Chemotherapy or targeted therapy as second-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies

Relationship between [18F]FDG PET/CT findings and claudin 18.2 expression in metastatic gastric cancer

AIM

Given that claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) is a cell surface protein specifically expressed by gastric cancer cells, anti-CLDN18.2 antibodies have demonstrated significant antitumor effects in patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. The correlation of [18F]FDG PET/CT with CLDN18.2 expression remains unexplored. This study aimed to investigate whether CLDN18.2 expression was associated with [18F]FDG uptake and whether [18F]FDG PET/CT can be used to predict the CLDN18.2 status of gastric cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of [18F]FDG PET/CT images from 163 patients diagnosed with metastatic gastric cancer was conducted, and the expression of CLDN18.2 was assessed immunohistochemically. SUVmax, metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were calculated in 3D mode using vendor-provided software. The relationship between PET metabolic parameters and CLDN18.2 status was analyzed.

RESULTS

CLDN18.2-negative tumors showed a higher median SUVmax of 13.2 (1.8-46.7) compared to CLDN18.2-positive tumors at 7.55 (2.3-34.8), with a significant difference (p < 0.001). The median TLG was significantly higher in CLDN18.2-negative tumors (231.6) than in CLDN18.2-positive ones (81.14), indicating greater metabolic activity (p = 0.001). Multivariate analysis suggested that SUVmax remained significantly correlated with the status of CLDN18.2 (p = 0.01). CLDN18.2 expression was predicted with an accuracy of 69.9% when the SUVmax value of 10.9 was used as a cutoff point for analysis.

CONCLUSION

Relatively reduced [18F]FDG uptake in metastatic gastric cancers correlates with positive CLDN18.2 expression compared to those with negative CLDN18.2 expression. [18F]FDG PET/CT may be useful for predicting the CLDN18.2 status of gastric cancer and thus aid in optimal treatment decisions.

KEY POINTS

Question The study resolves the clinical issue of determining the correlation between [18F]FDG PET/CT imaging and claudin 18.2 expression in metastatic gastric cancer. Findings Claudin 18.2-positive metastatic gastric cancers exhibit relatively lower [18F]FDG uptake than negative ones. The SUVmax of 10.9 moderately predicts claudin 18.2 expression. Clinical relevance [18F]FDG PET/CT imaging could be a noninvasive way to predict claudin 18.2 status in metastatic gastric cancer, helping to improve personalized treatment plans.

A prospective phase II single-arm study and predictive factor analysis of irinotecan as third-line treatment in patients with metastatic gastric cancer

Background

Currently, there is no recommended standard third-line chemotherapy for metastatic gastric cancer.

Objectives

In this study, we aimed to evaluate irinotecan's efficacy and safety in treating metastatic gastric cancer after the failure of first- and second-line chemotherapy.

Design

Prospective single-arm, two-center, phase II trial.

Methods

Patients were aged 18-70 years, with histologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, progressed during or within 3 months following the last administration of second-line chemotherapy and had no other severe hematologic, cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, or renal functional abnormalities or immunodeficiency diseases. Eligible patients received 28-day cycles of irinotecan (180 mg/m2 intravenously, days 1 and 15) and were assessed according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria every two cycles. Patients who discontinued treatment for any reason were followed up every 2 months until death. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and toxicity.

Results

A total of 98 eligible patients were enrolled in this study. In the intention-to-treat population, the median OS was 7.17 months, the median PFS was 3.47 months, and the ORR and DCR were 4.08% and 47.96%, respectively. In the per-protocol population, the median OS was 7.77 months, the median PFS was 3.47 months, and the ORR and DCR were 4.82% and 50.60%, respectively. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities was 19.4%, and none of the patients died owing to adverse events. Cox regression analysis revealed neutropenia and baseline thrombocyte levels were independently correlated with PFS and OS.

Conclusion

Irinotecan monotherapy is an efficient, well-tolerated, and economical third-line treatment for patients with metastatic gastric cancer as a third-line treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02662959.

Enhancing Gastric Cancer Therapeutic Efficacy through Synergistic Cotreatment of Linderae Radix and Hyperthermia in AGS Cells

Gastric cancer remains a global health threat, particularly in Asian countries. Current treatment methods include surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. However, they all have limitations, such as adverse side effects, tumor resistance, and patient tolerance. Hyperthermia therapy uses heat to selectively target and destroy cancer cells, but it has limited efficacy when used alone. Linderae Radix (LR), a natural compound with thermogenic effects, has the potential to enhance the therapeutic efficacy of hyperthermia treatment. In this study, we investigated the synergistic anticancer effects of cotreatment with LR and 43 °C hyperthermia in AGS gastric cancer cells. The cotreatment inhibited AGS cell proliferation, induced apoptosis, caused cell cycle arrest, suppressed heat-induced heat shock responses, increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, and promoted mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphorylation. N-acetylcysteine pretreatment abolished the apoptotic effect of LR and hyperthermia cotreatment, indicating the crucial role of ROS in mediating the observed anticancer effects. These findings highlight the potential of LR as an adjuvant to hyperthermia therapy for gastric cancer. Further research is needed to validate these findings in vivo, explore the underlying molecular pathways, and optimize treatment protocols for the development of novel and effective therapeutic strategies for patients with gastric cancer.

Nab-Paclitaxel in the Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers-Improvements in Clinical Efficacy and Safety

Taxanes (paclitaxel and docetaxel) are one of the most useful classes of anticancer drugs. Taxanes are highly hydrophobic; therefore, these drugs must be dissolved in organic solvents (polysorbate or Cremophor EL), which contribute to their toxicities. To reduce this toxicity and to enhance their efficacy, novel formulations have been developed. Nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) is an albumin-stabilized, Cremophor-free, and water-soluble nanoparticle formulation of paclitaxel. Nab-paclitaxel has better solubility and less infusion-associated toxicity compared to solvent-based paclitaxel. Additionally, nab-paclitaxel can be given at higher doses and concentrations compared with solvent-based paclitaxel. Based on its superior clinical efficacy and safety profile, nab-paclitaxel received FDA approval for metastatic breast cancer (2008) and NSCLC (2011). Among gastrointestinal cancers, it is now approved in the USA for treating patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas as first-line therapy in combination with gemcitabine. Furthermore, several clinical trials have suggested the potential efficacy of nab-paclitaxel as a single agent or in combination with other agents for the treatment of metastatic esophageal, gastric, bowel, and biliary tract cancers. Nab-paclitaxel has been demonstrated to have greater overall response rates (ORR) with enhanced progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and a superior safety profile with fewer adverse effects in patients with gastrointestinal tract cancers. This review summarizes the advantages associated with nab-paclitaxel-based regimens in terms of improving clinical efficacy and the safety profile in upper gastrointestinal cancer.

Comparative analysis of systemic oncological treatments and best supportive care for advanced gastresophageal cancer: A comprehensive scoping review and evidence map

OBJECTIVE

To identify, describe, and organize the available evidence regarding systemic oncological treatments compared to best supportive care (BSC) for advanced gastresophageal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough search across MEDLINE (PubMed), EMbase (Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Our inclusion criteria encompassed systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental and observational studies involving patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancer receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy or biological/targeted therapy compared to BSC. The outcomes included survival, quality of life, functional status, toxicity, and quality of end-of-life care.

