Summary Gastric cancer is the fourth most common cancer globally, and is the second most common cause of death from cancer worldwide. About three-quarters of newly diagnosed cases in 2008 were from ...Asian countries. With a high mortality-to-incidence ratio, management of gastric cancer is challenging. We discuss evidence for optimum management of gastric cancer in aspects of screening and early detection, diagnosis, and staging; endoscopic and surgical intervention; and the concepts of perioperative, postoperative, and palliative chemotherapy and use of molecularly targeted therapy. Recommendations are formulated on the basis of the framework provided by the Breast Health Global Initiative, using the categories of basic, limited, enhanced, and maximum level. We aim to provide a stepwise strategy for management of gastric cancer applicable to different levels of health-care resources in Asian countries.
Background
The comprehensive complication index (CCI) integrates all complications of the Clavien–Dindo classification (CDC) and offers a metric approach to measure morbidity. The aim of this study ...was to evaluate the CCI at a high-volume center for gastric cancer surgery and to compare the CCI to the conventional CDC.
Methods
Clinical factors were collected from the prospective complication data of gastric cancer patients who underwent radical gastrectomy at Seoul National University Hospital from 2013 to 2014. CDC and CCI were calculated, and risk factors were investigated. Correlations and generalized linear models of hospital stay were compared between the CCI and CDC. The complication monitoring model with cumulative sum control-CCI (CUSUM-CCI) was displayed for individual surgeons, for comparisons between surgeons, and for the institution.
Results
From 1660 patients, 583 complications in 424 patients (25.5%) were identified. The rate of CDC grade IIIa or greater was 9.7%, and the overall CCI was 5.8 ± 11.7. Age, gender, Charlson score, combined resection, open method, and total gastrectomy were associated with increased CCI (
p
< 0.05). The CCI demonstrated a stronger relationship with hospital stay (
ρ
= 0.721,
p
< 0.001) than did the CDC (
ρ
= 0.634,
p
< 0.001). For prolonged hospital stays (≥30 days), only the CCI showed a moderate correlation (
ρ
= 0.544,
p
= 0.024), although the CDC did not. The CUSUM-CCI model displayed dynamic time–event differences in individual and comparison monitoring models. In the institution monitoring model, a gradual decrease in the CCI was observed.
Conclusions
The CCI is more strongly correlated with postoperative hospital stay than is the conventional CDC. The CUSUM-CCI model can be used for the continuous monitoring of surgical quality.
It is unclear whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy. The noninferiority of laparoscopic subtotal ...gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer compared with open surgery in terms of 3-year relapse-free survival rate was evaluated.
A phase III, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted for patients with histologically proven locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma suitable for distal subtotal gastrectomy. The primary end point was the 3-year relapse-free survival rate; the upper limit of the hazard ratio (HR) for noninferiority was 1.43 between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups.
From November 2011 to April 2015, 1,050 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopy (n = 524) or open surgery (n = 526). After exclusions, 492 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 482 underwent open surgery and were included in the analysis. The laparoscopy group, compared with the open surgery group, suffered fewer early complications (15.7%
23.4%, respectively;
= .0027) and late complications (4.7%
9.5%, respectively;
= .0038), particularly intestinal obstruction (2.0%
4.4%, respectively;
= .0447). The 3-year relapse-free survival rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 76.0% to 85.0%) for the laparoscopy group and 81.3% (95% CI, 77.0% to 85.0%; log-rank
= .726) for the open group. Cox regression analysis after stratification by the surgeon revealed an HR of 1.035 (95% CI, 0.762 to 1.406; log-rank
= .827;
for noninferiority = .039). When stratified by pathologic stage, the HR was 1.020 (95% CI, 0.751 to 1.385; log-rank
= .900;
for noninferiority = .030).
Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was comparable to open surgery in terms of relapse-free survival for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy could be a potential standard treatment option for locally advanced gastric cancer.
