Phase II study of irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin in patients with primary refractory or relapsed advanced oesophageal and gastric carcinoma

Efficacy and safety evaluation of frontline immunotherapy combinations in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a network meta-analysis highlighting the value of PD-L1 expression positivity scores

Introduction

The systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) consolidate all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to initial immunotherapy treatments for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Our goal is to thoroughly assess the effectiveness and safety of various immunotherapy methods, focusing on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with advanced ESCC positive for PD-L1.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases, covering all records from their inception until January 22, 2024. The inclusion criteria targeted patients with advanced ESCC undergoing first-line immunotherapy or chemotherapy, limiting the study selection to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exclusively. The study upholds the values of openness, originality, and dependability, as evidenced by its enrollment in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42024504992).

Results

Our analysis encompasses 7 RCTs, totaling 4688 patients, and evaluates 8 distinct immunotherapy combinations. In advanced ESCC patients irrespective of PD-L1 expression, both sintilimab-chemotherapy and toripalimab-chemotherapy regimens demonstrated comparable OS benefits (HR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.64-1.33). The most pronounced PFS advantages were seen with sintilimab-chemotherapy and camrelizumab-chemotherapy as compared to standard chemotherapy (HR=0.56, 95% CI: 0.46-0.58). Notably, camrelizumab-chemotherapy (HR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.59-1.16) and nivolumab-ipilimumab (HR=0.84, 95% CI: 0.60-1.17) demonstrated significant safety profiles over chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis based on PD-L1 expression revealed nivolumab-chemotherapy to yield the highest OS benefit (HR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.37-0.79) in ESCC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%. Furthermore, camrelizumab-chemotherapy (HR=0.51, 95% CI: 0.39-0.67) exhibited superior PFS benefits. Among patients with PD-L1 expression ≥10%, camrelizumab-chemotherapy (HR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.35-0.78) emerged as the most efficacious in improving OS, while serplulimab-chemotherapy (HR=0.48, 95% CI: 0.34-0.68) was associated with the longest PFS benefit.

Conclusion

The integration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with chemotherapy appears to significantly enhance survival outcomes in patients with advanced ESCC compared to chemotherapy alone. Sintilimab-chemotherapy is potentially the optimal regimen for patients without PD-L1 expression. In contrast, nivolumab-chemotherapy and camrelizumab-chemotherapy are likely to offer the best OS and PFS benefits, respectively, in patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%. Among those with PD-L1 expression ≥10%, camrelizumab-chemotherapy is projected to provide the greatest OS advantage, whereas serplulimab-chemotherapy is anticipated to offer the most prolonged PFS benefit. Since most of the patients in this study originated from Asia, the above findings are more applicable to the Asian population.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024504992.

Real-world outcomes of third-line immune checkpoint inhibitors versus irinotecan-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a Korean, multicenter study (KCSG ST22-06)

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) or irinotecan-based chemotherapy is frequently used after failure of second-line paclitaxel plus ramucirumab treatment for patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This study aimed to compare the efficacy between ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy as third-line treatment in patients with AGC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with AGC, whose third-line treatment started between July 2019 and June 2021 at 17 institutions in Korea. The ICI group included patients who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab, and the irinotecan-based chemotherapy group included patients who received irinotecan or FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan).

RESULTS

A total of 363 patients [n = 129 (ICI) and n = 234 (irinotecan-based chemotherapy)] were analyzed. The median progression-free survival was 2.3 and 2.9 months in ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.802). The median overall survival (OS) was 5.5 and 6.0 months in ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.786). For all patients included in this study, multivariable analysis showed that weight loss, peritoneal metastasis, low serum sodium or albumin, and short duration of second-line treatment were associated with inferior OS (p < 0.05). ICI showed significantly longer OS than irinotecan-based chemotherapy in patients without peritoneal metastasis. Whereas ICI showed significantly shorter OS in patients without PD-L1 expression than irinotecan-based chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference in survival outcome was observed between ICI and irinotecan-based chemotherapy as third-line treatment for AGC patients. ICI might be preferred for patients without peritoneal metastasis and irinotecan-based chemotherapy for patients with tumors without PD-L1 expression.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in the Clinical Trial Registry of Korea ( https://cris.nih.go.kr : KCT 0007732).

Efficacy and safety of irinotecan combined with raltitrexed or irinotecan monotherapy for salvage chemotherapy of esophageal squamous cell cancer: A prospective, open label, randomized phase II study

BACKGROUND

Esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) accounts for approximately 90% of esophageal cancer cases in China. There are no standard regimens for second or third-line chemotherapy of metastatic squamous esophageal cancer. The objective of this study was to investigate the security and effectiveness of irinotecan combined with raltitrexed or irinotecan monotherapy for salvage chemotherapy of ESCC.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-eight patients with metastatic ESCC confirmed by histopathology were enrolled into this study. These patients had failure of the first-line chemotherapy combination of fluorouracil or platinum or paclitaxel and had not undergone chemotherapy with irinotecan or raltitrexed previously. Patients were randomly divided into irinotecan combined with raltitrexed group (experiment group) and irinotecan monotherapy group (control group). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

In the control group, the median PFS (mPFS) and median OS (mOS) of patients were 3.37 and 5.3 months. In the experiment group, mPFS and mOS were 3.91 and 7.0 months. There was statistical significance of PFS and OS between two groups (PFS P = 0.002, OS P = 0.01). In subgroup analysis, in the second-line treatment, the mPFS of control and experiment group, was 3.90 and 4.60 months, mOS was 6.95 and 8.5 months, which was statistically significant differences between the two groups. (PFS P = 0.001, OS P = 0.005), In the third-line and beyond treatment, mPFS of control and experiment group was 2.80 and 3.19 months, mOS were 4.5 and 4.8 months. But there was no significant difference of PFS or OS between the two groups (PFS P = 0.19, OS P = 0.31). There was no statistical significance of toxicity side effects between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The PFS and OS of irinotecan plus raltitrexed may be better than that of irinotecan monotherapy, especially in second line treatment, which should be confirmed with a phase III study including much more patients.

Ramucirumab plus irinotecan / leucovorin / 5-FU versus ramucirumab plus paclitaxel in patients with advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction, who failed one prior line of palliative chemotherapy: the phase II/III RAMIRIS study (AIO-STO-0415)

BACKGROUND

Paclitaxel in combination with ramucirumab is the standard of care second-line therapy in gastro-esophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). As the number of taxane pretreated patients in the perioperative or first-line setting is increasing, it is unknown whether these patients benefit from re-applying a taxane in using the combination of paclitaxel and ramucirumab. Furthermore, the rates of neurotoxicity with first-line FOLFOX or FLOT range from 30%-70%, making second-line taxane-containing therapy less suitable to a meaningful portion of patients. This patient group is likely to benefit from a taxane-free second-line chemotherapy regimen, such as FOLFIRI and ramucirumab (FOLFIRI-Ram). Therefore, the RAMIRIS phase III trial evaluates the effects of the regimen of FOLFIRI-Ram in the second-line treatment after a taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced GEA.

