Gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma survival outcomes relative to completion of perioperative fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT): A single-center retrospective analysis.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
224 Background: Perioperative FLOT is standard-of-care for locally advanced resectable gastric and gastroesophageal (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Completion of perioperative chemotherapy (8 cycles) is potentially jeopardised by significant toxicity and intolerance. Only 46% of patients completed all cycles in the initial phase 2/3 trial (FLOT-AIO). We sought to determine the rate of treatment completion in a real-world population and any subsequent impact on survival of incomplete treatment. Methods: A retrospective analysis of gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma patients treated with perioperative FLOT at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto between September 2017 and July 2020 was performed. The rate of perioperative FLOT administration, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was analysed, with outcomes compared between patients that completed perioperative FLOT and those that didn’t. Results: 32 patients were identified as receiving neoadjuvant FLOT. Mean age was 61.5y, 26 (81%) were male and 29 (91%) were non-Asian. All patients were ECOG 0-1. The median number of neoadjuvant cycles was 4. 29 (91%) had surgery (2 = disease progression; 1 = declined surgery). 10 (34%) patients had minimal/nil response upon resection (College of American Pathologists Tumour Regression Grading (TRG) Score 3), 5 of whom received adjuvant FLOT whilst 5 did not (p0.28). 10 (34%) patients did not receive adjuvant FLOT, 18 (62%) did and 1 received 8 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Nil demographic differences were observed between ‘yes’ and ‘no’ adjuvant FLOT groups. The reasons for not having adjuvant chemotherapy were: metastatic disease diagnosed post-operatively (n = 2), TRG Score 3 (n = 4), patient declined further chemotherapy (n = 1), reduced performance status and/or toxicity (n = 2), and the patient requiring treatment for a second malignancy (n = 2). 10 (34%) patients completed perioperative chemotherapy. Median DFS was 12.5m (95% CI 7.9-12.5) for ‘no’ FLOT’ and was not-reached for ‘yes’ FLOT (p = 0.29). 18m DFS was 50% (95% CI 27-93) v 81% (95% CI 64-100) respectively. The median OS for ‘no’ adjuvant FLOT was 16.7m (95% CI 11.5-16.7) with 5 deaths. Zero deaths due to malignancy had occurred at 23.3m in those who received adjuvant FLOT (p0.00164). 1 death in the ‘yes’ group occurred due to interstitial lung disease. Conclusions: In our small population size 34% of patients completed perioperative FLOT. Whilst nil statistically significant difference was observed in mDFS, an improved mOS was observed in those that received adjuvant FLOT suggesting an importance in receiving the maximum number of cycles of chemotherapy. Given the challenges of administering adjuvant FLOT future trials into the feasibility and efficacy of 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FLOT should be considered.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».