Sex differences in treatment allocation and survival of potentially curable gastroesophageal cancer: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Although curative treatment options are identical for male and female gastroesophageal cancer patients, access to care and survival may vary. This study aimed to compare treatment allocation and survival between male and female patients with potentially curable gastroesophageal cancer. METHODS: Nationwide cohort study including all patients with potentially curable gastroesophageal squamous cell or adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2018 registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The main outcome, treatment allocation, was compared between male and female patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC). Additionally, 5-year relative survival with relative excess risk (RER), that is, adjusted for the normal life expectancy, was compared. RESULTS: Among 27,496 patients (68.8% men), most were allocated to curative treatment (62.8%), although rates dropped to 45.6%>70 years. Curative treatment rates were comparable among younger male and female patients (≤70 years) with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, while older females with EAC were less frequently allocated to curative treatment than males (OR = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.99). For those allocated to curative treatment, relative survival was superior for female patients with EAC (RER = 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.96) and ESCC (RER = 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.91), and comparable for males and females with GAC (RER = 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.11). CONCLUSIONS: While curative treatment rates were comparable between younger male and female patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, treatment disparities were present between older patients. When treated, the survival of females with EAC and ESCC was superior to males. The treatment and survival gaps between male and female patients with gastroesophageal cancer warrant further exploration and could potentially improve treatment strategies and survival.

Comparing treatment and outcomes in advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinomas: a population-based study.

Background: Treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) follows the guidelines for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJC) and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), but patients with EAC are often excluded from clinical studies of GEJC/GAC. Objectives: Here we describe treatment and survival of patients with advanced EAC, GEJC, and GAC to provide population-based evidence on distinctions and similarities between these populations. Design: Retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable advanced (cT4b) or metastatic (cM1) EAC, GEJC, or GAC (2015-2020) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Methods: Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression. Results: In all, 7391 patients were included (EAC: n = 3346, GEJC: n = 1246, and GAC: n = 2798). Patients with EAC were more often males and more often had ⩾2 metastatic locations. First-line systemic therapy was received by 42%, 47%, and 36% of patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively. Median OS was 5.0, 5.1, and 4.0 months for all patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively (p < 0.001). Median OS from start of first-line therapy of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative adenocarcinomas was 7.6, 7.8, and 7.5 months (p = 0.12) and of patients with HER2-positive carcinoma receiving first-line trastuzumab-containing therapy was 11.0, 13.3, and 9.5 months (p = 0.37) in EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, no difference in OS for patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC was observed. Conclusion: Despite differences in clinical characteristics and treatment strategies, survival between patients with advanced EAC, GEJC, and GAC was similar. We advocate that EAC patients should not be excluded from clinical trials for patients with molecularly similar GEJC/GAC.

A phase Ib/II study of regorafenib and paclitaxel in patients with beyond first-line advanced esophagogastric carcinoma (REPEAT).

Purpose: Regorafenib monotherapy, a multikinase inhibitor of angiogenesis, tumor microenvironment, and tumorigenesis, showed promising results in gastric cancer. We aimed to assess the tolerability of regorafenib and paclitaxel in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer (EGC) refractory to first-line treatment, and explore potential biomarkers. Methods: Patients received paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle and regorafenib (80/120/160 mg) on days 1-21 in the dose-escalation cohort, and the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) in the dose-expansion cohort. Exploratory, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared to a propensity-score matched cohort receiving standard second-/third-line systemic treatment. Paclitaxel pharmacokinetics were assessed using samples from day 1 (D1) and day 15 (D15). We performed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay measurements of galectin-1, RNA sequencing, and shallow whole-genome sequencing of metastatic tumor biopsies for biomarker analyses. Results: In the dose-escalation cohort (n = 14), the MTD of regorafenib was 120 mg. In all, 34 patients were enrolled in the dose-expansion cohort. Most common toxicities (all grades; grade ⩾ 3) were fatigue (79%; 4%) and sensory neuropathy (63%; 4%). Best responses achieved were partial response (28%) and stable disease (54%). Median OS and PFS were 7.8 and 4.2 months, respectively (median follow-up: 7.8 months). OS (p = 0.08) and PFS (p = 0.81) were not significantly improved compared to the matched cohort. Paclitaxel concentrations were significantly increased with regorafenib (D15) compared with paclitaxel only (D1; p < 0.05); no associations were observed with toxicity or efficacy. An increase in circulating galectin-1 compared to baseline was associated with shorter OS (p < 0.01). Enrichment of angiogenesis-related gene expression was observed in short survivors measured by RNA sequencing. Chromosome 19q13.12-q13.2 amplification was associated with shorter OS (p = 0.02) and PFS (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Treatment with regorafenib and paclitaxel is tolerable and shows promising efficacy in advanced EGC refractory to first-line treatment. Galectin-1 and chromosome 19q13.12-q13.2 amplification could serve as negative predictive biomarkers for treatment response. Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02406170, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02406170.

