Outcomes of multiple salvage chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: implications for clinical practice and trial design

Comparison of adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) versus S-1 after gastrectomy: a population-based cohort study using a nationwide claims database

Although both capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and S-1 are accepted as adjuvant chemotherapy following gastrectomy for gastric cancer, the better option between the two is still controversial. We conducted a retrospective nationwide cohort study using data from the National Health Insurance Service of Korea. We included patients who underwent gastrectomy for a primary diagnosis of gastric cancer between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018. The study compared the survival outcomes of patients who received postoperative chemotherapy based on S-1 (Arm S) vs. CAPOX (Arm C), as well as other relevant clinical variables such as comorbidity and completion of planned treatment. A total of 6602 patients were included in the analysis, with 4199 in Arm S and 2403 in Arm C. After propensity score matching, the final study population consisted of 2067 patients in each arm. Arm C showed statistically inferior 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates compared to Arm S (84.0% vs. 90.0%; p < 0.0001; and 78.4% vs. 86.1%; p < 0.0001). Age (65 ≥ vs. < 65) and the incomplete planned treatment also had a significant negative effect on both OS and DFS. In the multivariable analysis, Arm C still showed worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.609; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.339-1.934; p < 0.0001) and DFS (HR, 1.552; 95% CI 1.333-1.807; p < 0.0001) than Arm S. Both S-1 and CAPOX showed excellent efficacy, but this nationwide cohort study suggests that S-1 may be a better option in certain clinical situations.

Third- and later-line treatment in advanced or metastatic gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of third-line (TLT) and salvage treatment (ST) in advanced or metastatic gastric cancer. Materials & methods: Eligible studies included randomized clinical trials assessing TLT and ST versus placebo or best supportive care. Outcomes of interest included: overall survival, objective response rate and disease control rate in TLT; progression-free survival in ST; grade 3-4 adverse events in ST. Results: The use of TLT and ST was superior to placebo or best supportive care in terms of prolonging overall survival and progression-free survival. Hematological toxicities were more frequent in ST. Conclusion: TLT and ST are considerable and tolerable treatment options for patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer. Given the substantial heterogeneities affecting the efficacy analyses, these results have to be interpreted cautiously.

The role of surgical resection before palliative chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer

The role of palliative surgical resection in recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer is still controversial. A retrospective review was conducted on 689 patients who received palliative chemotherapy for recurrent (n = 307) or primary metastatic (n = 382) gastric cancer. Among 131 patients (89 primary metastatic and 42 recurrent) with surgical resection before chemotherpay, 75 underwent gastrectomy, 42 metastasectomy, and 14 gastrectomy with metastasectomy. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent surgical resection was significantly longer than that of patients who received chemotherapy alone (18 vs. 9 months, p < 0.0001). The OS benefit of surgical resection was consistent across subgroups. In multivariate analysis, surgical resection was independently associated with favorable OS (hazard ratio = 0.42, p < 0.0001). Moreover, patients with surgical resection showed favorable OS both in univariate (p < 0.0001) and multivariate (p < 0.0001) analysis even after propensity score matching. In addition, the median OS of patients who underwent gross complete resection (n = 54) was significantly longer than that of patients who underwent incomplete resection (n = 77) (30 vs. 15 months, p = 0.002). The present study suggests that judicious use of surgical resection before chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer patients may result in a favorable outcome, especially when complete resection is achievable.

The role of third-line chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer: A cohort study with propensity score matching analysis

In recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer, second-line chemotherapy is generally recommended in current guidelines. Although third-line therapy is often performed in daily practice in some countries, there are only a few reports about its benefits.A retrospective review was conducted on 682 patients who underwent at least first-line chemotherapy for recurrent (n = 297) or primary metastatic (n = 385) disease. Clinicopathological characteristics and overall survival (OS) were analyzed according to lines of chemotherapy.One hundred sixty-seven patients (24.5%) underwent third- or further-line therapy. Third- or further-line therapy was frequently performed in patients with young age (<70) (P < .0001), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0 or 1 (P < .0001), surgical resection before first-line therapy (P = .007), and first-line combination regimen (P = .001). The median OS for all patients after the initiation of first-line therapy was 10 months. The median OS of patients who received third- or further-line therapy was significantly longer than that of patients who received second- or lesser-line therapy (18 vs 8 months, P < .0001). The multivariate analysis revealed that third- or further-line therapy was independently associated with favorable OS (hazard ratio = 0.58, P < .0001). Moreover, patients who received third- or further-line therapy demonstrated better OS both in univariate (P = .002) and multivariate (P < .0001) analysis even after propensity score matching using baseline characteristics. The median OS after the start of third-line chemotherapy was 6 months. In addition, ECOG PS 0 or 1 at the initiation of third-line therapy (P < .0001) and surgical resection (P = .009) were independently associated with longer OS after third-line therapy.The current study suggests that third-line therapy could be recommended for recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer patients with good PS after progression from second-line chemotherapy in clinical practice.

