A phase II multi-center study of triple therapy with paclitaxel, S-1 and cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer

Outcome of FOLFOX and Modified DCF Chemotherapy Regimen in Patients with Advanced Gastric Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Chemotherapy is used as an indispensable therapy for advanced gastric cancer. Different chemotherapy regimens have been used for this purpose. Toxicity due to the Chemotherapy drugs is one limiting factor. In this study we aim to compare the efficacy and toxicity of two regimens FOLFOX (leucoverin, 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin) and modified DCF (mDCF) (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil) in patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

In this analytical cross-sectional study, 47 patients treated with FOLFOX regimen and 57 patients treated with mDCF regimen were recruited, Patients in both groups were compared for demographic findings, response rate, mortality rate, overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

In FOLFOX and mDCF group, complete response (CR) occurred in 4.3% and 5.3%, partial response (PR) in 42.6% and 29.8%, stable disease in 34% and 52.6% and disease progression in 19.1% and 12.3%, respectively (p=0.25). Overall response rate was 48.9% and 56.1%, respectively. There was no significant difference between two regimens in OS and PFS (p=0.22). mDCF compared to FOLFOX had significantly higher hematologic, gastrointestinal complications, as well as creatinine rise, stomatitis and hair loss, but peripheral neuropathy was significantly lower.

CONCLUSION

The results of current study showed that in patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma, FOLFOX regimen compared to mDCF regimen have similar ORR, OS and PFS. Toxicity rate are also lower in FOLFOX group, thus it seems a better regimen for chemotherapy.<br />.

Phase II trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with intraperitoneal paclitaxel, S-1, and intravenous cisplatin and paclitaxel for stage IIIA or IIIB gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

We carried out a phase II trial to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy comprising a single intraperitoneal administration of paclitaxel, followed by intravenous administrations of paclitaxel and cisplatin with S-1 for clinical stage III gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with potentially resectable gastric cancer were eligible. A laparoscopic survey was performed to confirm CY0 and P0. Intraperitoneal paclitaxel (60 mg/m ² ) was administered, followed by systemic chemotherapy. Surgery was performed after two cycles of chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the response rate of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were adverse events, pathological response rate, and overall survival rate.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled. Planned cycles were completed in all patients. Grade 3/4 leukopenia and grade 3/4 neutropenia were observed in four (20%) and seven (35%) patients, respectively. The overall response rate was 70% (partial response: 14, stable disease: 5, progressive disease: 1). All patients underwent R0 gastrectomy with D2 lymph-node dissection, with no surgery-related deaths. The pathological response rate was 65% (13 of 20). The 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 90.0% and 77.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy including intraperitoneal paclitaxel followed by sequential intravenous paclitaxel and cisplatin with S-1 for resectable advanced gastric cancer is feasible and effective.

Phase II study of oxaliplatin, irinotecan and S-1 therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: the Korean Cancer Study Group ST14-11

BACKGROUND

Doublet chemotherapy of platinum and 5-fluorouracil is a standard first-line treatment for patients with unresectable gastric cancer. Although the addition of taxane or irinotecan to this regimen has yielded promising efficacy, its use has been limited due to severe toxicities. To overcome this limitation, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (OIS) for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naïve patients with pathologically proven advanced gastric adenocarcinoma were assessed for eligibility. Irinotecan (135 mg/m²) and oxaliplatin (65 mg/m²) were administered intravenously on day 1, and S-1 (80 mg/m²/day) was administered orally on days 1-7 of every 2-week cycle.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (median age 57 years) were enrolled and all but one patient had a good performance status (ECOG 0 or 1). A total of 529 cycles were administered, with a median of 9.5 (range 1-31) cycles per patient. The overall response rate was 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 46.6-74.3). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 10.8 months (95% CI 7.6-14.0) and 15.4 months (95% CI 12.6-18.2), respectively. Major toxicities included grade 3/4 neutropenia (38.6%), febrile neutropenia (13.6%), abdominal pain (9.1%), and diarrhea (9.1%).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that the OIS regimen is effective and relatively well tolerated in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Given that all the patients treated, but one, had a good performance status, these results must be confirmed in a patient population more representative of regular clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02527785.