External Validation of Two Established Clinical Risk Scores Predicting Outcome after Local Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastases in a Nationwide Cohort.

Optimized surgical techniques and systemic therapy have increased the number of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) eligible for local treatment. To increase postoperative survival, we need to stratify patients to customize therapy. Most clinical risk scores (CRSs) which predict prognosis after CRLM resection were based on the outcome of studies in specialized centers, and this may hamper the generalizability of these CRSs in unselected populations and underrepresented subgroups. We aimed to externally validate two CRSs in a population-based cohort of patients with CRLM. A total of 1105 patients with local treatment of CRLM, diagnosed in 2015/2016, were included from a nationwide population-based database. Survival outcomes were analyzed. The Fong and more recently developed GAME CRS were externally validated, including in pre-specified subgroups (≤70/>70 years and with/without perioperative systemic therapy). The three-year DFS was 22.8%, and the median OS in the GAME risk groups (high/moderate/low) was 32.4, 46.7, and 68.1 months, respectively (p < 0.005). The median OS for patients with versus without perioperative therapy was 47.6 (95%CI [39.8, 56.2]) and 54.9 months (95%CI [48.8, 63.7]), respectively (p = 0.152), and for below/above 70 years, it was 54.9 (95%CI [49.3−64.1]) and 44.2 months (95%CI [37.1−54.3]), respectively (p < 0.005). The discriminative ability for OS of Fong CRS was 0.577 (95%CI [0.554, 0.601]), and for GAME, it was 0.596 (95%CI [0.572, 0.621]), and was comparable in the subgroups. In conclusion, both CRSs showed predictive ability in a population-based cohort and in predefined subgroups. However, the limited discriminative ability of these CRSs results in insufficient preoperative risk stratification for clinical decision-making.

Quality of Life and Survival of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated With Trifluridine-Tipiracil (QUALITAS).

INTRODUCTION: The RECOURSE trial demonstrated a modest benefit in overall survival (OS) for trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) versus placebo in pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Unfortunately, quality of life (QoL) was not assessed. We evaluated QoL and survival of patients treated with FTD/TPI in daily practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: QUALITAS is a substudy of the Prospective Dutch CRC cohort (PLCRC). From 150 mCRC patients treated with FTD/TPI, QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29) was assessed monthly from study entry, and linked to clinical data of the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Joint models were constructed combining mixed effects models with Cox PH models. Primary endpoint was difference in QoL over time (which was deemed clinically relevant if ≥10 points). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), and OS. We analyzed the association between QLQ-C30 Summary Score (QoL-SS) at FTD/TPI initiation (baseline) and survival. RESULTS: There was no clinically relevant change in QoL-SS from baseline to 10 months post-baseline (i.e. the cut-off point after which 90% of patients had discontinued FTD/TPI treatment): -5.3 [95% CI -8.7;-1.5]. Patients who were treated with FTD/TPI for ≥ 3 months (n = 85) reported 6.3 [1.6;11.1] points higher baseline QoL, compared to patients treated < 3 months (n = 65, "poor responders"). In the latter, time to a clinically relevant QoL deterioration was < 2 months. Median PFS, TTF and OS were 2.9 [2.7;3.1], 3.1 [2.9;3.2] and 7.7 [6.6;8.8] months, respectively. Worse baseline QoL-SS was independently associated with shorter OS (HR 0.45 [0.32;0.63]), PFS (0.63 [0.48;0.83]), and TTF (0.64 [0.47;0.86]). CONCLUSION: The maintenance of QoL during FTD/TPI treatment in daily practice supports its use. The QoL deterioration in "poor responders" is likely due to disease progression. The strong association between worse baseline QoL and shorter survival suggests that clinicians should take QoL into account when determining prognosis and treatment strategy for individual patients.

A population-based study on treatment and outcomes in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma diagnosed with distant interval metastases.

