Search

Background: The current standard of care for locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy with surgical resection; however, disease-free survival in these patients remains poor. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved for adjuvant treatment of locally advanced esophageal and GEJ cancers, but their benefit in the perioperative and neoadjuvant settings remains under investigation., Methods: We used the PubMed online database to conduct a literature search to identify studies that investigated immunotherapy for locally advanced esophageal and GEJ carcinoma. A review of ClinicalTrials.gov yielded a list of ongoing trials., Results: Adjuvant nivolumab for residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery is the only approved immunotherapy regimen for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Early-phase trials investigating the addition of neoadjuvant or perioperative ICIs to standard-of-care multimodality approaches have observed pathologic complete response rates as high as 60%. Response rates are highest for ICIs plus chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and dual checkpoint inhibition in mismatch repair-deficient adenocarcinomas. Safety profiles are acceptable, with a pooled adverse event rate of 27%. Surgical morbidity and mortality with immunotherapy are similar to historical controls with no immunotherapy, and R0 resection rates are high. When reported, disease-free survival among patients treated with perioperative immunotherapy is promising., Conclusions: Outside of clinical trials, immunotherapy for resectable esophageal carcinoma is limited to the adjuvant setting. Phase III trials investigating neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy are now underway and will provide much-needed data on survival that may ultimately lead to practice-changing recommendations., (Copyright © 2024 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The clinical application of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing is complicated by the availability of multiple IHC assays, scoring algorithms, and cutoffs. This study assessed the analytical comparability of three commercially available PD-L1 assays and two scoring algorithms used to assess PD-L1 status in gastric cancer (GC) samples., Methods: Serial sections of 100 resected GC samples, with PD-L1 expression levels across the dynamic range, were stained with three in vitro diagnostic-grade PD-L1 assays (28-8, 22C3, and SP263). Three trained pathologists blindly and independently scored slides using combined positive score (CPS) and tumor area positivity (TAP) algorithms. Comprehensive statistical analyses were performed to evaluate analytical concordance. Digital image analysis (DIA) was used to objectively compare the technical performance of each assay by simulating CPS and TAP., Results: Comparable staining patterns were observed with these three PD-L1 assays. Despite discernible variation in staining intensity, reproducible evaluations of PD-L1 positivity were observed. Inter- and intra-assay assessments of all three assays, using either CPS or TAP and the same PD-L1 cutoffs, demonstrated moderate to almost-perfect (interassay Cohen's kappa [κ] range, 0.47-0.83) and substantial to almost-perfect (intra-assay κ range, 0.77-1.00) agreement. Interpathologist assessment exhibited a significant level of concordance (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.92). No difference in technical performance was observed using DIA., Conclusion: This study highlights analytical concordance in PD-L1 testing between three major PD-L1 assays when TAP and CPS are applied. Comparability of the technical assay performance was further supported by independent DIA. These observations support cross-application flexibility of the different PD-L1 assays and scoring algorithms to characterize PD-L1 expression in GC.

Anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors are the standard of care for advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Although recommendations and approval by regulatory agencies are often based on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, pathologic assessments of PD-L1 status have several limitations. Single-site biopsies do not adequately capture disease heterogeneity within individual tumor lesions or among several lesions within the same patient, the PD-L1 combined positive score is a dynamic biomarker subject to evolution throughout a patient's disease course, and repeated biopsies are invasive and not always feasible. Methods: This was a prospective pilot study of the PD-L1-targeting radiotracer, 18 F-BMS-986229, with PET imaging (PD-L1 PET) in patients with gastroesophageal cancer. Patients were administered the 18 F-BMS-986229 radiotracer intravenously at a dose of 370 MBq over 1-2 min and underwent whole-body PET/CT imaging 60 min later. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of 18 F-BMS-986229. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04161781). Results: Between February 3, 2020, and February 2, 2022, 10 patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma underwent PD-L1 PET. There were no adverse events associated with the 18 F-BMS-986229 tracer, and imaging did not result in treatment delays; the primary endpoint was achieved. Radiographic evaluation of PD-L1 expression was concordant with pathologic assessment in 88% of biopsied lesions, and 18 F-BMS-986229 uptake on PET imaging correlated with pathologic evaluation by the combined positive score (Spearman rank correlation coefficient, 0.64). Seventy-one percent of patients with 18 F-BMS-986229 accumulation on PET imaging also had lesions without 18 F-BMS-986229 uptake, highlighting the intrapatient heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression. Patients treated with frontline programmed death 1 inhibitors who had 18 F-BMS-986229 accumulation in any lesions on PET imaging had longer progression-free survival than patients without tracer accumulation in any lesions (median progression-free survival, 28.4 vs. 9.9 mo), though the small sample size prevents any definitive conclusions. Conclusion: PD-L1 PET imaging was safe, feasible, and concordant with pathologic evaluation and offers a potential noninvasive tool to assess PD-L1 expression., (© 2024 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)