Comparison of FOLFOX and DOF regimens as first-line treatment in East Asian patients with advanced gastric cancer

Background

Our study retrospectively assesses the safety and efficacy of the FOLFOX (oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin) versus DOF (docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and fluorouracil) regimens in untreated locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Patients and methods

A total of 108 patients underwent DOF (N=58) and FOLFOX (N=50) regimens. The end points were overall response rate (ORR), survival, and toxicity. Kaplan–Meier curve was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and Cox regression for multivariate analysis.

Results

The ORRs were 50% for DOF and 30% for FOLFOX groups (P<0.05), and disease control rates were 91.4% and 72%, respectively. The median PFS and OS in DOF group were significantly better than FOLFOX group (8.2 versus 6.4 months, P<0.05; 16.3 versus 11.2 months, P<0.001). Both groups showed acceptable toxicity; all grades and grade 3–4 toxicity had no significant differences (P=0.071; P=0.247). However, the incidence of grade 3–4 peripheral neuropathy was significantly higher in DOF group (10.3% versus 2%, P<0.05). In the subgroup analysis for elderly AGC patients (≥65 years), administration of DOF also resulted in a superior PFS (8.5 versus 5.9 months; P=0.038) and OS (15.3 versus 9.8 months; P=0.004) compared with FOLFOX. However, DOF regimen was associated with more neutropenia (67% versus 30%; P<0.05), thrombocytopenia (61% versus 52%; P<0.05), and peripheral neuropathy (49% versus 22%; P<0.05).

Conclusion

DOF regimen was more effective than FOLFOX for AGC, both in younger and older patients. The adverse effects of the two regimens were manageable. The combination of docetaxel/oxaliplatin/fluorouracil was active and well tolerated in AGC patients and deserves further evaluation. However, for elderly patients with AGC, the DOF regimen was associated with worse toxicities; therefore, the FOLFOX regimen might be a more suitable option.

Chemo-Immunotherapy Using Lentinan for the Treatment of Gastric Cancer with Liver Metastases

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Systemic chemotherapy is the main treatment option for advanced gastric cancer when the tumor is inoperable. Despite recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents, the prognosis of unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer remains extremely poor. In Japan, combination therapy including S-1 and cisplatin is the standard first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer; however, the five-year survival rate remains very low. Lentinan, the backbone of beta-(1,3)-glucan with beta-(1,6) branches, an active ingredient purified from Shiitake mushrooms, has been approved as a biological response modifier for the treatment of gastric cancer. This agent has been used in combination with oral fluoropyrimidines to improve the overall survival of gastric cancer patients. A retrospective chart review on 138 metastatic gastric cancer patients receiving chemotherapy was performed in Nagoya Memorial Hospital from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2015. 12 patients with liver metastases were treated by lentinan in combination with S-1-based chemotherapy. The rate of objective response was 42% (5/12) and the disease control rate was 83% (10/12) in response to chemo-immunotherapy using lentinan, with a median overall survival of 407 days (95% CI: 207-700 days).

Docetaxel plus oxaliplatin with or without fluorouracil or capecitabine in metastatic or locally recurrent gastric cancer: a randomized phase II study

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel/cisplatin/infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU; DCF) is a standard chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). This phase II study evaluated docetaxel/oxaliplatin (TE), docetaxel/oxaliplatin/5-FU (TEF), and docetaxel/oxaliplatin/capecitabine (TEX) in patients with advanced GC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with metastatic or locally recurrent gastric adenocarcinoma (including carcinoma of the gastro-oesophageal junction) were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1) to TE, TEF, or TEX. Each regimen was tested at two doses before full evaluation at optimized dose levels. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS), tumour response, and safety were also assessed. A therapeutic index (median PFS relative to the incidence of febrile neutropenia) was calculated for each regimen and compared with DCF (historical data).