BACKGROUND: In patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer treated with curative intent, distant interval metastases may be detected after start of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or during surgery. The aim of this study was to explore characteristics, allocated treatment and overall survival (OS) in gastric/GEJ cancer patients with interval metastases, and to compare OS with synchronous metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer patients who started palliative chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with interval metastases were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry by including patients with potentially curable gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma (2010-2018) who started chemotherapy without concurrent radiotherapy. The OS since start of neoadjuvant treatment of patients with interval metastases was compared with a propensity score-matched cohort of patients with synchronous metastases who received palliative systemic treatment. RESULTS: 164 patients with interval metastases diagnosed in 2010-2018 were included. Metastases were most frequently detected during surgery (83%) and most frequently located in the peritoneum (77%). Peritoneal interval metastases were observed in 63% and 80% of the patients who did and did not have a diagnostic laparoscopy prior to neoadjuvant treatment, respectively (P = 0.041). Median OS was 8.9 months (IQR 5.5-13.4), compared to 8.0 months (IQR 4.1-14.1) in matched synchronous metastatic patients calculated from start of neoadjuvant and palliative systemic treatment, respectively (P = 0.848). CONCLUSION: This population-based study shows that gastric/GEJ cancer patients who started neoadjuvant treatment and were diagnosed with interval metastases most frequently suffered from peritoneal metastases detected during (exploratory) surgery, even when a diagnostic laparoscopy was performed before start of treatment. OS was comparable to patients with synchronous metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer.

The fear of cancer recurrence and progression in patients with pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: It is plausible that patients with pancreatic cancer experience fear of tumor recurrence or progression (FOP). The aim of this study was to compare FOP in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with surgical resection, palliative systemic treatment, or best supportive care (BSC) and analyze the association between quality of life (QoL) and FOP and the effect of FOP on overall survival (OS). METHODS: This study included patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer between 2015 and 2018, who participated in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project (PACAP). The association between QoL and WOPS was assessed with logistic regression analyses. OS was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves with the log-rank tests and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses adjusted for clinical covariates and QoL. RESULTS: Of 315 included patients, 111 patients underwent surgical resection, 138 received palliative systemic treatment, and 66 received BSC. Patients who underwent surgical resection had significantly lower WOPS scores (i.e., less FOP) at initial diagnosis compared to patients who received palliative systemic treatment or BSC only (P < 0.001). Better QoL was independently associated with the probability of having a low FOP in the BSC (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.98) but not in the surgical resection (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.01) and palliative systemic treatment groups (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00). The baseline WOPS score was not independently associated with OS in any of the subgroups. CONCLUSION: Given the distress that FOP evokes, FOP should be explicitly addressed by health care providers when guiding pancreatic cancer patients through their treatment trajectory, especially those receiving palliative treatment or BSC.

Prognosis of Interval Distant Metastases After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In esophageal cancer patients, distant metastases develop between the start of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and planned surgery, so-called interval metastases. The primary aim of this study was to assess management, overall survival (OS), and prognostic factors for OS in these patients. A secondary aim was to compare OS with synchronous metastatic patients. METHODS: Esophageal cancer patients with interval distant metastases were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2010 to 2017). Management was categorized into metastasis-directed therapy (MDT), primary tumor resection, or best supportive care (BSC). The OS was calculated from the diagnosis of the primary tumor. Prognostic factors affecting OS were studied using Cox proportional hazard models. Propensity score-matching (1:3) generated matched cases with synchronous distant metastases. RESULTS: In all, 208 patients with interval metastases were identified: in 87 patients (42%) MDT was initiated; in 10%, primary tumor resection only; in 7%, primary tumor resection plus MDT; and in 41%, BSC. Median OS was 10 months (interquartile range, 8.6 to 11.1). Compared with BSC, superior OS was independently associated with MDT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26 to 0.49), primary tumor resection (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.94), and primary tumor resection plus MDT (HR 0.20; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.38). Worse OS was independently associated with signet ring cell carcinoma (HR 1.92; 95% CI, 1.12 to 3.28) and poor differentiation grade (HR 1.96; 95% CI, 1.35 to 2.83). The OS was comparable between matched patients with interval and synchronous distant metastases (10.2 versus 9.4 months, P = .760). CONCLUSIONS: In esophageal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with interval distant metastases, the OS was poor and comparable to that of synchronous metastatic patients.

