Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study

S-1 in combination with docetaxel and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced gastro-esophageal adenocarcinoma: two parallel phase 1/2a studies

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel in combination with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is one of several standard chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced gastro-esophageal adenocarcinoma (aGEA) in Europe. To enable outpatient treatment, we evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended dose (RD), dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and safety of docetaxel in combination with oxaliplatin (O) and S-1 (DOS) in Caucasian patients with aGEA.

METHODS

We present final results of two parallel phase 1/2a studies (3 + 3 design). Escalating doses of docetaxel and S-1 with fixed dose O were given for 18 weeks every second week (DOS2w) or every third week (DOS3w) followed by S-1 maintenance therapy.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients (18 in DOS2w and 16 in DOS3w) were enrolled between October 2013 and June 2015. Median age was 65 years (range 49-78). DLT was most often febrile neutropenia. Most common severe non-hematological adverse events were diarrhea (9%) and fatigue (6%). The RD of DOS3w was: docetaxel 50 mg/m², O 100 mg/m² and S-1 25 mg/m² twice daily and of DOS2w was: docetaxel 40 mg/m², O 70 mg/m² and S-1 35 mg/m² twice daily. Overall, response rate was 56%; median progression-free survival was 9.1 months; and median overall survival was 13.2 months in 34 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

At the RD, DOS2w and DOS3w showed an acceptable safety profile in patients with aGEA. Clinical trials ID: NCT-01928524 and EudraCT 2012-005187-10.

Reduced phosphorylation of ribosomal protein S6 is associated with sensitivity to MEK inhibition in gastric cancer cells

Gastric cancer (GC) is characterized by amplifications of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTK) and KRAS, therefore, targeting of the RTK/KRAS downstream pathways could help to broaden the applicability of molecular targeted therapy for GC. We assembled a panel of 48 GC cell lines and screened predictors of responsiveness to inhibition of the RAF/MEK/ERK pathway, one of the RTK/KRAS downstream pathways. We found that GC cells with MET amplification or KRAS mutation, but not amplification, tended to be sensitive to MEK inhibition. However, several cell lines without RTK/KRAS alterations also showed high sensitivity to MEK inhibition. We then focused on the phosphorylation of RTK/KRAS downstream molecules to screen for predictors’ sensitivity to MEK inhibition. We found that the phosphorylation level of mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) downstream molecules, including p70S6K, 4EBP1, and S6, was significantly associated with sensitivity to MEK inhibition in GC cells (P < 0.05), suggesting that mTORC1 activity is related to the sensitivity to MEK inhibition. Furthermore, the change in mTORC1 activity after MEK inhibition was also significantly associated with this sensitivity (P < 0.001). Among the mTORC1 downstream molecules, the change in S6 phosphorylation (pS6) showed the most significant correlation with sensitivity. Using xenograft models derived from highly sensitive and resistant cell lines, we found specific reduction of pS6 in xenografts from highly sensitive cell lines after 6 h of treatment with an MEK inhibitor. Thus, our data suggest the potential clinical applicability of an MEK inhibitor for a proportion of GC patients who could be selected on the basis of pS6 change after MEK inhibition.

Phase II trial of S-1 plus leucovorin in patients with advanced gastric cancer and clinical prediction by S-1 pharmacogenetic pathway

Background

The first one-arm phase II trial aimed to evaluate and predict efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oral leucovorin (S-1/LV) as first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC), using S-1 pharmacogenetic pathway approach.

Patients and methods

A total of 39 patients orally took S-1 at conventional dose and LV simultaneously at a dose of 25 mg twice daily for a week, within a 2-week cycle. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), while the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), time to failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs). Peripheral blood was sampled prospectively for baseline expression of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), orotate phosphoribosyltransferase (OPRT), thymidine phosphorylase (TP), and thymidylate synthase (TS), CYP2A6 gene polymorphisms, and 5-FU pharmacokinetics.

Results

The ORR and DCR were 41.0 and 76.9%. The median PFS, TTF, and OS were 4.13, 3.70, and 11.40 months. Grade 3–4 AEs occurred in only 13 patients, and grade 4 AEs occurred in only 1 of them. High OPRT/TS and peritoneal metastasis (vs. liver metastasis) independently predicted responding. High OPRT/DPD independently predicted grade 3–4 AEs. High AUC_0–24h of 5-FU and metastatic/recurrent sites ≤2 (vs. >3) independently predicted prolonged PFS. Low baseline plasmic DPD independently predicted prolonged OS.

Conclusions

Two-week, oral S-1/LV regimen demonstrated promising efficacy and safety as first-line chemotherapy for AGC.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT02090153

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00280-016-3209-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Many patients have inoperable disease at diagnosis or have recurrent disease after resection with curative intent. Gastric cancer is separated anatomically into true gastric adenocarcinomas and gastro-oesophageal-junction adenocarcinomas, and histologically into diffuse and intestinal types. Gastric cancer should be treated by teams of experts from different disciplines. Surgery is the only curative treatment. For locally advanced disease, adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy is usually implemented in combination with surgery. In metastatic disease, outcomes are poor, with median survival being around 1 year. Targeted therapies, such as trastuzumab, an antibody against HER2 (also known as ERBB2), and the VEGFR-2 antibody ramucirumab, have been introduced. In this Seminar, we present an update of the causes, classification, diagnosis, and treatment of gastric cancer.

Phase I study of irinotecan for previously treated lung cancer patients with the UGT1A1*28 or *6 polymorphism: Results of the Lung Oncology Group in Kyushu (LOGIK1004A)

Background

Various polymorphisms have been detected in the UDP‐glucuronosyltransferase 1A (UGT1A) gene, and UGT1A1*28 and UGT1A1*6 have important effects on the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and the risk of severe toxicities during irinotecan therapy. This study was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of irinotecan chemotherapy according to the UGT1A1 genotype in previously treated lung cancer patients with the UGT1A1*28 or UGT1A1*6 polymorphism.

Methods

The eligibility criteria were as follows: lung cancer patients that had previously been treated with anticancer agents other than irinotecan, possessed the UGT1A1*28 or UGT1A1*6 polymorphism (group A included *28/*28, *6/*6, and *28/*6, and group B included *28/− and *6/−), were aged ≤75 years old, had a performance score of 0–1, and exhibited adequate bone marrow function. The patients were scheduled to receive irinotecan on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, and 36.

Results

Four patients were enrolled in this trial. Two patients were determined to be ineligible. The remaining two patients, who belonged to group B, received an initial irinotecan dose of 60 mg/m², but did not complete the planned treatment because of diarrhea and leukopenia. Thus, in group B patients, 60 mg/m² was considered to be the MTD of irinotecan. The study was terminated in group A because of poor case recruitment.

Conclusions

The MTD of irinotecan for previously treated lung cancer patients that are heterozygous for the UGT1A1*28 or UGT1A1*6 gene polymorphism is 60 mg/m².

A case report of curative distal gastrectomy for stage IV gastric cancer after chemoradiotherapy in a patient with a gastrojejunal gastric bypass

Background

Advanced gastric cancer in the lower third of the stomach often results in stricture of the gastric cavity and digestive symptoms. Gastrojejunostomy has been suggested to improve such symptoms, and the advent of new anticancer agents for gastric cancer has improved the response rate of the disease, which makes it possible to perform R0 gastrectomy in part of patients with stage IV gastric cancer. We experienced a rare case in which a patient with stage IV gastric cancer and cancerous pyloric stenosis was treated with R0 surgery after undergoing a gastrojejunal bypass procedure and multidisciplinary treatment. There have not been any previous reports about cases in which a previous gastrojejunostomy was utilized as a reconstruction route during distal gastrectomy in a patient with gastric cancer that had been treated with chemotherapy and/or CRT.

