A randomized controlled phase III trial comparing two chemotherapy regimen and chemoradiotherapy regimen as neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer, JCOG1109 NExT study.
Ken Kato,Yoshinori Ito,Hiroyuki Daiko,Soji Ozawa,Takashi Ogata,Hiroki Hara,Takashi Kojima,Tetsuya Abe,Takeo Bamba,Masaya Watanabe,Hirofumi Kawakubo,Yuichi Shibuya,Yasuhiro Tsubosa,Naoki Takegawa,Takeshi Kajiwara,Hideo Baba,Masaki Ueno,Ryunosuke Machida,Kenichi Nakamura,Yuko Kitagawa
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2022.40.4_suppl.238
IF: 45.3
2022-02-01
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:238 Background: Neoadjuvant treatment is the standard care for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC). JCOG1109 (UMIN000009482) compared the doublet and triplet of chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) with ESCC of clinical stage IB, II, III (excluding T4) (UICC 7th) from 44 institutions were randomized 1:1:1 to neoadjuvant CF (cisplatin 80 mg/m 2 on day1 plus 5-FU 800 mg/m 2 on days 1-5 Q3W/2course), DCF (docetaxel 70 mg/m 2 on day 1, cisplatin 70 mg/m 2 on day1, plus 5-FU 750 mg/m 2 on days 1-5 Q3W/3 course), or CF-RT (cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 on day 1 plus 5-FU 1000 mg/m 2 on days 1-4 Q4W/2course, radiation 41.4 Gy/23 fr). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), %R0 resection, %objective response by neoadjuvant therapy, %pathological complete response (pCR) and safety. Differences in OS was assessed in the ITT using the stratified log-rank test. The data cutoff date for the analysis was July 20, 2021. Results: Of 601 pts 199 CF, 202 DCF, and 200 CF-RT were enrolled from December 5, 2012 to July 20, 2018, respectively. Among 601 pts, 88.2% were male, median (range) age was 65 (30-75), clinical stage III (nonT4) pts were 62.6%. Median follow-up time (range) was 4.2 years (y) (0-8.5). Median OS in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm were 4.6 y, not reached (NR), and 6.0y, and 3-year OS was 62.6%, 72.1%, and 68.3%, respectively (stratified log-rank test: p = 0.006 for CF vs. DCF and p = 0.12 for CF vs. CF-RT). By stratified Cox regression analysis for OS, hazard ratios (HR) [95% CI] was 0.68 [0.50–0.92] for CF vs. DCF and 0.84 [0.63–1.12] for CF vs. CF-RT. Median PFS in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm were 2.7 y, NR, and 5.3 y, and 3-year PFS was 47.7%, 61.8%, and 58.5%, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 168 (84.4%), 173 (85.6%), and 175 (87.5%), and pCR was 4 (2.1%), 40 (19.8%), and 77 (38.5%), respectively. During neoadjuvant therapy, febrile neutropenia in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm were 1.0%, 16.3% and 4.7%, and esophagitis (grade>3) were 1.0%, 1.0% and 8.9%, respectively. The treatment-related death was seen in 3 (1.5%), 4 (2.0%), and 2 (1.0%), in CF, DCF, and CF-RT arm, respectively. Conclusions: DCF significantly improved OS over CF as neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced ESCC, with a manageable toxicity profile. DCF represents a new standard neoadjuvant treatment for ESCC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000009482.
oncology