Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in locally advanced gastric cancer varies. This study compares tumor response to NACT across anatomical locations, considering clinicopathological differences.
Materials and Methods:
This retrospective study included 212 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who received NACT followed by surgery. Tumors were classified by location (antrum-pylorus, corpus-fundus, cardia). Treatment response was assessed using the Modified Ryan Scoring System (0 = complete, 1 = near complete, 2 = partial, 3 = minimal/none).
Results:
Tumor locations were antrum-pylorus (30.2%), corpus-fundus (28.3%), and cardia (41.5%). Localization showed no statistically significant differences in response (p = 0.337). However, cardia tumors were more frequent in Groups 3 (40.9%) and 4 (48.1%), which showed poorer pathological responses, whereas antrum (34.6%) and corpus (38.5%) tumors were more common in Group 1, representing patients with a pathological complete response. These findings suggest that cardia tumors may have a lower response to NACT, although definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. In multivariate analysis, only advanced T stage (T3–4) was independently associated with poor tumor regression grade response (odds ratio 14.3, 95% confidence interval 5.4–37.5, p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
Tumor response to NACT varied by anatomical location, although differences were not statistically significant. Cardia tumors showed a trend toward lower response rates. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study evaluating gastric anatomical subgroups in this context. While not conclusive, the findings suggest that tumor location may influence treatment strategies, warranting validation in larger studies.
AndersonWF, RabkinCS, TurnerN, et al.The changing face of noncardia gastric cancer incidence among US non-Hispanic whites. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2018; 110(6):608–615; doi: 10.1093/jnci/djx262
2.
HuangQ, LiR, XuGF, et al.Emerging evidence supports grouping by location of early gastric carcinoma for appropriate clinical management in Chinese patients. Dig Dis, 2018; 36(6):388–396; doi: 10.1159/000492259
3.
HuangQ, FangC, ShiJ, et al.Differences in clinicopathology of early gastric carcinoma between proximal and distal location in 438 Chinese patients. Sci Rep, 2015; 5:13439; doi: 10.1038/srep13439
4.
HuangQ, ChengY, ChenL, et al.; and The Jiangsu Province Early Gastric Carcinoma Multicenter Study Team. Low risk of lymph node metastasis in 495 early gastric cardiac carcinomas: A multicenter clinicopathologic study of 2101 radical gastrectomies for early gastric carcinoma. Mod Pathol, 2018; 31(10):1599–1607; doi: 10.1038/s41379-018-0063-1
5.
FanXS, ChenJY, LiCF, et al.Differences in HER2 over-expression between proximal and distal gastric cancers in the Chinese population. World J Gastroenterol, 2013; 19(21):3316–3323; doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i21.3316
6.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric adenocarcinoma. Nature, 2014; 513(7517):202–209.
7.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic characterization of oesophageal carcinoma. Nature, 2017; 541(7636):169–175.
8.
RicciAD, AlessandroR, LlimpeFLR, et al.HER2-directed treatments in advanced gastric carcinoma: Another paradigm shift. Cancers (Basel), 2021; 13(7):1664; doi: 10.3390/cancers13071664
9.
RicciAD, RizzoA, BrandiG. DNA damage response alterations in gastric cancer: Knocking down a new wall. Future Oncol, 2021; 17(8):865–868; doi: 10.2217/fon-2020-0989
10.
RihawiK, RicciAD, RizzoA, et al.Tumor-associated macrophages and inflammatory microenvironment in gastric cancer: Novel translational implications. Int J Mol Sci, 2021; 22(8):3805; doi: 10.3390/ijms22083805
11.
SohnBH, HwangJE, JangHJ, et al.Clinical significance of four molecular subtypes of gastric cancer identified by The Cancer Genome Atlas project. Clin Cancer Res, 2017; 23(15):4441–4449; doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-2211
12.
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2021 (6th edition).. Gastric Cancer; 2023; vol. 26, pp. 1–25; doi: 10.1007/s10120-022-01331-8
13.
MacdonaldJS, SmalleySR, BenedettiJ, et al.Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med, 2001; 345(10):725–730; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa010187
14.
CunninghamD, AllumWH, StenningSP, et al.Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med, 2006; 355(1):11–20; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa055531
15.
DigkliaA, WagnerAD. Advanced gastric cancer: Current treatment landscape and future perspectives. World J Gastroenterol, 2016; 22(8):2403–2414; doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i8.2403
YuanZ, CuiH, WangS, et al.Combining neoadjuvant chemotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol, 2023; 13:1103320; doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1103320
18.
CoccoliniF, NardiM, MontoriG, et al.Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gastric and esophago-gastric cancer. Meta-analysis of randomized trials. Int J Surg, 2018; 51:120–127; doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.01.008
19.
AndersonE, LeVeeA, KimS, et al.Comparison of clinicopathological outcomes between neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies for resectable gastric cancer. JAMA Netw Open, 2021; 4(12):e2138432; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.38432
20.
