A Comparison of Multimodality Treatment: Two or Four Courses of Paclitaxel plus Cisplatin or S-1 plus Cisplatin Followed by Surgery for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer, a Randomized Phase II Trial (COMPASS)

[Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer: implications for surgery]

BACKGROUND

Perioperative or neoadjuvant therapy is the mainstay of treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer in Europe; however, data regarding possible modifications in the surgical strategy depending on the response to preoperative treatment are lacking.

METHODS

This review was carried out based on a search of the relevant contemporary literature regarding neoadjuvant or perioperative treatment for gastric adenocarcinoma and the implications of tumor response for the subsequent surgical treatment.

RESULTS

The most recent randomized trials showed a survival benefit after perioperative or neoadjuvant treatment for gastric cancer. Due to the variable response to the preoperatively administered part of the therapy, including complete response, it appears reasonable to develop an individualized surgical approach; however, scientific results supporting this approach are limited due to the variable quality of the surgical resection provided in these studies and the limited rate of complete response to preoperative treatment. Moreover, the reliability of clinical restaging after preoperative treatment is also limited. On the other hand, there is currently evidence that supports a re-evaluation of the necessary resection margins for partial gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer with the help of intraoperative frozen sections and new reconstruction methods.

CONCLUSION

The current evidence does not support the implementation of a complete organ-sparing strategy with active follow-up surveillance for gastric cancer.; however, stomach-preserving partial gastrectomy techniques could be applied for advanced disease more often in the future.

Peripheral Blood Platelet-Lymphocyte Ratio Is Good Predictor of Chemosensitivity and Prognosis in Gastric Cancer Patients

Introduction

Platelets are one factor promoting tumor development. Conversely, lymphocytes are one factor for immune protection. The peripheral blood platelets–lymphocyte ratio (PLR) is useful as an inflammation/immune indicator to predict postoperative recurrence and prognosis of a variety of malignancies. The peripheral blood neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has also been reported as a useful inflammation/immune indicator. However, there are few studies evaluating the relationship between these peripheral blood indicators and the effectiveness of chemotherapy. Thus, we examined these relationships in gastric cancer patients.

Patients and Methods

Between 2005 and 2018, 41 gastric cancer patients treated with preoperative DCS therapy (docetaxel, cisplatin, and S-1) therapy followed by gastrectomy were evaluated. Data for peripheral blood tests prior to the initiation of chemotherapy were used. The effectiveness of chemotherapy was determined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and the pathological response of primary lesions (Ef grade). The relationship between the blood test results and the effectiveness of chemotherapy was evaluated.

Results

Each optimal cut-off value of peripheral inflammation/immune indicators was calculated through ROC curves. Although the pathological responder (Ef grade 2 or 3) revealed significantly better prognosis than the non-responder (Ef grade 0-1b), no relationship was found between responder according to RECIST and prognosis (P=0.014, P=0.992). In univariate analysis, a low PLR (<180, P=0.005), low NLR (<2.6, P=0.019), high lymphocyte (≥1.43, P=0.019) and high PNI (≥40, P=0.032) were identified as prognostic markers, whereas PLR was the only marker correlated with pathological response (P=0.031).

Conclusion

PLR obtained prior to chemotherapy might be a useful indicator for predicting chemosensitivity owing to the simplicity of its procedure.

Survival results of a randomised two-by-two factorial phase II trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with two and four courses of S-1 plus cisplatin (SC) and paclitaxel plus cisplatin (PC) followed by D2 gastrectomy for resectable advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The prognosis for stage III gastric cancer is unsatisfactory by D2 gastrectomy and S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy. Both S-1 plus cisplatin (SC) and paclitaxel plus cisplatin (PC) are promising regimens as neoadjuvant chemotherapy; however, the optimal duration remains unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this 2×2 randomised phase II trial, stage III gastric cancer patients, those with a prognosis corresponding to stage III, and macroscopically resectable stage IV cases were randomised to two or four courses of S-1 (80 mg/m(2) for 21 d with 1 week rest)/cisplatin (60 mg/m(2) at day 8) or PC (80 and 25 mg/m(2), respectively, on days 1, 8, and 15 with 1 week rest) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The primary end-point was the 3-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Between October 2009 and July 2011, 83 patients received 2 courses of SC (n=21), 4 courses of SC (n=20), 2 courses of PC (n=21) and 4 courses of PC (n=21). The 3-year OS was 60.9% for SC and 64.3% for PC and 64.3% for the two courses and 61.0% for the four courses. Subset analyses demonstrated no subgroup which showed any potential survival benefit by PC in comparison to SC or by four courses as in comparison to two courses.

