Background: Recent studies in patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ)-Neo-AEGIS and ESOPEC-have explored the comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with chemotherapy, with conflicting results. To contextualize the findings from these studies using nCRT as a comparator, we aimed to investigate contemporary real-world outcomes of nCRT in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or GEJ.

Methods: From the Netherlands Cancer Registry, patients were selected who were diagnosed between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2022 with a resectable (cT1N+M0 or cT2-4aNanyM0) esophageal, GEJ or gastric cardia adenocarcinoma and started treatment with nCRT according to the CROSS regimen, that is 5 weekly cycles of carboplatin (AUC 2 mg/mL per minute) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m²) combined with concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Gy in 23 fractions of 1.8 Gy). Pathologic complete response (pCR) according to Mandard was the primary outcome of this study and defined as complete tumor regression of the primary tumor (Mandard grade I) irrespective of residual nodal involvement.

Findings: Of the 4765 included patients, 4170 (87.5%) completed the full CROSS regimen of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. A pCR was observed in 704 (20.5%) of 3439 patients who underwent surgical resection within 16 weeks after completing the CROSS regimen. In the complete study population, the median overall survival (OS) was 33.7 months (95% CI 32.0-35.6), with a 3-year OS rate of 48.1%.

Interpretation: Although survival rates in real-world settings are often lower compared to clinical trials, in our real-world cohort the 3-year OS was only 2.6% lower compared to that reported for the group that underwent nCRT in ESOPEC. These real-world results underscore the potential of the CROSS regimen in daily clinical practice.

Funding: None.

The majority of patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancer do not start palliative systemic treatment. To gain insight into the considerations underlying the decision not to start systemic treatment, we analyzed characteristics of patients starting and not starting systemic treatment, reasons for not starting systemic treatment, and receipt of local palliative treatments on a nationwide scale. Patients diagnosed with advanced esophageal or gastric cancer between 2015 and 2021 were included (n = 10,948). Survival was compared using propensity score matching on patient and disease characteristics. Most patients did not start systemic treatment (esophageal cancer 59%; gastric cancer 64%). These patients were generally older, more often female, had more comorbidities and a worse performance status. The main reason for not starting systemic treatment was patient or family preference (35%). Among patients who did not start systemic treatment, 47% (esophageal) and 19% (gastric), received local palliative treatment, most commonly radiotherapy. Patients who did not start systemic treatment had worse median overall survival compared to patients who did start (esophageal cancer 2.9 months vs. 8.9 months; gastric cancer 2.2 vs. 8.2 months). These findings indicate that patient condition and disease burden are important aspects in systemic treatment decisions. However, patient or family preference was the main reason for not starting systemic treatment, highlighting that their priorities also strongly influence the decision. Systemic treatment did show to be associated with improved overall survival in matched patients, and therefore adequately weighing treatment risks and benefits based on real world data against patient preferences is of utmost importance.

Background: Many patients with advanced cancer are unaware of their limited prognosis, however little is known about the change in awareness during the last year of their lives.

Aim: To investigate changes in the perception of prognosis in the last year of life of patients with advanced cancer and its associated factors.

Design: Prospective, longitudinal, multicentre, observational study in patients with advanced cancer (eQuiPe). Patients completed 3-monthly follow-up questionnaires until death.

Setting/participants: Adult patients diagnosed with advanced cancer were recruited by their treating physician or self-enrolled in one of the forty Dutch hospitals. Only deceased patients with available prognostic data were included for analysis (n = 801).

Results: Perception of prognosis changes in the last year of life with an increase in the percentage of patients who are aware of their limited prognosis (from 15% to 40%). Especially in the last 6 months of life, most of the changes were towards a more realistic perception of prognosis. Patients who did not want to know their prognosis remained relatively stable in their wish not to know (range: 14%-18%). Time to death was associated with having a perception of prognosis of < 1 year, >1 year or not knowing the prognosis, but was not associated with not wanting to know the prognosis.

Conclusion: Becoming aware of their limited prognosis may make patients with advanced cancer more receptive to start end-of-life discussions. Although some patients prefer not to know their prognosis, it remains important to respectfully explore their preferences and wishes for end-of-life care.

Background: The FLOT4 trial demonstrated superior survival of perioperative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) compared to anthracycline triplets for resectable gastric cancer. These results were presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) congress in June 2017 and published in April 2019. However, adoption of novel treatments in clinical practice often encounters delays. This study assesses the patterns of perioperative chemotherapy utilization and FLOT uptake in clinical practice within the Netherlands.

Materials and methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted with resectable gastric cancer patients (cT_1-4a,XcN_allcM₀) between 2015-2020 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Descriptive statistics, Cochran-Armitage tests, Fisher's exact or unpaired T-tests, and Jonckheere-Terpstra tests were used to analyze chemotherapy trends and FLOT uptake across hospitals.

Results: Among 3290 included patients, 42.9 % received neoadjuvant treatment. In 2015, 43.6 % of patients received perioperative chemotherapy versus 43.5 % in 2020 (p = 0.63). 40 out of 62 hospitals (64.5 %) adopted FLOT between the ASCO presentation and the full publication. FLOT increased from 42.9 % before publication to 86.8 % after publication (p < 0.0001), while anthracycline triplet use decreased to 0.9 % (p < 0.0001). Higher hospital volume was associated with fewer days to adoption (p = 0.04) but not with adoption of FLOT before publication (p = 0.14).

Conclusion: Timing of FLOT adoption varied among Dutch hospitals, leading to unequal patient access to effective treatments. Establishing (inter)national guidelines on provisional treatment adjustment pending publication is crucial to reduce variation in access. Moreover, rapid publication of final trial results is imperative to reduce variation in practice and ensure fair patient treatment.

Purpose: Tobacco and alcohol use influence cancer risk as well as treatment outcomes, specifically for esophageal and gastric cancer patients. Therefore, it is an important topic to discuss during consultations. This study aims to uncover medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists' communication about substance use, i.e., tobacco and alcohol use, in simulated consultations about curative and palliative esophagogastric cancer treatment.

Methods: Secondary analyses were performed on n = 40 standardized patient assessments (SPAs) collected in three Dutch clinical studies. Simulated patients with esophagogastric cancer were instructed to ask about smoking or alcohol use during treatment. The responses of the 40 medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was performed in MAXQDA.

Results: Oncologists consistently advocated smoking cessation during curative treatment. There was more variation in their recommendations and arguments in the palliative compared to the curative setting and when addressing alcohol use instead of smoking. Overall, oncologists were less stringent regarding behavior change in the palliative than in the curative setting. Few oncologists actively inquired about the patient's perspective on the substance use behavior, the recommended substance use change, or the support offered.

Conclusion: Clear guidelines for oncologists on when and how to provide unequivocal recommendations about substance use behavior change and support to patients are needed. Oncologists might benefit from education on how to engage in a conversation about smoking or alcohol.