RESULTS

We included and mapped 72 studies, comprising SRs, experimental and observational designs, 12 on esophageal cancer, 51 on gastric cancer, and 10 both locations. Most compared schemes including chemotherapy (47 studies), but did not report therapeutic lines. Moreover, BSC as a control arm was poorly defined, including integral support and placebo. Data favor the use of systemic oncological treatments in survival outcomes and BSC in toxicity. Data for outcomes including quality of life, functional status, and quality of end-of-life care were limited. We found sundry evidence gaps specifically in assessing new treatments such as immunotherapy and important outcomes such as functional status, symptoms control, hospital admissions, and the quality of end-life care for all the treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

There are important evidence gaps regarding new for patients with advanced gastresophageal cancer and the effect of systemic oncological treatments on important patient-centered outcomes beyond survival. Future research should clearly describe the population included, specifying previous treatments and considering therapeutic, and consider all patient-centered outcomes. Otherwise, it will be complex to apply research results into practice.

Enhancing gastric cancer conventional chemotherapy effects by triple angiokinase inhibitor nintedanib in preclinical models

Background

Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Systemic chemotherapy is a preferred treatment option for advanced and recurrent GAC, but response rates and survival prolongation remain limited. Tumor angiogenesis plays a critical role in GAC growth, invasion and metastasis. We investigated the antitumor efficacy of nintedanib, a potent triple angiokinase inhibitor for VEGFR-1/2/3, PDGFR-α/β and FGFR-1/2/3, alone or in combination with chemotherapy, in preclinical models of GAC.

Methods

Animal survival studies were performed in peritoneal dissemination xenografts in NOD/SCID mice using human GAC cell lines MKN-45 and KATO-III. Tumor growth inhibition studies were performed in subcutaneous xenografts in NOD/SCID mice using human GAC cell lines MKN-45 and SNU-5. The mechanistic evaluation involved Immunohistochemistry analyses in tumor tissues obtained from subcutaneous xenografts. In vitro cell viability assays were performed using a colorimetric WST-1 reagent.

Results

In MKN-45 GAC cell-derived peritoneal dissemination xenografts, animal survival was improved by nintedanib (33%), docetaxel (100%) and irinotecan (181%), while oxaliplatin, 5-FU and epirubicin had no effect. The addition of nintedanib to docetaxel (157%) or irinotecan (214%) led to a further extension in animal survival. In KATO-III GAC cell-derived xenografts carrying FGFR2 gene amplification, nintedanib extended survival by 209%. Again, the addition of nintedanib further enhanced the animal survival benefits of docetaxel (273%) and irinotecan (332%). In MKN-45 subcutaneous xenografts, nintedanib, epirubicin, docetaxel and irinotecan reduced tumor growth (range: 68-87%), while 5-FU and oxaliplatin had a smaller effect (40%). Nintedanib addition to all chemotherapeutics demonstrated a further reduction in tumor growth. Subcutaneous tumor analysis revealed that nintedanib attenuated tumor cell proliferation, reduced tumor vasculature and increased tumor cell death.

Conclusion

Nintedanib showed notable antitumor efficacy and significantly improved taxane or irinotecan chemotherapy responses. These findings indicate that nintedanib, alone and in combination with a taxane or irinotecan, has the potential for improving clinical GAC therapy.

INTEGRATE II: randomised phase III controlled trials of regorafenib containing regimens versus standard of care in refractory Advanced Gastro-Oesophageal Cancer (AGOC): a study by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG)

BACKGROUND

Advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer (AGOC) carries a poor prognosis. No standard of care treatment options are available after first and second-line therapies. Regorafenib is an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. Regorafenib 160 mg daily prolonged progression free survival compared to placebo (INTEGRATE, phase 2). Regorafenib 80 mg daily in combination with nivolumab 3 mg/kg showed promising objective response rates (REGONIVO).

METHODS/DESIGN

INTEGRATE II (INTEGRATE IIa and IIb) platform comprises two international phase III randomised controlled trials (RCT) with 2:1 randomisation in favor of experimental intervention. INTEGRATE IIa (double-blind) compares regorafenib 160 mg daily on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle to placebo. INTEGRATE IIb (open label) compares REGONIVO, regorafenib 90 mg days 1 to 21 in combination with intravenous nivolumab 240 mg days 1 and 15 each 28-day cycle with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (control). Treatment continues until disease progression or intolerable adverse events as per protocol. Eligible participants include adults with AGOC who have failed two or more lines of treatment. Stratification is by location of tumour (INTEGRATE IIa only), geographic region, prior VEGF inhibitor and prior immunotherapy use (INTEGRATE IIb only). Primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are progression free survival, objective response rate, quality of life, and safety. Tertiary/correlative objectives include biomarker and pharmacokinetic evaluation.

DISCUSSION

INTEGRATE II provides a platform to evaluate the clinical utility of regorafenib alone, as well as regorafenib in combination with nivolumab in treatment of participants with refractory AGOC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

INTEGRATE IIa prospectively registered 1 April 2016 Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000420448 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02773524). INTEGRATE IIb prospectively registered 10 May 2021 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04879368.

Efficacy of systemic oncological treatments in patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancers at high risk of dying in the middle and short term: an overview of systematic reviews

Background

Esophageal and gastric cancers are a significant public health problem worldwide, with most patients presenting with advanced-stage disease and, consequently, poor prognosis. Systemic oncological treatments (SOT) have been widely used over more conservative approaches, such as supportive care. Nevertheless, its effectiveness in this scenario is not sufficiently clear. This paper provides an overview of systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of SOT compared with the best supportive care (BSC) or placebo in patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancers in an end-of-life context.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, and PROSPERO for eligible systematic reviews (SRs) published from 2008 onwards. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), functional status, and toxicity. Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data independently. We evaluated the methodological quality of included SRs using the AMSTAR-2 tool and the overlap of primary studies (corrected covered area, CCA). Also, we performed a de novo meta-analysis with data reported for each primary study when it was possible. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

Results

We identified 16 SRs (19 included trials) for inclusion within this overview. Most reviews had a critically low methodological quality, and there was a very high overlap of primary studies. It is uncertain whether SOT improves OS and PFS over more conservative approaches due to the very low certainty of evidence.

Conclusions

The evidence is very uncertain about the effectiveness of SOT for advanced esophageal or gastric cancers. High-quality SRs and further randomized clinical trials that include a thorough assessment of patient-centered outcomes are needed.

Trial registration

Open Science Framework, 10.17605/OSF.IO/7CHX6.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08330-5.

Beyond the Guidelines: The Grey Zones of the Management of Gastric Cancer. Consensus Statements from the Gastric Cancer Italian Network (GAIN)

BACKGROUND

Management of gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains challenging, because of the heterogeneity in tumor biology within the upper gastrointestinal tract. Daily clinical practice is full of grey areas regarding the complexity of diagnostic, staging, and therapeutic procedures. The aim of this paper is to provide a guide for clinicians facing challenging situations in routine practice, taking a multidisciplinary consensus approach based on available literature.

METHODS

The GAIN (GAstric cancer Italian Network) group was established with the aims of reviewing literature evidence, discussing key issues in prevention, diagnosis, and management of gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma, and offering a summary of statements. A Delphi consensus method was used to obtain opinions from the expert panel of specialists.

RESULTS

Forty-nine clinical questions were identified in six areas of interest: role of multidisciplinary team; risk factors; diagnosis; management of early gastric cancer and multimodal approach to localized gastric cancer; treatment of elderly patients with locally advanced resectable disease; and treatment of locally advanced and metastatic cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The statements presented may guide clinicians in practical management of this disease.

PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in gastric cancer: Epigenetics and beyond

PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is one of the most important signaling pathways involved in normal cellular processes. Its aberrant activation modulates autophagy, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, apoptosis, chemoresistance, and metastasis in many human cancers. Emerging evidence demonstrates that some infections as well as epigenetic regulatory mechanisms can control PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway. In this review, we focused on the role of this pathway in gastric cancer development, prognosis, and metastasis, with an emphasis on epigenetic alterations including DNA methylation, histone modifications, and post-transcriptional modulations through non-coding RNAs fluctuations as well as H. pylori and Epstein-Barr virus infections. Finally, we reviewed different molecular targets and therapeutic agents in clinical trials as a potential strategy for gastric cancer treatment through the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway.

Multicenter Phase II Study of Cabazitaxel in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: Association of HER2 Expression and M2-Like Tumor-Associated Macrophages with Patient Outcome

PURPOSE

We examined cabazitaxel, a novel next-generation taxoid, in patients with metastatic gastric cancer in a multicenter phase II study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who have progressed on one or more prior therapies for locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic disease were eligible, and prior taxane therapy was allowed. Taxane-naïve and pretreated cohorts were analyzed independently for efficacy. The primary endpoint for both cohorts was progression-free survival (PFS) using RECIST 1.1, using a Simon's two-stage design (10% significance and 80% power) for both cohorts. Comprehensive molecular annotation included whole exome and bulk RNA sequencing.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients enrolled in the taxane-naïve cohort (Arm A) and 23 patients in the prior-taxane cohort (Arm B), from January 8, 2013, to April 8, 2015: median age 61.7 years (range, 35.5-91.8 years), 66% male, 66% Caucasian. The most common adverse events included neutropenia (17% Arm A and 39% Arm B), fatigue/muscle weakness (13%), and hematuria (12%). In Arm A, the 3-month PFS rate was 28% [95% confidence interval (CI), 17%-42%] and did not meet the prespecified efficacy target. The 3-month PFS rate in Arm B was 35% (95% CI, 16%-57%) and surpassed its efficacy target. HER2 amplification or overexpression was associated with improved disease control (P = 0.003), PFS (P = 0.04), and overall survival (P = 0.002). An M2 macrophage signature was also associated with improved survival (P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Cabazitaxel has modest activity in advanced gastric cancer, including in patients previously treated with taxanes. Her2 amplification/overexpression and M2 high macrophage signature are potential biomarkers for taxane efficacy that warrant further evaluation.

Comparison of Platinum/S-1 and Platinum/5-Fluorouracil as First-Line Chemotherapy for Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Platinum/S-1 (PS) and platinum/5-fluorouracil (PF) as first-line chemotherapies are extensively used for the treatment of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (AGC); however, there is no definite consensus on which regimen is best. In our meta-analysis, we compared PS with PF in terms of their efficacy and safety in AGC patients.

METHODS

PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and CNKI were systematically searched for pertinent literature. We analyzed overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse effects (AEs) as major end points.

RESULTS

A total of 3,225 studies were identified, among which 6 randomized controlled trials, including 1,736 participants, were ultimately included in our analysis. Our results showed that PS and PF were comparable in terms of OS (p = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84-1.06), PFS (p = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09), ORR (p = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.91-1.28), DCR (p = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.86-1.43), total AEs (p = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01), and grade ≥3 AEs (p = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.82-1.41). However, those who received PF had a shorter time to failure (TTF) (p = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.77-0.97), and a significantly higher rate and more severe cases of stomatitis, nausea, and hypokalemia were reported in the PF group.

CONCLUSIONS

PF and PS show similar antitumor efficacy (OS, PFS, ORR, and DCR), but patients receiving PS exhibit longer TTF and fewer AEs (stomatitis, nausea, and hypokalemia) than those receiving PF.

Active Monomer RTR-1 Derived from the Root of Rhodomyrtus t omentosa Induces Apoptosis in Gastric Carcinoma Cells by Inducing ER Stress and Inhibiting the STAT3 Signaling Pathway

Purpose

Rhodomyrtus tomentosa, a flowering plant from the Myrtaceae family, is considered  an antitumour substance with versatile biological and pharmacological activities. RTR-1 is an active monomer purified from the root of Rhodomyrtus tomentosa. However, the detail of mechanism involving in RTR-1 anti-cancer activity remains to be elucidated, and the effect on gastric cancer cells is unknown.

Methods

Cell proliferation was determined by MTT and clone formation assay. The effect of RTR-1 on cell cycle distribution and apoptosis was analysed utilizing flow cytometry, respectively. Moreover, Western blotting was used to detect the expression of cell cycle- and apoptosis-related protein.

Results

Based on MTT and clone formation assay, we noticed that RTR-1 inhibited the proliferation of gastric carcinoma (BGC823 and SGC7901) cells in a dose- and time-dependent manner. Furthermore, the results of flow cytometry and Western blotting showed that RTR-1 induced cell cycle arrest in the G2/M phase through the ATM-Chk2-p53-p21 signaling pathway and induced cell apoptosis by inhibiting the signal transducers and activators of transcription 3 (STAT3) pathway and activating the endoplasmic reticulum stress (ER stress) pathway.

Conclusion

Taken together, these results demonstrate that RTR-1 induces cell cycle arrest and promotes apoptosis in gastric carcinoma, indicating its potential application for gastric cancer therapy.

Systemic therapy for previously treated advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Although paclitaxel plus ramucirumab has been recommended as the preferred second-line strategy, other regimens also display potentially comparable efficacies. Record retrieval was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ASCO and ESMO meeting libraries. Randomized controlled trials featuring comparisons between different systemic treatments among previously treated patients with advanced gastric cancer were eligible for our systematic review. Network calculation were based on random-effects model and the relative ranking of each regimen was numerically indicated by P-score (CRD42018104672). Concerning second-line regimens, "paclitaxel plus olaparib" and "paclitaxel plus ramucirumab" dominated the overall survival ranking while "paclitaxel plus ramucirumab" additionally topped the hierarchy for progression-free survival. Among refractory or third-line only cases, apatinib reigned the hierarchy by significantly and insignificantly surpassing placebo and nivolumab respectively. In conclusion, paclitaxel plus ramucirumab is the optimal second-line regimen. Both apatinib and nivolumab could be potentially recommended as refractory regimens.

Third-line systemic treatment in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer: a comprehensive review

The management of advanced gastric cancer has improved over the past decade. There is more evidence to support the efficacy of systemic treatment in refractory gastric cancer beyond second-line treatment. Important randomized controlled trials of chemotherapies, targeted agents and immunotherapies have been reported. With the development of these novel therapies, clinicians can better individualize treatment for patients beyond progression on second-line therapy. However, there is no guideline on third-line therapy available for clinicians. This review discussed the efficacy and safety data from the pivotal trials of the agents proven to be effective in third-line settings, including the quality of study design, level of evidence and subgroup analysis, and how the data can help to guide clinicians on selecting the most appropriate third-line therapy for their patients.

Second-line treatment efficacy and toxicity in older vs. non-older patients with advanced gastric cancer: A multicentre real-world study

OBJECTIVES

Although gastric cancer (GC) incidence rises with age, older patients are poorly represented in clinical trials, whose results are therefore difficult to translate into standard management of older patients. Purpose of this study was to compare clinico-pathological features and survival outcomes between older and non-older patients with advanced GC treated with at least two chemotherapy lines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinico-pathological characteristics, basal values, and treatment data of older (≥70 years at second-line start) and non-older patients were compared using chi-square test or 2-tailed Fisher exact test. The Kaplan-Meier estimation was used to calculate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), which were examined by log-rank test.

RESULTS

Older patients represented 31.8% of the population (N = 868). Intestinal type was more frequent in older patients (P = .02). Poorly differentiated tumours were more often observed in non-older patients (P = .009). At stage IV diagnosis, the rate of liver metastases was higher in older patients (P = .02), while peritoneal spread was more represented in non-older patients (P = .002). Although older patients were more often treated with monotherapy (P = .001), they had similar PFS (HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.71-1.03, P = .102) and OS (HR 0.82, 95%CI 0.65-1.02, P = .08) compared to the non-older counterpart. No statistical differences were observed in treatment-related adverse events, hospital admissions, or further treatment lines between age groups.

CONCLUSION

In our large cohort study, despite some differences in tumour characteristics and treatment intensity, no survival difference was found between older and non-older patients with advanced GC treated with at least two chemotherapy lines. Incidence of adverse events was similar between age groups.

New drug developments in metastatic gastric cancer

Metastatic gastric cancer is associated with a poor prognosis and novel treatment options are desperately needed. The development of targeted therapies heralded a new era for the management of metastatic gastric cancer, however results from clinical trials of numerous targeted agents have been mixed. The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors has yielded similar promise and results from early trials are encouraging. This review provides an overview of the systemic treatment options evaluated in metastatic gastric cancer, with a focus on recent evidence from clinical trials for targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. The failure to identify appropriate predictive biomarkers has hampered the success of many targeted therapies in gastric cancer, and a deeper understanding of specific molecular subtypes and genomic alterations may allow for more precision in the application of novel therapies. Identifying appropriate biomarkers for patient selection is essential for future clinical trials, for the most effective use of novel agents and in combination approaches to account for growing complexity of treatment options.

A phase I dose-escalation study of IMAB362 (Zolbetuximab) in patients with advanced gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer

INTRODUCTION

IMAB362 (Zolbetuximab) is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that binds to Claudin-18.2, a target antigen specific to cancer cells. In vitro, IMAB362 mediates cell death through antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity; thus, IMAB362 may serve as a potent, targeted immunotherapeutic agent.

METHODS

This first-in-human phase I study enroled adult patients (N = 15) with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer into five sequential single dose-escalation cohorts (33, 100, 300, 600, and 1000 mg/m²) following a 3 + 3 design. Safety/tolerability, including determination of maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase II dose, were the primary objectives; secondary objectives included assessment of the IMAB362 pharmacokinetic profile, immunogenicity, and antitumour activity (assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.0).

RESULTS

IMAB362 was generally well tolerated at all doses, with gastrointestinal toxicities being the most commonly observed treatment-related adverse events. As dose-limiting toxicity was not observed within 4 weeks of treatment, a maximum tolerated dose was not established. The pharmacokinetic profile of IMAB362 appeared to be proportional across the dose range; and mean half-life ranged from 13 to 24 d. While most patients showed progressive disease at weeks 4-5 after a single intravenous IMAB362 infusion, one patient in the 600 mg/m² dose group achieved and maintained stable disease for approximately 2 months postinfusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study demonstrate that IMAB362 is generally well tolerated and support further evaluation in patients with gastric/gastro-oesophageal junction cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT00909025.

Survival in Advanced Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma Improves With Use of Multiple Lines of Therapy: Results From an Analysis of More Than 500 Patients

BACKGROUND

Although progress has been made in the molecular stratification of esophagogastric adenocarcinoma, the outlook for advanced disease remains poor. The present evaluation of over 500 patients treated at a single European high-volume tertiary center during a 6-year period gives important information on current and developing "real-world" treatment patterns and outcomes.

RESULTS

The overall survival for the whole cohort was 11.5 months, with a range of treatments used in first-, second-, and third-line settings. Treatment with sequential lines of therapy was associated with better outcomes, although only 39% and 14% of patients subsequently received treatment in the second- and third-line setting, respectively. Treatment within a therapeutic clinical trial was associated with significantly improved survival.

CONCLUSION

At present, a substantial proportion of patients with advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma will not proceed beyond first-line therapy, and for this group refinement of initial systemic therapies are required to improve outcomes. Although a number of established first- and second-line treatment options are now available, the therapeutic landscape of the disease continues to change, most notably in the application of immunotherapy and increasing interest in establishing evidence-based interventions in the third-line setting and beyond. A small but growing proportion of patients will benefit from sequential treatment approaches incorporating multiple lines of therapy, and improved selection of such patients will be a key challenge for clinicians moving forwards. Data such as these provide an overview of current treatment patterns and outcomes which can be used to inform planning of future research effectively within existing treatment frameworks.

Efficacy prediction of targeted therapy for gastric cancer: The current status (Review)

Despite significant progress in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC), the prognosis remains poor and the mortality is high. Targeted drugs have been incorporated into routine treatment to improve treatment efficacy. However, the therapy response is still below 50%. Therefore, there is a need to identify predictive factors for patient response to a specific drug in order to improve the efficacy of drug therapy. The present article reviewed the predictive factors for target therapy in GC, including epidermal growth factor receptor, human epidermal receptor 2, vascular endothelial growth factor family, molecules in the mesenchymal‑epithelial transition pathway and the mammalian target of rapamycin. Additionally, the present review described the interactions between these molecules and signaling pathways.

Ramucirumab as Second-Line Therapy in Metastatic Gastric Cancer: Real-World Data from the RAMoss Study

BACKGROUND

Ramucirumab-alone or combined with paclitaxel-represents one of the main options for patients failing first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The RAMoss study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy profile of ramucirumab in the "real-life setting".

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients from 25 Italian hospitals started therapy consisting of ramucirumab 8 mg/kg i.v. d1,15q28 with or without paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 i.v. d1,8,15q28. The primary endpoint was safety, and secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-seven patients with disease progression on first-line therapy received ramucirumab as monotherapy (10%) or combined with paclitaxel (90%). Median treatment duration was 4 months (1-17 months). Global incidence of grade (G) 3-4 toxicity was 9.6%, and for neutropenia 5.4%; treatment was discontinued due to toxicity in 3% of patients. The most frequent adverse events (AE) were G1-2 fatigue (27.5%), G1-2 neuropathy (26.3%), and G1-2 neutropenia (14.9%). ORR was 20.2%. Stable disease was observed in 39.2% of patients, with a disease control rate of 59.4%. With a median follow-up of 11 months, median PFS was 4.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-4.7), whereas median OS was 8.0 months (95% CI: 7.09-8.9). In a multivariate analysis, ECOG performance status <1 or ≥1 (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.0-1.27, p = 0.04) and the presence versus absence of peritoneal metastases (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.63-2.39, p = 0.03) were independent poor prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

These "real-life" efficacy data on ramucirumab treatment are in line with previous randomized trials. Ramucirumab is well tolerated in daily clinical practice.

Management of advanced gastric cancer: An overview of major findings from meta-analysis

This study aims to provide an overview of different treatment for advanced gastric cancer. In the present study, we systematically reviewed the major findings from relevant meta-analyses. A total of 54 relevant papers were searched via the PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar databases. They were classified according to the mainstay treatment modalities such as surgery, chemotherapy and others. Primary outcomes including overall survival, response rate, disease-free survival, recurrence-free survival, progression-free survival, time-to-progression, time-to failure, recurrence and safety were summarized. The recommendations and uncertainties regarding the treatment of advanced gastric cancer were also proposed. It was suggested that laparoscopic gastrectomy was a safe and technical alternative to open gastrectomy. Besides, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were thought to benefit the survival over surgery alone. And it was demonstrated in the study that targeted therapy like anti-angiogenic and anti-HER2 agents but anti-EGFR agent might have a significant survival benefit.

lncRNA BG981369 Inhibits Cell Proliferation, Migration, and Invasion, and Promotes Cell Apoptosis by SRY-Related High-Mobility Group Box 4 (SOX4) Signaling Pathway in Human Gastric Cancer

Background

Human gastric cancer (GC) is a leading primary cause of cancer-associated deaths in both males and females worldwide. However, there are few effective diagnostic and therapeutic measures for GC patients due to the complicated underlying mechanisms of GC. Recently, increasing research has indicated that lncRNAs may play a critical role in the progression of GC.