RESULTS

Overall, 248 patients were randomly assigned to receive optimized dose treatment. Median PFS was longer with TEF (7.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.97-9.40] months) versus TE (4.50 [3.68-5.32] months) and TEX (5.55 [4.30-6.37] months). Median OS was 14.59 (95% CI: 11.70-21.78) months for TEF versus 8.97 (7.79-10.87) months for TE and 11.30 (8.08-14.03) months for TEX. The rate of tumour response (complete or partial) was 46.6% (95% CI 35.9-57.5) for TEF versus 23.1% (14.3-34.0) for TE and 25.6% (16.6-36.4) for TEX. The frequency and type of adverse events (AEs) were similar across the three arms. Common grade 3/4 AEs were fatigue (21%), sensory neuropathy (14%), and diarrhoea (13%). Febrile neutropenia was reported in 2% (TEF), 14% (TE), and 9% (TEX) of patients. The therapeutic index was improved with TEF versus TEX, TE, or DCF.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that TEF is worthy of evaluation as an arm in a phase III trial or as a backbone regimen for new targeted agents in advanced GC. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: Identifier Trial registration number: NCT00382720.

The use of lentinan for treating gastric cancer

Natural compounds containing fungal β-glucans have been used to improve general health for thousands of years in China and Japan. Lentinan, the backbone of β-(1, 3)-glucan with β-(1, 6) branches, is one of the active ingredients purified from Shiitake mushrooms and has been approved as a biological response modifier for the treatment of gastric cancer in Japan. Despite recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents, unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer remains an incurable disease, with survival rates being far from satisfactory. Recent clinical studies have shown that chemo-immunotherapy using lentinan prolongs the survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer, as compared to chemotherapy alone. In addition, trastuzumab, an antibody against HER2/neu growth factor receptor, has been used for the treatment of gastric cancer in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents. Lentinan may exert a synergistic action with anti-cancer monoclonal antibodies to activate complement systems through the mechanism of antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement dependent cytotoxicity. Because a better understanding of its biological activities should enable us to use lentinan more efficiently in the treatment of gastric cancer, immunological effects provided by β-glucans, a possible mode of action of lentinan, and its clinical application including future potential uses are discussed in the present review.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Role of S-1 in treatment of advanced gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is the fourth most common malignancy worldwide. More than 50% of gastric cancer patients have unresectable disease at diagnosis, and there is a high rate of local or distant recurrence, even in patients with an operable tumor. Chemotherapy is regarded as a significant and basic treatment that can provide a longer symptom-free period and improve quality of life. S-1 is a novel oral derivative of 5-FU. Compared with 5-FU, S-1 is more tolerable and effective, and will be more convenient to use for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Recent phase II randomized trials of S-1 based chemotherapy have achieved encouraging results with regard to objective response rate and overall survival. This paper aims to review the efficacy of S-1 in treating advanced gastric cancer, molecular markers that can predict efficacy, and the prospect for therapy with S-1 in combination with new chemotherapeutic drugs or molecularly targeted drugs.

A phase I study of triplet combination chemotherapy of paclitaxel, cisplatin and S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

S-1 and cisplatin combination therapy is a standard regimen for patients with advanced gastric cancer in Japan. The primary objective of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicities of a triplet regimen adding paclitaxel to S-1 and cisplatin combination therapy.

METHODS

Patients with previously untreated metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer were enrolled. Patients received S-1 (40 mg/m(2) p.o., twice daily, on days 1-21 every 35 days), cisplatin (30 mg/m(2) divided, on days 1 and 15) and paclitaxel (divided on days 1 and 15). The starting dose of paclitaxel was 50 mg/m(2) (level 1); the dose was escalated to 60 (level 2), 70 (level 3) and 80 mg/m(2) (level 4) in a stepwise fashion. Dose-limiting toxicity was determined during the first treatment cycle.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients enrolled. During the first cycle, no dose-limiting toxicity was observed at dose levels 1 and 2. At dose level 3, one of the six patients had dose-limiting toxicity (one patient had grade 4 neutropenia) and at dose level 4, one of the six patients had dose-limiting toxicity (one patient had febrile neutropenia, hypoalbuminemia and fatigue of grade 3). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached at level 4; however, grade 3 hyponatremia and hypokalemia in two of the six patients occurred during the second treatment course at level 4. From the point of view of safety in the outpatient setting, the recommended dose of paclitaxel was determined at 70 mg/m(2). The overall response rate was 50%.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommended dose of paclitaxel added to S-1 (80 mg/m(2) days 1-21) plus cisplatin (30 mg/m(2) days 1 and 15) was 70 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 of a 5-week cycle.