Background: The FLOT4-AIO trial (2019) showed improved survival with perioperative fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) compared to anthracyclin triplets in gastric cancer treatment. It is unclear whether these results extend to real-world scenarios in the Netherlands. This study aimed to compare outcomes of perioperative FLOT to anthracyclin triplets in a real-world Dutch gastric cancer population. Methods: Patients diagnosed with resectable (cT2-4a/cTxN0-3/NxM0) gastric or gastro-esophageal junction carcinoma between 2015-2021 who received neoadjuvant FLOT or anthracyclin triplets were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), analyzed through multivariable Cox regression. Secondary outcomes included pathological complete response (pCR), neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycle completion, surgical resection rates, and adjuvant therapy. Results: Adjusted OS showed no significant survival benefit (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.77-1.01, p = 0.07), even though the median OS was numerically improved by 8 months with FLOT compared to anthracyclin triplets (48.1 vs. 39.9 months, p = 0.16). FLOT patients were more likely to undergo diagnostic staging laparoscopies (74.2% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.001), had higher rates of completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.68, p = 0.007), receiving adjuvant therapy (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.08-1.66, p = 0.08), and achieving pCR (OR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.20, p = 0.03). No significant differences were observed in (radical) resection rates. Conclusion(s): Real-world data showed no significant OS improvement for FLOT-treated patients compared to anthracyclin triplets, despite more staging laparoscopies. However, FLOT patients demonstrated higher rates of neoadjuvant therapy completion, proceeding to adjuvant therapy, and increased pCR rates. Therefore, we recommend the continued use of neoadjuvant FLOT therapy in the current clinical setting.

Objective: To assess the degree of openness of communication about illness and death between patients with advanced cancer and their relatives during the last three months of the patient's life, and its association with relatives' characteristics and bereavement distress.

Methods: We used data from bereaved relatives of patients with advanced cancer from the prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational eQuipe study. Univariate and multivariable linear regression analyses were used to assess the association between the degree of openness of communication (measured using the validated Caregivers' Communication with patients about Illness and Death scale), the a priori defined characteristics of the relatives, and the degree of bereavement distress (measured using the Impact of Event Scale).

Results: A total of 160 bereaved relatives were included in the analysis. The average degree of open communication about illness and death between patients with advanced cancer and their relatives was 3.86 on a scale of 1 to 5 (SE=0.08). A higher degree of open communication was associated with a lower degree of bereavement distress (p=0.003). No associations were found between the degree of open communication and the relatives' age (p=0.745), gender (p=0.196), level of education (p>0.773), (religious) worldview (p=0.435), type of relationship with the patient (p>0.548), or level of emotional functioning before the patient's death (p=0.075).

Conclusions: Open communication about illness and death between patients and relatives seems to be important, as it is associated with a lower degree of bereavement distress. Healthcare professionals can play an important role in encouraging the dialogue. However, it is important to keep in mind that some people not feel comfortable talking about illness and death.

Background: Support for health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an essential part of cancer care in the final stages of life, yet empirical guidance regarding HRQOL and symptom trajectories is lacking.

Aim: To assess the change in HRQOL and symptom burden in the last year of life in patients with advanced cancer and its association with health care-related factors, cancer-specific treatment, and comorbidity.

Methods: A prospective, multicenter, observational study in patients with advanced cancer (eQuiPe). Three monthly questionnaires included European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-C30 and reported continuity of care. Multivariable mixed-effects analysis was used to assess the association between HRQOL and health care-related factors.

Results: A total of 762 deceased patients were included with a mean age of 66 (SD, 10) years and 52% were male. The most common primary tumors were lung (29%), colorectal (20%), and breast cancer (13%). Mean overall HRQOL decreased in the last 9 months of life, with the greatest decrease in the last 3 months (β -16.2). Fatigue, pain, appetite loss, dyspnea, constipation, and nausea worsened significantly in the last year of life. Multimorbidity (β -7.5) and a better reported continuity of care (β 0.7) were both significantly associated with the trajectory of HRQOL.

Conclusion: Mean overall HRQOL begins to decline 9 months before death, highlighting the need for early identification and (re)assessment of different symptoms as aspects of HRQOL follow different trajectories. Multimorbidity and reported continuity of care may be associated with the trajectory of HRQOL.

Background: Diffuse type adenocarcinoma and, more specifically, signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) have a poor prognosis and the value of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (nCRT) is unclear.

Methods: All patients who underwent surgery for diffuse type gastric and GEJ carcinoma between 2004 and 2015 were retrospectively included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The primary outcome was overall survival after surgery. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted. Furthermore, multivariable Poisson and Cox regressions were performed, correcting for confounders. To comply with the Cox regression proportional hazard assumption, gastric cancer survival was split into two groups, i.e. <90 days and >90 days, postoperatively by adding an interaction variable.

Results: Analyses included 2046 patients with diffuse type cancer: 1728 gastric cancers (50% SRCC) and 318 GEJ cancers (39% SRCC). In the gastric cancer group, 49% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and 51% received primary surgery (PS). All-cause mortality within 90 days postoperatively was lower after nCT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.44; p < 0.001). Also after 90 days, mortality was lower in the nCT group (HR for the interaction variable 2.84, 95% CI 1.87-4.30, p < 0.001; total HR 0.29*2.84 = 0.84). In the GEJ group, 38% received nCT, 22% received nCRT, and 39% received PS. All-cause mortality was lower after nCT (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.93; p = 0.020) compared with PS. The nCRT group was removed from the Cox regression analysis since the Kaplan-Meier curves of nCRT and PS intersected. The results for gastric and GEJ carcinomas were similar between the SRCC and non-SRCC subgroups.

Conclusion: For gastric and GEJ diffuse type cancer, including SRCC, nCT was associated with increased survival.

Objective: Advanced cancer has a major impact on both patients and their relatives. To allow for personalized support, it is important to recognize which relatives will experience a decline in emotional functioning during the patient's last year of life, when this decline will occur, and what factors are associated with it. This study aimed to examine the trajectory of emotional functioning of relatives during that time and the characteristics associated with changes in this trajectory.

Methods: A prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study in patients with advanced cancer and their relatives was conducted (eQuiPe). We analyzed relatives' changes in emotional functioning in the patient's last year using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and assessed associations with sociodemographic and care characteristics using multivariable mixed-effects analysis.

Results: 409 relatives completed ≥1 questionnaires during the patient's last year of life. Mean age was 64 years, 61% were female and 75% were the patient's partner. During this year, mean emotional functioning declined significantly over time from 73.9 to 64.6 (p = 0.023, effect size = 0.43). The type of relationship between relatives and patients (p = 0.002), patient' sleep problems (p = 0.033), and continuity of care (p = 0.002) were significantly associated with changes in emotional functioning.

Conclusions: Relatives' emotional functioning declined during the patient's last year of life. Support for them, especially partners and relatives of patients with sleep problems, is important. Relatives who experienced more continuity of care had a less steep decline in emotional functioning.

Objectives: This study aimed to explore the real-world representativeness of a prospective registry cohort with active accrual in oncology, applying a representativeness metric that is novel to health care.