METHODS

The RAMIRIS trial is a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II/III study comparing treatment of FOLFIRI-Ram (arm A) with paclitaxel and ramucirumab (arm B). The Phase II is already closed with 111 enrolled patients. In the phase III, 318 taxane-pretreated patients with advanced GEA will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to FOLFIRI (5-FU 2400 mg/m² over 46 h i.v., irinotecan 180 mg/m² i.v.; 5-FU 400 mg/m² bolus; leucovorin 400 mg/m² i.v.; on day 1 and 15, q28) with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg every two weeks (Arm A) or paclitaxel 80 mg/m² (days 1, 8, 15, q28) with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg every two weeks (Arm B). The primary endpoints are overall survival (OS) and objective overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate and safety and quality of life as assessed by EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire.

DISCUSSION

The already completed RAMIRIS phase II demonstrated feasibility and efficacy of FOLFIRI-Ram. Especially docetaxel-pretreated patients seemed to markedly benefit from FOLFIRI-Ram, with favorable response- and PFS rates and lower toxicity. This offers a rationale for the phase III trial. If the RAMIRIS III trial transfers and confirms the results, they will affect the current treatment guidelines, recommending the combination therapy of FOLFIRI-Ram for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced GEA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03081143 Date of registration: 13.11.2015.

Comparison of Two Chemotherapy Regimens After First-Line Treatment for HER2-Negative Metastatic Gastric Cancer

AIM

Metastatic stage gastric cancer is a disease with a poor prognosis and the likelihood of achieving a cure in these patients is low. Treatment response to subsequent-line treatments is poor. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and paclitaxel+carboplatin regimens, which are used in subsequent lines of therapy in advanced-stage gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 40 patients who have metastatic stage gastric cancer and received FOLFIRI or paclitaxel+carboplatin therapy in subsequent lines of therapy between 2017 and 2022. The data of the patients were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

At diagnosis median age was 51 (23-88) years. The tumor was localized in the gastroesophageal junction in eight (20%) patients and in other gastric locations in 32 (80%) patients. At diagnosis, 75% (n=30) of the patients presented with the disease in the metastatic stage, while 25% (n=10) presented with stage II-III disease. Regarding the treatments received in the second and further lines of therapy, 18 (45%) patients received paclitaxel+carboplatin and 22 (55%) patients received a FOLFIRI regimen. Of these treatments, 67.5% (n=27) were given as the second line and 32.5% (n=13) were given as third-line therapy. The objective response rate (ORR) was 45.5% in the FOLFIRI arm compared to 16.7% in the paclitaxel+carboplatin arm (p=0.05). Both treatment arms had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of three months (p=0.82). The median overall survival (OS) time was seven months in the FOLFIRI arm compared to eight months in the paclitaxel+carboplatin arm (p=0.71). Side effects were similar between both treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

This study determined that FOLFIRI and paclitaxel+carboplatin treatments have similar OS, PFS, and side effect profiles in subsequent line treatment of gastric cancer. The FOLFIRI treatment regimen yielded a higher ORR.

Tislelizumab Versus Chemotherapy as Second-Line Treatment for Advanced or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (RATIONALE-302): A Randomized Phase III Study

PURPOSE

Patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) have poor prognosis. For these patients, treatment options are limited after first-line systemic therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this open-label phase III clinical study, patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC, whose tumor progressed after first-line systemic treatment, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous tislelizumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 antibody, 200 mg every 3 weeks or chemotherapy (investigator's choice of paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in all patients. The key secondary end point was OS in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 tumor area positivity (TAP) score ≥ 10%.

RESULTS

In total, 512 patients across 11 countries/regions were randomly assigned. At final analysis, conducted after 410 death events occurred, OS was significantly longer with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy in all patients (median, 8.6 v 6.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.85]; one-sided P = .0001), and in patients with TAP ≥ 10% (median, 10.3 months v 6.8 months; HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79]; one-sided P = .0006). Survival benefit was consistently observed across all predefined subgroups, including those defined by baseline TAP score, region, and race. Treatment with tislelizumab was associated with higher objective response rate (20.3% v 9.8%) and a more durable antitumor response (median, 7.1 months v 4.0 months) versus chemotherapy in all patients. Fewer patients experienced ≥ grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (18.8% v 55.8%) with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Tislelizumab significantly improved OS compared with chemotherapy as second-line therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC, with a tolerable safety profile. Patients with programmed death-ligand 1 TAP ≥ 10% also demonstrated statistically significant survival benefit with tislelizumab versus chemotherapy.

PRaG Therapy of Refractory Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Case Report

Patients with metastatic gastric cancer had limited treatments and often had a somber prognosis, especially when patients were unable to tolerate high-intensity cytotoxic treatment due to poor physical condition or organ dysfunction after the failure of standard therapy. Here, we reported a metastatic and proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) gastric adenocarcinoma patient with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 2 associated with hypoproteinemia and fatigue, and poor appetite that was unable to tolerate high-intensity therapy after several chemotherapy regimens and anti-angiogenic therapy. After receiving novel triple-combination therapy, which consists of PD-1 inhibitor, Radiotherapy and Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) therapy (PRaG for short), the patient achieved a complete response (CR) with a progression-free survival time of 14 months, and ECOG performance status score improved from 2 to 0. A significant systemic effect was observed in this case and the PRaG triple-combination therapy might provide a novel treatment strategy for metastatic pMMR gastric cancer patients.

Tislelizumab versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (RATIONALE 302): impact on health-related quality of life

Background

RATIONALE 302 (NCT03430843) an open-label, phase III study of second-line treatment of advanced/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), reported that tislelizumab, relative to investigator-chosen chemotherapy (ICC), was associated with improvements in overall survival and a favorable safety profile. This study assessed the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and ESCC-related symptoms of patients in RATIONALE 302.

Methods

Adults with advanced/metastatic ESCC whose disease progressed following prior systemic therapy were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either tislelizumab or ICC (paclitaxel, docetaxel, or irinotecan). HRQoL was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 items (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Oesophageal Cancer Module 18 items (QLQ-OES18), and the EuroQoL Five-Dimensions Five-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) visual analogue scale. Mixed effect modeling for repeated measurements examined changes from baseline to weeks 12 and 18. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to examine time to deterioration.

Results

Overall, 512 patients were randomized to tislelizumab (n = 256) or ICC (n = 256). The tislelizumab arm maintained QLQ-C30 global health status/quality whereas the ICC arm worsened at week 12 {difference in least square (LS) mean change: 5.8 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.0-9.5], P = 0.0028} and week 18 [difference in LS mean change: 8.1 (95% CI: 3.4-12.8), P = 0.0008]. Physical functioning (week 18) and fatigue (weeks 12 and 18) worsened less in the tislelizumab compared with the ICC arm. The tislelizumab arm improved in reflux symptoms, whereas the ICC worsened at week 12 [difference in LS mean change: −4.1 (95% CI: −7.6 to −0.6), P = 0.0229]. The visual analogue scale remained consistent in the tislelizumab arm whereas it worsened in the ICC arm. The hazard of time to deterioration was lower in tislelizumab patients compared with ICC for physical functioning and reflux.

Conclusions

HRQoL, including fatigue symptoms and physical functioning, was maintained in patients with advanced or metastatic ESCC receiving tislelizumab compared with ICC-treated patients. These results provide additional support for the benefits of tislelizumab in this patient population.

•

Global health status and HRQoL remained consistent in the tislelizumab arm whereas the ICC arm experienced worsening.

