Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and brain metastases in gastroesophageal carcinoma: a real-world analysis of clinical and pathologic characteristics and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastasis (BrM) and Leptomeningeal Carcinomatosis (LMC) are uncommon complications in gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) patients. These patients have a poor prognosis and are challenging to treat. We described the clinicopathologic features and outcomes in the largest cohort of Central Nervous System (CNS) metastasis in GEC patients. METHODS: single-center retrospective study of GEC treated from 2007 to 2021. Clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment modalities were reviewed. Survival was calculated from the date of CNS diagnosis until date of death/last follow-up using the Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used. RESULTS: Of 3283 GEC patients, 100 (3.04%) were diagnosed with BrM and 20 with LMC (0.61%). Patients with known human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status (N = 48), 60% were HER2 positive (defined as IHC 3 + or IHC 2+/FISH+). Among LMC patients most were signet-ring subtype (85%), and only 15% (2/13) were HER2 positive. Median survival was 0.7; 3.8; and 7.7 months in BrM patients treated with best supportive care, radiation, and surgery, respectively (p < 0.001). In LMC, median survival was 0.7 month in patients who had best supportive care (7/19) and 2.8 months for those who had whole brain radiation therapy (p = 0.015). Multivariate analysis showed worse outcomes in ECOG ≥ 2 (p = 0.002), number of BrM ≥ 4 (p < 0.001) and number of metastatic sites (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: HER2 expression were enriched in patients with BrM, while it is uncommon in LMC. Patients treated with surgery followed by radiation had an improved OS in BrM and WBRT benefited patients with LMC.

Comparison of Four Clinical Prognostic Scores in Patients with Advanced Gastric and Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic scores that can identify patients at risk for early death are needed to aid treatment decision-making and patient selection for clinical trials. We compared the accuracy of four scores to predict early death (within 90 days) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic gastric and esophageal (GE) cancer. METHODS: Advanced GE cancer patients receiving first-line systemic therapy were included. Prognostic risks were calculated using: Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH), MD Anderson Cancer Centre (MDACC), Gustave Roussy Immune (GRIm-Score), and MD Anderson Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (MDA-ICI) scores. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze associations between prognostic scores and OS. The predictive discrimination was estimated using Harrell's c-index. Predictive ability for early death was measured using time-dependent AUCs. RESULTS: In total, 451 patients with metastatic GE cancer were included. High risk patients had shorter OS for all scores (RMH high- vs. low-risk median OS 7.9 vs. 12.2 months, P < .001; MDACC 6.8 vs. 11.9 months P < .001; GRIm-Score 5.3 vs. 13 months, P < .001; MDA-ICI 8.2 vs. 12.2 months, P < .001). On multivariable analysis, each prognostic score was significantly associated with OS. The GRIm-Score had the highest predictive discrimination and predictive ability for early death. CONCLUSIONS: The GRIm-Score had the highest accuracy in predicting early death and OS. Clinicians may use this score to identify patients at higher risk of early death to guide treatment decisions including clinical trial enrolment. This score could also be used as a stratification factor in future clinical trial designs.

Differential prognostic significance of sarcopenia in metastatic esophageal squamous and adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia indicates poor prognosis in various malignancies. We evaluated the association of sarcopenia with overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic esophageal cancer (MEC) patients, a population often presenting with poor nutritional status. METHODS: In newly diagnosed MEC patients managed at the Princess Margaret (PM) Cancer Centre (diagnosed 2006-2015), total muscle area, visceral adiposity (VA), and subcutaneous adiposity (SA) were quantified on abdominal computed tomography at L3. Sarcopenia was determined using published cutoffs, based on sex and height. RESULTS: Of 202 MEC patients, most were male (166/82%), < 65 years (116/57%), and had adenocarcinoma histology (141/70%); 110/54% had recurrent MEC after initial curative-intent treatment; 92/46% presented with de novo MEC. At stage IV diagnosis, 20/10% were underweight, 97/48% were normal-weight and 84/42% were overweight/obese; 103/51% were sarcopenic. Sarcopenia was associated with worse median OS (4.6 vs. 7.9 months; log-rank p = 0.03) and 1-year survival, even after adjusting for other body composition variables (e.g., BMI, VA, and SA): adjusted-HR 1.51 [95% CI 1.1-2.2, p = 0.02]. In post hoc analysis, sarcopenia was highly prognostic in adenocarcinomas (p = 0.003), but not squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). In patients receiving palliative systemic treatment (104/51%), sarcopenia was associated with shorter PFS (p = 0.004) in adenocarcinoma patients (75/72%). CONCLUSIONS: In metastatic esophageal adenocarcinomas, sarcopenia is associated with worse PFS and OS. In metastatic esophageal SCC, there was a non-significant trend for worse PFS but no association with OS. In order to offset the poor prognosis associated with sarcopenia particularly in metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma patients, future research should focus on possible countermeasures.