5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as a third-line chemotherapy treatment in metastatic gastric cancer, after failure of fluoropyrimidine, platinum, anthracycline, and taxane

Studies on the effects of third-line chemotherapy (CT) in advanced gastric cancer (GC) patients are still scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the modified 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (mFOLFIRI) regimen as a third-line CT in metastatic GC patients, after failure of fluoropyrimidine, platinum, anthracycline, and taxane. After failure of first- and second-line therapies, 42 patients received third-line FOLFIRI (180 mg/m² irinotecan and 400 mg/m² leucovorin administered concomitantly as a 90-minute intravenous (IV) infusion on day 1, followed by a 400 mg/m² 5-fluorouracil IV bolus then 2600 mg/m² continuous infusion over 46 hours), between January 2009 and December 2015. FOLFIRI was administered for a median of 6 cycles (range 4-12 cycles). Eight patients achieved partial response, while 13 patients showed stable disease, resulting in the overall response rate (ORR) of 19% and disease control rate (DCR) of 50%. The most frequent grade 3-4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities were neutropenia (14.2%) and diarrhea (7.1%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the start of third-line CT were 3.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-4.5) and 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.6-7.9), respectively. According to the multivariate analysis, two factors were independently predictive of the poor OS: >2 regions of metastasis (relative risk [RR], 2.6; 95% CI, 1.3-5.4) and a high level of carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA] (RR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.6-7.4). In conclusion, FOLFIRI was well tolerated as third-line CT and showed promising PFS and OS in advanced GC patients, after failure of fluoropyrimidine, platinum, anthracycline, and taxane.

Palliative chemotherapy and targeted therapies for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer

BACKGROUND

Almost half of people with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer have metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. Chemotherapy and targeted therapies are increasingly used with a palliative intent to control tumor growth, improve quality of life, and prolong survival. To date, and with the exception of ramucirumab, evidence for the efficacy of palliative treatments for esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of cytostatic or targeted therapy for treating esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer with palliative intent.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Web of Science, PubMed Publisher, Google Scholar, and trial registries up to 13 May 2015, and we handsearched the reference lists of studies. We did not restrict the search to publications in English. Additional searches were run in September 2017 prior to publication, and they are listed in the 'Studies awaiting assessment' section.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy versus best supportive care or control in people with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the quality and risk of bias of eligible studies according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We calculated pooled estimates of effect using an inverse variance random-effects model for meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 41 RCTs with 11,853 participants for inclusion in the review as well as 49 ongoing studies. For the main comparison of adding a cytostatic and/or targeted agent to a control arm, we included 11 studies with 1347 participants. This analysis demonstrated an increase in overall survival in favor of the arm with an additional cytostatic or targeted therapeutic agent with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 0.84, high-quality evidence). The median increased survival time was one month. Five studies in 750 participants contributed data to the comparison of palliative therapy versus best supportive care. We found a benefit in overall survival in favor of the group receiving palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy compared to best supportive care (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92, high-quality evidence). Subcomparisons including only people receiving second-line therapies, chemotherapies, targeted therapies, adenocarcinomas, and squamous cell carcinomas all showed a similar benefit. The only individual agent that more than one study found to improve both overall survival and progression-free survival was ramucirumab. Palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy increased the frequency of grade 3 or higher treatment-related toxicity. However, treatment-related deaths did not occur more frequently. Quality of life often improved in the arm with an additional agent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

People who receive more chemotherapeutic or targeted therapeutic agents have an increased overall survival compared to people who receive less. These agents, administered as both first-line or second-line treatments, also led to better overall survival than best supportive care. With the exception of ramucirumab, it remains unclear which other individual agents cause the survival benefit. Although treatment-associated toxicities of grade 3 or more occurred more frequently in arms with an additional chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent, there is no evidence that palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy decrease quality of life. Based on this meta-analysis, palliative chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy can be considered standard care for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma.

Irinotecan monotherapy as third-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer refractory to fluoropyrimidines, platinum, and taxanes

BACKGROUND

Because standard chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer consists of oral fluoropyrimidines plus platinum as first-line therapy, with paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as the second line, irinotecan is usually positioned as third-line chemotherapy in clinical practice in Japan.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of irinotecan as third-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer in patients refractory or intolerant to fluoropyrimidines, platinum, and taxanes.

RESULTS

Between February 2008 and December 2013, 52 patients received third-line irinotecan monotherapy. Among the 32 patients with measurable lesions, 1 patient achieved a confirmed partial response and 6 patients had stable disease. The overall response rate was 3% and the disease control rate was 22%. Median progression-free survival was 2.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.8-2.8] and median overall survival was 4.0 months (95% CI, 2.6-5.3). The most common adverse events of grade 3 severity or higher were neutropenia (27%), febrile neutropenia (12%), anorexia (12%), and diarrhea (6%). Although no treatment-related deaths occurred, 2 patients (4%) died of disease progression within 30 days after the last administration of irinotecan.

CONCLUSION

Irinotecan monotherapy appears to be tolerated but was shown to have modest activity as third-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant chemotherapies in patients presenting with gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy

Background

To analyze and compare the economic outcomes of adjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (referred to as the XELOX strategy) and of S-1 (the S-1 strategy) for gastric cancer patients after D2 gastrectomy.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime disease course associated with stage II or III gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy. The lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), associated costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. The clinical data were derived from the results of pilot studies. Direct costs were estimated from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, and the utility data were measured from end-point observations of Chinese patients. Sensitivity analyses were used to explore the impact of uncertainty on the model’s outcomes.

Results

The combined adjuvant chemotherapy strategy with XELOX yielded the greatest increase in QALYs over the course of the disease (8.1 QALYs compared with 7.8 QALYs for the S-1 strategy and 6.2 for surgery alone). The incremental cost per QALY gained using the XELOX strategy was significantly lower than that for the S-1 strategy ($3,502 vs. $6,837, respectively). The results were sensitive to the costs of oxaliplatin and the hazard ratio of relapse-free survival.

Conclusion

The observations reported herein suggest that adjuvant therapy with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin is a highly cost-effective strategy and more favorable treatment option than the S-1 strategy in patients with stage II or III gastric cancer who have undergone D2 gastrectomy.

Thymidylate synthase genotype-directed chemotherapy for patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers

BACKGROUND

Retrospective studies indicate associations between TSER (thymidylate synthase enhancer region) genotypes and clinical outcomes in patients receiving 5-FU based chemotherapy, but well-controlled prospective validation has been lacking.

METHODS

In this phase II study (NCT00515216 registered through ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00515216), patients with "good risk" TSER genotypes (at least one TSER*2 allele) were treated with FOLFOX chemotherapy to determine whether prospective patient selection can improve overall response rates (ORR) in patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers, compared with historical outcomes in unselected patients (estimated 43%).

RESULTS

The ORR in genotype-selected patients was 39.1% (9 partial responses out of 23 evaluable patients, 95% CI, 22.2 to 59.2), not achieving the primary objective of improving ORR. An encouraging disease control rate (DCR, consisting of partial responses and stable diseases) of 95.7% was noted and patients with homozygous TSER*2 genotype showed better tumor response.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first prospective, multi-institutional study in patients with gastric or GEJ cancers, selecting patients with at least one TSER*2 allele did not improve the ORR but led to an encouraging DCR. Further studies are needed to investigate the utility of selecting patients homozygous for the TSER*2 allele and additional genomic markers in improving clinical outcomes for patients with gastric and GEJ cancers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00515216.

Third-line docetaxel chemotherapy for recurrent and metastatic gastric cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To determine the efficacy and toxicity of docetaxel as a third-line therapy for patients with relapsed gastric cancer who have undergone modified oxaliplatin-fluorouracil (m-FOLFOX)-4 and modified irinotecan-fluorouracil (m-FOLFIRI) regimens.

