Quality of life with biweekly docetaxel and capecitabine in advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer

A randomized phase II trial comparing capecitabine with oxaliplatin or docetaxel as first-line treatment in advanced gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

A combination of fluoropyrimidines and platinum is widely accepted as the standard first-line treatment for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas. However, the benefit compared with platinum-free chemotherapeutic regimens remains controversial. We compared the efficacy and safety of capecitabine with oxaliplatin or docetaxel, as first-line therapy in advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) (capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2; twice daily for 14 days with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1, every 21 days), or DX (capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2; twice daily for 14 days with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 1, every 21 days). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included the disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival, overall survival, and prespecified safety endpoints.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were enrolled in the West China Hospital from April 2012 to August 2016; a total of 83 and 66 patients were eligible for safety and efficacy analyses, respectively. Between the XELOX and DX groups, ORR (24.2% vs 24.2%, p = 1.000), DCR (90.9% vs 75.8%, p = 0.099), progression-free survival (6.1m vs 4.1m, p = 0.346), and overall survival (8.8m vs 9.0m, p = 0.973) were similar. There was no significant difference in toxicity between the two regimens. The frequent grade 3 or higher toxicities in the XELOX and DX groups were peripheral neuropathy and hematological toxicity, respectively. Toxicity was tolerable; no treatment-related deaths occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The DX regimen was not superior to XELOX, but instead, similar. The platinum-containing regimen remains the preferred first-line option for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas, and DX might be considered as an alternative for patients unsuitable for platinum-containing chemotherapy.

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

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

Changes in health-related quality of life in oesophagogastric cancer patients participating in palliative and curative therapies

Background: Various treatments are used to prolong survival and improve quality of life (QOL). The purpose of this study was to assess the change in QOL scores in patients with Oesophagogastric (OG) cancer undergoing curative intent and palliative therapy.

Methods: This was a mix-designed cohort study with a consecutive sampling of patients with OG cancer who underwent curative or palliative treatment regimens. The QOL, as a determinant of efficacy and impact of cancer care, was evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires. QOL data were collected from the eligible subjects at three points of time. The repeated measurement test was used to compare the significance of change in scores.

Results: Overall, 149 patients (54.4% male, 61.1% curative intent, 52.3% esophageal, 37.6 % gastric, 10.1% OG junction cancer; with mean age 62 year) with OG cancer were eligible for inclusion in the study. Compared to the palliative group, the curative group was more likely to have an esophageal tumor site, Squamous Cell Carcinoma, and stage 2 (versus stomach, Adenocarcinoma, and stage 4 in the palliative group). In comparing the patients' functional, global health status, and cancer symptom, considering time, group of treatment, and their mutual effect the result indicated significant difference between the intervention groups.

Conclusion: Most patients with Oesophagogastric cancer are diagnosed with an incurable form of the disease. Hence in absence of curative treatment, palliative therapy is the most effective therapy to maintain patient independency and relieve pain and symptom in order to improve their QOL. The present study has shown that palliative similar to curative intervention can improve the QOL in cancer patient especially in short term.