Randomized trial comparing epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and methotrexate in advanced esophagogastric cancer

One-Day DCF Regimen in Patients with Metastatic Gastric Cancer

Background

Cytotoxic chemotherapy is the basic treatment for metastatic gastric cancer. The “docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-day infusion of 5-FU (DCF5)” regimen is regarded as an effective therapy. However, the poor toxicity profile of this regimen and administration by 5-day infusion are major drawbacks of this method.

Methods

Patients with measurable metastatic gastric carcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤2, normal hematological and renal function, adequate hepatic function, and not pretreated for advanced disease with chemotherapy, received docetaxel on day 1, cisplatin on day 1, and 5-FU peripheral IV on day 1 (DCF1) every 3 weeks. The patients undergoing the DCF1 regimen could not receive the infusion regimen. This was a retrospective study about the use of DCF in 1 day in not previously treated metastatic gastric cancer.

Results

In total, 95 patients were treated with a median of 5 cycles per patient. Those not previously treated for advanced disease received docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, and 5-FU peripheral IV 750 mg/m2/day on day 1, plus filgrastim or lenograstim between days 3 and 7. Grade ≥3 toxicities were neutropenia (12%), anemia (11%), thrombocytopenia (3%), fatigue (18%), mucositis (10%), diarrhea (3%), nausea/vomiting (6%), neurological (3%), and palmar-plantar (2%). Two nonfatal febrile neutropenia episodes were recorded. There were no treatment-related deaths. In all patients with measurable disease, we observed an overall response rate of 46% (40 partial responses, 4 complete responses). Thirty-one patients (33%) had stable disease. The median overall survival was 9.0 months (95% CI 7.34–10.6).

Conclusions

Use of the DCF1 regimen in metastatic gastric cancer is feasible, with comparable activity to previous results achieved with epirubicin-based chemotherapy and infusion DCF in terms of overall survival. However, randomized and prospective studies need to be carried out with this regimen.

Metastatic gastric cancer treatment: a little slow but worthy progress

Metastatic gastric cancer is incurable and remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths around the world. Despite the significant progress in its systemic treatment, metastatic gastric cancer is still a major therapeutic challenge for oncologists. Newer chemotherapy regimens and the addition of molecularly targeted agents to chemotherapy seem to provide better clinical outcomes for patients with metastatic gastric cancer. The objective of this article is to review the current treatment approach for this formidable disease.

Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinoma: a single-institution experience

Most patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction (gej) cancer are diagnosed with inoperable advanced or metastatic disease. In these cases, chemotherapy is the only treatment demonstrating survival benefit. The present study compares clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes for patients with advanced esophageal, gej, and gastric adenocarcinoma treated with first-line chemotherapy [epirubicin-cisplatin-5-fluorouracil (ecf), epirubicin-cisplatin-capecitabine (ecx), or etoposide-leucovorin-5-fluorouracil (elf)] or best supportive care (bsc) at our institution with those for historical controls.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed medical information for 401 patients with newly diagnosed advanced esophageal, gej, or gastric adenocarcinoma treated with first-line chemotherapy (ecf, ecx, or elf) or bsc from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2010. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the data collected with data for historical control patients.

RESULTS

Of the study patients, 93% were diagnosed with metastatic disease (n = 374), and 63% received bsc only (n = 251). The main reasons that patients received bsc only included poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (55%), patient decision (31%), and comorbidities (14%). Of the remaining patients, 98 (24%) received ecf or ecx and 52 (13%) received elf as first-line treatment. Median overall survival was significantly longer in patients treated with ecf or ecx or with elf than in those receiving bsc (12.7 months vs. 12.7 months vs. 5.5 months respectively). Chemotherapy also significantly reduced the risk of death (64% reduction with ecf or ecx, 58% with elf).

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed the substantial overall survival benefit of combination chemotherapy compared with bsc, with better survival in our patient population than in historical controls. However, novel treatment options are still warranted to improve outcomes in this patient population.

Bimonthly regimen of high-dose leucovorin, infusional 5-fluorouracil, docetaxel, and cisplatin (modified DCF) in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The combination of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) is an effective but highly toxic regimen for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. To improve tolerability while maintaining the efficacy of the DCF regimen, we developed a modified DCF regimen including an infusional 5-fluorouracil administration according to the de Gramont regimen.

METHODS

In this study, 70 patients with advanced gastric cancer were treated. Each 2-week cycle consisted of docetaxel (60 mg/m(2)), cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)), a 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)) i.v. bolus, and 5-fluorouracil (2,400 mg/m(2)) i.v. over 46 h plus leucovorin (400 mg/m(2)) i.v. over 2 h.

RESULTS

The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.1-10.9) and 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.4-14.2), respectively; the 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates were 46.3 and 18.4%, respectively. Twenty-nine (41.4%) partial responses, 19 (27.1%) stable disease, and 22 (31.4%) progression of disease were observed. Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia (37.1%), febrile neutropenia (15.7%), thrombocytopenia (10.0%), anemia (8.6%), nausea and vomiting (10.0%), stomatitis (5.7%), infection (8.6%), and diarrhea (2.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that a de Gramont-based DCF regimen may have tolerable toxicities and be an effective and convenient palliative treatment for advanced gastric cancer.

Second-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer in Korea

Stomach cancer is still one of the most prevalent malignancies and is the main cause of cancer deaths worldwide. The outcome for patients with metastasis, as well as for those with tumor recurrence, is dismal, with median survival time not greater than a year. Patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic lesions have been treated with systemic chemotherapy, and several randomized studies have demonstrated the benefit of chemotherapy compared with best supportive care. Recently, randomized phase III trials have presented a benefit of second-line chemotherapy compared with supportive care alone. However, it is not known at present which drug is the most effective in this setting. In Korea, the practice of offering second-line treatment to patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is common, and many prospective clinical trials investigating clinical outcomes of second-line chemotherapy have been reported. Therefore, to define the potential role of second-line chemotherapy and to help to select an effective regimen, we review the published Korean prospective data concerning the use of chemotherapy in the second-line setting for the treatment of AGC. No phase III trials but 20 phase II trials were identified. The benefit of second-line chemotherapy in AGC has indirect evidence considering prolongation of progression-free survival (PFS) and improvement of the response rate. Taxanes, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin have been studied much and might be promising drugs considering cross-resistance to a 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin combination (FP). A large, prospective, multicenter, randomized phase III study is warranted to select the most effective second-line chemotherapeutic agents.

Assessment of Histopathological Response in Gastric and Gastro-Oesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Which Scoring System to Use?

Background. The standard of care for patients with operable gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) tumours involves neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This improves survival and reduces risk of tumour recurrence following surgery. The various grading criteria published to assess histological response to neoadjuvant treatments have never been compared in terms of their reproducibility and ability to predict survival. Methods. A study was carried out of 66 patients with gastric and GOJ (types II and III) adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to the MAGIC protocol. Histology slides were reviewed independently by two histopathologists using three published grading systems (Mandard, Japanese, and Becker). Histological, demographic, and survival data were collected. The kappa statistic was used to assess interobserver reproducibility. Results. Three (5%) patients had a complete pathological response. There was reasonable interobserver agreement for the grading systems: κ-scores = 0.44 (Mandard), 0.28 (Japanese), and 0.51 (Becker). Only Mandard and Becker scores provided prognostic information: 5-year overall survival rates of 100% for complete or near complete responders versus 35% for nonresponders () for both. Positive lymph nodes () and resection margins () were associated with poor survival. Conclusion. Becker’s score is most reproducible for the evaluation of histological response. Furthermore, lymph node and resection margins status provides prognostic information.