The impact of cancer treatment on quality of life in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer: a propensity score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of pancreatic and periampullary cancer treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is unclear. METHODS: This study merged data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry with EORTC QLQ-C30 and -PAN26 questionnaires at baseline and three-months follow-up of pancreatic and periampullary cancer patients (2015-2018). Propensity score matching (1:3) of group without to group with treatment was performed. Linear mixed model regression analyses were performed to investigate the association between cancer treatment and HRQoL at follow-up. RESULTS: After matching, 247 of 629 available patients remained (68 (27.5%) no treatment, 179 (72.5%) treatment). Treatment consisted of resection (n = 68 (27.5%)), chemotherapy only (n = 111 (44.9%)), or both (n = 40 (16.2%)). At follow-up, cancer treatment was associated with better global health status (Beta-coefficient 4.8, 95% confidence-interval 0.0-9.5) and less constipation (Beta-coefficient -7.6, 95% confidence-interval -13.8-1.4) compared to no cancer treatment. Median overall survival was longer for the cancer treatment group compared to the no treatment group (15.4 vs. 6.2 months, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancer reported slight improvement in global HRQoL and less constipation at three months-follow up compared to patients without cancer treatment, while overall survival was also improved.

The association between effectiveness of first-line treatment and second-line treatment in gastro-oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Population-based predictive factors for the effectiveness of second-line palliative systemic therapy in gastro-oesophageal cancer are not available. This study investigates the predictive value of effectiveness of first-line treatment for second-line treatment outcomes in gastro-oesophageal cancer in a real-world setting. METHODS: Patients with metastatic gastro-oesophageal cancer diagnosed in 2010-2017 who were treated with second-line therapy after disease progression on first-line therapy were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were divided into four groups as per duration of time to treatment failure (TTF) of the first line (0-3, 3-6, 6-9 and >9 months), and the association with overall survival (OS) and second-line TTF was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and two-sided multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Median OS since the start of the second line of patients (n = 611) with first-line TTF of 0-3, 3-6, 6-9 and >9 months was 4.0, 4.1, 5.5 and 7.1 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Median second-line TTF of patients with first-line TTF of 0-3, 3-6, 6-9 and >9 months was 2.8, 2.4, 3.0 and 4.5 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Patients with first-line TTF of >9 months showed a longer OS than patients with first-line TTF of 0-3 months (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-2.47), 3-6 months (adjusted HR 1.88; 95% CI 1.47-2.39) and 6-9 months (adjusted HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.04-1.65). Results for second-line TTF were similar. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a positive correlation between effectiveness of first-line therapy and outcomes of second-line therapy in gastro-oesophageal cancer. Physicians should take duration of the first line into account when considering second-line palliative systemic therapy.

First- and Second-Line Palliative Systemic Treatment Outcomes in a Real-World Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is characterized by a poor survival rate, which can be improved by systemic treatment. Consensus on the most optimal first- and second-line palliative systemic treatment is lacking. The aim of this study was to describe the use of first- and second-line systemic treatment, overall survival (OS), and time to failure (TTF) of first- and second-line treatment in metastatic PDAC in a real-world setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with synchronous metastatic PDAC diagnosed between 2015 and 2018 who received systemic treatment were selected from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS and TTF were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses. RESULTS: The majority of 1,586 included patients received FOLFIRINOX (65%), followed by gemcitabine (18%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (13%) in the first line. Median OS for first-line FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, and gemcitabine monotherapy was 6.6, 4.7, and 2.9 months, respectively. Compared to FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel showed significantly inferior OS after adjustment for confounders (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41), and gemcitabine monotherapy was independently associated with a shorter OS and TTF (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.71-2.30 and HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.88-2.83, respectively). Of the 121 patients who received second-line systemic treatment, 33% received gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, followed by gemcitabine (31%) and FOLFIRINOX (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on population-based data in patients with metastatic PDAC, treatment predominantly consists of FOLFIRINOX in the first line and gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel in the second line. FOLFIRINOX in the first line shows superior OS compared with gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel.

SOURCE-PANC: A Prediction Model for Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Based on Nationwide Population-Based Data.

