Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

ePoster Display

1396P - Radiological criteria for selecting candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: An exploratory analysis from the PRODIGY study

Date

16 Sep 2021

Session

ePoster Display

Topics

Clinical Research

Tumour Site

Gastric Cancer

Presenters

Hyung-don Kim

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2021) 32 (suppl_5): S1040-S1075. 10.1016/annonc/annonc708

Authors

H. Kim1, J.S. Lee2, J.H. Yook3, M.H. Ryu4, Y. Park5, J. Kim6, Y. Kim7, S. Noh8, Y. Kang9

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Oncology, Asan Medical Center - University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 138-931 - Seoul/KR
  • 2 Department Of Radiology, Asan Medical Center - University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 138-931 - Seoul/KR
  • 3 Department Of Surgery, Asan Medical Center - University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 138-931 - Seoul/KR
  • 4 Oncology Dept, Asan Medical Center - University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 138-931 - Seoul/KR
  • 5 Department Of Surgery, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun/KR
  • 6 Department Of Hemato-oncology, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegue/KR
  • 7 Department Of Surgery, National Cancer Center, Goyang/KR
  • 8 Gangnam Severance Hospital, Department of Surgery, Seoul/KR
  • 9 Department Of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, Seoul/KR

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 1396P

Background

In this exploratory analysis from the PRODIGY study, we aimed to define the radiological criteria to identify patients with gastric cancer who may derive maximal clinical benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

There were 246 patients allocated to receive surgery followed by adjuvant S-1 (SC group) and 238 allocated to receive additional neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CSC group). cT stage was assessed based on the invasion depth by computed tomography (CT). As the PRODIGY study’s radiological method of lymph node evaluation by CT considers short diameter and morphology (the size and morphology method), a method considering only short diameter (size-only method) was also employed. In the SC group, the correlation between radiologic and pathologic findings was analyzed. The hazard ratio (HR) for the progression-free survival (PFS) of the CSC group was analyzed in subgroups with different cT/N stages.

Results

While the overall concordance rate between clinical and pathological T staging was 48.2%, cT4 disease showed a sensitivity of 85.6% for detecting pT4 and it was associated with a low proportion of pathologic Stage I disease (≤ 5.6%). Among the criteria determined by different cT/N stages by each method of lymph node positivity, those involving cT4Nany or cT4N+ by both methods had a minimal proportion of pathologic stage I disease (≤ 5%), while cT4Nany by both methods and cT4N+ by the size and morphology method exhibited a sensitivity for detecting pathologic Stage III disease of ≥ 75.9%. The relative risk reduction in PFS of the CSC group was the greatest in patients meeting the cT4Nany criterion defined by both methods (HR 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.50–0.94).

Conclusions

The cT4Nany criterion, regardless of the radiological method used for lymph node evaluation, may help select patients with resectable gastric cancer for neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

Y. Kang: Other, Personal, Advisory Role: ALX Oncology; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Amgen; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: BMS; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Blueprint; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Daehwa; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Macrogenics; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Merck (MSD); Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Novartis; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Surface Oncology; Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Zymeworks. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.