The role of taxanes in the management of gastroesphageal cancer

Upper gastrointestinal cancers commonly referred to as gastroesophageal carcinomas encompass cancers of the esophagus, stomach and gastroesophageal junction. Although the number of newly diagnosed cases of gastric cancer has decreased in the United States, the whole burden of upper gastrointestinal carcinomas on society remains significantly high, with only a small improvement in overall survival achieved over the past two decades. Traditionally, therapeutic agents used to treat gastroesophageal cancers have been platinums and fluoropyrimidines. Taxanes are di-terpenes produced by the plants of the genus Taxus (yews). As their name suggests, taxanes were first derived from natural sources, but now they are all synthesized artificially. Interfering with cellular microtubular function during cell division is the main mechanism of action for currently available taxanes. Since their introduction into therapeutic oncology, many different other taxane-derivatives have been manufactured and are being developed. Changing the formulation of the drug to improve delivery such as liposomal encapsulation, and target deliver with antibody-drug conjugation, as well as introducing new class of cytotoxic agents that can overcome taxane-resistance. The two most commonly used taxanes are paclitaxel and docetaxel. Taxane is a class of cytotoxic agents more commonly administered in patients with breast and lung cancers. However, the regulatory approval of docetaxel to treat patients with metastatic or advanced gastroesophageal cancers in 2006 established the role of taxanes in the management of upper gastroesophageal cancers. This paper will review the current data of taxanes in the management of patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers.

A pilot study evaluating the safety and toxicity of epirubicin, cisplatin, and UFT (ECU regimen) in advanced gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Best response rates have been achieved with three-drug regimens containing 5-FU in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and oral fluoropyrimidines are the best alternatives as substitutes for infusional 5-FU. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and toxicity of epirubicin, cisplatin, and UFT (ECU regimen) regimens in AGC outpatients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-one patients with AGC received epirubicin, cisplatin, and oral UFT plus leucovorin. Epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 60mg/m(2) were administered on Day 1. Three hundreds (300) mg/m(2)/day UFT was administered with leucovorin at a fixed oral dose of 90 mg/day for 21 days, followed by a 7-day rest period. Cycles were repeated every 4 weeks. Performance status was either as 0 and 1.

RESULTS

Among the 41 patients enrolled, complete and partial response was achieved in 7.3% and 36.6% of patients, respectively, with an overall response rate of 43.9%. Stable disease was observed in 34.1% of patients and 22% showed disease progression. Median time to progression was 5.2 months and median survival was 12.3 months. A median of 4 cycles (range: 1-6) of chemotherapy were administered. The main grade III-IV toxicities were nausea/vomiting (19.4%) and neutropenia (12.1%). Grade IV toxicities were gastric perforation and renal failure.

CONCLUSION

ECU appears to be an effective regimen in the treatment of AGC, with acceptable tolerability and manageable toxicity. In three-drug regimens, substitution of infusional 5-FU by UFT offers the possibility of increased AGC outpatient compliance.

Incidence of hand-foot syndrome with capecitabine in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with advanced and/or metastatic gastric cancer suitable for treatment with a fluoropyrimidine-based regimen

INTRODUCTION

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a limiting toxicity of capecitabine, which is not life-threatening but could compromise capecitabine efficacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This phase II, multicenter, non-controlled study assessed the safety, particularly grade three HFS incidence, and efficacy of four capecitabine-based chemotherapy regimens [cisplatin/capecitabine (CX), epirubicin/cisplatin/capecitabine (ECX), epirubicin/oxaliplatin/capecitabine (EOX) and docetaxel/cisplatin/capecitabine (DCX)] as first-line treatment for advanced and/or metastatic gastric cancer.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight patients were assigned to one of the four treatment groups, according to investigator's criteria, and grouped together for both safety and efficacy primary analyses. HFS was reported in 31 patients (19.6%) and its first presentation occurred at a median of 72 days (range 19-209 days). Grade 3 HFS developed in 6.3, 5.2, 3.7 and 2.4%, of patients receiving ECX, DCX, EOX or CX chemotherapy regimen, respectively. Capecitabine dose reduction/discontinuation due to HFS was required in 5.7% of patients (9/158). The most common (> 10%) grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs were neutropenia (15.2%), asthenia (12.0%) and diarrhoea (11.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

A moderate incidence of HFS was reported in patients treated with capecitabine, which generally presented late and required dose reduction in < 1/3 of patients. The results suggest that capecitabine may be useful in combination with standard fluorouracil-based regimens in patients with advanced and/or metastatic gastric cancer with favourable safety profile.

Randomized prospective phase II study to compare the combination chemotherapy regimen epirubicin, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine in patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (ECF) regimen with that of the epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX) regimen in patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive either the ECF or ECX regimen. The primary end point was the response rate. The secondary end points were time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were enrolled in the study from January 2003 to March 2007. Forty-five patients received the ECF regimen and 40 patients received the ECX regimen. The objective response rate was 31% [9% complete response (CR) and 22% partial response (PR)] for ECF and 30% (10% CR and 20% PR) for ECX. The disease control rate was 51% and 73%, respectively (P<0.05). Median OS and TTP were 6.8 and 5.5 months, respectively, in the ECF group and 8.3 and 6.0 months, respectively, in the ECX group. The majority of adverse events were grade 1/2. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events in both groups were fatigue (ECF 15%, ECX 21%), neutropenia (ECF 16%, ECX 16%), vomiting (ECF 11%, ECX 8%), nausea (ECF 9%, ECX 3%), and anemia (ECF 7%, ECX 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The ECX regimen was at least as effective as the ECF regimen with a similar tolerability profile, and could therefore replace the ECF regimen for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Phase I trial of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (DOC) in untreated gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

A combination of docetaxel (D), oxaliplatin (O), and capecitabine (C) (DOC) was studied in this dose-escalation phase Ib trial in patients with untreated advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) included any grade 4 hematological or any grade 3 non-hematological toxicity, besides alopecia and nausea or vomiting. Cohorts of three patients, expanded to six if one DLT occurred, were studied. Two DLTs out of three patients, or ≥3 out of six patients defined the toxic level. The preceding level, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), was further expanded to nine patients. The primary objective was to establish the MTD of the DOC regimen.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients entered four dose levels. Levels I, II, and IIb were considered safe and included 3, 6, and 6 patients, respectively. Level III defined our toxic level with three analyzed patients. Therefore, level IIB was expanded to 9 patients. No other DLTs were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Fractionation of doses and the use of less toxic and more convenient derivatives are the rationales for this new combination. The MTD (mg/m(2)) was: D, 30 and O, 70, both on days 1 and 8, i.v.; C 1000 per day, days 2-15, p.o.; all given every 3 weeks. A cooperative phase II study has been opened.

Phase II multi-institutional prospective randomised trial comparing S-1+paclitaxel with S-1+cisplatin in patients with unresectable and/or recurrent advanced gastric cancer

Background:

A combination of S-1 and cisplatin has been shown to be effective with acceptable safety for the first-line treatment of far-advanced gastric cancer in Japan. This is the first randomised phase II trial to compare S-1+paclitaxel with S-1+cisplatin in this setting.

