Fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and mitomycin combination versus PELF chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a prospective randomized trial of the Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research

TOXview: a novel graphical presentation of cancer treatment toxicity profiles

Background: Toxicity profiles play a crucial role in the choice between specific palliative chemotherapy regimens. To optimize the quality of life for cancer patients, patients should be adequately informed about potential toxicities before undergoing chemotherapy. Therefore, we constructed TOXviews, a novel graphical presentation and overview of toxicity profiles to improve information provision about adverse events. As an example, we analyzed first-line chemotherapy regimens for advanced esophagogastric cancer (AEGC). Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ASCO and ESMO for prospective phase II or III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on palliative first-line systemic treatment for AEGC until February 2017. We extracted proportions of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 1-2 (mild) and 3-4 (severe) adverse events from each chemotherapy arm and pooled these by using single-arm meta-analysis. Toxicity profiles per chemotherapy regimen were visualized in bidirectional bar charts with pooled proportions plus 95% confidence intervals. For comparative analysis, chemotherapy regimens were grouped in singlets, doublets and triplets. Results: We included 92 RCTs with a total of 16,963 patients. TOXviews for 3 fluoropyrimidine singlets, 5 cisplatin-containing doublets (C-doublets), 10 fluoropyrimidine non-cisplatin containing doublets (F-doublets), 4 anthracycline-containing triplets (A-triplets) and 5 taxane-containing triplets (T-triplets) were constructed. C-doublets, A-triplets and T-triplets all showed an increased incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events and clinically relevant grade 1-2 adverse events compared to F-doublets. Conclusion: TOXview provides a new graphical presentation and overview of chemotherapy toxicities. TOXviews can be used to educate physicians about the incidences of AEs of systemic therapy and improve informed decision-making.

A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis for Identifying the Optimal Taxane-Based Chemotherapy Regimens for Treating Gastric Cancer

Background: Several taxane-based chemotherapy regimens are effective in the treatment of gastric cancer; nevertheless, their comparative efficacy and safety remain disputed. This network meta-analysis (NMA) was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of different taxane-based chemotherapy regimens against gastric cancer.

Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in multiple electronic databases. A Bayesian NMA was performed to combine the direct and indirect evidence and estimate the comparative efficacy and safety of different taxane-based chemotherapy regimens simultaneously by utilizing WinBUGS 1.4.3 and Stata 13.1 software. The efficacy outcomes included overall survival rate (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR), and the safety outcomes were adverse reactions (ADRs), namely, neutropenia, leucopenia, vomiting, and fatigue.

Results: A total of 37 RCTs were identified involving 7,178 patients with gastric cancer, and 10 taxane-based chemotherapy regimens (RT, T, TC, TCF, TF, TO, TOF, mTCF, mTF, and mTOF) were collected in gastric cancer therapy. According to the results of cluster analysis, compared with other taxane-based chemotherapy regimens, the regimens of TOF, mTCF, and TF were associated with the most favorable clinical efficacy in improving OS, PFS, and ORR. On the other hand, the regimens of T and mTF had the potential to be the most tolerable and acceptable therapeutic alternative in terms of ADRs.

Conclusions: The current NMA provides the evidence that the combination of taxanes (paclitaxel or docetaxel) and fluorouracil is associated with the most preferable and beneficial option for patients with gastric cancer, although additional results from multicenter trials and high-quality studies will be pivotal for supporting our findings.

Randomization in clinical studies

Randomized controlled trial is widely accepted as the best design for evaluating the efficacy of a new treatment because of the advantages of randomization (random allocation). Randomization eliminates accidental bias, including selection bias, and provides a base for allowing the use of probability theory. Despite its importance, randomization has not been properly understood. This article introduces the different randomization methods with examples: simple randomization; block randomization; adaptive randomization, including minimization; and response-adaptive randomization. Ethics related to randomization are also discussed. The study is helpful in understanding the basic concepts of randomization and how to use R software.

Co-operative groups in the development of chemotherapy for gastric cancer

In the multimodality treatment strategy for gastric cancer, chemotherapy has an important role in conferring survival benefit. For the last three decades, great progress has been achieved in adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy. Powerful combination regimens using doublet or triplet cytotoxic agents have been developed and new molecular targeted drugs, including trastuzumab and ramucirumab, have been introduced in clinical practice. These advances have resulted from the accumulation of many clinical trials. A well-designed phase III trial can change standard treatment; however, such a trial is hard to complete due to its huge cost and need to recruit many patients. Some co-operative groups have actively made efforts at fundraising and patient recruitment, which can make implementation of high-quality and large-scale phase III trials possible. This review summarizes the development of chemotherapy for gastric cancer with focus on co-operative groups around the world, considering effective treatment developments in gastric cancer. We studied 11 active co-operative groups, including six in Europe, two in the United States, and three in Japan, that have completed one or more phase III trials cited in the major guidelines. Each co-operative group had its own characteristics and contributed to the establishment of standard treatment in each region. International collaboration in the development of gastric cancer treatment may be difficult due to regional differences in standards of care, particularly for resectable gastric cancer. Whereas, intergroup collaboration within each region is a reasonable method to effectively develop treatments for resectable and advanced gastric cancer.

Short-term efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A network meta-analysis was performed to compare the short-term efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of different chemotherapy regimens for advanced gastric cancer were included in this study. Network meta-analysis combined direct evidence and indirect evidence to evaluate the odds ratio and draw surface under the cumulative ranking curves of different chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer.

RESULTS

The results of surface under the cumulative ranking curves showed that S-1 and capecitabine regimens were better than fluorouracil. As for multi-drug combination regimens, the disease control rate of cisplatin + capecitabine, docetaxel + cisplatin + fluorouracil and etoposide + cisplatin + capecitabine regimens were relatively better, while fluorouracil + adriamycin + mitomycin regimen was relatively poorer when compared with cisplatin + fluorouracil regimen. Additionally, the overall response ratio of cisplatin + capecitabine, paclitaxel + fluorouracil, docetaxel + cisplatin + fluorouracil and etoposide + cisplatin + fluorouracil regimens were relatively better, while the disease control rate of fluorouracil + adriamycin + mitomycin regimen was relatively poorer when compared with cisplatin + fluorouracil regimen. Furthermore, the results of cluster analysis demonstrated that cisplatin + capecitabine, etoposide + cisplatin + capecitabine, S-1 + paclitaxel and S-1 + irinotecan chemotherapy regimens had better disease control rate and overall response ratio for advanced gastric cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

This network meta-analysis clearly showed that multi-drug combination chemotherapy regimens based on capecitabine and S-1 might be the best chemotherapy regimen for advanced gastric cancer.

A Pilot Clinical Trial of Postoperative Intensive Weekly Chemotherapy Using Cisplatin, Epi-Doxorubicin, 5-Fluorouracil, 6S-Leucovorin, Glutathione and Filgrastim in Patients with Resected Gastric Cancer

Aims and background

The study was performed to assess the feasibility and activity of an intensive chemotherapeutic regimen as adjuvant treatment for patients with resected gastric cancer at high risk of recurrence (PT2N1-2; pT3-4Nany M0).

Patients and methods

Starting 21 to 28 days after potentially curative surgery for primary gastric cancer, 25 patients received 8 weekly cycles of cisplatin 40 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, epidoxorubicin 35 mg/m2, 6S-stereoisomer of leucovorin at a dose of 250 mg/m2, and glutathione at a dose of 1.5 g/m2. From the day after to the day before each cycle of chemotherapy, filgrastim was administered by subcutaneous injection at a dose of 5 μg/kg.

Results

After a median follow-up of 33 months, 80% of the patients were alive and disease-free. Five patients had relapsed: three in the liver, one in the peritoneum and one in the lymph nodes. Toxicity was mild: five patients experienced WHO grade III toxicity (three leukopenia, two thrombocytopenia); no toxic deaths occurred.

Conclusion

Intensive weekly chemotherapy is a feasible postoperative treatment option for patients with resected gastric cancer at high risk of relapse. These data, together with recent results in advanced disease, make this approach of interest for the development of new programs of adjuvant therapy in this setting.

Epirubicin, Cisplatin and Continuous Infusion 5-Fluorouracil (ECF) in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Single Institution Experience

Aims and Background

The role of chemotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer has been controversial, but chemotherapy has recently been shown to relieve tumor-related symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival when compared with best supportive care. Furthermore, palliative chemotherapy is also cost-effective. “Second-generation” combination chemotherapy regimens were developed in the 1980s with high activity in advanced or metastatic gastric cancer (EAP, FAMTX, PELF, ECF). In randomized studies, EAP demonstrated no difference in activity but a significantly higher overall toxicity and toxic death rate than FAMTX, and the ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) regimen gave a survival and response advantage, tolerable toxicity, better quality of life and was more cost-effective than FAMTX.