Impact of Sites of Metastatic Dissemination on Survival in Advanced Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) is a heterogeneous disease with an overall poor prognosis. The impact of sites of metastatic dissemination on survival is not well characterized. This study aimed to evaluate whether certain sites of metastatic disease impacts survival. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 375 patients with metastatic GEA treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from 2006 to 2016 was performed. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association between sites of metastases and OS adjusting for baseline patient characteristics. RESULTS: Median duration of follow-up was 47.8 months. Median OS in this cohort was 11.8 months (95% CI: 10.2-12.9 months). Patients with lymph node only disease, compared to those with other sites of metastases, had the longest median OS (20.4 vs. 10.6 months; p < 0.001) and PFS (11.4 vs. 6.3 months; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis adjusting for relevant clinical factors including age, sex, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, the presence of lung (HR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.23-2.26; p < 0.001) or bone metastases (HR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.31-2.59; p < 0.001) were independently associated with shorter OS. The majority of patients (68%) were treated with palliative intent first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Patients with metastatic GEA have an overall poor prognosis. The presence of lung or bone metastases is an independent risk factor for decreased survival. Prognostic models incorporating sites of metastasis should be considered in the clinical evaluation of metastatic GEA.

Influence of sarcopenia, clinical data, and 2-[18F] FDG PET/CT in outcome prediction of patients with early-stage adenocarcinoma esophageal cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the prognostic value of sarcopenia measurements done on staging 2-[18F] FDG PET/CT together with metabolic activity of the tumor in patients with adenocarcinoma esophagogastric cancer with surgical treatment. METHODS: Patients with early-stage, surgically treated esophageal adenocarcinoma and available pre-treatment 2-[18F] FDG PET/CT were included. The standard uptake value (SUV) and SUV normalized by lean body mass (SUL) were recorded. Skeletal muscle index (SMI) was measured at the L3 level on the CT component of the PET/CT. Sarcopenia was defined as SMI < 34.4cm2/m2 in women and < 45.4cm2/m2 in men. RESULTS: Of the included 145 patients. 30% were sarcopenic at baseline. On the univariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, ECOG, surgical T and N staging, lymphovascular invasion (LVI) positive lymph nodes, and sarcopenia were significant prognostic factors concerning RFS and OS. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, surgical N staging (p = 0.025) and sarcopenia (p = 0.022) remained significant poor prognostic factors for OS and RFS. Combining the clinical parameters with the imaging-derived nutritional evaluation of the patient but not metabolic parameters of the tumor showed improved predictive ability for OS and RFS. CONCLUSION: Combining the patients' imaging-derived sarcopenic status with standard clinical data, but not metabolic parameters, offered an overall improved prognostic value concerning OS and RFS.

Preoperative and Postoperative Approaches to Gastroesophageal Cancer: What is All the Fuss About.

Gastroesophageal cancers carry poor prognoses, and are a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Even in those with resectable disease, more than half of patients treated with surgery alone experience disease recurrence. Multimodality approaches using preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy have been established, resulting in incremental improvements in outcomes. Globally, there is no standardized approach, and treatment varies with geographic location. The question remains of how to select the optimal perioperative treatment that will maximize benefit for patients while avoiding toxicities from unnecessary therapies. This article reviews currently available evidence supporting preoperative and postoperative therapy in gastroesophageal cancers, with an emphasis on recent practice-changing trials and ongoing areas of investigation, including the role of immune checkpoint inhibition and biomarker-guided treatment.