Case presentation

An 80-year-old female with advanced gastric cancer and pyloric stenosis was admitted to Kagoshima University Hospital. As peritoneal washing cytology produced a positive result, laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (modified Devine procedure) was performed to improve food passage, and S-1 (100 mg/body, days 1–14) plus paclitaxel (120 mg/body, days 1 and 15) was administered. Although the tumor was temporarily reduced in size, an abdominal computed tomography scan obtained after four courses of chemotherapy showed progressive disease. Thus, chemoradiotherapy (56 Gy, S-1: 60 mg/body, CDDP: 5 mg/body, days 1–5) was indicated. Marked tumor shrinkage and negative peritoneal washing cytological results were achieved. Curative gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was performed. We carried out distal gastrectomy and lymph node dissection, and the gastrojejunostomy produced as a gastric bypass in the previous operation was preserved. The patient has not suffered a tumor relapse in 4 years since the surgery.

Conclusions

We surgeons increase a chance to perform R0 gastrectomy for stage IV gastric cancer following intensive chemotherapy and/or CRT. We should choose proper position of gastrojejunostomy in producing alimentary bypass for stage IV gastric cancer patients to facilitate curative surgery.

Therapeutic efficacy and safety of S-1-based combination therapy compare with S-1 monotherapy following gemcitabine failure in pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis

S-1 monotherapy is widely used following gemcitabine failure in pancreatic cancer, especially in East Asia. We performed a meta-analysis to determine whether S-1-based combination therapy had better efficacy and safety compared with S-1 monotherapy. We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane CENTRAL and subsequently included five trials with a total of 690 patients. The combined hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio; the corresponding 95% confidence intervals of progression-free survival, overall survival, and overall response rate; and grade 3–4 adverse events were examined. Five randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated S-1-based combination therapy significantly increased progression-free survival (HR = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67–0.90, p = 0.0009) and overall response rate (HR = 1.74, 95% CI: 1.20–2.52, p = 0.003). Evidence was insufficient to confirm that S-1-based combined regimens improved overall survival (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.75–1.00, p = 0.05). There was no significant difference in adverse events between the two treatment arms. In conclusion, S-1-based combination therapy improved progression-free survival and overall response rate compared to S-1 monotherapy with acceptable toxicity.

Current Development of Anti-Cancer Drug S-1

S-1 is a novel oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, widely used for treating gastric, pancreatic, lung, head, neck and breast carcinomas. It is designed to enhance the clinical utility of an oral fluoropyrimidine and is associated with low gastrointestinal toxicity. S-1 consists of three pharmacological agents (at a molar ratio of 1:0.4:1)-Tegafur (FT), a prodrug of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU), 5-Chloro-2-4-Dihydroxypyridine (CDHP), which inhibits the activity of Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPD) and Oxonic Acid (Oxo), which reduces Gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity of 5-FU. The present article reviews the current development of clinical study of S-1.

A Multicenter Randomized Phase II Study of Docetaxel vs. Docetaxel Plus Cisplatin vs. Docetaxel Plus S-1 as Second-Line Chemotherapy in Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients Who Had Progressed after Cisplatin Plus Either S-1 or Capecitabine

Purpose

This study evaluated the re-challenge of S-1 or cisplatin in combination with docetaxel in metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) that had progressed on a cisplatin plus either S-1 or capecitabine regimen.

Materials and Methods

Patients with progressive disease after first-line cisplatin plus S-1 or capecitabine were randomized to receive 3-week cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m² intravenously (IV) on D1 (D), docetaxel 60 mg/m² IV plus cisplatin 60 mg/m² IV on D1 (DC), or docetaxel 60 mg/m² IV D1 plus oral S-1 30 mg/m² twice a day on D1-14 (DS).

Results

Seventy-two patients were randomized to the D (n=23), DC (n=24), or DS (n=25) group. The confirmed response rate was 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0% to 12.6%), 4.3% (95% CI, 0% to 12.6%), and 8.7% (95% CI, 0% to 20.2%) for the D, DC, and DS groups, respectively. Compared to the D arm, the DS arm had a better progression-free survival (2.7 months vs. 1.3 months, p=0.034) without any deterioration in safety or quality of life, whereas the DC arm had a similar progression-free survival (1.8 months vs. 1.3 months, p=0.804) and poorer overall survival (5.6 months vs. 10.0 months, p=0.035).

Conclusion

A re-challenge with S-1, but not cisplatin, in combination with docetaxel has potential anticancer benefits over docetaxel alone in MGC with progression after prior cisplatin plus S-1 or capecitabine.

Capecitabine for the treatment of gastric cancer

Capecitabine is an orally administered prodrug of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and was designed to specifically affect tumor cells more than normal tissues. Capecitabine is as effective and well tolerated as infusional 5-FU in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Following the REAL-2 and ML17032 studies, capecitabine has replaced infusional 5-FU for treating GC. Capecitabine plus platinum is one of the most widely used regimens for the first-line treatment of AGC, regardless of HER2 status. The adjuvant capecitabine/oxaliplatin regimen is one therapeutic option for resectable gastric cancer, especially after D2 resection. Compared with S-1, capecitabine has been shown to have a similar efficacy, but is associated with fewer ethnic differences than S-1, which accounts for the more widespread usage of capecitabine worldwide.

The Efficacy and Safety of First-line Chemotherapy in Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A globally accepted standard first-line chemotherapy regimen in advanced esophagogastric cancer (AEGC) is not clearly established. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the efficacy and safety of first-line chemotherapy using Network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and conferences were searched until June 2015 for randomized controlled trials that compared regimens containing: fluoropyrimidine (F), platinum (cisplatin [C] and oxaliplatin [Ox]), taxane (T), anthracycline (A), irinotecan (I), or methotrexate (M). Direct and indirect evidence for overall survival (OS) and progression-free-survival (PFS) were combined using random-effects NMA on the hazard ratio (HR) scale and calculated as combined hazard ratios and 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

RESULTS

The NMA incorporated 17 chemotherapy regimens with 37 direct comparisons between regimens for OS (50 studies, n = 10 249) and 29 direct comparisons for PFS (34 studies, n = 7795). Combining direct and indirect effects showed increased efficacy for fluoropyrimidine noncisplatin doublets (F-doublets) over cisplatin doublets (C-doublets): FI vs CF (combined HR = 0.85, 95% CrI = 0.71 to 0.99), FOx vs CF (combined HR = 0.83, 95% CrI = 0.71 to 0.98) in OS and FOx vs CF (combined HR = 0.82, 95% CrI = 0.66 to 0.99) in PFS. Anthracycline-containing triplets (A-triplets: ACF, AFOx, AFM) and TCF triplet showed no benefit over F-doublets in OS and PFS. The triplet FOxT showed increased PFS vs F-doublets FT (combined HR = 0.61, 95% CrI = 0.38 to 0.99), FI (combined HR = 0.62, 95% CrI = 0.38 to 0.99), and FOx (combined HR = 0.67, 95% CrI = 0.44 to 0.99). Increased grade 3 to 4 toxicity was found for CF vs F-doublets, for ACF vs FI for TCF vs CF, and for FOxT vs FOx.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on efficacy and toxicity, F-doublets FOx, FI, and FT are preferred as first-line treatment for AEGC compared with C-doublets, A-triplets, and TCF. FOxT is the most promising triplet.

Efficacy and safety of irinotecan monotherapy as third-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer

PURPOSE

Although irinotecan monotherapy is often used in third-line treatment after the failure of taxanes in Japanese clinical practice, its survival benefit is still unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan monotherapy as third-line treatment.

METHODS

Clinical data from consecutive patients in whom irinotecan had been initiated as third-line treatment between December 2003 and July 2015 in Shizuoka Cancer Center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who were refractory or intolerant to fluoropyrimidine with or without platinum in first-line treatment and subsequent therapy with taxanes were included in this study. Irinotecan was administered at 150 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

The data of 50 patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The overall response rate was 18.4 % (7/38) among the patients with measurable disease. The median progression-free survival time was 66 days, and the median survival time was 180 days from the initiation of irinotecan therapy. The major grade 3 or 4 adverse events including neutropenia, fatigue, and anorexia were observed in 12 (24 %), 8 (16 %), and 7 (14 %), respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Thirteen patients (26 %) required a dose reduction to 120 mg/m(2) or less from the initiation of irinotecan.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that irinotecan as third-line treatment has an anti-tumor effect and is feasible with optimal dose modification for advanced gastric cancer.