Methods

Sixty patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer were treated with the ECF regimen (21 weeks of 5-fluorouracil given by continuous infusion through a central line at 200 mg/m2 for 24-hr combined with cisplatin at 60 mg/m2 iv and epirubicin at 50 mg/m2 iv beginning on day 1 and repeated every 3 weeks for 8 courses). There were 42 males and 18 females, with a median age of 64 years (range, 40-74). The median performance status was 1. The histologic type was adenocarcinoma in 44 patients and undifferentiated carcinoma in 16 (27%). Three patients had locally advanced disease (5%) and 57 had metastatic disease (95%). Seven patients (12%) had received prior chemotherapy for advanced disease.

Results

All patients were assessable for toxicity and 55 for response (5 had insufficient treatment). Toxicity was mild or moderate, and there was no toxic death. Incidence of WHO toxicity ≥ 2 was nausea and vomiting in 3%, mucositis in 3%, leukopenia in 7%, anemia in 3%, and thrombocytopenia in 2%. Port-a-Cath toxicity was thrombosis in 4, dislocation in 2 and infection in 3 patients. Seven complete responses and 13 partial responses (overall response rate, 36%) were achieved, with a response rate of 39% in untreated and 17% in pretreated patients. Nine patients (16%) had stable disease and 26 (47%) progressive disease. Most patients felt symptomatically improved on ECF.

Conclusions

Our study confirms that the ECF regimen has a favorable pattern of toxicity and is feasible on an outpatient basis. However, it did not confirm the high response rate reported in other phase II trials.

A Pilot Phase ii Study of Chemotherapy with Oxaliplatin, Folinic acid, 5-Fluorouracil and Irinotecan in Metastatic Gastric Cancer

Aims and background

Previous phase II studies have reported that combinations of oxaliplatin, folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil or irinotecan, folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil are associated with good efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in metastatic gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate chemotherapy with oxaliplatin, folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan (COFFI regimen) in metastatic gastric cancer.

Methods

Patients received oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2 d 1), irinotecan (140 mg/m2 d 1), and L-folinic acid (200 mg/m2 d 1) followed by 5-fluorouracil bolus (400 mg/m2 d 1) and then 5-fluorouracil (2,400 mg/m2 48-h continuous infusion), every 14 days.

Results

Seventeen patients with metastatic gastric cancer were enrolled. Eight patients were pretreated for advanced disease. Of the 9 chemo-naïve patients, 8 were evaluated for response (1 patient was lost to follow-up): one complete response, 5 partial responses and 2 progressions of disease occurred, giving an overall response rate, at intention-to-treat analysis, of 67%. Of the 8 pretreated patients, 6 were evaluated for response (2 patients had nonmeasurable disease): one partial response, 2 disease stabilizations and 3 progressions of disease occurred, giving an overall response rate, at intention-to-treat analysis, of 12%. Median progression-free and overall survival in chemo-naïve patients were 8.2 and 10.2 months, respectively, and in pretreated patients 2.7 and 3 months. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 55% of chemo-naïve patients. Thrombocytopenia, and anemia were observed in 18% and 29%, respectively. Grade 3 nausea/vomiting occurred in 12% and grade 3 diarrhea in 6%.

Conclusions

The COFFI regimen is active and well tolerated, therefore phase III studies are warranted.

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide. In "Western" countries, most people are either diagnosed at an advanced stage, or develop a relapse after surgery with curative intent. In people with advanced disease, significant benefits from targeted therapies are currently limited to HER-2 positive disease treated with trastuzumab, in combination with chemotherapy, in first-line. In second-line, ramucirumab, alone or in combination with paclitaxel, demonstrated significant survival benefits. Thus, systemic chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Uncertainty remains regarding the choice of the regimen.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of chemotherapy versus best supportive care (BSC), combination versus single-agent chemotherapy and different chemotherapy combinations in advanced gastric cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Embase up to June 2016, reference lists of studies, and contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only RCTs on systemic, intravenous or oral chemotherapy versus BSC, combination versus single-agent chemotherapy and different chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified studies and extracted data. A third investigator was consulted in case of disagreements. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 64 RCTs, of which 60 RCTs (11,698 participants) provided data for the meta-analysis of overall survival. We found chemotherapy extends overall survival (OS) by approximately 6.7 months more than BSC (hazard ratio (HR) 0.3, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.24 to 0.55, 184 participants, three studies, moderate-quality evidence). Combination chemotherapy extends OS slightly (by an additional month) versus single-agent chemotherapy (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.89, 4447 participants, 23 studies, moderate-quality evidence), which is partly counterbalanced by increased toxicity. The benefit of epirubicin in three-drug combinations, in which cisplatin is replaced by oxaliplatin and 5-FU is replaced by capecitabine is unknown.Irinotecan extends OS slightly (by an additional 1.6 months) versus non-irinotecan-containing regimens (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95, 2135 participants, 10 studies, high-quality evidence).Docetaxel extends OS slightly (just over one month) compared to non-docetaxel-containing regimens (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.95, 2001 participants, eight studies, high-quality evidence). However, due to subgroup analyses, we are uncertain whether docetaxel-containing combinations (docetaxel added to a single-agent or two-drug combination) extends OS due to moderate-quality evidence (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.91, 1466 participants, four studies, moderate-quality evidence). When another chemotherapy was replaced by docetaxel, there is probably little or no difference in OS (HR 1.05; 0.87 to 1.27, 479 participants, three studies, moderate-quality evidence). We found there is probably little or no difference in OS when comparing capecitabine versus 5-FU-containing regimens (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.11, 732 participants, five studies, moderate-quality evidence) .Oxaliplatin may extend (by less than one month) OS versus cisplatin-containing regimens (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98, 1105 participants, five studies, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether taxane-platinum combinations with (versus without) fluoropyrimidines extend OS due to very low-quality evidence (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.06, 482 participants, three studies, very low-quality evidence). S-1 regimens improve OS slightly (by less than an additional month) versus 5-FU-containing regimens (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.00, 1793 participants, four studies, high-quality evidence), however since S-1 is used in different doses and schedules between Asian and non-Asian population, the applicability of this finding to individual populations is uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy improves survival (by an additional 6.7 months) in comparison to BSC, and combination chemotherapy improves survival (by an additional month) compared to single-agent 5-FU. Testing all patients for HER-2 status may help to identify patients with HER-2-positive tumours, for whom, in the absence of contraindications, trastuzumab in combination with capecitabine or 5-FU in combination with cisplatin has been shown to be beneficial. For HER-2 negative people, all different two-and three-drug combinations including irinotecan, docetaxel, oxaliplatin or oral 5-FU prodrugs are valid treatment options for advanced gastric cancer, and consideration of the side effects of each regimen is essential in the treatment decision. Irinotecan-containing combinations and docetaxel-containing combinations (in which docetaxel was added to a single-agent or two-drug (platinum/5-FUcombination) show significant survival benefits in the comparisons studied above. Furthermore, docetaxel-containing three-drug regimens have increased response rates, but the advantages of the docetaxel-containing three-drug combinations (DCF, FLO-T) are counterbalanced by increased toxicity. Additionally, oxaliplatin-containing regimens demonstrated a benefit in OS as compared to the same regimen containing cisplatin, and there is a modest survival improvement of S-1 compared to 5-FU-containing regimens.Whether the survival benefit for three-drug combinations including cisplatin, 5-FU, and epirubicin as compared to the same regimen without epirubicin is still valid when second-line therapy is routinely administered and when cisplatin is replaced by oxaliplatin and 5-FU by capecitabine is questionable. Furthermore, the magnitude of the observed survival benefits for the three-drug regimens is not large enough to be clinically meaningful as defined recently by the American Society for Clinical Oncology (Ellis 2014). In contrast to the comparisons in which a survival benefit was observed by adding a third drug to a two-drug regimen at the cost of increased toxicity, the comparison of regimens in which another chemotherapy was replaced by irinotecan was associated with a survival benefit (of borderline statistical significance), but without increased toxicity. For this reason irinotecan/5-FU-containing combinations are an attractive option for first-line treatment. Although they need to be interpreted with caution, subgroup analyses of one study suggest that elderly people have a greater benefit form oxaliplatin, as compared to cisplatin-based regimens, and that people with locally advanced disease or younger than 65 years might benefit more from a three-drug regimen including 5-FU, docetaxel, and oxaliplatin as compared to a two-drug combination of 5-FU and oxaliplatin, a hypothesis that needs further confirmation. For people with good performance status, the benefit of second-line chemotherapy has been established in several RCTs.

Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma: Is More Chemotherapy Better?

OPINION STATEMENT

Two cycles of neoadjuvant cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine (CF) and 6 cycles of perioperative CF with or without epirubicin are an evidence-based approach in operable esophageal and esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinomas. Three-drug regimens with anthracycline or taxane are associated with significantly higher tumor regression rates, with an expected increase in toxicity. In order to achieve an R0 resection and consequently a survival advantage, in selected patients having a risk of a threatened margin or incomplete resection, chemotherapy might be continued beyond 2 cycles if a response has been demonstrated. In metastatic setting, multidrug combination regimens have demonstrated a significant survival benefit when compared to single-agent regimes. A three-drug regimen should be considered for fit patients and/or when a response is required for symptom control. The expected increase in toxicity needs to be carefully considered and discussed with patients. The choice to use a taxane in first-line setting may limit the options of second-line treatment to irinotecan-containing regimens and also precludes the use of anthracyclines in the first line. For this reason, we prefer to reserve taxane-based therapy for the second-line setting.

Platinum-based versus non-platinum-based chemotherapy as first line treatment of inoperable, advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the platinum regimen is adopted widely nowadays in spite of the excessive side effects, there is still no international standard for palliative chemotherapy of advanced gastric cancer. This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and tolerability of platinum versus non-platinum chemotherapy as first-line palliative treatment in patients with inoperable, advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Randomized phase II and III clinical trials on first-line palliative chemotherapy in inoperable, advanced gastric cancer were identified by electronic searches of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, and hand searches of relevant abstract books and reference lists. Response rates, overall survival, and toxicity were analyzed. Depending on whether new-generation agents (S-1, taxanes and irinotecan) were utilized, the non-platinum regimens were divided into two subgroup.

RESULTS

Compared to non-platinum regimens containing new-generation agents, the use of platinum-based regimens was associated with better response (risk ratio (RR) = 1.94, 95%CI[1.48, 2.55], p<0.001), an increase of overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.85, 95%CI[0.78, 0.92], p<0.001), a higher risk of hematological and non-hematological toxicity. No statistically significant increase in response (RR = 1.03, 95%CI [0.85, 1.24], p = 0.76) or overall survival (HR = 1.07, 95%CI [0.88, 1.30], p = 0.49) was found when platinum therapies were compared to new-generation agent based combination regimens. The toxicity of platinum-based regimens was significantly higher for hematologic toxicity, nausea and vomiting, and neurotoxicity, but not for diarrhea and toxic death rate.

CONCLUSION

New-generation agent based combination regimens achieved similar response rate and overall survival as platinum-based therapy that had generally higher side effects. S-1, taxanes and irinotecan seemed to be valid options for patients with inoperable, advanced gastric cancer as first-line chemotherapy.

Bimonthly regimen of high-dose leucovorin, infusional 5-fluorouracil, docetaxel, and cisplatin (modified DCF) in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The combination of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) is an effective but highly toxic regimen for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. To improve tolerability while maintaining the efficacy of the DCF regimen, we developed a modified DCF regimen including an infusional 5-fluorouracil administration according to the de Gramont regimen.

METHODS

In this study, 70 patients with advanced gastric cancer were treated. Each 2-week cycle consisted of docetaxel (60 mg/m(2)), cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)), a 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)) i.v. bolus, and 5-fluorouracil (2,400 mg/m(2)) i.v. over 46 h plus leucovorin (400 mg/m(2)) i.v. over 2 h.

RESULTS

The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.1-10.9) and 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.4-14.2), respectively; the 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates were 46.3 and 18.4%, respectively. Twenty-nine (41.4%) partial responses, 19 (27.1%) stable disease, and 22 (31.4%) progression of disease were observed. Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia (37.1%), febrile neutropenia (15.7%), thrombocytopenia (10.0%), anemia (8.6%), nausea and vomiting (10.0%), stomatitis (5.7%), infection (8.6%), and diarrhea (2.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that a de Gramont-based DCF regimen may have tolerable toxicities and be an effective and convenient palliative treatment for advanced gastric cancer.

Role of chemotherapy for advanced/recurrent gastric cancer: an individual-patient-data meta-analysis

We conducted an individual-patient-data meta-analysis of the efficacy of chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced/recurrent gastric cancer (AGC). Our primary research question was whether the experimental arms of the trials included in the meta-analysis showed a benefit as compared with their corresponding control arms. MEDLINE (up to 2010), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, National Institutes of Health (NIH) trial registry and proceedings of major oncologic and gastrointestinal cancer meetings were searched. Randomised controlled trials for AGC closed to patient accrual before the end of 2006 were eligible. As of December 2010, individual patient data were available from 22 trials (4245 patients, representing 47% of the targeted data) of 55 eligible trials. The overall comparison of experimental arms with the corresponding control arms showed statistically significant differences in terms of both OS and PFS. Hazard ratio was 0.88 (95% confidence interval 0.82-0.94, P<0.0001) for OS and 0.81 (0.76-0.88, P<0.0001) for PFS. The results of the sub-analysis of adding a given chemotherapeutic agent to any chemotherapy confirm the results of the overall analysis, with a hazard reduction of 11% for OS (P<0.01) and 26% for PFS (P<0.0001). This meta-analysis of individual patient data shows that the additions of experimental chemotherapeutic agents to pre-existing control or standard regimens have produced a modest improvement in OS and PFS. Median survival remained below 1 year for all investigated chemotherapy regimens and none emerged as a clear standard.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer treated with Cisplatin: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Several reports suggest that cisplatin is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, because the excess risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) with cisplatin-based chemotherapy has not been well described, we conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the incidence and risk of VTEs associated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles published from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2010. Eligible studies included prospective randomized phase II and III trials evaluating cisplatin-based versus non-cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with solid tumors. Data on all-grade VTEs were extracted. Study quality was calculated using Jadad scores. Incidence rates, relative risks (RRs), and 95% CIs were calculated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 8,216 patients with various advanced solid tumors from 38 randomized controlled trials were included. The incidence of VTEs was 1.92% (95% CI, 1.07 to 2.76) in patients treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy and 0.79% (95% CI, 0.45 to 1.13) in patients treated with non-cisplatin-based regimens. Patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy had a significantly increased risk of VTEs (RR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.23; P = .01). Exploratory subgroup analysis revealed the highest RR of VTEs in patients receiving a weekly equivalent cisplatin dose > 30 mg/m(2) (2.71; 95% CI, 1.17 to 6.30; P = .02) and in trials reported during 2000 to 2010 (1.72; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.34; P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Cisplatin is associated with a significant increase in the risk of VTEs in patients with advanced solid tumors when compared with non-cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Cisplatin, Epirubicin, Levoleucovorin (or Leucovorin), and Fluorouracil (PELF) Regimen for Gastric Cancer

The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of antineoplastic therapy, and the agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases.

Bimonthly regimen of high-dose leucovorin, infusional 5-fluorouracil, docetaxel, and cisplatin (modified DCF) in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The combination of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) is an effective but highly toxic regimen for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. To improve tolerability while maintaining the efficacy of the DCF regimen, we developed a modified DCF regimen including an infusional 5-fluorouracil administration according to the de Gramont regimen.

METHODS

In this study, 70 patients with advanced gastric cancer were treated. Each 2-week cycle consisted of docetaxel (60 mg/m(2)), cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)), a 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)) i.v. bolus, and 5-fluorouracil (2,400 mg/m(2)) i.v. over 46 h plus leucovorin (400 mg/m(2)) i.v. over 2 h.

RESULTS

The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 9.0 months (95% CI, 7.1-10.9) and 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.4-14.2), respectively; the 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates were 46.3 and 18.4%, respectively. Twenty-nine (41.4%) partial responses, 19 (27.1%) stable disease, and 22 (31.4%) progression of disease were observed. Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia (37.1%), febrile neutropenia (15.7%), thrombocytopenia (10.0%), anemia (8.6%), nausea and vomiting (10.0%), stomatitis (5.7%), infection (8.6%), and diarrhea (2.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that a de Gramont-based DCF regimen may have tolerable toxicities and be an effective and convenient palliative treatment for advanced gastric cancer.

Bimonthly regimen of high-dose leucovorin, infusional 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cisplatin (modified ECF) as adjuvant chemotherapy in resected gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The administration of the de Gramont regimen in combination with cisplatin and epirubicin (modified ECF) has previously been reported as a treatment for advanced gastric cancer, but here we report this regimen combination in an adjuvant setting for the first time.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients with curatively resected gastric cancer were treated. Each 2-week cycle consisted of epirubicin (50 mg/m(2)), cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) IV bolus (400 mg/m(2)) and 5-FU IV (2,400 mg/m(2)) over 46 h plus leucovorin IV (400 mg/m(2)) over 2 h. Postoperative chemoradiotherapy was also administered to the patients when indicated. We retrospectively reviewed the patients who were treated with modified ECF.

RESULTS

The median disease-free survival (DFS) was 40.7 months and the 1-, 3- and 5-year DFS rates were 78.5, 55.7 and 44.6%, respectively. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were hematological and gastrointestinal.

CONCLUSION

A modified ECF regimen may be an effective and convenient treatment with tolerable toxicities for the adjuvant treatment of gastric cancer. It may provide an alternative regimen to the standard ECF when a continuous ambulatory infusion pump is not feasible or not preferred by the patient.

Systemic therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a clinical practice guideline

QUESTION

What is the optimal chemotherapy regimen in advanced gastric cancer?

PERSPECTIVES

Gastric cancer is the second leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Despite low incidence rates for gastric cancer in Ontario, the overall prognosis is bleak, with 5-year survival rates of approximately 23% in Canada. Even with the considerable body of research available on chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer, uncertainty remains. There is no recognized standard treatment, and there appears to be geographic variation in practice.

OUTCOMES

Outcomes of interest were overall survival, objective response rate (complete plus partial responses), time to disease progression, adverse effects, and quality of life.

METHODOLOGY

After a systematic review, a practice guideline containing clinical recommendations relevant to patients in Ontario was drafted. The practice guideline was reviewed and approved by the Gastrointestinal Disease Site Group (gi dsg) and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care. External review by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a survey, the results of which were incorporated into the practice guideline.

PRACTICE GUIDELINE

The gi dsg makes the following recommendations: To improve survival, a platinum agent should be included in any combination chemotherapy regimen.Within a combination chemotherapy regimen, oral capecitabine is preferred over intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5fu)-that is, epirubicin-cisplatin-capecitabine is preferred over the prior standard regimen, epirubicin-cisplatin-5fu (ecf).Epirubicin-oxaliplatin-capecitabine (eox) is a reasonable alternative to ecf. The choice between ecf and eox should be based on patient preference.Trastuzumab in combination with cisplatin and a fluoropyrimidine (5fu or oral capecitabine) is recommended for advanced gastric cancer positive for the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (her2/neu).

Predictive value of VEGF gene polymorphisms for metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving first-line treatment including fluorouracil, irinotecan, and bevacizumab

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of germline vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene polymorphisms (VGPs) on the efficacy of the anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab (Bev) in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) patients.

METHODS

Forty MCRC patients eligible for a first-line therapy were enrolled in this prospective trial and treated with FOLinate/Fluorouracil/Irinotecan (FOLFIRI) + Bev (male/female = 22:18, age (median) = 61 years). Eight VGPs within the promoter/5'UTR region were evaluated in patient blood samples. Primary endpoint was association between VGPs and median progression-free survival (mPFS). Overall radiological response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and toxicity were assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

VGPs -2578, -1512, -1451, -1411, and -460 were in complete linkage disequilibrium and therefore analyzed as haplotype (two variants: Haplo1: A-18 bp insertion-T-4G-C and Haplo2: C-18 bp deletion-C-5G-T, respectively). Seventeen patients Haplo2/Haplo2 had significantly shorter mPFS compared to 23 patients Haplo1/Haplo1 or Haplo1/Haplo2 (mPFS, 9 vs. 15.4 months, respectively, p = 0.02; hazard ratio (HR), 2.64). Also, VGPs -152 (G/G vs. G/A + A/A) and -1154 (G/G vs. G/A + A/A) were significantly associated with PFS (mPFS, 8.9 vs. 15.4 months, p = 0.007; HR, 3.53 and 9.8 vs. 16 months, p = 0.03, HR, 2.32, respectively). In the multivariate analysis including also biochemical variables known to influence prognosis, VGP -1154 retained an independent predictive value for mPFS (G/G over G/A + A/A = HR, 4.43; p = 0.02). With regard to ORR, only VGP -634 was significantly associated with response (G/G vs. G/C + C/C = 64% vs. 14%, p = 0.03). No significant influence on OS and toxicity by the investigated VGPs was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although these data need to be confirmed in larger trials, investigation of germline VGPs may help identify patients who are more sensitive to anti-VEGF agents.

Safety and efficacy of S-1 monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Although S-1 is effective against advanced gastric cancer (AGC), its efficacy in elderly patients has not yet been investigated sufficiently. We assessed the efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy in elderly patients with AGC.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of the data of 153 patients with unresectable/recurrent gastric adenocarcinoma who received S-1 monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy at our institution. S-1 was administered orally twice daily at the dose of 40 mg/m², on days 1-28, every 6 weeks. We categorized the patients into three groups, the young (≤65 years old), the middle-aged (66-75 years old), and the elderly (≥76 years old); and the drug toxicity, objective responses, progression-free survivals, and overall survivals were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

The incidence of leukopenia of grade 3 or greater in the three groups was 7%, 5%, and 13%, and that of anemia was 9%, 18%, and 27%, respectively. In regard to nonhematological toxicities, the incidence of nausea of grade 3 or greater was 3%, 5%, and 13%; that of fatigue was 5%, 11%, and 20%; and that of anorexia was 5%, 6%, and 27%, respectively. As for the treatment efficacy, the objective response rates, median progressionfree survivals, and overall survivals in the young, middle-aged, and elderly groups were 53%, 46%, and 33%; 7.8, 5.6, and 3.9 months; and 16.9, 17.1; and 7.7 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although S-1 monotherapy showed moderate efficacy in elderly (≥76 years) patients with AGC, patients in this age group showed higher incidences of severe toxicities than the younger patients.

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer currently ranks second in global cancer mortality. Most patients are either diagnosed at an advanced stage, or develop a relapse after surgery with curative intent. Apart from supportive care and palliative radiation to localized (e.g. bone) metastasis, systemic chemotherapy is the only treatment option available in this situation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to March 2009, reference lists of studies, and contacted pharmaceutical companies and national and international experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on systemic intravenous chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapies in advanced gastric cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. A third investigator was consulted in case of disagreements. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty five trials, with a total of 5726 patients, have been included in the meta-analysis of overall survival. The comparison of chemotherapy versus best supportive care consistently demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival in favour of the group receiving chemotherapy (hazard ratios (HR) 0.37; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.24 to 0.55, 184 participants). The comparison of combination versus single-agent chemotherapy provides evidence for a survival benefit in favour of combination chemotherapy (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90, 1914 participants). The price of this benefit is increased toxicity as a result of combination chemotherapy. When comparing 5-FU/cisplatin-containing combination therapy regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95, 501 participants) and 5-FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92, 1147 participants) there was a significant survival benefit for regimens including 5-FU, anthracyclines and cisplatin. Both the comparison of irinotecan versus non-irinotecan (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.02, 639 participants) and docetaxel versus non-docetaxel containing regimens (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, 805 participants) show non-significant overall survival benefits in favour of the irinotecan and docetaxel-containing regimens.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy significantly improves survival in comparison to best supportive care. In addition, combination chemotherapy improves survival compared to single-agent 5-FU. All patients should be tested for their HER-2 status and trastuzumab should be added to a standard fluoropyrimidine/cisplatin regimen in patients with HER-2 positive tumours. Two and three-drug regimens including 5-FU, cisplatin, with or without an anthracycline, as well as irinotecan or docetaxel-containing regimens are reasonable treatment options for HER-2 negative patients.

Pre-operative chemotherapy for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is highly prevalent in several countries around the world and remains an incurable disease. Treatment involves surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Surgical resection remains the definitive treatment for early stage (T1 and T2) gastric cancer, with 5-year survival rates of 70 - 95%. Localized tumours that extend beyond the submucosa are, however, associated with worse outcomes and a 5-year survival rate of 20 - 30%. Recent advances mainly concern chemotherapy prior to surgical resection. The goal of pre-operative chemotherapy is to allow an early attack on systemic micrometastatic disease and, by downstaging the primary tumour, to increase the percentage of patients able to undergo curative resection. Pre-operative chemotherapy remains experimental, but several phase II and III studies have shown promising results. One approach involves systemic, pre-operative chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer. This review focuses on the development of pre-operative chemotherapy as a component of the multimodal treatment of gastric cancer.

