Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Study Comparing Irinotecan With Paclitaxel in Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer Without Severe Peritoneal Metastasis After Failure of Prior Combination Chemotherapy Using Fluoropyrimidine Plus Platinum: WJOG 4007 Trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (35) ◽  
pp. 4438-4444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuichi Hironaka ◽  
Shinya Ueda ◽  
Hirofumi Yasui ◽  
Tomohiro Nishina ◽  
Masahiro Tsuda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Paclitaxel Group ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Purpose This phase III study compared treatment with weekly paclitaxel and biweekly irinotecan in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to treatment with fluoropyrimidine plus platinum. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive either paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks) or irinotecan (150 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, every 4 weeks). Primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, adverse events, and proportion of patients who received third-line chemotherapy. Results Of 223 patients, 219 were eligible for analysis. Median OS was 9.5 months in 108 patients allocated to the paclitaxel group and 8.4 months in 111 patients allocated to the irinotecan group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.13; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.49; P = .38). Median PFS was 3.6 months in the paclitaxel group and 2.3 months in the irinotecan group (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.49; P = .33). Response rate was 20.9% in the paclitaxel group and 13.6% in the irinotecan group (P = .24). Common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were neutropenia (paclitaxel group, 28.7%; irinotecan group, 39.1%), anemia (21.3%; 30.0%), and anorexia (7.4%; 17.3%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two patients (1.8%) in the irinotecan group. Third-line chemotherapy was administered in 97 patients (89.8%) after paclitaxel treatment and in 80 patients (72.1%) after irinotecan treatment (P = .001). Conclusion No statistically significant difference was observed between paclitaxel and irinotecan for OS. Both are reasonable second-line treatment options for advanced gastric cancer.

Randomized phase II study to compare docetaxel plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in advanced gastric cancer without measurable lesions (HERBIS-3).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 119-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Matsuyama ◽  
Yukinori Kurokawa ◽  
Kazuhiro Nishikawa ◽  
Yutaka Kimura ◽  
Atsushi Takeno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Peritoneal Metastasis ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Phase Iii Study

119 Background: Cisplatin and S-1 (CS) regimen is one of the standard chemotherapy as first-line for advanced gastric cancer. Docetaxel is a well-known agent with high anti-tumor effect for peritoneal metastasis from gastric cancer. A previous phase III study showed docetaxel plus S-1 (DS) regimen was recommended especially for advanced gastric cancer without measurable lesions. However, there was no study comparing the efficacy and safety of these two regimens. Methods: Eligibility criteria included HER2-negative unresectable or recurrent gastric adenocarcinoma, no measurable lesion according to RECIST v1.1, no massive peritoneal metastasis, no prior chemotherapy or radiotherapy, age ≤75, PS 0-2, adequate oral intake, and preserved organ functions. Patients were randomized to receive CS (cisplatin 60 mg/m² on day 8, S-1 40–60 mg twice a day for 3 weeks, every 5 weeks) or DS (docetaxel 40 mg/m² on day 1, S-1 40–60 mg twice a day for 2 weeks, every 3 weeks). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. Results: Sixty-one patients were randomly allocated the CS group (n = 31) or the DS group (n = 30) between Aug 2011 and Sep 2015. All were unresectable primary cases, and baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. One patient was ineligible due to HER2-positive. There was no treatment-related death. The main grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (27% in CS vs. 40% in DS), anemia (10% in CS vs. 10% in DS), fatigue (13% in CS vs. 7% in DS), anorexia (10% in CS vs. 3% in DS), and diarrhea (10% in CS vs. 3% in DS). The median OS time were 15.8 months in CS and 20.0 months in DS, respectively (log-rank P = 0.113). Hazard ratio for OS was 0.617 (95%CI, 0.337 – 1.128). The median PFS time were 9.6 months in CS and 11.2 months in DS, respectively (log-rank P = 0.196). Hazard ratio for PFS was 0.698 (95%CI, 0.404 – 1.208). Conclusions: DS showed less toxic and more active profiles than CS for treatment of advanced gastric cancer without measurable lesions. The clinical benefit of DS regimen should be demonstrated in a phase III study. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006179.

S-1/docetaxel compared with the other standard S-1 based regimens as a first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15173-e15173
Author(s):  
Tetsuya Kusumoto ◽  
Koji Ando ◽  
Satoshi Ida ◽  
Yasue Kimura ◽  
Hiroshi Saeki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
The Other ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

e15173 Background: S-1 monotherapy or S-1/CDDP have remained important as a standard chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC), based on the randomized phase III trials. Although S-1/docetaxel has been reported highly active and well tolerated for AGC by many researchers, it could not show the superiority compared with S-1 monotherapy in the recent international randomized trial. We have also demonstrated that it might be effective for patients with Stage III AGC in both preoperative and postoperative adjuvant setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy, toxicity and validity of S-1/docetaxel retrospectively, compared with the standard regimens. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of the data of 89 patients with AGC who received chemotherapy who were given S-1-containing regimens as the first line chemotherapy; 15 patients treated with S-1 monotherapy, 21 with S-1/CDDP, and 53 with S-1/docetaxel. The objective response, adverse event (AE), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the three groups. Results: The overall response rates (ORRs) were obtained 6.7%, 38.1% and 30.2% for S-1 monotherapy, S-1/CDDP, and S-1/docetaxel, respectively. The incidence of AEs was more frequent in S-1 based combined treatments than in the S-1 monotherapy, however there was no significant difference in the severe AEs between each group. Survival data showed that the PFSs were 121 days, 199 days and 178 days, respectively, and there was the significant difference between S-1 monotherapy and S-1/docetaxel (p<0.05). The overall survival showed that the MSTs were not significantly different. The conversion rate to the subsequent treatments following S-1 monotherapy was higher than the other treatments. Conclusions: S-1/docetaxel was active and well tolerated for the patients with ARGC as the first line. Although the Japanese guideline for treatment of gastric cancer recommends S-1 monotherapy or S-1/CDDP as the standard regimens, docetaxel could be applied for patients with AGC in case of CDDP-resistant or –naïve patients.