Methods:

Patients with unresectable and/or recurrent advanced gastric cancer were randomly assigned to receive one of the two regimens: S-1 (40 mg m⁻² twice daily) on days 1–14 plus paclitaxel (60 mg m⁻²) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 4-week cycle (S-1+paclitaxel) or S-1 (40 mg m⁻² twice daily) on days 1–21 plus cisplatin (60 mg m⁻²) on day 8 of a 5-week cycle (S-1+cisplatin). The primary end point was the response rate (RR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

Results:

A total of 83 patients were eligible for safety and efficacy analyses. In the S-1+paclitaxel and S-1+cisplatin groups, RRs (52.3% vs 48.7% P=0.74) and median PFS (9 vs 6 months; P=0.50) were similar. The median OS was similar in the S-1+paclitaxel and S-1+cisplatin groups (16 vs 17 months; P=0.84). The incidence of grade 3 or higher haematological toxicity was 19.0% with S-1+paclitaxel and 19.5% with S-1+cisplatin. The incidence of grade 3 or higher non-haematological toxicity was 14.2% with S-1+paclitaxel and 17.1% with S-1+cisplatin.

Conclusion:

S-1+paclitaxel was suggested to be a feasible and effective non-platinum-based regimen for chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Our results should be confirmed in multicenter, phase III-controlled clinical trials.

Phase II and UGT1A1 genotype study of irinotecan dose escalation as salvage therapy for advanced gastric cancer

Background:

To assess the efficacy and safety of individualised dose optimisation of irinotecan monotherapy as salvage treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods:

A total of 43 patients were enrolled. Intravenous irinotecan (350 mg m⁻²) was administered every 3 weeks. The dose was increased (425 mg m⁻² and 500 mg m⁻²) or decreased (250 mg m⁻²) depending on patient tolerance. UGT1A1 genotypes were determined by direct sequencing of genomic DNA extracted from peripheral blood.

Results:

A total of 183 cycles of irinotecan were administered, with a median of four cycles per patient. The overall response rate was 9.3%, and the disease control rate was 62.8%. Median time to disease progression was 2.8 months, and median overall survival was 8.0 months. Grade 3–4 neutropenia was the most common toxicity (53.5%), and febrile neutropenia was the least common toxicity (4.6%). Compared with defective allele groups, UGT1A1 *1/*1 was associated with a lower incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia during the first cycle (P=0.018).

Conclusion:

Individualised irinotecan dose escalation based on patient tolerance was not associated with increased toxicity and shows modest activity as salvage chemotherapy for AGC. The role of UGT1A1 genotype in clinical toxicity requires further evaluation.

Chemotherapy for gastric cancer patients - time for personalization in medicine?

Gastric cancer is one of the most frequent neoplasms. Although the incidence of gastric cancer worldwide has declined, there is still high mortality. Treatment of inoperable disease is under evaluation in clinical trials. In palliative treatment chemotherapy containing cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil is the most widely used. In the past years progress in tumour biology has advanced greatly and has led to development of new molecules aimed at targets important for cancer expansion. There are several randomized trials under targeted therapies for gastric cancer patients. One of them led to approval of trastuzumab. In the current paper the authors illustrate new possibilities in systemic treatment with particular attention to targeted therapy and personalization in medicine.

Targeted therapies for gastric cancer: current status

Gastric cancer represents one of the most common cancers internationally. Unfortunately the majority of patients still present at an advanced stage, and despite advances in diagnostic and treatment strategies, outcomes still remain poor with high mortality rates despite a decline in incidence. Whilst the utility of classical chemotherapy agents has been explored thoroughly (and continues to be investigated, alone or in various combinations), advances have been slow and the efficacy of these agents has reached a plateau. As such, the focus of recent study has shifted toward developing a greater understanding of the molecular biology of carcinogenesis and the cancer cell phenotype, and, in turn, the development of rationally designed drugs that target molecular aberrancies in signal transduction pathways specific to gastric cancer. These targets include circulating growth and angiogenic factors, cell surface receptors, and other molecules that comprise downstream intracellular signalling pathways, including receptor tyrosine kinases. Therapeutic advances in this area significantly lag behind other solid organ malignancies such as breast and colorectal cancer. This article reviews the role of targeted therapies in gastric cancer, including rationale and mechanism of action, current and emerging data, as single-agent therapy or in combination regimens. A recently published randomized phaseIII trial supporting the use of trastuzumab, an anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/neu monoclonal antibody, in a selected population of patients is discussed. Therapies that have been evaluated in phase II trials are also reviewed, as well as promising new therapies currently being investigated in preclinical or phase I studies. There is optimism that targeted therapies, whether as single-agent therapy or in combination with traditional therapies, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery, may yet have an impact on improvement of the overall prognosis of gastric cancer.

Tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1) approved for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer in adults when given in combination with cisplatin: a review comparing it with other fluoropyrimidine-based therapies

S-1 is a combination of three pharmacological compounds, namely tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil potassium. Tegafur is a prodrug of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), an oral fluoropyrimidine, and it has been developed as a replacement for infusional 5-FU therapy. S-1-based chemotherapy and the combination of S-1 and cisplatin are the most reasonable first-line standards for unresectable advanced gastric cancer in Japan. However, the application of S-1 for gastric cancer has been delayed in Western countries. One reason for this delay is that the pharmacokinetics of tegafur is affected by polymorphisms in cytochrome P-450 2A6, and consequently 5-FU concentrations in the plasma are more likely to be elevated in patients from Western countries. Although the dose of S-1 was reduced compared with the approved dose in Japan, a global Phase III study reported similar results regarding overall survival between S-1 plus cisplatin and infusional 5-FU plus cisplatin arms. Significant safety advantages were observed in the S-1 plus cisplatin arm compared with the infusional 5-FU plus cisplatin arm. S-1 plus cisplatin has become acceptable for Western countries, also, as a choice for unresectable advanced gastric cancer. Comparisons with capecitabine and combination of several targeting agents with S-1 are expected in the future.

Eastern Canadian Colorectal Cancer Consensus Conference: setting the limits of resectable disease

The annual Eastern Canadian Colorectal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Montreal, Quebec, October 22-24, 2009. Health care professionals involved in the care of patients with colorectal cancer participated in presentation and discussion sessions for the purposes of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management colorectal cancer, such as the management of hepatic and pulmonary metastases, the role of monoclonal antibodies to the epidermal growth factor receptor, and the benefits and safety of chemotherapy in elderly patients. The management of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours and gastric cancer are also discussed.

Capecitabine for the treatment for advanced gastric cancer: efficacy, safety and ethnicity

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Capecitabine- and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based regimens are widely used for the treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). We aimed to compare the efficacy of the two regimens for both Caucasian and Asian subjects, through a meta-analysis of the available trial evidence.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, ASO, ECCO, ESMO, Wanfang database (Chinese), CNKI (Chinese), Weipu database (Chinese) and J-STAGE (Japanese) using combinations of keywords, including 'capecitabine', '5-fluorouracil', 'chemotherapy', 'stomach neoplasms' and 'gastric cancer'. We identified relevant trial evidence and pooled the results on both efficacy and adverse events.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Capecitabine-based chemotherapy for AGC prolonged the overall survival (OS; 10·7 months vs. 9·5 months, P = 0·03) and enhanced the response rate (RR; OR = 1·32; 95% CI, 1·11-1·57; P = 0·002) over 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Similar trends were observed in both Caucasian and Asian patients. Capecitabine-based regimens were associated with reduced incidence rates of grade 3 or grade 4 leukopenia (OR = 0·42; P = 0·005), stomatitis (OR = 0·43; P = 0·004) and nausea and vomiting (OR = 0·60; P = 0·002) compared with 5-FU-based treatment. Incidence of haematological toxicity such as anaemia (OR = 0·88; P = 0·53), thrombocytopenia (OR = 0·58; P = 0·06), neutropenia (OR = 1·03; P = 0·78) and treatment-related mortality was similar between capecitabine- and 5-FU-based treatments. Higher frequency of grade 3 or grade 4 hand-foot syndrome (HFS; OR 2·45; P = 0·0007) was observed in capecitabine-based combination therapies. Asian patients with AGC receiving capecitabine-based combination therapies showed less frequent occurrence of grade 3 or grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity including nausea and vomiting (OR = 0·24; P = 0·0002) and stomatitis (OR = 0·33; P = 0·02) than those receiving 5-FU-based regimens. These differences in GI toxicity between treatment regimens were not significant in Caucasian subjects. No significant difference was found for the occurrence of anaemia (Caucasian subgroup: OR = 0·97, P = 0·88; Asian subgroup: OR = 0·63, P = 0·29), neutropenia (Caucasian subgroup: OR = 1·16, P = 0·27; Asian subgroup: OR = 0·75, P = 0·21) or thrombocytopenia (Caucasian subgroup: OR = 0·62, P = 0·18; Asian subgroup: OR = 0·51, P = 0·17) between the two ethnic subgroups.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Capecitabine-based chemotherapy strategies show prolonged OS and enhanced ORR compared with traditional 5-FU-based treatments and therefore should be considered as one of the first choices for treatment for AGC. Asian patients also showed less grade 3 or grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity with the capecitabine-based regimens.

