Background: Palliative systemic therapy can prolong life and reduce tumor-related symptoms for patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer. However, side effects of treatment could negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Our aim was to review the literature and conduct a meta-analysis to examine the effect of palliative systemic therapy on HRQoL.Methods: EMBASE, Medline, and Central were searched for phase II/III randomized controlled trials until April 2018 investigating palliative systemic therapy and HRQoL. Meta-analysis was performed on baseline and follow-up summary values of global health status (GHS) and other European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer scales. A clinically relevant change and difference of 10 points (scale 0–100) was set to assess the course of HRQoL over time within treatment arms as well as between arms.Results: We included 43 randomized controlled trials (N = 13 727 patients). In the first-line and beyond first-line treatment setting, pooled baseline GHS mean estimates were 54.6 (95% confidence interval = 51.9 to 57.3) and 57.9 (95% confidence interval = 55.7 to 60.1), respectively. Thirty-nine (81.3%) treatment arms showed a stable GHS over the course of time. Anthracycline-based triplets, fluoropyrimidine-based doublets without cisplatin, and the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy were found to have favorable HRQoL outcomes. HRQoL benefit was observed for taxane monotherapy and several targeted agents over best supportive care beyond first line.Conclusions: Patients reported impaired GHS at baseline and generally remained stable over time. Anthracycline-based triplets and fluoropyrimidine-based doublets without cisplatin may be preferable first-line treatment options regarding HRQoL for HER2-negative disease. Taxanes and targeted agents could provide HRQoL benefit beyond first line compared with best supportive care.

Prediction models are only sparsely available for metastatic oesophagogastric cancer. Because treatment in this setting is often preference-based, decision-making with the aid of a prediction model is wanted. The aim of this study is to construct a prediction model, called SOURCE, for the overall survival in patients with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer. Data from patients with metastatic oesophageal (n = 8010) or gastric (n = 4763) cancer diagnosed during 2005–2015 were retrieved from the nationwide Netherlands cancer registry. A multivariate Cox regression model was created to predict overall survival for various treatments. Predictor selection was performed via the Akaike Information Criterion and a Delphi consensus among experts in palliative oesophagogastric cancer. Validation was performed according to a temporal internal-external scheme. The predictive quality was assessed with the concordance-index (c-index) and calibration. The model c-indices showed consistent discriminative ability during validation: 0.71 for oesophageal cancer and 0.68 for gastric cancer. The calibration showed an average slope of 1.0 and intercept of 0.0 for both tumour locations, indicating a close agreement between predicted and observed survival. With a fair c-index and good calibration, SOURCE provides a solid foundation for further investigation in clinical practice to determine its added value in shared decision making.

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessments are increasingly incorporated into oncological randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The quality of HRQoL reporting in RCTs concerning palliative systemic treatment for advanced esophagogastric cancer is currently unknown. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to investigate the quality of HRQoL reporting over time.

First-line triplet chemotherapy including a taxane may prolong survival in patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer. The added toxicity of the taxane might be minimized by using nab-paclitaxel. The aim of this phase I study was to determine the feasibility of combining nab-paclitaxel with the standard of care in the Netherlands, capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapOx). Patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma received oxaliplatin 65 mg/m² on days 1 and 8, and capecitabine 1000 mg/m² bid on days 1–14 in a 21-day cycle, with nab-paclitaxel on days 1 and 8 at four dose levels (60, 80, 100, and 120 mg/m², respectively), using a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation phase, followed by a safety expansion cohort. Baseline tissue and serum markers for activated tumor stroma were assessed as biomarkers for response and survival. Twenty-six patients were included. The first two dose-limiting toxicities (i.e., diarrhea and dehydration) occurred at dose level 3. The resulting maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of 80 mg/m² was used in the expansion cohort, but was reduced to 60 mg/m² after three out of eight patients experienced diarrhea grade 3. The objective response rate was 54%. The median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival were 8.0 and 12.8 months, respectively. High baseline serum ADAM12 was associated with a significantly shorter PFS (p = 0.011). In conclusion, albeit that the addition of nab-paclitaxel 60 mg/m² to CapOx may be better tolerated than other taxane triplets, relevant toxicity was observed. There is a rationale for preserving taxanes for later-line treatment. ADAM12 is a potential biomarker to predict survival, and warrants further investigation.

The SOURCE prediction model predicts individualised survival conditional on various treatments for patients with metastatic oesophageal or gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to validate SOURCE in an external cohort from the Belgian Cancer Registry. Data of Belgian patients diagnosed with metastatic disease between 2004 and 2014 were extracted (n = 4097). Model calibration and discrimination (c-indices) were determined. A total of 2514 patients with oesophageal cancer and 1583 patients with gastric cancer with a median survival of 7.7 and 5.4 months, respectively, were included. The oesophageal cancer model showed poor calibration (intercept: 0.30, slope: 0.42) with an absolute mean prediction error of 14.6%. The mean difference between predicted and observed survival was −2.6%. The concordance index (c-index) of the oesophageal model was 0.64. The gastric cancer model showed good calibration (intercept: 0.02, slope: 0.91) with an absolute mean prediction error of 2.5%. The mean difference between predicted and observed survival was 2.0%. The c-index of the gastric cancer model was 0.66. The SOURCE gastric cancer model was well calibrated and had a similar performance in the Belgian cohort compared with the Dutch internal validation. However, the oesophageal cancer model had not. Our findings underscore the importance of evaluating the performance of prediction models in other populations.