Ajani, Jaffer A.

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.

344 Background: ICI with anti-PD-1 therapy was approved by the US FDA as 1st/2nd-line treatment of advanced GEC regardless of PD-L1 status. It is argued that patients (pts) with PD-L1-low GEC do not benefit from ICI. To avoid spurious exclusion of pts, we systematically reviewed phase 3 trials to assess the magnitude and consistency of PD-L1 to predict benefit from ICI. We also examined other potential predictive factors to understand their magnitude and consistency in comparison with PD-L1 status. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register were searched for all randomized clinical trials (RCT; 2000-2021) in advanced GEC comparing ICI, alone or with chemotherapy, vs standard of care (SOC). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Study screening, data abstraction, and bias assessment were done independently by two reviewers per PRISMA guidelines. The mean HR for ICI vs SOC was calculated by random effects model. The predictive value of a factor was quantified using relative magnitude and consistency (table). Results: 14 RCTs at low risk of bias were included (N = 9,210 pts; KN62, CM649, CM648, ESCORT1st, KN590, ATT4, JAV100, KN181, KN61, ATT3, ESCORT, RATIONALE302, JAV300, ATT2). 6 trials were 1st-line, 8 were after 1st-line. Treatment comparisons were ICI + chemo vs chemo (6 trials), ICI vs chemo (9 trials), and ICI vs placebo (1 trial). ICI was always anti-PD-1/-L1 (1 trial also had anti-CTLA-4). Table shows primary results. To enable head to head comparisons, subgroup analyses of trials containing both levels of a factor or having similar design were done and generally yielded consistent results. Conclusions: PD-L1 CPS is the strongest predictive biomarker, after MSI, for OS benefit from ICI-containing therapy vs SOC. Additional research on gender is warranted.[Table: see text]

292 Background: Despite recent approval of anti-PD-1 antibodies as 1L therapy in HER2(-) advanced GEA, benefit remains modest and limited largely to PD-L1(+) patients (pts), primarily those with combined positive scores (CPS) ≥5. Thus novel therapeutic approaches are needed for this pt population. DKN-01 is a targeted anti-DKK1 mAb which has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes in pts with elevated tumoral DKK1 expression, a subset of pts with more aggressive disease and shorter overall survival. Methods: DisTinGuish (NCT04363801) is a Phase 2a single arm 2-part trial; Part A investigated DKN-01 (D) + tislelizumab (TS) + CAPOX as 1L therapy for pts with advanced HER2(-) GEA regardless of DKK1 status; Part B investigated two dosing cohorts of D (300 mg and 600 mg) + TS as 2L therapy for DKK1-high advanced GEA pts. Primary objective was to examine safety and tolerability and secondary objectives evaluated multiple efficacy endpoints including overall response rate (ORR) in a modified intent to treat (mITT) population (>1 dose D). Results: Forty-nine pts enrolled between 01 Sept 2020 and 15 Sept 2021; 25 pts in Part A and 24 pts in Part B (D-300 mg). Key clinicopathologic features and efficacy outcomes are shown in Table. The most common D-related AEs were low grade (G1/2) fatigue, nausea, and diarrhea. Nine pts had D-related ≥G3 toxicities, elevated AST/ALT, elevated alkaline phosphatase, hypophosphatemia, hyponatremia, lymphopenia, neutropenia, diarrhea, vomiting, fatigue all occurring in 1 pt and pulmonary embolism in 2 pts (one G5 event). No new safety signals were observed in Part A or B1. Duration of response (DoR), median PFS and median OS have not been reached for Part A. Last pt enrolled in Part B1 on 15 Sept 2021. Conclusions: The combination of D/TS + CAPOX represents a well-tolerated, active 1L combination, particularly for DKK1-high patients consistent with the proposed mechanism of action. Activity appears to be independent of PD-L1 status. Part B1 is aligned with biomarker enrichment and efficacy and biomarker data will be presented along with updated Part A efficacy data. Clinical trial information: NCT04363801. [Table: see text]

AbstractAlthough the development of effective combined chemoradiation regimens for esophageal cancers has resulted in statistically significant survival benefits, the majority of patients treated with curative intent develop locoregional and/or distant relapse. Further improvements in disease control and survival will require the development of individualized therapy based on the knowledge of host and tumor genomics and potentially harnessing the host immune system. Although there are a number of gene targets that are amplified and proteins that are overexpressed in esophageal cancers, attempts to target several of these have not proven successful in unselected patients. Herein, we review our current state of knowledge regarding the molecular pathways implicated in esophageal carcinoma, and the available agents for targeting these pathways that may rationally be combined with standard chemoradiation, with the hope that this commentary will guide future efforts of novel combinations of therapy.

