The RENAISSANCE (AIO-FLOT5) trial: effect of chemotherapy alone vs. chemotherapy followed by surgical resection on survival and quality of life in patients with limited-metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction - a phase III trial of the German AIO/CAO-V/CAOGI.

BACKGROUND: Historical data indicate that surgical resection may benefit select patients with metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer. However, randomized clinical trials are lacking. The current RENAISSANCE trial addresses the potential benefits of surgical intervention in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer with limited metastases. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, investigator-initiated phase III trial. Previously untreated patients with limited metastatic stage (retroperitoneal lymph node metastases only or a maximum of one incurable organ site that is potentially resectable or locally controllable with or without retroperitoneal lymph nodes) receive 4 cycles of FLOT chemotherapy alone or with trastuzumab if Her2+. Patients without disease progression after 4 cycles are randomized 1:1 to receive additional chemotherapy cycles or surgical resection of primary and metastases followed by subsequent chemotherapy. 271 patients are to be allocated to the trial, of which at least 176 patients will proceed to randomization. The primary endpoint is overall survival; main secondary endpoints are quality of life assessed by EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire, progression free survival and surgical morbidity and mortality. Recruitment has already started; currently (Feb 2017) 22 patients have been enrolled. DISCUSSION: If the RENAISSANCE concept proves to be effective, this could potentially lead to a new standard of therapy. On the contrary, if the outcome is negative, patients with gastric or GEJ cancer and metastases will no longer be considered candidates for surgical intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The article reports of a health care intervention on human participants and is registered on October 12, 2015 under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02578368 ; EudraCT: 2014-002665-30.

Extension of resection after positive intraoperative pathology during surgery for gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Residual tumor at the resection margins after surgery for gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is a known prognostic factor. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study in a tertiary referral center, the authors aimed to evaluate the relevance of intraoperative pathology consultation (IOC) and consecutive extension of surgery on patient survival. STUDY DESIGN: Of 737 consecutive patients undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy for gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, 679 cases with curative intent surgery between 05/1996 and 03/2019 were included. Patients were categorized into: R0 without further resection (direct R0), R0 after positive IOC and extension of resection (converted R0), and R1. RESULTS: IOC was performed in 242 (35.6%) patients, in 216 (89.3%) at the proximal resection margin. Direct R0-status was achieved in 598 (88.1%), converted R0 in 26 (3.8%) of 38 (5.6%) patients with positive IOC and R1 in 55 (8.1%) patients. The median follow-up was 29 months for surviving patients. 3-year survival rate (3-YSR) was significantly higher for direct R0 compared to converted R0 with 62.3% compared to 21.8% (hazard ratio=0.298; 95% CI=0.186-0.477, P <0.001). 3-YSR was similar between converted R0 and R1 (21.8 vs. 13.3%; hazard ratio =0.928; 95% CI=0.526-1.636, P =0.792). In multivariate analysis, advanced T ( P <0.001), N ( P <0.001), R ( P =0.003), and M1 status ( P <0.001) were associated with worse overall survival. CONCLUSION: IOC and consecutive extended resection for positive resection margins in gastrectomy for the proximal gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma does not achieve long-term survival benefits in advanced tumor stages.

Two decades of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer surgery.

PURPOSE: Diagnosis and treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer have undergone many critical changes during the last two decades. We addressed the question of how clinical reality outside of clinical trials has changed for gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients in a European center for upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy for gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma between 1996 and 2017 in a tertiary upper gastrointestinal center were included. The time was divided into a) before (1996-2006) (pre-CTx) and b) after (2006-2017) (CTx) the MAGIC trial. Data were comprehensively analyzed for demographics, tumor stage, perioperative treatment, surgery, histopathology, and survival rates (SR). RESULTS: 737 patients (32% female) underwent gastrectomy, 255 patients in the pre-CTx era and 482 patients in the CTx era. The median age was 65 years and the median follow-up was 27.5 months for surviving patients. Around 16.9% of patients received neoadjuvant treatment in the pre-CTx era versus 46.3% in the CTx era. The 3-year survival rate (3-YSR) was 46.4% in the pre-CTx and 60.9% in the CTx era (p < 0.001). For pretreated patients, 3-YSR was 39.0% (pre-CTx) versus 55.3% (CTx) (p = 0.168). Survival rate (SR) for locally advanced tumor stages (cT3/cT4) was higher when neoadjuvant therapy was administered (3-YSR: 56.7% vs 40.6%; p = 0.022). There were no significant differences according to sex (p = 0.357), age (p = 0.379), pT category (p = 0.817), pN stage (p = 0.074), cM stage (p = 0.112), Laurén classification (p = 0.158), and SRs (3-YSR: 60.3% vs 59.4%; p = 0.898) between the MAGIC and FLOT regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Survival rates have dramatically improved for gastric cancer patients during the last two decades. MAGIC and FLOT regimens showed similar results in the postsurgical follow-up.

Histological grading in gastric cancer by Ming classification: correlation with histopathological subtypes, metastasis, and prognosis.

The aim of this prospective study was to analyze Ming's classification in correlation with other currently used classification systems of gastric cancer. In addition, we wanted to define the prognostic significance of the Ming classification system. The present study analyzed material of 117 patients with gastric carcinoma who underwent D2-gastrectomy with curative intent. All specimens were categorized according to International Union Against Cancer (UICC) classification, World Health Organization (WHO) classification, Borrmann classification, Laurén classification, Goseki classification, Ming classification, and tumor differentiation. For analysis of correlation between the classification systems, the correlation coefficient according to Spearman was calculated. The survival curves have been calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. According to the Ming classification, 38.5% of the carcinomas exhibited an expanding growth pattern, and 61.5% of specimens showed an infiltrating growth pattern. The subtypes according to the Ming and Laurén classification correlated significantly (P < 0.001). WHO classification (P < 0.001), tumor differentiation (P < 0.001), and Goseki classification (P < 0.001), as well as the macroscopic classification of Borrmann (P < 0.001) and the pT and pN categories of the UICC classification exhibited a highly significant correlation with the Ming classification (P < 0.001 and 0.001, respectively). Median overall survival was 31.3 months. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, the 3-year survival rates were lower in the infiltrative tumor type when compared to the expansive tumor type according to Ming (P = 0.0847). In multivariate analysis, only the UICC system presented as an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (P < 0.001). This study shows that the Ming classification correlates significantly with the currently used classification systems for gastric cancer and with the UICC staging system, especially, the pT and pN category. The 3-year survival rates were lower in the infiltrative tumor type than in the expansive tumor type according to Ming. However, the Ming classification is not an independent prognostic factor.