Summary Background Chemotherapy is the standard of care for incurable advanced gastric cancer. Whether the addition of gastrectomy to chemotherapy improves survival for patients with advanced gastric ...cancer with a single non-curable factor remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the superiority of gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone with respect to overall survival in these patients. Methods We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at 44 centres or hospitals in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore. Patients aged 20–75 years with advanced gastric cancer with a single non-curable factor confined to either the liver (H1), peritoneum (P1), or para-aortic lymph nodes (16a1/b2) were randomly assigned (1:1) in each country to chemotherapy alone or gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy by a minimisation method with biased-coin assignment to balance the groups according to institution, clinical nodal status, and non-curable factor. Patients, treating physicians, and individuals who assessed outcomes and analysed data were not masked to treatment assignment. Chemotherapy consisted of oral S-1 80 mg/m2 per day on days 1–21 and cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 8 of every 5-week cycle. Gastrectomy was restricted to D1 lymphadenectomy without any resection of metastatic lesions. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with UMIN-CTR, number UMIN000001012. Findings Between Feb 4, 2008, and Sept 17, 2013, 175 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy alone (86 patients) or gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy (89 patients). After the first interim analysis on Sept 14, 2013, the predictive probability of overall survival being significantly higher in the gastrectomy plus chemotherapy group than in the chemotherapy alone group at the final analysis was only 13·2%, so the study was closed on the basis of futility. Overall survival at 2 years for all randomly assigned patients was 31·7% (95% CI 21·7–42·2) for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone compared with 25·1% (16·2–34·9) for those assigned to gastrectomy plus chemotherapy. Median overall survival was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·7–19·8) for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone and 14·3 months (11·8–16·3) for those assigned to gastrectomy plus chemotherapy (hazard ratio 1·09, 95% CI 0·78–1·52; one-sided p=0·70). The incidence of the following grade 3 or 4 chemotherapy-associated adverse events was higher in patients assigned to gastrectomy plus chemotherapy than in those assigned to chemotherapy alone: leucopenia (14 patients 18% vs two 3%), anorexia (22 29% vs nine 12%), nausea (11 15% vs four 5%), and hyponatraemia (seven 9% vs four 5%). One treatment-related death occurred in a patient assigned to chemotherapy alone (sudden cardiopulmonary arrest of unknown cause during the second cycle of chemotherapy) and one occurred in a patient assigned to chemotherapy plus gastrectomy (rapid growth of peritoneal metastasis after discharge 12 days after surgery). Interpretation Since gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy did not show any survival benefit compared with chemotherapy alone in advanced gastric cancer with a single non-curable factor, gastrectomy cannot be justified for treatment of patients with these tumours. Funding The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and the Korean Gastric Cancer Association.
Adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery improves survival of patients with stage II–III, resectable gastric cancer. However, the overall survival benefit observed after adjuvant chemotherapy is moderate, ...suggesting that not all patients with resectable gastric cancer treated with adjuvant chemotherapy benefit from it. We aimed to develop and validate a predictive test for adjuvant chemotherapy response in patients with resectable, stage II–III gastric cancer.
In this multi-cohort, retrospective study, we developed through a multi-step strategy a predictive test consisting of two rule-based classifier algorithms with predictive value for adjuvant chemotherapy response and prognosis. Exploratory bioinformatics analyses identified biologically relevant candidate genes in gastric cancer transcriptome datasets. In the discovery analysis, a four-gene, real-time RT-PCR assay was developed and analytically validated in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumour tissues from an internal cohort of 307 patients with stage II–III gastric cancer treated at the Yonsei Cancer Center with D2 gastrectomy plus adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemotherapy (n=193) or surgery alone (n=114). The same internal cohort was used to evaluate the prognostic and chemotherapy response predictive value of the single patient classifier genes using associations with 5-year overall survival. The results were validated with a subset (n=625) of FFPE tumour samples from an independent cohort of patients treated in the CLASSIC trial (NCT00411229), who received D2 gastrectomy plus capecitabine and oxaliplatin chemotherapy (n=323) or surgery alone (n=302). The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival.