VEGF-D correlates with metastatic disease in gastric cancer patients undergoing surgery

BACKGROUND

The present study was designed to evaluate the impact of the tyrosine kinase ligands VEGF-A/C/D, PDGF-A/B on tumor dissemination and survival in gastric cancer. This is the first study analyzing all these parameters in a homogeneous patient population undergoing surgery.

METHODS

The expression pattern of VEGF-A/C/D and PDGF-A/B was analyzed by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in 69 samples of human gastric adenocarcinoma and correlated with tumor stage and survival.

RESULTS

Expression of the ligand VEGF-D significantly correlated with distant metastatic disease (P=0.00001) but not with patient survival. However, VEGF-A inversely correlated with M1 and grading, PDGF-A inversely correlated with pT and pN category. In contrast, VEGF-C and PDGF-B did not have an impact on clinicopathological parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

The ligand VEGF-D, rather than the other ligands or tyrosine kinase receptors analyzed, is associated with progressive disease in gastric cancer patients undergoing surgery. The VEGF-D ligand might be a helpful marker indicating disseminated disease, and targeting VEGF-D may be a potential therapeutic strategy, although limitations imposed by the selected sample population have to be considered critically.

Docetaxel and capecitabine for advanced gastric cancer: investigating dose-dependent efficacy in two patient cohorts

BACKGROUND

No comparisons of different doses of docetaxel-capecitabine in patients with advanced gastric cancer have been performed.

METHODS

Patients with previously untreated metastatic/locally advanced gastro-oesophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma were enrolled in a prospective multicentre phase II trial. Two sequential cohorts received docetaxel 75 mg m(-2) (day 1) plus capecitabine 1000 mg m(-2) twice daily (days 1-14) (cohort I) or docetaxel 60 mg m(-2) (day 1) plus capecitabine 800 mg m(-2) twice daily (days 1-14) (cohort II) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was confirmed overall response rate.

RESULTS

In all, 91 patients were enrolled (cohort I, n=40; cohort II, n=51) and 87 were evaluable for efficacy (n=38, 49, respectively). Overall response rate was 50.0% in cohort I and 23.5% in cohort II (exploratory analysis, P=0.014). Median times to tumour progression and overall survival were 5.6 and 10.1 months in cohort I and 3.7 and 7.2 months in cohort II, respectively. Dose reductions for docetaxel and capecitabine were required in 50.0% and 57.5% of patients in cohort I and 11.8% and 15.7% in cohort II, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Starting treatment with full doses and reducing promptly seems to be the more promisingly effective strategy than starting cautiously with lower doses. Docetaxel/capecitabine 75/2000 mg m(-2) is a manageable, convenient outpatient combination with promising efficacy against advanced gastric cancer.

Systemic therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a clinical practice guideline

QUESTION

What is the optimal chemotherapy regimen in advanced gastric cancer?

PERSPECTIVES

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Despite low incidence rates for gastric cancer in Ontario, the overall prognosis is bleak, with 5-year survival rates of approximately 23% in Canada. Even with the considerable body of research available on chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer, uncertainty remains. There is no recognized standard treatment, and there appears to be geographic variation in practice.

OUTCOMES

Outcomes of interest were overall survival, objective response rate (complete plus partial responses), time to disease progression, adverse effects, and quality of life.

METHODOLOGY

After a systematic review, a practice guideline containing clinical recommendations relevant to patients in Ontario was drafted. The practice guideline was reviewed and approved by the Gastrointestinal Disease Site Group (gi dsg) and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care. External review by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a survey, the results of which were incorporated into the practice guideline.

PRACTICE GUIDELINE

The gi dsg makes the following recommendations: To improve survival, a platinum agent should be included in any combination chemotherapy regimen.Within a combination chemotherapy regimen, oral capecitabine is preferred over intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5fu)-that is, epirubicin-cisplatin-capecitabine is preferred over the prior standard regimen, epirubicin-cisplatin-5fu (ecf).Epirubicin-oxaliplatin-capecitabine (eox) is a reasonable alternative to ecf. The choice between ecf and eox should be based on patient preference.Trastuzumab in combination with cisplatin and a fluoropyrimidine (5fu or oral capecitabine) is recommended for advanced gastric cancer positive for the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (her2/neu).

Chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic gastric cancer: is there a global standard?

Gastric cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer mortality worldwide even though its incidence has been decreasing in recent years. Despite remarkable advancements in chemotherapy, advanced gastric cancer has remained a therapeutic challenge for physicians as well as for patients. While early chemotherapeutic regimens succeeded in showing a modest but definite improvement over best supportive care, no single regimen stood out as superior. Most early trials failed to show survival benefit of combination regimens over single agent fluorouracil, but combination regimens were shown to have better response rates. Based on these data, the Japanese adopted single agent fluorouracil as a reference standard for further investigations, while the rest of the world used a doublet containing fluorouracil and platinum. As more clinical trials were conducted, the Japanese standard evolved into a doublet, while the Western countries adopted triplet combinations. There is no established global standard as yet, but with the introduction of newer targeted agents based on molecular assays and personalized approaches combined with conventional chemotherapy, multiple regimens are likely to emerge as global standards rather than one standard treatment for all.

Capecitabine or infusional 5-fluorouracil for gastroesophageal cancer: a cost-consequence analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer, the phase iii Randomized ECF for Advanced and Locally Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer 2 (real-2) trial demonstrated equivalent clinical efficacy when capecitabine (x) was substituted for 5-fluorouracil (5fu) in the epirubicin-cisplatin-5fu (ecf) regimen. The present analysis compares the direct medical costs associated with both regimens.

METHODS

This cost-consequence analysis of direct medical costs took resource utilization data from the real-2 trial where available. Direct medical costs were derived from the perspective of the Canadian public health care system in 2008 Canadian dollars. Mean cost per patient on each treatment arm was calculated.

RESULTS

Drug costs from start of treatment until first progression, including pre- and post-chemotherapy medications and administration costs, totalled $5,344 for ecx as compared with $3,187 for ecf. Costs for treatment of adverse events were estimated at $2,621 for ecx as compared with $3,397 for ecf. An additional cost of $873 was associated with insertion of an implanted venous access. Total incremental cost of ecx over ecf was $508.

CONCLUSIONS

In advanced gastroesophageal cancer, capecitabine is an attractive alternative to 5fu. Although the drug cost per se is greater, use of capecitabine is associated with decreased consumption of hospital resources. Not only does capecitabine fit with patient preference for oral therapy, it also avoids the inconvenience and complications of central venous access.