Randomised phase III study of S-1 alone versus S-1 plus lentinan for unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer (JFMC36-0701)

BACKGROUND

Lentinan (LNT) is a purified β-1, 3-glucan that augments immune responses. The present study was conducted to assess the efficacy of LNT in combination with S-1 as a first-line treatment for unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive S-1 alone or S-1 plus LNT. The primary end-point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end-points were time-to-treatment failure (TTF), overall response rate (ORR), safety, quality of life (QOL), and biomarker. The percentages of LNT-binding monocytes in peripheral blood prior to treatment were analysed for the biomarker assessment.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-four and 155 patients were randomly assigned to receive S-1 alone or S-1 plus LNT, respectively. The median OS was 13.8 and 9.9 months (P = 0.208), the median TTF was 4.3 and 2.6 months (P < 0.001), the ORR was 22.3% and 18.7% for the S-1 and S-1 plus LNT groups, respectively. The incidences of haematologic and non-haematologic adverse events were similar, and no significant changes in QOL scores were observed during the treatment in both groups. In a subpopulation of patients with LNT-binding monocytes ≥2%, patients who received more than two cycles of chemotherapy showed a longer survival time in the S-1 plus LNT group.

CONCLUSIONS

OS did not improve and TTF was significantly worse in the S-1 plus LNT group as compared with the S-1-only group. This study showed no efficacy of LNT when combined with S-1 treatment in patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ID NUMBER

UMIN 000000574.

The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

S-1 is first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in Asia and is used with increased frequency in Western counties. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of S-1-based therapy compared with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based therapy and S-1-based combination therapy compared with S-1 monotherapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting abstracts, European Society for Medical Oncology meeting abstracts and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized clinical trials until May 2015. Data were extracted for overall survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and grade 1-2 and grade 3-4 adverse events. Stratified OS data for subgroups were extracted.

RESULTS

S-1 was not different from 5-FU (eight studies, n = 2788) in terms of OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.85-1.01] and PFS (HR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.73-1.04), whereas ORR was higher (risk ratio 1.43, 95 % CI 1.05-1.96). There was no subgroup difference in efficacy among Asian and Western patients, but in Western patients S-1 was associated with a lower rate of febrile neutropenia, toxicity-related deaths and grade 3-4 stomatitis and mucositis compared with 5-FU. S-1 showed no difference in efficacy compared with capecitabine (three studies, n = 329), but was associated with a lower rate of grade 3-4 neutropenia and grade 1-2 hand-foot syndrome. S-1-combination therapy was superior to S-1 monotherapy (eight studies, n = 1808) in terms of OS (HR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.65-0.90), PFS (HR 0.68, 95 % CI 0.56-0.82) and ORR (risk ratio 1.20, 95 % CI 1.04-1.38) but was more toxic. Survival benefit of S-1 combination therapy over S-1 monotherapy was most pronounced in patients with non-measurable disease, diffuse-type histological features and peritoneal metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

S-1 is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in both Asian and Western countries.

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy using fluorouracil, epirubicin, and mitomycin C for patients with liver metastases from gastric cancer after treatment failure of systemic S-1 plus cisplatin

BACKGROUND

For patients with liver metastases from gastric cancer (LMGC), combination chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidines and platinum agents has been recognized as standard treatment. However, the prognosis of hepatic progression after first-line treatment failure remains poor. When hepatic progression occurs, hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) chemotherapy may be helpful for preventing disease progression.

PURPOSE

To retrospectively assess the feasibility and efficacy of HAI chemotherapy using 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and mitomycin C (FEM) for patients with LMGC after failure of systemic S-1 plus cisplatin.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed the records of patients who received HAI chemotherapy using FEM for LMGC that progressed during systemic S-1 plus cisplatin treatment while extrahepatic disease was decreased or did not appear. HAI chemotherapy was given as second-line therapy using 5-fluorouracil (330 mg/m(2) weekly), epirubicin (30 or 40 mg/m(2) every 4 weeks), and mitomycin C (2.7 mg/m(2) biweekly).

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were analyzed. Toxicity of HAI chemotherapy was generally mild. The objective response rate was 42.9%, including a complete response rate of 14.3%. Median times to hepatic and extrahepatic progression were 9.2 and 7.4 months, respectively. Of 12 patients with documented progression after HAI chemotherapy, 10 patients (83.3%) received additional treatment, including irinotecan or taxanes. Overall, median survival was 12.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that HAI chemotherapy using FEM is a feasible and effective treatment for patients with LMGC after failure of systemic S-1 plus cisplatin. HAI chemotherapy employed in the second-line setting is useful for achieving long-term disease control of LMGC.

Excessive watering eyes in gastric cancer patients receiving S-1 chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Watering eyes is a common late adverse event associated with S-1 chemotherapy; however, the frequency and predictive factors are not known.

METHODS

This study included 304 consecutive gastric cancer patients treated with adjuvant S-1 monotherapy for 1 year at Shizuoka Cancer Center. We retrospectively evaluated the frequency of watering eyes, and explored other nonhematological adverse events during the first course of S-1 monotherapy which could become predictive factors for watering eyes.

RESULTS

The severest grade of watering eyes during S-1 monotherapy was grade 2 in 41 patients (13.5 %) and grade 3 in 36 patients (11.8 %). The median time to onset of grade 2 and grade 3 watering eyes was 82 days (range 6-344 days) and 249 days (range 84-653 days), respectively, and the median cumulative S-1 dose at the onset of grade 2 and grade 3 watering eyes was 4174 mg/m(2) (range 491-16,095 mg/m(2)) and 10,243 mg/m(2) (range 4943-16,341 mg/m(2)), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that anorexia (odds ratio 2.37, P = 0.008), oral mucositis (odds ratio 3.86, P = 0.0003), skin hyperpigmentation (odds ratio 3.84, P = 0.0001), and rash (odds ratio 3.76, P = 0.01) observed during the first course were significantly associated with watering eyes.

CONCLUSION

The risk of watering eyes was higher in patients who also had anorexia, oral mucositis, skin hyperpigmentation, or rash during first course of S-1 monotherapy than in those without them.

Development of an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function by a prospective pharmacokinetic study

BACKGROUND

S-1 is an oral anticancer drug, containing tegafur (a prodrug of 5-fluorouracil, 5-FU), 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine, and potassium oxonate. As renal dysfunction is known to increase exposure of 5-FU following S-1 administration, the incidence of severe adverse reactions is increased in patients with impaired renal function. However, no reliable information on its dose modification for patients with renal dysfunction has been provided.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective pharmacokinetic study to develop an S-1 dosage formula based on renal function. Sixteen cancer patients with various degrees of renal function received a single dose of S-1 at 40 mg/m(2). A series of blood samples were collected at predefined times within 24 h to assess the plasma concentration profiles of 5-FU, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine, and tegafur. A mathematical model for the relationship between renal function and exposure of 5-FU was constructed by a population pharmacokinetic analysis.

RESULTS

The clearance of 5-FU following S-1 administration was related to body surface area and creatinine clearance in the range 15.9-108.8 mL/min as estimated by the Cockcroft-Gault equation. The S-1 dosage formula was derived as follows:[Formula: see text]where AUC is the area under the concentration-time curve, CLcr is creatinine clearance, and BSA is body surface area. The recommended daily doses of S-1 in Asia and Europe were also proposed as nomograms according to exposure matching to the previously reported area under the concentration-time curve of 5-FU, which confirmed the efficacy and toxicity in pivotal registration studies.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a novel formula for determining the S-1 dosage on the basis of renal function. Further validation is needed to confirm the formula for practical application.