CONCLUSIONS

Two courses of SC as neoadjuvant chemotherapy are recommended as a test arm of a future phase III study for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

UMIN-000002595.

Treatment of stage IV gastric cancer with induction chemotherapy using S-1 and cisplatin followed by curative resection in selected patients

Background

The standard treatment for stage IV gastric cancer is chemotherapy, but outcomes remain poor. The effectiveness of induction chemotherapy followed by surgery in selected patients who had a good response to chemotherapy is unclear.

Methods

A total of 59 patients with stage IV gastric cancer received induction chemotherapy with S-1 and cisplatin. In each cycle, oral S-1 (80 mg/m²) was administered for 3 weeks, followed by a 2-week drug holiday. Intravenous cisplatin (60 mg/m²) was administered on day 8 after adequate premedication and hydration. If unresectable features resolved after chemotherapy, patients underwent curative (R0) resection. The safety and outcomes of this treatment combination were evaluated, and predictive factors for survival were determined.

Results

Thirteen of 59 patients (22%) were eligible for R0 resection after induction chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed an overall median survival time of 13 months and a 3-year survival rate of 18.2%. Among patients who underwent R0 resection, the median survival time was 53 months and the 3-year survival rate was 53.8%. Multivariate analyses showed that negative para-aortic lymph nodes and undergoing R0 resection were independent predictors of survival.

Conclusions

Treatment of stage IV gastric cancer with S-1 and cisplatin induction chemotherapy followed by R0 resection is safe and may improve survival compared with chemotherapy alone. Further study of this dual-modality therapy is warranted.

Low creatinine clearance is a risk factor for D2 gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and safety of D2 surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has not been fully evaluated in patients with gastric cancer. Moreover, risk factor for surgical complications after D2 gastrectomy following NAC is also unknown. The purpose of the present study was to identify risk factors of postoperative complications after D2 surgery following NAC.

METHODS

This study was conducted as an exploratory analysis of a prospective, randomized Phase II trial of NAC. The surgical complications were assessed and classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. A uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors for morbidity.

RESULTS

Among 83 patients who were registered to the Phase II trial, 69 patients received the NAC and D2 gastrectomy. Postoperative complications were identified in 18 patients and the overall morbidity rate was 26.1 %. The results of univariate and multivariate analyses of various factors for overall operative morbidity, creatinine clearance (CCr) ≤ 60 ml/min (P = 0.016) was identified as sole significant independent risk factor for overall morbidity. Occurrence of pancreatic fistula was significantly higher in the patients with a low CCr than in those with a high CCr.

CONCLUSIONS

Low CCr was a significant risk factor for surgical complications in D2 gastrectomy after NAC. Careful attention is required for these patients.

Accuracy of CT staging of locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: cohort evaluation within a randomized phase II study

BACKGROUND

Accuracy of the radiologic diagnosis of gastric cancer staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the COMPASS trial, a randomized phase II study comparing two and four courses of S-1 plus cisplatin and paclitaxel and cisplatin followed by gastrectomy, were examined. The radiologic stage was determined by using thin-slice computed tomography (CT) or multidetector low CT by following Habermann's method.

RESULTS

A total of 75 patients registered in the COMPASS study who underwent surgical resection were examined in this study. The radiologic T and pathologic T stages were not significantly correlated (p = 0.221). The radiologic accuracy and rates of underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis were 42.7, 10.7, and 46.7%, respectively. When patients were stratified according to the pathologic response of the primary tumor, the correlation was not significant in either the responders (n = 32, p = 0.410) or the nonresponders (n = 43, p = 0.742). The radiologic accuracy was 37.5% in the responders and 42.7% in the nonresponders. The radiologic N and pathologic N stages were significantly correlated (p = 0.000). The radiologic accuracy and rates of underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis were 44, 29.3, and 26.7%, respectively. When stratifying the patients with measurable lymph nodes according only to the radiologic response, the correlation was significant in the nonresponders (n = 23, p = 0.035) but not in the responders (n = 28, p = 0.634). The radiologic accuracy was 39.3% in the responders and 52.1% in the nonresponders.