METHODS

We analyzed 33 patients who had been histologically diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the stomach and who had progressed after m-FOLFOX-4 and m-FOLFIRI regimens. Patients were treated with cycles of 75 mg/m(2) docetaxel on day 1 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 56.0 years (range, 31.0 to 74.0), and 73% of the patients (24/33) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. All patients were evaluated in terms of tumor response: five (15%), nine (27%), and 19 (58%) patients experienced a partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease, respectively. The median time to progression was 2.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63 to 2.58), and overall survival was 4.7 months (95% CI, 3.20 to 6.20), from the start of the docetaxel regimen. Assessing patients' toxicity profiles, the median number of cycles was 2.0 (range, 1.0 to 12.0). The major hematologic toxicities included grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (19/33, 58%), grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia (2/33, 6%), and grade 3 to 4 anemia (5/33, 15%). Neutropenic fever developed in three patients (3/33, 9%). The nonhematological toxicities were nausea and vomiting (10/33, 30%), abdominal pain (4/33, 12%), skin rash (1/33, 3%), and fluid retention (3/33, 9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Docetaxel is a feasible third-line therapy regimen for patients with advanced gastric cancer after m-FOLFIRI and m-FOLFOX-4 regimens.

Outcomes of third-line docetaxel-based chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer who failed previous oxaliplatin-based and irinotecan-based chemotherapies

Purpose

Little is known about outcomes in the use of third-line chemotherapy in cases of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The primary aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate outcomes of docetaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with AGC that progressed after both oxaliplatin-based and irinotecan-based regimens.

Materials and Methods

Eligible patients were those with AGC who had previous chemotherapy including fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin as well as fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan and who received subsequent docetaxel-based chemotherapy. Thirty-five patients were retrospectively recruited from 5 medical centers in Korea. Patients received either weekly or 3 weekly with docetaxel +/- cisplatin.

Results

Thirty-one out of 35 patients were evaluated for treatment response. A total of 94 cycles of chemotherapy (median, 2; range, 1 to 7) were administered. The overall response rate was 14.3%, and the disease control rate was 45.7%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.7 months). The median overall survival (OS) was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.4 months). PFS and OS were significantly prolonged in patients of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, with performance status of 0 or 1 in multivariate analysis (PFS: hazard ratio[HR], 0.411; 95% CI, 0.195 to 0.868; p=0.020 and OS: HR, 0.390; 95% CI, 0.184 to 0.826; p=0.014, respectively). Four of the 35 patients enrolled in the study died due to infection associated with neutropenia.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that salvage docetaxel-based chemotherapy is a feasible treatment option for AGC patients with good performance status (PS), whereas chemotherapy for patients with poor PS (PS≤2) should be undertaken with caution for those who previously failed oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based regimens.

Survival in patients with stage IV noncardia gastric cancer - the influence of DNA ploidy and Helicobacter pylori infection

Background

Palliative surgery followed by postoperative chemotherapy is a challenging approach in the treatment of stage IV gastric cancer yet patients must be carefully selected on the basis of likely clinical benefit.

Methods

The records of 218 patients with histological diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent palliative surgery followed by postoperative chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. Twelve potential prognostic variables including tumour DNA index and serum IgG anti- Helicobacter pylori (HP) antibodies were evaluated for their influence on overall survival by multivariate analysis.

Results

The median survival was 13.25 months [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 12.00, 14.50]. Three factors were found to have an independent effect on survival: performance status (PS) [PS 60–70 vs. 90–100 Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.676; CI 1.171-2.398, p = 0.005], liver metastases (HR 1.745; CI 1.318-2.310, p < 0.001), and DNA Index as assessed by Image cytometry (2.2-3.6 vs. >3.6 HR 3.059; CI 2.185-4.283, p < 0.001 and <2.2 vs. >3.6 HR; 4.207 CI 2.751-6.433 <0.001). HP infection had no statistically significant effect on survival by either univariate or multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

Poor pre-treatment PS, the presence of liver metastasis and high DNA Index were identified factors associated with adverse survival outcome in patients with Stage IV gastric cancer treated with palliative gastrectomy and postoperative chemotherapy. HP infection had no influence on survival of these patients.

Prognostic factors of second and third line chemotherapy using 5-fu with platinum, irinotecan, and taxane for advanced gastric cancer

Purpose

The aims of this study are to find out whether the sequence of chemotherapeutic regimens including second- and third-line taxane and irinotecan influences the survival of patients with unresectable gastric carcinoma and to identify clinical characteristics of patients with improved response.

Materials and Methods

Fifty gastric carcinoma patients who were treated by third-line sequential chemotherapy between November 2004 and July 2010 were enrolled in this study. Their overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) were set up as primary and secondary end points. For the sequence of chemotherapy regimen, two arms were used. Arm A was defined as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)+cisplatin (FP) or folinic acid, 5-FU and oxaliplati (FOLFOX), followed by folinic acid, 5-FU and irinotecan (FOLFIRI), and paclitaxel or docetaxel plus 5-FU, with or without epirubicin. Arm B was defined as FP or FOLFOX, followed by paclitaxel or docetaxel plus 5-FU, and FOLFIRI.

