Phase II study of gemcitabine plus S-1 chemotherapy in recurrent and metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy

Effect of anlotinib combined with ticeorgio for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a case report

For patients with locally unresectable recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma who relapsed after 2 years of radiotherapy, re-radiotherapy is also the preferred treatment. However, for patients relapsed within 2 years, the use of re-radiotherapy would be greatly limited by its adverse effects. Consequently, finding a new strategy to prolong the time of re-radiotherapy for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma is very necessary to reduce the related side effects and improve the curative effect. Anlotinib is an orally available small molecule multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor that primarily inhibits VEGFR2/3, FGFR1-4, PDGFR α/β, c-Kit, and Ret. However, whether recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients can be treated with anlotinib combined with ticeorgio (also called S-1) remains unknown. Herein, we report a nasopharyngeal carcinoma patient with local recurrence after radical radiotherapy who benefited from combination treatment of anlotinib with ticeorgio.

Maintenance therapy improves the survival outcomes of patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma responding to first-line chemotherapy: a multicentre, randomized controlled clinical study

PURPOSE

To explore the safety and role of tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S1) maintenance therapy (MT) in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients after response to first-line chemotherapy and to assess outcome-associated biomarkers.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled study involving metastatic NPC patients recruited (from May 2015 to May 2019) at five hospitals in China. The participants were randomized to S1-MT (receiving S1 MT until disease progression or intolerance) or non-MT (followed up until disease progression) groups. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were the overall survival (OS), the correlation between EBV-DNA, serum amyloid A (SAA) status, and outcomes after the first-line chemotherapy, and safety.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 24.3 months; 88 and 95 participants were evaluable in the S1-MT and non-MT groups, respectively. Compared with non-MT, S1-MT prolonged PFS (16.9 vs. 9.3 months, P < 0.001) and OS (33.6 vs. 20.6 months, P < 0.001). Regardless of their EBV-DNA status after first-line chemotherapy, participants were able to benefit from S1 MT, but EBV-DNA-positive participants benefited more significantly (PFS: HR = 0.600, 95% CI = 0.373-0.965, P = 0.035; OS: HR = 0.393, 95% CI = 0.227-0.681, P = 0.001). MT only improved PFS and OS in patients with an SAA decline after first-line chemotherapy (PFS: HR = 0.570, 95% CI = 0.350-0.919, P = 0.021; OS: HR = 0.404, 95% CI = 0.230-0.709, P = 0.002). The median S1 treatment was 23 cycles. Grade 1-2 skin pigmentation, oral mucositis, and hand and foot syndrome were the main adverse reactions.

CONCLUSION

For metastatic NPC patients with first-line chemotherapy response, S1 MT can improve PFS and OS, with good tolerability. EBV-DNA and SAA can better help us identify patients who can benefit from MT after standard treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOR-16007939).

Association of Epstein-Barr virus DNA and SAA with S1 maintenance therapy outcomes in patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Objectives: The relevant biomarkers in predicting maintenance therapy (MT) outcomes in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are yet unclear. Patients & methods: Metastatic NPC patients were randomly divided into MT (S1-MT) and non-MT groups. The association of Epstein-Barr virus DNA (EBV-DNA) and SAA with survival was assessed. Results: A total of 183 patients were included. S1-MT significantly increased the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of the metastatic NPC patients (both p < 0.001). For patients who were EBV-DNA positive or had decreased SAA, the PFS and OS increased significantly after S1-MT (both p < 0.001), while patients with stable SAA did not benefit from S1-MT. Conclusion: S1-MT improved the PFS and OS of metastatic NPC patients. EBV-DNA and SAA status were closely associated with the outcomes of S1-MT. Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR-IOR-16007939.

Gemcitabine Plus Platinum versus Docetaxel Plus Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Study

Background:

A well-established first-line chemotherapy standard for metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma is yet lacking.

Objectives:

To compare the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus platinum versus docetaxel plus platinum regimen as first-line therapies for distal metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Study Design and Participants:

A single center, randomized, open-label, parallel-arm study. The study included 120 patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma who met the study requirements.