BACKGROUND: A prediction model for overall survival (OS) in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) including patient and treatment characteristics is currently not available, but it could be valuable for supporting clinicians in patient communication about expectations and prognosis. We aimed to develop a prediction model for OS in metastatic PDAC, called SOURCE-PANC, based on nationwide population-based data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on patients diagnosed with synchronous metastatic PDAC in 2015 through 2018 were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. A multivariate Cox regression model was created to predict OS for various treatment strategies. Available patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were used to compose the model. Treatment strategies were categorized as systemic treatment (subdivided into FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, and gemcitabine monotherapy), biliary drainage, and best supportive care only. Validation was performed according to a temporal internal-external cross-validation scheme. The predictive quality was assessed with the C-index and calibration. RESULTS: Data for 4,739 patients were included in the model. Sixteen predictors were included: age, sex, performance status, laboratory values (albumin, bilirubin, CA19-9, lactate dehydrogenase), clinical tumor and nodal stage, tumor sublocation, presence of distant lymph node metastases, liver or peritoneal metastases, number of metastatic sites, and treatment strategy. The model demonstrated a C-index of 0.72 in the internal-external cross-validation and showed good calibration, with the intercept and slope 95% confidence intervals including the ideal values of 0 and 1, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A population-based prediction model for OS was developed for patients with metastatic PDAC and showed good performance. The predictors that were included in the model comprised both baseline patient and tumor characteristics and type of treatment. SOURCE-PANC will be incorporated in an electronic decision support tool to support shared decision-making in clinical practice.

Gender Differences in Treatment Allocation and Survival of Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Biological sex and gender have been reported to affect incidence and overall survival (OS) of curatively treated gastroesophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare palliative treatment allocation and OS between women and men with advanced gastroesophageal cancer. METHODS: Patients with an unresectable or metastatic esophageal (including cardia) adenocarcinoma (EAC) or squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) or gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) diagnosed in 2015-2018 were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Treatment allocation was compared using χ2 tests and multivariable logistic regression analyses, and OS using the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Of patients with EAC (n = 3077), ESCC (n = 794), and GAC (n = 1836), 18.0%, 39.4%, and 39.1% were women, respectively. Women less often received systemic treatment compared with men for EAC (42.7% vs 47.4%, P = .045) and GAC (33.8% vs 38.8%, P = .03) but not for ESCC (33.2% vs 39.5%, P = .07). Women had a lower probability of receiving systemic treatment for GAC in multivariable analyses (odds ratio [OR] = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62 to 1.00) but not for EAC (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.06) and ESCC (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.14). Median OS was lower in women with EAC (4.4 vs 5.2 months, P = .04) but did not differ after adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics and systemic treatment administration. CONCLUSIONS: We observed statistically significant and clinically relevant gender differences in systemic treatment administration and OS in advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Causes of these disparities may be sex based (ie, related to tumor biology) as well as gender based (eg, related to differences in treatment choices).

Cachexia and Dietetic Interventions in Patients With Esophagogastric Cancer: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cachexia is common in patients with esophagogastric cancer and is associated with increased mortality. Nutritional screening and dietetic interventions can be helpful in preventing evolvement of cachexia. Our aim was to study the real-world prevalence and prognostic value of pretreatment cachexia on overall survival (OS) using patient-reported weight loss, and to explore dietetic interventions in esophagogastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with esophagogastric cancer (2015-2018), regardless of disease stage, who participated in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Esophageal-Gastric Cancer Patients (POCOP) and completed patient-reported outcome measures were included. Data on weight loss and dietetic interventions were retrieved from questionnaires before start of treatment (baseline) and 3 months thereafter. Additional patient data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cachexia was defined as self-reported >5% half-year body weight loss at baseline or >2% in patients with a body mass index (BMI) <20 kg/m2 according to the Fearon criteria. The association between cachexia and OS was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses adjusted for sex, age, performance status, comorbidities, primary tumor location, disease stage, histology, and treatment strategy. RESULTS: Of 406 included patients, 48% had pretreatment cachexia, of whom 65% were referred for dietetic consultation at baseline. The proportion of patients with cachexia was the highest among those who received palliative chemotherapy (59%) or best supportive care (67%). Cachexia was associated with decreased OS (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.11-2.09). Median weight loss after 3-month follow-up was lower in patients with cachexia who were referred to a dietician at baseline compared with those who were not (0% vs 2%; P=.047). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of patients with esophagogastric cancer have pretreatment cachexia. Dietetic consultation at baseline was not reported in more than one-third of the patients with cachexia. Because cachexia was independently associated with decreased survival, improving nutritional screening and referral for dietetic consultation are warranted to prevent further deterioration of malnutrition and mortality.