•

Fatigue and physical functioning worsened in both arms; however, the worsening was greater in the ICC arm.

•

The tislelizumab arm was at lower risk of reaching the threshold for worsening in physical functioning and reflux.

A phase 1b multicenter study of TAS-102 in combination with irinotecan in patients with advanced recurrent or unresectable gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma after at least one line of treatment with a fluoropyrimidine and platinum-containing regimen

TAS-102 is approved for treatment of refractory metastatic gastroesophageal carcinoma (mGEC). This study sought to determine whether the combination of TAS-102 with irinotecan (TASIRI) was safe and effective in previously treated mGEC. This was a single-arm phase 1b study for patients (pts) with mGEC previously treated with at least one line of fluoropyrimidine and platinum-containing regimen. TAS-102 was given at 25 mg/m² twice daily on days 1 to 5 with irinotecan 180 mg/m² on day 1 of a 14-day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 6 months ≥ 35% (PFS-6). 20 Pts were enrolled. The study met its primary endpoint. PFS-6 is 40% (95% CI 19.3-60.0). Median PFS and overall survival are 5.3 months and not reached, respectively. 17 of 20 pts had measurable disease by RECIST criteria. Of the 17, 13 had stable disease and 4 had progressive disease as best response (8 pts had tumor shrinkage < 30%). The disease control rate was 75%. In exploratory analyses, mutations in homologous recombination deficiency genes were associated with inferior PFS (P < 0.03). The most common any grade (G) treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were nausea (n = 14, 70%), diarrhea (n = 9, 45%), and fatigue (n = 8, 40%). G3-4 TRAE in > 5% of pts were anemia (20%) and neutropenia (10%). 2 serious TRAE were reported: G4 febrile neutropenia (n = 1) and G3 hypotension (n = 1). There was no G5 TRAE. The combination of TASIRI showed encouraging clinical activity with a meaningful improvement in PFS-6 compared to historic controls.

Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.

Benefit of second-line therapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a tri-center propensity score analysis

Background

The level of evidence for palliative second-line therapy in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (aESCC) is limited. This is the first study that reports efficacy data comparing second-line therapy + active symptom control (ASC) versus ASC alone in aESCC.

Methods

We conducted a tri-center retrospective cohort study (n = 166) including patients with aESCC who had experienced disease progression on palliative first-line therapy. A propensity score model using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was implemented for comparative efficacy analysis of overall survival (OS) in patients with second-line + ASC (n = 92, 55%) versus ASC alone (n = 74, 45%).

Results

The most frequent second-line regimens used were docetaxel (36%) and paclitaxel (18%). In unadjusted primary endpoint analysis, second-line + ASC was associated with significantly longer OS compared with ASC alone [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35-0.69, p < 0.0001]. However, patients in the second-line + ASC group were characterized by more favorable baseline features including a better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, a longer first-line treatment duration and lower C-reactive protein levels. After rigorous adjusting for baseline confounders by re-weighting the data with the IPTW the favorable association between second-line and longer OS weakened but prevailed. The median OS was 6.1 months in the second-line + ASC group and 3.2 months in the ASC group, respectively (IPTW-adjusted HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.24-0.69, p = 0.001). Importantly, the benefit of second-line was consistent across several clinical subgroups, including patients with ECOG performance status ⩾1 and age ⩾65 years. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events associated with palliative second-line therapy were hematological toxicities.

Conclusion

This real-world study supports the concept that systemic second-line therapy prolongs survival in patients with aESCC.

Clinical efficacy of irinotecan plus raltitrexed chemotherapy in refractory esophageal squamous cell cancer

Our retrospective study assessed the efficacy and safety of irinotecan plus raltitrexed in esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) patients who were previously treated with multiple systemic therapies. Between January 2016 and December 2018, records of 38 ESCC patients who underwent irinotecan plus raltitrexed chemotherapy after at least one line of chemotherapy were reviewed. Efficacy assessment was performed every two cycles according to the RECIST version 1.1. A total of 95 cycles of chemotherapy were administered, and the median course was 3 (range 2-6). There was no treatment-related death. Nine patients had partial response, 21 had stable disease and eight had progressive disease. The overall objective response rate was 23.68% (9/38) and the disease control rate was78.94% (30/38). After a median follow-up of 18.5 months, the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 105 and 221 days, respectively. There were five patients (13.15%) with grade 3/4 leukopenia, three patients (7.89%) with grade 3/4 neutropenia and one patient (2.63%) with grade 3/4 diarrhea. The combination of irinotecan plus raltitrexed was effective for pretreated ESCC patients. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal dose of the two drugs.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Patients Receiving Second-Line Therapy for Advanced/Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Currently available second-line (2L) therapies for advanced/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (adv/met ESCC) include the taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel. In clinical trials, such therapies have provided only modest improvements in survival. Few studies have assessed outcomes in routine clinical practice in the USA. We compared real-world clinical outcomes in the US for patients receiving taxane or non-taxane 2L therapy for adv/met ESCC.

METHODS

The Flatiron Health database was used to identify patients diagnosed with adv/met ESCC (1 January 2011-31 January 2019) who received 2L therapy; index date was date of adv/met diagnosis. Baseline variables and treatment regimens received were identified. Overall survival (OS; 2L start until death or last recorded medical activity) and duration of therapy (DoT; start of 2L therapy until last administration date of 2L therapy) in patients receiving taxane vs. non-taxane-based therapies in the 2L setting were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

There were no clear differences in baseline characteristics between patients who received 2L taxane therapy (n = 37) and 2L non-taxane therapy (n = 49). Median (95% CI) 2L OS was significantly longer with 2L taxanes (7.3 [5.9-11.5] months) vs. 2L non-taxanes (5.1 [2.9-7.6] months); median (95% CI) 2L DoT was 2.1 (1.8-3.0) months vs. 3.3 (2.6-6.7) months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Survival was generally poor in patients receiving 2L therapy for adv/met ESCC and was longer in patients receiving 2L taxanes than 2L non-taxane therapy. Efficacious, tolerable therapies for ESCC in the 2L setting are urgently needed.

Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Esophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common histology in Eastern Europe and Asia, and adenocarcinoma is most common in North America and Western Europe. Surgery is a major component of treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer, and randomized trials have shown that the addition of preoperative chemoradiation or perioperative chemotherapy to surgery significantly improves survival. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, ramucirumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with esophageal and EGJ cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on recommendations for the management of locally advanced and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and EGJ.

Irinotecan plus S-1 versus S-1 in patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic esophageal cancer (ESWN 01): a prospective randomized, multicenter, open-labeled phase 3 trial

Background

The benefit of systemic treatments in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) which has progressed after chemotherapy is still uncertain and optimal regimens based on randomized trials have not yet been established. We aimed to compare the efficacy of irinotecan plus S-1 with S-1 monotherapy in recurrent or metastatic ESCC patients who had resistance to platinum- or taxane-based chemotherapy.