Chemoradiotherapy Using Carboplatin plus Paclitaxel versus Cisplatin plus Fluorouracil for Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trimodality therapy (TMT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) using concurrent carboplatin plus paclitaxel (CP) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locoregional esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers. Alternatively, nCRT with cisplatin plus fluorouracil (CF) can be used. Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) with CP or CF can be used if surgery is not planned. In the absence of comparative trials, we aimed to evaluate outcomes of CP and CF in the settings of TMT and dCRT. METHODS: A single-site, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre to identify all patients who received CRT for locoregional esophageal or GEJ cancer. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression model. The inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2015, 93 patients with esophageal (49%) and GEJ (51%) cancers underwent nCRT (n = 67; 72%) or dCRT (n = 26; 28%). Median age was 62.3 years and 74% were male. Median follow-up was 23.9 months. Comparing CP to CF in the setting of TMT, the OS and DFS rates were similar. In the setting of dCRT, CP was associated with significantly inferior 3-year OS (36 vs. 63%; p = 0.001; HR 3.1; 95% CI: 1.2-7.7) and DFS (0 vs. 41%; p = 0.004; HR 3.6; 95% CI: 1.4-8.9) on multivariable and IPTW sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: TMT with CF and CP produced comparable outcomes. However, for dCRT, CF may be a superior regimen.

The "rocky treatment course": identifying a high-risk subgroup of head and neck cancer patients for supportive interventions.

PURPOSE: We aim to identify the risk factors for a "rocky" treatment course (RTC) in head and neck cancer. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was conducted utilizing data from a prospective study. We defined the RTC as a composite of adverse outcomes including G-tube dependence and increased nursing interventions. Statistically associative variables were included in a multivariable logistic regression. We also evaluated whether the RTC, or its components, associated with worse cancer outcomes. RESULTS: Being single, unemployed, having N2/3 disease and receiving chemoradiotherapy were associated with a RTC. In turn, G-tube dependence was associated with worse 3-year OS (73 vs 91 %; p = 0.02) and increased nursing interventions with worse 3-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (85 vs 92 %; p = 0.03) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) (14 vs 7 %; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We identified baseline factors associated with a RTC for head and neck cancer patients. Future supportive care interventions could be evaluated using the RTC as a marker of benefit.

Improving Outcomes in Resectable Gastric Cancer: A Review of Current and Future Strategies.

Gastric cancer is a highly fatal malignancy, and surgery alone often does not provide a cure, even for relatively early stages of disease. Various approaches have been adopted around the world to improve surgical outcomes; however, there currently is no global consensus with regard to the extent of surgery or the timing and choice of chemotherapy and radiation. Here we review the evidence supporting current approaches to resectable gastric cancer, including discussion of the optimal extent of surgery and lymphadenectomy, adjuvant chemotherapy, postoperative chemotherapy with chemoradiation, and perioperative chemotherapy. Additionally, we discuss novel approaches, including intensified chemotherapy (in neoadjuvant, perioperative, and adjuvant settings), pre- and postoperative chemoradiation in combination with chemotherapy, and the role of biologics and targeted therapy. Finally, we examine the promise of molecular subtyping and potential biomarkers for improved patient selection. Upcoming and future trials should help answer questions regarding the optimal sequencing and choice of treatments, in order to further improve survival and move us towards ultimately curing more patients with resectable gastric cancer.

Exploring the Language Used to Describe Older Patients at Multidisciplinary Cancer Conferences.

