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

Poster session 16

1233P - Real world outcomes of FLOT versus CROSS for patients with oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer

Date

10 Sep 2022

Session

Poster session 16

Topics

Clinical Research

Tumour Site

Oesophageal Cancer;  Gastro-Oesophageal Junction Cancer

Presenters

Adel Shahnam

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2022) 33 (suppl_7): S555-S580. 10.1016/annonc/annonc1065

Authors

A. Shahnam1, U. Nindra2, N. McNamee1, R. Yoon2, G.R. Asghari3, W.L. Ng2, D. Karikios4, M. Wong1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre Westmead, 2145 - Westmead/AU
  • 2 Medical Oncology Department, Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, 2170 - Liverpool/AU
  • 3 Medical Oncology, Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital, 2200 - Bankstown/AU
  • 4 Medical Oncology Department, Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District, NSW 2751 - Penrith/AU

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

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

Abstract 1233P

Background

Peri-operative 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) or neoadjuvant carboplatin, paclitaxel with radiation (CROSS) has become the standard of care for locally advanced gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) and oesophageal cancer (OC). Currently head to head comparisons of the 2 regimens are lacking. This study aims to evaluate, using real-world data, the efficacy and toxicity difference of FLOT and CROSS for the treatment of GOJ and OC adenocarcinomas.

Methods

This is a retrospective multi-center observation study of patients from 5 centres in Western Sydney with locally advanced histological confirmed GOJ or OC adenocarcinoma treated with FLOT or CROSS between 2015 and 2021. Treatment recommendations were based on expert consensus from multidisciplinary team meetings. Overall survival (OS) was defined from time of diagnosis (TOD) to death from any cause. Relapse free Survival (RFS) was defined from TOD to first occurrence of disease progression, relapse, or death. Log-rank test was used to estimate a difference between OS/RFS. Hazard ratios for univariate and multivariate analysis was estimated using cox-proportional hazard. Toxicity was graded as per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0.

Results

Of the 104 patients, 34 (33%) received FLOT and 70 (67%) had CROSS. There was no difference in OS or RFS between treatments. The hazard ratio for death for FLOT compared to CROSS on univariate and multivariate analysis was 0.97 (95% CI 0.49-1.95 p-value>0.9) and 1.33 (95% CI 1.33(0.39-4.49, p=0.649) respectively. No significant difference in complete pathological response (20% (CROSS), 30% (FLOT)) was seen. Recurrence occurred in 41% (79% distant) of CROSS treated patients compared to 32% (63% distant) in FLOT. 85% and 29% of FLOT treated patients completed 4 and 8 cycles of treatment, respectively(vs 75% completing CROSS treatment). Patients receiving FLOT had more statistically significant clinically relevant grade 2 and 3 toxicity than those with CROSS.

Conclusions

CROSS and FLOT had similar efficacy outcomes in the treatment of GOJ and OC adenocarcinoma. However FLOT appeared to be less well tolerated with more discontinuations.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All 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.