K Parry1, P S N van Rossum2, N Haj Mohammad3, J P Ruurda4, R van Hillegersberg4. 1. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: k.parry@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal neoadjuvant approach for patients with adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains unclear. Aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of perioperative chemotherapy in these patients. METHOD: Consecutive patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma, treated with surgery alone or chemotherapy plus surgery, were included from a prospective database (2003-2013). Propensity score matching was used to build comparable groups. Response to chemotherapy was assessed according to standardized regression grading. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 196 patients were included. Chemotherapy was administered in 124 patients (63%). There was no difference between the chemotherapy plus surgery and surgery-alone group regarding overall and disease-free survival (p = 0.351 and p = 0.529). Pathological good response (i.e. tumor regression grading [TRG] 1-3) was achieved in 32 patients (34%), whereas 81 (66%) had poor response (TRG 4). Good responders had lower ypT-stage (p < 0.001), lower ypN-stage (p < 0.001) and more R0-resections (100% vs. 78%, p = 0.016) compared to surgery-alone patients, which improved the 5-year survival from 35% to 67% (p = 0.002). They also developed less recurrences (35% vs. 57%, p = 0.048). In poor responders, histopathology did not differ compared to surgery-alone and more recurrences were found (73% vs. 57%, p = 0.037). Overall survival in poor responders was 21% compared to 35% in surgery-alone patients (p = 0.551). CONCLUSION: Perioperative chemotherapy for GEJ adenocarcinoma leads to increased survival in good responders (34%) as compared to surgery alone. Poor responders had no survival benefit and developed more recurrences, which underlines the importance of the search for predictive biological or radiological markers to predict or assess chemotherapy sensitivity.
BACKGROUND: The optimal neoadjuvant approach for patients with adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains unclear. Aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of perioperative chemotherapy in these patients. METHOD: Consecutive patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma, treated with surgery alone or chemotherapy plus surgery, were included from a prospective database (2003-2013). Propensity score matching was used to build comparable groups. Response to chemotherapy was assessed according to standardized regression grading. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 196 patients were included. Chemotherapy was administered in 124 patients (63%). There was no difference between the chemotherapy plus surgery and surgery-alone group regarding overall and disease-free survival (p = 0.351 and p = 0.529). Pathological good response (i.e. tumor regression grading [TRG] 1-3) was achieved in 32 patients (34%), whereas 81 (66%) had poor response (TRG 4). Good responders had lower ypT-stage (p < 0.001), lower ypN-stage (p < 0.001) and more R0-resections (100% vs. 78%, p = 0.016) compared to surgery-alone patients, which improved the 5-year survival from 35% to 67% (p = 0.002). They also developed less recurrences (35% vs. 57%, p = 0.048). In poor responders, histopathology did not differ compared to surgery-alone and more recurrences were found (73% vs. 57%, p = 0.037). Overall survival in poor responders was 21% compared to 35% in surgery-alone patients (p = 0.551). CONCLUSION: Perioperative chemotherapy for GEJ adenocarcinoma leads to increased survival in good responders (34%) as compared to surgery alone. Poor responders had no survival benefit and developed more recurrences, which underlines the importance of the search for predictive biological or radiological markers to predict or assess chemotherapy sensitivity.
Authors: Nasser Davarzani; Gordon G A Hutchins; Nicholas P West; Lindsay C Hewitt; Matthew Nankivell; David Cunningham; William H Allum; Elizabeth Smyth; Nicola Valeri; Ruth E Langley; Heike I Grabsch Journal: Histopathology Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 5.087