A Prognostic Model in Metastatic or Recurrent Gastric Cancer Patients with Good Performance Status Who Received First-Line Chemotherapy

PURPOSE: Good performance status is widely known as a superior prognostic predictor. However, some patients have large survival differences despite having good performance status that are influenced by certain prognostic factors. The purpose of this study was to explore baseline host- or tumor-related factors and to establish a prognostic model for metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer patients with good performance status who received first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: A total of 310 metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer patients with good performance status who received first-line chemotherapy were enrolled. Prognostic significance was determined using multivariate Cox regression analysis. Incorporating all pretreatment indicators, a prognostic model was established. Overall survival outcomes were compared with different risk groups using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, no previous gastrectomy [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.42; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08-1.85], number of distant metastatic sites (HR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.11-1.96), bone metastasis (HR = 2.20; 95% CI = 1.16–4.18), liver metastasis (HR = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.31-2.39), and an elevated neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (HR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.04-1.79) were independent prognostic factors of overall survival. Patients were categorized into three risk groups according to their risk scores. Median survival times for the low-risk (0 point), intermediate-risk (1-3 points), and high-risk (≥ 4 points) groups were 19.7, 10.7 and 5.1 months, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A prognostic model was developed that could facilitate risk stratification for metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer patients with good performance status who received first-line chemotherapy to help clinicians choose an applicable treatment based on the estimated prognosis.

Can S-1 replace fluorouracil for advanced gastric cancer? A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

It remains to be seen whether S-1 can be a replacement for infusional fluorouracil (5-FU) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of S-1 with 5-FU in AGC.PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched. Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing S-1 with 5-FU for AGC were eligible. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2.Seven trials involving 2443 patients were included. Compared with 5-FU, S-1 showed no significant prolongation of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.83-1.01], P = 0.07) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.89, 95% CI [0.70-1.13], P = 0.35), but longer time to treatment failure (HR = 0.74, 95% CI [0.56-0.97], P = 0.03). The objective response rates were comparable (risk ratio [RR] = 1.36, 95% CI [0.95, 1.96], P = 0.10). Regarding treatment-related deaths and hematological toxicities, there was significant heterogeneity between Asian and non-Asian trials, and subgroup analysis was applied. In Asian patients, there was a significant increase in hematological toxicities such as leukopenia (grade 1-4: RR = 1.22, 95% CI [1.08, 1.37], P = 0.001; grade 3-4: RR = 2.21, 95% CI [1.52, 3.21], P < 0.0001), neutropenia (grade 1-4: RR = 1.29, 95% CI [1.11, 1.48], P = 0.0005; grade 3-4: RR = 1.87, 95% CI [1.11, 3.17], P = 0.02), and thrombocytopenia (grade 1-4: RR = 1.71, 95% CI [1.22, 2.41], P = 0.002) in S-1-containing regimens compared with 5-FU-containing regimens, but without significant difference in treatment-related mortality rate (risk difference [RD] = 0.00, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.01], P = 0.68). In non-Asian patients, S-1-containing regimens were, however, associated with significantly fewer treatment-related deaths (RD = -0.02, 95% CI [-0.05, -0.00], P = 0.04), as well as less all grade 1-4 and grade 3-4 hematological toxicities except anemia. There was no significant heterogeneity in nonhematologic toxicities between Asian and non-Asian trials. Lower incidence of grade 1-4 nausea, diarrhea, mucositis, grade 3-4 mucositis, increased creatinine, and decreased calculated creatinine clearance was observed in S-1-containing regimens.S-1 could not improve OS, but increase some hematological toxicities in Asian patients. Therefore, special attention on hematological toxicities should be paid to Asian patients because S-1 is administered on an outpatient basis.

Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer: a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Fluoropyrimidine-based regimens are the most common treatments in advanced gastric cancer. We used a Bayesian network meta-analysis to identify the optimal fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy by comparing their relative efficacy and safety. We systematically searched databases and extracted data from randomized controlled trials, which compared fluoropyrimidine-based regimens as first-line treatment in AGC. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs). A total of 12 RCTs of 4026 patients were included in our network meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed S-1 and capecitabine had a significant OS benefit over 5-Fu, with hazard ratios of 0.90 (95%CI = 0.81-0.99) and 0.88 (95%CI = 0.80-0.96), respectively. The result also exhibited a trend that S-1 and capecitabine prolonged PFS in contrast to 5-Fu, with hazard ratios of 0.84 (95%CI = 0.66-1.02) and 0.84 (95%CI = 0.65-1.03), respectively. Additionally, all the three fluoropyrimidine-based regimens were similar in terms of ORR and grade 3 or 4 AEs. Compared with regimens based on 5-Fu, regimens based on S-1 or capecitabine demonstrated a significant OS improvement without compromise of AEs as first-line treatment in AGC in Asian population. S-1 and capecitabine can be interchangeable according their different emphasis on AEs.

Clinical Characteristics Associated with Long-term Survival in Metastatic Gastric Cancer after Systemic Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Systemic chemotherapy for patients with metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) is generally palliative, although some patients experience long-term survival after treatment. Thus, we identified clinical characteristics that are associated with long-term survival of patients with MGC after palliative chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 514 MGC patients who received systemic chemotherapy at our institution from 2001 to 2008. To identify clinical predictors of survival beyond 2 years, multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed, and 5-year survival rates were estimated among MGC patients following chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Among 514 patients, 96 (19%) and 16 (3%) survived beyond 2 and 5 years, respectively, and performance status of 0 or 1 (odds ratio [OR]=3.39; p=0.01), previous gastrectomy (OR=1.86; p=0.01), single metastatic site (OR=1.80; p=0.03), and normal alkaline phosphatase levels (OR=2.81; p<0.01) were identified as independent predictors of long-term survival. Of the 16 5-year survivors, six were alive at the end of the study and showed no evidence of disease despite cessation of chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The present data demonstrate distinct clinical characteristics that are associated with long-term survival of MGC patients, and indicated that palliative chemotherapy can be curative in highly selected patients.

Prospective study of the UGT1A1*27 gene polymorphism during irinotecan therapy in patients with lung cancer: Results of Lung Oncology Group in Kyusyu (LOGIK1004B)

Background

Uridine 5′‐diphospho‐glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1*27) is known to impair the effect of UGT in basic research; however, little clinical investigation has been conducted. To evaluate the effect of the UGT1A1*27 polymorphism in irinotecan therapy, we conducted a prospective study.

Methods

Eligibility criteria included: lung cancer patients; scheduled irinotecan therapy doses of single ≥ 80, combination ≥ 50, radiation with single ≥ 50, or radiation with combination ≥ 40 mg/m²; age ≥ 20; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (PS) 0–2. Patients were examined for UGT1A1*28 and *6 polymorphisms and received irinotecan. When the UGT1A1*28 polymorphism was detected, a search for UGT1A1*27 was conducted. Fifty patients were enrolled, with 48 patients determined eligible.

Results

UGT1A1 polymorphisms *28/*28, *6/*6, *28/*6, *28/−, *6/−, −/− observed 0 (0%), 1 (2%), 1 (2%), 7 (15%), 17 (35%) and 22 (46%), respectively. UGT1A1*27 were examined in nine patients including one ineligible patient; however, no polymorphisms were found. The study ceased after interim analysis. In an evaluation of the side effects of irinotecan, patients with UGT1A1*28 and UGT1A1*6 polymorphisms had a higher tendency to experience febrile neutropenia than wild type (25% and 32% vs. 14%). Incidences of grade 3/4 leukopenia and neutropenia were significantly higher in patients with UGT1A1*28 polymorphisms compared with wild type (75% vs. 32%, P = 0.049; 75% vs. 36%, P = 0.039, respectively).

Conclusion

Our prospective study did not locate the UGT1A1*27 polymorphism, suggesting that UGT1A1*27 does not significantly predict severe irinotecan toxicity in cancer patients.

