4.6 Editorial Material

Perioperative chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer: MAGIC and beyond

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 21, 期 24, 页码 7343-7348

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i24.7343

关键词

Gastric cancer; Neoadjuvant therapy; Adjuvant therapy; Chemotherapy; Chemoradiation

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [K12 CA001727, 5K12CA001727-20] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Over the last 15 years, there have been major advances in the multimodal treatment of gastric cancer, in large part due to several phase. studies showing the treatment benefits of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation protocols. The objective of this editorial is to review the current high-level evidence supporting the use of chemotherapy, chemoradiation and anti-HER2 agents in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, as well as to provide a clinical framework for use of this data based on our own institutional protocol for gastric cancer. Major studies reviewed include the SWOG/INT 0116, Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC), CLASSIC, ACTS-GC, Adjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy in Stomach Cancer (ARTIST) and Trastuzumab for Gastric Cancer trials. Although these studies have demonstrated that multiple approaches in terms of the timing and therapy for gastric cancer are effective, no standard of care is widely accepted and questions regarding the optimal timing of chemotherapy, the benefit of radiotherapy, the minimum required extent of lymphadenectomy and optimal chemotherapy regimen still exist. Protocols from the upcoming ARTIST II, CRITICS, TOPGEAR, Neo-AEGIS and MAGIC-B studies are outlined, and results from these studies will provide critical information regarding optimal timing and treatment regimen. Additionally, the future directions of gastric cancer research predicated on molecular profiling and tailored therapies based on targetable genetic alterations in individual patient's tumors are addressed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据