Abstract
Adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction represent a large burden of cancer death in the Western World with an increasing incidence. In the past two decades, the overall survival of patients on a potentially curative treatment pathway has more than doubled due to the addition of perioperative oncological therapies to surgery. However, patients often fail to respond to oncological treatment or struggle to complete their treatment after surgery. In this review, we discuss the current evidence for total neoadjuvant therapy and options for assessment of treatment response.
Similar content being viewed by others
Background
Oesophageal cancer is the 14th most common cancer in the United Kingdom, with adenocarcinoma being the most common histological subtype, and it is the 7th most common cause of cancer death [1]. The overall benefit of preoperative or perioperative oncological therapy (chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) for oesophageal and junctional adenocarcinoma is widely recognised, most notably demonstrated by landmarks trials including OEO2, MAGIC, FLOT4 and CROSS with overall 5-year survival reaching 47% in CROSS, a large improvement from 17–23% for surgery alone [2,3,4,5]. In this review, we discuss the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) on surgical resection margin, lymph node downstaging, and primary tumour pathological response and how this impacts survival. We also review the challenges of delivering perioperative therapy and discuss total neoadjuvant therapy as a potential novel treatment regimen for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer.
Total neoadjuvant therapy—is it possible in oesophageal cancer?
Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT), where all oncological treatment is delivered before surgery, is beneficial in other cancer types. This experience should be exploited with regard to potential issues which could arise using the TNT approach for oesophageal cancer, such as increased toxicity and poorer tolerability of neoadjuvant therapy given the higher chemotherapy dose and subsequent failure of progression to surgery.
For example, TNT has gained prominence in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer and has now been incorporated into national rectal cancer guidelines [6]. A summary of key trials of TNT in rectal cancer is shown in Table 1. The RAPIDO trial included high-risk patients with T4 or N2 clinical staging or other high-risk factors, and patients in the TNT group received 6 cycles of CAPOX or FOLFOX4 chemotherapy following a short course of radiotherapy [7]. In the UNICANCER-PRODIGE 23 trial, patients with T3-T4 and N0 clinical disease were included, arguably less advanced disease than in RAPIDO [8]. This trial used the more aggressive FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy before nCRT and showed a better 3-year disease-free survival in the TNT group and the trial concluded that there was a lower toxicity rate in the TNT group despite using FOLFIRINOX. These trials did not show any improvement in overall survival with TNT, but two meta-analyses have supported the improved oncological outcomes using TNT and consensus has shifted in favour of TNT in locally advanced rectal cancer [9, 10]. As well as these trials, there are various other smaller studies of TNT in rectal cancer, which consistently show better tolerability, less toxicity, and higher rates of planned treatment completion when the TNT approach is used [11,12,13]. Furthermore, excellent results have been reported in Phase 2 trials of TNT for borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, with 2-year progression-free and overall survival of 43% and 56%, respectively and a median PFS of 48.6 months in those undergoing resection with 2-year OS of 72% [14]. There is evidence to suggest that TNT enables the delivery of intended systemic therapy with a greater chance of pCR and without compromising on surgical resection in pancreatic adenocarcinoma [15]. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggest superior oncological and pathological outcomes with TNT compared to standard neoadjuvant therapy [16]. Phase III trials of TNT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma are currently ongoing [17].
Current evidence for TNT in oesophageal adenocarcinoma is limited to retrospective or small pilot study evidence but is promising and summarised in Table 2. Due to the non-randomised and largely retrospective nature of these studies, it is difficult to draw strong conclusions, however, there appears to be a consistently high disease-free and overall survival with intensified neoadjuvant regimens compared to standard of care. In addition, there are high rates of treatment completion and surgical resection as evidenced by in patients receiving FLOXFOX + CROSS [18]. Although there was an 80% grade 4 toxicity rate in the prospective study by Wo et al., the majority of this was due to subclinical lymphopenia. When patients with M1 nodal disease were excluded, 2-year progression-free survival was 78% in this study [19]. There are several ongoing trials of TNT or enhanced neoadjuvant therapy in patients with oesophageal or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. These are summarised in Table 3.
The, albeit limited, existing evidence in oesophageal and junctional adenocarcinoma, as well as other solid tumours suggests a significant survival benefit for patients receiving TNT and allows more patients to complete all oncological therapy and surgery. Prospective, randomised controlled trials are needed to compare treatment modalities directly using the TNT approach in oesophageal cancer.
Total neoadjuvant therapy—assessing treatment response
If patients are to embark on a prolonged course of preoperative treatment, ideally it should be a precision medicine strategy with mechanisms in place for an as early as possible assessment of response and adaption of treatment accordingly. Again, rectal cancer might help us to address this problem. The OPRA trial compared surgical resection to a “watch-and-wait” approach following TNT in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer [20]. This trial used an extensive surveillance protocol with a combination of digital rectal examination, flexible sigmoidoscopy (every 4 months for the first 2 years, then 6 monthly), CEA, MRI, CT chest/abdomen/pelvis and colonoscopies at year 1 and year 5 and demonstrated that organ preservation is safe and achievable in half of patients. Findings from the International Watch & Wait Database emphasise the importance of endoscopic surveillance [21]. We can also look to oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, for which definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is a treatment option. Surveillance after dCRT includes regular OGD and biopsies, EUS, CT scan and Fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET-CT) [22, 23]. The SANO trial is ongoing, which investigates the use of active surveillance in an organ-sparing “watch-and wait” approach for patients with oesophageal squamous cell and adenocarcinoma and utilises PET-CT, OGD with biopsies and EUS with FNA of suspicious nodes in its clinical response evaluation [24].
Generally, PET-CT has been shown to be a feasible and accurate modality for detecting response to neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal cancer [25,26,27,28]. However, its accuracy in detecting non-response is questionable, with one study suggesting reliable detection of non-responders in gastric and Siewert II-III cancers [29], and another suggesting a lack of accuracy in detecting non-response in oesophageal cancer [30]. In the absence of a “one size fits all” endoscopic or radiological surveillance modality and a lack of reliable tumour markers in oesophageal adenocarcinoma, it may be that a multimodality approach is required to assess response, and more importantly, non-response to preoperative treatment. The burden of such an approach for patients and the health care system will need to be understood.
Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is well established as a marker of minimal residual disease and correlates with recurrence and survival in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer [31,32,33,34,35,36]. The use of ctDNA in oesophageal cancer is still being established. The prospective pilot study of TNT in oesophageal adenocarcinoma analysed ctDNA at various time points, including post-chemoradiotherapy and post-surgery [19]. Those with undetectable ctDNA post-chemoradiotherapy and post-operatively had significantly lower recurrence rates compared to those with detectable ctDNA at these time points (8% vs 75% post-CRT, p = 0.004; 0% vs 40% post-op, P = 0.045). ctDNA has been identified in other studies as a useful biomarker of recurrence and treatment response in oesophageal cancer [37,38,39]. This highlights the potential utility of ctDNA as a biomarker of response to treatment, a predictor of recurrence and its utility in planning adjuvant treatment where needed. It is essential that any future trials of TNT incorporate several modalities to monitor response to treatment such as PET-CT, endoscopic surveillance and ctDNA.
Surgical resection margin
The importance of complete surgical excision of oesophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GOJ) cancers is long established. The 3-year survival in those with a complete surgical resection (R0) in OEO2 was 42.4% compared to 18.0% and 8.6% in those with R1 and R2 resections, respectively [40]. Patients who undergo preoperative oncological therapy are more likely to have an R0 resection. This is particularly evident in regimens where all the therapy is delivered pre-operatively, for example, in the CROSS trial, those receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy had an R0 rate of 92% compared with 69% in those having surgery alone [5]. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has been shown to deliver better local tumour control (R0 resection rate) than preoperative chemotherapy. In the Neo-AEGIS study, which compared neoadjuvant CRT (CROSS) with perioperative chemotherapy, R0 in the CROSS group was 95% compared to 82% in the perioperative chemotherapy group [41]. Similar results have been shown for R0 rate in the NeoRes I study, where chemoradiotherapy (R0=89%) and chemotherapy (R0=71%) were compared in the neoadjuvant setting alone in patients with T1-T3 disease[42]. However, there were comparable R0 rates between nCRT and nCT in the POET study (72% vs 69%), in patients with T3-T4 disease [43]. It should be noted that in these comparative studies older chemotherapy regimens were largely used in the chemotherapy arm rather than FLOT. The ESOPEC trial is currently ongoing, which directly compares FLOT and CROSS [44]. In the FLOT4 trial, where 83% of patients who received perioperative FLOT chemotherapy had T3/T4 disease and 78% had node-positive disease, there was an R0 resection rate of 92% in those with resected specimens [45]. The recent DANTE trial, in which 93% of patients completed pre-op FLOT cycles, had similarly high R0 rates of 91% in the FLOT arm and 92% in FLOT + atezolizumab [46]. Indirect comparison of the studies above is limited by significant differences in the study population, notably differences in histological type, disease location, disease stage, age, and performance status. This highlights the need for precise patient selection in clinical trials comparing treatment modalities.
From the available evidence, if the objective of preoperative treatment were solely to improve R0 resection rate both CROSS and FLOT offer comparable outcomes, but other important outcomes that have a profound impact on overall survival need to be considered.
Lymph node status, primary tumour pathological response and survival
Systemic disease control in patients with node-positive or micrometastatic disease is important for improving long-term outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer [47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55]. A recent meta-analysis has highlighted the importance of lymph node downstaging after neoadjuvant therapy as a prognostic factor in oesophageal cancer, with those with ypN0 achieving a much-improved survival over those with positive nodes (ypN+) after neoadjuvant therapy [56]. The POET study demonstrated a significantly improved 3-year survival for patients with an R0 resection and ypN0 (64.2%) compared with those who had tumour in the resected lymph nodes (38.8%), P < 0.001 [43]. Other studies have demonstrated the benefit of ypN0 as a prognostic factor in surgery for oesophageal cancer [57], with one study showing response in the lymph nodes and primary tumour to independently improve disease-free survival [58]. Two studies have suggested that adequate lymph node response improves survival, even if there is little response in the primary tumour [59, 60]. Furthermore, lymph node status was the largest determinant of prognosis in a recent machine-learning model predicting long-term survival [61]. Although there is a survival benefit for ypN0 over those with positive lymph nodes in the resected specimen (ypN+), the greatest benefit is seen in those with natural N0 or in those in whom there is concomitant complete regression in the primary tumour (ypT0)[62]. This highlights the importance of adequate pathological response in both the primary tumour and the lymph nodes. Moreover, primary tumour pathological complete response (pCR) has demonstrated 5-year overall survival of 88% vs 39% in those with complete resection (R0) but residual tumour in the resected specimen [63]. In a separate study, pCR was demonstrated as an independent predictor of improved survival following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy [64]. However, the Neo-AEGIS study, which compared neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to mostly older ECX perioperative chemotherapy, demonstrated higher rates of pCR (16% vs 5%) and ypN0 (60.1% vs 44.5%) after nCRT compared to nCT but this did not translate into improved survival [41]. If the objective of preoperative treatment were solely to improve pCR in the primary tumour and lymph nodes, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy would be the clear treatment of choice. However, it is important to consider how this impacts disease-free and overall survival.