4515 Background: INT0116 (SWOG 9008) was a prospectively randomized phase III trial of postoperative adjuvant therapy utilizing 5-FU/leucovorin plus external beam radiation in 582 eligible cases of resected stage IB-IV(M0) stomach and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Initial results (NEJM 345: 725, 2001) showed both overall and disease free survivals improved by chemoradiation. Methods:We now report INT0116 results with >10years median follow-up. Exploratory subset outcomes are also reported. Results: INT0116 continues to show benefit for chemoradiation with hazard ratios (HR) for survival (HR=1.32, p=.004) and disease free survival (HR=1.51, p<.001) favoring chemoradiation. Subset analyses were performed for sex, race, T and N stage, D-level of surgical resection, tumor location (proximal or other), histology (intestinal or diffuse) and Maruyama index. Chemoradiation benefited all subsets with the exceptions of women and diffuse histology. In women the HR for therapy was 1.0(0.68–1.45). The HR for therapy in diffuse histology cases was 0.97(0.62–1.40). Interaction between these factors is suggested as women were significantly more likely to have diffuse histology than men (56% versus 33%). A multivariate analysis of sex and histology did not detect an effect of sex once histology was included. These data suggest that sex may not be an independent variable for lack of response to chemoradiation but that diffuse histology may be. Long term toxicities were examined. Thirty-five second tumors occurred in 31 cases. Twenty-two occurred in chemoradiation cases and 9 in surgery only cases. Second tumors represented a spectrum of types of neoplasms commonly occurring in this age group (median age 60 years). Excessive numbers of tumors known to be caused by radiation and/or chemotherapy were not noted. More tumors may have occurred in the treated patients since their death rates were less than surgery only cases. Conclusions: With >10 years median follow-up, survival remains improved in stage IB-IV (M0) gastric cancer cases treated with post-operative chemoradiaiton. All subsets benefit from this treatment with the exception of cases with diffuse histology. Women may be more likely to have diffuse histology gastric cancers. No increases in late toxic effects were noted. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

4009 Background: An ∼65% 5-year disease-free-survival (DFS) rate from 5-FU/mitomycin/radiation for anal carcinoma needs improvement. Methods: A phase III randomized trial compared 5-FU (1,000mg/m2 days 1–4 and 29–32) plus mitomycin (10mg/m2 days 1 and 29) and radiation (45 to 59 Gy) (Arm A) to 5-FU (1,000mg/m2 days 1–4, 29–32, 57–60 and 85–88) plus cisplatin (75mg/m2 on days 1, 29, 57 and 85) and radiation (45 to 59 Gy; start day=57) (Arm B) in anal carcinoma patients. Stratification included gender, clinical N status and tumor diameter. Primary endpoint was DFS. Statistical power was 80% with two-sided test to detect 10% DFS increase for Arm B. Results: Of 682 patients accrued, 598 were analyzable. Most unanalyzed patients’ data are early. Patient characteristics were balanced. Median age was 55 years, women predominated (69%), 27.5% had >5 cm tumor diameter and 26% had clinically N+ cancer. Preliminary 5-year estimated DFS was 56% for Arm A and 48% for Arm B (p=0.28) and 5-year estimated overall survival was 69% for both arms (p=0.24). Men(p=0.04), clinically N+ cancer (p<0.0001) and tumor diameter >5 cm (p=0.005) independently prognosticated DFS in a multivariate analysis. 5-year colostomy rate was 10% for Arm A and 20% for arm B(p=0.12). Grade 3/4 toxicity rates: non-hematologic=76% for Arm A and 75% for Arm B but hematologic=67% for Arm A and 47% for Arm B(p=0.0004). Conclusions: In Intergroup-98–11, induction 5-FU/cisplatin followed by 5-FU/cisplatin/radiation failed to improve DFS compared to the standard treatment, 5-FU/mitomycin/radiation. Supported by RTOG U10 CA21661, CCOP U10 CA37422, Stat U10 CA32115. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract Esophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common histology in Eastern Europe and Asia, and adenocarcinoma is most common in North America and Western Europe. Surgery is a major component of treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer, and randomized trials have shown that the addition of preoperative chemoradiation or perioperative chemotherapy to surgery significantly improves survival. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, ramucirumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with esophageal and EGJ cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on recommendations for the management of locally advanced and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and EGJ.

Background and ObjectivesStaging laparoscopy is recommended before preoperative therapy in patients with locoregional gastric cancer, but yield of repeated diagnostic laparoscopy at the time of resection is unknown.MethodsRetrospective review of a prospective database of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (1994‐2016) who had negative staging laparoscopy followed by preoperative therapy and subsequent attempted resection. Primary outcome was positive exploration (peritoneal or unresectable disease) at the time of resection. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with positive exploration.ResultsOf the 451 patients with attempted resection, 54 (12.0%) had positive explorations, including 48 with peritoneal disease. Patients with positive explorations were more likely to be female and have poorly differentiated tumors, linitis features, and signet‐ring morphology. There was no significant difference by exploration results in age, race, clinical stage, or delayed definitive surgery. Positive explorations were independently associated with poor differentiation (OR 4.6, 95%CI 1.4‐15.3; P = 0.01) and linitis (OR 4.2, 95%CI 1.9‐9.2; P < 0.001). Positive explorations were seen in 14.0% of patients with poor differentiation, 36.6% of patients with linitis, and 5.8% of patients with neither linitis nor poor differentiation.ConclusionDespite negative pretreatment laparoscopy, post‐treatment repeat laparoscopy may prevent non‐therapeutic laparotomies. At a minimum, we recommend selective repeat laparoscopy for patients with linitis features.

Objective: To discern recurrence risk stratification and investigate its influence on postoperative surveillance in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Background: Reports documenting recurrence risk stratification in EAC after neoadjuvant CRT are scarce. Methods: Between 1998 and 2014, 601 patients with EAC who underwent neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy were included for analysis. The pattern, site, timing, and frequency of the first recurrence and potential prognostic factors for developing recurrences were analyzed. This cohort was used as the training set to propose a recurrence risk stratification system, and the stratification was further validated in another cohort of 172 patients. Results: A total of 150 patients (25.0%) achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant CRT and the rest were defined as the non-pCR group (n = 451) in the training cohort. After a median follow-up of 63.6 months, the pCR group demonstrated a significantly lower locoregional (4.7% vs 19.1%) and distant recurrence rate (22.0% vs.44.6%) than the non-pCR group (P < 0.001). Based on independent prognostic factors, patients were stratified into 4 recurrence risk categories: pCR with clinical stage I/II, pCR with clinical stage III, non-pCR with pN0, and non-pCR with pN+, with corresponding 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of 88.7%, 65.8%, 55.3%, and 33.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). The risk stratification was reproducible in the validation cohort. Conclusions: We proposed a recurrence risk stratification system for EAC patients based on pathologic response and pretreatment clinical stage. Risk-based postoperative surveillance strategies could be developed for different risk categories.

7 Background: The organ preserving strategy of selective esophageal resection after definitive chemoradiation was evaluated in a multi-center, prospective Phase II trial. Methods: Treatment involved induction chemotherapy with 5-FU (650 mg/mg2/d), cisplatin (15 mg/mg2/d) and paclitaxel (200 mg/mg2/d) for 2 cycles followed by concurrent chemoradiation with 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy/fx) and daily 5-FU (300 mg/mg2/d) with cisplatin (15 mg/mg2/d) over the first 5 days. Following definitive chemoradiation, pts were evaluated for residual locoregional disease with chest and abdominal CT scans, EUS and optional PET scans. If there was no suspected residual disease patients were observed and monitored serially for recurrent disease at 3 mos x 2, 6 mos x 3 and then yrly. Esophageal resection was considered only for pts with suspected residual or recurrent locoregional esophageal cancer that did not have systemic disease. Results: 43 pts from Sept 2003 to March 2006 with non-metastatic resectable esophageal cancer were entered from 19 sites to RTOG 0246. 41 pts were eligible for analysis. 29 pts (73%) were adenocarcinoma histology with pretreatment clinical stage T3 or greater in 31 pts (76%) and N1 in 29 pts (71%). Following induction chemotherapy and chemoradiation 3 pts (7.3%) died of treatment related deaths and 1 pt died of disease progression. 21 pts (51%) underwent surgical resection following chemoradiation because of suspected residual disease 17 pts (41%), pt choice (1) or recurrent locoregional disease 3 pts (7%). 1 pt died postoperatively from esophageal anastomotic leak. 11 pts (27%) are alive and free of disease 70 to 90 months after chemoradiation, of which 5 (12%) did not have esophagectomy. With a median follow-up of 6.7 yrs (for 16 alive pts), the estimated overall 2.5 and 5-year survival rates (95% CI) are 46.3% (30.7%-60.6%) and 36.6% (22.3%-51.0%). Conclusions: The long-term results from this multi-center, prospective Phase II trial demonstrates the efficacy of a selective surgical resection approach following definitive chemoradiation in a predominantly adenocarcinoma population of locoregionally advanced esophageal cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT00081289.