S-1 for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Phase I/II study of S-1 plus cisplatin combined with peptide vaccines for human vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 and 2 in patients with advanced gastric cancer

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of vaccination with human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A24-restricted human vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 (VEGFR1)-1084 and VEGFR2-169 combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. HLA-A 2402-positive patients with advanced or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the stomach were vaccinated with VEGFR1-1084 and VEGFR2-169 combined with S-1 and cisplatin. The study included 22 patients (median age 60.5 years) who received at least one cycle of the combination therapy. No severe adverse effects caused by the vaccine therapy were observed except for an inflammatory reaction at the site of injection in 6 patients. Twelve patients (55%) showed partial response and 10 had stable disease after two cycles of the combination therapy. The disease control rate (partial response and stable disease) was 100% after two cycles. The median time to progression was 9.6 months and median overall survival was 14.2 months. VEGFR1-1084-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) response was induced in 18 (82%) of the 22 patients and VEGFR2-169-specific CTL response was induced in 18 (82%) of the 22 patients. Patients showing CTL response to VEGFR2-169 peptide had significantly better prognosis than those without, as demonstrated by the overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) (OS, p=0.028, TTP, p=0.006). The combination therapy was well tolerated and highly effective in advanced or recurrent gastric cancer. Substantial specific CTL for both peptides was frequently induced even under chemotherapy. Thus, cancer vaccination combined with standard chemotherapy warrants further analysis as a promising strategy for the treatment of advanced cancer.

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

As it remains uncertain whether patients with advanced gastric cancer who progress after first-line chemotherapy should receive second-line chemotherapy, we attempted to identify the optimal indications for second-line chemotherapy. In this retrospective study, 101 patients were included in univariate and multivariate analyses to identify clinicopathological variables independently associated with longer survival postprogression (SPP), defined as the time from recognition of disease progression on first-line chemotherapy to death from any cause or last follow-up. The median SPP was 340 days. On multivariate analysis, performance status 2 [hazard ratio (HR), 14.234; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.766-73.258], serum albumin level less than 3.5 g/dl (HR, 2.088; 95% CI, 1.047-4.060) at initiation of second-line chemotherapy, and time to progression less than 170 days on first-line chemotherapy (HR, 2.497; 95% CI, 1.227-5.083) were identified as independent prognostic factors associated with shorter SPP. The median SPP was 496, 375, and 232 days in patients with 0, 1, and 2 of these 3 negative prognostic factors, respectively (P=0.0002). The present study suggests that second-line chemotherapy would not be beneficial in patients with two or more of the following three negative prognostic factors: performance status 2, serum albumin less than 3.5 g/dl at initiation of second-line chemotherapy and time to progression less than 170 days on first-line chemotherapy.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Convergent pathogenic pathways in Alzheimer's and Huntington's diseases: shared targets for drug development

Neurodegenerative diseases, exemplified by Alzheimer's disease and Huntington's disease, are characterized by progressive neuropsychiatric dysfunction and loss of specific neuronal subtypes. Although there are differences in the exact sites of pathology, and the clinical profiles of these two conditions only partially overlap, considerable similarities in disease mechanisms and pathogenic pathways can be observed. These shared mechanisms raise the possibility of exploiting common therapeutic targets for drug development. As Huntington's disease has a monogenic cause, it is possible to accurately identify individuals who carry the Huntington's disease mutation but do not yet manifest symptoms. These individuals could act as a model for Alzheimer's disease to test therapeutic interventions that target shared pathogenic pathways.

Lentinan prolonged survival in patients with gastric cancer receiving S-1-based chemotherapy

AIM: To examine whether administration of lentinan, purified β-1, 3-glucan, can prolong survival in advanced gastric cancer patients receiving S-1-based chemotherapy.

METHODS: Since 2004, 78 patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer have received S-1-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment. Survival, side effects, and the ratio of granulocytes/lymphocytes (G/L ratio) were compared between 2 groups of patients who received chemo-immunotherapy using lentinan and chemotherapy alone.

RESULTS: Median overall survival was significantly longer in the former group than in the latter group [689 d (95% CI: 431-2339 d) vs 565 d (95% CI: 323-662 d), P = 0.0406]. In addition, the G/L ratio in patients who received lentinan was maintained around or below 2, which was significantly lower than that in patients who received chemotherapy alone (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION: Chemo-immunotherapy with lentinan offers a significant advantage over S-1-based chemotherapy alone in terms of survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer.