Simple Summary Perioperative chemotherapy is the current standard treatment for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Either cisplatin or oxaliplatin could be part of the chemotherapy regimen,... Show moreSimple Summary Perioperative chemotherapy is the current standard treatment for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Either cisplatin or oxaliplatin could be part of the chemotherapy regimen, of which oxaliplatin is currently most used in the standard treatment. Evidence to choose oxaliplatin over cisplatin in the curative setting is limited. In this study, we compared cisplatin versus oxaliplatin in patients with resectable gastric cancer treated with pre- and postoperative chemotherapy. Adverse events were not different for patients who received cisplatin versus those who received oxaliplatin, nor was compliance with the treatment regimen. We could not detect survival differences between patients treated with cisplatin versus oxaliplatin. Diarrhea more frequently impacted patients treated with oxaliplatin than patients treated with cisplatin. As hydration is not needed for oxaliplatin, it is more practical to use in daily care. In conclusion, both cisplatin and oxaliplatin are legitimate options as part of systemic treatment in patients with resectable gastric cancer. (1) Background: Perioperative chemotherapy is the current standard treatment for patients with resectable gastric cancer. Based on studies in patients with metastatic gastric cancer, oxaliplatin has replaced cisplatin in the curative setting as well. However, evidence to prefer oxaliplatin over cisplatin in the curative setting is limited. (2) Methods: We compared patient-related and tumor-related outcomes for cisplatin versus oxaliplatin in patients with resectable gastric cancer treated with perioperative chemotherapy in the CRITICS trial. (3) Results: Preoperatively, 632 patients received cisplatin and 149 patients received oxaliplatin. Preoperative severe toxicity was encountered in 422 (67%) patients who received cisplatin versus 89 (60%) patients who received oxaliplatin (p = 0.105). Severe neuropathy was observed in 5 (1%) versus 6 (4%; p = 0.009) patients, respectively. Postoperative severe toxicity occurred in 109 (60%) versus 26 (51%) (p = 0.266) patients; severe neuropathy in 2 (1%) versus 2 (4%; p = 0.209) for patients who received cisplatin or oxaliplatin, respectively. Diarrhea impacted the quality of life more frequently in patients who received oxaliplatin compared to cisplatin. Complete or near-complete pathological response was achieved in 94 (21%) versus 16 (15%; p = 0.126) patients who received cisplatin or oxaliplatin, respectively. Overall survival was not significantly different in both groups (p = 0.300). (4) Conclusions: Both cisplatin and oxaliplatin are legitimate options as part of systemic treatment in patients with resectable gastric cancer. Show less
Aim To evaluate the prognostic value of tumor markers in a European cohort of patients with resectable gastric cancer. Methods We performed a post hoc analysis of the CRITICS trial, in which 788... Show moreAim To evaluate the prognostic value of tumor markers in a European cohort of patients with resectable gastric cancer. Methods We performed a post hoc analysis of the CRITICS trial, in which 788 patients received perioperative therapy. Association between survival and pretreatment CEA, CA 19-9, alkaline phosphatase, neutrophils, hemoglobin and lactate dehydrogenase were explored in uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Likelihoods to receive potentially curative surgery were investigated for patients without elevated tumor markers versus one of the tumor markers elevated versus both tumor markers elevated. The association between tumor markers and the presence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was explored in 50 patients with available ctDNA data. Results In multivariable analysis, in which we corrected for allocated treatment and other baseline characteristics, elevated pretreatment CEA (HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.11-1.85, p < 0.001) and CA 19-9 (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.42-2.25, p < 0.001) were associated with worse OS. Likelihoods to receive potentially curative surgery were 86%, 77% and 60% for patients without elevated tumor marker versus either elevated CEA or CA 19-9 versus both elevated, respectively (p < 0.001). Although both preoperative presence of ctDNA and tumor markers were prognostic for survival, no association was found between these two parameters. Conclusion CEA and CA 19-9 were independent prognostic factors for survival in a large cohort of European patients with resectable gastric cancer. No relationship was found between tumor markers and ctDNA. These factors could potentially guide treatment choices and should be included in future trials to determine their definitive position. Show less