Advanced gastric cancer--slow but steady progress

Progress in gastric cancer has been slow, but steady. Historically, patients commonly presented with significant disease related co-morbidity and received treatment of marginal benefit but unfortunately associated with significant toxicity. Today there is no universally accepted reference standard chemotherapy for this disease. However, there is reason for optimism. Meta-analyses of randomized trials have shown a benefit for first-line combination chemotherapy. Current three drug chemotherapy regimens remain toxic, though perhaps less so than previously, and can result in a small but significant survival advantage in carefully chosen patients. Incremental improvements have been observed in both treatment-related toxicity and survival after first-line therapy. More patients are candidates for chemotherapy beyond progression with first-line therapy and response rates with second-line regimens are similar to those seen in other solid tumor malignancies. Although there is no randomized data to support its use second-line treatment should be considered in appropriate patients. Even before the integration of targeted therapies in the treatment of gastric cancer, it was evident that survival for more than 2 years is possible in a subset of patients and large retrospective studies have highlighted clinicopathologic factors associated with improved survival. Presently, with the addition of targeted therapy, especially anti-angiogenic and anti-Her2 therapy, and a better understanding of the biology of the disease, perhaps a sense of optimism should indeed suppress the nihilism commonly associated with this disease.

Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

The best chemotherapy regimen for metastatic gastric cancer is uncertain, but promising findings have been reported with irinotecan plus cisplatin and S-1 (tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydropyrimidine, and potassium oxonate). We aimed to investigate the superiority of irinotecan plus cisplatin and non-inferiority of S-1 compared with fluorouracil, with respect to overall survival, in patients with metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

We undertook a phase 3 open label randomised trial in 34 institutions in Japan. We enrolled patients aged 20-75 years or younger, who had histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma, and randomly assigned them by minimisation to receive either: a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (800 mg/m(2) per day, on days 1-5) every 4 weeks (n=234); intravenous irinotecan (70 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 15) and cisplatin (80 mg/m(2), on day 1) every 4 weeks (n=236); or oral S-1 (40 mg/m(2), twice a day, on days 1-28) every 6 weeks (n=234). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00142350, and with UMIN-CTR, number C000000062.

FINDINGS

All randomised patients were included in the primary analysis. Median overall survival was 10.8 months (IQR 5.7-17.8) for individuals assigned fluorouracil, 12.3 months (8.1-19.5) for those allocated irinotecan plus cisplatin (hazard ratio 0.85 [95% CI 0.70-1.04]; p=0.0552), and 11.4 months (6.4-21.3) for those assigned S-1 (0.83 [0.68-1.01]; p=0.0005 for non-inferiority). Three treatment-related deaths occurred in the irinotecan plus cisplatin group and one was recorded in the S-1 group.

INTERPRETATION

S-1 is non-inferior to fluorouracil and, in view of the convenience of an oral administration, could replace intravenous fluorouracil for treatment of unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer, at least in Asia. Irinotecan plus cisplatin is not superior to fluorouracil in this setting.

Challenge for a better combination with basic evidence

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) has been the most widely accepted and studied chemotherapeutic agent, and many combination chemotherapeutic regimens have been reported. However, until recently, a standard regimen for metastatic gastric cancer had not been established. The combination of S-1 and cisplatin is a good candidate as a standard first-line regimen for metastatic gastric cancer. On the other hand, interest in biochemical modulation has become wide spread recently. The low level of dihydropyrimidine denhydrogenase (DPD), thymidylate synthase (TS) activities, and a high level of orotate phosphoribosyl-transferase (OPRT) activity enhance the antitumor effect of 5-FU and S-1. Docetaxel is one of the agents that modulate these enzyme expressions and activities. Moreover, the response rate of combination therapy of docetaxel and S-1 for metastatic gastric cancer was 56.3% and median survival time was 14.3 months in a phase II study, showing it to be a good candidate for a new standard regimen for gastric cancer. A phase III collaborative study, START (S-1 and Taxotere for advanced gastric cancer randomized phase III trial), is now under way in Japan and Korea.

Chemotherapy for metastatic disease: review from JCOG trials

The Gastrointestinal Oncology Study Group of Japan Clinical Oncology Group (GIOSG/JCOG) has conducted several clinical trials to establish standard chemotherapy for unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer. From the late 1980s to early 1990s, two phase II studies by JCOG evaluated oral fluoropyrimidines, and others introduced Western chemotherapy regimens. Thereafter, the first phase III study (JCOG9205), comparing 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), 5-FU plus ciplatin (CDDP) (FP), and uracil and tegafur (UFT) plus mitomycin (UFTM), could not show a survival benefit of either FP or UFTM over 5-FU alone. In the late 1990s, new active agents such as irinotecan (CPT-11) and S-1 (new oral fluoropyrimidine) showed promising results in their phase II trials. The latest phase III study (JCOG9912), comparing 5-FU, CPT-11 plus CDDP, and S-1, showed significant noninferiority of S-1 to 5-FU in overall survival, associated with a better response rate and progression-free survival and acceptable toxicities, and concluded that S-1 should be considered for the standard chemotherapy of unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer. Simultaneously, another Japanese phase III trial comparing S-1 with S-1 plus CDDP showed a survival benefit of S-1 plus CDDP. At present, S-1 plus CDDP is recognized as standard chemotherapy for unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer, and new treatment with molecular target agents is under development.

The role of UFT in advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Advanced gastric cancer has a poor prognosis, with a relative 5-year survival rate of 7%-27%. Chemotherapy, which improves overall survival (OS) and quality of life, is the main treatment option. Although numerous regimens have been investigated, there is no standard treatment. Combination chemotherapy, however, is associated with a significant survival benefit compared with monotherapy and i.v. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is one of the most widely used agents. UFT (tegafur-uracil) has similar efficacy to continuous infusion 5-FU with improved tolerability and is more convenient for patients.

DESIGN

The efficacy and safety of UFT in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer have been demonstrated in a number of phase II studies.

RESULTS

UFT with leucovorin (folinic acid) monotherapy shows overall response rates (ORRs) of 16%-29% and median OS of 5.8 months. Combination of UFT with cisplatin, etoposide, or paclitaxel shows ORRs of 35%-51% and median OS of 8.3-10.1 months. UFT-based three-drug combinations show ORRs of 41%-57% and median OS of 8.6-15 months. UFT-based combinations have a good tolerability profile, particularly a low incidence of myelosuppression, mucositis, and hand-foot syndrome.

CONCLUSION

UFT represents a logical replacement for 5-FU in chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

Phase II Study of S-1 Monotherapy as a First-line, Combination Therapy of S-1 plus Cisplatin as a Second-line, and Weekly Paclitaxel Monotherapy as a Third-line Therapy in Patients with Advanced Gastric Carcinoma: Phase II Study of S-1, S-1 plus Cisplatin, and Weekly Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Gastric Carcinoma

Background

We conducted a pilot phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of S-1 as a first-line, S-1 plus cisplatin as a second-line, and weekly paclitaxel as a third-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer.

Patients and methods

Between 2002 and 2005, 19 patients were enrolled in this study. Chemotherapy consisted of either 60 mg/m² of S-1 for 4 weeks at 6 weeks interval, a combination of 60 mg/m² S-1 for 3 weeks and 60 mg/m² cisplatin on day 8 at 5 weeks interval, or 60 mg/m² paclitaxel at day 1, 8, 15, at 4 weeks interval. The regimen was repeated until the occurrence of unacceptable toxicities, disease progression, or patient refusal. The primary end point was the overall survival.

Results

The response rates were 33.3%, 12.5%, and 0% after the first, second, and third line chemotherapy, respectively. The mean overall survival time was 994 days. The median survival time could not be calculated because 12 out of 19 patients were still alive when the study was concluded. Regarding hematological toxicity, the major adverse effect was leukopenia, which reached grades 3–4 in all lines of chemotherapy investigated. In addition, regarding non-hematological toxicities, the major adverse effect was anorexia, which reached grade 3–4 in the second line chemotherapy, and no deaths were attributable to the adverse effects of the drugs.

Conclusion

This sequential therapy was an effective treatment for advanced gastric cancer with acceptable toxic side-effects. We considered this sequential therapy to be effective because of the smooth switch to the next regimen.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer: a randomized phase III trial conducted by GOIRC

BACKGROUND

Complete surgical resection of gastric cancer is potentially curative, but long-term survival is poor.