Review of docetaxel in the treatment of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is a global health problem accounting for 800,000 cancer related deaths annually. Often diagnosed at an advanced stage, the treatment of gastric cancer with chemotherapy is directed towards palliating cancer related symptoms with only modest improvements in survival. In addition, no regimen has emerged as a globally accepted standard. New therapeutic options are desperately needed for the treatment of gastric cancer. Docetaxel given in combination has recently emerged as a new option for patients with advanced gastric cancer. This review focuses on the treatment of advanced gastric cancer utilizing docetaxel-based therapy and the novel additions of biotherapy to the existing cytotoxic platforms. In addition, the current investigations of docetaxel for the treatment of potentially curable gastric cancer will be discussed.

Current gene expression studies in esophageal carcinoma

Esophageal carcinoma is one of the deadliest cancers with highly aggressive potency, ranking as the sixth most common cancer among males and ninth most common cancer among females globally. Due to metastasis and invasion of surrounding tissues in early stage, the 5-year overall survival rate (14%) of esophageal cancer remains poor, even in comparison with the dismal survival rates (4%) from the 1970s. Numerous genes and proteins with abnormal expression and function involve in the pathogenesis of esophageal cancer, but the concrete process remains unclear. Microarray technique has been applied to investigating esophageal cancer. Many gene expression studies have been undertaken to look at the specific patterns of gene transcript levels in esophageal cancer. Human tissues and cell lines were used in these geneprofiling studies and a very valuable and interesting set of data has resulted from various microarray experiments. These expression studies have provided increased understanding of the complex pathological mechanisms involved in esophageal cancer. The eventual goal of microarray is to discover new markers for therapy and to customize therapy based on an individual tumor genetic composition. This review summarized the current state of gene expression profile studies in esophageal cancer.

Adjuvant chemoradiation for gastric cancer with infusional 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin: a phase I study

OBJECTIVE

This phase I study aimed to determine the maximal tolerated dose of cisplatin administered every 2 weeks with infusional 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and concurrent radiation therapy (RT) in patients after complete resection of gastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients with resected stage IB to IV (M0) gastric adenocarcinoma were treated with 12 weeks of infusional 5FU (200 mg/m(2) daily) and with RT (45 Gy in 25 fractions starting on day 16). Cisplatin was administered in escalating doses (0, 20, 30, and 40 mg/m(2)) in weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7. In the final cohort, patients received an additional dose of cisplatin (40 mg/m(2)) in week 9.

RESULTS

Among the 34 patients [median age: 56 years (range: 31-77 years)] who were assessable for toxicity, 5 experienced dose-limiting toxicities: 1 sepsis (cohort 1), 1 fatigue (cohort 2), 3 upper gastrointestinal toxicity (1 in cohort 2, 2 in cohort 5). Cohort 5 exceeded the maximal tolerated dose. Median follow-up was 2.5 years (range: 0.3-5 years). The 3-year overall and relapse-free survival rates were 86% and 71% respectively; median survival was not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

Cisplatin was well tolerated in combination with infusional 5FU and RT, showing promising activity in the adjuvant treatment of gastric cancer. Infusional 5FU 200 mg/m(2) daily for 12 weeks with cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) in weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7 and with concurrent RT 45 Gy in 25 fractions, starting at day 16, is being explored in a phase II study at our institution.

Targeting key signalling pathways in oesophageal adenocarcinoma: A reality for personalised medicine?

Cancer treatments are rapidly changing. Curative treatment for oesophageal adenocarcinoma currently involves surgery and cytotoxic chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Outcomes for both regimes are generally poor as a result of tumor recurrence. We have reviewed the key signalling pathways associated with oesophageal adenocarcinomas and discussed the recent trials of novel agents that attempt to target these pathways. There are many trials underway with the aim of improving survival in oesophageal cancer. Currently, phase 2 and 3 trials are focused on MAP kinase inhibition, either through inhibition of growth factor receptors or signal transducer proteins. In order to avoid tumor resistance, it appears to be clear that targeted therapy will be needed to combat the multiple signalling pathways that are in operation in oesophageal adenocarcinomas. This may be achievable in the future with the advent of gene signatures and a combinatorial approach.

Systematic review: quality of life after treatment for upper gastrointestinal cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this systematic review is to scrutinize and summarize the design, conduct and reporting standards of articles recently published describing health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes of treatment of upper gastrointestinal cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some 2312 abstracts were published between January and July 2009 and initial elimination of papers reduced this number to 22 articles. Of these, 17 were judged to have robust HRQL methodology, but a further seven were excluded due to a high risk of bias in the study design. Ten articles (four randomized trials) were finally included in the review. Studies in curative treatments for oesophagogastric cancer show that surgery and chemoradiation therapy has a major short-term detrimental effect on HRQL, but recovery occurs within 6 months in long-term survivors but those not achieving a survival benefit report very poor HRQL. In advanced oesophageal cancer, 18 mm self-expandable metal stents and nonstent therapies lead to better short-term HRQL scores than nonexpandable stents and are the recommended standard of care. A small survival advantage and improved HRQL is conferred by adjuvant and palliative gemcitabine chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer.

SUMMARY

This review identified few well-designed studies that also included a robust assessment of HRQL. High-quality trials with reliable HRQL methods are required for outcomes to inform health policy and clinical decision-making.

WITHDRAWN: Interventions for dysphagia in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The majority of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage and palliative treatment is the realistic management option for most patients. The optimal intervention for the palliation of dysphagia in these patients has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically analyse and summarise the efficacy of different interventions used in the palliation of dysphagia in primary oesophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We undertook a search according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL and major conference proceedings up to August 2005. The literature search was re-run in August 2006 and March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with inoperable or unresectable primary oesophageal cancer who underwent palliative treatment. We included rigid plastic intubation, self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, oesophageal bypass surgery, chemical and thermal ablation therapy, either head-to-head or in combination. The primary outcome was dysphagia improvement. Secondary outcomes included recurrent dysphagia, technical success, procedure related mortality, 30-day mortality, adverse effects and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author assessed the eligibility criteria of each study and extracted data regarding outcomes and factors affecting risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 2542 patients from 40 studies. SEMS insertion is safer and more effective than plastic tube insertion. Thermal and chemical ablative therapy provide comparable dysphagia palliation but have an increased requirement for re-interventions and adverse effects. Anti-reflux stents provide comparable dysphagia palliation to conventional metal stents. Some anti-reflux stents might reduce gastro-oesophageal reflux compared to conventional metal stents. Brachytherapy might be a suitable alternative to SEMS in providing a survival advantage and possibly a better quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-expanding metal stent insertion is safe, effective and quicker in palliating dysphagia compared to other modalities. However, high-dose intraluminal brachytherapy is a suitable alternative and might provide additional survival benefit with a better quality of life. Self-expanding metal stent insertion and brachytherapy provide comparable palliation to endoscopic ablative therapy but are preferable due to the reduced requirement for re-interventions. Rigid plastic tube insertion, dilatation alone or in combination with other modalities, chemotherapy alone, combination chemoradiotherapy and bypass surgery are not recommended for palliation of dysphagia due to a high incidence of delayed complications and recurrent dysphagia.