We identified four classifier genes related to relevant gastric cancer features (GZMB, WARS, SFRP4, and CDX1) that formed the single patient classifier assay. In the validation cohort, the prognostic single patient classifier (based on the expression of GZMB, WARS, and SFRP4) identified 79 (13%) of 625 patients as low risk, 296 (47%) as intermediate risk, and 250 (40%) as high risk, and 5-year overall survival for these groups was 83·2% (95% CI 75·2–92·0), 74·8% (69·9–80·1), and 66·0% (60·1–72·4), respectively (p=0·012). The predictive single patient classifier (based on the expression of GZMB, WARS, and CDX1) assigned 281 (45%) of 625 patients in the validation cohort to the chemotherapy-benefit group and 344 (55%) to the no-benefit group. In the predicted chemotherapy-benefit group, 5-year overall survival was significantly improved in those patients who had received adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery compared with those who received surgery only (80% 95% CI 73·5–87·1 vs 64·5% 56·8–73·3; univariate hazard ratio 0·47 95% CI 0·30–0·75, p=0·0015), whereas no such improvement in 5-year overall survival was observed in the no-benefit group (72·9% 66·5–79·9 in patients who received chemotherapy plus surgery vs 72·5% 65·8–79·9 in patients who only had surgery; 0·93 0·62–1·38, p=0·71). The predictive single patient classifier groups (chemotherapy benefit vs no-benefit) could predict adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in terms of 5-year overall survival in the validation cohort (pinteraction=0·036 in univariate analysis). Similar results were obtained in the internal evaluation cohort.
The single patient classifiers validated in this study provide clinically important prognostic information independent of standard risk-stratification methods and predicted chemotherapy response after surgery in two independent cohorts of patients with resectable, stage II–III gastric cancer. The single patient classifiers could complement TNM staging to optimise decision making in patients with resectable gastric cancer who are eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery. Further validation of these results in prospective studies is warranted.
Ministry of ICT and Future Planning; Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy; and Ministry of Health and Welfare.
Background
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nationwide benefit and cost of the national cancer screening program (NCSP) for gastric cancer treatment.
Methods
For this nationwide, ...population‐based study, the Korean National Health Insurance Big Data Base, which included gastric cancer–related treatment information and the costs for all patients with gastric cancer who were 40 years old or older between 2004 and 2013, was restructured. Patients with gastric cancer who participated in the NCSP at least once (the screening group) were compared with those who did not participate in the NCSP (the nonscreening group).
Results
The screening group (n = 116,775) spent significantly less on medical care expenses than the nonscreening group (n = 74,927) during the 5 years since the initial treatment (P < .0001). The screening group presented a significantly better prognosis for 5 and 9 years than the nonscreening group (P < .0001). The screening group revealed a 41% decreased hazard ratio (P < .0001) for death in comparison with the nonscreening group; the prognostic benefit became more obvious when treatment was started within the first 4 months after screening. The age‐standardized mortality rate ratio of the screening group versus the nonscreening group was 0.62 (P < .0001). The NCSP for gastric cancer required an average of 22,169,769 Korean Republic won (US $20,309) for 1 life‐year saved, which was less than the average gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in Korea.
Conclusions
The screening group had significantly lower medical care expenses and showed a significantly better prognosis than the nonscreening group. On the basis of the GDP per capita, the NCSP for gastric cancer was cost‐effective for treatment prognosis.
The nationwide, population‐based health insurance big database in Korea, where a national cancer screening program for gastric cancer was introduced in 2002, reveals that a screening group has lower medical care expenses and presents with a better prognosis than a nonscreening group even after stratification of the treatment group. On the basis of medical care expenses and screening costs, the national cancer screening program for gastric cancer is cost‐effective.
To compare short-term surgical outcomes including financial cost of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy.
Despite a lack of supporting evidence, robotic surgery has been increasingly adopted as a ...minimally invasive modality for the treatment of gastric cancer because of its assumed technical superiority over conventional laparoscopy.
A prospective, multicenter comparative study was conducted. Patients were matched according to the surgeon, extent of gastric resection, and sex. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis.