Older adults with cancer often present with distinct complexities that complicate their care, yet the language used to discuss their management at multidisciplinary cancer conferences (MCCs) remains poorly understood. A mixed methods study was conducted at a tertiary cancer centre in Toronto, Canada, where MCCs spanning five tumour sites were attended over six months. For presentations pertaining to a patient aged 75 or older, a standardized data collection form was used to record their demographic, cancer-related, and non-cancer-related information, as well as the presenter's specialty and training level. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were employed to explore MCC depictions of older patients (n = 75). Frailty status was explicitly mentioned in 20.0% of presentations, but discussions more frequently referenced comorbidity burden (50.7%), age (33.3%), and projected treatment tolerance (30.7%) as surrogate measures. None of the presentations included mentions of formal geriatric assessment (GA) or validated frailty tools; instead, presenters tended to feature select GA domains and subjective descriptions of appearance ("looks to be fit") or overall health ("relatively healthy"). In general, MCCs appeared to rely on age-focused language that may perpetuate ageism. Further work is needed to investigate how frailty and geriatric considerations can be objectively incorporated into discussions in geriatric oncology.

Prognostic Value of Sarcopenia and Metabolic Parameters of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in Patients with Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer.

We investigated the prognostic value of sarcopenia measurements and metabolic parameters of primary tumors derived from 18F-FDG-PET/CT among patients with primary, metastatic esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer. A total of 128 patients (26 females; 102 males; mean age 63.5 ± 11.7 years; age range: 29-91 years) with advanced metastatic gastroesophageal cancer who underwent 18F-FDG-PET/CT as part of their initial staging between November 2008 and December 2019 were included. Mean and maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) and SUV normalized by lean body mass (SUL) were measured. Skeletal muscle index (SMI) was measured at the level of L3 on the CT component of the 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Sarcopenia was defined as SMI < 34.4 cm2/m2 in women and <45.4 cm2/m2 in men. A total of 60/128 patients (47%) had sarcopenia on baseline 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Mean SMI in patients with sarcopenia was 29.7 cm2/m2 in females and 37.5 cm2/m2 in males. In a univariable analysis, ECOG (<0.001), bone metastases (p = 0.028), SMI (p = 0.0075) and dichotomized sarcopenia score (p = 0.033) were significant prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Age was a poor prognostic factor for OS (p = 0.017). Standard metabolic parameters were not statistically significant in the univariable analysis and thus were not evaluated further. In a multivariable analysis, ECOG (p < 0.001) and bone metastases (p = 0.019) remained significant poor prognostic factors for OS and PFS. The final model demonstrated improved OS and PFS prognostication when combining clinical parameters with imaging-derived sarcopenia measurements but not metabolic tumor parameters. In summary, the combination of clinical parameters and sarcopenia status, but not standard metabolic values from 18F-FDG-PET/CT, may improve survival prognostication in patients with advanced, metastatic gastroesophageal cancer.

Combination of clinical, radiomic, and "delta" radiomic features in survival prediction of metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Objectives: To identify combined clinical, radiomic, and delta-radiomic features in metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEAs) that may predict survival outcomes. Methods: A total of 166 patients with metastatic GEAs on palliative chemotherapy with baseline and treatment/follow-up (8-12 weeks) contrast-enhanced CT were retrospectively identified. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Three-dimensional whole-lesional radiomic analysis was performed on the treatment/follow-up scans. "Delta" radiomic features were calculated based on the change in radiomic parameters compared to the baseline. The univariable analysis (UVA) Cox proportional hazards model was used to select clinical variables predictive of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) (p-value <0.05). The radiomic and "delta" features were then assessed in a multivariable analysis (MVA) Cox model in combination with clinical features identified on UVA. Features with a p-value <0.01 in the MVA models were selected to assess their pairwise correlation. Only non-highly correlated features (Pearson's correlation coefficient <0.7) were included in the final model. Leave-one-out cross-validation method was used, and the 1-year area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for PFS and OS. Results: Of the 166 patients (median age of 59.8 years), 114 (69%) were male, 139 (84%) were non-Asian, and 147 (89%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1. The median PFS and OS on treatment were 3.6 months (95% CI 2.86, 4.63) and 9 months (95% CI 7.49, 11.04), respectively. On UVA, the number of chemotherapy cycles and number of lesions at the end of treatment were associated with both PFS and OS (p < 0.001). ECOG status was associated with OS (p = 0.0063), but not PFS (p = 0.054). Of the delta-radiomic features, delta conventional HUmin, delta gray-level zone length matrix (GLZLM) GLNU, and delta GLZLM LGZE were incorporated into the model for PFS, and delta shape compacity was incorporated in the model for OS. Of the treatment/follow-up radiomic features, shape compacity and neighborhood gray-level dependence matrix (NGLDM) contrast were used in both models. The combined 1-year AUC (Kaplan-Meier estimator) was 0.82 and 0.81 for PFS and OS, respectively. Conclusions: A combination of clinical, radiomics, and delta-radiomic features may predict PFS and OS in GEAs with reasonable accuracy.