Study design and setting: We used data from the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Esophageal-Gastric Cancer Patients (POCOP) registry and from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). We used Representativeness-indicators (R-indicators) and overall survival to investigate the degree to which the POCOP cohort and clinically relevant subgroups were a representative sample compared to the NCR database. Calibration using inverse propensity score weighting was applied to correct differences between POCOP and NCR.

Results: The R-indicator of the entire POCOP registry was 0.72 95% confidence interval [0.71, 0.73]. Representativeness of palliative patients was higher than that of potentially curable patients (R-indicator 0.88 [0.85, 0.90] and 0.70 [0.68, 0.71], respectively). Stratification to clinically relevant subgroups based on treatment resulted in higher R-indicators of the respective subgroups. Both after stratification and calibration weighting survival estimates in the POCOP registry were more similar to that in the NCR population.

Conclusion: This study demonstrated the assessment of real-world representativeness of patients who participated in a prospective registry cohort and showed that real-world representativeness improved when the variability in treatment was accounted for.

Background: For cancer patients to effectively engage in decision making, they require comprehensive and understandable information regarding treatment options and their associated outcomes. We developed an online prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to assist healthcare providers (HCPs) in this complex task. This study aims to assess the impact of this combined intervention (prediction tool and training) on the communication practices of HCPs when discussing treatment options.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter intervention trial using a pragmatic stepped wedge design (NCT04232735). Standardized Patient Assessments (simulated consultations) using cases of esophageal and gastric cancer patients, were performed before and after the combined intervention (March 2020 to July 2022). Audio recordings were analyzed using an observational coding scale, rating all utterances of treatment outcome information on the primary outcome-precision of provided outcome information-and on secondary outcomes-such as: personalization, tailoring and use of visualizations. Pre vs. post measurements were compared in order to assess the effect of the intervention.

Findings: 31 HCPs of 11 different centers in the Netherlands participated. The tool and training significantly affected the precision of the overall communicated treatment outcome information (p = 0.001, median difference 6.93, IQR (-0.32 to 12.44)). In the curative setting, survival information was significantly more precise after the intervention (p = 0.029). In the palliative setting, information about side effects was more precise (p < 0.001).

Interpretation: A prediction tool and communication skills training for HCPs improves the precision of treatment information on outcomes in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such interventions on communication in clinical practice and on patient-reported outcomes.

Funding: Financial support for this study was provided entirely by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (UVA 2014-7000).

Purpose: To investigate the effect of systemic therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer in daily clinical practice. This study assessed the HRQoL of patients with esophagogastric cancer during first-line systemic therapy, at disease progression, and after progression in a real-world context.

Methods: Patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer (2014-2021) receiving first-line systemic therapy registered in the Prospective Observational Cohort Study of Oesophageal-gastric cancer (POCOP) were included (n = 335). HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25. Outcomes of mixed-effects models were presented as adjusted mean changes.

Results: Results of the mixed-effect models showed the largest significant improvements during systemic therapy for odynophagia (- 18.9, p < 0.001), anxiety (- 18.7, p < 0.001), and dysphagia (- 13.8, p < 0.001) compared to baseline. After progression, global health status (- 6.3, p = 0.002) and cognitive (- 6.2, p = 0.001) and social functioning (- 9.7, p < 0.001) significantly worsened. At and after progression, physical (- 9.0, p < 0.001 and - 8.8, p < 0.001) and role functioning (- 15.2, p = 0.003 and - 14.7, p < 0.001) worsened, respectively. Trouble with taste worsened during systemic therapy (11.5, p < 0.001), at progression (12.0, p = 0.004), and after progression (15.3, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: In general, HRQoL outcomes in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer improved during first-line therapy. Deterioration in outcomes was mainly observed at and after progression.

Implications for cancer survivors: Identification of HRQoL aspects is important in shared decision-making and to inform patients on the impact of systemic therapy on their HRQoL.

Background: As previous studies showed significant hospital variation in curative treatment of esophagogastric cancer, this study assesses the association between this variation and overall, cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival, and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL).

Methods: Patients diagnosed with potentially curable esophageal or gastric cancer between 2015 and 2018 as registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included. Data on overall survival was available for all patients, data on cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival and HRQoL was available for subgroups. Patients were classified according to diagnosis in hospitals with low, medium or high probability of treatment with curative intent (LP, MP or HP). Multivariable models were used to assess the association between LP, MP and HP hospitals and HRQoL and survival.

Results: This study includes 7,199 patients with esophageal, and 2,407 with gastric cancer. Overall and cancer-specific survival was better for patients diagnosed in HP versus LP hospitals for both esophageal (HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.77-0.88 and HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.75-0.91, respectively), and gastric cancer (HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.73-0.92 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI:0.64-0.87, respectively). These differences disappeared after adjustments for treatment. Recurrence-free survival was worse for gastric cancer patients diagnosed in HP hospitals (HR = 1.50, 95%CI:1.14-1.96), which disappeared after adjustment for radicality of surgery. Minor, but no clinically relevant, differences in HRQoL were observed.

Conclusions: Patients diagnosed in hospitals with a high probability of treatment with curative intent have a better overall and cancer-specific but not recurrence-free survival, while minor differences in HRQoL were observed.

Background: This study assesses the incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms in the first year after resection of esophageal or gastric cancer and its association with health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functioning, work productivity, and daily activities.

Patients and methods: Patients diagnosed with esophageal or gastric cancer between 2015 and 2021, who underwent a resection, and completed ≥ 2 questionnaires from the time intervals prior to resection and 0-3, 3-6, 6-9, and 9-12 months after resection were included. Multivariable generalized linear mixed models were used to assess changes in gastrointestinal symptoms over time and the impact of the number of gastrointestinal symptoms on HRQoL, functioning, work productivity, and daily activities for patients who underwent an esophagectomy or gastrectomy separately.

Results: The study population consisted of 961 (78.8%) and 259 (21.2%) patients who underwent an esophagectomy and gastrectomy, respectively. For both groups, the majority of gastrointestinal symptoms changed significantly over time. Most clinically relevant differences were observed 0-3 after resection compared with prior to resection and included increased diarrhea, appetite loss, and eating restrictions, and specifically after esophagectomy dry mouth, trouble with coughing, and trouble talking. At 9-12 after resection one or more severe gastrointestinal symptoms were reported by 38.9% after esophagectomy and 33.7% after gastrectomy. A higher number of gastrointestinal symptoms was associated with poorer functioning, lower HRQoL, higher impairment in daily activities, and lower work productivity.

Conclusions: This study shows that gastrointestinal symptoms are frequently observed and burdensome after esophagectomy or gastrectomy, highlighting the importance to address these sequelae for high quality survivorship.

Background: Although curative treatment options are identical for male and female gastroesophageal cancer patients, access to care and survival may vary. This study aimed to compare treatment allocation and survival between male and female patients with potentially curable gastroesophageal cancer.