Adjuvant therapy
The evidence for adjuvant therapy alone is extremely limited in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and is restricted to trials in gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma [65, 66]. In oesophageal adenocarcinoma, specific benefit of adjuvant therapy has only been demonstrated within the context of perioperative chemotherapy. In a large retrospective analysis, patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy had improved median survival over those who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (62.7 months vs 50.4 months) [67]. Moreover, the benefit of completing all cycles of FLOT has been shown to improve overall survival, regardless of tumour regression [68]. Adjuvant chemotherapy is also associated with improved median overall survival (40 months vs 34 months) in patients who had preoperative chemoradiotherapy [69]. Other studies suggest that the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting is greatest in node-positive disease [70, 71]. Indeed, in their subgroup analysis in patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy Rahman et al. [67] found that patients who had ypN0 had excellent survival outcomes, with no additional benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy whereas those with ypN+ had superior survival if they received adjuvant chemotherapy. The relative benefit of neoadjuvant over adjuvant therapy alone has been shown in patients with gastric cancer in the PRODIGY trial with increased 3-year PFS in those receiving nCT (66.3%) compared to adjuvant CT alone (60.2%) [72]. Retrospective studies also show survival benefit in those with gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma receiving nCRT over adjuvant CRT [73].
Adjuvant therapy following preoperative oncological therapy can improve survival outcomes for patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma, particularly those with residual nodal disease and is part of the current standard of care. However, there are challenges in delivering adjuvant chemotherapy in patients who have undergone oesophagogastrectomy and there is some evidence to suggest a relative benefit of neoadjuvant therapy over adjuvant.
Current standard of care and its challenges
Although accepted as a standard of care, the perioperative approach of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy thereafter is often hampered by failure to complete all chemotherapy cycles. In the FLOT4 trial, only 46% of patients completed all cycles using the perioperative approach [4]. Whereas, in regimens where all treatment is delivered pre-operatively there is a much higher rate of treatment completion without reducing the number of patients proceeding to surgery. An example is the CROSS trial, in which 95% of patients completed oncological treatment and 90% of patients underwent resection, albeit that the amount of chemotherapy delivered in this regimen is much less than in FLOT. However, in the FLOT4 trial, 90% of patients completed all preoperative chemotherapy, suggesting that preoperative treatment is better tolerated than postoperative treatment, in part due to the morbidity following oesophagogastrectomy. Timing of surgery after neoadjuvant therapy is also an important consideration. Patients undergoing nCRT have improved response after delayed surgery (>7–8 weeks after nCRT completion) but have higher 30-day mortality after surgery [74]. A large study of >2000 patients suggests that the optimal timing for surgery is 56 days after nCRT completion to balance increased pathological response with overall survival [75].
Both the perioperative FLOT chemotherapy regimen and the preoperative CROSS chemoradiotherapy regimen plus surgery are accepted standards of care for patients with resectable oesophageal adenocarcinoma and are currently being compared in the ESOPEC trial [44]. Although there is currently no directly comparable clinical evidence to suggest that either is superior to the other, CROSS (nCRT) and FLOT (perioperative chemotherapy) have different effects on the primary tumour and systemic disease. There is a higher rate of pCR with CROSS than preoperative chemotherapy. Due to its radiotherapy component, CROSS gives the opportunity to downstage primary tumours where there is a risk of R1 resection. However, CROSS delivers less systemic treatment than FLOT. As a result, there is a risk of systemic undertreatment in patients allocated to nCRT using CROSS. This has been demonstrated in a recent large cohort study of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma all achieving pCR (ypT0N0) after neoadjuvant therapy, which showed that 5-year recurrence-free survival was significantly better in the nCT group (87.1%) compared to nCRT (75.3%), notably with a greater prevalence of distant recurrence in the nCRT group, suggesting potential systemic undertreatment [55]. This has also been demonstrated in 10-year CROSS follow-up, in which CROSS reduced oesophageal cancer-related death by reducing locoregional recurrence but did not reduce the incidence of distant recurrence compared to surgery alone [76].
Regarding pCR in the primary tumour and lymph nodes (ypT0N0), it is important to consider how this translates to into long-term outcomes and the differential outcomes observed after different neoadjuvant regimens. It is evident that whilst achieving ypT0N0 is important, the modality used to achieve this is also important for survival outcomes. Although there were higher rates of ypT0 and ypN0 in those receiving nCRT compared to nCT (using older ECX chemotherapy rather than FLOT) in the NEO-AEGIS study, this did not translate into improved 3-year overall survival (56% vs 57%) [41]. There were similar results in NeoRes I, with higher pCR for nCRT than nCT (28% vs 9%) but similar 5-year OS (42.2% vs 39.6%) [42]. A recent retrospective study directly comparing FLOT vs CROSS shows similar 5-year overall survival in patients receiving FLOT and CROSS despite a higher pCR with CROSS [77]. Other recent smaller studies demonstrate similar survival patterns between CROSS and FLOT but show higher distant recurrence and postoperative respiratory failure with CROSS [78, 79]. Results from the ESOPEC Phase III trial are eagerly awaited [44]. A 2019 meta-analysis makes the conclusion that although the addition of radiotherapy to chemotherapy alone increases the chance of pCR and reduces the risk of locoregional failure, it does not reduce the risk of distant metastases or death [80].
These clinical observations support tumour biology relating to intra-patient heterogeneity. One study has shown discrepancy in genomic alterations between primary tumour and metastatic disease and highlights the limitations of using genetic alterations in biopsies of the primary tumour to guide treatment in other areas of the patient’s disease such as distant metastases [81]. Furthermore, intratumoural heterogeneity exists between tissue from superficial primary tumour, deep primary tumour, and lymph node metastases [82].
The main challenges for the current standards of care are non-completion of perioperative therapy in the context of FLOT, as well as a risk of systemic undertreatment in those receiving CROSS. Whilst pCR is seen as a marker of treatment success, studies comparing patients achieving pCR who received nCT or nCRT lead us to conclude that ypT0N0 does not always translate into the same outcomes in primary endpoints such as disease-free or overall survival between treatment modalities and should not be used as a surrogate primary endpoint. Future comparative randomised trials should focus not only on pCR but also on survival outcomes. By combining both modalities in the preoperative setting using a total neoadjuvant approach, for example using extended preoperative FLOT or a combination of preoperative FLOT plus CROSS, we may be able to achieve both optimal locoregional and systemic disease control, without compromising progression to surgery, enabling more patients to complete all intended treatment.
The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors
Immune checkpoint inhibitors remove the inhibitory signals of T-cell activation that enable tumour-reactive T cells to overcome regulatory mechanisms and mount an effective antitumour response [83]. Although their mechanism of action is different, there are synergies between chemotherapy and immunotherapy and it has been suggested that an effective strategy to harness such synergies is to give immune checkpoint inhibitors after the tumour mass has been optimally reduced with surgery and systemic chemotherapy in the setting of minimal residual disease, where the negative impact of tumour bulk on antitumour immune response is minimised [84]. In the context of TNT, this could theoretically enable best possible response to local and systemic therapy whilst engaging the immune response in the postoperative setting. The positive impact of postoperative checkpoint inhibitors has been demonstrated in the nCRT setting in the CHECKMATE 577 trial, in which patients with residual disease after surgery (ypT+ or ypN+) were randomised to receive adjuvant PD-1 inhibitor, nivolumab, or placebo [85]. Median disease-free survival was 22.4 months in the treatment vs 11 months in the placebo arm (HR 0.69, P < 0.001). These results have changed the paradigm of treatment for oesophageal cancer, giving us a fourth treatment modality in addition to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery to improve outcomes for patients with locally advanced, high-risk oesophageal cancer. It must be noted that quality of life scores were comparable between the placebo and treatment groups with an acceptable safety profile, which is important when considering patients who might have already received TNT and surgical resection for further treatment [86]. However, recent trial results have failed to show a benefit for the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy. Final results are awaited but KEYNOTE-585 reports a higher pathological complete response rate from the addition of pembrolizumab to perioperative FLOT, but the event-free and overall survival endpoints were not met [87]. Similarly, ATTRACTION-5 reported no recurrence-free survival benefit from the addition of Nivolumab to adjuvant chemotherapy [88]. In both KEYNOTE-585 and ATTRACTION-5 the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors was in biomarker unselected patients, and it is relevant that in CHECKMATE577 a post hoc subgroup analysis indicated that disease-free survival benefit from adjuvant nivolumab was only demonstrated in PDL1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥5 patients and not seen in PDL1 CPS ≤5. In metastatic or advanced-stage unresectable gastroesophageal cancer patients a number of randomised trials have reported the benefit of the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitor to chemotherapy and tumour PDL1 CPS has demonstrated benefit as a biomarker to predict the quantum of benefit from the checkpoint inhibitor. In CHECKMATE 649, patients with metastatic, or unresectable oesophageal, junctional or gastric adenocarcinomas who were not known to be HER2 positive were enrolled regardless of PDL1 CPS result, but the co-primary endpoints were PFS and OS in patients with PDL1 CPS ≥5 where benefit was seen with the addition of nivolumab to oxaliplatin plus capecitabine or 5-FU (OS HR = 0.70 (95% CI 0.61, 0.81), PFS HR = 0.70 (95% CI 0.60, 0.81)) [89]. Similarly in KEYNOTE 859, in metastatic or advanced-stage unresectable gastroesophageal junctional or gastric adenocarcinomas OS and PFS benefit from the addition of pembrolizumab to platinum fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy was demonstrated recently in patients with PDL1 CPS ≥1 with a greater incremental benefit seen in those with PDL1 CPS ≥10 [90]. While KEYNOTE 590 demonstrated benefit of the addition of pembrolizumab to platinum fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy to all randomised patients with oesophageal cancer (squamous and adenocarcinoma) and Siewert type I junctional adenocarcinomas, but greater incremental benefit in those with PDL1 CPS ≥10 [91]. These trials demonstrating the survival benefit of checkpoint inhibitors in unresectable and metastatic gastro-oesophageal malignancy have established new standards of care in biomarker-selected patients with advanced-stage disease and underscore the importance of biomarker-directed use of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Together with the recent results from KEYNOTE-585 and ATTRACTION-5, and post hoc PDL1 CPS analysis from CHECKMATE 577 this suggests that biomarker section for immune checkpoint inhibitors is likely to be important in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting as well. This has important relevance for ongoing trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the curative setting, including those which incorporate perioperative FLOT such as MATERHORN (FLOT + durvalumab or placebo) (NCT04592913). Microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) is present in 6–24% of resected gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and is an established predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors [92]. Encouraging results have been reported in non-randomised Phase 2 trials of perioperative immune checkpoint inhibitors without chemotherapy in MSI-H selected patients, for example, the NEONIPIGA trial has shown pCR rates of 59% in patients with MSI-high disease, but survival follow-up is limited at present and larger randomised studies are yet to be undertaken [93].
Overall, the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in perioperative treatment of gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas is not yet established and emerging trial results highlight the importance of biomarker-directed use of these agents. This emphasises the importance of optimising the conventional perioperative treatments with chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy for those patients who are immune checkpoint inhibitor biomarker negative and the incorporation of treatment with checkpoint inhibitors in a biomarker-directed manner into trials of TNT where patients have residual disease despite optimal local and systematic therapy.
Conclusion
In Summary, the addition of perioperative oncological therapies to surgery have greatly improved overall and progression-free survival in patients with oesophageal and junctional adenocarcinoma, achieving higher R0 resection rates and pathological response in the primary tumour and involved lymph nodes. However, more than 50% of patients do not complete all planned therapy if receiving perioperative chemotherapy. Furthermore, whilst pCR is important, intra-tumour heterogeneity impacts how this translates into long-term disease-free survival, and the impact of FLOT and CROSS on survival does not appear to be directly related to pCR alone. Total neoadjuvant therapy has shown promising results with high pCR rates together with impressive disease-free and overall survival in the retrospective setting. This warrants a randomised controlled trial of total neoadjuvant therapy approaches, incorporating methods of treatment response.
References
Cancer Research UK. Oesophageal cancer statistics. Available from: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/oesophageal-cancer#heading-One.
Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Party. Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;359:1727–33.
Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Thompson JN, Van de Velde CJ, Nicolson M, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:11–20.
Al-Batran SE, Homann N, Pauligk C, Goetze TO, Meiler J, Kasper S, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel versus fluorouracil or capecitabine plus cisplatin and epirubicin for locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4): a randomised, phase 2/3 trial. Lancet. 2019;393:1948–57.
van Hagen P, Hulshof MC, van Lanschot JJ, Steyerberg EW, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BP, et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2074–84.
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Azad N, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, et al. Rectal cancer, version 2.2022, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022;20:1139–67.
Bahadoer RR, Dijkstra EA, van Etten B, Marijnen CAM, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, et al. Short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy before total mesorectal excision (TME) versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME, and optional adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (RAPIDO): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:29–42.
Conroy T, Bosset JF, Etienne PL, Rio E, François É, Mesgouez-Nebout N, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX and preoperative chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (UNICANCER-PRODIGE 23): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:702–15.
Kasi A, Abbasi S, Handa S, Al-Rajabi R, Saeed A, Baranda J, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy vs standard therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3:e2030097.
Petrelli F, Trevisan F, Cabiddu M, Sgroi G, Bruschieri L, Rausa E, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Ann Surg. 2020;271:440–8.
Cercek A, Roxburgh CSD, Strombom P, Smith JJ, Temple LKF, Nash GM, et al. Adoption of total neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:e180071.
Fernandez-Martos C, Garcia-Albeniz X, Pericay C, Maurel J, Aparicio J, Montagut C, et al. Chemoradiation, surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy versus induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery: long-term results of the Spanish GCR-3 phase II randomized trial†. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:1722–8.
Sclafani F, Brown G, Cunningham D, Wotherspoon A, Tait D, Peckitt C, et al. PAN-EX: a pooled analysis of two trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy in MRI-defined, locally advanced rectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1557–65.
Murphy JE, Wo JY, Ryan DP, Jiang W, Yeap BY, Drapek LC, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy with FOLFIRINOX followed by individualized chemoradiotherapy for borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:963–9.
Kim RY, Christians KK, Aldakkak M, Clarke CN, George B, Kamgar M, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy for operable pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:2246–56.
De Simoni O, Scarpa M, Soldà C, Bergamo F, Lonardi S, Fantin A, et al. Could total neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection be the new standard of care in pancreatic cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2022;11:812.
Janssen QP, van Dam JL, Bonsing BA, Bos H, Bosscha KP, Coene P, et al. Total neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-2 trial): study protocol for a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer. 2021;21:300.
Dunne RF, Badri N, Nicolais M, Noel MS, Baran AM, Wang W, et al. Induction FOLFOX prior to CROSS chemoradiotherapy and surgery in patients with locally-advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: a phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:327.
Wo JY, Clark JW, Eyler CE, Mino-Kenudson M, Klempner SJ, Allen JN, et al. Results and molecular correlates from a pilot study of neoadjuvant induction FOLFIRINOX followed by chemoradiation and surgery for gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27:6343–53.
Garcia-Aguilar J, Patil S, Gollub MJ, Kim JK, Yuval JB, Thompson HM, et al. Organ preservation in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma treated with total neoadjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:2546–56.
van der Valk MJM, Hilling DE, Bastiaannet E, Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg E, Beets GL, Figueiredo NL, et al. Long-term outcomes of clinical complete responders after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD): an international multicentre registry study. Lancet. 2018;391:2537–45.
Sudo K, Xiao L, Wadhwa R, Shiozaki H, Elimova E, Taketa T, et al. Importance of surveillance and success of salvage strategies after definitive chemoradiation in patients with esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3400–5.
Allum WH, Blazeby JM, Griffin SM, Cunningham D, Jankowski JA, Wong R. Guidelines for the management of oesophageal and gastric cancer. Gut. 2011;60:1449–72.
Noordman BJ, Wijnhoven BPL, Lagarde SM, Boonstra JJ, Coene P, Dekker JWT, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus active surveillance for oesophageal cancer: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:142.
Westerterp M, van Westreenen HL, Reitsma JB, Hoekstra OS, Stoker J, Fockens P, et al. Esophageal cancer: CT, endoscopic US, and FDG PET for assessment of response to neoadjuvant therapy-systematic review. Radiology. 2005;236:841–51.
Anderegg MC, de Groof EJ, Gisbertz SS, Bennink RJ, Lagarde SM, Klinkenbijl JH, et al. 18F-FDG PET-CT after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer patients to optimize surgical decision making. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0133690.
Sánchez-Izquierdo N, Perlaza P, Pagès M, Buxó E, Rios J, Rubello D, et al. Assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with locally advanced esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2020;45:38–43.
Obermannova R, Selingerova I, Rehak Z, Jedlicka V, Slavik M, Fabian P, et al. PET/CT-tailored treatment of locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma: a report on the feasibility of the multicenter GastroPET study. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2021;13:17588359211065153.
Schneider PM, Eshmuminov D, Rordorf T, Vetter D, Veit-Haibach P, Weber A, et al. (18)FDG-PET-CT identifies histopathological non-responders after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric and cardia cancer: cohort study. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:548.
van Heijl M, Omloo JM, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Hoekstra OS, Boellaard R, Bossuyt PM, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for evaluating early response during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer. Ann Surg. 2011;253:56–63.
Kotaka M, Shirasu H, Watanabe J, Yamazaki K, Hirata K, Akazawa N, et al. Association of circulating tumor DNA dynamics with clinical outcomes in the adjuvant setting for patients with colorectal cancer from an observational GALAXY study in CIRCULATE-Japan. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:9.
Vidal J, Casadevall D, Bellosillo B, Pericay C, Garcia-Carbonero R, Losa F, et al. Clinical impact of presurgery circulating tumor DNA after total neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer: a biomarker study from the GEMCAD 1402 Trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27:2890–8.
Murahashi S, Akiyoshi T, Sano T, Fukunaga Y, Noda T, Ueno M, et al. Serial circulating tumour DNA analysis for locally advanced rectal cancer treated with preoperative therapy: prediction of pathological response and postoperative recurrence. Br J Cancer. 2020;123:803–10.
Tie J, Cohen JD, Wang Y, Li L, Christie M, Simons K, et al. Serial circulating tumour DNA analysis during multimodality treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer: a prospective biomarker study. Gut. 2019;68:663–71.
Dasari A, Morris VK, Allegra CJ, Atreya C, Benson AB 3rd, Boland P, et al. ctDNA applications and integration in colorectal cancer: an NCI Colon and Rectal-Anal Task Forces whitepaper. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020;17:757–70.
Tie J, Cohen JD, Lo SN, Wang Y, Li L, Christie M, et al. Prognostic significance of postsurgery circulating tumor DNA in nonmetastatic colorectal cancer: Individual patient pooled analysis of three cohort studies. Int J Cancer. 2021;148:1014–26.
Azad TD, Chaudhuri AA, Fang P, Qiao Y, Esfahani MS, Chabon JJ, et al. Circulating tumor DNA analysis for detection of minimal residual disease after chemoradiotherapy for localized esophageal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:494–505.e6.
Egyud M, Tejani M, Pennathur A, Luketich J, Sridhar P, Yamada E, et al. Detection of circulating tumor DNA in plasma: a potential biomarker for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019;108:343–9.
Chidambaram S, Markar SR. Clinical utility and applicability of circulating tumor DNA testing in esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2022;35:doab046.
Allum WH, Stenning SP, Bancewicz J, Clark PI, Langley RE. Long-term results of a randomized trial of surgery with or without preoperative chemotherapy in esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5062–7.
Reynolds JV, Preston SR, O'Neill B, Lowery MA, Baeksgaard L, Crosby T, et al. Neo-AEGIS (neoadjuvant trial in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophago-gastric junction international study): preliminary results of phase III RCT of CROSS versus perioperative chemotherapy (modified MAGIC or FLOT protocol). (NCT01726452). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:4004.
von Döbeln GA, Klevebro F, Jacobsen AB, Johannessen HO, Nielsen NH, Johnsen G, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction: long-term results of a randomized clinical trial. Dis Esophagus. 2019;32:doy078.
Stahl M, Walz MK, Stuschke M, Lehmann N, Meyer HJ, Riera-Knorrenschild J, et al. Phase III comparison of preoperative chemotherapy compared with chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:851–6.
Hoeppner J, Lordick F, Brunner T, Glatz T, Bronsert P, Röthling N, et al. ESOPEC: prospective randomized controlled multicenter phase III trial comparing perioperative chemotherapy (FLOT protocol) to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CROSS protocol) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (NCT02509286). BMC Cancer. 2016;16:503.
Al-Batran SE, Hofheinz RD, Pauligk C, Kopp HG, Haag GM, Luley KB, et al. Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:1697–708.
Al-Batran S-E, Lorenzen S, Thuss-Patience PC, Homann N, Schenk M, Lindig U, et al. Surgical and pathological outcome, and pathological regression, in patients receiving perioperative atezolizumab in combination with FLOT chemotherapy versus FLOT alone for resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinoma: Interim results from DANTE, a randomized, multicenter, phase IIb trial of the FLOT-AIO German Gastric Cancer Group and Swiss SAKK. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:4003.
Smyth EC, Fassan M, Cunningham D, Allum WH, Okines AF, Lampis A, et al. Effect of pathologic tumor response and nodal status on survival in the medical research council adjuvant gastric infusional chemotherapy trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:2721–7.
Noble F, Lloyd MA, Turkington R, Griffiths E, O'Donovan M, O'Neill JR, et al. Multicentre cohort study to define and validate pathological assessment of response to neoadjuvant therapy in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg. 2017;104:1816–28.
Matsuyama J, Doki Y, Yasuda T, Miyata H, Fujiwara Y, Takiguchi S, et al. The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on lymph node micrometastases in squamous cell carcinomas of the thoracic esophagus. Surgery. 2007;141:570–80.
Kalff MC, Henckens SPG, Voeten DM, Heineman DJ, Hulshof M, van Laarhoven HWM, et al. Recurrent disease after esophageal cancer surgery: a substudy of The Dutch Nationwide Ivory Study. Ann Surg. 2022;276:806–13.
Hosch SB, Stoecklein NH, Pichlmeier U, Rehders A, Scheunemann P, Niendorf A, et al. Esophageal cancer: the mode of lymphatic tumor cell spread and its prognostic significance. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1970–5.
Karstens KF, Ghadban T, Effenberger K, Sauter G, Pantel K, Izbicki JR, et al. Lymph node and bone marrow micrometastases define the prognosis of patients with pN0 esophageal cancer. Cancers. 2020;12:588.
Samson P, Puri V, Lockhart AC, Robinson C, Broderick S, Patterson GA, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with pathologic node-positive esophageal cancer after induction chemotherapy is associated with improved survival. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;156:1725–35.
Drake J, Tauer K, Portnoy D, Weksler B. Adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved survival in patients with nodal metastases after neoadjuvant therapy and esophagectomy. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11:2546–54.
Cools-Lartigue J, Markar S, Mueller C, Hofstetter W, Nilsson M, Ilonen I, et al. An international cohort study of prognosis associated with pathologically complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy of surgical treated esophageal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2022;276:799–805.
Hagens E, Tukanova K, Jamel S, van Berge Henegouwen M, Hanna GB, Gisbertz S, et al. Prognostic relevance of lymph node regression on survival in esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2022;35:doab021.
Watanabe M, Baba Y, Yoshida N, Ishimoto T, Nagai Y, Iwatsuki M, et al. Outcomes of preoperative chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil followed by esophagectomy in patients with resectable node-positive esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:2838–44.
Noble F, Nolan L, Bateman AC, Byrne JP, Kelly JJ, Bailey IS, et al. Refining pathological evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19:9282–93.
Davarzani N, Hutchins GGA, West NP, Hewitt LC, Nankivell M, Cunningham D, et al. Prognostic value of pathological lymph node status and primary tumour regression grading following neoadjuvant chemotherapy—results from the MRC OE02 oesophageal cancer trial. Histopathology. 2018;72:1180–8.
Davies AR, Myoteri D, Zylstra J, Baker CR, Wulaningsih W, Van Hemelrijck M, et al. Lymph node regression and survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg. 2018;105:1639–49.
Rahman SA, Walker RC, Maynard N, Trudgill N, Crosby T, Cromwell DA, et al. The AUGIS Survival Predictor: Prediction of Long-term and Conditional Survival after Esophagectomy Using Random Survival Forests. Ann Surg. 2021;277:267–74.
Zanoni A, Verlato G, Giacopuzzi S, Motton M, Casella F, Weindelmayer J, et al. ypN0: does it matter how you get there? Nodal downstaging in esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:998–1004.
Stahl M, Walz MK, Riera-Knorrenschild J, Stuschke M, Sandermann A, Bitzer M, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the oesophagogastric junction (POET): long-term results of a controlled randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 2017;81:183–90.
Alnaji RM, Du W, Gabriel E, Singla S, Attwood K, Nava H, et al. Pathologic complete response is an independent predictor of improved survival following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20:1541–6.
Macdonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J, Hundahl SA, Estes NC, Stemmermann GN, et al. Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:725–30.
Noh SH, Park SR, Yang HK, Chung HC, Chung IJ, Kim SW, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (CLASSIC): 5-year follow-up of an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1389–96.
Rahman S, Thomas B, Maynard N, Park MH, Wahedally M, Trudgill N, et al. Impact of postoperative chemotherapy on survival for oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma after preoperative chemotherapy and surgery. Br J Surg. 2022;109:227–36.
Stüben BO, Stuhlfelder J, Kemper M, Tachezy M, Ghadban T, Izbicki JR, et al. Completion of FLOT therapy, regardless of tumor regression, significantly improves overall survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancers. 2022;14:1084.
Mokdad AA, Yopp AC, Polanco PM, Mansour JC, Reznik SI, Heitjan DF, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy vs postoperative observation following preoperative chemoradiotherapy and resection in gastroesophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:31–8.
Burt BM, Groth SS, Sada YH, Farjah F, Cornwell L, Sugarbaker DJ, et al. Utility of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg. 2017;266:297–304.
Nevala-Plagemann C, Francis S, Cavalieri C, Tao R, Whisenant J, Glasgow R, et al. Benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy based on lymph node involvement for oesophageal cancer following trimodality therapy. ESMO Open. 2018;3:e000386.
Kang YK, Yook JH, Park YK, Lee JS, Kim YW, Kim JY, et al. PRODIGY: a phase III study of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 plus surgery and adjuvant S-1 versus surgery and adjuvant S-1 for resectable advanced gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:2903–13.
Zhang F, Feng X, Li Y, Yan J, Zhang Z, Song X. Survival outcomes of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction: a retrospective cohort study using the SEER database. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2022;13:26–39.
Qin Q, Xu H, Liu J, Zhang C, Xu L, Di X, et al. Does timing of esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiation affect outcomes? A meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2018;59:11–8.
Ranney DN, Mulvihill MS, Yerokun BA, Fitch Z, Sun Z, Yang CF, et al. Surgical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oesophageal adenocarcinoma: what is the optimal timing? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52:543–51.
Eyck BM, van Lanschot JJB, Hulshof M, van der Wilk BJ, Shapiro J, van Hagen P, et al. Ten-year outcome of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery for esophageal cancer: the randomized controlled CROSS trial. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1995–2004.
Gebauer F, Plum PS, Damanakis A, Chon SH, Popp F, Zander T, et al. Long-term postsurgical outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CROSS) versus chemotherapy (FLOT) for multimodal treatment of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and the esophagogastric junction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13643-9.
Lombardi PM, Pansa A, Basato S, Giorgi L, Perano V, Marano S, et al. Facing adenocarcinoma of distal esophagus and esophagogastric junction: a CROSS versus FLOT propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcomes in a high-volume institution. Updates Surg. 2023;75:921–30.
Donlon NE, Moran B, Kamilli A, Davern M, Sheppard A, King S, et al. CROSS versus FLOT regimens in esophageal and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: a propensity-matched comparison. Ann Surg. 2022;276:792–8.
Petrelli F, Ghidini M, Barni S, Sgroi G, Passalacqua R, Tomasello G. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastric Cancer. 2019;22:245–54.
Pectasides E, Stachler MD, Derks S, Liu Y, Maron S, Islam M, et al. Genomic heterogeneity as a barrier to precision medicine in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Discov. 2018;8:37–48.
Sundar R, Liu DH, Hutchins GG, Slaney HL, Silva AN, Oosting J, et al. Spatial profiling of gastric cancer patient-matched primary and locoregional metastases reveals principles of tumour dissemination. Gut. 2021;70:1823–32.
Pardoll DM. The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012;12:252–64.
Emens LA, Middleton G. The interplay of immunotherapy and chemotherapy: harnessing potential synergies. Cancer Immunol Res. 2015;3:436–43.
Kelly RJ, Ajani JA, Kuzdzal J, Zander T, Van Cutsem E, Piessen G, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab in resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:1191–203.
Kelly RJ, Ajani JA, Kuzdzal J, Zander T, Cutsem EV, Piessen G, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) in resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer (EC/GEJC) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT): expanded efficacy and safety analyses from CheckMate 577. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:4003.
Merck. Merck provides update on phase 3 KEYNOTE-585 trial in locally advanced resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma 2023 [updated 20/06/2023]. Available from https://www.merck.com/news/merck-provides-update-on-phase-3-keynote-585-trial-in-locally-advanced-resectable-gastric-and-gastroesophageal-junction-gej-adenocarcinoma/.
Terashima M, Kang Y-K, Kim Y-W, Boku N, Chung HCC, Chen J-S, et al. ATTRACTION-5: A phase 3 study of nivolumab plus chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment for pathological stage III (pStage III) gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:4000.
Janjigian YY, Shitara K, Moehler M, Garrido M, Salman P, Shen L, et al. First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 649): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2021;398(10294):27–40.
Rha SY, Wyrwicz L, Weber PEY, Bai Y, Ryu M-H, Lee J, et al. KEYNOTE-859 study of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for advanced HER2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer: outcomes in the protocol-specified PD-L1–selected populations. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:4014.
Sun JM, Shen L, Shah MA, Enzinger P, Adenis A, Doi T, et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for first-line treatment of advanced oesophageal cancer (KEYNOTE-590): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2021;398:759–71.
van Velzen MJM, Derks S, van Grieken NCT, Haj Mohammad N, van Laarhoven HWM. MSI as a predictive factor for treatment outcome of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Treat Rev. 2020;86:102024.
André T, Tougeron D, Piessen G, de la Fouchardière C, Louvet C, Adenis A, et al. Neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab and adjuvant nivolumab in localized deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high gastric or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: the GERCOR NEONIPIGA phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:255–65.
Bujko K, Wyrwicz L, Rutkowski A, Malinowska M, Pietrzak L, Kryński J, et al. Long-course oxaliplatin-based preoperative chemoradiation versus 5 × 5 Gy and consolidation chemotherapy for cT4 or fixed cT3 rectal cancer: results of a randomized phase III study. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:834–42.
Ciseł B, Pietrzak L, Michalski W, Wyrwicz L, Rutkowski A, Kosakowska E, et al. Long-course preoperative chemoradiation versus 5 × 5 Gy and consolidation chemotherapy for clinical T4 and fixed clinical T3 rectal cancer: long-term results of the randomized Polish II study. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1298–303.
van der Valk MJM, Marijnen CAM, van Etten B, Dijkstra EA, Hilling DE, Kranenbarg EM, et al. Compliance and tolerability of short-course radiotherapy followed by preoperative chemotherapy and surgery for high-risk rectal cancer— results of the international randomized RAPIDO-trial. Radiother Oncol. 2020;147:75–83.
Etienne P-L, Rio E, Evesque L, Mesgouez-Nebout N, Vendrely V, Artignan X, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy with mFOLFIRINOX versus preoperative chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: 7-year results of PRODIGE 23 phase III trial, a UNICANCER GI trial. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:LBA3504–LBA.
Fokas E, Allgäuer M, Polat B, Klautke G, Grabenbauer GG, Fietkau R, et al. Randomized phase II trial of chemoradiotherapy plus induction or consolidation chemotherapy as total neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: CAO/ARO/AIO-12. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:3212–22.
Fokas E, Schlenska-Lange A, Polat B, Klautke G, Grabenbauer GG, Fietkau R, et al. Chemoradiotherapy plus induction or consolidation chemotherapy as total neoadjuvant therapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: long-term results of the CAO/ARO/AIO-12 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2022;8:e215445.
Schulz C, Kullmann F, Kunzmann V, Fuchs M, Geissler M, Vehling-Kaiser U, et al. NeoFLOT: multicenter phase II study of perioperative chemotherapy in resectable adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction or gastric adenocarcinoma-very good response predominantly in patients with intestinal type tumors. Int J Cancer. 2015;137:678–85.
Ganschow P, Hofmann L, Stintzing S, Heinemann V, Angele M, Werner J, et al. Operative results and perioperative morbidity after intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FLOT for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma impact of intensified neoadjuvant treatment. J Gastrointest Surg. 2021;25:58–66.
Ho F, Torphy RJ, Friedman C, Leong S, Kim S, Wani S, et al. Induction chemotherapy plus neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:7208–18.
Jurkowski L, Shreenivas AV, Chakrabarti S, Kamgar M, Thomas JP, Puckett L, et al. Association of total neoadjuvant therapy with favorable clinical outcomes in patients with locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas (LA-GEJ CA). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:231.
Carr RA, Hsu M, Harrington CA, Tan KS, Bains MS, Bott MJ, et al. Induction FOLFOX and PET-directed chemoradiation for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2023;277:e538–e44.
Leong T, Smithers BM, Haustermans K, Michael M, Gebski V, Miller D, et al. TOPGEAR: a randomized, phase III trial of perioperative ECF chemotherapy with or without preoperative chemoradiation for resectable gastric cancer: interim results from an international, intergroup trial of the AGITG, TROG, EORTC and CCTG. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:2252–8.
Slagter AE, Jansen EPM, van Laarhoven HWM, van Sandick JW, van Grieken NCT, Sikorska K, et al. CRITICS-II: a multicentre randomised phase II trial of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery versus neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in resectable gastric cancer. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:877.
van der Zijden CJ, Eyck BM, van der Gaast A, van Doorn L, Nuyttens J, van Lanschot JJB, et al. Chemotherapy aNd chemoradiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the OESophagus and esophagogastric junction with oligometastases: protocol of the TNT-OES-1 trial. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2022;28:100934.
Shi J, Li N, Tang Y, Jiang L, Yang L, Wang S, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: study protocol for a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, phase II clinical trial. BMC Gastroenterol. 2022;22:359.
Lorenzen S, Biederstädt A, Ronellenfitsch U, Reißfelder C, Mönig S, Wenz F, et al. RACE-trial: neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced, potentially resectable adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction—a randomized phase III joint study of the AIO, ARO and DGAV. BMC Cancer. 2020;20:886.
Liu X, Jin J, Cai H, Huang H, Zhao G, Zhou Y, et al. Study protocol of a randomized phase III trial of comparing preoperative chemoradiation with preoperative chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: PREACT. BMC Cancer. 2019;19:606.
Funding
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
HAC searched the literature and prepared the manuscript. TJU and RDP conceptualised the review article and its content, reviewed and edited the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Clements, H.A., Underwood, T.J. & Petty, R.D. Total neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma. Br J Cancer 130, 9–18 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-023-02458-w
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-023-02458-w
