BACKGROUND AND AIM: Western studies have suggested two distinct etiologies of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer: Helicobacter pylori-associated atrophic gastritis and non-atrophic gastric mucosa resembling esophageal adenocarcinoma. The present study investigated whether endoscopic gastric mucosal atrophy can distinguish between these two types of EGJ adenocarcinoma.
METHODS: Data were collected from patients with Siewert type II, T1 EGJ adenocarcinoma who underwent endoscopic or surgical resection at eight Japanese institutions in 2010-2015. Clinicopathological characteristics of EGJ cancers with and without endoscopic gastric mucosal atrophy were compared. EGJ was defined as the lower end of the palisade vein and/or the top of the gastric folds.
RESULTS: Of the 229 patients identified, 161 had endoscopic gastric mucosal atrophy and 68 did not. The latter group was younger (64 vs 70 years, P = 0.000); had a higher proportion of patients negative for H. pylori (90% vs 47%, P
The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of early and locally-advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was published in 2017, and covered the diagnosis, staging, management and treatment of both early stage I and II disease and locally-advanced stage III disease. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2018, it was decided by both the ESMO and the Korean Society of Medical Oncology (KSMO) to convene a special face-to-face guidelines meeting in 2019 in Seoul. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2017 guidelines to take into account potential differences related to ethnicity, cancer biology and standard practices associated with the treatment of locally-advanced, unresectable NSCLC in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by those experts in the treatment of patients with lung cancer who represented the oncology societies of Korea (KSMO), China (CSCO), India (ISMPO), Japan (JSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and it was independent of both local current treatment practices and the treatment availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.