Material/Methods

AI769947, AK054978, DB077273, BG981369, AK054588, and AF131784 expressions were analyzed by qRT-PCR assay in GC tissues and corresponding normal tissues (n=44). BG981369 expression was detected by qRT-PCR assay in GC cells. BG981369 was overexpressed and silenced in AGS and SNU-5 cells. The proliferation ability was detected by MTT and colony formation assays. Cell cycle distribution and cell apoptosis rate were analyzed by flow cytometry. The migration and invasion abilities were measured by Transwell assay. In addition, SOX4 expression was analyzed by qRT-PCR in GC tissues. The correlation between SOX4 and BG981369 was analyzed by Pearson analysis.

Results

The results indicated that lncRNA BG981369 was significantly higher in GC tissues than in normal tissues. Overexpression of BG981369 inhibited the proliferation, migration, and invasion and promoted apoptosis of gastric adenocarcinoma (AGS) cells, and silencing of BG981369 promoted proliferation, migration, and invasion, and inhibited cell apoptosis of SNU-5 cells. Furthermore, we found that SOX4 may act as a downstream mediator of BG981369, suggesting that BG981369 inhibits proliferation, migration, and invasion, and promotes apoptosis by targeting SOX4 in the GC cell lines.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that BG981369 and SOX4 are potentially effective therapeutic targets for GC.

Efficacy and safety of apatinib as second-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a single-center observational study

Apatinib has been proven to be effective and safe among patients in the third-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer in phase II and III trials. We aimed to evaluate its efficacy and safety in second-line practice, and to explore the factors associated with efficacy. Between April 2015 and May 2017, a total of 23 patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma or adenocarcinoma of gastroesophageal junction were enrolled and followed up retrospectively after failing the first line of systemic therapy. The median progression-free survival was 4.43 months (95% confidence interval: 1.63-7.22) and the median overall survival was 9.11 months (95% confidence interval: 8.22-9.99). Two patients achieved a partial response and 14 patients achieved stable disease. The disease control rate was 69.6% and the objective response rate was 8.7%. The most common adverse events over grade 3 were hypertension (8.7%) and thrombocytopenia (8.7%). No treatment-related death was documented during the drug administration. Apatinib is an effective regimen for the second-line treatment of advanced gastric and gastroesophageal cancer with manageable toxicity.

Prospective randomized phase II study of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX7 in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: a Chinese Western Cooperative Gastrointestinal Oncology Group Study

Until now, no standard chemotherapy has been widely accepted for advanced gastric cancer (GC). The current research aimed to compare folinic acid, fluorouracil with irinotecan (mFOLFIRI) or with oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX7) as first-line treatments in patients with locally advanced GC in an open, randomized, phase II study. Previously untreated metastatic or recurrent GC patients with measurable disease received mFOLFIRI (arm A) or mFOLFOX7 (arm B) every 2 weeks. The defined second-line treatment was mFOLFOX7 for arm A and mFOLFIRI for arm B. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) and toxicity. The evaluable population consisted of 128 patients (54 in arm A; 74 in arm B). Median PFS of arm A was 2.9 months (m) (95% confidence interval, CI, 1.9 to 4.1 m) versus 4.1 m (95% CI, 3.2 to 4.8 m) for arm B (p = 0.109). Median OS was 9.9 months (95% CI, 6.0 to 13.5 m) for arm A versus 12.0 m for arm B (95% CI, 10.3 to 13.7m; p = 0.431). DCRs for arm A and arm B were 59.3% and 66.3%, respectively (p = 0.850). In subgroup analysis of the patients who completed both treatment lines per protocol, the median first-line PFS was 2.1 m for the mFOLFIRI/mFOLFOX7arm versus 8.0 m for the mFOLFOX7/mFOLFIRI arm (p = 0.053), and the median second-line PFS values were 1.2 m versus 5.1 m (p = 0.287). Total PFS and OS were 8.1m and 11.0 m for the mFOLFIRI/mFOLFOX7 group compared with 12.2m and 20.2 m for the mFOLFOX7/mFOLFIRI group (p = 0.008, p = 0.030). Both regimens were well-tolerated with acceptable and manageable toxicities. Hence, there was no significant difference in the PFS or DCR. However, mFOLFOX7 followed by mFOLFIRI might have a better OS.

Real-World Treatment Patterns among Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer in South Korea

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to understand patient treatment patterns, outcomes, and healthcare resource use in cases of metastatic and/or locally recurrent, unresectable gastric cancer (MGC) in South Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty physicians reviewed charts of eligible patients to collect de-identified data. Patients must have received platinum/fluoropyrimidine first-line therapy followed by second-line therapy or best supportive care, had no other primary cancer, and not participated in a clinical trial following MGC diagnosis. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to describe survival.

RESULTS

Of 198 patients, 73.7% were male, 78.3% were diagnosed with MGC after age 55 (mean, 61.3 years), and 47.0% were current or former smokers. The majority of tumorswere located in the antrum/pylorus (51.5%). Metastatic sites most often occurred in the peritoneum (53.5%), lymph nodes (47.5%), and liver (38.9%). At diagnosis, the mean Charlson comorbidity indexwas 0.4 (standard deviation, 0.6). The most common comorbidities were chronic gastritis (22.7%) and cardiovascular disease (18.7%). Most patients (80.3%) received second-line treatment. Single-agent fluoropyrimidine was reported for 22.0% of patients, while 19.5% were treated with irinotecan and a fluoropyrimidine or platinum agent. The most common physician-reported symptoms during second-line treatment were nausea/vomiting (44.7%) and pain (11.3%), with antiemetics (44.7%), analgesics (36.5%), and nutritional support (11.3%) most often used as supportive care. Two-thirds of inpatient hospitalizations were for chemotherapy infusion. Outpatient hospitalization (31.6%) and visits to the oncologist (58.8%) were common among second-line patients.

CONCLUSION

Most patients received second-line treatment, although regimens varied. Understanding MGC patient characteristics and treatment patterns in South Korea will help address unmet needs.

The G8 screening tool enhances prognostic value to ECOG performance status in elderly cancer patients: A retrospective, single institutional study

Background

Some elderly cancer patients, even with good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS), have poor survival outcomes and cannot tolerate standard therapy. Few studies have detailed the associations between the G8 screening tool, ECOG-PS, and overall survival (OS) in such patients.

Methods

Cancer patients, aged 70 years or older, were assessed for G8 and classified into three groups according to their G8 score: <11 as the low score group, 11–14 as the intermediate score group, and >14 as the high score group. We retrospectively analyzed the association between G8 score and OS in all patients and for each ECOG-PS-categorized group.

Results

Out of 264 enrolled patients, most patients (87%) with solid tumor were categorized as TNM stage IV. ECOG-PS was 0 or 1 in 215 patients and ≥2 in 48; there was missing data for one patient. Among all patients, the low score group with a median OS of 7.7 months survived significantly less than both the high score group with a median OS of 25.6 months [Hazard ratio (HR) 3.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.96–6.63; p < 0.0001] and the intermediate score group with a median of 15.6 months (HR 1.83; 95% CI, 1.28–2.65; p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, TNM stage and G8 score were independent prognostic factors for OS. When patients with an ECOG-PS of 0 or 1 were analyzed, patients with a lower G8 score showed significantly shorter OS than patients with a higher score when any two groups were compared.