CONCLUSIONS

Restaging using CT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer is considered to be inaccurate and unreliable. In particular, the radiologic T-staging determined after neoadjuvant chemotherapy should not be considered in clinical decision-making.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Induction of a pathological complete response by four courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: early results of the randomized phase II COMPASS trial

BACKGROUND

The prognosis for stage 3 gastric cancer is not satisfactory, even with S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy. A randomized phase II trial was conducted to compare two and four courses of neoadjuvant S-1/cisplatin (SC) and paclitaxel/cisplatin (PC) using a two-by-two factorial design for locally advanced gastric cancer. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We clarified the impact of these regimens on the secondary endpoints, including the clinical and pathological responses, chemotherapy-related toxicities, and surgical results.

METHODS

Patients received S-1 (80 mg/m(2) for 21 days with 1 week's rest)/cisplatin (60 mg/m(2) at day 8) or paclitaxel/cisplatin (80 and 25 mg/m(2), respectively, on days 1, 8, and 15 with 1 week's rest) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were assigned to arm A (two courses of SC, n = 21), arm B (four courses of SC, n = 20), arm C (two courses of PC, n = 21), and arm D (four courses of PC, n = 21). Pathological response rate was 43 % in arm A, 40 % in arm B, 29 % in arm C, and 38 % in arm D. Pathological complete response was only observed in arms B (10 %) and D (10 %). Most bone marrow toxicities, nausea, vomiting, alopecia, and fatigue were slightly higher but acceptable in arms B and D. Grade 3/4 surgical morbidities were not commonly observed in all four arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathological complete response could be induced by four courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy without a marked increase of toxicities, regardless of a SC or PC regimen.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer in Japan: a standing position by comparing with adjuvant chemotherapy

Adjuvant chemotherapy aims to eradicate micrometastatic tumor cells before and after curative surgery. Many Phase III trials have been conducted to study the efficacy of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy; however, most trials have failed to show any survival benefit because of their low statistical power and/or poor patient compliance. Since 2000, two pivotal Phase III trials, the ACTS-GC and the CLASSIC, have demonstrated the efficacy of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy following D2 gastrectomy. Although treatment with S-1 for 1 year or combination therapy with capecitabine and oxaliplatin for 6 months is effective, more intensive chemotherapy is necessary to further improve the survival rates. In Europe, two Phase III trials, the MAGIC and the FNCLCC/FFCD, have produced results that strongly suggest that neoadjuvant chemotherapy is beneficial. The advantages of neoadjuvant chemotherapy include a high rate of R0 resection, tumor regression, high compliance and the avoidance of unnecessary surgery. The disadvantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is over-diagnosis. In Japan, the Japan Clinical Oncology Group has conducted several clinical trials using neoadjuvant chemotherapy to target extensive nodal disease and/or scirrhous carcinomas. The optimal courses and regimens of neoadjuvant chemotherapy should, therefore, be clarified in the future.

Phase II trial of paclitaxel and cisplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer

PURPOSE

Paclitaxel-cisplatin (TC) combination is effective and well tolerated in patients with unresectable gastric cancer. We investigated the efficacy and safety of TC for locally advanced gastric cancers in a neoadjuvant setting.

METHODS

Patients received 2-4 courses of paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin (25 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 8, and 15 in a 4-weekly schedule, followed by radical gastrectomy. Primary endpoint was the pathological response rate: percentage of tumors in which one-third or more parts were affected.

RESULTS

All 52 patients enrolled were eligible. Thirty-six (69.7 %) patients completed two or more courses of chemotherapy. Forty-three patients (82.7 %) underwent surgery, 33 (63.5 %) had R0 resection, and there was no treatment-related death. The pathological response was 34.6 % (95 % CI 22.0-49.1) for all registered patients; the null hypothesis of tumor response ≤10 % was rejected (p < 0.0001). The 3-year overall survival was 41.5 % (95 % CI 27.4-55.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy with TC was safe and effective for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, and further study is needed to confirm the effectiveness of this regimen.

S-1 for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer

INTRODUCTION

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based regimens are used worldwide as the standard treatment in chemotherapy for gastric cancer. S-1 , a fourth-generation oral fluoropyrimidine that combines tegafur and two biochemical modulators: gimeracil and oteracil potassium, is now attracting considerable interest.

AREAS COVERED

This review addresses the clinical evidence of S-1 in gastrointestinal malignancies, such as gastric, colorectal, pancreatic and biliary tract cancers. S-1 has demonstrated advantages over standard therapies, in both advanced and postoperative settings, in large Phase III studies. S-1 alone or S-1 plus cisplatin is recommended in the 2010 Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines, by the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Results from Phase III studies have demonstrated that S-1 in combination with chemotherapies, such as cisplatin in gastric cancer, and irinotecan and oxaliplatin in colorectal cancers, is non-inferior to conventional 5-FU-based standard regimens, with the benefit of convenience and reduced toxicity.

EXPERT OPINION

The excellent design of S-1 aimed to reduce toxicity by avoiding certain routes of degradation, and to enhance activity by reducing catabolism. This has provided not only a suitable alternative to 5-FU, but also higher efficacy.

Pathological complete response of locally advanced gastric cancer after four courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel plus cisplatin: report of a case

We report a case of advanced gastric carcinoma treated successfully by four courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with paclitaxel and cisplatin. The patient was a 43-year-old man with advanced gastric cancer, clinically diagnosed as P0H0M0CY0T3N2, which had invaded the upper body of the stomach and esophagus. He was entered into a clinical trial and received the following NAC regimen: paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2), and cisplatin 25 mg/m(2), on days 1, 8, and 15, followed by a rest on day 22, as one course. The lymph nodes had reduced in size to 59% after two courses and to 40% after four courses, with no sign of severe toxicity. Subsequently, he underwent D2 total gastrectomy with pancreatico-splenectomy. On microscopic examinations, no tumor cells were detected in the ulcer scar of the resected stomach or the regional lymph nodes. Thus, we discuss the potential of long-term NAC, especially for responders to two initial courses.

Phase II trial of preoperative S-1 plus cisplatin followed by surgery for initially unresectable locally advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of preoperative chemotherapy with S-1 plus cisplatin in patients with initially unresectable locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with initially unresectable locally advanced gastric cancer because of severe lymph node metastases or invasion of adjacent structures. Preoperative chemotherapy consisted of S-1 at 80 mg/m(2) divided in two daily doses for 21 days and cisplatin at 60 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 8, repeated every 35 days. If a tumor decreased in size, patients received 1 or 2 more courses. Surgery involved radical resection with D2 lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

Between December 2000 and December 2007, 27 patients were enrolled on the study. No CR was obtained, but PR was seen in 17 cases, and the response rate was 63.0%. Thirteen patients (48.1%) had R0 resections. There were no treatment related deaths. The median overall survival time (MST) and the 3-year overall survival (OS) of all patients were 31.4 months and 31.0%, respectively. Among the 13 patients who underwent curative resection, the median disease-free survival (DFS) and the 3-year DFS were 17.4 months and 23.1%, respectively. The MST and the 3-year OS were 50.1 months and 53.8%, respectively. The most common site of initial recurrence after the R0 resection was the para-aortic lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative S-1 plus cisplatin can be safely delivered to patients undergoing radical gastrectomy. This regimen is promising as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer. For initially unresectable locally advanced gastric cancer, new trials using more effective regimens along with extended lymph node dissection are necessary.

A comparison of multimodality treatment: two and four courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using S-1/CDDP or S-1/CDDP/docetaxel followed by surgery and S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for macroscopically resectable serosa-positive gastric cancer: a randomized phase II trial (COMPASS-D trial)

This randomized Phase II trial will compare the outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using two and four courses of S-1 plus cisplatin or S-1 plus cisplatin plus docetaxel by a two-by-two factorial design for patients with macroscopically resectable serosa-positive gastric cancer. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, patients will receive D2 gastrectomy followed by S-1 chemotherapy for 1 year postoperatively. The primary endpoint is the 3-year overall survival. The sample size is 120 for the two hypotheses: the superiority of four courses compared with two courses and the superiority of S-1 plus cisplatin plus docetaxel compared with S-1 plus cisplatin. This trial will be able to define the more suitable number of cycles and better regimen of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer.