Citations

Cancers originating in the esophagus or esophagogastric junction constitute a major global health problem. Esophageal cancers are histologically classified as squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or adenocarcinoma, which differ in their etiology, pathology, tumor location, therapeutics, and prognosis. In contrast to esophageal adenocarcinoma, which usually affects the lower esophagus, esophageal SCC is more likely to localize at or higher than the tracheal bifurcation. 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 status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1, has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, 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 locally advanced esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on the management of recurrent or metastatic disease.

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesPublished data comparing peritoneal metastases from appendiceal cancers (pAC) and colorectal cancers (pCRC) remain sparse. We compared pAC and pCRC using comprehensive tumor profiling (CTP).MethodsCTP was performed, including next‐generation sequencing and analysis of copy number variation (CNV), microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutational burden (TMB).ResultsOne hundred thirty‐six pAC and 348 pCRC samples underwent CTP. The cohorts' age and gender were similar. pCRC demonstrated increased pathogenic variants (PATHs) in APC (48% vs. 3%, p < 0.01), ARID1A (12% vs. 2%, p < 0.01), BRAF (12% vs. 2%, p < 0.01), FBXW7 (7% vs. 2%, p < 0.01), KRAS (52% vs. 41%, p < 0.05), PIK3CA (15% vs. 2%, p < 0.01), and TP53 (53% vs. 23%, p < 0.01), and decreased PATHs in GNAS (8% vs. 31%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in CNV, fusion rate, or MSI. Median TMB was higher in pCRC (5.8 vs. 5.0 mutations per megabase, p = 0.0007). Rates of TMB‐high tumors were similar (pAC 2.1% vs. pCRC 9.0%, p = 0.1957). pCRC had significantly more TMB‐high tumors at lower thresholds.ConclusionsDespite a reduced overall TMB, pAC demonstrated mutations distinct from those seen in pCRC. These may serve as discrete biomarkers for future study.

Background National studies have reported racial and socioeconomic disparities in gastric cancer (GC) care. The current study evaluated adequate lymph node (LN) assessment (≥16 LNs) during resection for GC within a healthcare system servicing a socioeconomically disparate, mostly non-White population in the Southeast United States. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing resection for GC between 2003-2019 was performed. Factors associated with adequate LN assessment including patient and tumor characteristics were analyzed. Results Among 202 patients, adequate LN assessment was performed in 97 (48%) patients. On univariable analysis, younger age, non-White race, lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Medicaid or no insurance, D1+/D2 lymphadenectomy, clinical evidence of regional LN metastases, total gastrectomy, and receipt of neoadjuvant therapy were associated with adequate LN assessment. On multivariable analysis, non-White race (OR 2.79, 95% CI 1.38-5.65), CCI <4 (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.15-3.96), and D1+/D2 lymphadenectomy (OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.96-6.74) were the only factors independently associated with adequate LN evaluation. Conclusions In the current study, non-White race, independent of socioeconomics, was significantly associated with adequate LN assessment. Future work is necessary to improve standardization and achieve higher rates of adequate LN assessment for all patients during resection for GC.

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.