Addition of HER2 and CD44 to 18F-FDG PET-based clinico-radiomic models enhances prediction of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy response in esophageal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the complementary value of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-related biological tumor markers to clinico-radiomic models in predicting complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) in esophageal cancer patients. METHODS: Expression of HER2 was assessed by immunohistochemistry in pre-treatment tumor biopsies of 96 patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Five other potentially active HER2-related biological tumor markers in esophageal cancer were examined in a sub-analysis on 43 patients. Patients received at least four of the five cycles of chemotherapy and full radiotherapy regimen followed by esophagectomy. Three reference clinico-radiomic models based on 18F-FDG PET were constructed to predict pathologic response, which was categorized into complete versus incomplete (Mandard tumor regression grade 1 vs. 2-5). The complementary value of the biological tumor markers was evaluated by internal validation through bootstrapping. RESULTS: Pathologic examination revealed 21 (22%) complete and 75 (78%) incomplete responders. HER2 and cluster of differentiation 44 (CD44), analyzed in the sub-analysis, were univariably associated with pathologic response. Incorporation of HER2 and CD44 into the reference models improved the overall performance (R2s of 0.221, 0.270, and 0.225) and discrimination AUCs of 0.759, 0.857, and 0.816. All models exhibited moderate to good calibration. The remaining studied biological tumor markers did not yield model improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of HER2 and CD44 into clinico-radiomic prediction models improved NCRT response prediction in esophageal cancer. These biological tumor markers are promising in initial response evaluation. KEY POINTS: • A multimodality approach, integrating independent genomic and radiomic information, is promising to improve prediction of γpCR in patients with esophageal cancer. • HER2 and CD44 are potential biological tumor markers in the initial work-up of patients with esophageal cancer. • Prediction models combining 18F-FDG PET radiomic features with HER2 and CD44 may be useful in the decision to omit surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer.

Cachexia, dietetic consultation, and survival in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer: A multicenter cohort study.

It is unclear to what extent patients with pancreatic cancer have cachexia and had a dietetic consult for nutritional support. The aim was to assess the prevalence of cachexia, dietitian consultation, and overall survival in these patients. This prospective multicenter cohort study included patients with pancreatic cancer, who participated in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project and completed patient reported outcome measures (2015-2018). Additional data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cachexia was defined as self-reported >5% body weight loss, or >2% in patients with a BMI <20 kg/m2 over the past half year. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze overall survival. In total, 202 patients were included from 18 centers. Cachexia was present in 144 patients (71%) and 81 of those patients (56%) had dietetic consultation. Cachexia was present in 63% of 94 patients who underwent surgery, 77% of 70 patients who received palliative chemotherapy and 82% of 38 patients who had best supportive care. Dietitian consultation was reported in 53%, 52%, and 71%, respectively. Median overall survival did not differ between patients with and without cachexia, but decreased in those with severe weight loss (12 months (IQR 7-20) vs. 16 months (IQR 8-31), p = 0.02), as compared to those with <10% weight loss during the past half year. Two-thirds of patients with pancreatic cancer present with cachexia of which nearly half had no dietetic consultation. Survival was comparable in patients with and without cachexia, but decreased in patients with more severe weight loss.

Hospital volume and beyond first-line palliative systemic treatment in metastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Beyond first-line palliative systemic treatment can be beneficial to selected oesophagogastric cancer patients, but experience with its administration may be limited and vary among hospitals. In a population-based study, we analysed the association between hospital systemic treatment volume and administration of beyond first-line treatment in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma, as well as the effect on overall survival (OS). METHODS: Synchronous metastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma patients (2010-2017) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospitals were categorised in volumes quartiles. The association between hospital systemic treatment volume and the use of beyond first-line treatment was assessed using trend and multivariable logistic regression analyses. OS was compared between hospitals with high and low beyond first-line treatment administration and treatment strategies using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression. RESULTS: Beyond first-line treatment was administered in 606 of 2,466 patients who received first-line treatment, and increased from 20% to 31% between 2010 and 2017 (P < 0.001). The lowest hospital volumes were independently associated with lower beyond first-line treatment administration compared to the highest volume (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.99; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.95). Median OS was higher in all patients treated in hospitals with a high versus low beyond first-line treatment administration (7.9 versus 6.2 months, P < 0.001). Second-line paclitaxel/ramucirumab was administered most frequently and independently associated with longer OS compared to taxane monotherapy (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59-0.92). CONCLUSION: Higher hospital volume was associated with increased beyond first-line treatment administration in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Second-line paclitaxel/ramucirumab resulted in longer survival compared to taxane monotherapy.