Results

The median OS of all patients was 16.0 months (95% confidence interval, 13.6 to 18.3 months), which is longer than historical control of patients who did not receive third-line chemotherapy. The sequence of second and third-line regimen, including irinotecan and taxane, did not present significant difference in OS or TTP after failure of 5-FU with platinum chemotherapy. In survival analysis of patients' clinicopathologic characteristics, poor prognosis was shown in patients with poorly differentiated histologic features, elevated serum carcinoembryonic level, and shorter TTP of first line chemotherapy.

Conclusion

It is possible for patients to respond differently to chemotherapy due to differences in clinical features and underlying gene expression profiles. Development of individualized chemotherapy regimens based on gene expression profiles is warranted.

Therapeutic effects of combined oxaliplatin and S-1 in older patients with advanced gastric cardiac adenocarcinoma

AIM: To evaluate the effects and safety of combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (L-OHP) and S-1 (SOX regimen) in older patients with advanced gastric cardiac adenocarcinoma (GCA).

METHODS: Seventy patients with advanced GCA were classified according to age into an older group (≥ 75 years) and a control group (< 75 years). The SOX regimen was administered to the two groups as follows: S-1 (40 mg/m² po bid) on days 1 to 14 followed by a 7-d off period, plus L-OHP (65 mg/m² iv) for 2 h on days 1 and 8 of a 21-d cycle. This regimen was repeated for four to six cycles. Response and swallow statuses were evaluated after two cycles (6 wk). Effects and toxicity were evaluated four weeks after chemotherapy was completed.

RESULTS: The response rate was 65.6% (21/32) in the older group and 68.4% (26/38) in the control group (χ² = 0.062 and P = 0.804). Improvement in swallowing was 78.1% (25/32) in the older group and 76.3% (29/38) in the control group (χ² = 0.032 and P = 0.857). Efficacy was 68.8% (22/32) in the older group and 65.8% (25/38) in the control group (χ² = 0.069 and P = 0.793). Toxicities were reversible and similar in both groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION: The SOX regimen is an effective, safe and well-tolerated regimen for older patients with advanced GCA.

Esophageal cancer: a critical evaluation of systemic second-line therapy

The objective of this article was to review clinical trials that used antineoplastic second-line chemotherapy and/or targeted therapies in patients with esophageal cancer after first-line therapy. Computerized (MEDLINE) and manual searches were performed to identify articles published on this topic between 1996 and 2011. Twenty-five published trials and four abstracts presented at scientific meetings were identified. A total of 10 trials included only patients with squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs), four focused exclusively on adenocarcinoma (AC), the remaining 15 studies included both SCC and AC. The majority of trials (17 of 29) used docetaxel in combination with platinum analogs, eight used single-agent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and six evaluated targeted therapies. The numbers of patients were relatively small, ranging from eight to 55 patients. The response rates were generally low (between 0% and 39%), with only two small studies reporting objective responses of 50% and 63%, respectively. Time to progression ranged from 1.4 to 6.2 months, and the overall survival was disappointing at 4.0 to 11.4 months. Approximately 40% of patients who experience progressive disease after first-line chemotherapy are able to undergo second-line treatment. On the basis of data published so far, no standard second-line therapy has emerged. Future research will need to focus on individual therapy strategies such as genetic receptor mutations to increase the therapeutic outcome.

Salvage chemotherapy of biweekly irinotecan plus S-1 (biweekly IRIS) in previously treated patients with advanced gastric cancer

PURPOSE

This phase II trial first describes the combination chemotherapy of biweekly irinotecan plus S-1 (biweekly IRIS) for pretreated advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients.

METHODS

Patients who had previously been treated with greater than or equal to one regimen were enrolled. They received S-1 35 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and irinotecan 150 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15, every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among the 38 patients enrolled, 18 patients were treated as second line, and the remaining 20 patients were enrolled as third- or fourth line. A total of 208 cycles were administered with the median being four cycles (range 1-16). The median OS was 8.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.5-10.3], and the median progression-free survival was 6.3 months (95% CI 5.3-7.3). Low serum albumin (<3.5 mg/dL) was an independent adverse prognosticator for survival. Overall response rate was 17% (95% CI 4-30%). The major grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (26%) and diarrhea (18%).