First impressions: A prospective evaluation of patient-physician concordance and satisfaction following the initial medical oncology consultation.

BACKGROUND: An especially significant event in the patient-oncologist relationship is the initial consultation, where many complex topics-diagnosis, treatment intent, and often, prognosis-are discussed in a relatively short period of time. This study aimed to measure patients' understanding of the information discussed during their first medical oncology visit and their satisfaction with the communication from medical oncologists. METHODS: Between January and August 2021, patients without prior systemic treatment of their gastrointestinal malignancy (GI) attending the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC) were approached within 24 h of their initial consultation to complete a paper-based questionnaire assessing understanding of their disease (diagnosis, treatment plan/intent, and prognosis) and satisfaction with the consultation. Medical oncology physicians simultaneously completed a similar questionnaire about the information discussed at the initial visit. Matched patient-physician responses were compared to assess the degree of concordance. RESULTS: A total of 184 matched patient-physician surveys were completed. The concordance rates for understanding of diagnosis, treatment plan, treatment intent, and prognosis were 92.9%, 59.2%, 66.8%, and 59.8%, respectively. After adjusting for patient and physician variables, patients who reported treatment intent to be unclear at the time of the consultation were independently associated with lower satisfaction scores (global p = 0.014). There was no statistically significant association between patient satisfaction and whether prognosis was disclosed (p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: An in-depth conversation as to what treatment intent and prognosis means is reasonable during the initial medical oncology consultation to ensure patients and caregivers have a better understanding about their cancer.

Combined 18 F-FDG PET/CT Radiomics and Sarcopenia Score in Predicting Relapse-Free Survival and Overall Survival in Patients With Esophagogastric Cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine if radiomic features combined with sarcopenia measurements on pretreatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT can improve outcome prediction in surgically treated adenocarcinoma esophagogastric cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred forty-five esophageal adenocarcinoma patients with curative therapeutic intent and available pretreatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT were included. Textural features from PET and CT images were evaluated using LIFEx software ( lifexsoft.org ). Sarcopenia measurements were done by measuring the Skeletal Muscle Index at L3 level on the CT component. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to create a model including the radiomic parameters, clinical features, and Skeletal Muscle Index score to predict patients' outcome. RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, we combined clinicopathological parameters including ECOG, surgical T, and N staging along with imaging derived sarcopenia measurements and radiomic features to build a predictor model for relapse-free survival and overall survival. Overall, adding sarcopenic status to the model with clinical features only (likelihood ratio test P = 0.03) and CT feature ( P = 0.0037) improved the model fit for overall survival. Similarly, adding sarcopenic status ( P = 0.051), CT feature ( P = 0.042), and PET feature ( P = 0.011) improved the model fit for relapse-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: PET and CT radiomics derived from combined PET/CT integrated with clinicopathological parameters and sarcopenia measurement might improve outcome prediction in patients with nonmetastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

Germline BRCA2 variants in advanced pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma: A case report and review of literature.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma (PACC) is a rare tumor. Up to 45% of PACCs have alterations in the DNA damage repair pathway and 23% harbor rearrangements in the BRAF or RAF1 genes. We present a PACC case with a germline BRCA2 likely pathogenic variant (LPV) to highlight the impact of genomic testing on treatment decisions and patient outcomes. In our larger case series, we provide clinic-based information on additional 10 PACC patients treated in our center. CASE SUMMARY: A 70-year-old male was diagnosed with advanced PACC. At presentation, he was cachectic with severe arthralgia despite prednisolone and a skin rash that was later confirmed to be panniculitis. He was treated with modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) with the knowledge of the germline BRCA2 LPV. Following 11 cycles of mFFX, a computed tomography (CT) scan demonstrated significant tumor response in the pancreatic primary and hepatic metastases, totaling 70% from baseline as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Resolution of the skin panniculitis was also noted. We identified two additional PACCs with druggable targets in our case series. Our data contribute to practical evidence for the value of germline and somatic profiling in the management of rare diseases like PACC. CONCLUSION: This patient and others in our larger case series highlight the importance of genomic testing in PACC with potential utility in personalized treatment.

