ABCD: Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (Jan 2022)

ENDOSCOPIC CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS WITH COMPLETE PATHOLOGICAL RESPONSE AFTER NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY FOR GASTRIC AND ESOPHAGOGASTRIC JUNCTION ADENOCARCINOMAS

  • Juliana Silveira Lima de CASTRO,
  • Adriane Graicer PELOSOF,
  • João Guilherme Guerra de ANDRADE-CABRAL,
  • Alvaro Moura SERAPHIM,
  • Eloy TAGLIERI,
  • Felipe Jose Fernandez COIMBRA,
  • Claudia ZITRON

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-672020210002e1616
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 34, no. 3

Abstract

Read online Read online

ABSTRACT Background: Gastric and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma are responsible for approximately 13.5% of cancer-related deaths. Given the fact that these tumors are not typically detected until they are already in the advanced stages, neoadjuvancy plays a fundamental role in improving long-term survival. Identification of those with complete pathological response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a major challenge, with effects on organ preservation, extent of resection, and additional surgery. There is little or no information in the literature about which endoscopic signs should be evaluated after NAC, or even when such re-evaluation should occur. Aim: To describe the endoscopic aspects of patients with gastric and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinomas who underwent NAC and achieved pCR, and to determine the accuracy of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in predicting the pCR. Methods: A survey was conducted of the medical records of patients with these tumors who were submitted to gastrectomy after NAC, with anatomopathological result of pCR. Results: Twenty-nine patients were identified who achieved pCR after NAC within the study period. Endoscopic responses were used to classify patients into two groups: G1-endoscopic findings consistent with pCR and G2-endoscopic findings not consistent with pCR. Endoscopic evaluation in G1 was present in an equal percentage (47.4%; p=0.28) in Borrmann classification II and III. In this group, the predominance was in the gastric body (57.9%; p=0.14), intestinal subtype with 42.1% (p=0.75), undifferentiated degree, 62.5% (p=0.78), Herb+ in 73.3% (p=0.68). The most significant finding, however, was that the time interval between NAC and EGD was longer for G1 than G2 (24.4 vs. 10.2 days, p=0.008). Conclusion: EGD after NAC seems to be a useful tool for predicting pCR, and it may be possible to use it to create a reliable response classification. In addition, the time interval between NAC and EGD appears to significantly influence the predictive power of endoscopy for pCR.

Keywords