Methods

We conducted a prospective randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 trial in 15 centers across China. Eligible patients were adults with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic ESCC, and were randomly assigned (ratio, 1:1) to receive either irinotecan plus S-1 (intravenous infusion of irinotecan [160 mg/m²] on day 1 and oral S-1 [80–120 mg] on days 1–10, repeated every 14 days) or oral S-1 monotherapy (80–120 mg/day on days 1–14, repeated every 21 days) using a central computerized minimization procedure. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Between December 23, 2014 and July 25, 2016, we screened 148 patients and randomly assigned 123 patients to receive either irinotecan plus S-1 regimen (n = 61) or S-1 monotherapy (n = 62). After a median follow-up of 29.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.5–40.9 months), the median PFS was significantly longer in the irinotecan plus S-1 group than in the S-1 monotherapy group (3.8 months [95% CI 2.9–4.3 months] vs. 1.7 months [95% CI 1.4–2.7 months], hazard ratio = 0.58, 95% CI 0.38–0.86, P = 0.006). The objective response rates were 24.6% in the irinotecan plus S-1 group and 9.7% in the S-1 monotherapy group (P = 0.002). The patients in the irinotecan plus S-1 group presented with increased rates of grade 3–4 leukopenia (16.4% vs. 0%), neutropenia (14.8% vs. 1.6%), and nausea (4.9% vs. 0%). No significant difference in grade 3–4 diarrhea and no treatment-related deaths were observed in both groups.

Conclusions

The combination of irinotecan with S-1 was similarly tolerable but significantly prolonged PFS compared to S-1 monotherapy as a second- or third-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic ESCC.

Clinical Trial Registration NCT02319187. Registered on December 9, 2014

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40880-019-0359-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Efficacy of irinotecan-based chemotherapy after exposure to an anti-PD-1 antibody in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Objective

Several anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) antibodies have demonstrated potential efficacy in the treatment of advanced esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC). However, the response to subsequent chemotherapy after the failure of PD-1 blockade in ESCC patients has not been reported, and the optimal sequencing of immunotherapy and chemotherapy remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate responses to irinotecan-based subsequent chemotherapy in advanced ESCC patients who had progressed after treatment with camrelizumab (SHR-1210), a novel anti-PD-1 antibody.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with advanced ESCC treated with camrelizumab at a single institution. Consecutive patients who received subsequent irinotecan-based chemotherapy were selected for data collection and analysis.

Results

Overall, a total of 28 patients were included. All patients had received at least two lines of systemic treatment prior to irinotecan salvage. The most common regimen that was administered after PD-1 blockade was irinotecan in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-Fu) (or its derivatives), which was given to 19 patients. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 17.9% (5/28) and 64.3% (18/28), respectively, with 5 (17.9%) patients achieving a partial response and 13 (46.4%) having stable disease. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.18 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 2.48−3.88] months and the median overall survival (OS) was 6.23 (95% CI, 4.71−7.75) months. No new safety issues, either immune-related or otherwise, were observed.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that the response to irinotecan-based chemotherapy after PD-1 blockade in advanced ESCC patients appeared similar to that previously observed in patients who had not received PD-1 antibodies, and further study in larger cohorts or randomized trials is warranted to verify our observation.

Phase Ib study of irinotecan and ramucirumab for advanced gastric cancer previously treated with fluoropyrimidine with/without platinum and taxane

PURPOSE

Optimal salvage chemotherapy for patients with treated advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (AGC) is unknown. Irinotecan is commonly used in Japan. Ramucirumab, a human IgG-1 monoclonal antibody targeting the extracellular domain of VEGF receptor 2, is the first molecularly targeted agent proven to be effective in second-line therapy for AGC in combination with chemotherapy. We sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD) of ramucirumab plus irinotecan for AGC previously treated with fluoropyrimidine with/without platinum and taxane.

METHODS

Patients received systemic chemotherapy with ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) and irinotecan on day 1, repeated every 2 weeks. A decrease in irinotecan dose was planned from start level 1 (irinotecan 150 mg/m2). This trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Network (UMIN no. 000018606).

RESULTS

Six patients were enrolled from August 2015 to September 2017. No dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed, and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached at level 1. Irinotecan 150 mg/m2 in combination with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg was administered with acceptable toxicity, and all patients were treated at these doses. No treatment-related deaths were observed. Adverse events of Grade 3/4 were neutropenia (17%), anemia (17%) and hypertension (17%). Patients were evaluated using the RECIST criteria, and response rate and disease control rate were 17% and 83%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage chemotherapy with irinotecan plus ramucirumab was well-tolerated by patients previously treated for AGC. RD was defined as irinotecan 150 mg/m2 in combination with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg.

Modified 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan as a feasible and efficacious second-line chemotherapeutic regimen in advanced gastric cancers

BACKGROUND

Modified 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (mFOLFIRI) is a commonly used combination second-line chemotherapeutic regimen in advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with AGC, receiving biweekly mFOLFIRI between July 2013 and June 2016, as second-line chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed for tolerance, prognostic factors, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Overall, 91 patients were administered a median of 6 cycles of therapy. Response rate was 29.7% and clinical benefit rate was 57.2%. With a median follow-up of 11.5 months, median EFS was 3.98 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.54-5.41) and median OS was 7.73 months (95% CI: 5.30-10.15). Common Grade 3 and Grade 4 adverse events were neutropenia (18.7%), febrile neutropenia (9.9%), thrombocytopenia (7.7%), and vomiting (4.4%). Nearly 33% of patients required dose modification during therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

mFOLFIRI regimen as a second-line therapy in AGCs appears feasible and efficacious in clinical practice.

Targeted Therapies for Targeted Populations: Anti-EGFR Treatment for EGFR-Amplified Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma

Previous anti-EGFR trials in unselected patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) were resoundingly negative. We identified EGFR amplification in 5% (19/363) of patients at the University of Chicago, including 6% (8/140) who were prospectively screened with intention-to-treat using anti-EGFR therapy. Seven patients received ≥1 dose of treatment: three first-line FOLFOX plus ABT-806, one second-line FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, and three third/fourth-line cetuximab alone. Treatment achieved objective response in 58% (4/7) and disease control in 100% (7/7) with a median progression-free survival of 10 months. Pretreatment and posttreatment tumor next-generation sequencing (NGS), serial plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) NGS, and tumor IHC/FISH for EGFR revealed preexisting and/or acquired genomic events, including EGFR-negative clones, PTEN deletion, KRAS amplification/mutation, NRAS, MYC, and HER2 amplification, and GNAS mutations serving as mechanisms of resistance. Two evaluable patients demonstrated interval increase of CD3+ infiltrate, including one who demonstrated increased NKp46+, and PD-L1 IHC expression from baseline, suggesting an immune therapeutic mechanism of action. EGFR amplification predicted benefit from anti-EGFR therapy, albeit until various resistance mechanisms emerged.Significance: This paper highlights the role of EGFR inhibitors in EGFR-amplified GEA-despite negative results in prior unselected phase III trials. Using serial ctDNA and tissue NGS, we identified mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance in all patients, as well as potential contribution of antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity to their clinical benefit. Cancer Discov; 8(6); 696-713. ©2018 AACR.See related commentary by Strickler, p. 679This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 663.

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.

Irinotecan, Fluorouracil and Folinic ACID (FOLFIRI) as Effective Treatment Combination for Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer in Poor Clinical Condition

Aims and Background

Irinotecan (CPT-11) has been tested as a single agent in several studies, and response rates of 18-23% have been reported in first-line gastric cancer therapy. In the present study we report the safety and efficacy results combining CPT-11 with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA).