Prognostic significance of nutritional markers in metastatic gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition and sarcopenia are poor prognostic factors in many cancers. Studies in gastric and esophageal (GE) cancer have focused on curative intent patients. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic utility of malnutrition and sarcopenia in de novo metastatic GE adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Patients with de novo metastatic GE adenocarcinoma seen at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from 2010 to 2016 with an available pre-treatment abdominal computed tomography (CT) were included. Malnutrition was defined as nutritional risk index (NRI) <97.5. Skeletal muscle index (SMI) was measured at the L3 level (sarcopenia defined as SMI <34.4 cm2 /m2 in women and <45.4 cm2 /m2 in men). Patients receiving chemotherapy had NRI and SMI recalculated at the time of first restaging CT. RESULTS: Of 175 consecutive patients, 33% were malnourished and 39% were sarcopenic at baseline. Patients with pretreatment malnourishment had significantly shorter overall survival (OS; 5.8 vs. 10.9 months, p = 0.000475). Patients who became malnourished during chemotherapy had worse OS compared to those who maintained their nutrition (12.2 vs. 17.5 months p = 0.0484). On univariable analysis, ECOG (p < 0.001), number of metastatic sites (p = 0.029) and NRI (p < 0.001) were significant prognostic factors while BMI (p = 0.57) and sarcopenia (p = 0.19) were not. On multivariable analysis, ECOG (p < 0.001), baseline NRI (p = 0.025), and change in NRI during treatment (p < 0.001) were significant poor prognostic factors for OS. CONCLUSIONS: In de novo metastatic GE adenocarcinoma patients, ECOG, pretreatment NRI and change in NRI were significant prognostic factors for OS while sarcopenia was not. Use of NRI at baseline and during treatment can provide useful prognostic information.

Surveillance and outcomes after curative resection for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The goal of surveillance testing is to enable curative salvage therapy through early disease detection, however supporting evidence in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is limited. We evaluated frequency of successful salvage therapy and outcomes in patients who underwent surveillance. METHODS: A single-site, retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify all patients who received curative resection for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Surveillance testing were those investigations not triggered by abnormal symptoms, physical examination, or blood tests. Successful salvage therapy was any potentially curative therapy for disease recurrence which resulted in postrecurrence disease-free survival ≥2 years. Time-to-event data were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log rank tests. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2016, 210 consecutive patients were reviewed. Esophageal (14%), gastroesophageal junction (40%), and gastric adenocarcinomas (45%) were treated with surgery alone (29%) or multimodality therapy (71%). Adjuvant therapy was administered in 35%. At median follow-up of 38.3 months, 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 56%. Among 97 recurrences, 53% were surveillance-detected, and 46% were symptomatic. None was detected by surveillance endoscopy. Median time-to-recurrence (TTR) was 14.8 months. Recurrences included locoregional only (4%), distant (86%), and both (10%). Salvage therapy was attempted in 15 patients, 4 were successful. Compared to symptomatic recurrences, patients with surveillance-detected recurrences had longer median OS (36.2 vs 23.7 months, P = .004) and postrecurrence survival (PRS, 16.5 vs 4.6 months, P < .001), but similar TTR (16.2 vs 13.3 months, P = .40) and duration of palliative chemotherapy (3.9 vs 3.3 months, P = .64). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients surveyed, 96% of recurrences were distant, and salvage therapy was successful in only 1.9% of patients. Longer OS in patients with surveillance-detected compared to symptomatic recurrences was not associated with significant earlier disease detection, and may be contributed by differences in disease biology. Further prospective data are warranted to establish the benefit of surveillance testing in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Impact of adjuvant therapy in patients with a microscopically positive margin after resection for gastric and esophageal cancers.

