to the AJCC staging manual and will provide critical guidance to clinicians in making informed decisions throughout the treatment course.

Is the (Neo)adjuvant Therapy of Patients with Primary HER2-positive Breast Cancer Cost-Covering?: Process Cost Analysis of Neoadjuvant and Post-Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy of Patients with Primary HER2-positive Breast Cancer.

Introduction HER2 positivity is one of the most important predictive factors in the treatment of breast cancer patients. Thanks to new targeted anti-HER2 drugs, the prognosis for HER2-positive breast cancer patients has been significantly improved, and the treatment can now be designed according to the risk situation and the response to treatment. At the same time, these innovative targeted anti-HER2 drugs are associated with high costs and require long and involved patient care. Materials and Methods In this paper, we compare the treatment costs of three post-neoadjuvant treatment regimens (trastuzumab vs. trastuzumab/pertuzumab vs. T-DM1) in early stage HER2-positive breast cancer from the perspective of the oncological outpatient clinic of a certified breast center at a university hospital, and evaluate the cost coverage. Results The highest costs in systemic therapy were the material costs. These were the highest for dual blockade with trastuzumab/pertuzumab, followed by T-DM1 and trastuzumab monotherapy. According to our study, all three of these post-neoadjuvant therapy variants achieve a positive contribution margin. While all three models have similar contribution margins, the treatment pathway with T-DM1 is associated with a 30% lower contribution margin. Conclusions Although these model calculations are associated with limitations in view of the introduction of biosimilar antibodies, it can be shown that modern therapeutic approaches do not always have to be associated with lower profits.

Post-Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategies for Patients with Early Breast Cancer.

Pre-surgical treatments in patients with early breast cancer allows a direct estimation of treatment efficacy, by comparing the tumor and the treatment. Patients who achieve a pathological complete response at surgery have a better prognosis, with lower risk of disease recurrence and death. Hence, clinical research efforts have been focusing on high-risk patients with residual disease at surgery, who may be "salvaged" through additional treatments administered in the post-neoadjuvant setting. In the present review, we aim to illustrate the development and advantages of the post-neoadjuvant setting, and to discuss the available strategies for patients with early breast cancer, either approved or under investigation. This review was written after literature search on main scientific databases (e.g., PubMed) and conference proceedings from major oncology conferences up to 1 August 2022. T-DM1 and capecitabine are currently approved as post-neoadjuvant treatments for patients with HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer, respectively, with residual disease at surgery. More recently, other treatment strategies have been approved for patients with high-risk early breast cancer, including the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab, the PARP inhibitor olaparib and the CDK 4/6 inhibitor abemaciclib. Novel agents and treatment combinations are currently under investigation as promising post-neoadjuvant treatment strategies.

Treatment Strategies for Residual Disease following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Breast cancer continues to be the most diagnosed cancer among women worldwide. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the standard of care for breast cancer patients with locally advanced disease and patients with poor pathological features, such as triple-negative (TN) or human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive subtypes. Neoadjuvant therapy offers several advantages, including better surgical outcomes, early systemic treatment for micro-metastases, and accurate tumor biology and chemosensitivity assessment. Multiple studies have shown that achieving pathological complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with better prognosis and better treatment outcomes; almost half of such patients may fail to achieve pCR. Tumor proliferative index, hormone receptor (HR) status, and HER2 expression are the major predictors of pCR. Strategies to improve pCR have been dependent on augmenting neoadjuvant chemotherapy with the addition of taxanes and dual anti-HER2 targeted therapy in patients with HER2-positive tumor, and more recently, immunotherapy for patients with TN disease. The clinical management of patients with residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy varies and depends mostly on the level of HR expression and HER2 status. Recent data have suggested that switching trastuzumab to trastuzumab-emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with HER2-positive disease and the addition of capecitabine for patients with HER2-negative and HR-negative subtype is associated with a better outcome; both strategies are incorporated into current clinical practice guidelines. This paper reviews available and ongoing studies addressing strategies to better manage patients who continue to have residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Post-neoadjuvant strategies in breast cancer: From risk assessment to treatment escalation.

The post-neoadjuvant setting in early breast cancer represents an attractive scenario for adjuvant clinical trials, offering the opportunity to test new drugs or combinations in high-risk patients who did not achieve pathologic complete response after primary treatment. No standard therapies are routinely proposed to patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and few trials have explored this setting. To date, only one randomized phase III study showed the benefit of additional capecitabine after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and international guidelines recommend at least to consider its use, particularly for triple negative breast cancer. Therefore, the management of these patients is still a clinical challenge, with limited data supporting the use of an additional adjuvant non-cross-resistant chemotherapy. Escalation strategies are currently under evaluation, with new agents proposed as supplementary post-neoadjuvant treatment (e.g. platinum salts, capecitabine, poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors). Based on these premises, selection criteria are critical to identify patients who may benefit from post-neoadjuvant therapies, through the validation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers for a reliable risk assessment and estimation of benefit. The present review summarizes the efforts in introducing new therapeutic options for patients with breast cancer and residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment, with a particular focus on the ongoing clinical trials and useful biomarkers for risk stratification.