Patients and Methods

Thirty consecutive patients with metastatic gastric cancer, considered in poor clinical condition, were treated with CPT-11 and 5-FU/FA according to the FOLFIRI regimen. All enrolled cases were evaluable for toxicity and drug activity.

Results

The main grade 3-4 toxicity (according to the NCI-CTC criteria) was neutropenia (16%, grade 4 in 1 patient); nonhematological grade 3 toxicity consisted mainly in vomiting and diarrhea reported in 1 patient. No treatment-related serious adverse events were observed. Response was obtained in 12 patients (40%), stable disease in 2 patients (7%), while progression was documented in 16 patients (53%).

Conclusions

These results are very promising, and suggest that the combination of CPT-11 plus 5-FU/FA is active and well tolerated and can be considered as useful treatment in patients with metastatic gastric cancer in poor clinical condition.

Second-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer

The first choice for treating patients with metastatic gastric cancer is chemotherapy, and combination therapy with fluorouracil, platinum, and trastuzumab has been established as the standard first-line chemotherapy. For further improvement of treatment outcomes, it is important to develop second- and third-line chemotherapy. In the first decade of this century, irinotecan and taxanes, cytotoxic agents, and various molecular targeted agents began to be developed as second-line therapy. Treatment with paclitaxcel weekly in combination with ramucirumab targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 has become the first choice for second-line therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are now being developed, and the current treatment strategies for advanced gastric cancer may undergo major changes in the future. This review summarizes the transitions and future prospects of clinical developments for second-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Active salvage chemotherapy versus best supportive care for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus refractory or intolerable to fluorouracil, platinum, and taxane

PURPOSE

The survival benefit of chemotherapy (CTx) compared with best supportive care (BSC) is unclear in patients with recurrent or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-ESCC) previously treated with fluorouracil (FU), platinum (PT), and taxane (TAX).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The data of 283 consecutive patients with R/M-ESCC, who could not tolerate or whose tumor was refractory to all three agents (FU, PT, and TAX) between March 2003 and November 2014, were retrospectively reviewed. Patient selection criteria were as follows: age 20-75 years, performance status 0-2, and preserved organ function. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), defined as survival time from the last administration of all three agents, were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Of the 283 patients, 147 received BSC and 136 received CTx (PT-containing regimen 37, investigative new drugs 28, irinotecan-containing regimen 29, TAX alone 25, FU alone 16, others 4). Most patients' tumors were refractory to all three agents. The median OS of BSC and CTx patients was 4.2 and 7.8 months (hazard ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.54), respectively. Multivariate analysis with or without propensity score matching indicated that BSC, metastatic sites other than lung, liver, or bone, and hemoglobin <10 g/dL were associated with poor prognosis.

CONCLUSION

CTx might provide a survival benefit over BSC even for patients with R/M-ESCC who cannot tolerate or whose tumor is refractory to all three agents.

Phase II study of TP300 in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

TP300, a recently developed synthetic camptothecin analogue, is a highly selective topoisomerase I inhibitor. A phase I study showed good safety and tolerability. As camptothecins have proven active in oesophago-gastric adenocarcinomas, in this phase II study we assessed the efficacy and safety of TP300 in patients with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinomas.

METHODS

Eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced gastric or Siewert Types II or III GOJ inoperable adenocarcinoma. Patients were chemotherapy naïve unless this had been administered in the perioperative setting. TP300 was administered as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks (a cycle) for up to 6 cycles at a starting dose of 8 mg/m2 with intra-patient escalation to 10 mg/m2 from cycle 2 in the absence of dose-limiting toxicity. Tumour responses (RECIST 1.1) were assessed every 6 weeks. Toxicity was recorded by NCI-CTCAE version 3.0. Using a modified two-stage Simon design (Stage I and II), a total of 43 patients were to be included providing there were 3 of 18 patients with objective response in Stage I of the study.

RESULTS

In Stage I of the study 20 patients (14 males, 6 females), median age 67 years (range 40 - 82), performance status ECOG 0/1, with GC [14] or GOJ carcinoma [6] were enrolled. Of the 16 evaluable patients, 11 received the planned dose increase to 10 mg/m2 at cycle 2, 2 decreased to 6 mg/m2, and 3 continued on 8 mg/m2. There were no objective responses after 2 cycles of treatment. Twelve patients had stable disease for 1 - 5 months and 4 had progressive disease. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.1 months (CI [1.6 - 4.9]), median time to progression (TTP) was 2.9 months (CI [1.4 - 4.2]). Grade 3/4 toxicities (worst grade all cycles) included 7 patients (35 %) with neutropenia, 4 patients (20 %) with anaemia, 2 patients (10 %) with thrombocytopenia, and 3 patients (15 %) with fatigue. This study was terminated at the end of Stage I due to a lack of the required (3/18) responders.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of TP300 showed good drug tolerability but it failed to demonstrate sufficient efficacy as measured by radiological response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EU-CTR 2009-012097-12 2009-09-03.

Phase II Study of Irinotecan and Cisplatin Combination Chemotherapy in Metastatic, Unresectable Esophageal Cancer

Purpose

The objective of this multicenter phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan and cisplatin combination chemotherapy in metastatic, unresectable esophageal cancer.

Materials and Methods

Patients were treated with irinotecan 65 mg/m² and cisplatin 30 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day treatment cycle. The primary endpoint was response rate, and secondary endpoints were survival, duration of response, initial metabolic response rate, and toxicity.

Results

A total of 27 patients with squamous cell histology were enrolled in the study. The median age of the patients was 61 years. The objective response rate of the 20 patients in the perprotocol group was 30.0% (90% confidence interval [CI], 13.2 to 46.9). The median follow-up duration was 10.0 months, and the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.5 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 6.2) and 8.8 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 10.5), respectively. Four of 13 patients (30.8%) evaluated showed initial metabolic response. The median duration of response for partial responders was 5.0 months (range, 3.4 to 8.0 months). The following grade 3/4 treatment-related hematologic toxicities were reported: neutropenia (40.7%), anaemia (22.2%), and thrombocytopenia (7.4%). Two patients experienced febrile neutropenia. The most common grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities were asthenia (14.8%) and diarrhoea (11.1%).

Conclusion

Irinotecan and cisplatin combination chemotherapy showed modest anti-tumour activity and manageable toxicity for patients with metastatic, unresectable esophageal cancer.

Irinotecan plus fluorouracil-based regimen as second or third-line chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

No standard second‐line regimen exists for the treatment of advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan and fluorouracil‐based chemotherapy as a second or third‐line regimen for advanced ESCC patients.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 27 consecutive patients with advanced ESCC in one institute, treated with a combination of irinotecan plus fluorouracil‐based regimens after the failure of first‐line platinum‐based therapy. Nine patients were treated with 150–160 mg/m² irinotecan and 400 mg/m² fluorouracil (5‐FU) on day 1, followed by 2000 mg/m² 5‐FU during a 48‐hour infusion every two weeks. Eighteen patients received 150–160 mg/m² irinotecan on day 1 and 80–120 mg/day S‐1 on days 1–10 every two weeks. The S‐1 dose was based on the patients' body surface area.