BACKGROUND: A microscopically positive (R1) resection margin following resection for gastric and esophageal cancers has been documented to be a poor prognostic factor. The optimal strategy and impact of different modalities of adjuvant treatment for an R1 resection margin remain unclear. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for patients with gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC) from 2006-2016. Electronic medical records of all patients with an R1 resection margin were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods were used to analyze recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) with stage and neoadjuvant treatment as covariates in the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: We identified 69 gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma patients with a R1 resection. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was used in 13% of patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 12%, surgery alone in 75%. Margins involved included proximal in 30%, distal in 14%, radial in 52% and multiple margins in 3% of patients. Pathological staging showed 3% with stage I disease, 20% stage II and 74% stage III. Adjuvant therapy was given in 52% of R1 pts (28% CRT, 20% chemotherapy alone, 3% radiation alone, 1% reoperation). Median RFS was 14.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.1-17.2]. The site of first recurrence was 72% distant, 12% mixed, 16% locoregional alone. Median OS was 34.5 months (95% CI, 23.3-57.9) for all patients. There was no significant difference in RFS (adjusted P=0.26) or OS (adjusted P=0.83) comparing modality of adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with positive margins after resection for gastric and esophageal cancer had advanced pathologic stage and prognosis was poor. Our study did not find improved RFS or OS with adjuvant treatment and only one patient had reresection. The main failure pattern was distant recurrence, suggesting that patients being considered for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) should be carefully selected. Further studies are required to determine factors to select patients with good prognosis despite a positive margin, or those who may benefit from adjuvant treatment.

A case of prolonged disease-free survival in a patient with choroidal metastasis from breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: A 57-year-old woman presented with distorted vision and decreased visual acuity (finger count only) in her left eye, 6 years after she had undergone a lumpectomy, lymph-node dissection, and radiation therapy for a 1.1 cm infiltrating ductal carcinoma of her right breast. A year before this presentation, she had completed 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy. INVESTIGATIONS: Physical examination, including a thorough ophthalmologic evaluation; laboratory investigations, ocular fluorescein angiography, ocular ultrasonography, head CT, chest X-ray, abdominal ultrasonography, bone scan, and bilateral mammography. DIAGNOSIS: Choroidal metastasis from breast carcinoma, with no other evidence of disease recurrence. MANAGEMENT: Radiation therapy to the left eye followed by ongoing hormonal therapy with oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily for the past 9.5 years.

Anticancer drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration for gastrointestinal malignancies: Clinical benefit and price considerations.

BACKGROUND: The cost of new anticancer drugs is rising. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit and price of anti-cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for advanced gastrointestinal cancers. METHODS: Drugs approved between 2006 and 2017 for advanced GI malignancies were identified from FDA.gov, and their updated supporting trial data were searched. Incremental clinical benefit was quantified by using ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (grade 0-5) and ASCO Value Framework version 2 (score range -20 to 180). Higher scores indicate larger net benefit, and substantial benefit was defined as score 4 or 5 by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The Micromedex REDBOOK was used to estimate the monthly average wholesale price (AWP) and total drug price (TDP) over the median treatment duration per patient. Clinical benefit, AWP and TDP of each drug class were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 16 GI cancer drugs received FDA approval for 24 indications, including five monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), five oral targeted therapies (TT), two immunotherapeutics (IO), three cytotoxic chemotherapies (CT), and one recombinant fusion protein (aflibercept). Most supporting trials (82%) reported overall survival benefit of less than 3 months and no significant improvement in quality of life. Only five agents (including one TT and one IO) with 21% the of approved indications met the ESMO's threshold of substantial clinical benefit. Median incremental benefit scores of TT and IO were comparable to other drug classes. However their median TDP was much higher at $153 402 and $98 208, respectively, compared to $30 330 USD per patient for CT. The estimated TDP did not correlate with clinical benefit scores. CONCLUSION: Most FDA-approved gastrointestinal cancer drugs do not meet the ESMO threshold of substantial clinical benefit. TT and IO are estimated to carry significant drug costs, and further cost analysis of these drugs is urgently needed.