Perioperative Chemotherapy Compared With Surgery Alone for Resectable Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: An FNCLCC and FFCD Multicenter Phase III Trial

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (13) ◽  
pp. 1715-1721 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Ychou ◽  
Valérie Boige ◽  
Jean-Pierre Pignon ◽  
Thierry Conroy ◽  
Olivier Bouché ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Curative Resection ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Perioperative Chemotherapy ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
Lower Esophagus ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Disease Free

PurposeAfter curative resection, the prognosis of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is poor. This phase III trial was designed to evaluate the benefit in overall survival (OS) of perioperative fluorouracil plus cisplatin in resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.Patients and MethodsOverall, 224 patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus, gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), or stomach were randomly assigned to either perioperative chemotherapy and surgery (CS group; n = 113) or surgery alone (S group; n = 111). Chemotherapy consisted of two or three preoperative cycles of intravenous cisplatin (100 mg/m2) on day 1, and a continuous intravenous infusion of fluorouracil (800 mg/m2/d) for 5 consecutive days (days 1 to 5) every 28 days and three or four postoperative cycles of the same regimen. The primary end point was OS.ResultsCompared with the S group, the CS group had a better OS (5-year rate 38% v 24%; hazard ratio [HR] for death: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.95; P = .02); and a better disease-free survival (5-year rate: 34% v 19%; HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89; P = .003). In the multivariable analysis, the favorable prognostic factors for survival were perioperative chemotherapy (P = .01) and stomach tumor localization (P < .01). Perioperative chemotherapy significantly improved the curative resection rate (84% v 73%; P = .04). Grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred in 38% of CS patients (mainly neutropenia) but postoperative morbidity was similar in the two groups.ConclusionIn patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus, GEJ, or stomach, perioperative chemotherapy using fluorouracil plus cisplatin significantly increased the curative resection rate, disease-free survival, and OS.

scholarly journals Neoadjuvant rectal score as individual-level surrogate for disease-free survival in rectal cancer in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomized phase III trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 1521-1527 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Fokas ◽  
R. Fietkau ◽  
A. Hartmann ◽  
W. Hohenberger ◽  
R. Grützmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Disease Free

Phase III trial of androgen suppression using goserelin in unfavorable-prognosis carcinoma of the prostate treated with definitive radiotherapy: report of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocol 85-31.

1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1013-1021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M V Pilepich ◽  
R Caplan ◽  
R W Byhardt ◽  
C A Lawton ◽  
M J Gallagher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Carcinoma Of The Prostate ◽  
Androgen Suppression ◽  
Disease Free

PURPOSE Although androgen suppression results in a tumor response/remission in the majority of patients with carcinoma of the prostate, its potential value as an adjuvant has not been substantiated. MATERIALS AND METHODS In 1987, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) initiated a randomized phase III trial of adjuvant goserelin in definitively irradiated patients with carcinoma of the prostate. A total of 977 patients had been accessioned to the study. Of these, 945 remained analyzable: 477 on the adjuvant arm and 468 on the observation arm. RESULTS Actuarial projections show that at 5 years, 84% of patients on the adjuvant goserelin arm and 71% on the observation arm remain without evidence of local recurrence (P < .0001). The corresponding figures for freedom from distant metastases and disease-free survival are 83% versus 70% (P < .001) and 60% and 44% (P < .0001). If prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level greater than 1.5 ng is included as a failure (after > or = 1 year), the 5-year disease-free survival rate on the adjuvant goserelin arm is 53% versus 20% on the observation arm (P < .0001). The 5-year survival rate (for the entire population) is 75% on the adjuvant arm versus 71% on the observation arm (P = .52). However, in patients with centrally reviewed tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10, the difference in actuarial 5-year survival (66% on the adjuvant goserelin arm v 55% on the observation arm) reaches statistical significance (P = .03). CONCLUSION Application of androgen suppression as an adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy has been associated with a highly significant improvement in local control and freedom from disease progression. At this point, with a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, a significant improvement in survival has been observed only in patients with centrally reviewed tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10.

Phase III trial of adjuvant capecitabine/cisplatin (XP) versus capecitabine/cisplatin/RT (XPRT) in resected gastric cancer with D2 nodal dissection (ARTIST trial): Safety analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4537-4537 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Lee ◽  
W. Kang ◽  
D. Lim ◽  
J. Park ◽  
Y. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Chemoradiation Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Resected Gastric Cancer ◽  
Disease Free

4537 Background: Although the adjuvant chemoradiation therapy has gained popularity and has become the standard of care in patients with resected gastric cancer in U.S., the role of chemoradiation therapy after extended D2 dissection has been questioned. We conducted a phase III trial to compare capecitabine/cisplatin (XP) vs XP + radiotherapy (RT) in curatively D2 resected gastric cancer patients in terms of disease free survival and overall survival. Methods: Eligibility criteria were as follows: stage Ib (T1N1, T2bN0) - IV (M1 excluded), curatively ≥ D2 resected gastric adenocarcinoma. XP only: X 2,000 mg/m2/d D1∼14, CDDP 60 mg/m2 D1 repeated every 3 weeks, 6 cycles; XP + RT: X 2,000 mg/m2/d D1∼14, CDDP 60 mg/m2 D1 x 2 cycles ⋄ RT 45 Gy (25 fractions) + X 1,650 mg/m2/d during RT ⋄ X 2,000 mg/m2/d D1∼14, CDDP 60 mg/m2 D1 x 2 cycles. The primary endpoint is 3-year disease-free survival. Results: From October 2004 to April 2008, 458 patients (XP arm: 228 patients; XP/RT arm: 230 patients) were enrolled. In XP arm, 172 (75%) of 228 enrolled patients completed 6 cycles of chemotherapy. In XP + RT arm, 188 (82%) of 230 patients completed the full course of XP 2 cycles - X + RT - XP 2 cycles. Conclusions: Safety and feasibility analysis of the two arms will be reported at the meeting. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Phase III trial of metronomic capecitabine maintenance after standard treatment in operable triple-negative breast cancer (SYSUCC-001).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 507-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
XI Wang ◽  
Shu-Sen Wang ◽  
Heng Huang ◽  
Li Cai ◽  
Rou-Jun Peng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Observation Group ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
One Year ◽  
Disease Free