Simple Summary Around 20% of gastric cancer patients develop peritoneal metastasis after preoperative chemotherapy and curative surgery. Patients with peritoneal metastasis as a single site of... Show moreSimple Summary Around 20% of gastric cancer patients develop peritoneal metastasis after preoperative chemotherapy and curative surgery. Patients with peritoneal metastasis as a single site of metastasis may potentially benefit from prophylactic strategies. In this post-hoc analysis of the international phase III CRITICS trial, we aim to identify factors that can distinguish patients at high risk for developing peritoneal metastasis as a single site. Diffuse or mixed histological subtype, tumors with serosal involvement (ypT4) and advanced lymph node stage (ypN3 or a tumor positive lymph node ratio >20%) were independent risk factors for isolated peritoneal metastasis after preoperative chemotherapy and curative surgery. The combination of these risk factors identifies a subgroup that may benefit from treatment strategies that aim to prevent peritoneal metastasis. Gastric cancer (GC) patients at high risk of developing peritoneal metastasis (PM) as a single site of metastasis after curative treatment may be candidates for adjuvant prophylactic strategies. Here we investigated risk factors for metachronous isolated PM in patients who were treated in the CRITICS trial (NCT00407186). Univariable and multivariable analyses on both metachronous isolated PM and 'other events', i.e., (concurrent) distant metastasis, locoregional recurrence or death, were performed using a competing risk model and summarized by cumulative incidences. Isolated PM occurred in 64 of the 606 (11%) included patients. Diffuse or mixed histological subtype, ypT4 tumor stage and LNhigh (ypN3 lymph node stage or a lymph node ratio >20%) were independent risk factors for isolated PM in both univariable and multivariable analyses. Likewise, LNhigh was an independent risk factor for 'other events'. Patients with tumors who were positive for all three independent risk factors had the highest two-year cumulative incidence of 43% for isolated PM development. In conclusion, diffuse or mixed histological subtype, ypT4 and LNhigh were identified as independent risk factors for isolated PM in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. The combination of these factors may identify a subgroup that may benefit from PM-preventing treatment strategies. Show less
Aim: To evaluate treatment-related toxicity, treatment compliance, surgical complications and event-free survival (EFS) in older (>= 70 years) versus younger (<70 years) adults who underwent... Show moreAim: To evaluate treatment-related toxicity, treatment compliance, surgical complications and event-free survival (EFS) in older (>= 70 years) versus younger (<70 years) adults who underwent perioperative treatment for gastric cancer.Methods: In the CRITICS trial, 788 patients with resectable gastric cancer were randomised before start of any treatment and received preoperative chemotherapy (3 cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin or oxaliplatin and capecitabine), followed by surgery, followed by either postoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (45Gy + cisplatin + capecitabine).Results: 172 (22%) patients were older adults. During preoperative chemotherapy, 131 (77%) older adults versus 380 (62%) younger adults experienced severe toxicity (p < 0.001); older adults received significantly lower relative dose intensities (RDIs) for all chemotherapeutic drugs. Equal proportions of older versus younger adults underwent curative surgery: 137 (80%) versus 499 (81%), with comparable postoperative complications and postoperative mortality. Postoperative therapy after curative surgery started in 87 (64%) older adults versus 391 (78%) younger adults (p < 0.001). Incidence of severe toxicity during postoperative chemotherapy was 22 (54%) in older adults versus 113 (59%) in younger adults (p = 0.541); older adults received significantly lower RDIs for all chemotherapeutic drugs. Severe toxicity rates for postoperative chemoradiotherapy were 22 (48%) older adults versus 89 (45%) for younger adults (p = 0.703), with comparable chemotherapy RDIs and radiotherapy dose. Two-year EFS was 53% for older adults versus 51% for younger adults.Conclusion: Perioperative treatment compliance, especially in the postoperative phase, was poorer in older adults compared with younger adults. As comparable proportions of patients underwent curative surgery, future studies should focus on neo-adjuvant treatment. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Background: Although radical surgery remains the cornerstone of cure in resectable gastric cancer, survival remains poor. Current evidence-based (neo) adjuvant strategies have shown to improve... Show moreBackground: Although radical surgery remains the cornerstone of cure in resectable gastric cancer, survival remains poor. Current evidence-based (neo) adjuvant strategies have shown to improve outcome, including perioperative chemotherapy, postoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. However, these regimens suffer from poor patient compliance, particularly in the postoperative phase of treatment. The CRITICS-II trial aims to optimize preoperative treatment by comparing three treatment regimens: (1) chemotherapy, (2) chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and (3) chemoradiotherapy.Methods: In this multicentre phase II non-comparative study, patients with clinical stage IB-IIIC (TNM 8th edition) resectable gastric adenocarcinoma are randomised between: (1) 4 cycles of docetaxel+oxaliplatin+capecitabine (DOC), (2) 2 cycles of DOC followed by chemoradiotherapy (45Gy in combination with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin) or (3) chemoradiotherapy. Primary endpoint is event-free survival, 1 year after randomisation (events are local and/or regional recurrence or progression, distant recurrence, or death from any cause). Secondary endpoints include: toxicity, surgical outcomes, percentage radical (R0) resections, pathological tumour response, disease recurrence, overall survival, and health related quality of life. Exploratory endpoints include translational studies on predictive and prognostic biomarkers.Discussion: The aim of this study is to select the most promising among three preoperative treatment arms in patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. This treatment regimen will subsequently be compared with the standard therapy in a phase III trial. Show less