Results

Twenty‐four of the 27 patients were assessable for response. One (3.7%) patient achieved complete response, seven (25.9%) achieved partial response, eight (29.6%) had stable disease, and eight (29.6%) had progressive disease. The median progression‐free and overall survival were 4.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2–8.4) and 10.5 months (95% CI: 8.4–12.7), respectively. Grade 3 neutropenia and diarrhea were detected in four (15%) and one (4%) patient, respectively. No grade 4 toxicity was noted.

Conclusions

Our study indicates that an irinotecan plus 5‐FU‐based regimen is effective and well‐tolerated as a second or third‐line chemotherapy for patients with advanced ESCC.

Second-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer: Current options and future directions

Gastric cancer remains one among the leading causes of cancer-related deaths, regardless of its decreasing incidence and newly available treatment options. Most patients present at an advanced stage and are treated with upfront systemic chemotherapy. Those patients receiving first-line therapy may initially respond to treatment, but many of them relapse over time. In such condition, second-line treatment for disease progression remains the only available option. Although there exists no standard approach in the second-line setting, several phase III trials have shown modest survival benefit in patients receiving irinotecan, taxane and ramucirumab over the best supportive care or active agents. This review analyzes the currently available treatment regimens and future directions of research in the second-line setting for metastatic gastric cancer with the best available evidence. Additionally, the prognostic factors that influence patient survival in those receiving second-line therapy are discussed.

Unmet needs and challenges in gastric cancer: the way forward

Although the incidence of gastric cancer has fallen steadily in developed countries over the past 50 years, outcomes in Western countries remain poor, primarily due to the advanced stage of the disease at presentation. While earlier diagnosis would help to improve outcomes for patients with gastric cancer, better understanding of the biology of the disease is also needed, along with advances in therapy. Indeed, progress in the treatment of gastric cancer has been limited, mainly because of its genetic complexity and heterogeneity. As a result, there is an urgent need to apply precision medicine to the management of the disease in order to ensure that individuals receive the most appropriate treatment. This article suggests a number of strategies that may help to accelerate progress in treating patients with gastric cancer. Incorporation of some of these approaches could help to improve the quality of life and survival for patients diagnosed with the disease. Standardisation of care across Europe through expansion of the European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA) registry - a European cancer audit that aims to improve quality and decrease variation in care across the region - may also be expected to lead to improved outcomes for those suffering from this common malignancy.

Sequential chemotherapies for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective analysis of 111 patients

BACKGROUND

The role of second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer is not yet fully established.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analysed 111 patients with advanced gastric cancer treated at the University Hospital Heidelberg (51) and the private oncology practice Bottrop/Dorsten (60) between 2001 and 2011, comparing the outcome of patients with first-line chemotherapy and those who received second-line chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were treated with one chemotherapy regimen, 75 patients received at least two different chemotherapies. Patients who received one chemotherapy regimen were older (median age 69 years) and had a shorter overall survival (6 months) than patients receiving sequential chemotherapies [median age 61 years, p = 0.009, overall survival 14 months (2-42), p = 0.001]. Under second-line chemotherapy, partial response was observed in 25 patients (33%) and stable disease for ≥3 months in 26 patients (35%). Patients treated before 2005 had a slightly better overall survival than patients treated in or after 2005. Survival was not influenced by the treatment centre (primary or tertiary), but was influenced by former surgery.

CONCLUSION

The prognosis of advanced gastric cancer is still poor. Selected patients may benefit from individualized salvage chemotherapy after failure of first-line chemotherapy.

Irinotecan combined with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin third-line chemotherapy after failure of fluoropyrimidine, platinum, and taxane in gastric cancer: treatment outcomes and a prognostic model to predict survival

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity and safety of the combination chemotherapy of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI regimen) after failure of fluoropyrimidine, platinum, and taxane in gastric cancer (GC) and to evaluate the prognostic factors for survival.

METHODS

Patients received biweekly FOLFIRI chemotherapy as third-line treatment. The FOLFIRI-1 consisted of irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) in a 2-h infusion) on day 1, and then leucovorin (200 mg/m(2) in a 2-h infusion) and 5-FU (a 400 mg/m(2) bolus, followed by 600 mg/m(2) in a 22-h continuous infusion) on days 1 and 2. FOLFIRI-2 consisted of irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) in a 2-h infusion) on day 1, and then leucovorin (400 mg/m(2) in a 2-h infusion) and 5-FU (a 400 mg/m(2) bolus, followed by 2400 mg/m(2) in a 46-h continuous infusion) on day 1.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients were included. The overall response rate was 9.6 % in patients with measurable lesions. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.1 months [95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.7-2.5] and 5.6 months (95 % CI, 4.7-6.5), respectively. The major grade 3/4 toxicity was myelosuppression (36.7 %). Good performance status (PS), fewer metastatic sites, and longer duration from the first-line to third-line chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors affecting both PFS and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The FOLFIRI regimen showed antitumor activity and tolerable toxicity profiles against advanced GC in the third-line setting. Patients with good PS, fewer metastatic sites and longer previous treatment duration might have the maximal benefit from third-line chemotherapy.

CPT-11 as a second-line treatment for patients with advanced/metastatic gastric cancer who failed S-1 (CCOG0702)

BACKGROUND

In Japan, CPT-11 is often used to treat unresectable gastric cancer in the second-line setting. However, evidence regarding benefit of second-line chemotherapy remains sparse, especially after failing S-1.

METHODS

A phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly administration of CPT-11 at a dose of 100 mg/m(2) after failing a S-1-containing first-line treatment was planned with response rate as a primary end point. UGT1A1*6, *27, and *28 genotyping were performed in all cases, and those found to have either homozygous for *28, homozygous for *6, heterozygous for both *6 and *28, and heterozygous for *27 were rendered ineligible for the phase II trial.

RESULTS

Two patients of homozygous for *28, two patients of homozygous for *6, and one patient of heterozygous for *27 were found among 39 recruited patients. The median number of courses delivered was 3 courses. The overall response rate was 15.4 % and disease control rate was 65.4 %. The median time to treatment failure was 87.5 days and median overall survival was 268 days. Twenty-two (73 %) of 30 valuable patients experienced protocol-specified skip of treatment and 8 (30 %) of patients could continue treatment with dose reduction. ≥G3 neutropenia was found in 30 % and ≥G3 anorexia and diarrhea were found in 23 and 17 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Weekly CPT-11 at 100 mg/m(2) showed moderate response among gastric cancer patients who were refractory to S-1, but the disease control rate seemed meaningful. Even after selection of patients by UGT1A1 polymorphism of *6, *27, and *28, severe toxic events could not be prevented completely.

Geographic differences in approach to advanced gastric cancer: Is there a standard approach?

Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer related deaths worldwide. Regional differences in gastric cancer are evident between Asian and Western societies with respect to etiology, prevalence, clinicopathologic features as well as treatment pattern of the disease. For patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC), chemotherapy has been found to improve survival and quality of life compared to best supportive care alone. But contrast to other tumors such as colon or pancreatic cancer, there are regional differences in outcome in gastric cancer. Various geographic/ethnic, biology and treatment strategies may contribute to these differences. In the first line setting, cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine based therapies remain the backbone of treatment for advanced gastric cancer in Asian and Western patients, although there is preference for S1 in Asia and 5FU in the West. A third agent may be added in patients with good performance status. Recent trials from Asia and Europe demonstrate an advantage for second line chemotherapy. Irinotecan and taxanes are the most commonly used agents. The introduction of trastuzumab into the frontline therapy of AGC has ushered the age of targeted therapy and personalized medicine in this disease. In this article, we will review the various first and second line chemotherapy regimens in AGC, taking into account regional differences including potential biomarkers.

The efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan with leucovorin and bolus and continuous infusional 5-fluorouracil (FOLFIRI) as salvage therapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer previously treated with platinum and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens

There is no established standard salvage chemotherapy in the second-line setting for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) pre-treated with platinum and taxane-based chemotherapy. Our study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FOLFIRI regimen (irinotecan with leucovorin and bolus and continuous infusion with 5-fluorouracil) as a salvage chemotherapy regimen in patients with AGC. Medical records of 97 patients with AGC who received second-line FOLFIRI regimen between March 2006 and February 2011 were examined. Complete and partial responses were observed in 3 (3.1%) and 23 (23.7%) patients, respectively. The median time to progression (TTP) was 3.5 months (95% CI: 2.4-4.6) and the median overall survival (OS) was 10.5 months (95% CI: 8.8-12.2). The most common observed grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (23.7%), diarrhea (6.2%), and stomatitis (5.2%). FOLFIRI regimen is safe and effective in the second-line treatment of AGC patients pre-treated with cisplatin and taxanes.

A randomized phase II study of biweekly irinotecan monotherapy or a combination of irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (mFOLFIRI) in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma refractory to or progressive after first-line chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of irinotecan (CPT-11) monotherapy and CPT-11 plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) combination (mFOLFIRI) as second-line treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

METHODS

A total of 59 patients were randomly assigned to either CPT-11 (150 mg/m(2) iv on day 1) or mFOLFIRI (CPT-11 150 mg/m(2) plus LV 20 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by 5-FU 2,000 mg/m(2) over 48 h), every 2 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Following random assignment, 29 patients received CPT-11 and 30 patients mFOLFIRI. The ORR was 17.2 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.4-30.9] and 20.0 % (95 % CI 5.6-34.3) for the CPT-11 and mFOLFIRI arms, respectively (P = 0.525). There was no significant difference in median progression-free survival: 2.2 months (95 % CI 0.2-4.3) for CPT-11 versus 3.0 months (95 % CI 2.0-3.7) for mFOLFIRI (P = 0.481) or in median overall survival: 5.8 months (95 % CI 3.0-8.7), compared with 6.7 months (95 % CI 5.3-8.2) (P = 0.514). Grade 3/4 toxicity was observed in 21 and 28 events in the CPT-11 and mFOLFIRI arms, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this study had a small sample size and limited statistical power, CPT-11 monotherapy and mFOLFIRI appear to be equally active and tolerable as second-line chemotherapy for AGC. The addition of 5-FU/LV to CPT-11 did not significantly improve efficacy.

Docetaxel combined with irinotecan or 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced oesophago-gastric cancer: a randomised phase II study

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel and irinotecan chemotherapy have shown good efficacy in the treatment of advanced oesophago-gastric cancer. This randomised phase II study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity profile of two non-platinum docetaxel-based doublet regimens in advanced oesophago-gastric cancer.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced oesophago-gastric cancer were randomised to receive either 3-weekly DI (docetaxel 60 mg m(-2) plus irinotecan 250 mg m(-2) (Day 1)) or 3-weekly DF (docetaxel 85 mg m(-2) (Day 1) followed by 5-fluorouracil 750 mg m(-2) per day as a continuous infusion (Days 1-5)).

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients received DI (n=42) or DF (n=43). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). The ORR and time to progression (TTP) in the evaluable population (n=65) were 37.5% (DI) vs 33.3% (DF), and 4.2 months vs 4.4 months, respectively. In the intent-to-treat population, the observed ORR, TTP and median overall survival were similar between the two groups. Grade 3-4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and diarrhoea were more frequent in the DI arm as compared with the DF arm (83.3% vs 69.8%, 40.5% vs 18.6%, and 42.9% vs 16.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Both docetaxel-based doublet regimens show comparable efficacy; however, the DF regimen was associated with a better toxicity profile and is an alternative treatment option for patients in whom platinum-based regimens are unsuitable.

[Comparison of the toxicities and efficacies of the combination chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer patients who achieved complete response after chemotherapy]

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We retrospectively analyzed comparative toxicities and efficacies of chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients who achieved complete response (CR) after chemotherapy.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 1,203 patients, who were pathologically diagnosed as AGC in a single center between January 2001 and October 2007. On the basis of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, CR was evaluated with abdominal computed tomography. Toxicities were evaluated using the National Cancer Institute's common toxicity criteria before each chemotherapy cycle.

RESULTS

Among the 1,203 AGC patients enrolled in this study, 568 received chemotherapy and 635 received best supportive care. The major chemotherapy regimens were 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) and 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and irinotecan (FOLFIRI). Among the 568 patients, 51 (9.0%) achieved CR (49 [8.6%] with FOLFOX [n=12], DCF [n=26], or FOLFIRI [n=11] and 2 [0.3%] with etoposide, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil). For patients administered FOLFOX, DCF, and FOLFIRI, the median time to disease progression was 4 months (range, 1.8-59.5), 15 months (range, 2.9-31.2) and 10 months (range, 2.0-39.5), and the median survival times were 48 months (range, 5.9-74.0), 37 months (range, 14.0-86.0), and 30 months (range, 6.0-50.0), respectively. Grades 3-4 mucositis occurred mostly in patients administered DCF (n=8, 30.8%). Grades 3-4 leucopenia were observed in 1 (8.3%), 11 (42.3%), and 4 (36.4%) patients administered FOLFOX, DCF and FOLFIRI, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in the 3 regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

All 3 regimens (FOLFOX, DCF and FOLFIRI) were active and tolerable. Their efficacies and toxicities were not significantly different.

Management of advanced gastric cancer

The management of advanced gastric cancer has only evolved a little over the last 15 years: platinum and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy remains the backbone of therapy with ongoing debate as to the benefit of triplet therapy with either an anthracycline or taxane. Recently published trials of biological agents, in particular those targeting the Her2 receptor, have provided some signs of improvement. This article summarizes the relevant literature, discusses the role of these agents, as well as geographical variations in use, and provides recommendations regarding both 'standard chemotherapy' and the role of biological agents in advanced gastric cancer. Given the relative lack of progress for gastric cancer over the last 15 years, the focus for the next 5 years should be on an improved understanding of the molecular basis of gastric cancer, thus allowing rational integration of new molecular agents.

Targeted therapies for gastric cancer: current status

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

Phase 2 study of capecitabine and irinotecan combination chemotherapy (modified XELIRI regimen) in patients with advanced gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

The prognosis of patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains poor, and no single chemotherapy regimen is recognized as a global standard. A phase 2 trial was conducted to determine the efficacy and tolerability of the modified combination regimen of capecitabine and irinotecan (mXELIRI) in patients with AGC.