Interventions:

Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio through a sealed envelope selection. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m²/d intravenously (IV) for >30 min (days 1 and 8) or docetaxel 75 mg/m²/d IV for 1 h (day 1) were administered to the respective group participants. Nedaplatin 75 mg/m²/d, IV (day 1), cisplatin 75 mg/m²/d IV (day 1) or carboplatin (area under the curve set as 5) IV (day 1) were used in both groups. One cycle duration was 21 days, with 4–6 cycles for all participants.

Outcomes:

The primary assessed outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were short-term efficacy [i.e., response rate (RR) and disease control rate (DCR)] and safety.

Results:

Seven patients withdrew from the study, and efficacy and adverse reactions were obtained for 113 patients (gemcitabine: 56; docetaxel: 57). Compared with the docetaxel plus platinum group, the gemcitabine plus platinum group had significantly higher RR (71.4% vs. 52.6%, P < 0.05); mPFS (9.7 vs. 7.8 months, P < 0.05), and mOS (20.6 vs. 16.8 months, P < 0.01). The significance was not associated with increased adverse reactions, as both groups showed similar Grades 3 and 4 adverse reactions (P > 0.05). DCR was non-significantly higher in the gemcitabine group (85.7% vs. 75.4%, P > 0.05). Multivariable analysis revealed that time to disease progression, number of involved organs, liver metastasis, and grouping were associated with mPFS and mOS (all P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

The combination of gemcitabine with platinum is likely superior to that of docetaxel with platinum as first-line treatment for metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Effects of oral maintenance chemotherapy and predictive value of circulating EBV DNA in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Background/Objectives

Oral maintenance chemotherapy can effectively prolong overall survival (OS) in many types of metastatic cancer, but its role in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (mNPC) is unclear. In this study, the efficacy of oral maintenance chemotherapy in mNPC and the effectiveness of circulating tumor EBV‐DNA for screening patients were evaluated.

Methods

Between June 2016 and December 2017, 141 patients with mNPC who received platinum‐based systemic chemotherapy were included (median follow‐up time, 21 months). Patients were classified into two groups according to the administration of oral maintenance chemotherapy. Plasma samples were collected before, during, and after treatment for the measurement of circulating EBV DNA.

Results

The 2‐year OS was higher for patients who received maintenance chemotherapy than for patients without maintenance chemotherapy (78.9% vs 62.7%, P = .016). Patients with undetectable posttreatment EBV‐DNA after 4‐6 cycles of systemic chemotherapy (n = 73) had a higher 2‐year OS than that of patients with detectable EBV‐DNA (n = 68) (82.16% vs 51.45%, P = .001). For patients with undetectable posttreatment EBV‐DNA, OS was better for those with maintenance chemotherapy than for those without (86.7% vs 73%, P = .027). For patients with detectable posttreatment EBV‐DNA, maintenance chemotherapy did not improve outcomes (49.5% vs 55.4%, P = .824). The most common acute events were hematological toxicity, and all were tolerable and curable.

Conclusions

Oral maintenance chemotherapy with S1 or capecitabine can improve OS in mNPC. Posttreatment EBV‐DNA was not only an independent prognosis factor for mNPC but also can screen out beneficiaries of maintenance chemotherapy.

Maintenance chemotherapy using S-1 following definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with N3 nasopharyngeal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with N3 stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are at high risk for treatment failure. This study aims to assess the efficacy of maintenance chemotherapy (MC) using S-1 (MC-S1), a novel oral fluoropyrimidine agent, following definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with N3 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (N3-NPC).

