Proctor, Tanja

ImportanceThe prognosis of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction (AEG) is poor. From current evidence, it remains unclear to what extent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy achieve better outcomes than surgery alone.ObjectiveTo assess the association of preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy in patients with AEG with overall survival and other outcomes.Data SourcesLiterature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform was performed from inception to April 21, 2023.Study SelectionTwo blinded reviewers screened for randomized clinical trials comparing preoperative CRT plus surgery with preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery, 1 intervention with surgery alone, or all 3 treatments. Only data from participants with AEG were included from trials that encompassed mixed histology or gastric cancer. Among 2768 initially identified studies, 17 (0.6%) met the selection criteria.Data Extraction and SynthesisThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were followed for extracting data and assessing data quality by 2 independent extractors. A bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the 2-stage approach.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOverall and disease-free survival, postoperative morbidity, and mortality.ResultsThe analyses included 2549 patients (2206 [86.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [9.4] years) from 17 trials (conducted from 1989-2016). Both preoperative CRT plus surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% credible interval (CrI), 0.62-0.90]; 3-year difference, 105 deaths per 1000 patients) and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery (HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.64-0.91]; 3-year difference, 90 deaths per 1000 patients) showed longer overall survival than surgery alone. Comparing the 2 modalities yielded similar overall survival (HR, 1.04 [95% CrI], 0.83-1.28]; 3-year difference, 15 deaths per 1000 patients fewer for CRT). Similarly, disease-free survival was longer for both modalities compared with surgery alone. Postoperative morbidity was more frequent after CRT plus surgery (odds ratio [OR], 2.94 [95% CrI, 1.01-8.59]) than surgery alone. Postoperative mortality was not significantly more frequent after CRT plus surgery than surgery alone (OR, 2.50 [95% CrI, 0.66-10.56]) or after chemotherapy plus surgery than CRT plus surgery (OR, 0.44 [95% CrI, 0.08-2.00]).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this meta-analysis of patients with AEG, both preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy were associated with longer survival without relevant differences between the 2 modalities. Thus, either of the 2 treatments may be recommended to patients.

The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology (PSC) reporting system classifies pancreatobiliary samples into six categories (I–VI), providing guidance for personalized management. As the World Health Organization (WHO) has been preparing an updated reporting system for pancreatobiliary cytopathology, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the risk of malignancy (ROM) of each PSC category, also the sensitivity and specificity of pancreatic FNA cytology using the current PSC system. Five databases were investigated with a predefined search algorithm. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select the eligible studies for subsequent data extraction. A study quality assessment was also performed. Eight studies were included in the qualitative analysis. The ROM of the PSC categories I, II, III, IV, V, VI were in the ranges of 8–50%, 0–40%, 28–100%, 0–31%, 82–100%, and 97–100%, respectively. Notably, the ROM IVB (“neoplastic—benign”) subcategory showed a 0% ROM. Four of the included studies reported separately the ROMs for the IVO subcategory (“neoplastic—other”; its overall ROM ranged from 0 to 34%) with low (LGA) and high-grade atypia (HGA). ROM for LGA ranged from 4.3 to 19%, whereas ROM for HGA from 64 to 95.2%. When the subcategory IVO with HGA was considered as cytologically positive, together with the categories V and VI, there was a higher sensitivity of pancreatic cytology, at minimal expense of the specificity. Evidence suggests the proposed WHO international system changes—shifting the IVB entities into the “benign/negative for malignancy” category and establishing two new categories, the “pancreatic neoplasm, low-risk/grade” and “pancreatic neoplasm, high-risk/grade”—could stratify pancreatic neoplasms more effectively than the current PSC system.

The Paris System (TPS) for Reporting Urinary Cytology is a standardized, evidence-based reporting system, comprising seven diagnostic categories: nondiagnostic, negative for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (NHGUC), atypical urothelial cells (AUC), suspicious for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (SHGUC), HGUC, low-grade urothelial neoplasm (LGUN), and other malignancies. This study aimed to calculate the pooled risk of high-grade malignancy (ROHM) of each category and demonstrate the diagnostic accuracy of urine cytology reported with TPS. Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched. Specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, while data were extracted and analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The pooled ROHM was 17.70% for the nondiagnostic category (95% CI, 0.0650; 0.3997), 13.04% for the NHGUC (95% CI, 0.0932; 0.1796), 38.65% for the AUC (95% CI, 0.3042; 0.4759), 12.45% for the LGUN (95% CI, 0.0431; 0.3101), 76.89 for the SHGUC (95% CI, 0.7063; 0.8216), and 91.79% for the HGUC and other malignancies (95% CI, 0.8722; 0.9482). A summary ROC curve was created and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) was 0.849, while the pooled sensitivity was 0.669 (95% CI, 0.589; 0.741) and false-positive rate was 0.101 (95% CI, 0.063; 0.158). In addition, the pooled DOR of the included studies was 21.258 (95% CI, 14.336; 31.522). TPS assigns each sample into a diagnostic category linked with a specific ROHM, guiding clinical management.