A multicenter phase II trial of single-agent cetuximab in advanced esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is overexpressed in a significant proportion of esophageal and gastric carcinomas. Although previous studies have examined tyrosine kinase inhibitors of EGFR, there remains limited data regarding the role of EGFR-directed monoclonal antibody therapy in these malignancies. We carried out a multi-institutional phase II study of cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody against EGFR, in patients with unresectable or metastatic esophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-five patients with previously treated metastatic esophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma were treated with weekly cetuximab, at an initial dose of 400 mg/m(2) followed by weekly infusions at 250 mg/m(2). Patients were followed for toxicity, treatment response, and survival.

RESULTS

Treatment with cetuximab was well tolerated; no patients were taken off study due to drug-related adverse events. One (3%) partial treatment response was noted. Two (6%) patients had stable disease after 2 months of treatment. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.6 and 3.1 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although well tolerated, cetuximab administered as a single agent had minimal clinical activity in patients with metastatic esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. Ongoing studies of EGFR inhibitors in combination with other agents may define a role for these agents in the treatment of esophageal and gastric cancer.

Safety and efficacy of S-1 monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Although S-1 is effective against advanced gastric cancer (AGC), its efficacy in elderly patients has not yet been investigated sufficiently. We assessed the efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy in elderly patients with AGC.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of the data of 153 patients with unresectable/recurrent gastric adenocarcinoma who received S-1 monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy at our institution. S-1 was administered orally twice daily at the dose of 40 mg/m², on days 1-28, every 6 weeks. We categorized the patients into three groups, the young (≤65 years old), the middle-aged (66-75 years old), and the elderly (≥76 years old); and the drug toxicity, objective responses, progression-free survivals, and overall survivals were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

The incidence of leukopenia of grade 3 or greater in the three groups was 7%, 5%, and 13%, and that of anemia was 9%, 18%, and 27%, respectively. In regard to nonhematological toxicities, the incidence of nausea of grade 3 or greater was 3%, 5%, and 13%; that of fatigue was 5%, 11%, and 20%; and that of anorexia was 5%, 6%, and 27%, respectively. As for the treatment efficacy, the objective response rates, median progressionfree survivals, and overall survivals in the young, middle-aged, and elderly groups were 53%, 46%, and 33%; 7.8, 5.6, and 3.9 months; and 16.9, 17.1; and 7.7 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although S-1 monotherapy showed moderate efficacy in elderly (≥76 years) patients with AGC, patients in this age group showed higher incidences of severe toxicities than the younger patients.

A phase II study of weekly docetaxel and cisplatin plus oral tegafur/uracil and leucovorin as first-line chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer

Background:

Docetaxel plus cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil has become a new standard for treating advanced gastric cancer. However, high rates of severe neutropenia limit its application. Modification of the regimen could be the solution to get similar activity but less myelosuppression.

Methods:

Patients with histologically confirmed, locally advanced, or recurrent/metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma without previous chemotherapy were enrolled. This regimen consisted of docetaxel (Tyxan, TTY, Taipei, Taiwan) 30-min infusion at a dose of 36 mg m⁻², followed by cisplatin 30 mg m⁻² infusion over 1 h on days 1 and 8, and oral tegafur/uracil 300 mg m⁻² per day plus leucovorin 90 mg per day on days 1–14, every 3 weeks. Tumour response was evaluated after every 2 cycles of treatment.

Results:

From August 2007 to March 2009, 45 patients were enrolled. The median age was 56 years (range: 22–75). Among the 40 patients evaluable for tumour response, one achieved a complete response, 22 had partial responses and 11 had stable disease. The overall response rates of the evaluable and intent-to-treat (ITT) populations were 58% (95% CI: 41–74%) and 53% (95% CI: 38–68%), respectively. The disease control rates in these populations were 85% (95% CI: 70–94%) and 82% (95% CI: 68–92%), respectively. In the ITT analysis, the median time to progression and overall survival were 6.8 and 13.9 months, respectively. Major grade 3–4 toxicities were neutropenia (51%), anaemia (22%), diarrhoea (16%), and infections (20%). No patient died of treatment-related toxicities.

Conclusion:

Concurrent weekly docetaxel and cisplatin plus oral tegafur/uracil and leucovorin are effective and well tolerated in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

Phase II study of a triplet regimen of S-1 combined with irinotecan and oxaliplatin in patients with metastatic gastric cancer: clinical and pharmacogenetic results

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of S-1/irinotecan/oxaliplatin (TIROX) in metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) and the association between treatment outcome and uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A polymorphisms.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with previously untreated MGC received S-1 40 mg/m(2) b.i.d. on days 1-14 and irinotecan 150 mg/m(2) plus oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were enrolled. In intent-to-treat analysis, the objective response rate was 75%, including the complete response (CR) rate of 14%. The median time to progression and overall survival was 10.2 and 17.6 months, respectively. Ten (26%) of the 39 patients with primary gastric tumor showed biopsy-confirmed gastric CR. Grade 3/4 neutropenia developed in 66% of patients and grade 3 febrile neutropenia in 16%. The most common grade 3 nonhematologic toxic effects were abdominal pain (18%), anorexia (16%), and diarrhea (14%). UGT1A polymorphisms were associated with significantly higher incidence of grade 4 leukopenia (UGT1A1*6), neutropenia (UGT1A1*6, UGT1A6*2, and UGT1A7*3), grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia (UGT1A1*6), and grade 3 abdominal pain (UGT1A1*6).

CONCLUSIONS

The TIROX regimen induced marked tumor reduction and promising survival with a manageable toxicity profile in MGC patients. UGT1A genotype may be predictive of TIROX toxicity.

Randomized phase II study of sequential docetaxel and irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (leucovorin) in patients with advanced gastric cancer: the GATAC trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma (GC) is yet to be determined. We compared sequential administration of docetaxel and irinotecan, both in combination with infused 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-Fu/Lv), and randomly assigned patients to start with either of the two.

METHODS

Patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic GC and with measurable lesions (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors; RECIST) were randomly assigned to start with docetaxel 45 mg/m(2) (arm T) or irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) (arm C) with bolus/44-h infusion of 5-Fu/Lv (day 1 every 2 weeks). After four courses, there was a prescheduled crossover to the alternative regimen for four additional courses.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were randomized and 78 started treatment. Complete and partial responses were seen in 31 (40%) patients after 8 weeks and in 32 (41%) after 16 weeks, with similar results in both study arms. The median overall survival (OS) was 11.5 and 10.6 months in arms T and C, respectively (P = 0.3). The two schedules were feasible and did not differ in the overall rate of severe adverse events (SAEs).

CONCLUSION

This is the first randomized comparison of two of the newer cytostatic drugs in GC therapy. No differences favoring either arm T or arm C were found with respect to response rate, OS, or toxicity. The median OS of 11 months indicates that sequential administration of the two combinations is effective and is similar to triple combinations. Thus, comparable efficacy to platinum combinations appears to be obtained with newer, less toxic regimens when given sequentially.

Recent advances in chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

Although medical treatment has been shown to improve quality of life and prolong survival, no significant progress has been made in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) within the last two decades. Thus, the choice of optimum standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for AGC remains debatable, and most responses to chemotherapy are partial and of short duration, with a median survival of approximately 7-11 mo and survival at 2 years rarely more than 10%. Recently, remarkable progress in tumor biology has led to the development of new agents that target critical aspects of oncogenic pathways. For AGC, several molecular targeting agents are now under evaluation in international randomized studies, and trastuzumab, an anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody, has shown antitumor activity against HER-2 positive AGC. However, this benefit is limited to only about 20% of patients with AGC (patients with HER-2 positive AGC). Therefore, there remains a critical need for both the development of more effective agents and the identification of predictive and prognostic molecular markers to select those patients who will benefit most from specific chemotherapeutic regimens and targeted therapies.