Lauren classification and individualized chemotherapy in gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. During the last 50 years, the histological classification of gastric carcinoma has been largely based on Lauren's criteria, in which gastric cancer is classified into two major histological subtypes, namely intestinal type and diffuse type adenocarcinoma. This classification was introduced in 1965, and remains currently widely accepted and employed, since it constitutes a simple and robust classification approach. The two histological subtypes of gastric cancer proposed by the Lauren classification exhibit a number of distinct clinical and molecular characteristics, including histogenesis, cell differentiation, epidemiology, etiology, carcinogenesis, biological behaviors and prognosis. Gastric cancer exhibits varied sensitivity to chemotherapy drugs and significant heterogeneity; therefore, the disease may be a target for individualized therapy. The Lauren classification may provide the basis for individualized treatment for advanced gastric cancer, which is increasingly gaining attention in the scientific field. However, few studies have investigated individualized treatment that is guided by pathological classification. The aim of the current review is to analyze the two major histological subtypes of gastric cancer, as proposed by the Lauren classification, and to discuss the implications of this for personalized chemotherapy.

Phase II study of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 therapy in patients with metastatic gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Although the docetaxel, 5-fluorouracil, and cisplatin triplet has yielded significant improvements in time to progression, overall survival, and overall response rate, the high incidence of severe adverse events limits the use of the docetaxel, 5-fluorouracil, and cisplatin triplet. To overcome this limitation, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 for the treatment of metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients with pathologically proven unresectable recurrent or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma were assessed for eligibility. Docetaxel at 52.5 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin at 105 mg/m(2) were administered intravenously on day 1, and S-1 was administered orally at 80 mg/m(2) on days 1-14 of every 21-day cycle.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (median age 54.5 years) were enrolled. All patients had metastatic disease. A total of 340 cycles of chemotherapy were administered (median of eight cycles per patient; range 1-36 cycles). Toxicities were evaluated in 43 patients, and the responses were evaluated in 40 patients. Major toxicities included grade 3/4 neutropenia (37.2 %) and leukopenia (27.9 %). The overall response rate was 54.5 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 40.1-68.3 %] in the intention-to-treat population. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 7.6 months (95 % CI 6.2-9.0 months) and 12.0 months (95 % CI 6.9-17.2 months), respectively.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that the docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 combination regimen is effective and relatively well tolerable, and it seems to have potential to be a reasonable therapeutic strategy in patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer.

Mucinous ovarian cancer: A therapeutic review

Mucinous ovarian cancer represents approximately 3% of epithelial ovarian cancers (EOC). Despite this seemingly low prevalence, it remains a diagnostic and therapeutic conundrum that has resulted in numerous attempts to adopt novel strategies in managing this disease. Anecdotally, there has been a prevailing notion that established gold standard systemic regimens should be substituted for those utilised in cancers such as gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies; tumours that share more biological similarities than other EOC subtypes. This review summarises the plethora of small studies which have adopted this philosophy and influenced the design of the multinational GOG142 study, which was ultimately terminated due to poor accrual. To date, there is a paucity of evidence to support delivering 'GI style' chemotherapy for mucinous ovarian cancer over and above carboplatin-paclitaxel doublet therapy. Hence there is an urge to develop studies focused on targeted therapeutic agents driven by refined mutational analysis and conducted within the context of harmonised international collaborations.

Advanced gastric cancer: Current treatment landscape and future perspectives

Gastric cancer currently ranks fourth in cancer-related mortality worldwide. In the western world, it is most often diagnosed at an advanced stage, after becoming metastatic at distant sites. Patients with advanced disease (locally advanced or metastatic) have a somber prognosis, with a median overall survival of 10-12 mo, and palliative chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment. In recent years, novel approaches using inhibition of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) have demonstrated significant improvements in progression-free and overall survival, compared with chemotherapy alone, in first-line treatment of patients with overexpression of HER2. In addition, both second-line chemotherapy and treatment with the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-inhibitor ramucirumab demonstrated significant benefits in terms of overall survival, compared with best supportive care, in randomized studies. Moreover, ramucirumab in combination with chemotherapy demonstrated further significant benefits in terms of progression-free and overall survival, compared with chemotherapy alone, in second-line treatment for patients with metastatic gastric cancer. A recently published molecular classification of gastric cancer is expected to improve patient stratification and selection for clinical trials and provide a roadmap for future drug development. Nevertheless, despite these developments the prognosis of patients with advanced gastric cancer remains poor. In this review we discuss current standards of care and outline major topics of drug development in gastric cancer.

Clinical Benefit and Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment in Patients Treated with Cisplatin/S-1 Versus Cisplatin/5-FU: Secondary End Point Results From the First-Line Advanced Gastric Cancer Study (FLAGS)

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and time to worsening of clinical benefit parameters were evaluated as secondary end points in the phase 3 first-line advanced gastric cancer study (FLAGS) trial of cisplatin/S-1 versus cisplatin/5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

The primary PRO end point was the Trial Outcome Index of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gastric (FACT-Ga). FACT-Ga was completed at the beginning of the first 4 cycles, cycle 6, and then every 3 cycles thereafter. The Chemotherapy Convenience and Satisfaction Questionnaire (CCSQ) was administered before the first 4 cycles; clinical benefit parameters (performance status, weight loss, and anorexia) were assessed at baseline, prior to study drug administration on day 1 of each cycle after cycle 1, and at the end of study treatment.

RESULTS

Compliance to questionnaire fulfillment was more than 80 % through cycle 9. Significantly, fewer patients treated with cisplatin/S-1 reported worsened physical well-being (PWB) scores (45.1 versus 51.7 %, p = 0.044) and experienced significantly longer time to worsening in PWB scores, with a median of 4.5 months (95 % confidence interval (CI), 3.1-5.1) compared to 3.0 months (2.8-4.6) with cisplatin/5-FU (CF) (p = 0.01). Patients receiving cisplatin/S-1 also reported significantly higher best and worst score of PWB as well as CCSQ scores and a longer median time to worsening in clinical benefit parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in secondary end points of PWB, CCSQ scores, and clinical benefit parameters favoring the cisplatin/S-1 arm provide further evidence for considering this combination a standard therapeutic option for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

Phase II and UGT1A1 Polymorphism Study of Two Different Irinotecan Dosages Combined with Cisplatin as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

We investigated the efficacy and safety of biweekly irinotecan and cisplatin (IP) as first-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

Irinotecan 125 mg/m2 on day 1 and cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 2 were administrated every 14 days. UGT1A1*28/*6 and toxicities were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-one eligible patients were enrolled. Fifteen patients, who were defined as the high-dose group, received starting doses of irinotecan 125 mg/m2. Twenty-six patients, who were defined as the low-dose group, received starting doses of irinotecan 80 mg/m2 and cisplatin 50 mg/m2. The response rate was 53.3% in the irinotecan high-dose group and 53.8% in the irinotecan low-dose group. The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (68.3%). No significant difference in grade 3/4 neutropenia was found between patients with the wild-type genotype and those with variant genotypes for UGT1A1*28 or UGT1A1*6.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of biweekly irinotecan 80 mg/m2 and cisplatin 50 mg/m2 was active and tolerable. The role of the UGT1A1 genotype in clinical toxicity of an IP regimen requires further investigation.

Impact of UGT1A1 genotype upon toxicities of combination with low-dose irinotecan plus platinum

AIM

Irinotecan-induced severe toxicities are possibly related to UGT1A1*6 and *28 genotypes. However, the correlation between UGT1A1 polymorphisms and the risk of toxicities induced by low-dose irinotecan plus platinum combination therapy still remains controversial. This prospective observational study aimed to examine the correlation between UGT1A1 genotypes and clinical outcomes of low-dose irinotecan (median 60 mg/m(2) , range 25-115 mg/m(2) ) plus platinum in Japanese patients with solid tumors.

METHODS

Toxicity profiles were compared between UGT1A1 SNP heterozygotes (hetero-group) and patients with homozygous SNP profile (*6/*6, *28/*28 and *6/*28). Logistic regression models were used to identify independent risk factors for these toxicities.