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted for all N3-NPC treated with CRT with MC (CRT-MC) or without MC (CRT-non-MC) during 2014-2016. Toxicities with MC were recorded. Overall survival (OS), locoregional failure-free survival (LFFS) and distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) were compared between CRT-MC vs. CRT-non-MC cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 130 N3 patients were identified, of whom 21 (16.2%) were treated with CRT-MC, and 109 (83.8%) with CRT-non-MC. Patient characteristics did not significantly differ between the CRT-MC and CRT-non-MC groups, with the exception of the number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Following IMRT 69 patients achieved a complete response (CR) (CRT-MC: 10; CRT-non-MC: 59), 61 had a partial response (PR) (11 vs. 50), and none maintained stable disease (SD) or developed progression of disease (PD). After a median follow-up of 41 months for surviving patients, a significant differences in OS (76.3% vs. 95.2%, p = 0.046) and DMFS (70.3% vs. 90.5%, p = 0.043) but not LFFS (84.9% vs. 100%, p = 0.091) at 3 years were observed between the CRT-non-MC and CRT-MC groups. Skin hyperpigmentation, leucopenia, fatigue, neutropenia, anorexia and nausea were the common but not severe (grade 1-2) toxicities of MC.

CONCLUSIONS

Using MC-S1 in N3-NPC patients following IMRT achieved superior survival to the CRT-non-MC patients. The toxicities of MC-S1 were mild and tolerable. Further clinical trials are required to evaluate the efficacy of MC-S1 in N3-NPC patients.

A retrospective study of concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy on curative effect for treatment of patients with N3 stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for N3 stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

Methods

This study included 44 N3 stage NPC patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy. The intensity-modulated radiation therapy doses were planning target volume (PTV) 70–72 Gy for gross disease in the nasopharynx and 66–70 Gy for positive lymph nodes. The doses for high-risk- and low-risk region PTV were 60–62 and 54–56 Gy in 31–33 fractions. All patients received a concurrent chemotherapy program consisting of cisplatin 100 mg/m², day 1, and the cycle repetition was every 21 days. The adjuvant chemotherapy program consisted of 4 cycles of S-1. The dose of S-1 was determined according to the body surface area (BSA): 40 mg twice a day for BSA <1.25 m²; 50 mg twice a day for 1.25 m²≤BSA<1.5 m²; and 60 mg twice a day for BSA ≥1.5 m². S-1 was given on days 1–28, given 6 weeks apart.

Results

All 44 patients completed at least 2 cycles of concurrent chemotherapy and 4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. The total efficiency of therapy was 100.0%. The 3-year overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), local-regional control, and progression-free survival rates were 86.4%, 84.1%, 97.7%, and 81.8%, respectively. There were no differences in the OS, DMFS, and efficiency between fast-fading group (reaching partial response before the second cycle of concurrent chemotherapy) and general-fading group (the rest of the group). The incidence of rash in the entire group was low, and there was also no association with prognosis.

Conclusion

In patients with N3 stage NPC, concurrent chemoradiotherapy plus S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy yielded an excellent survival benefit, and the toxicities were mild and tolerable. Distant metastasis was the main cause of treatment failure.

Efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens in treatment of advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: A network meta-analysis

We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the short- and long-term efficacy of Gemcitabine, Gemcitabine + S-1 (tegafur), Gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, Gemcitabine + Capecitabine, Gemcitabine + Cisplatin, FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin + irinotecan + fluorouracil + leucovorin), Gemcitabine + oxaliplatin, Gemcitabine + irinotecan, Gemcitabine + Exatecan, Gemcitabine + pemetrexed, Gemcitabine + 5-FU, and S-1 in treating advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC). The odds radios (OR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) were evaluated by a combination of direct evidence and indirect evidence. In total twenty studies were included in this paper. For short-term efficacy, the overall response rate (ORR) was lower for patients treated with Gemcitabine compared with Gemcitabine + S-1, Gemcitabine + Cisplatin, Gemcitabine + irinotecan and S-1. The ORR for FOLFIRINOX was higher compared with Gemcitabine, Gemcitabine + Capecitabine and Gemcitabine + Cisplatin. The disease control rate (DCR) for Gemcitabine was lower compared with Gemcitabine + S-1, Gemcitabine + Cisplatin, and FOLFIRINOX. For long-term efficacy, the 12-month overall survival (OS) rate for FOLFIRINOX was higher compared with Gemcitabine, Gemcitabine + Capecitabine, Gemcitabine + Cisplatin, Gemcitabine + irinotecan, Gemcitabine + Exatecan, and Gemcitabine + pemetrexed. The SUCRA revealed that FOLFIRINOX was relatively better in both short- and long-term efficacy, while Gemcitabine was relatively poorer. In both short- and long-term efficacy, FOLFIRINOX had the best short- and long-term efficacy among the 12 chemotherapy regimens while efficacy of Gemcitabine was relatively poorer in the treatment of advanced or metastatic PC.

