Factors predicting prognosis and recurrence in patients with esophago-gastric adenocarcinoma and histopathological response with less than 10 % residual tumor

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant treatment is an accepted standard approach for treating locally advanced esophago-gastric adenocarcinomas. Despite a response of the primary tumor, a significant percentage dies from tumor recurrence. The aim of this retrospective exploratory study from two academic centers was to identify predictors of survival and recurrence in histopathologically responding patients. METHODS: Two hundred thirty one patients with adenocarcinomas (esophagus: n = 185, stomach: n = 46, cT3/4, cN0/+, cM0) treated with preoperative chemotherapy (n = 212) or chemoradiotherapy (n = 19) followed by resection achieved a histopathological response (regression 1a: no residual tumor (n = 58), and regression 1b < 10 % residual tumor (n = 173)). RESULTS: The estimated median overall survival was 92.4 months (5-year survival, 56.6 %) for all patients. For patients with regression 1a, median survival is not reached (5-year survival, 71.6 %) compared to patients with regression 1b with 75.3 months median (5-year survival, 52.2 %) (p = 0.031). Patients with a regression 1a had lymph node metastases in 19.0 versus 33.7 % in regression 1b. The ypT-category (p < 0.001), the M-category (p = 0.005), and the type of treatment (p = 0.04) were found to be independent prognostic factors in R0-resected patients. The recurrence rate was 31.7 % (n = 66) (local, 39.4 %; peritoneal carcinomatosis, 25.7 %; distant metastases, 50 %). Recurrence was predicted by female gender (p = 0.013), ypT-category (p = 0.007), and M-category (p = 0.003) in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Response of the primary tumor does not guarantee recurrence-free long-term survival, but histopathological complete responders have better prognosis compared to partial responders. Established prognostic factors strongly influence the outcome, which could, in the future, be used for stratification of adjuvant treatment approaches. Increasing the rate of histopathological complete responders is a valid endpoint for future clinical trials investigating new drugs.

Tumor classification of six common cancer types based on proteomic profiling by MALDI imaging

In clinical diagnostics, it is of outmost importance to correctly identify the source of a metastatic tumor, especially if no apparent primary tumor is present. Tissue-based proteomics might allow correct tumor classification. As a result, we performed MALDI imaging to generate proteomic signatures for different tumors. These signatures were used to classify common cancer types. At first, a cohort comprised of tissue samples from six adenocarcinoma entities located at different organ sites (esophagus, breast, colon, liver, stomach, thyroid gland, n = 171) was classified using two algorithms for a training and test set. For the test set, Support Vector Machine and Random Forest yielded overall accuracies of 82.74 and 81.18%, respectively. Then, colon cancer liver metastasis samples (n = 19) were introduced into the classification. The liver metastasis samples could be discriminated with high accuracy from primary tumors of colon cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. Additionally, colon cancer liver metastasis samples could be successfully classified by using colon cancer primary tumor samples for the training of the classifier. These findings demonstrate that MALDI imaging-derived proteomic classifiers can discriminate between different tumor types at different organ sites and in the same site.

Tumor budding in upper gastrointestinal carcinomas.

The basis of personalized medicine in oncology is the prediction of an individual's risk of relapse and death from disease. The presence of tumor budding (TB) at the tumor-host interface of gastrointestinal cancers has been recognized as a hallmark of unfavorable disease biology. TB is defined as the presence of dedifferentiated cells or small clusters of up to five cells at the tumor invasive front and can be observed in aggressive carcinomas of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, ampulla, colon, and rectum. Presence of TB reproducibly correlates with advanced tumor stage, frequent lymphovascular invasion, nodal, and distant metastasis. The UICC has officially recognized TB as additional independent prognostic factor in cancers of the colon and rectum. Recent studies have also characterized TB as a promising prognostic indicator for clinical management of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma of the gastro-esophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinoma. However, several important issues have to be addressed for application in daily diagnostic practice: (1) validation of prognostic scoring systems for TB in large, multi-center studies, (2) consensus on the optimal assessment method, and (3) inter-observer reproducibility. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of TB in cancers of the upper gastrointestinal tract including critical appraisal of perspectives for further study.

Is preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery the appropriate treatment for signet ring cell containing adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction and stomach?

BACKGROUND Recent data suggest primary resection as the preferable approach in patients with signet ring cell gastric cancer (SRC). The aim of our retrospective exploratory study was to evaluate the influence of SRC on prognosis and response in esophagogastric adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS A total of 723 locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinomas (cT3/4 N any) documented in a prospective database from two academic centers were classified according to the WHO definition for SRC (more than 50 % SRC) and analyzed for their association with response and prognosis after neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS A total of 235 tumors (32.5 %) contained SRC. Median survival of SRC was 26.3 compared with 46.6 months (p < 0.001) for non-SRC. SRC were significantly associated with female gender, gastric localization, advanced ypT and R1/2 categories, and lower risk of surgical complications and anastomotic leakage (each p < 0.001). Clinical (21.1 vs. 33.7 %, p = 0.001) and histopathological response (less than 10 % residual tumor: 16.3 vs. 28.9 %, p < 0.001) were significantly less frequent in SRC. Clinical response (p = 0.003) and complete histopathological response (pCR) (3.4 %) (p = 0.003) were associated with improved prognosis in SRC. Clinical response, surgical complications, ypTN categories, but not SRC were independent prognostic factors in forward Cox regression analysis in R0 resected patients. Risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis was increased (p < 0.001), while local (p = 0.015) and distant metastases (p = 0.02) were less frequent than in non-SRC. CONCLUSIONS Prognosis of SRC is unfavorable. Although response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is rare in SRC, it is associated with improved outcome. Thus, chemotherapy might not generally be abandoned in SRC. A stratification based on SRC should be included in clinical trials.

The search for the primary tumor in metastasized gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) often present as liver metastasis from a carcinoma of unknown primary. We recently showed that primary NETs from the pancreas, small intestine and stomach as well as their respective liver metastases differ from each other by the expression profile of the three genes CD302, PPWD1 and ABHB14B. The gene and protein expression of CD302, PPWD1, and ABHB14B was studied in abdominal NET metastases to identify the site of the respective primary tumors. Cryopreserved tissue from NET metastases collected in different institutions (group A: 29, group B: 50, group C: 132 specimens) were examined by comparative genomic hybridization (Agilent 105 K), gene expression analysis (Agilent 44 K) (groups A and B) and immunohistochemistry (group C). The data were blindly evaluated, i.e. without knowing the site of the primary. Gene expression analysis correctly revealed the primary in the ileum in 94 % of the cases of group A and in 58 % of group B. A pancreatic primary was predicted in 83 % (group A) and 20 % (group B), respectively. The combined sensitivity of group A and B was 75 % for ileal NETs and 38 % for pancreatic NETs. Immunohistochemical analysis of group C revealed an overall sensitivity of 80 %. Gene and protein expression analysis of CD302 and PPWD1 in NET metastases correctly identifies the primary in the pancreas or the ileum in 80 % of the cases, provided that the tissue is well preserved. Immunohistochemical profiling revealed CD302 as the best marker for ileal and PPWD1 for pancreatic detection.