METHODS

Patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the stomach of stages IB, II, IIIA and B, or IV (T4N2M0) and treated with potentially curative surgery were randomly assigned to follow-up alone or to intravenous treatment with four cycles (repeated every 21 days) of PELF (cisplatin [40 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 5], epirubicin [30 mg/m(2), days 1 and 5], L-leucovorin [100 mg/m(2), days 1-4], and 5-fluorouracil [300 mg/m(2), days 1-4] in a hospital setting. Frequencies and severity of adverse events were determined. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between the treatment arms using Kaplan-Meier analysis and a Cox proportional hazards regression model. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

From January 1995 through September 2000, 258 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy (n = 130) or surgery alone (n = 128). Patient characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Among those who received chemotherapy, grade 3 or 4 toxic effects including vomiting, mucositis, and diarrhea were experienced by 21.1%, 8.4%, and 11.8% of patients, respectively. Leucopenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia of grade 3 or 4 were experienced by 20.3%, 3.3%, and 4.2% of patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 72.8 months, 128 patients (49.6%) experienced recurrence and 139 (53.9%) deaths were observed, one toxicity-related. Relative to treatment with surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy did not increase disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] of recurrence = 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.27) or overall survival (HR of death = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results failed to provide proof of an effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with PELF on overall survival or disease-free survival. The estimated effect of chemotherapy (10% reduction in the hazard of death or relapse) is modest and consistent with the results of meta-analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy without platinum agents.

Docetaxel and oxaliplatin combination in second-line treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

In advanced gastric cancer few data are available on the efficacy or safety of new drug combination regimens after progression following first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with histologically confirmed advanced gastric cancer and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) less than 2, progressing after first-line chemotherapy, were eligible. Patients were treated with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and oxaliplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 2, every 3 weeks, until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

Between May 2002 and April 2005, 38 patients were enrolled. Men accounted for 73.7% of the patients and the median age was 59 years. The primary tumor was not resected in 47.4% of the patients; the peritoneum was the most frequent metastatic site (60.5%). The first-line treatment was cisplatin, epirubicin, and infusional 5-fluorouracil (ECF) in 81.5% of the patients and cisplatin and infusional 5-fluorouracil (CF) in 15.7%. The median number of cycles was 4.3. The treatment was well tolerated, with no toxic deaths. National Cancer Institute (NCI) grade III-IV neutropenia was frequent (26.3%), but no febrile neutropenia was reported. Severe asthenia (15.7%) and severe nausea (15.7%) required dose reductions in 2 patients and treatment discontinuation in another. The overall response rate was 10.5%, and 18 patients (47.3%) experienced disease stabilization (7 of them with significant clinical benefit). Median time to progression was 4.0 months (range, 2-8 months) and median overall survival was 8.1 months (range, 3-26 months). Thirteen patients (34.2%) also received third-line chemotherapy, with an irinotecan-containing regimen, and their median overall survival was higher than that of the other patients (16.3 vs 6.0 months)

CONCLUSION

The combination of oxaliplatin and docetaxel shows only marginal activity as second-line treatment, but it has a good tolerability profile. This suggests that there is room for optimizing the schedule as well as for planning sequential treatments in gastric cancer.

Intensive weekly chemotherapy with docetaxel, epirubicin and carboplatin with G-CSF support in patients with advanced gastric cancer

Chemotherapy is an established modality in the management of patients with advanced gastric cancer but the optimal regimen has not been defined yet. Platinum and the anthracyclines and more recently docetaxel have shown activity in this tumor. The primary objective of this phase II study was to assess the efficacy and safety of an intensified regimen of weekly docetaxel/epirubicin/carboplatin (DECb) with growth factor support in previously untreated patients with advanced gastric cancer. A total of 72 patients with measurable disease received docetaxel at a dose of 30 mg/m2, epirubicin at a dose of 30 mg/m2 and carboplatin to a target area under the curve (AUC) of 2, every week for 6 consecutive weeks followed by 2 weeks' rest, with filgrastim support. Analysis was performed on an intention to treat basis. The main toxicity was hematologic with grade 3/4 neutropenia occurring in 35% of the patients. Other grade 3/4 toxicities included anemia (7%), thrombocytopenia (14%) and leucopenia (26%). The relative dose intensity of docetaxel and epirubicin was 62%. The overall response rate was 21%, the median time to tumor progression was 4.1 months and the median survival 7.3 months. Intensified weekly treatment with DECb has modest activity in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. Myelotoxicity limits adequate drug delivery.

Phase II multicenter trial of docetaxel, epirubicin, and 5-fluorouracil (DEF) in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a novel, safe, and active regimen

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of docetaxel, epirubicin, and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) [DEF] as treatment for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients participated in the study (median age, 56 years; range, 22-73 years); Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status [PS], 0-2). Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV (day 1), 5-FU 500 mg/m2 IV (days 1-3), and epirubicin 50 mg/m2 IV (day 1) were administered every 3 weeks for six cycles.

RESULTS

In total, 20/37 patients (54%) completed six treatment cycles. Thirteen patients (35%; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 20% to 51%) had an objective response; 1 patient (3%) achieved a complete response and 12 patients (32%) achieved partial responses. Stable disease was observed in 7 patients (19%) and progressive disease in 5 patients (14%). Twelve patients (32%) were unevaluable. Clinical benefit (based on PS, weight gain, and analgesic consumption) was observed in 11 patients (30%). Median follow-up was 41 months (range, 26-53 months), median time to progression was 6.6 months (range, 0.5-29.2 months), median overall survival was 10.7 months (range, 7.0-14.6 months), and 1-year survival was 40%. The regimen was well tolerated. Grade 3-4 febrile neutropenia occurred in 8 patients (22%; 6% of cycles) and grade 3-4 neutropenia in 1 patient (1% of cycles). The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were alopecia (11% of cycles), diarrhea (4% of cycles) and vomiting (2% of cycles); grade 1-2 asthenia and fatigue occurred in 43% of cycles.

CONCLUSION

DEF is effective in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, and has a good safety profile.

Oxaliplatin in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) in patients with metastatic gastric cancer (MGC)

OBJECTIVE

Treatment options for advanced or metastatic gastric cancer (A/MGC) are limited and inclusion of novel substances is necessary. Few studies have confirmed the activity and tolerability of the combination of oxaliplatin (OXA) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) modulated with leucovorin (LV) administrated to patients with A/MGC. The goal of current study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of Folfox-4 regimen in patients with A/MGC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-six patients were treated with Folfox-4 regimen. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or until a patient chose to discontinue treatment. Responses to treatment and toxicity were recorded according to the WHO criteria and NCI toxicity criteria.

RESULTS

All patients were assessable for toxicity and response. Patients (71.4% male, 28.6% female) had a median age of 65 years (range, 28-78). All patients had histologically confirmed metastatic (89.3%) or advanced (10.7%) gastric cancer. Response was evaluated every 6 weeks; 1 complete (1.8%) and 23 (41.1%) partial remission were observed (overall response rate 42.9%). Twenty patients (35.7%) showed stable disease and 12 (21.4%) had a progressive disease. Median overall survival, time to progression and follow up were 10 months, 6 months, and 11.5 months, respectively. WHO grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities included leucopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. No patient experienced neutropenic fever. Other grade 3/4 toxicities included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomatitis, and anorexia. Three patients (5.3%) experienced grade 3 peripheral neuropathy. No treatment-related deaths were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Folfox-4 regimen is active and well tolerated in patients with advanced/metastatic gastric cancer.

Correlation between tumor response to first-line chemotherapy and prognosis in advanced gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

In advanced gastric cancer, the relationship between tumor response and prognosis is far from clear.

METHODS

We performed a pooled analysis on published data from 4593 patients in 25 randomized trials of first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. A weighed analysis was used to investigate the correlation between objective response rate (RR) and time to progression (TTP) and overall survival time (OS).

RESULTS

A moderate correlation was found between RR and TTP and OS (r = 0.49 and r = 0.45, respectively) in all 25 trials. In treatment arms without new drugs including irinotecan, taxanes, or oxaliplatin, RR also was associated with TTP and OS (r = 0.56 and r = 0.47, respectively). However, no association between RR and OS was found, whereas there was a moderate correlation between RR and TTP (r = 0.41) in treatment arms using new drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicated that response to treatment was related to TTP and OS. The potential role of objective response as a surrogate in chemotherapy trials of advanced gastric cancer warrants further investigation, especially with regard to treatment with new drugs.

Chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on aggregate data

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Randomized phase II and III clinical trials on first-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer were identified by electronic searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and Cancerlit; hand searches of relevant abstract books and reference lists; and contact to experts. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed-effect model. Overall survival, reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI, was the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

Analysis of chemotherapy versus best supportive care (HR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52) and combination versus single agent, mainly fluorouracil (FU) -based chemotherapy (HR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.93) showed significant overall survival benefits in favor of chemotherapy and combination chemotherapy, respectively. In addition, comparisons of FU/cisplatin-containing regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.95) and FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.91) both demonstrated a significant survival benefit for the three-drug combination. Comparing irinotecan-containing versus nonirinotecan-containing combinations (mainly FU/cisplatin) resulted in a nonsignificant survival benefit in favor of the irinotecan-containing regimens (HR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.06), but they have never been compared against a three-drug combination.

CONCLUSION

Best survival results are achieved with three-drug regimens containing FU, an anthracycline, and cisplatin. Among these, regimens including FU as bolus exhibit a higher rate of toxic deaths than regimens using a continuous infusion of FU, such as epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous-infusion FU.

A phase II trial of weekly fractionated irinotecan and cisplatin for advanced gastric cancer

PURPOSE

This study was to evaluate the activity and the safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen of weekly fractionated irinotecan and cisplatin in advanced gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma with either chemotherapy-naive or only one prior chemotherapy regimen received irinotecan 50 mg/m2 followed by cisplatin 30 mg/m2. Both drugs were administered weekly for 3 consecutive weeks, followed by 1-week rest. Treatment was repeated until disease progression occurred. Response evaluation was performed according to the RECIST criteria.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients (13 chemo-naive, 34 prior chemotherapy) were enrolled. Of 46 evaluable patients, overall response rate was 25.5% (95% CI, 12.9-39.3%) and disease control rate was 63.8% (95% CI, 50.9-79.5%) by intent-to-treat analysis. The time to progression and overall survival duration were 21 and 44 weeks, respectively. One-year survival rate was 41.6%. The most frequent grade 4 toxicity was neutropenia, which was the major cause of treatment delay. Non-hematological toxicities of grade 3-4 were rare with occurrence rate of 14.9% for anorexia and emesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Fractionated irinotecan combined with cisplatin with 3-week-on and 1-week-off schedule produced favorable clinical results for advanced gastric cancer. Because of the feasible efficacy and low non-hematologic toxicity, this treatment could be a promising salvage regimen in patients who have failed to taxanes.

Chemotherapy for gastric cancer

Metastatic gastric cancer remains a non-curative disease. Palliative chemotherapy has been demonstrated to prolong survival without quality of life compromise. Many single-agents and combinations have been confirmed to be active in the treatment of metastatic disease. Objective response rates ranged from 10-30% for single-agent therapy and 30-60% for polychemotherapy. Results of phase II and III studies are reviewed in this paper as well as the potential efficacy of new drugs. For patients with localized disease, the role of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy is discussed. Most studies on adjuvant chemotherapy failed to demonstrate a survival advantage, and therefore, it is not considered as standard treatment in most centres. Adjuvant immunochemotherapy has been developed fundamentally in Korea and Japan. A meta-analysis of phase III trials with OK-432 suggested that immunochemotherapy may improve survival of patients with curatively resected gastric cancer. Based on the results of US Intergroup 0116 study, postoperative chemoradiation has been accepted as standard care in patients with resected gastric cancer in North America. However, the results are somewhat confounded by the fact that patients underwent less than a recommended D1 lymph node dissection and the pattern of recurrence suggested a positive effect derived from local radiotherapy without any effect on micrometastatic disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation therapy remains experimental, but several phase II studies are showing promising results. Phase III trials are needed.

The role of chemotherapy in patients with established gastric cancer

Chemotherapy significantly improves survival in comparison to best supportive care in patients with metastasised gastric cancer. In patients for whom a three-drug-combination is considered as the treatment of choice, ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin and 5-FU as a continuous infusion) should be regarded as standard of care. However, results for ECF have been challenged by the recently presented REAL-2-trial, which demonstrated a significant survival benefit for EOX (epirubicin, oxaliplatin, capecitabine) over ECF. Adjuvant 5-FU-based chemoradiation should be discussed in patients with inadequate lymphadenectomy, but is not internationally accepted as standard of care: whether patients with adequate lymhphadenectomy benefit from adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is currently unclear. According to the results of the UK MAGIC trial, perioperative treatment with ECF (3 cycles prior to and post surgery) results in a significantly reduced risk of death for patients with resectable gastric cancer as compared to surgery alone. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy has the ability to downsize gastric tumours and appears to improve R0-resection rates, but its potential to improve overall survival is still unclear.

Phase II study of low-dose docetaxel/fluorouracil/cisplatin in metastatic gastric carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

In several recent reports, docetaxel (75-85 mg/m2) combined with fluorouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin has shown considerable efficacy but significant toxicities, especially neutropenia, in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The authors tested the efficacy and safety of a lower dose (50 mg/m2) of docetaxel, combined with 5-FU and cisplatin, in metastatic gastric cancer (MGC).

METHODS

Chemonaive patients with MGC received docetaxel (50 mg/m2 on day 1), cisplatin (80 mg/m2 on day 1), and 5-FU (1200 mg/m2 on days 1-3) every 21 days.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients with a median age of 55 years (range, 30-73 years) received a median of 4 cycles (range, 1-13+ cycles). Of the 42 efficacy-"evaluable" patients, 17 showed a partial response (response rate, 40%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 26-55) according to the independent review panel. With a median follow-up of 12.6 months for all patients, the median time to progression was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.6-5.6 months) and overall survival was 9.7 months (95% CI, 8.4-11.0 months). Grade 3/4 neutropenia developed in 68% of patients, and febrile neutropenia/neutropenic infection occurred in 26%. The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicity was stomatitis (21%), followed by syncope (6%), diarrhea (4%), peripheral neuropathy (4%), dizziness (2%), constipation (2%), and abnormal liver function tests (2%). There was 1 possible treatment-related death.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower dose (50 mg/m2) docetaxel combined with 5-FU and cisplatin was active in MGC with a tolerable toxicity profile.

Bi-weekly chemotherapy with cisplatin, epirubicin, folinic acid and 5-fluororacil continuous infusion plus g-csf in advanced gastric cancer: a multicentric phase II study

BACKGROUND

It has been demonstrated that the 3-weekly PELF regimen is superior to FAM and FAMTX in advanced gastric cancer. The aim of this multicentric phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a PELF regimen, given every 2 weeks as a first-line therapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic gastric carcinoma.

METHODS

Fifty-nine patients were treated with the following schedule: cisplatin (40 mg/m2, day 1), epirubicin (30 mg/m2, day 1), 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2 bolus, followed by 600 mg/m2, 22 h continuous infusion, day 1 and 2) and folinic acid (100 mg/m2, 2-h infusion, day 1 and 2). G-CSF (5 microg/kg) was administered on day 6, 8, 10, and 12. Cycles were repeated every 2 weeks for a maximum of twelve courses.

RESULTS

Of the 52 evaluable patients, three (5.8%) complete responses, and 15 (28.8%) partial responses were observed, for an overall response rate of 34.6%. The median duration of response was 8 months. Nineteen patients had stable disease and 15 progressed on therapy. At a median follow-up of 12 months, the median time to progression was 8 months and the median survival duration was 13 months, with a 1-year survival rate of 53.5%. Grade 3 or 4 observed toxicities were: neutropenia in 26 patients (44%), thrombocytopenia in four patients (6.7%), and mucositis in seven patients (11.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

The bi-weekly PELF regimen seems to be feasible with an acceptable toxicity profile and an activity comparable to the 3-weekly schedule.

The use of unequal randomisation ratios in clinical trials: a review

OBJECTIVE

To examine reasons given for the use of unequal randomisation in randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

MAIN MEASURES

Setting of the trial; intervention being tested; randomisation ratio; sample size calculation; reason given for randomisation.

METHODS

Review of trials using unequal randomisation. DATABASES AND SOURCES: Cochrane library, Medline, Pub Med and Science Citation Index.

RESULTS

A total of 65 trials were identified; 56 were two-armed trials and nine trials had more than two arms. Of the two-arm trials, 50 trials recruited patients in favour of the experimental group. Various reasons for the use of unequal randomisation were given. Six studies stated that they used unequal randomisation to reduce the cost of the trial, with one screening trial limited by the availability of the intervention. Other reasons for using unequal allocation were: avoiding loss of power from drop-out or cross-over, ethics and the gaining of additional information on the treatment. Thirty seven trials papers (57%) did not state why they had used unequal randomisation and only 14 trials (22%) appeared to have taken the unequal randomisation into account in their sample size calculation.