RESULTS

A total of 331 patients were enrolled: 84% with hetero-group and 16% with homo-group. Although the initial irinotecan dose was similar, the dose intensities during the three cycles were significantly lower in the homo-group (P < 0.01). Grade 3/4 hematological toxicities were significantly more frequent in the homo-group. Multivariable analysis identified UGT1A1 genotype (P < 0.01) as an independent factor for grade 4 hematological toxicity in the first treatment cycle.

CONCLUSION

UGT1A1 genotype has a major impact on the increased risk of severe hematological toxicities, even in low-dose irinotecan regimens. UGT1A1 genotypes are useful biomarkers for predicting severe hematological toxicities in patients treated with irinotecan plus platinum analog.

Inter-institutional heterogeneity in outcomes of chemotherapy for metastatic gastric cancer: correlative study in the JCOG9912 phase III trial

BACKGROUND

The standard chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer has been established by several phase III trials. However, few studies have evaluated inter-institutional heterogeneity in randomised trials; such research may assure the generalisability of the results and also the reliability of the study group itself.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG)9912 phase III trial compared irinotecan plus cisplatin and S-1 alone with fluorouracil alone for metastatic gastric cancer, and finally demonstrated the non-inferiority of S-1 alone with respect to overall survival (OS). Mixed effects models were used to evaluate outcomes of 658 patients from 22 hospitals. After adjustment for nine background factors, the heterogeneity in OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and incidences of grade 3-4 adverse events among hospitals was estimated. We also estimated the correlation between outcomes and either hospital volume or medical oncology clinical experience.

RESULTS

A large degree of heterogeneity in median OS was observed for fluorouracil alone (range, 8.3-13.3 months), while the difference in median PFS between hospitals was small (range, 2.4-3.4 months). Although some heterogeneity in the treatment effect of irinotecan plus cisplatin or S-1 alone was observed in OS and PFS, the HRs did not exceed 1.00 in any hospital for either regimen. There was minimal heterogeneity in the incidences of grade 3-4 adverse events. There was a trend towards correlation between greater medical oncology clinical experience and both better OS after fluorouracil alone and a lower HR for OS after irinotecan plus cisplatin, but it was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Large inter-institutional heterogeneity was observed in OS, but not in PFS, after the standard regimen, but there was little heterogeneity in the treatment effects of irinotecan plus cisplatin or S-1 alone, indicating that the final results of the JCOG9912 trial can be generalised to the target population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00142350.

Gastrectomy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced gastric cancer with a single non-curable factor (REGATTA): a phase 3, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy is the standard of care for incurable advanced gastric cancer. Whether the addition of gastrectomy to chemotherapy improves survival for patients with advanced gastric cancer with a single non-curable factor remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the superiority of gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone with respect to overall survival in these patients.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at 44 centres or hospitals in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore. Patients aged 20-75 years with advanced gastric cancer with a single non-curable factor confined to either the liver (H1), peritoneum (P1), or para-aortic lymph nodes (16a1/b2) were randomly assigned (1:1) in each country to chemotherapy alone or gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy by a minimisation method with biased-coin assignment to balance the groups according to institution, clinical nodal status, and non-curable factor. Patients, treating physicians, and individuals who assessed outcomes and analysed data were not masked to treatment assignment. Chemotherapy consisted of oral S-1 80 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21 and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 8 of every 5-week cycle. Gastrectomy was restricted to D1 lymphadenectomy without any resection of metastatic lesions. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with UMIN-CTR, number UMIN000001012.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 4, 2008, and Sept 17, 2013, 175 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy alone (86 patients) or gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy (89 patients). After the first interim analysis on Sept 14, 2013, the predictive probability of overall survival being significantly higher in the gastrectomy plus chemotherapy group than in the chemotherapy alone group at the final analysis was only 13·2%, so the study was closed on the basis of futility. Overall survival at 2 years for all randomly assigned patients was 31·7% (95% CI 21·7-42·2) for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone compared with 25·1% (16·2-34·9) for those assigned to gastrectomy plus chemotherapy. Median overall survival was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·7-19·8) for patients assigned to chemotherapy alone and 14·3 months (11·8-16·3) for those assigned to gastrectomy plus chemotherapy (hazard ratio 1·09, 95% CI 0·78-1·52; one-sided p=0·70). The incidence of the following grade 3 or 4 chemotherapy-associated adverse events was higher in patients assigned to gastrectomy plus chemotherapy than in those assigned to chemotherapy alone: leucopenia (14 patients [18%] vs two [3%]), anorexia (22 [29%] vs nine [12%]), nausea (11 [15%] vs four [5%]), and hyponatraemia (seven [9%] vs four [5%]). One treatment-related death occurred in a patient assigned to chemotherapy alone (sudden cardiopulmonary arrest of unknown cause during the second cycle of chemotherapy) and one occurred in a patient assigned to chemotherapy plus gastrectomy (rapid growth of peritoneal metastasis after discharge 12 days after surgery).

INTERPRETATION

Since gastrectomy followed by chemotherapy did not show any survival benefit compared with chemotherapy alone in advanced gastric cancer with a single non-curable factor, gastrectomy cannot be justified for treatment of patients with these tumours.

FUNDING

The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and the Korean Gastric Cancer Association.

Phase II study of oxaliplatin combined with S-1 and leucovorin (SOL) for Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin are widely used for patients with colorectal cancer. This phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of S-1, oxaliplatin, and leucovorin (SOL) in the treatment of Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Eligible patients with untreated mCRC from four hospitals in China received intravenous oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2)) on day 1, oral S-1 twice daily (80-120 mg per day) on day 1-7, and leucovorin twice daily (50 mg per day) simultaneously with S-1, every 2 weeks.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Forty patients were enrolled in our study. In total, 296 cycles of SOL were administered. The overall response rate was 50.0%. At a median follow-up of 27 months, progression-free survival and overall survival were 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0-10.6 months) and 22.2 months (95% CI 15.1-29.3 months), respectively. The most common grade 3/4 non-hematological adverse events were diarrhea (n = 8, 20.0%), nausea (n = 3, 7.5%), and vomiting (n = 3, 7.5%). The most common grade 3/4 hematological toxicities were thrombocytopenia (n = 3, 7.5%), neutropenia (n = 1, 2.5%), and abnormal alanine transaminase/aspartate transaminase levels (n = 1, 2.5%). There was one treatment-related death.

CONCLUSIONS

The data indicate that the SOL regimen is effective and moderately tolerated in Chinese patients with mCRC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION

ChiCTR-TNRC-100000838.

Meta-analysis supporting noninferiority of oxaliplatin plus S-1 to cisplatin plus S-1 in first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (G-SOX study): indirect comparison with S-1 alone

BACKGROUND

The Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Oxaliplatin plus S-1 with Cisplatin plus S-1 in Chemotherapy-naïve Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer (G-SOX) showed the noninferiority of S-1 (an oral fluoropyrimidine-derivative dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor) plus oxaliplatin combination therapy (SOX) to S-1 plus cisplatin therapy (CS) in overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) from proportional hazard model 0.958, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.803-1.142; noninferiority margin 1.15]. To further clarify the clinical position of SOX in advanced gastric cancer (AGC), a meta-analysis including information from other reported studies was conducted.

METHODS

In addition to G-SOX, Japanese phase III clinical trials including S-1 monotherapy were included in the analyses. Individual patient data for SOX (318 patients) and CS (324 patients) from G-SOX, as well as those for S-1 (160 patients) from the Randomized Phase III Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Irinotecan plus S-1 with S-1 Alone as First-line Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer (GC0301/TOP-002), were available. Published clinical information for S-1 from other studies (total 705 patients) was also collected. A Weibull distribution was assumed for overall survival time, and parameters for SOX, CS, and S-1 were estimated parametrically. Posterior HR distributions were obtained with a Bayesian approach.

