Optimal indications for second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer. Anticancer Drugs. 2012;23:465-470. [PMID: 22227714 DOI: 10.1097/cad.0b013e3283504442]

Integrated clinical and genomic models using machine-learning methods to predict the efficacy of paclitaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Paclitaxel is commonly used as a second-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The decision to proceed with second-line chemotherapy and select an appropriate regimen is critical for vulnerable patients with AGC progressing after first-line chemotherapy. However, no predictive biomarkers exist to identify patients with AGC who would benefit from paclitaxel-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

This study included 288 patients with AGC receiving second-line paclitaxel-based chemotherapy between 2017 and 2022 as part of the K-MASTER project, a nationwide government-funded precision medicine initiative. The data included clinical (age [young-onset vs. others], sex, histology [intestinal vs. diffuse type], prior trastuzumab use, duration of first-line chemotherapy), and genomic factors (pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants). Data were randomly divided into training and validation sets (0.8:0.2). Four machine learning (ML) methods, namely random forest (RF), logistic regression (LR), artificial neural network (ANN), and ANN with genetic embedding (ANN with GE), were used to develop the prediction model and validated in the validation sets.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 64 years (range 25-91), and 65.6% of those were male. A total of 288 patients were divided into the training (n = 230) and validation (n = 58) sets. No significant differences existed in baseline characteristics between the training and validation sets. In the training set, the areas under the ROC curves (AUROC) for predicting better progression-free survival (PFS) with paclitaxel-based chemotherapy were 0.499, 0.679, 0.618, and 0.732 in the RF, LR, ANN, and ANN with GE models, respectively. The ANN with the GE model that achieved the highest AUROC recorded accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score performance of 0.458, 0.912, 0.724, and 0.579, respectively. In the validation set, the ANN with GE model predicted that paclitaxel-sensitive patients had significantly longer PFS (median PFS 7.59 vs. 2.07 months, P = 0.020) and overall survival (OS) (median OS 14.70 vs. 7.50 months, P = 0.008). The LR model predicted that paclitaxel-sensitive patients showed a trend for longer PFS (median PFS 6.48 vs. 2.33 months, P = 0.078) and OS (median OS 12.20 vs. 8.61 months, P = 0.099).

CONCLUSIONS

These ML models, integrated with clinical and genomic factors, offer the possibility to help identify patients with AGC who may benefit from paclitaxel chemotherapy.

Elevation of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio before First-Line Chemotherapy Predicts a Poor Prognosis for Second-Line Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer

OBJECTIVES

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been proposed as an indicator of cancer-related inflammation. The aim of our study was to examine the prognostic value of the NLR for patients with advanced gastric cancer receiving second-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

The association of overall survival (OS) in second-line chemotherapy and the clinicopathological findings including NLR were analyzed retrospectively. The selection criteria were patients who received second-line chemotherapy between January 2010 and June 2015, had histologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinoma, and were followed up until death or for 180 days or longer.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients met the selection criteria. Multivariate analysis revealed that performance status 2, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, and NLR before first-line chemotherapy ≥3 were adverse predictive markers. NLR before second-line chemotherapy was not associated with OS. A prognostic model was constructed dividing patients into three groups according to the number of adverse predictive factors: good (no factor), intermediate (one factor), and poor (more than two factors). The median OS for the good, intermediate, and poor groups was 14.3, 7.2, and 4.4 months, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced gastric cancer with performance status 2, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, and NLR before first-line chemotherapy ≥3 are not likely to benefit from second-line chemotherapy.

Positioning of second-line treatment for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

Tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract are increasing in incidence; yet, approaches to the treatment of advanced gastric and/or gastroesophageal junction cancer vary widely, with no internationally agreed first‐line regimens. Recent clinical trials have shown that second‐line treatment is now possible for selected patients with advanced disease, and current data suggest that the combination of ramucirumab plus paclitaxel may become a standard of care in the second‐line setting for metastatic gastric cancer. Several prognostic factors have been identified for overall survival in the second‐line setting; this emphasizes the need for careful sequencing of all treatments to ensure that individual patients receive optimum care. This article reviews published data on the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, with a particular emphasis on second‐line chemotherapy, and suggests treatment sequences based on current understanding.

Taxanes in the Treatment of Advanced Gastric Cancer

Although rapid advances in treatment options have improved the prognosis of advanced gastric cancer (AGC), it remains a major public health problem and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the world. Taxanes (paclitaxel and docetaxel) are microtubule stabilizing agents that inhibit the process of cell division, and have shown antitumor activity in the treatment of AGC as a single or combination chemotherapy. Accordingly, this review focuses on the efficacy and tolerability of taxanes in the first- or second-line chemotherapy setting for AGC.

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.

Second-line chemotherapy versus supportive cancer treatment in advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many patients with refractory or relapsed gastric cancer after first-line chemotherapy have received salvage chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. However, there was no evidence to support this treatment until recent phase III trials demonstrated substantial prolongation of overall survival. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of these trials and investigated whether second-line chemotherapy was more effective than best supportive care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE (1950 to March week 4, 2013) and EMBASE (1980-2013, week 13). In addition, we searched all abstracts and virtual meeting presentations from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conferences held between 2004 and 2013.

RESULTS

The search process yielded 578 studies, two of which were randomized phase III trials that compared chemotherapy with supportive care. From the abstracts and virtual meeting presentations of ASCO held between 2004 and 2013, 127 abstracts were identified that evaluated second-line chemotherapy; only one relevant abstract was included in the meta-analysis. A total of 410 patients were eligible for analysis, of whom 150 received docetaxel chemotherapy, and 81 received irinotecan chemotherapy. A significant reduction in the risk of death [HR = 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.79, P < 0.0001] was observed with salvage chemotherapy. When the analysis was restricted to irinotecan or docetaxel, there was still significant reduction in the risk of death with each chemotherapeutic agent. The HR was 0.55 (95% CI 0.40-0.77, P = 0.0004) for irinotecan and 0.71 (95% CI 0.56-0.90, P = 0.004) for docetaxel.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated evidence to support second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer.

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

Purpose

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

Materials and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Advanced gastric cancer: is there enough evidence to call second-line therapy standard?

Gastric cancer and cancer of the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) are the 4th most common cancer diagnoses worldwide with regional differences in incidence rates. The treatment of gastric and GOJ cancers is complex and requires multimodality treatment including chemotherapy treatment, surgery, and radiotherapy. During the past decade considerable improvements were achieved by advanced surgical techniques, tailored chemotherapies/radiotherapy and technical innovations in clinical diagnostics. In patients with advanced or metastatic gastric/GOJ cancer systemic chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine/platinum-based regimens (+/-human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 antibody) is the mainstay of treatment. Despite these improvements, the clinical outcome for patients with advanced or metastatic disease is generally poor with 5-year survival rates ranging between 5%-15%. These poor survival rates may to some extent be related that standard therapies beyond first-line therapies have never been defined. Considering that this patient population is often not fit enough to receive further treatments there is an increasing body of evidence from phase-2 studies that in fact second-line therapies may have a positive impact in terms of overall survival. Moreover two recently published phase-3 studies support the use of second-line chemotherapy. A South Korean study compared either, irinotecan or docetaxel with best supportive care and a German study compared irinotecan with best supportive care-both studies met their primary endpoint overall survival. In this "Field of Vision" article, we review these recently published phase-3 studies and put them into the context of clinical prognostic factors helping to guide treatment decisions in patients who most likely benefit.