No abstract

238 Background: Neoadjuvant treatment is the standard care for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC). JCOG1109 (UMIN000009482) compared the doublet and triplet of chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) with ESCC of clinical stage IB, II, III (excluding T4) (UICC 7th) from 44 institutions were randomized 1:1:1 to neoadjuvant CF (cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day1 plus 5-FU 800 mg/m2 on days 1-5 Q3W/2course), DCF (docetaxel 70 mg/m2 on day 1, cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day1, plus 5-FU 750 mg/m2 on days 1-5 Q3W/3 course), or CF-RT (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 plus 5-FU 1000 mg/m2 on days 1-4 Q4W/2course, radiation 41.4 Gy/23 fr). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), %R0 resection, %objective response by neoadjuvant therapy, %pathological complete response (pCR) and safety. Differences in OS was assessed in the ITT using the stratified log-rank test. The data cutoff date for the analysis was July 20, 2021. Results: Of 601 pts 199 CF, 202 DCF, and 200 CF-RT were enrolled from December 5, 2012 to July 20, 2018, respectively. Among 601 pts, 88.2% were male, median (range) age was 65 (30-75), clinical stage III (nonT4) pts were 62.6%. Median follow-up time (range) was 4.2 years (y) (0-8.5). Median OS in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm were 4.6 y, not reached (NR), and 6.0y, and 3-year OS was 62.6%, 72.1%, and 68.3%, respectively (stratified log-rank test: p = 0.006 for CF vs. DCF and p = 0.12 for CF vs. CF-RT). By stratified Cox regression analysis for OS, hazard ratios (HR) [95% CI] was 0.68 [0.50–0.92] for CF vs. DCF and 0.84 [0.63–1.12] for CF vs. CF-RT. Median PFS in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm were 2.7 y, NR, and 5.3 y, and 3-year PFS was 47.7%, 61.8%, and 58.5%, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 168 (84.4%), 173 (85.6%), and 175 (87.5%), and pCR was 4 (2.1%), 40 (19.8%), and 77 (38.5%), respectively. During neoadjuvant therapy, febrile neutropenia in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm were 1.0%, 16.3% and 4.7%, and esophagitis (grade>3) were 1.0%, 1.0% and 8.9%, respectively. The treatment-related death was seen in 3 (1.5%), 4 (2.0%), and 2 (1.0%), in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm, respectively. Conclusions: DCF significantly improved OS over CF as neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced ESCC, with a manageable toxicity profile. DCF represents a new standard neoadjuvant treatment for ESCC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000009482.

No abstract

Background Recent studies have found a negative impact of postoperative complications on long-term survival outcomes, but it has not been confirmed by data obtained from a prospective study with a large sample size. This study investigated the impact of postoperative complications on long-term survival outcomes, and considered the optimal definition of complication, using data from JCOG1001, which compared bursectomy and non-bursectomy for patients with cT3/4a locally advanced gastric cancer. Methods This study included 1191 of 1204 patients enrolled in the JCOG1001 trial. Complications were graded by Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification. Impact of the grade (≥ C-D grade II or ≥ grade III) or type (any or intra-abdominal infectious) of complication on survival outcome was evaluated by univariate and multivariable analyses using the Cox proportional hazard model. Results The incidence of any ≥ C-D grade II and ≥ grade III complication was 23.0% and 9.7%, respectively, and that of ≥ grade II and ≥ grade III intra-abdominal infectious complication was 13.4% and 6.9%, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed all four definitions of complications were independent prognostic factors for overall survival. Conversely, only any ≥ C-D grade III complication was found to be an independent prognostic factor for relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.445; 95% confidence interval, 1.026-2.036; P = 0.035). Conclusions Postoperative complications adversely affect the long-term survival outcomes of patients with cT3/4a gastric cancer. Any ≥ C-D grade III complication seems to be the most suitable definition of complication for predicting negative long-term survival outcomes.

TERT promoter mutations are commonly associated with 1p/19q codeletion in IDH-mutated gliomas. However, whether these mutations have an impact on patient survival independent of 1p/19q codeletion is unknown. In this study, we investigated the impact of TERT promoter mutations on survival in IDH-mutated glioma cases. Detailed clinical information and molecular status data were collected for a cohort of 560 adult patients with IDH-mutated gliomas. Among these patients, 279 had both TERT promoter mutation and 1p/19q codeletion, while 30 had either TERT promoter mutation (n = 24) or 1p/19q codeletion (n = 6) alone. A univariable Cox proportional hazard analysis for survival using clinical and genetic factors indicated that a Karnofsky performance status score (KPS) of 90 or 100, WHO grade II or III, TERT promoter mutation, 1p/19q codeletion, radiation therapy, and extent of resection (90–100%) were associated with favorable prognosis (p < 0.05). A multivariable Cox regression model revealed that TERT promoter mutation had a significantly favorable prognostic impact (hazard ratio = 0.421, p = 0.049), while 1p/19q codeletion did not have a significant impact (hazard ratio = 0.648, p = 0.349). Analyses incorporating patient clinical and genetic information were further conducted to identify subgroups showing the favorable prognostic impact of TERT promoter mutation. Among the grade II-III glioma patients with a KPS score of 90 or 100, those with IDH-TERT co-mutation and intact 1p/19q (n = 17) showed significantly longer survival than those with IDH mutation, wild-type TERT, and intact 1p/19q (n = 185) (5-year overall survival, 94% and 77%, respectively; p = 0.032). Our results demonstrate that TERT promoter mutation predicts favorable prognosis independent of 1p/19q codeletion in IDH-mutated gliomas. Combined with its adverse effect on survival among IDH-wild glioma cases, the bivalent prognostic impact of TERT promoter mutation may help further refine the molecular diagnosis and prognostication of diffuse gliomas.