SahBK, ZhangB, ZhangH, et al.Neoadjuvant FLOT and SOX phase II randomized clinical trials for locally advanced gastric cancer. Nat Commun, 2020; 11(1):6093; doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-19965-6
21.
LiZ, ShanF, YingX, et al.Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg, 2019; 154(12):1093–1101; doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.3473
22.
FujitaniK, AjaniJA, CraneCH, et al.Impact of induction chemotherapy and preoperative chemoradiotherapy on operative morbidity and mortality in patients with locoregional adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. Ann Surg Oncol, 2007; 14(7):2010–2017; doi: 10.1245/s10434-006-9198-2
23.
Al-BatranSE, HomannN, PauligkC, et al.; FLOT4-AIO Investigators. Perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine (ECF/ECX) for resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4): A randomised, phase 2/3 trial. Lancet, 2019; 393(10184):1948–1957; doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32557-1
24.
SchuhmacherC, GretschelS, LordickF, et al.Neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared with surgery alone for locally advanced cancer of the stomach and cardia: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized trial 40954. J Clin Oncol, 2010; 28(35):5210–5218; doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.6114
25.
YchouM, BoigeV, PignonJP, et al.Perioperative chemotherapy compared with surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: An FNCLCC and FFCD multicenter phase III trial. J Clin Oncol, 2011; 29(13):1715–1721; doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.0597
26.
PetrelliF, GhidiniM, BarniS, et al.Prognostic role of primary tumor location in non-metastatic gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 studies. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017; 24(9):2655–2668; doi: 10.1245/s10434-017-5832-4
27.
ChenY, ChenX, LinY, et al.Oncological risk of proximal gastrectomy for proximal advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. BMC Cancer, 2024; 24(1):255; doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-11993-5
28.
MacchiaG, GambacortaMA, MasciocchiC, et al.Time to surgery and pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer: A population study on 2094 patients. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol, 2017; 4:8–14; doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2017.04.004
29.
YoshikawaT, SasakoM, YamamotoS, et al.Phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extended surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer. Br J Surg, 2009; 96(9):1015–1022; doi: 10.1002/bjs.6665
30.
GarrerWY, HossienyHAK, GadZS, et al.Appropriate timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2016; 17(9):4381–4389.
31.
FrancoisY, NemozCJ, BaulieuxJ, et al.Influence of the interval between preoperative radiation therapy and surgery on downstaging and on the rate of sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer: The Lyon R90–01 randomized trial. J Clin Oncol, 1999; 17(8):2396; doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.8.2396
32.
AkgunE, CaliskanC, BozbiyikO, et al.Randomized clinical trial of short or long interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for rectal cancer. Br J Surg, 2018; 105(11):1417–1425; doi: 10.1002/bjs.10984
33.
RyanEJ, SullivanDPO, KellyME, et al.Meta-analysis of the effect of extending the interval after long-course chemoradiotherapy before surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. Br J Surg, 2019; 106(10):1298–1310; doi: 10.1002/bjs.11220
34.
OvergaardM, OvergaardJ, SellA. Dose-response relationship for radiation therapy of recurrent, residual, and primarily inoperable colorectal cancer. Radiother Oncol, 1984; 1(3):217–225; doi: 10.1016/S0167-8140(84)80003-1
35.
BausysA, ÜmarikT, LukstaM, et al.Impact of the interval between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and gastrectomy on short- and long-term outcomes for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol, 2021; 28(8):4444–4455; doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-09507-1
36.
ZhaiY, ZhengZ, DengW, et al.Interval time between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery in advanced gastric cancer does not affect outcome: A meta-analysis. Front Surg, 2022; 9:1047456; doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1047456
37.
Ocaña JiménezJ, PriegoP, CuadradoM, et al.Impact of interval timing to surgery on tumor response after neoadjuvant treatment for gastric cancer. Rev Esp Enferm Dig, 2020; 112(8):598–604; doi: 10.17235/reed.2020.6763/2019
38.
WuC, ZhouH, WangT, et al.Impact of the time from the completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery on the outcomes of patients with gastric cancer. Transl Cancer Res, 2019; 8(5):1853–1862; doi: 10.21037/tcr.2019.08.42
39.
LingQ, HuangST, YuTH, et al.Optimal timing of surgery for gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol, 2023; 21(1):377; doi: 10.1186/s12957-023-03251-y
40.
WangY, LiuZ, ShanF, et al.Optimal timing to surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer. Front Oncol, 2020; 10:613988; doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.613988
41.
YangH, ZhangW, GeR, et al.Application of gross tissue response system in gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A primary report of a prospective cohort study. Front Oncol, 2021; 11:585006; doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.585006
42.
JiangL, MaZ, YeX, et al.Clinicopathological factors affecting the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer. World J Surg Oncol, 2021; 19(1):44; doi: 10.1186/s12957-021-02157-x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