A total of 434 patients were enrolled for treatment with either robotic (n = 223) or laparoscopic (n = 211) gastrectomy for intention-to-treat analysis, and a total of 370 patients (n = 185 per treatment) were compared in per-protocol analysis. Results were similar between both analyses. In per-protocol analysis, both groups showed similar overall complication rates (robotic = 11.9% vs laparoscopic = 10.3%) and major complication rates (robotic = 1.1% vs laparoscopic = 1.1%) with no operative mortality in either group. Patients treated with robotic surgery showed significantly longer operative time (robotic = 221 minutes vs laparoscopic = 178 minutes; P < 0.001) and significantly higher total costs (robotic = US$13,432 vs laparoscopic = US$8090; P < 0.001), compared with those who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy. No significant differences between groups were noted in estimated blood loss, rates of open conversion, diet build-up, or length of hospital stay.
The use of robotic systems is assumed to provide a technically superior operative environment for minimally invasive surgery. However, our analysis of perioperative surgical outcomes indicated that robotic gastrectomy is not superior to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Clinical trials identification: NCT01309256.
Background
With improved short-term surgical outcomes, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy has rapidly gained popularity. However, the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) has ...not yet been proven due to the difficulty of the technique. This single-arm prospective multi-center study was conducted to evaluate the use of LTG for clinical stage I gastric cancer.
Methods
Between October 2012 and January 2014, 170 patients with pathologically proven, clinical stage I gastric adenocarcinoma located at the proximal stomach were enrolled. Twenty-two experienced surgeons from 19 institutions participated in this clinical trial. The primary end point was the incidence of postoperative morbidity and mortality at postoperative 30 days. The severity of postoperative complications was categorized according to Clavien–Dindo classification, and the incidence of postoperative morbidity and mortality was compared with that in a historical control.
Results
Of the enrolled patients, 160 met criteria for inclusion in the full analysis set. Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates reached 20.6% (33/160) and 0.6% (1/160), respectively. Fifteen patients (9.4%) had grade III or higher complications, and three reoperations (1.9%) were performed. The incidence of morbidity after LTG in this trial did not significantly differ from that reported in a previous study for open total gastrectomy (18%).
Conclusions
LTG performed by experienced surgeons showed acceptable postoperative morbidity and mortality for patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer.
Summary Background The CLASSIC trial was done to compare adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin versus observation after D2 gastrectomy for patients with stage II or III gastric cancer. The planned ...interim analysis of CLASSIC (median follow-up 34 months) showed that adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin significantly improved disease-free survival, the primary endpoint, compared with observation after D2 gastrectomy. We report the 5-year follow-up data from the trial. Methods CLASSIC was a phase 3, randomised, open-label study done at 35 cancer centres, medical centres, and hospitals in China, South Korea, and Taiwan. Patients with stage II–IIIB gastric cancer who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) after surgery to receive adjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (eight 3-week cycles of oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–14 plus intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1) for 6 months or observation alone. Randomisation was stratified by country and disease stage with a permuted block (size four) design. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This analysis presents the final preplanned assessment of outcomes after 5 years. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00411229. Findings We enrolled 1035 patients: 520 were randomly assigned to adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin, and 515 to observation. Median follow-up for this analysis in the intention-to-treat population was 62·4 months (IQR 54–70). 139 (27%) patients had disease-free survival events in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 203 (39%) patients in the observation group (stratified hazard ratio HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·47–0·72; p<0·0001). Estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 68% (95% CI 63–73) in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 53% (47–58) in the observation alone group. By the clinical cutoff date, 103 patients (20%) had died in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 141 patients (27%) in the observation group (stratified HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·51–0·85; p=0·0015). Estimated 5-year overall survival was 78% (95% CI 74–82) in the adjuvant capecitabine and oxaliplatin group versus 69% (64–73) in the observation group. Adverse event data were not collected after the primary analysis. Interpretation Adjuvant treatment with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin after D2 gastrectomy should be considered for patients with operable stage II or III gastric cancer. Funding F Hoffmann La-Roche and Sanofi.
PDF
