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
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