Clinical efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus nedaplatin in the treatment of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The purpose was to explore the clinical effects and safety of gemcitabine plus nedaplatin in the treatment of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From March 2014 to August 2015, we recruited 63 advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients in our hospital. Moreover, the 62 cases were randomly divided into control group (n = 31) and treatment group (n = 32). Patients in the control groups were treated with 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m 2 + 500 ml 0.9% sodium chloride injection intervenous drop infusion in day 1-5 plus cisplatin 20 mg/m 2 + 500 ml 0.9% sodium chloride injection intervenous drop infusion in day 1-5 with 21 days per cycle for 3 cycles; Moreover, patients in the treatment group were given gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 + 500 ml 0.9% sodium chloride injection intervenous drop infusion in day 1 and 8 plus nedaplatin 20 mg/m 2 + 500 ml 0.9% sodium chloride injection intervenous drop infusion in day 1 with 21 days per cycle for 3 cycles. The objective response rate (ORR) and chemotherapy-associated toxicities were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

After 3 cycle chemotherapy, the ORR was 41.9% and 78.1% in the control and treatment group, respectively, with statistical difference (P < 0.05); The main chemotherapy-related toxicity were hematological toxicity and gastrointestinal reaction with no statistical difference between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The ORR was relative high for gemcitabine plus nedaplatin in the treatment of advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma with main toxicity of hematological toxicity and gastrointestinal reaction.

Gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin in recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Outcomes are poor for patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma and no well established first-line chemotherapy is available for the disease. We compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma were recruited from 22 hospitals in China. Key inclusion criteria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and measurable lesions according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either gemcitabine (1 g/m² intravenously on days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (80 mg/m² intravenously on day 1), or fluorouracil (4 g/m² in continuous intravenous infusion over 96 h) and cisplatin (80 mg/m² on day 1 given intravenously) once every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The randomisation was done centrally via an interactive phone response system using block randomisation with a size of six. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by the independent image committee in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one cycle of study drug. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01528618.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 20, 2012, and Oct 30, 2015, 362 patients were randomly assigned to a group (181 to the gemcitabine [plus cisplatin] group and 181 to the fluorouracil [plus cisplatin] group). Median follow-up time for progression-free survival was 19·4 months (IQR 12·1-35·6). The median progression-free survival was 7·0 months (4·4-10·9) in the gemcitabine group and 5·6 months (3·0-7·0) in the fluorouracil group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·55 [95% CI 0·44-0·68]; p<0·0001). A total of 180 patients in the gemcitabine group and 173 patients in the fluorouracil group were included in the safety analysis. Significantly different treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events between the gemcitabine and fluorouracil groups were leucopenia (52 [29%] vs 15 [9%]; <0·0001), neutropenia (41 [23%] vs 23 [13%]; p=0·0251), thrombocytopenia (24 [13%] vs three [2%]; p=0·0007), and mucosal inflammation (0 vs 25 [14%]; <0·0001). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in seven (4%) patients in the gemcitabine group and ten (6%) in the fluorouracil group. Six (3%) patients in the gemcitabine group and 14 (8%) patients in the fluorouracil group discontinued treatment because of drug-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths occurred in either group.

INTERPRETATION

Gemcitabine plus cisplatin prolongs progression-free survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The results establish gemcitabine plus cisplatin as the standard first-line treatment option for this population.

FUNDING

Sun Yat-Sen University Clinical Research 5010 Programme, Chinese National Natural Science Foundation project (grant numbers 81372502 and 81201917), the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 program numbers 2012AA02A501 and 2012AA02A502), and the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong (grant number S2013010016564).