RESULTS

The HR of SOX to S-1 was 0.817 (95 % credible interval 0.704-0.939), and the probability of the HR <1.00 was 99.8 %. The HR of CS to S-1 was 0.871 (95 % credible interval; 0.754-0.998), and the probability of the HR <1.00 was 97.6 %. The HR of SOX to CS in G-SOX was 0.942 (95 % credible interval; 0.789-1.117), and the probability of HR <1.15 was 98.9 %.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that SOX was superior to S-1 and noninferior to CS in AGC.

Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients with Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most frequent malignant diseases in the elderly. Systemic chemotherapy showed an improvement of quality of life and survival benefit compared to supportive care alone in patients with advanced GC. Because comorbidities or age-related changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics may lead to higher toxicity, however, many oncologists hesitate to recommend elderly patients to receive chemotherapy.

Available data suggest that elderly patients with GC are able to tolerate and benefit from systemic chemotherapy to the same extent as younger patients. The age alone should not be the only criteria to preclude effective chemotherapy. However, proper patient selection is extremely important to deliver effective treatment safely. A comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a useful method to assess life expectancy and risk of morbidity in older patients and to guide providing optimal treatment. Treatment should be personalized based on the nature of the disease, the life expectancy, the risk of complication, and the patient's preference. Combination chemotherapy can be considered for older patients with metastatic GC who are classified as non-frail patients by CGA. For frail or vulnerable patients, however, monotherapy or only symptomatic treatment may be desirable. Targeted agents seem to be promising treatment options for elderly patients with GC considering their better efficacy and less toxicity.

Randomized multicenter phase III study of a modified docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil regimen compared with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for advanced or locally recurrent gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The V325 study showed that docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) prolonged overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced gastric cancer, but with a high incidence of dose-limiting toxicities. We investigated the efficacy and safety of a modified DCF (mDCF) regimen for Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Untreated advanced gastric cancer patients randomly received docetaxel and cisplatin at 60 mg/m(2) (day 1) followed by fluorouracil at 600 mg/m(2)/day (days 1-5; mDCF regimen) or cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) (day 1) followed by fluorouracil at 600 mg/m(2)/day (days 1-5; CF) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary end points were OS, overall response rate (ORR), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and safety.

RESULTS

In total, 243 patients were randomized to treatment (mDCF regimen 121; CF 122). Compared with CF, the mDCF regimen significantly improved PFS and OS: the median PFS was 7.2 and 4.9 months, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, log-rank P = 0.0008], and the median OS was 10.2 and 8.5 months, respectively (HR = 0.71, P = 0.0319). Additionally, the mDCF regimen improved the parameters used as secondary objectives: the ORR was 48.7% with the mDCF regimen versus 33.9% with CF (P = 0.0244); the median TTF was 3.4 months with the mDCF regimen and 2.4 months with CF (HR = 0.67, P = 0.0027). Grade 3 and grade 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 77.3 % of patients who received the mDCF regimen versus 46.1% of patients who received CF (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The mDCF regimen, compared with CF, significantly prolonged PFS and OS and enhanced ORR of Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer. The mDCF regimen achieved efficacy comparable to that of DCF but with fewer toxicities, which is appropriate for the Chinese population.

Identifying therapeutic targets in gastric cancer: the current status and future direction

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Our basic understanding of gastric cancer biology falls behind that of many other cancer types. Current standard treatment options for gastric cancer have not changed for the last 20 years. Thus, there is an urgent need to establish novel strategies to treat this deadly cancer. Successful clinical trials with Gleevec in CML and gastrointestinal stromal tumors have set up an example for targeted therapy of cancer. In this review, we will summarize major progress in classification, therapeutic options of gastric cancer. We will also discuss molecular mechanisms for drug resistance in gastric cancer. In addition, we will attempt to propose potential future directions in gastric cancer biology and drug targets.

Circulating tumor cell count as a biomarker of a specific gastric cancer subgroup characterized by bone metastasis and/or disseminated intravascular coagulation - an early indicator of chemotherapeutic response

The incidence of gastric cancer coupled with multiple bone metastases, and/or disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), is characterized by the clinical presentation of rapid progression and a poor prognosis, and differs from typical gastric cancers. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are negligible in typical advanced gastric cancers, however, a considerable number of CTCs in the bloodstream may be detected in the subgroup demonstrating multiple bone metastases and/or DIC. The present study analyzed two cases, with the first case regarding a 51-year-old male who exhibited a CTC count of 275 cells/7.5 ml following an initial, ineffective, chemotherapy cycle. The patient underwent a second chemotherapy course that was effective, and the cell count was observed to reduced to 2 cells/7.5 ml. A decreased CTC count was first confirmed on day 16 following treatment. During the chemoresistant phase, the CTC count was observed to increase again. The second case presented by the current study describes a 59-year-old female who exhibited a CTC count of 235 cells/7.5 ml prior to chemotherapy. This subsequently decreased to 7 cells/7.5 ml following an effective course of chemotherapy. Notably, the CTC count increased alongside disease progression in this case. Within the rare subgroup of gastric cancer patients with multiple bone metastases and/or DIC, CTC count may serve as an early biomarker allowing the evaluation of therapeutic efficacy. However, due to the aggressive nature of this type of cancer, imaging analysis is not recommended as it may typically take several months to complete.

Impact of the availability of active cytotoxic agents on the survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer

Several cytotoxic agents, including fluoropyrimidines, platinums, taxanes and irinotecan, are effective in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, the effect of the availability of cytotoxic agents on survival has not yet been evaluated. Therefore, the present study assessed the impact of the availability of active cytotoxic agents on the survival of patients with AGC. The records of 216 patients with newly diagnosed AGC that were treated with palliative chemotherapy between March 2002 and November 2012 at Chungbuk National University Hospital were reviewed. For the present study, the patients were divided according to the availability of active cytotoxic agents over the course of treatment: Group 1 received fluoropyrimidine and platinum; group 2 received fluoropyrimidine, platinum and taxane or irinotecan; and group 3 received fluoropyrimidine, platinum, taxane and irinotecan. The median overall survival times for groups 1, 2 and 3 were 6.3, 9.9 and 14.3 months, respectively (P<0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status and the availability of active cytotoxic agents were independent prognostic factors, as the hazard ratios for mortality were 3.25 for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2-3 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.99-5.30; P<0.0001], 0.58 for patients in group 2 (95% CI, 0.42-0.80; P=0.0009), and 0.40 for patients in group 3 (95% CI, 0.28-0.58; P<0.0001). The present study reveals that the availability of active cytotoxic agents is associated with an improved survival time in patients with AGC.

Long-term survival of a patient with small cell carcinoma of the stomach with metachronous lung metastases treated by multimodal therapy: a case report

A 69-year-old man was referred to our institution for treatment of gastric cancer. Type 2 gastric cancer was found on the anterior wall of the lower body of the stomach.The patient underwent distal gastrectomy, D2 lymph node dissection, and Roux-en-Y reconstruction with curative resection. The tumor was diagnosed as a small cell carcinoma of the stomach. Recurrence occurred in the lung after surgery. The patient underwent several chemoradiation therapy regimens, including cisplatin + irinotecan + radiation, S-1 + paclitaxel, amrubicin, carboplatin + etoposide, nogitecan, and docetaxel for lung metastases and radiation for brain and bone metastases for 43 months. He finally died of brain metastases 74 months after surgery (47 months after recognition of the lung metastases). Long continuous multimodal treatment including surgery, regimens for small cell lung cancer, S-1, taxanes, and radiation was thought to prolong the survival of this man with small cell carcinoma of the stomach.

S-1 plus leucovorin versus S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin versus S-1 plus cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Although leucovorin enhances the efficacy of fluorouracil, the anti-tumour activity of S-1 and leucovorin and their combination with oxaliplatin for patients with advanced gastric cancer is unknown. We compared the activity and safety of S-1 plus leucovorin, S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin, and S-1 plus cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial, we recruited chemotherapy-naive patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer with measurable lesions aged 20 years or older from 25 general hospitals and specialist centres in Japan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally to receive S-1 plus leucovorin (S-1 40-60 mg orally plus oral leucovorin 25 mg twice a day for 1 week, every 2 weeks), S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin (S-1 plus leucovorin and intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1, every 2 weeks), or S-1 plus cisplatin (S-1 40-60 mg orally twice a day for 3 weeks, plus intravenous cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 8, every 5 weeks). Randomisation was done with the minimisation method using performance status (0 vs 1) and tumour stage (stage IV vs recurrent) as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was independently reviewed overall response in the full analysis set. This trial is registered with Japic CTI, number 111635.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 20, 2011, and Dec 17, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 145 patients: 49 patients were assigned to S-1 plus leucovorin, 47 to S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin, and 49 to S-1 plus cisplatin. An objective response assessed by the independent review committee was achieved in 20 (43% [95% CI 28·3-57·8]) of the 47 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin group, 31 (66% [50·7-79·1]) of the 47 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin group, and 22 (46% [31·4-60·8]) of the 48 patients in the S-1 plus cisplatin group (Fisher's exact test, p=0·84 for S-1 plus leucovorin vs S-1 plus cisplatin, p=0·063 for S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin vs S-1 plus cisplatin, and p=0·038 for S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin vs S-1 plus leucovorin). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (three [6%] of 48 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin group vs 12 [26%] of 47 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin group vs 17 [35%] of 49 patients in the S-1 plus cisplatin group), decreased appetite (six [13%] vs 14 [30%] vs 12 [24%]), anaemia (five [10%] vs seven [15%] vs 13 [27%]), and hyponatraemia (two [4%] vs two [4%] vs nine [18%]).

INTERPRETATION

S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin was more active than S-1 plus leucovorin or S-1 plus cisplatin with acceptable toxic effects for patients with advanced gastric cancer. A phase 3 trial comparing S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin with S-1 plus cisplatin is underway.

FUNDING

Taiho Pharmaceutical.

Recent aspects for disseminated carcinomatosis of the bone marrow associated with gastric cancer: What has been done for the past, and what will be needed in future?

Disseminated carcinomatosis of the bone marrow is characterized by widespread bone metastasis (bone marrow infiltration) from solid tumors with hematological disorders coexisted. This disease is frequently complicated with gastric cancer among solid tumors although its incidence is very rare. In recent years, technological innovations in diagnosis and treatment for cancer have remarkably improved, which made survival rates of various cancers prolonged. Prognosis of disseminated carcinomatosis of the bone marrow associated with gastric cancer, however, is still poor (less than a year), possibly because this disease has not been given attention due to low incidence. In this review, I summarize the results obtained for the past, and propose ways to improve the prognosis of this disease.

S-1 combined with cisplatin versus cisplatin alone for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a pilot randomized-controlled trial

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of S-1 combined with cisplatin (SC) over cisplatin alone (C) for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer in China. Between July 2009 and June 2011, 72 eligible patients with advanced gastric cancer were selected and divided randomly into two groups. Thirty-six patients received SC, with S-1 on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle and cisplatin (60 mg/m on day 1) every 4 weeks for two cycles. The other 36 patients were administered only cisplatin (in the same manner as SC). The primary outcome was overall survival. The secondary outcomes were progression-free survival and adverse events. The 2-year overall response rate was 51.5 and 42.3% for the SC and C groups, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant, whereas the median overall survival was 9.4 months (range, 1.9-24.4 months) and 7.6 months (range, 1.7-21.4 months), respectively (P=0.039). The median progression-free survival was 7.7 months for SC (range, 1.8-19.4 months), whereas it was 6.5 months (range, 1.5-16.4 months) for C (P=0.047). The toxicity profile was similar in both groups. In summary, we have shown that S-1 combined with cisplatin is more effective, with acceptable toxicity in comparison with cisplatin alone in Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer. Chinese Clinical Trials Register: ChiCTR-TRC-13003993.

S-1-based regimens and the risk of oral and gastrointestinal mucosal injury: a meta-analysis with comparison to other fluoropyrimidines

BACKGROUND

We performed a meta-analysis of the risk of oral and gastrointestinal (GI) mucosal injury associated with S-1-based regimens.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Randomized phase II and III trials of patients with solid tumors on S-1; describing events of all-grade and high-grade stomatitis and diarrhea constituted the eligible studies.

RESULTS

After exclusion of ineligible studies, a total of 26 clinical trials were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. The odds ratio (OR) of all-grade and high-grade stomatitis for S-1 vs. non-fluoropyrimidine controls was 4.39 [95% CI: 1.05, 18.37; p = 0.04] and 5.64 [95% CI: 1.46, 21.77; p = 0.01], respectively; while the OR of all-grade and high-grade stomatitis for S-1 vs. infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) control was -1.01 [95% CI: 0.22, 4.63; p = 0.99] and 0.32 [95% CI: 0.20, 0.49; p < 0.00001], respectively. The OR of all-grade and high-grade diarrhea for S-1 vs. non-fluoropyrimidine controls was 2.48 [95% CI: 2.12, 2.90; p < 0.00001] and 1.95 [95% CI: 1.29, 2.96; p = 0.002], respectively; while the OR of all-grade and high-grade diarrhea for S-1 vs. infusional 5-FU control was -1.03 [95% CI: 0.87, 1.22; p = 0.76] and 2.52 [95% CI: 1.80, 3.52; p < 0.00001], respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to non-fluoropyrimidine control, patients treated with S-1-based regimens have an increased risk of all-grade and high-grade stomatitis and diarrhea; while on the other hand, patients treated with infusional 5-FU have a greater risk of high-grade stomatitis and diarrhea compared to patients treated with S-1-based regimens.

Clinical utility of ramucirumab in advanced gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is currently the third most common cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Prognosis remains poor with most patients presenting with advanced or metastatic disease. A better understanding of angiogenesis has led to the investigation of drugs that inhibit the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway including anti-VEGF antibody therapy (eg, bevacizumab), inhibitors of angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinases (eg, sunitinib, sorafenib, apatinib, regorafenib), and inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs) (eg, ramucirumab). Ramucirumab, a VEGFR-2 inhibitor, is the first anti-angiogenic agent approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in the treatment of advanced gastric cancers. This review will focus on the clinical utility and potential use of ramucirumab in advanced gastric cancer.

Histological and molecular classification of gastric cancer and personalized therapy

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignancies of the digestive system, and the majority of gastric cancer patients have already had advanced disease at diagnosis. Although rapid progress has been made in medical diagnostic equipment, surgical techniques, chemotherapy drugs and targeted therapy, the prognosis of advanced gastric cancer is still poor. Gastric cancer still has the second highest mortality rate among all cancers and is highly heterogeneous in terms of biology and genetics. The existing pathological typing system for gastric cancer cannot well evaluate prognosis and guide treatment. This paper aims to analyze and discuss the relationship between different histological and molecular classification methods and susceptibility to drugs in order to seek a suitable pathological and molecular typing method to guide the personalized therapy of this malignancy.

Advancing pharmacological treatment options for advanced gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Improvement of conventional chemotherapy has been modest in the past decades.

AREAS COVERED

We review recent important studies of metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer. For human epidermal growth factor receptors 2 (HER2) negative cancer, standard treatments are combinations of fluoropyrimidine and platinum with or without epirubicin or docetaxel in first-line therapy. Controversy exists regarding the use of triplet chemotherapies due to their toxicity. For HER2 positive cancer, standard treatments are combinations of fluoropyrimidine and cisplatin with trastuzumab. As second- or third-line treatment, taxanes or irinotecan prolonged survival compared with best supportive care alone, but the extension of overall survival was only 1 - 2 months. A recent study demonstrated that ramucirumab plus paclitaxel improved survival as a second-line therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Most trials have failed to demonstrate a benefit of targeted agents. It is important to identify predictive biomarkers to enrich an appropriate patient population for targeted agents such as HER2 status for trastuzumab.