METHODS

Patients with earlier untreated AGC received intravenous irinotecan (125 mg/m) over 90 minutes on days 1 and 8, and oral capecitabine (850 mg/m) twice daily on days 2 to 15, every 3 weeks. Treatment was continued for at most 8 cycles or until disease progression or intolerable toxicity.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were enrolled. In total, 141 cycles of mXELIRI were administered. The overall response rate was 43.7%, with 1 complete response and 13 partial responses. At a median follow-up of 16.2 months, median time to progression and overall survival were 5.6 months (95% confidence interval, 4.27-6.93 mo) and 11.0 months (95% confidence interval, 8.71-13.29 mo), respectively. The most common hematological adverse event was neutropenia (n=18, 56.3%); grade 3 neutropenia was observed in 5 patients, with neutropenic fever in only 2 patients. The most common grade 3/4 nonhematological toxicities were anorexia (n=3, 9.4%), nausea (n=3, 9.4%), vomiting (n=2, 6.3%), and diarrhea (n=2, 6.3%). There was no treatment-related death.

CONCLUSIONS

mXELIRI is a safe and effective first-line treatment for unresectable and metastatic gastric cancer with a manageable tolerability profile. It can be used as one of the first-line treatment options for patients with AGC.

Survival advantage for irinotecan versus best supportive care as second-line chemotherapy in gastric cancer--a randomised phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO)

BACKGROUND

The value of second-line therapy for metastatic gastric cancer is unclear. So far there are no randomised phase III data comparing second-line chemotherapy to best supportive care (BSC). In this prospective, multicenter, open label, randomised phase III study we compared irinotecan to BSC to evaluate the impact on survival of second-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Eligible patients (pts) had metastatic or locally advanced gastro-oesophageal junction or gastric adenocarcinoma, objective tumour progression during or within 6months after first-line chemotherapy and ECOG performance status 0-2. Stratification for time of progression after first-line therapy, ECOG PS and pretreatment secured even distribution of important prognostic factors.

TREATMENT

Arm A: Irinotecan 250mg/m(2)q3w (first cycle) to be increased to 350mg/m(2), depending on toxicity. Arm B: BSC.

FINDINGS

Between 10/2002 and 12/2006 40 pts were randomised. The study was closed prematurely due to poor accrual. Responsefor arm A (19 pts evaluable): No objective responses, SD 53%, PD 47%. Improvement of tumour related symptoms: Arm A 50% of pts, arm B 7%. Overall Survival: (all events in 40 pts have occurred): The hazard ratio for death was reduced to 0.48 (95%CI 0.25-0.92) in the irinotecan-arm (p=0.012). Median survival arm A: 4.0months (95% CI 3.6-7.5), arm B: 2.4months (95% CI 1.7-4.9).

INTERPRETATION

Irinotecan as second-line chemotherapy significantly prolongs overall survival compared to BSC in the studied pts. Second-line chemotherapy can now be considered as a proven treatment option for metastatic or locally advanced gastric cancer.

FUNDING

The study was supported by a research grant from Aventis and Pfizer.

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

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

Modified FOLFIRI as Second-Line Chemotherapy after Failure of Modified FOLFOX-4 in Advanced Gastric Cancer

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFIRI) as second-line treatment after failure of oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) for advanced gastric cancer.

Materials and Methods

Patients who received modified FOLFOX-4 as first-line treatment and then received sequential modified FOLFIRI for disease progression were included in this study. The modified FOLFIRI regimen consisted of irinotecan 150 mg/m² in a 90-minute intravenous infusion on day 1, leucovorin (LV) 20 mg/m² and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m² as a bolus followed by 600 mg/m² as a 22-hour infusion on days 1 and 2 with the same dose of 5-FU/LV of modified FOLFOX-4 every 2 weeks.

Results

A total of 32 patients received 126 courses of FOLFIRI chemotherapy. No complete response was achieved. Three patients (9.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0 to 20.1%) achieved partial response, whereas 11 (34.4%; 95% CI, 17.0 to 51.8%) patients showed stable disease. Disease control rate (complete response, partial responses and stable diseases) was 43.8% (95% CI, 25.6 to 61.9%) and median follow up duration was 11.3 months (range, 2.23 to 37.9 months). Median time to progression was 2 months (95% CI, 1.49 to 2.51 months), and median overall survival from the start of FOLFIRI was 5.84 months (95% CI, 4.34 to 7.34 months). Toxicities were tolerable.

Conclusion

Modified FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy after failure of the modified FOLFOX-4 in advanced gastric cancer was tolerable but showed a lower response rate. Further study about retrying 5-FU/LV with irinotecan after failure of the 5-FU/LV combined regimen is necessary in advanced gastric cancer.

Management of esophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing in Western countries with a tendency to exceed that of squamous-cell carcinoma. Prognosis is unfavorable with 5-year survival less than 15%, irrespective of treatment and the stage. At the time of diagnosis, more than two thirds of patients have a non-operable cancer because of extension or associated co-morbidities. Most studies have included different tumoral locations (esophagus and stomach) and different histological types (adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma), making it difficult to interpret results. Surgery is currently the standard treatment for small tumors. Surgery should be preceded by neo-adjuvant treatment for patients with locally advanced resectable tumors, either preoperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiation therapy. The therapeutic choice should be decided during multidisciplinary meetings according to patient and tumor characteristics and the expertise of the center. For patients with contraindications to surgery, exclusive chemoradiation therapy is recommended. Herein we reviewed and synthesized the different therapeutic strategies for esophageal adenocarcinoma.

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

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

Palliative first-line therapy with weekly high-dose 5-fluorouracil and sodium folinic acid as a 24-hour infusion (AIO regimen) combined with weekly irinotecan in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction followed by secondary metastatic resection after downsizing

BACKGROUND

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly high-dose 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) as 24-h infusion (AIO regimen) plus irinotecan in patients with histologically proven metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (UICC stage IV).

MATERIAL/METHODS

From 08/1999 to 12/2008, 76 registered, previously untreated patients were evaluable. Treatment regimen: irinotecan (80 mg/m²) as 1-h infusion followed by 5-FU (2000 mg/m²) combined with FA (500 mg/m²) as 24-h infusion (d1, 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, qd 57).

RESULTS

Median age: 59 years; male/female: 74%/26%; ECOG ≤1: 83%; response: CR: 1%, PR: 16%, SD: 61%, PD: 17%, not evaluable in terms of response: 5%; tumor control: 78%; median OS: 11.2 months; median time-to-progression: 5.3 months; 1-year survival rate: 49%; 2-year survival rate: 17%; no evidence of disease: 6.6%; higher grade toxicities (grade 3/4): anemia: 7%, leucopenia: 1%, ascites: 3%, nausea: 3%, infections: 12%, vomiting: 9%, GI bleeding of the primary tumor: 4%, diarrhea: 17%, thromboembolic events: 4%; secondary metastatic resection after downsizing: 16 patients (21%), R-classification of secondary resections: R0/R1/R2: 81%/6%/13%, median survival of the 16 patients with secondary resection: 23.7 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined 5-FU/FA as 24-h infusion plus irinotecan may be considered as an active palliative first-line treatment accompanied by tolerable toxicity; thus offering an alternative to cisplatin-based treatment regimens. Thanks to efficient interdisciplinary teamwork, secondary metastatic resections could be performed in 16 patients. In total, the patients who had undergone secondary resection had a median survival of 23.7 months, whereas the median survival of patients without secondary resection was 10.1 months (p≤0.001).