507 Background: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has a relatively high relapse rate and poor outcome after standard therapy among all subtypes of breast cancer. Effective strategies to reduce risk of relapse and death are unmet medical needs. Methods: In this phase III trial, patients with operable TNBC were randomly assigned to receive metronomic capecitabine (650 mg/m2 twice daily continuously for one year) as maintenance therapy or observation after standard local and systemic treatment for curative intent. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary end points included distant disease-free survival (DDFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: A total of 434 patients were randomly assigned to capecitabine group (n = 221) or observation group (n = 213). At a median follow-up of 56.5 months, 5-year DFS was significantly better in capecitabine group than in observation group (83% vs. 73%, HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.96; p = 0.027). 5-year DDFS was also significantly better in capecitabine group than in observation group (85% vs. 76%, HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90; p = 0.016). However, 5-year OS was not significantly different between two groups (85% vs. 81%, HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.18; p = 0.203). Two hundred and two (91.4%) of patients completed one year of capecitabine therapy as planned. The most common capecitabine-related adverse events were hand-foot syndrome (46%), leukopenia (24%), Hyperbilirubinemia (13%), gastrointestinal pain (7%) and elevated serum transaminases (5%). Conclusions: Maintenance therapy with metronomic capecitabine for one year following standard treatment significantly improved DFS in operable TNBC, which was safe and well tolerated. (SYSUCC-001, Clinical trial information: NCT01112826 .

624 A PHASE III STUDY ON NEOADJUVANT TORIPALIMAB PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY VERSUS NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY FOR LOCALLY RESECTABLE ESOPHAGEAL SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Zheng ◽  
Jiangong Zhang ◽  
Wenqun Xing
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Pathologic Complete Response ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival

Abstract   In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown promising results in the treatment of ESCC. More than 20 phase II clinical trials have been launched to explore combinations of ICIs in the neoadjuvant setting for ESCC. Based on our phase II clinical trial, a two-arm phase III trial was launched in our Hospital. Methods A two-arm phase III trial was launched in April 2020 in our Hospital. Patient recruitment will be completed within 18 months. The primary endpoint is event-free survival (EFS). The secondary endpoints include pathologic complete response (pCR), disease-free survival (DFS) rate, overall response rate (ORR), R0 resection rate, major pathologic response (MPR), adverse events (AEs), complication rate and quality of life (QOL). A biobank of pretreatment, resected tumor tissue and paired blood samples will be built for translational research in the future. Results Until Dec. 2021, one hundred and twenty ESCC patients recruited in the trial. The trial is ongoing. Conclusion This RCT directly compares NAC with neoadjuvant toripalimab plus chemotherapy in terms of EFS for locally advanced ESCC. The results may usher in a new era of resectable ESCC treatment.

scholarly journals Ecoendoscopia en la estadificación del cáncer de esófago y de estómago

2021 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-42
Author(s):  
Martín Galvarini Recabarren ◽  
◽  
Francisco Schlottmann ◽  
C. Agustín Angeramo ◽  
Javier Kerman Cabo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Perioperative Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Causes Of Mortality ◽  
Node Metastases ◽  
Disease Free

Background: Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are one of the leading causes of mortality from gastrointestinal cancer worldwide. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has proved to be a valuable tool for preoperative staging of GAC and EAC in selected cases. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of EUS for staging of EAC and GAC and selecting patients who are candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, as compared with the previous stage before the implementation of EUS, in a surgical center in Argentina. Material and methods: Consecutive patients with EAC and GAC between 2013-2019 were included. Patients with criteria of unresectable cancer or who underwent emergency surgery were excluded. The sample was divided into four groups G1 and G2 (EAC with and without EUS, respectively) and G3 and G4 (GAC with and without EUS, respectively). The clinical and anatomopathological variables and survival were evaluated in all the groups. Results: A total of 89 patients were included, 40 with EAC (30 in G1 and 10 in G2, and 49 with GAC, 20 in G3 and 29 in G4. Of the patients undergoing EUS staging in G1, 23 (75%) received neoadjuvant therapy vs. 2 patients in G2 (20%) (P ≤ 0.005). Eight patients (40%) in G3 and 2 (7%) in G4 received perioperative chemotherapy (P ≤ 0.005). Lymph node metastases were observed in 9 (30%) of surgical specimens of EAC in G1 and in 60% in G2 (P ≤ 0.005), and in 45% in G3 and G4. After a mean follow-up of 36 months (6-72), we observed a non-significant trend toward higher overall survival and disease-free survival in patients undergoing EUS staging. Conclusion: EUS for preoperative staging pf EAC and GAC is a useful tool. Although the use of EUS use may be a challenging task in many centers in Argentina, future efforts are needed to include this test in selected cases for staging patients with these types of cancers

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document