Conclusion

This novel classification of the G8 score contributes to prompt identification of patients with poor prognosis and improved the prognostic value of ECOG-PS. Using G8 with ECOG-PS may be helpful in deciding treatment for elderly patients with advanced cancer.

The role of antiangiogenic agents in the treatment of gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The survival of advanced gastric cancer (GC) is dismal, and effects of antiangiogenic agents remain inconclusive. The purpose of this study is to assess combination of chemotherapy with antiangiogenic therapy versus traditional chemotherapy.

METHODS

To achieve the goal of scientific rigor, statistics from both referenced works and experiments were analyzed. We carefully searched for the referenced works by retrieving, as well as analyzing, literature databases for information on antiangiogenic therapy compared to other therapeutic approaches used to treat GC patients. Two groups were defined in the experiment: experimental and control groups. The experimental group was treated with antiangiogenic drug, and the control group was treated with standard chemotherapy or placebo.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 3240 participants. Overall, there was significant improvement in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.91, P = 0.002), progression-free survival (HR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.81, P = 0.0002), objective response rate (risk ratio [RR] = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.33-1.88, P < 0.00001), and disease control rate (RR 2.44, 95% CI: 1.57-3.78, P < 0.0001) in the group with antiangiogenic drug versus the group with standard chemotherapy or placebo. Moreover, this new treatment approach showed tolerable toxicity.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the superior efficacy of combination therapy with antiangiogenic agents in comparison to traditional chemotherapy regimens for patients with GC. Moreover, this new treatment approach showed tolerable toxicity. This meta-analysis provides important information for clinicians who are interested in using antiangiogenic therapies to treat GC patients.

Clinical effectiveness and toxicity of second-line irinotecan in advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a single-center observational study

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials showed improved overall survival (OS) of advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) patients treated with second-line taxane or irinotecan. However, most data on irinotecan efficacy in this setting come from large Asian trials. We retrospectively analyzed clinical effectiveness and toxicity of irinotecan in a cohort of patients with advanced GEA treated in our department.

METHODS

Advanced GEA patients who received at least one cycle of second-line irinotecan were eligible for inclusion. Irinotecan was administered every 3 weeks at an initial dose of 250 mg/m² of body surface area with subsequent gradual (every 50 mg/m²) dose escalation up to 350 mg/m², in the case of good treatment tolerance. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to examine the association between clinical and laboratory parameters and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients were identified. Median OS was 6.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.9-7.6]. In multivariate analysis, age < 65 years, baseline total lymphocyte count (TLC) < 1500/µl and presence of peritoneal metastases were associated with shorter OS. Most adverse events were grade 1-2 and included: anemia (52.3%), leukocytopenia (40.9%), neutropenia (59.1%), nausea (25.0%), vomiting (31.8%), diarrhea (31.8%), anorexia (29.5%) and fatigue (43.2%). Febrile neutropenia occurred in three patients (6.8%). Nine patients (20.5%) experienced a toxicity grade 3-4 of any kind.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis confirms clinical effectiveness and manageable toxicity of second-line irinotecan in an unselected cohort of advanced GEA patients. Age < 65 years, baseline TLC < 1500/µl and presence of peritoneal metastases were independent prognostic factors associated with shorter OS.

Characteristics of Gastric Cancer in Lebanon: a Descriptive Study from a Single Institutional Experience

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of gastric cancer in the Middle East has never been described. Therefore, the characteristics of gastric cancer in the Lebanese population will be reported in this study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study that included all patients diagnosed with gastric cancer at Hotel Dieu de France University Hospital in Beirut, Lebanon between 2010 and 2016 was conducted. All eligible patients were reviewed for demographic and epidemiologic analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 123 patients diagnosed with gastric cancer. The median age at diagnosis was 59 years (range 15-72 years), and the median ECOG performance status was 2 (range 1-4). Most patients were metastatic at diagnosis (52.8%), and diffuse pathology type was predominant (39%). HER2 was positive in 16.2% and correlated with the occurrence of hepatic metastasis (p = 0.048). The HER2 status did not differ significantly between the histological subtypes, the site of the tumor, the stage of the gastric cancer at diagnosis, and the recurrence of cancer (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Gastric cancer in the Lebanese population is characterized by aggressive features such as advanced stage at diagnosis, high prevalence of diffuse type histology, and HER2 positivity.

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.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) plus targeted agents versus NCT alone in colorectal liver metastases patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) plus targeted agents versus NCT alone for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) patients.

Methods

Trials published between 1994 and 2015 were identified by an electronic search of public databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library). All clinical studies were independently identified by two authors for inclusion. Demographic data, treatment regimens, objective response rate (ORR), hepatic resection and R0 hepatic resection rate were extracted and analyzed using Comprehensive MetaAnalysis software (Version 2.0).

Results

A total of 40 cohorts with 2099 CRLM patients were included: 962 patients were treated with NCT alone, 602 with NCT plus anti-epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR)-monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) and 535 with NCT plus bevacizumab. Pooled ORR was significantly higher for NCT plus bevacizumab or anti-EGFR-MoAbs than NCT alone [relative risk (RR) 1.53, 95% CI 1.30–1.80; p < 0.001; RR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.27–1.83, p < 0.001; respectively]. NCT plus bevacizumab significantly improved R0 hepatic resection rate (RR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.27–2.04, p < 0.001), but not for overall hepatic resection rate (RR 1.26, 95% CI: 0.81–1.94, p = 0.30). While hepatic resection and R0 hepatic resection rate was comparable between NCT plus anti-EGFR-MoAbs and NCT alone (p = 0.42 and p = 0.37, respectively).

Conclusions

In comparison with NCT alone, NCT plus bevacizumab significantly improve ORR and R0 hepatic resection rate but not for hepatic resection rate. Our findings support the need to compare NCT plus bevacizumab with NCT alone in the neoadjuvant setting in large prospective trials due to its higher hepatic resection rate and R0 hepatic resection rate in CRLM patients.

Second- and third-line systemic therapy in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer: a systematic review of the literature

The optimal second- and third-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer is still a matter of debate. Therefore, a literature search was carried out in Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and oncology conferences until January 2016 for randomized controlled trials that compared second- or third-line therapy. We included 28 studies with 4810 patients. Second-line, single-agent taxane/irinotecan showed increased survival compared to best supportive care (BSC) (hazard ratio 0.65, 95 % confidence interval 0.53-0.79). Median survival gain ranged from 1.4 to 2.7 months among individual studies. Taxane- and irinotecan-based regimens showed equal survival benefit. Doublet chemotherapy taxane/irinotecan plus platinum and fluoropyrimidine was not different in survival, but showed increased toxicity vs. taxane/irinotecan monotherapy. Compared to BSC, second-line ramucirumab and second- or third-line everolimus and regorafenib showed limited median survival gain ranging from 1.1 to 1.4 months, and progression-free survival gain, ranging from 0.3 to 1.6 months. Third- or later-line apatinib showed increased survival benefit over BSC (HR 0.50, 0.32-0.79). Median survival gain ranged from 1.8 to 2.3 months. Compared to taxane-alone, survival was superior for second-line ramucirumab plus taxane (HR 0.81, 0.68-0.96), and olaparib plus taxane (HR 0.56, 0.35-0.87), with median survival gains of 2.2 and 4.8 months respectively. Targeted agents, either in monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy showed increased toxicity compared to BSC and chemotherapy-alone. This review indicates that, given the survival benefit in a phase III study setting, ramucirumab plus taxane is the preferred second-line treatment. Taxane or irinotecan monotherapy are alternatives, although the absolute survival benefit was limited. In third-line setting, apatinib monotherapy is preferred.