Methods: Nationwide cohort study including all patients with potentially curable gastroesophageal squamous cell or adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2018 registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The main outcome, treatment allocation, was compared between male and female patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC). Additionally, 5-year relative survival with relative excess risk (RER), that is, adjusted for the normal life expectancy, was compared.

Results: Among 27,496 patients (68.8% men), most were allocated to curative treatment (62.8%), although rates dropped to 45.6%>70 years. Curative treatment rates were comparable among younger male and female patients (≤70 years) with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, while older females with EAC were less frequently allocated to curative treatment than males (OR = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.99). For those allocated to curative treatment, relative survival was superior for female patients with EAC (RER = 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.96) and ESCC (RER = 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.91), and comparable for males and females with GAC (RER = 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.11).

Conclusions: While curative treatment rates were comparable between younger male and female patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, treatment disparities were present between older patients. When treated, the survival of females with EAC and ESCC was superior to males. The treatment and survival gaps between male and female patients with gastroesophageal cancer warrant further exploration and could potentially improve treatment strategies and survival.

New treatment options and centralization of surgery have improved survival for patients with non-metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. It is unknown, however, which patients benefitted the most from treatment advances. The aim of this study was to identify best-case, typical and worst-case scenarios in terms of survival time, and to assess if survival associated with these scenarios changed over time. Patients with non-metastatic potentially resectable esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Best-case (20th percentile), upper-typical (40th percentile), typical (median), lower-typical (60th percentile) and worst-case (80th percentile) survival scenarios were defined, and regression analysis was used to investigate the change in survival time for each scenario across years. For patients with esophageal cancer (N = 24 352) survival time improved on average 12.0 (until 2011), 1.5 (until 2018), 0.7, 0.4 and 0.2 months per year for the best-case, upper-typical, median, lower-typical and worst-case scenario, respectively. For patients with gastric cancer (N = 9993) survival time of the best-case scenario remained constant, whereas the upper-typical, median, lower-typical and worst-case scenario improved on average with 1.0 (until 2018), 0.5, 0.2 and 0.2 months per year, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that, survival scenarios improved for nearly all patients across treatment groups and for patients with squamous cell carcinomas or adenocarcinomas. Survival improved for almost all patients suggesting that in clinical practice the vast majority of patients benefitted from treatment advances. The clinically most meaningful survival advantage was observed for the best-case scenario of esophageal cancer.

Background: Treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) follows the guidelines for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEJC) and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), but patients with EAC are often excluded from clinical studies of GEJC/GAC.

Objectives: Here we describe treatment and survival of patients with advanced EAC, GEJC, and GAC to provide population-based evidence on distinctions and similarities between these populations.

Design: Retrospective cohort study of patients with unresectable advanced (cT4b) or metastatic (cM1) EAC, GEJC, or GAC (2015-2020) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry.

Methods: Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression.

Results: In all, 7391 patients were included (EAC: n = 3346, GEJC: n = 1246, and GAC: n = 2798). Patients with EAC were more often males and more often had ⩾2 metastatic locations. First-line systemic therapy was received by 42%, 47%, and 36% of patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively. Median OS was 5.0, 5.1, and 4.0 months for all patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively (p < 0.001). Median OS from start of first-line therapy of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative adenocarcinomas was 7.6, 7.8, and 7.5 months (p = 0.12) and of patients with HER2-positive carcinoma receiving first-line trastuzumab-containing therapy was 11.0, 13.3, and 9.5 months (p = 0.37) in EAC, GEJC, and GAC, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, no difference in OS for patients with EAC, GEJC, and GAC was observed.

Conclusion: Despite differences in clinical characteristics and treatment strategies, survival between patients with advanced EAC, GEJC, and GAC was similar. We advocate that EAC patients should not be excluded from clinical trials for patients with molecularly similar GEJC/GAC.

Conditional relative survival (CRS) is useful for communicating prognosis to patients as it provides an estimate of the life expectancy after having survived a certain time after treatment. Our study estimates the 3-year relative survival conditional on having survived a certain period for patients with esophageal or gastric cancer. Patients with nonmetastatic esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 treated with curative intent (resection with or without [neo]adjuvant therapy, or chemoradiotherapy) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. CRS was calculated since resection or last day of chemoradiotherapy. The probability of surviving an additional 3 years (ie, 3-year CRS), if the patients survived 1, 3 and 5 years after diagnosis was 62%, 79%, 87% and 69%, 84%, 90% for esophageal and gastric cancer, respectively. The 3-year CRS after having survived 3 years for patients with esophageal cancer who underwent a resection (n = 12 204) was 91%, 88%, 77% and 60% for pathological Stage 0, I, II and III, and for patients with esophageal cancer who received chemoradiotherapy (n = 4158) was 51% and 66% for clinical Stage II and III, respectively. The 3-year CRS after having survived 3 years for patients with gastric cancer who underwent a resection (n = 6531) was 99%, 90%, 73% and 59% for pathological Stage 0, I, II and III, respectively. Despite poor prognosis of patients with esophageal or gastric cancer, life expectancy increases substantially after patients have survived several years after treatment. Our study provides valuable information for communication of prognosis to patients during follow-up after treatment.

Purpose: Patients with a rare cancer face difficulties during their disease trajectory, such as delayed diagnosis and lack of expert care. However, little is known about their perceived quality of care (QoC) and quality of life (QoL) in the advanced disease stage. We aimed to assess the QoC and QoL as experienced by patients with advanced rare cancers compared to patients with advanced common cancers.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, baseline data of patients with advanced cancer from the multicentre, longitudinal, observational eQuipe study were analysed. Multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to assess differences in experienced QoC (continuity of care, continuity of information, and satisfaction with care) and QoL (functioning, symptoms, overall QoL, and social wellbeing) between advanced rare and common cancer patients.

Results: Of the 1087 included patients, 106 (9.8%) had a rare cancer type. In comparison to patients with advanced common cancers, patients with advanced rare cancers experienced significantly lower continuity of care (77.8 vs. 71.1 respectively, p = 0.011) and social functioning (78.8 vs. 72.6 respectively, p = 0.012). No differences were found regarding continuity of information, satisfaction with care, overall QoL, and social wellbeing.

Conclusions: Patients with advanced rare cancers experience less continuity of care, and the impact of the disease on social and family life seems higher compared to patients with advanced common cancers.

Implications for cancer survivors: To enhance the QoC and QoL of patients with advanced rare cancers, supportive care should mainly focus on improving continuity of care and patients' social functioning.

Background: In recent years, clinical trials have shown improved survival of patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer. The number of patients participating in clinical trials is limited, and survival improvements observed from clinical trials are unrepresentative for the full population. The aim of our study was to assess trends in survival for the best-case, typical, and worst-case scenarios in patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer.

Methods: We selected patients with metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2020 from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Survival was calculated for different percentiles of the survival curve for each incidence year (eg, the 10th percentile [p10] represents the top 10% of patients with the best survival): p10 (best-case), p25 (upper-typical), p50 (median), p75 (lower-typical), and p90 (worst-case). Weighted linear regression analyses were performed to test whether changes in survival were significant.