Increased assessment of HER2 in metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Addition of trastuzumab to first-line palliative chemotherapy in gastroesophageal cancer patients with HER2 overexpression has shown to improve survival. Real-world data on HER2 assessment and administration of trastuzumab are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess HER2 testing, trastuzumab administration, and overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients. METHODS: Data of patients with synchronous metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma diagnosed in 2010-2016 that received palliative systemic treatment (n = 2846) were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. The ToGA trial criteria were used to determine HER2 overexpression. Proportions of HER2 tested patients were analyzed between hospital volume categories using Chi-square tests, and over time using trend analysis. OS was tested using the Kaplan Meier method with log rank test. RESULTS: HER2 assessment increased annually, from 18% in 2010 to 88% in 2016 (P < 0.01). Median OS increased from 6.9 (2010-2013) to 7.9 months (2014-2016; P < 0.05). Between the hospitals, the proportion of tested patients varied between 29-100%, and was higher in high-volume hospitals (P < 0.01). Overall, 77% of the HER2 positive patients received trastuzumab. Median OS was higher in patients with positive (8.8 months) and negative (7.4 months) HER2 status, compared to non-tested patients (5.6 months; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Increased determination of HER2 and administration of trastuzumab have changed daily practice management of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients receiving palliative systemic therapy, and possibly contributed to their improved survival. Further increase in awareness of HER2 testing and trastuzumab administration may improve quality of care and patient outcomes.

From presentation to paper: Gender disparities in oncological research.

Gender disparities in scientific publications have been identified in oncological research. Oral research presentations at major conferences enhance visibility of presenters. The share of women presenting at such podia is unknown. We aim to identify gender-based differences in contributions to presentations at two major oncological conferences. Abstracts presented at plenary sessions of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meetings and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congresses were collected. Trend analyses were used to analyze female contribution over time. The association between presenter's sex, study outcome (positive/negative) and journals' impact factors (IFs) of subsequently published papers was assessed using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Of 166 consecutive abstracts presented at ASCO in 2011-2018 (n = 34) and ESMO in 2008-2018 (n = 132), 21% had female presenters, all originating from Northern America (n = 17) or Europe (n = 18). The distribution of presenter's sex was similar over time (p = 0.70). Of 2,425 contributing authors to these presented abstracts, 28% were women. The proportion of female abstract authors increased over time (p < 0.05) and was higher in abstracts with female (34%) compared to male presenters (26%; p < 0.01). Presenter's sex was not associated with study outcome (p = 0.82). Median journals' IFs were lower in papers with a female first author (p < 0.05). In conclusion, there is a clear gender disparity in research presentations at two major oncological conferences, with 28% of authors and 21% of presenters of these studies being female. Lack of visibility of female presenters could impair acknowledgement for their research, opportunities in their academic career and even hamper heterogeneity in research.

Heterogeneity of first-line palliative systemic treatment in synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients: A real-world evidence study.

The optimal first-line palliative systemic treatment strategy for metastatic esophagogastric cancer is not well defined. The aim of our study was to explore real-world use of first-line systemic treatment in esophagogastric cancer and assess the effect of treatment strategy on overall survival (OS), time to failure (TTF) of first-line treatment and toxicity. We selected synchronous metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients treated with systemic therapy (2010-2016) from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 2,204). Systemic treatment strategies were divided into monotherapy, doublet and triplet chemotherapy, and trastuzumab-containing regimens. Data on OS were available for all patients, on TTF for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 (n = 1,700), and on toxicity for patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2014 (n = 1,221). OS and TTF were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression, with adjustment for relevant tumor and patient characteristics. Up to 45 different systemic treatment regimens were found to be administered, with a median TTF of 4.6 and OS of 7.5 months. Most patients (45%) were treated with doublet chemotherapy; 34% received triplets, 10% monotherapy and 10% a trastuzumab-containing regimen. The highest median OS was found in patients receiving a trastuzumab-containing regimen (11.9 months). Triplet chemotherapy showed equal survival rates compared to doublets (OS: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.83-1.02; TTF: HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.82-1.04) but significantly more grade 3-5 toxicity than doublets (33% vs. 21%, respectively). In conclusion, heterogeneity of first-line palliative systemic treatment in metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients is striking. Based on our data, doublet chemotherapy is the preferred treatment strategy because of similar survival and less toxicity compared to triplets.