CONCLUSION

Although unequal randomisation offers a number of advantages to trials the method is rarely used and is especially under-utilised to reduce trial costs. Unequal randomisation should be considered more in trial design especially where there are large differences between treatment costs.

Gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers and one of the most frequent causes of cancer-related deaths. The incidence, diagnostic studies, and therapeutic options have undergone important changes in the last decades, but the prognosis for gastric cancer patients remains poor, especially in more advanced stages. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment of this disease, even if it is associated with a high rate of locoregional and distant recurrence. There is ongoing debate regarding the role of adjuvant treatment In advanced disease, palliation of symptoms, rather than cure, is the primary goal of patient management. Several combination therapies have been developed and have been examined in phase III trials; however, in most cases, they have failed to demonstrate a survival advantage over the reference arm. This review summarizes the most important recommendations for the management of patients with gastric cancer.

Impact of five prophylactic filgrastim schedules on hematologic toxicity in early breast cancer patients treated with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide

PURPOSE

To evaluate the comparative efficacy of varying intensity schedules of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF; filgrastim) support in preventing febrile neutropenia in early breast cancer patients treated with relatively high-dose epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From October 1991 to April 1994, 506 stage I and II breast cancer patients were randomly assigned to receive, in a factorial 2 x 2 design, epirubicin 120 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 21 days for 4 cycles +/- lonidamine +/- G-CSF. The following five consecutive G-CSF schedules were tested every 100 randomly assigned patients: (1) 480 microg/d subcutaneously days 8 to 14; (2) 480 microg/d days 8, 10, 12, and 14; (3) 300 microg/d days 8 to 14; (4) 300 microg/d days 8, 10, 12, and 14; and (5) 300 microg/d days 8 and 12.

RESULTS

All of the G-CSF schedules covered the neutrophil nadir time. Schedule 5 was equivalent to the daily schedules (schedules 1 and 3) and to the alternate day schedules (schedules 2 and 4) with respect to incidence of grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (P = .79 and P = .89, respectively), rate of fever episodes (P = .84 and P = .77, respectively), incidence of neutropenic fever (P = .74 and P = .56, respectively), need of antibiotics (P = .77 and P = .88, respectively), and percentage of delayed cycles (P = .43 and P = .42, respectively). G-CSF had no significant impact on the delivered dose-intensity compared with the non-G-CSF arms.

CONCLUSION

In the adjuvant setting, the frequency of prophylactic G-CSF administration during EC could be curtailed to only two administrations (days 8 and 12) without altering outcome. This nonrandomized trial design provides support for evaluating alternative, less intense G-CSF schedules for women with early breast cancer.

Phase II study of weekly paclitaxel and 24-hour infusion of high-dose 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in the treatment of recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer

To investigate the efficacy and safety of combining weekly paclitaxel with weekly 24-hour infusion of high-dose 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV, folinic acid) in the treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Patients with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer were studied. Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 3-hour intravenous infusion was given on days 1, 8, and 15, and high-dose 5-FU 2,600 mg/m2 plus LV 300 mg/m2 24-hour intravenous infusion (HDFL) was given on days 2, 9, and 16, repeated every 4 weeks. Between August 1997 and August 2003, 30 patients were enrolled. The median age was 58 years (range: 37-70). Eighteen patients (60.0%) had recurrent or metastatic disease and 12 patients had de novo metastatic disease. Among the 27 patients evaluable for tumor response, 2 achieved complete response and 9 achieved partial response, with an overall response rate of 40.7% (95% confidence interval, CI: 22-61%). Eleven of the 21 patients without prior exposure to HDFL-containing regimens responded (response rate: 52.4%, 95% CI: 29-74%), while none of the 6 patients who had previously failed HDFL-containing regimens responded (p value = 0.054 by Fisher's exact test). All 30 patients were evaluated for survival and toxicities. Median time to progression and overall survival were 6 and 10 months, respectively. Major grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia in 12 patients (40.0%), diarrhea in 10 patients (33.3%), and stomatitis in 3 patients (10.0%). Grade 1-2 and 3-4 paclitaxel-related neuropathy developed in 16 (53.3%) and 2 (6.7%) patients, respectively. None of the patients discontinued protocol treatment because of paclitaxel-related neuropathy or developed HDFL-related hyperammonemic encephalopathy. This paclitaxel-HDFL regimen is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

Gemcitabine (GEM) plus oxaliplatin, folinic acid, and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX-4) in patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

oxaliplatin in combination with folinic acid (FA) and infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has shown significant anti-tumor activity in gastric cancer patients (FOLFOX). Previous studies have shown that gemcitabine (GEM), a new fluorinated anti-metabolite, enhances the individual anti-tumor activity of either 5-FU or oxaliplatin. We have therefore designed a multi-center phase II trial in order to test a novel GEM+FOLFOX-4 regimen in patients with metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

we enrolled 36 patients, 28 males and 8 females, with an average age of 64.4 years (range 37-78), who received bi-weekly treatment with GEM (1,000 mg/m2 on day 1), levo-FA (100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2), a 5-FU (400 mg/m2) bolus injection followed by 22-h continuous infusion (800 mg/m2) on days 1 and 2, and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 in a 4-6 h intravenous (i.v.) infusion before the second FUFA administration on day 2.

RESULTS

the most frequent side effect was grade 1-2 hematological toxicity and late sensorial neurotoxicity. Two patients developed hypersensitivity to oxaliplatin while another developed an aseptic eosinophilic pneumonitis. Two patients refused to continue the treatment after two cycles of chemotherapy and were lost at the follow-up. Among the remaining 34 patients four achieved a complete response, 15 a partial response, 12 had a stable disease and three progressed.

CONCLUSIONS

these results may grant the rationale to evaluate this multi-drug combination in randomized phase III trials in advanced gastric cancer.

Palliative chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

More than two-thirds of patients diagnosed with gastric cancer will have unresectable disease. They present a difficult problem to clinicians as to whether to choose a strictly supportive approach or expose patients to the side-effects of a potentially ineffective treatment. The objective of this article is to review the clinical trials utilizing cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

A computerized (Medline) search was carried out to identify papers published on this topic between 1966 and 2003. Only articles with an English abstract were reviewed, and studies only presented in abstract form were not included in the analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 101 trials were subsequently identified. Four randomized trials compared palliative chemotherapy with best supportive care in 174 patients with advanced gastric cancer. Effectiveness and side-effects were evaluated in 73 phase II studies and 24 randomized phase III trials.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of results shows chemotherapy to be superior to best supportive care alone. Combination chemotherapy compared with monochemotherapy is associated with significantly higher overall (complete plus partial) response rates but nevertheless results in similar survival. ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) currently represents one of the most effective regimens for advanced gastric cancer, whereas among the newer combinations, irinotecan- or taxane-based regimens have also given promising results. In patients with a poor performance status, consideration could be given to leucovorin-modulated 5-fluorouracil alone. Prognosis for the majority of patients, however, remains poor, as increases in survival were moderate at best.

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer currently ranks second in global cancer mortality. Most patients are either diagnosed at an advanced stage, or develop a relapse after apparently curative operation. Apart from supportive measures, systemic chemotherapy is the only treatment option available in this situation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2004), MEDLINE and EMBASE up to February 2004 and reference lists of articles. We also contacted pharmaceutical companies as well as national and international experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on systemic intravenous chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapies in advanced gastric cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. A third investigator was consulted in case of disagreements. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Chemotherapy versus best supportive care consistently demonstrated a significant benefit in terms of overall survival in favour of the group receiving chemotherapy (Hazard Ratios (HR) 0.39; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.28 to 0.52). Combination versus single-agent chemotherapy provides evidence for a survival benefit in favour of combination chemotherapy (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.76 to 0.96). Numbers included in these comparisons were 184 and 1338 participants respectively. This benefit is achieved at the price of increased toxicity in the combination chemotherapy arms. When comparing 5-FU/cisplatin-containing combination therapy regimens with anthracyclines versus those without anthracyclines (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95 based on 501 participants) and 5-FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with cisplatin versus those without cisplatin (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.76 to 0.91 based on 1147 participants), there was a significant survival benefit for regimens including 5-FU, anthracyclines and cisplatin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy significantly improves survival in comparison to best supportive care. In addition, combination chemotherapy improves survival compared to single-agent 5-FU, but the effect size is much smaller. Among the combination chemotherapy regimens studied, best survival results are achieved with regimens containing 5-FU, anthracyclines and cisplatin. In this category, ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin and continuous infusion 5-FU) is tolerated best.