Results: The overall median survival between 2006 and 2020 remained unchanged for patients with esophageal cancer (n=10,448; from 5.2 to 5.2 months, respectively; P=.06) and improved for patients with gastric cancer (n=10,512; from 3.5 to 4.3 months, respectively; P=.001). For patients with esophageal cancer, survival for the best-case scenario (p10; best 10% of patients) significantly improved from 17.2 to 21.0 months (P=.006). For patients with gastric cancer, survival significantly improved for the best-case scenario (p10) from 15.9 to 23.5 months (P<.001) and the upper-typical scenario (p25) scenario improved from 7.9 to 9.9 months (P<.001).

Conclusions: Despite significant survival improvements in clinical trials, survival improvements were not observed for the majority of patients treated in daily clinical practice. An increase in survival was only observed for patients with the best prognosis.

Introduction: This population-based cohort study analysed treatment, overall survival (OS), and independent prognostic factors for OS in gastric cancer patients with liver metastases.

Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, patients with synchronous metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma limited to the liver were included from the prospectively maintained population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Liver oligometastatic disease (OMD) was defined as ≤3 liver metastases. The primary outcome was OS. Independent prognostic factors for OS were analysed using multivariable Cox regression analysis.

Results: A total 295 patients with metastases limited to the liver were included. The primary tumour was resected in four patients (1.4%). Treatment for liver metastases consisted of chemotherapy alone (28.1%), trastuzumab plus chemotherapy (4.7%), surgery (1.0%), or best supportive care (67.5%). Median OS across all included patients was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-4.5). Liver OMD was detected in 77 patients (26%). Treatment for liver OMD consisted of chemotherapy alone (24.6%), trastuzumab plus chemotherapy (5.2%), surgery (3.9%), or best supportive care (67.5%). Median OS among patients with liver OMD was 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.8-7.5). Across all patients, better OS was independently associated with liver OMD (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% CI: 0.50-0.87), trastuzumab (HR 0.41, 95% CI: 0.23-0.72) but not with triplet compared with doublet chemotherapy (HR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.57-2.87). Worse OS was independently associated with unknown nodal stage versus cN0 (HR 1.74, 95% CI: 1.17-2.60), diffuse-type versus intestinal-type adenocarcinoma (HR 2.06, 95% CI: 1.32-3.20), and monotherapy or best supportive care versus doublet chemotherapy (HR 1.72, 95% CI: 1.03-2.87, and HR 3.61, 95% CI: 2.55-5.10, respectively).

Conclusion: In this population-based cohort study, liver OMD was detected in 26% of patients. Liver OMD and trastuzumab treatment were independently associated with better OS while triplet as compared with doublet chemotherapy was not. OS among patients with liver OMD nevertheless remained poor. The concept of OMD and the benefit of resection of liver OMD may still have been relatively unknown in this disease type during the study inclusion years.

Objective: The death of a loved one is considered to be the most stressful of all life events. However, the impact of bereavement on quality of life varies between individuals. The aim of our study was to assess emotional functioning (EF), which is a domain of quality of life, of bereaved relatives after the death of their loved one and its associated factors.

Method: A prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study on quality of care and quality of life of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives was conducted (eQuiPe). The association between EF of relatives during bereavement and the following factors was investigated: gender, type of relationship, educational level, pre-bereavement emotional and social functioning and global quality of life, social support pre- and during bereavement, anticipatory complicated grief, support of healthcare professionals during bereavement, age of patient and bereaved relative and duration of survival after primary cancer diagnosis.

Results: 150 bereaved relatives completed the bereavement questionnaire. In 41% of the bereaved relatives EF was ≤71, indicating clinically relevant low EF. Multivariable logistic regression showed that females experienced more often emotional problems (OR = 2.82). Emotional functioning pre-bereavement (OR = 0.96) and social support during bereavement (OR = 0.97) were associated with low EF during bereavement.

Conclusions: Almost half of the bereaved relatives of patients with advanced cancer experienced low EF and this was associated with low EF pre-bereavement and low social support during bereavement. Support for relatives should be initiated before the patient's death. Future research is needed to investigate the impact of such support on relatives' wellbeing during bereavement.

Introduction: The recent POLDER trial investigated the effects of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) on dysphagia caused by incurable oesophageal cancer. An estimated life expectancy of minimally three months was required for inclusion. However, nearly one-third of the included patients died within three months. The aim of this study was to investigate if the use of prediction models could have improved the physician's estimation of the patient's survival.

Methods: Data from the POLDER trial (N = 110) were linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry to retrieve patient, tumour, and treatment characteristics. Two published prediction models (the SOURCE model and Steyerberg model) were used to predict three-month survival for all patients included in the POLDER trial. Predicted survival probabilities were dichotomised and the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the predictive performance.

Results: The SOURCE and Steyerberg model had an accuracy of 79% and 64%, and an AUC of 0.76 and 0.60 (p = .017), respectively. The SOURCE model had higher specificity across survival cut-off probabilities, the Steyerberg model had a higher sensitivity beyond the survival probability cut-off of 0.7. Using optimal cut-off probabilities, SOURCE would have wrongfully included 16/110 patients into the POLDER and Steyerberg 34/110.

Conclusion: The SOURCE model was found to be a more useful decision aid than the Steyerberg model. Results showed that the SOURCE model could be used for three-month survival predictions for patients that are considered for palliative treatment of dysphagia caused by oesophageal cancer in addition to clinicians' judgement.

Background: Real-world data on treatment and outcomes in patients with synchronous metastatic disease compared with patients with metachronous metastatic disease in esophagogastric cancer have not been published before. The aim of our study was to explore treatment, overall survival (OS), and time to treatment fialure (TTF) in patients with synchronous and metachronous metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

Methods: Patients with synchronous metastatic disease (2015-2017) and patients with metachronous metastatic disease initially treated with curative intent for nonmetastatic disease (2015-2016) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS and TTF were assessed from metastatic diagnosis for patients with synchronous, early metachronous (⩽6 months) or late metachronous (>6 months) metastatic disease using Kaplan-Meier curves with two-sided log-rank test.

Results: Median OS was 4.2, 2.1, and 4.4 months in patients with synchronous, early metachronous, and late metachronous metastatic disease, respectively (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients receiving systemic treatment was 41.3%, 21.5%, and 32.5% for synchronous, early metachronous, and late metachronous metastatic disease, respectively (p = 0.001). Among patients receiving systemic treatment, median OS was 8.8, 4.5, and 9.1 months (p < 0.001) and median TTF was 6.1, 3.8, and 5.7 months (p < 0.001) in synchronous, early metachronous, and late metachronous metastatic disease, respectively.

Conclusion: Patients with early metachronous metastatic disease have a worse survival compared with patients with synchronous or late metachronous metastatic disease. These patients less often receive systemic treatment, and even when treated, survival is worse compared with patients with synchronous or late metachronous metastatic disease, suggesting a more aggressive tumor behavior.

Background: In patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer treated with curative intent, distant interval metastases may be detected after start of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or during surgery. The aim of this study was to explore characteristics, allocated treatment and overall survival (OS) in gastric/GEJ cancer patients with interval metastases, and to compare OS with synchronous metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer patients who started palliative chemotherapy.

Methods: Patients with interval metastases were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry by including patients with potentially curable gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma (2010-2018) who started chemotherapy without concurrent radiotherapy. The OS since start of neoadjuvant treatment of patients with interval metastases was compared with a propensity score-matched cohort of patients with synchronous metastases who received palliative systemic treatment.

Results: 164 patients with interval metastases diagnosed in 2010-2018 were included. Metastases were most frequently detected during surgery (83%) and most frequently located in the peritoneum (77%). Peritoneal interval metastases were observed in 63% and 80% of the patients who did and did not have a diagnostic laparoscopy prior to neoadjuvant treatment, respectively (P = 0.041). Median OS was 8.9 months (IQR 5.5-13.4), compared to 8.0 months (IQR 4.1-14.1) in matched synchronous metastatic patients calculated from start of neoadjuvant and palliative systemic treatment, respectively (P = 0.848).

Conclusion: This population-based study shows that gastric/GEJ cancer patients who started neoadjuvant treatment and were diagnosed with interval metastases most frequently suffered from peritoneal metastases detected during (exploratory) surgery, even when a diagnostic laparoscopy was performed before start of treatment. OS was comparable to patients with synchronous metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer.

Background: Results of CheckMate 577 show an improved disease-free survival for patients with resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer treated with adjuvant nivolumab compared with placebo (22.4 versus 11.0 months). Population-based data can provide insights in outcomes from clinical practice. The aim of our study was to investigate disease-free and overall survival in a nationwide population aligned with the inclusion criteria of CheckMate 577.

Patients and methods: Resected patients with stage II/III esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer (2015-2016) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients with cervical esophageal cancer, irradical resection, or complete pathological response were excluded. Disease-free and overall survival were assessed from 12 weeks after resection using Kaplan-Meier methods. In addition, to adjust for differences in characteristics between CheckMate 577 and our population-based cohort, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison was performed for pathological lymph node status and pathological tumor status.

Results: We identified 634 patients. Sixty percent of patients were diagnosed with recurrence or were deceased at the end of follow-up. Median disease-free survival was 19.7 months and median overall survival was 32.2 months. After the matching procedure, the median disease-free survival was 17.2 months and median overall survival was 28.2 months.

Conclusions: Disease-free survival in our population-based study was considerably longer than the placebo population of CheckMate-577 (19.7 versus 11.0 months). Possible explanations are differences in characteristics, quality of esophageal cancer care, or differential strategies for evaluation of recurrence. In the Netherlands postoperative imaging is not part of the standard follow-up as opposed to the standard postoperative imaging in the CheckMate 577 trial. The difference in postoperative imaging could partially explain the longer disease-free survival observed in our study. Quality and optimization of current treatment modalities remain important aspects of esophageal cancer care.

Data on treatment and survival of patients with advanced unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from Western populations are limited. Here we describe treatment and survival in patients with advanced unresectable ESCC: patients with cT4b disease without metastases (cT4b), metastases limited to the supraclavicular lymph nodes (SCLNM) or distant metastatic ESCC at the population level. All patients with unresectable (cT4b) or synchronous metastatic ESCC at primary diagnosis (2015-2018) or patients with metachronous metastases after primary non-metastatic diagnosis in 2015-2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Fifteen percent of patients had cT4b disease (n = 146), 12% SCLNM (n = 118) and 72% distant metastases (n = 681). Median overall survival (OS) time was 6.3, 11.2, and 4.4 months in patients with cT4b, SCLNM, and distant metastases, respectively (P < .001). Multivariable Cox regression showed that patients with cT4b (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-1.99) and patients with distant metastases (hazard ratio 1.42, 95% CI 1.12-1.80) had a worse survival time compared with patients with SCLNM. Among patients who received chemoradiotherapy and/or underwent resection (primary tumor and/or metastases), median OS was 11.9, 16.1, and 14.0 months in patients with cT4b, SCLNM, and distant metastases, respectively (P = .76). Patients with SCLNM had a better survival time compared with patients with cT4b and patients with distant metastases. Survival of patients with advanced unresectable ESCC in clinical practice was poor, even in patients treated with curative intent.

Background: Due to the increasing use of shared decision-making, patients with esophagogastric cancer play an increasingly important role in the decision-making process. To be able to make well-informed decisions, patients need to be adequately informed about treatment options and their outcomes, namely survival, side effects or complications, and health-related quality of life. Web-based tools and training programs can aid physicians in this complex task. However, to date, none of these instruments are available for use in informing patients with esophagogastric cancer about treatment outcomes.

Objective: This study aims to develop and evaluate the feasibility of using a web-based prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to improve how physicians inform patients with esophagogastric cancer about treatment outcomes. By improving the provision of treatment outcome information, we aim to stimulate the use of information that is evidence-based, precise, and personalized to patient and tumor characteristics and is communicated in a way that is tailored to individual information needs.

Methods: We designed a web-based, physician-assisted prediction tool-Source-to be used during consultations by using an iterative, user-centered approach. The accompanying communication skills training was developed based on specific learning objectives, literature, and expert opinions. The Source tool was tested in several rounds-a face-to-face focus group with 6 patients and survivors, semistructured interviews with 5 patients, think-aloud sessions with 3 medical oncologists, and interviews with 6 field experts. In a final pilot study, the Source tool and training were tested as a combined intervention by 5 medical oncology fellows and 3 esophagogastric outpatients.

Results: The Source tool contains personalized prediction models and data from meta-analyses regarding survival, treatment side effects and complications, and health-related quality of life. The treatment outcomes were visualized in a patient-friendly manner by using pictographs and bar and line graphs. The communication skills training consisted of blended learning for clinicians comprising e-learning and 2 face-to-face sessions. Adjustments to improve both training and the Source tool were made according to feedback from all testing rounds.

Conclusions: The Source tool and training could play an important role in informing patients with esophagogastric cancer about treatment outcomes in an evidence-based, precise, personalized, and tailored manner. The preliminary evaluation results are promising and provide valuable input for the further development and testing of both elements. However, the remaining uncertainty about treatment outcomes in patients and established habits in doctors, in addition to the varying trust in the prediction models, might influence the effectiveness of the tool and training in daily practice. We are currently conducting a multicenter clinical trial to investigate the impact that the combined tool and training have on the provision of information in the context of treatment decision-making.

Background: Population-based predictive factors for the effectiveness of second-line palliative systemic therapy in gastro-oesophageal cancer are not available. This study investigates the predictive value of effectiveness of first-line treatment for second-line treatment outcomes in gastro-oesophageal cancer in a real-world setting.

Methods: Patients with metastatic gastro-oesophageal cancer diagnosed in 2010-2017 who were treated with second-line therapy after disease progression on first-line therapy were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were divided into four groups as per duration of time to treatment failure (TTF) of the first line (0-3, 3-6, 6-9 and >9 months), and the association with overall survival (OS) and second-line TTF was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and two-sided multivariable regression models.

Results: Median OS since the start of the second line of patients (n = 611) with first-line TTF of 0-3, 3-6, 6-9 and >9 months was 4.0, 4.1, 5.5 and 7.1 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Median second-line TTF of patients with first-line TTF of 0-3, 3-6, 6-9 and >9 months was 2.8, 2.4, 3.0 and 4.5 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Patients with first-line TTF of >9 months showed a longer OS than patients with first-line TTF of 0-3 months (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46-2.47), 3-6 months (adjusted HR 1.88; 95% CI 1.47-2.39) and 6-9 months (adjusted HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.04-1.65). Results for second-line TTF were similar.

Conclusions: This study shows a positive correlation between effectiveness of first-line therapy and outcomes of second-line therapy in gastro-oesophageal cancer. Physicians should take duration of the first line into account when considering second-line palliative systemic therapy.

Background: Accumulating evidence of trials demonstrates that patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at diagnosis is prognostic for overall survival (OS) in oesophagogastric cancer. However, real-world data are lacking. Moreover, differences in disease stages and tumour-specific symptoms are usually not taken into consideration. The aim of this population-based study was to assess the prognostic value of HRQoL, including tumour-specific scales, on OS in patients with potentially curable and advanced oesophagogastric cancer.
Methods: Data were derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the patient reported outcome registry (POCOP). Patients included in POCOP between 2016 and 2018 were stratified for potentially curable (cT1-4aNallM0) or advanced (cT4b or cM1) disease. HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the tumour-specific OG25 module. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the impact of HRQoL, sociodemographic and clinical factors (including treatment) on OS.
Results: In total, 924 patients were included. Median OS was 38.9 months in potentially curable patients (n = 795) and 10.6 months in patients with advanced disease (n = 129). Global Health Status was independently associated with OS in potentially curable patients (HR 0.89, 99%CI 0.82-0.97), together with several other HRQoL items: appetite loss, dysphagia, eating restrictions, odynophagia, and body image. In advanced disease, the Summary Score was the strongest independent prognostic factor (HR 0.75, 99%CI 0.59-0.94), followed by fatigue, pain, insomnia and role functioning.
Conclusion: In a real-world setting, HRQoL was prognostic for OS in patients with potentially curable and advanced oesophagogastric cancer. Several HRQoL domains, including the Summary Score and several OG25 items, could be used to develop or update prognostic models.

Purpose: Advance Care Planning (ACP) is positively associated with the quality of care, but its impact on emotional functioning is ambiguous. This study investigated the association between perceptions of ACP involvement and emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer.

Methods: This study analyzed baseline data of 1,001 patients of the eQuiPe study, a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study on quality of care and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer in the Netherlands. Patients with metastatic solid cancer were asked to participate between November 2017 and January 2020. Patients' perceptions of ACP involvement were measured by three self-administered statements. Emotional functioning was measured by the EORTC-QLQ-C30. A linear multivariable regression analysis was performed while taking gender, age, migrant background, education, marital status, and symptom burden into account.

Results: The majority of patients (87%) reported that they were as much involved as they wanted to be in decisions about their future medical treatment and care. Most patients felt that their relatives (81%) and physicians (75%) were familiar with their preferences for future medical treatment and care. A positive association was found between patients' perceptions of ACP involvement and their emotional functioning (b=0.162, p<0.001, 95%CI[0.095;0.229]) while controlling for relevant confounders.

Conclusions: Perceptions of involvement in ACP are positively associated with emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer. Future studies are needed to further investigate the effect of ACP on emotional functioning.

Trial registration number: NTR6584 Date of registration: 30 June 2017 IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patients' emotional functioning might improve from routine discussions regarding goals of future care. Therefore, integration of ACP into palliative might be promising.

Background: The oncological efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy are under debate for the Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer undergoing multimodality treatment.

Methods: In 10 experienced upper GI centers in the Netherlands, patients with resectable (cT1-4aN0-3bM0) gastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. No masking was performed. The primary outcome was hospital stay. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. It was hypothesized that laparoscopic gastrectomy leads to shorter hospital stay, less postoperative complications, and equal oncological outcomes.

Results: Between 2015 and 2018, a total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic (n = 115) or open gastrectomy (n = 112). Preoperative chemotherapy was administered to 77 patients (67%) in the laparoscopic group and 87 patients (78%) in the open group. Median hospital stay was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-9) in both groups (P = .34). Median blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group (150 v 300 mL, P < .001), whereas mean operating time was longer (216 v 182 minutes, P < .001). Both groups did not differ regarding postoperative complications (44% v 42%, P = .91), in-hospital mortality (4% v 7%, P = .40), 30-day readmission rate (9.6% v 9.1%, P = 1.00), R0 resection rate (95% v 95%, P = 1.00), median lymph node yield (29 v 29 nodes, P = .49), 1-year overall survival (76% v 78%, P = .74), and global health-related quality of life up to 1 year postoperatively (mean differences between + 1.5 and + 3.6 on a 1-100 scale; 95% CIs include zero).

Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy did not lead to a shorter hospital stay in this Western multicenter randomized trial of patients with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. Postoperative complications and oncological efficacy did not differ between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy.

Background: With increasing interest in organ-preserving strategies for potentially curable esophageal cancer, real-world data is needed to understand the impact of pathological tumor response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on patient outcome. The objective of this study is to assess the association between pathological tumor response following CROSS neoadjuvant CRT and long-term overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort.

Material and methods: All patients diagnosed in the Netherlands with potentially curable esophageal cancer between 2009 and 2017, and treated with neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy were included. Through record linkage with the nationwide Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA), pathological data were obtained. The primary outcome was pathological tumor response based on ypTNM, classified into pathological complete response (ypT0N0) and incomplete responders (ypT0N+, ypT+N0, and ypT+N+). Multivariable logistic and Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of pathological complete response (pCR) and survival.

Results: A total of 4946 patients were included. Overall, 24% achieved pCR, with 19% in adenocarcinoma and 42% in squamous cell carcinoma. Patients with pCR had a better estimated 5-year OS compared to incomplete responders (62% vs. 38%, p< .001). Of the patients with incomplete response, ypT+N+ patients (32% of total population) had the lowest estimated 5-year OS rate, followed by ypT0N+ and ypT+ N0 (22%, 47%, and 49%, respectively, p< .001). Adenocarcinoma, well to moderate differentiation, cT3-4, cN+, signet ring cell differentiation and lymph node yield (≥15) were associated with lower likelihood of pCR.

Conclusion: In this population-based study, pathological tumor response based on the ypTNM-stage was associated with different prognostic subgroups. A quarter of patients achieved ypT0N0 with favorable long-term survival, while one-third had an ypT+N+ response with very poor survival. The association between pathological tumor response and long-term survival could help in more accurate assessments of individual prognosis and treatment decisions.

Background: Surgical resection is the cornerstone of curative treatment for gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate reasons for and patient- and tumor characteristics that are associated with refraining from surgical resection in patients with potentially curable gastric cancer.

Materials and methods: Between 2015 and 2017, all patients with potentially curable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4a-x, cN0-3-x, cM0) were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patients were divided into a resection (RG) and a no-resection group (nRG). Reasons for not undergoing resection as registered by the NCR were evaluated. Using multivariable logistic regression analyses, patient and tumor characteristics associated with refraining from resection were assessed.

Results: Of the 1679 analyzed patients with potentially curable disease, 1127 patients (67%) underwent resection, and 552 patients (33%) did not. Most common registered reasons for refraining from surgery were patient refusal (25%), low performance status (23%), comorbidity and extent of disease (both 10%). Factors associated with not undergoing resection were: age ≥80 years (OR 4.77, [95%CI 2.27-10.06], p < 0.001), low Social-Economic-Status (SES) (OR 2.68 [95%CI 1.31-5.46], p = 0.007), WHO performance status 3-4 (OR 10.48 [95%CI 2.41-45.73], p = 0.002) with several accompanying comorbidities, unclassified Lauren classification (OR 3.93 [95%CI 1.61-9.56], p = 0.003) and overlapping/diffuse tumors (OR 3.51, [95%CI 1.54-8.05], p = 0.003).

Conclusion: A third of patients with potentially curable gastric cancer did not undergo resection. Most frequent registered reasons for refraining from surgery were patient refusal, performance status, comorbidity and extent of disease. Additionally, multivariable analyses identified higher age, lower SES, and poor tumor characteristics as associated factors.

Background: Beyond first-line palliative systemic treatment can be beneficial to selected oesophagogastric cancer patients, but experience with its administration may be limited and vary among hospitals. In a population-based study, we analysed the association between hospital systemic treatment volume and administration of beyond first-line treatment in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma, as well as the effect on overall survival (OS).

Methods: Synchronous metastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma patients (2010-2017) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospitals were categorised in volumes quartiles. The association between hospital systemic treatment volume and the use of beyond first-line treatment was assessed using trend and multivariable logistic regression analyses. OS was compared between hospitals with high and low beyond first-line treatment administration and treatment strategies using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression.

Results: Beyond first-line treatment was administered in 606 of 2,466 patients who received first-line treatment, and increased from 20% to 31% between 2010 and 2017 (P < 0.001). The lowest hospital volumes were independently associated with lower beyond first-line treatment administration compared to the highest volume (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.99; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.95). Median OS was higher in all patients treated in hospitals with a high versus low beyond first-line treatment administration (7.9 versus 6.2 months, P < 0.001). Second-line paclitaxel/ramucirumab was administered most frequently and independently associated with longer OS compared to taxane monotherapy (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59-0.92).

Conclusion: Higher hospital volume was associated with increased beyond first-line treatment administration in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Second-line paclitaxel/ramucirumab resulted in longer survival compared to taxane monotherapy.

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.

Background: Addition of trastuzumab to first-line palliative chemotherapy in gastroesophageal cancer patients with HER2 overexpression has shown to improve survival. Real-world data on HER2 assessment and administration of trastuzumab are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess HER2 testing, trastuzumab administration, and overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients.

Methods: Data of patients with synchronous metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma diagnosed in 2010-2016 that received palliative systemic treatment (n = 2846) were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Dutch Pathology Registry. The ToGA trial criteria were used to determine HER2 overexpression. Proportions of HER2 tested patients were analyzed between hospital volume categories using Chi-square tests, and over time using trend analysis. OS was tested using the Kaplan Meier method with log rank test.

Results: HER2 assessment increased annually, from 18% in 2010 to 88% in 2016 (P < 0.01). Median OS increased from 6.9 (2010-2013) to 7.9 months (2014-2016; P < 0.05). Between the hospitals, the proportion of tested patients varied between 29-100%, and was higher in high-volume hospitals (P < 0.01). Overall, 77% of the HER2 positive patients received trastuzumab. Median OS was higher in patients with positive (8.8 months) and negative (7.4 months) HER2 status, compared to non-tested patients (5.6 months; P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Increased determination of HER2 and administration of trastuzumab have changed daily practice management of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients receiving palliative systemic therapy, and possibly contributed to their improved survival. Further increase in awareness of HER2 testing and trastuzumab administration may improve quality of care and patient outcomes.

Background: In several Western European countries it is recommended to treat gastric cancer patients with perioperative chemotherapy if they are eligible for surgery. However, little is known about its use in daily clinical practice. This study examines the use of perioperative treatment and its impact on survival in the Netherlands.

Methods: Patients diagnosed with potentially resectable gastric cancer (cT1N+/cT2-T3,X any cN, cM0,X) between 2006 and 2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (N = 5824). Treatment trends were examined. Propensity score matching was used to create a subsample to reduce selection bias. Cox regression analysis was used to assess differences in overall survival.

Results: The percentage of patients treated with perioperative treatment increased from 3% in 2006 to 26% in 2014 and the use of only surgery decreased from 60% to 26%. 35% of all patients did not undergo surgery. Of the patients who underwent preoperative chemotherapy and surgery, 43% did not commence postoperative treatment. Cox regression analysis showed a better overall survival for patients who underwent perioperative treatment compared to patients who underwent preoperative treatment only (HR = 0.80 95%CI 0.70-0.93; propensity matched sample: HR = 0.84 95%CI 0.71-0.99), whereas survival was comparable for patients who underwent preoperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone (HR = 0.89 95%CI 0.77-1.02, propensity matched sample: HR = 0.85 95%CI 0.72-1.01).

Conclusion: This population-based study highlights that a significant proportion of the patients did not receive perioperative treatment. More research is necessary to elucidate the importance of the individual components of perioperative treatment.

Introduction: Palliative systemic therapy has been shown to improve survival in metastatic oesophagogastric cancer. Administration of palliative systemic therapy in metastatic oesophagogastric cancer varies between hospitals. We aimed to explore the association between the annual hospital volume of oesophagogastric cancer patients and survival.

Methods: Patients diagnosed in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2013 with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were attributed according to three definitions of high volume: (1) high-volume incidence centre, (2) high-volume treatment centre and (3) high-volume surgical centre. Independent predictors for administration of palliative chemotherapy were evaluated by means of multivariable logistic regression analysis, and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of high-volume centres on survival.

Results: Our data set comprised 4078 patients with metastatic oesophageal cancer, and 5425 patients with metastatic gastric cancer, with a median overall survival of 20 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI] 19-21 weeks) and 16 weeks (95% CI 15-17 weeks), respectively. Patients with oesophageal cancer treated in a high-volume surgical centre (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91) and a high-volume treatment centre (adjusted HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78-0.99) exhibited a decreased risk of death. For gastric cancer, patients treated in a high-volume surgical centre (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.92) had a superior outcome.

Conclusion: Improved survival in patients undergoing palliative systemic therapy for oesophagogastric cancer was associated with treatment in high-volume treatment and surgical centres. Further research should be implemented to explore which specific factors of high-volume centres are associated with improved outcomes.