CONCLUSIONS

Biweekly IRIS showed the moderate activity as salvage treatment in AGC. Considering high neutropenia and gastrointestinal toxicity, patient selection should be warranted; serum albumin may be a predictive factor for treatment decision.

Biweekly cetuximab and irinotecan as second-line therapy in patients with gastro-esophageal cancer previously treated with platinum

BACKGROUND

Until recently there has been no proven second-line therapy for patients with advanced gastro-esophageal cancer (GEC). Since 2004, Denmark has had a national health program where non-proven therapy can be offered to patients with advanced cancer, after approval by an expert panel appointed by the National Board of Health. This program has accelerated the introduction and implementation of new therapies in Denmark. Inspired by therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer, a combination of cetuximab and irinotecan (Cetiri) was chosen for second-line therapy in GEC patients. We report our experience with Cetiri as second-line therapy in patients with GEC.

METHODS

All patients had histologically confirmed GEC and all patients had progressive disease during or after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy. The patients received cetuximab 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 and irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 2nd week until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Toxicity was prospectively evaluated according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) version 3.0.

RESULTS

From December 2007 to February 2009, 50 consecutive patients received Cetiri as second-line therapy. Median performance status (PS) was 1. The median number of courses was seven. Seven patients (14%) had a partial response. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.3 months and overall survival (OS) was 5.5 months; two patients are still alive without progressive disease. Major toxicities were: diarrhea (8%), fatigue (10%), neutropenia (16%), and febrile neutropenia (2%).

CONCLUSION

Cetiri every two weeks is a convenient and well-tolerated second-line regimen in GEC patients. A promising effect was seen in patients with PS 0-1 and in patients who developed a rash.

Prognostic factor analysis of third-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Almost all patients with advanced gastric cancer will eventually develop progressive disease after first-line chemotherapy. However, the role of subsequent salvage chemotherapy remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate prognostic factors for the survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer who received third-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

We reviewed 502 patients with advanced gastric cancer who received palliative chemotherapy at the Onocology Department of Hwasun Chonnam National University Hospital (2004-2008). Among them, 174 received third-line chemotherapy. To evaluate the clinicopathologic factors that affected overall survival, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on the baseline factors before beginning third-line chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis found 4 prognostic factors affecting poor survival following third-line chemotherapy: performance status of 2-3 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-2.02; P = 0.022), serum albumin level < 4 mg/dL (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.32-2.53; P < 0.00), poor histologic type (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.27-2.47; P = 0.001), and progression-free survival of <2.7 months following second-line chemotherapy (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.09-2.08; P = 0.012). A prognostic index was constructed, dividing patients into low- (0-1 factor), intermediate- (2 or 3 risk factors), or high- (4 risk factors) risk groups. Median survival times for each group were 11.8, 6.7, and 3.3 months, respectively (P < 0.00).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that some clinicopathologic factors might be helpful in identifying the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit from third-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.

Phase I/II study of a combination of docetaxel, capecitabine, and cisplatin (DXP) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to determine the optimal dosage of the docetaxel-capecitabine-cisplatin (DXP) regimen and to evaluate its efficacy and safety in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with advanced gastric or esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma received capecitabine (days 1-14) and intravenous docetaxel and cisplatin (day 1) every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

In the phase I study, 15 patients were treated with 4 different dose levels. Asthenia and neutropenic fever were the dose-limiting toxicities. For the phase II study, 1,125 mg/m(2) of capecitabine was initially recommended with 60 mg/m(2) docetaxel and 60 mg/m(2) cisplatin. However, frequent dose modifications at this dose level resulted in a final optimal dose of 937.5 mg/m(2) capecitabine. Among the 40 patients enrolled in the phase II study, 4 complete and 23 partial responses were observed, presenting objective response rate of 68%. Ten patients achieving good response with complete disappearance of distant metastases underwent surgery, and 4 pathologic complete responses were identified. After the median follow-up of 83.7 months (range, 20.2-86.5) in surviving patients, the median overall survival was 14.4 months and median progression-free survival was 7.6 months. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (62.5%) and asthenia (37.5%). Ten per cent of the patients experienced neutropenic fever, with one case of sepsis-induced death.

CONCLUSION

DXP displays considerable antitumor activity, and may thus present effective first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Further investigation of the efficacy and safety of this regimen in both first-line and neoadjuvant settings is warranted.