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: incidence, characteristics, and treatment strategies

The incidence of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) is dramatically increasing in Western countries, while it is not increasing in Eastern countries. Siewert type I tumors are observed less frequently in Eastern countries in comparison to Western countries. On the other hand, other clinicopathological features of AEG, including age, male-to-female ratio, pathological grade, tumor progression, and prognosis, are similar in Western and Eastern countries. Two surgical phase III trials have indicated that AEG type I should be treated surgically as esophageal cancer, while types II and III should be regarded as true gastric cancer. No phase III trials have demonstrated a significant interaction comparing hazard ratios for death between AEG and true gastric cancer in the subset analyses with regard to chemotherapy.

Phase II study of oxaliplatin, UFT, and leucovorin in patients with metastatic gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The present study evaluated the efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin, UFT, and leucovorin in metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients received intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1, followed by oral UFT capsules (350 mg/m(2) per day) and leucovorin tablets (90 mg/day), every 8 h, for 14 days, in a 3-week cycle.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients (61% with > or = 2 metastatic sites), median age of 60 years (range, 39-69 years) were entered. Based on intention-to-treat analysis, one complete response and seven partial responses were found, resulting in an overall response rate (RR) of 35% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16-54), a median time to progression of 4 months (95% CI, 0.5-7.5), and a median overall survival (OS) of 8 months (95% CI, 4.5-11.5). The 1-year survival rate was 26%. Three patients did not complete the first course of 2 weeks; 1 died suddenly on day 16 with fatal lung embolism; 1 had rapid progressive disease and 1 experienced gastric hemorrhage on day 15 - both these patients withdrew. In the 20 patients assessable for toxicity no grade 4 toxicity occurred, grade 3 toxicity consisted of anemia in 1, diarrhea in 2, and neurotoxicity in 3 patients. No hand-foot syndrome (HFS) occurred.

CONCLUSION

Oxaliplatin is an effective drug in gastric cancer, but, as previously reported, its feasibility in combination with capecitabine is hampered due to combined hand-foot-based toxicity. The present phase II study of a combination of oxaliplatin with UFT and leucovorin appears to have efficacy and tolerability comparable to two other drug regimens used in gastric cancer, without the HFS problem.

Matuzumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) compared with epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine alone as first-line treatment in patients with advanced oesophago-gastric cancer: a randomised, multicentre open-label phase II study

BACKGROUND

Clinical data showed promising antitumour activity with feasible tolerability for matuzumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy in untreated advanced oesophago-gastric (OG) cancer. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of matuzumab plus ECX versus ECX alone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised open-label phase II study, 72 patients with metastatic OG cancer were randomly assigned to either 800 mg matuzumab weekly plus epirubicin 50 mg/m², cisplatin 60 mg/m² on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m² daily in a 21-day cycle (ECX) or the same ECX regimen alone. The primary end point was objective response. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), quality of life, safety and tolerability.

RESULTS

Following random assignment, 35 patients (median age 59 years) received ECX/matuzumab and 36 patients (median age 64 years) ECX. The addition of matuzumab to ECX did not improve objective response: 31% for ECX/matuzumab [95% confidence interval (CI) 17-49] compared with 58% for the ECX arm (95% CI 41-74) P = 0.994 (one sided). There was no significant difference in median PFS: 4.8 months (95% CI 2.9-8.1) for ECX/matuzumab versus 7.1 months (95% CI 4.4-8.5) for ECX, or in median OS: 9.4 months (95% CI 7.5-16.2), compared with 12.2 months (95% CI 9.8-13.8 months). Grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicity was observed in 27 and 25 patients in the ECX/matuzumab and ECX groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Matuzumab 800 mg weekly combined with ECX chemotherapy does not increase response or survival for patients with advanced OG cancer. Therefore, ECX/matuzumab should not be examined further in phase III trials.

WITHDRAWN: Chemotherapy for metastatic carcinoma of the esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction

BACKGROUND

More than 50% of patients with esophageal cancer have metastatic disease at presentation. The use of chemotherapy for this patient group is increasing with the intention of local and distant tumor control, improving quality of life and prolongation of survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of a) chemotherapy versus best supportive care or b) different chemotherapy regimes against each other, in metastatic esophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified by searching MEDLINE 1950- November week 3 2008, Central (Cochrane Library 4th Quarter 2008), Embase 1980 - 2008 week 50. We did not confine our search to English language publications. Searches in all databases were updated in February 2005, February 2006 and December 2008.The Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy for identifying randomized trials in MEDLINE, Sensitivity maximising version; Ovid format was combined with the following search terms to identify RCTs in MEDLINE. The MEDLINE search strategy was adapted for use in the other databases searched. Members of the Cochrane UGPD Group, and experts in the field were contacted and asked to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing chemotherapy versus best supportive care, or different chemotherapy regimes against each other in patients with metastatic carcinoma of the esophagus or gastro-esophageal junction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (MYVH/EJK) extracted data and assessed trial quality. Study authors were contacted to obtain subgroup results of patients with metastatic esophageal carcinoma.

MAIN RESULTS

Only two RCTs with a total of 42 participants compared chemotherapy with best supportive care for metastatic esophageal cancer. No survival benefit was shown for chemotherapy treatment in these RCTs. Five RCTs with a total of 1242 participants compared different chemotherapy regimes. Due to variation in patient population and chemotherapy regimes, it was not possible to perform a formal pooled analysis. There was no consistent benefit of any specific chemotherapy regimen.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for well designed, adequately powered, phase III trials comparing chemotherapy versus best supportive care for patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. Chemotherapy agents with promising response rates and tolerable toxicity are cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), paclitaxel and antracyclins. Future trials comparing palliative treatment modalities should assess quality of life with validated quality of life measures.

A case of esophageal adenocarcinoma arising from the ectopic gastric mucosa in the thoracic esophagus

A 75-year old man was detected with a pediculate tumor in the upper esophagus. A biopsy determined that it was an adenocarcinoma. A subtotal esophagectomy with dissection of three-fields of lymph nodes was selected. The pathological study revealed it to be an esophageal adenocarcinoma arising from ectopic gastric mucosa of the fundus of the stomach. His post-operative course was uneventful and without sign of recurrence for 3.5 years.

A phase II study of bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel in locally advanced and metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab has demonstrated antitumor activity in multiple diseases. This phase II study was undertaken to determine the effects of adding bevacizumab to a regimen of docetaxel and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease and a performance status (PS) of 0-1 were eligible for this study. Patients received bevacizumab at 7.5 mg/kg, docetaxel at 70 mg/m(2), and oxaliplatin at 75 mg/m(2) administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

A total of 38 eligible patients (median age 57 years, 45% gastric, 55% PS 0) were enrolled on to the study. Median PFS was 6.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.4-10.5] and median survival 11.1 months (95% CI 8.2-15.3). Complete responses were documented in 2 (5%) patients, partial responses in 14 (37%), and stable disease in 14 (37%). No treatment-related deaths were observed. The most commonly reported grade 3-4 toxicity was neutropenia (34%), and gastrointestinal perforation occurred in three patients (8%).

CONCLUSION

The combination of bevacizumab, docetaxel, and oxaliplatin has promising activity for further evaluation in randomized trials.

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer currently ranks second in global cancer mortality. Most patients are either diagnosed at an advanced stage, or develop a relapse after surgery with curative intent. Apart from supportive care and palliative radiation to localized (e.g. bone) metastasis, systemic chemotherapy is the only treatment option available in this situation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to March 2009, reference lists of studies, and contacted pharmaceutical companies and national and international experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on systemic intravenous chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapies in advanced gastric cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. A third investigator was consulted in case of disagreements. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty five trials, with a total of 5726 patients, have been included in the meta-analysis of overall survival. The comparison of chemotherapy versus best supportive care consistently demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival in favour of the group receiving chemotherapy (hazard ratios (HR) 0.37; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.24 to 0.55, 184 participants). The comparison of combination versus single-agent chemotherapy provides evidence for a survival benefit in favour of combination chemotherapy (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90, 1914 participants). The price of this benefit is increased toxicity as a result of combination chemotherapy. When comparing 5-FU/cisplatin-containing combination therapy regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95, 501 participants) and 5-FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92, 1147 participants) there was a significant survival benefit for regimens including 5-FU, anthracyclines and cisplatin. Both the comparison of irinotecan versus non-irinotecan (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.02, 639 participants) and docetaxel versus non-docetaxel containing regimens (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, 805 participants) show non-significant overall survival benefits in favour of the irinotecan and docetaxel-containing regimens.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy significantly improves survival in comparison to best supportive care. In addition, combination chemotherapy improves survival compared to single-agent 5-FU. All patients should be tested for their HER-2 status and trastuzumab should be added to a standard fluoropyrimidine/cisplatin regimen in patients with HER-2 positive tumours. Two and three-drug regimens including 5-FU, cisplatin, with or without an anthracycline, as well as irinotecan or docetaxel-containing regimens are reasonable treatment options for HER-2 negative patients.

Multicenter phase II study of everolimus in patients with previously treated metastatic gastric cancer

PURPOSE Everolimus, an oral inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, has shown antitumor activity in gastric cancer in preclinical and phase I studies. This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of everolimus in pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced gastric cancer who experienced progression despite prior chemotherapy received everolimus 10 mg orally daily until disease progression or study discontinuation. The primary end point was disease control rate (DCR; ie, complete response, partial response, or stable disease). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Fifty-three patients were assessable (median age, 63 years; 51% and 49% received one or two prior chemotherapy regimens, respectively). Although no complete or partial response was obtained, a decrease in tumor size from baseline was observed in 45% of patients by central review. The DCR was 56.0% (95% CI, 41.3% to 70.0%); median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0 months). At a median follow-up time of 9.6 months, median OS was 10.1 months (95% CI, 6.5 to 12.1 months). Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included anemia, hyponatremia, increased gamma-glutamyltransferase, and lymphopenia. Grade 1 or 2 pneumonitis was reported in eight patients (15.1%). CONCLUSION Everolimus monotherapy resulted in a promising DCR in patients with previously treated advanced gastric cancer. Adverse events are consistent with the reported safety profile of everolimus. These results warrant further evaluation in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Chemotherapy of advanced small-bowel adenocarcinoma: a multicenter AGEO study

BACKGROUND

Small-bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare tumor of poor prognosis. Data on the efficacy of chemotherapy for advanced SBA are scarce.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients with advanced SBA who received frontline chemotherapy from 1996 to 2008 were eligible for this retrospective multicenter study.

RESULTS

Ninety-three consecutive patients were included. In the entire population, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times were 6.6 and 15.1 months, respectively. Median PFS times among patients treated with LV5FU2 (n = 10), FOLFOX (n = 48), FOLFIRI (n = 19) and LV5FU2-cisplatin (n = 16) were 7.7, 6.9, 6.0 and 4.8 months, respectively, while median OS times were 13.5, 17.8, 10.6 and 9.3 months, respectively. In multivariate analysis, World Health Organization performance status (PS) (P < 0.0001) and elevated serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) (P = 0.02) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) (P = 0.03) were the only variables significantly associated with poor OS. In the subgroup of patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, multivariate analysis showed that LV5FU2-cisplatin was associated with poorer PFS (P < 0.0001) and OS (P = 0.02) compared with FOLFOX.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study of chemotherapy in advanced SBA. Baseline PS and CEA and CA 19-9 levels were the main prognostic factors. FOLFOX seems to be the most effective platinum-based chemotherapy regimen.

Docetaxel: its role in current and future treatments for advanced gastric cancer

A globally accepted standard chemotherapy remains undetermined in gastric cancer, but the recent introduction of active "new-generation agents" such as taxanes, irinotecan (CPT-11), oxaliplatin, S-1, and capecitabine, offers hope for markedly improving patient outcomes. Docetaxel, as well as the other new-generation agents, plays a key role in the development of the new-era chemotherapy, and the incorporation of taxanes has provided several regimens, such as docetaxel/cisplatin/5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (DCF), that could become standard treatment. The DCF regimen is now regarded as a standard treatment option in advanced gastric cancer in selected patients in good condition. Many institutions and cooperative groups continue to study a variety of docetaxel-based combinations with "new-generation cytotoxic agents" in various treatment settings, and recent attention has been focused on the incorporation of biological agents, such as cetuximab, bevacizumab, everolimus, and sunitinib, into docetaxel-containing combinations as another innovative approach. The ongoing clinical trials of a number of new regimens will clarify their clinical benefits in gastric cancer treatment. Along with the development of more active docetaxel combination regimens, the identification of predictive biomarkers for each regimen has been intensively studied recently. This review focuses on docetaxel as a key agent in gastric cancer chemotherapy, and discusses the role of this taxane in current and future treatments for advanced gastric cancer.

Recommendations on current approach to gastric cancer

The management of gastric cancer has been updated by the Grupo Español de Tratamiento de Tumores Digestivos (TTD). A multidisciplinary approach is essential in these patients including a precise diagnosis and staging and correct nutritional evaluation. For resectable disease, surgical resection remains the treatment mainstay and both perioperatory chemotherapy and postoperatory chemo-radiotherapy are considered standard complementary treatments. In advanced disease chemotherapy should always be considered. There are different reference schemes (TCF, XC, ECF, EXC) and the therapeutic option has to be individualised. Recently a phase III trial has shown a significant improvement in overall survival when trastuzumab is added to cisplatin-capecitabine or cisplatin-5-fluorouracil in patients with HER2+ advanced gastric cancer. Currently, there are several ongoing clinical trials evaluating the role of other new drugs against cellular targets. It would be desirable to incorporate biomarker studies in these trials in order to identify the best treatment for each patient.

The GYMSSA trial: a prospective randomized trial comparing gastrectomy, metastasectomy plus systemic therapy versus systemic therapy alone

BACKGROUND

The standard of care for metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) is systemic chemotherapy which leads to a median survival of 6-15 months. Survival beyond 3 years is rare. For selected groups of patients with limited MGC, retrospective studies have shown improved overall survival following gastrectomy and metastasectomies including peritoneal stripping with continuous hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion (CHPP), liver resection, and pulmonary resection. Median survival after liver resection for MGC is up to 34 months, with a five year survival rate of 24.5%. Similarly, reported median survival after pulmonary resection of MGC is 21 months with long term survival of greater than 5 years a possibility. Several case reports and small studies have documented evidence of long-term survival in select individuals who undergo CHPP for MGC.

DESIGN

The GYMSSA trial is a prospective randomized trial for patients with MGC. It is designed to compare two therapeutic approaches: gastrectomy with metastasectomy plus systemic chemotherapy (GYMS) versus systemic chemotherapy alone (SA). Systemic therapy will be composed of the FOLFOXIRI regimen. The aim of the study is to evaluate overall survival and potential selection criteria to determine those patients who may benefit from surgery plus systemic therapy. The study will be conducted by the Surgery Branch at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland. Surgeries and followup will be done at the NCI, and chemotherapy will be given by either the local oncologist or the medical oncology branch at NCI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID. NCT00941655.