Comparison of International Guidelines on the Accompanying Therapy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: Reasons for the Differences

The purpose of this study was to determine if international guidelines differ in their recommendations concerning additive therapy for advanced, but potentially curable, gastric cancer. A systematic search of the English and German literature was conducted in the databases Medline, Cochrane Database, Embase, and PubMed. The search terms used were 'guidelines gastric cancer,' 'guidelines stomach cancer,' and 'Leitlinien Magenkarzinom.' Six different guidelines published after January 1, 2010, in which the tumors were classified according to the seventh edition of the TNM system (2010), were identified. Although the examined guidelines were based on the same study results, their recommendations concerning accompanying therapy for gastric cancer differ considerably. While perioperative chemotherapy is recommended in Germany, Great Britain, and large parts of Europe, postoperative adjuvant radiochemotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy is recommended in the USA and Canada. In Japan, postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended.The results of identical studies were interpreted differently in different countries. Since considerable effort is required for each country to separately test relevant studies for their validity and suitability, an international cooperation could simplify the creation of a common basis for guidelines and contribute to improved comparability of international guidelines.

Can Perioperative Chemotherapy for Advanced Gastric Cancer Be Recommended on the Basis of Current Research? A Critical Analysis

PURPOSE: According to current guidelines, perioperative chemotherapy is an integral part of the treatment strategy for advanced gastric cancer. Randomized controlled studies have been conducted in order to determine whether perioperative chemotherapy leads to improved R0 resection rates, fewer recurrences, and prolonged survival. The aim of our project was to critically appraise three major studies to establish whether perioperative chemotherapy for advanced, potentially resectable gastric cancer can be recommended on the basis of their findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the validity of the three most important studies (MAGIC, ACCORD, and EORTC) using a standardized questionnaire. Each study was evaluated for the study design, patient selection, randomization, changes in protocol, participating clinics, preoperative staging, chemotherapy, homogeneity of subjects, surgical quality, analysis of the results, and recruitment period. RESULTS: All three studies had serious shortcomings with respect to patient selection, homogeneity of subjects, changes in protocol, surgical quality, and analysis of the results. The protocols of the MAGIC and ACCORD-studies were changed during the study period because of insufficient recruitment, such that carcinomas of the lower esophagus and the stomach were examined collectively. In neither the MAGIC study nor the ACCORD study did patients undergo adequate lymphadenectomy, and only about half of the patients in the chemotherapy group could undergo the treatment specified in the protocol. The EORTC study had insufficient statistical power. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that none of the three studies was sufficiently robust to justify an unrestrained recommendation for perioperative chemotherapy in cases of advanced gastric cancer.