Ramucirumab Clinical Development: an Emerging Role in Gastrointestinal Tumors

Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B, LY3009806) is a fully human G1 monoclonal antibody that specifically targets vascular endotelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR-2) with a substantially greater binding affinity than that of its natural ligands. Early clinical trials in patients with advanced solid tumors demonstrated that biologically relevant blood target concentrations are achievable with tolerable doses, and also showed some preliminary evidence of clinical activity. Several pivotal phase III trials have now been concluded and have led regulatory agencies to grant marketing authorization to ramucirumab for use as second line therapy in patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma (as single agent or in combination with paclitaxel), in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma (CRC) (in combination with infusional fluorouracil and irinotecan (FOLFIRI regimen)) and in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (in combination with docetaxel). In contrast, ramucirumab failed to significantly improve survival versus placebo as second line therapy in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this review is to summarize the clinical development and emerging role of ramucirumab in gastrointestinal (GI) tumors, including relevant aspects of its mechanism of action, pharmacology, safety profile, and antitumor activity in gastric, HCC, and CRC carcinomas.

Clinical role of ramucirumab alone or in combination with paclitaxel for gastric and gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma

Cancers of the stomach and gastro-esophageal junction represent a significant challenge in oncology. Despite some recent advances in genetic categorization and the development of novel agents, outcomes remain poor. The vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 monoclonal antibody ramucirumab is the first targeted therapy to improve survival in a molecularly unselected population, and represents a valuable new treatment option. This review describes the current treatment landscape for advanced disease, evaluates existing and ongoing research into ramucirumab, and discusses its current and potential future therapeutic role.

Immunotherapy for oesophagogastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Gastric and oesophageal cancers are a pressing global health problem with high mortality rates and poor outcomes for advanced disease. The mainstay of treatment in the palliative setting has traditionally been chemotherapy, which accrues only modest survival benefits. As with other cancer types, there is increasing interest in the use of immunotherapy approaches to improve outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

This paper reviews the aetiological and genetic characteristics of oesophagogastric (OG) cancers relevant to the application of immunotherapy and outlines the historical, present-day and potential future applications of immunotherapy in their management.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of agents targeting the PD1 pathway have led to impressive and durable responses in a minority of OG cancer patients and it would be expected that combinatorial approaches with chemotherapy, radiotherapy and other biological agents will improve responses further. Identification of clinically robust biomarkers is crucial in refining such approaches moving forwards. The application of modern sequencing technology to the development of personalized neoantigen-based vaccines represents an exciting amalgamation of genomics and immunotherapy, with potentially important clinical implications in OG cancer.

Metastatic gastric cancer treatment: Second line and beyond

Advanced gastric cancer (aGC), not amenable to curative surgery, is still a burdensome illness tormenting afflicted patients and their healthcare providers. Whereas combination chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival and tumor related symptoms in the frontline setting, second-line therapy (SLT) is subject to much debate in the scientific community, mainly because of the debilitating effects of GC, which would impede the administration of cytotoxic therapy. Recent data has provided sufficient evidence for the safe use of SLT in patients with an adequate performance status. Taxanes, Irinotecan and even some Fluoropyrimidine analogs were found to provide a survival advantage in this subset of patients. Most importantly, quality of life measures were also improved through the use of adequate therapy. Even more pertinent were the findings involving antiangiogenic agents, which would add measurable improvements without significantly jeopardizing the patients’ well-being. Further lines of therapy are cause for much more debate nowadays, but specific targeted agents have shown considerable promise in this context. We herein review noteworthy published data involving the use of additional lines of the therapy after failure of standard frontline therapies in patients with aGC.

Chemotherapy vs supportive care alone for relapsed gastric, gastroesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of patient-level data

BACKGROUND

Second-line chemotherapy treatment of patients with relapsed gastric and oesophageal cancers in comparison with supportive care (SC) alone has been supported by recent phase 3 clinical trials, but a meta-analysis of patient-level data is lacking.

METHODS

We searched Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Web of Science for phase 3 clinical trials that compared second-line chemotherapy with SC alone for gastric and oesophageal cancers. A meta-analysis of the comprehensive patient-level data from the three identified trials was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 410 patients with gastric (n=301), gastroesophageal junction (n=76), or oesophageal (n=33) adenocarcinoma were identified. In all, 154 patients received single-agent docetaxel and 84 patients received single-agent irinotecan, each with SC. SC alone was given to 172 patients. Chemotherapy significantly reduced the risk of death (hazard ratio (HR)=0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.51-0.77, P<0.0001). This effect was observed for treatment with docetaxel (HR=0.71, 95% CI=0.56-0.89, P=0.003) and irinotecan (HR=0.49, 95% CI=0.36-0.67, P<0.001). Overall survival (OS) benefit was greatest for patients who progressed 3-6 months following first-line chemotherapy (HR=0.39, 95% CI=0.26-0.59, P<0.0001). Performance status (PS) 0-1 compared with PS 2 (HR=0.66, 95% CI=0.46-0.94, P=0.02), locally advanced disease compared with metastatic disease (HR=0.41, 95% CI=0.25-0.67, P=0.0004) and older age (HR=0.94 per 5 years, 95% CI=0.90-0.99, P=0.01) were significant predictors of improved OS. Progression of disease during first-line treatment (HR=1.24, 95% CI=0.96-1.59) or within the first 3 months of completion of first-line treatment (HR=1.42, 95% CI=1.09-1.83) were predictors of an increased risk of death compared with progression between 3 and 6 months (P=0.03). Health-related quality of life outcomes were reported in only one of the three trials, precluding meta-analysis of these parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of patient-level data confirms that second-line chemotherapy treatment results in significantly better OS compared with SC alone in patients with platinum and fluoropyrimidine refractory gastric and oesphageal adenocarcinoma. Health-related quality of life outcomes should be included in future trials in this setting.

Doublet Versus Single Agent as Second-Line Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 10 Randomized Controlled Trials

The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and safety of doublet versus single agent as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify relevant RCTs. All clinical studies were independently identified by 2 authors for inclusion. Demographic data, treatment regimens, objective response rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were extracted and analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (Version 2.0).Ten RCTs involving 1698 pretreated AGC patients were ultimately identified. The pooled results demonstrated that doublet combination therapy as second-line treatment for AGC significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-0.97, P = 0.011), PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.87, P < 0.001), and ORR (relative risk [RR] 1.57, 95% CI: 1.27-1.95, P < 0.001). Sub-group analysis according to treatment regimens also showed that targeted agent plus chemotherapy significantly improve OS, PFS, and ORR. However, no significant survival benefits had been observed in doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy when compared with single cytotoxic agent. Additionally, more incidences of grade 3 or 4 myelosuppression toxicities, diarrhea, and fatigue were observed in doublet combination groups, while equivalent frequencies of grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia and nausea were found between the 2 groups.In comparison with single cytotoxic agent alone, the addition of targeted agent to mono-chemotherapy as salvage treatment for pretreated AGC patients provide substantial survival benefits, while no significant survival benefits were observed in doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens.

Seom guidelines for the treatment of gastric cancer 2015

Gastric cancer is the fourth cause of death by cancer in Spain and a significant medical problem. Molecular biology results evidence that gastroesophageal junction tumors and gastric cancer should be considered as two independent entities with a different prognosis and treatment approach. Endoscopic resection in very early tumors is feasible. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy in locally advanced resectable tumor increase overall survival and should be considered standard treatments. In stage IV tumors, platinum–fluoropyrimidine-based schedule, with trastuzumab in HER2-overexpressed tumors, is the first-line treatment. Different therapies in second line have demonstrated in randomized studies their clear benefit in survival improvement.

Systemic therapy beyond first-line in advanced gastric cancer: An overview of the main randomized clinical trials

Following progression on first-line platinum and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy, prognosis for advanced gastric cancer patients is extremely poor. Thus, new and effective treatments are required. Based on positive results of recent randomized controlled trials, second-line monochemotherapies with either irinotecan or taxanes confer a median overall survival of approximately 5 months in gastro-esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. Combination of weekly paclitaxel and ramucirumab, a novel anti-angiogenic VEGFR2 antibody, pushes the overall survival up to over 9.5 months, whereas apatinib, a novel oral VEGFR2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, seems to be promising in heavily pretreated patients. In contrast, the role of EGFR/HER2 and mTOR inhibitors is controversial. Studies are heterogeneous for tumor population, geographical areas, quality of life assessment, type of first-line therapy and response to that, making clinical practice application of the trial results difficult. Furthermore, sustainability is challenging due to high cost of novel biotherapies.

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 treatments for advanced gastric cancer: Interpreting outcomes by network meta-analysis

AIM: To study the effectiveness of second-line treatments for advancer gastric cancer by application of Bayesian network meta-analysis.

METHODS: Our search covered the literature up to February 2015. The following 6 treatments were evaluated: (1) irinotecan (camptothecins); (2) paclitaxel (taxanes class); (3) docetaxel (taxanes); (4) everolimus (mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors); (5) ramucirumab (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 inhibitors); (6) ramucirumab + paclitaxel. Our methodology was based on standard models of Bayesian network meta-analysis. The reference treatment was best supportive care (BSC). The end-point was overall survival. Median survival was the outcome measure along with 95% credible intervals.

RESULTS: Our search identified a total of 7 randomized controlled trials. These trials included 2298 patients (in 15 treatment arms) in whom a total of 6 active treatments were evaluated as well as BSC. There were 21 head-to-head comparisons (6 direct, 15 indirect). The difference in survival between each of two active treatments (paclitaxel and ramucirumab + paclitaxel) vs BSC was statistically significant, while the other 4 showed no statistical difference. In the 6 head-to-head comparisons between active treatments, no significant survival difference was demonstrated.

CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that both paclitaxel monotherapy and ramucirumab + paclitaxel determine a significant prolongation in survival as compared with BSC.

Application of radiation technology in vaccines development

One of the earliest methods used in the manufacture of stable and safe vaccines is the use of chemical and physical treatments to produce inactivated forms of pathogens. Although these types of vaccines have been successful in eliciting specific humoral immune responses to pathogen-associated immunogens, there is a large demand for the development of fast, safe, and effective vaccine manufacturing strategies. Radiation sterilization has been used to develop a variety of vaccine types, because it can eradicate chemical contaminants and penetrate pathogens to destroy nucleic acids without damaging the pathogen surface antigens. Nevertheless, irradiated vaccines have not widely been used at an industrial level because of difficulties obtaining the necessary equipment. Recent successful clinical trials of irradiated vaccines against pathogens and tumors have led to a reevaluation of radiation technology as an alternative method to produce vaccines. In the present article, we review the challenges associated with creating irradiated vaccines and discuss potential strategies for developing vaccines using radiation technology.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials on the role of targeted therapy in the management of advanced gastric cancer: Evidence does not translate?

It is still uncertain if targeted therapy-based regimens in advanced gastric cancer actually produce survival benefit. To shed light on this important question, we performed a systematic review and meta-analyses on each relevant targeted-pathway. By searching literature databases and proceedings of major cancer meetings in the time-frame 2005-2014, 22 randomized clinical trials exploring targeted therapy for a total of 7022 advanced gastric cancer patients were selected and included in the final analysis. Benefit was demonstrated for antiangiogenic agents in terms of overall survival (HR 0.759; 95%CI 0.655-0.880; p < 0.001). Conversely no benefit was found for EGFR pathway (HR 1.077; 95%CI 0.847-1.370; p = 0.543). Meta-analysis of HER-2 pathway confirmed improvement in terms of survival outcome, already known for this class of drugs (HR 0.823; 95%CI 0.722-0.939; p = 0.004). Pooled analysis demonstrated a significant survival benefit (OS: HR 0.823; PFS: HR 0.762) with acceptable tolerability profile for targeted-based therapies as compared to conventional treatments. This finding conflicts with the outcome of most individual studies, probably due to poor trial design or patients selection. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate a significant survival benefit for targeted therapy in its whole, which can be ascribed to anti-angiogenic and anti-HER2 agents.

Update on metastatic gastric and esophageal cancers

Cancers of the stomach and esophagus are among the most challenging cancers of the GI tract to treat, associated with poor median survivals for metastatic disease and significant, sometimes prolonged, deteriorations in patient performance status as the diseases progress. However, in the past decade, we have begun to better understand disease biology and carcinogenesis, leading to the identification of subtypes of these diseases. There is also an increasing awareness of the global heterogeneity of disease and its impact on drug development. Our improved understanding of the molecular underpinnings of gastric and esophageal cancers has been accompanied with the development of novel therapeutic strategies. Recent actively investigated targets in this disease include human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, angiogenesis, MET, and immune checkpoint inhibition, with approvals of two new targeted agents, trastuzumab and ramucirumab. Improvements in our ability to deliver cytotoxic therapy, which is better tolerated and allows patients an opportunity to benefit from second- and more advanced lines of therapy, have also been observed. In this review, the current state-of-the-art management of advanced and metastatic gastric and esophageal adenocarcinomas, specifically highlighting the development of targeted therapies in these diseases, is described.

Randomised phase III trial of second-line irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to S-1 monotherapy: TRICS trial

AIM

The optimal second-line regimen for treating advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains unclear. While irinotecan (CPT-11) plus cisplatin (CDDP) combination therapy and CPT-11 monotherapy have been explored in the second-line setting, the superiority of second-line platinum-based therapies for AGC patients initially treated with S-1 monotherapy has not yet been evaluated; therefore, we aimed to examine the survival benefit of CPT-11/CDDP combination over CPT-11 monotherapy.

METHODS

AGC patients showing progression after S-1 monotherapy for advanced cancer or recurrence within 6 months after completion of S-1 adjuvant therapy were randomly allocated to CPT-11/CDDP (CPT-11, 60 mg/m(2); CDDP, 30 mg/m(2), q2w) or CPT-11 (150 mg/m(2), q2w).

RESULTS

Sixty-eight advanced and 95 recurrent cases were evaluated. The median overall survivals were 13.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.8-17.6) and 12.7 (95% CI: 10.3-17.2) months for CPT-11/CDDP and CPT-11, respectively (hazard ratio: 0.834; 95% CI: 0.596-1.167, P = 0.288). No significant differences were observed in the secondary end-points, including progression-free survival (4.6 [95% CI: 3.4-5.9] versus 4.1 [95% CI: 3.3-4.9]months) and response rate (16.9% [95% CI: 8.8-28.3] versus 15.4% [95% CI: 7.6-26.5]). The incidences of grade 3-4 anaemia (16% versus 4%) and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase levels (5% versus 0%) were higher for CPT-11/CDDP than for CPT-11. Exploratory subgroup analysis revealed that CPT-11/CDDP was significantly more effective for intestinal-type AGC, compared with CPT-11 (overall survival: 15.8 versus 14.0 months; P = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

No survival benefit was observed upon adding CDDP to CPT-11 after S-1 monotherapy failure.