Badgwell, Brian D.

AbstractBackgroundGastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases is a debilitating disease with limited treatment options. This article describes an update of the 2018 Chicago Consensus guidelines addressing the management of gastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases in line with the most recent evidence.MethodsA clinical management pathway was updated through two rounds of a Delphi consensus to assess agreement levels with pathway blocks. Supporting evidence underwent evaluation using a rapid literature review. Meta‐analyses were performed as appropriate.ResultsOverall, the level of evidence in this disease subset was low to moderate. Of 124 participants in the first round, 109 (88%) responded in the second round. Strong consensus (>90%) was achieved in six of eight blocks (75%) in rounds 1 and 2. A multidisciplinary preoperative assessment and diagnostic laparoscopy should be offered to all patients, whereas patients with a high burden of disease or progression should undergo nonsurgical management. Patients with stable/responsive disease and a low peritoneal carcinomatosis index should subsequently be offered treatment with regional therapeutic interventions and cytoreductive surgery. In patients who are cytology‐positive, systemic therapy can be used to convert them to cytology‐negative, with subsequent surgery offered according to the patient's goals of care. Meta‐analysis of observational and randomized control trials revealed a survival benefit with the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to cytoreductive surgery (hazard ratio, 0.52).ConclusionsThe consensus‐driven clinical pathway for gastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases offers vital clinical guidance for practitioners. There is a growing body of high‐quality evidence to support management strategies, and future clinical trials are eagerly awaited.

PURPOSE To compare overall survival (OS) in patients with baseline metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) with and without ovarian metastasis (OM). Furthermore, within the group that had ovarian metastases, we aimed to assess whether there was a survival benefit (SB) with palliative oophorectomy (PO). PATIENTS AND METHODS This is a single-institution retrospective analysis of the clinicopathological features of women diagnosed with metastatic GA with a comparison of outcomes based on PO status. We identified 240 women with baseline metastatic GAs who were treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center between February 2003 and September 2022. Among these women, we categorized a subgroup of 102 women who had OM from their primary GA. Patients were analyzed whether they underwent PO. RESULTS Patients who developed OM were most often non-Caucasian, had peritoneal involvement, and had tumors that were both human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative and PD-L1–negative, with signet ring cell features and diffuse histological type. Among patients with ovarian metastases, those who had PO had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group = 0, more comprehensive molecular and immunohistochemical profiling, lower percentage of family history of gastroesophageal malignancies, and lower interval between diagnosis of the GA primary and the OM. PO was associated with significantly improved OS in this subgroup (hazard ratio, 0.5 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.81]; P = .005). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest multiethnic population study assessing SB of PO in patients with GA with OM. Additionally, it is the largest study analyzing survival in this population according to the patient's multiethnic characteristics and metastasis timing and growth patterns. PO presents as a therapeutic option for women with GAs with OM if the patient is clinically suitable for surgical resection.

Abstract Background: The current standard operation for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction (P/GEJ) cancers with limited esophageal extension is total gastrectomy (TG). TG is associated with impaired appetite and weight loss, which is caused by a decreased level of ghrelin and anemia due to intrinsic factor loss and vitamin B12 malabsorption. Theoretically, proximal gastrectomy (PG) can mitigate these problems by preserving gastric function. However, PG with direct esophagogastric reconstruction is associated with severe postoperative reflux, delayed gastric emptying, and poor quality of life (QoL). Minimally invasive PG (MIPG) with antireflux techniques has been increasingly performed by experts but is technically demanding owing to its complexity. Moreover, the actual advantages of MIPG over minimally invasive TG (MITG) with regards to postoperative QoL are unknown. Our overall objective of this study is to determine the short-term QoL benefits of MIPG. Our central hypotheses are that MIPG is safe and that patients have improved appetite after MIPG with effective antireflux techniques, which leads to an overall QoL improvement when compared with MITG. Methods: Enrollment of a total of 60 patients in this prospective survey-collection study is expected. Procedures (MITG versus MIPG, antireflux techniques for MIPG [double-tract reconstruction versus the double-flap technique]) will be chosen based on surgeon and/or patient preference. Randomization is not considered feasible because patients often have strong preferences regarding MITG and MIPG. The primary outcome is appetite level (reported on a 0-10 scale) at 3 months after surgery. With an expected 30 patients per cohort (MITG versus MIPG), this study will have 80% power to detect a one-point difference in appetite level. Patient-reported outcomes will be longitudinally collected (including questions about appetite and reflux), and specific QoL items, body weight, body mass index and ghrelin, albumin, and hemoglobin levels will be compared. Discussion: Surgeons from the US, Japan, and South Korea formed this collaboration with the agreement that the surgical approach to P/GEJ cancers is an internationally important but controversial topic that requires immediate action. At the completion of the proposed research, our expected outcome is the establishment of the benefit and safety of MIPG. Trial Registration Number: This trial was registered with Clinical Trials Reporting Program Registration under the registration number NCI-2022-00267 on January 11, 2022, as well as with ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05205343 on January 11, 2022.

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.