The real-world data in patients with advanced gastric cancer treated with ramucirumab combination chemotherapy.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 156-156
Author(s):  
Akie Kimura ◽  
Daisuke Sakai ◽  
Toshihiro Kudo ◽  
Naohiro Nishida ◽  
Aya Katou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factor ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Neutrophil Lymphocyte Ratio ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

156 Background: Ramucirumab with paclitaxel or ramucirumab monotherapy have shown the efficacy and safety in second-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. The previous reports have shown that neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was the prognostic factor for progression free survival. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of clinical data from patients treated with ramucirumab at our institution between April 2015 to August 2018. Results: Of 90 patients, 81 received ramucirumab plus paclitaxel, and 9 received ramucirumab monotherapy. There was a significant difference of treatment line between combination therapy and monotherapy (mean 2.5 vs. 3.9, p = 0.00127). Response rate among the patients with target lesions was 18.8% (13/69), and disease control rate was 62.3% (43/69). On the other hand, response rate among the patients previously treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab was 57.1% (4/7). Median overall survival (OS) for combination therapy and monotherapy was 10.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.1-11.9) and 5.5 months (95% CI 0.89-9.5), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was more common with combination therapy than with monotherapy (53.1 vs. 11.1%). Of 69 patients who received ramucirumab plus paclitaxel as second or third-line chemotherapy, high NLR (> 3) was the significant factor for poor PFS (median PFS, 2.7 vs. 5.4 months, p = 0.00103), but didn’t show the difference about OS (median OS, 9.7 vs. 11.9 months, p = 0.27). Conclusions: In our analysis, efficacy data was comparable with previous reports. In subgroup analysis, good response was observed in the group of prior nivolumab or pembrolizumab. NLR was prognostic factor for PFS, while it wasn’t show the relevance to OS because of the influence of after ramucirumab therapy.

Lapatinib Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel Alone in the Second-Line Treatment ofHER2-Amplified Advanced Gastric Cancer in Asian Populations: TyTAN—A Randomized, Phase III Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (19) ◽  
pp. 2039-2049 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taroh Satoh ◽  
Rui-Hua Xu ◽  
Hyun Cheol Chung ◽  
Guo-Ping Sun ◽  
Toshihiko Doi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Similar Proportion ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Phase Iii Study

PurposeIn Asian countries, paclitaxel once per week is used as second-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer, including human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –positive tumors. The role of anti-HER2 agents, including lapatinib, in this setting and population is unclear.Patients and MethodsTyTAN was a two-part, parallel-group, phase III study in Asian patients. An open-label, dose-optimization phase (n = 12) was followed by a randomized phase (n = 261), in which patients who were HER2 positive by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) received lapatinib 1,500 mg once per day plus once-per-week paclitaxel 80 mg/m2or paclitaxel alone. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), time to response, response duration, and safety. Analyses were based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and gastrectomy status, prior trastuzumab therapy, and regional subpopulations.ResultsMedian OS was 11.0 months with lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus 8.9 months with paclitaxel alone (P = .1044), with no significant difference in median PFS (5.4 v 4.4 months) or TTP (5.5 v 4.4 months). ORR was higher with lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone (odds ratio, 3.85; P < .001). Better efficacy with lapatinib plus paclitaxel was demonstrated in IHC3+ compared with IHC0/1+ and 2+ patients and in Chinese compared with Japanese patients. A similar proportion of patients experienced adverse events with each treatment (lapatinib plus paclitaxel, 100% v paclitaxel alone, 98%).ConclusionLapatinib plus paclitaxel demonstrated activity in the second-line treatment of patients with HER2 FISH-positive IHC3+ advanced gastric cancer but did not significantly improve OS in the intent-to-treat population.

A phase II study (KSCC/HGCSG/CCOG/PerSeUS1501B) of trastuzumab plus S-1 and oxaliplatin for HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4059-4059 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katsunori Shinozaki ◽  
Satoshi Yuki ◽  
Tomomi Kashiwada ◽  
Tetsuya Kusumoto ◽  
Masaaki Iwatsuki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Standard Regimen

4059 Background: A combination of S-1 and cisplatin (SP) has been the standard regimen for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) in East Asia. The combination of S-1 and oxaliplatin (SOX100) was demonstrated to be non-inferior to SP in the randomized phase III study. The ToGA study demonstrated that trastuzumab (T-mab) combination therapies with cisplatin and fluoropyrimidines improved the overall survival of patients with HER2-positive AGC. This multicenter study is the first phase II trial to assess the efficacy and safety of T-mab in combination with S-1 and oxaliplatin (HER-SOX130) in HER2-positive AGC. Methods: Patients with HER2-positive AGC or recurrent gastric cancer defined to be IHC 3+ or IHC 2+/FISH positive received 80 mg/m2 S-1 per day orally on days 1–14, 130 mg/m2 oxaliplatin intravenously on day 1, and T-mab (8-mg/kg loading dose and 6 mg/kg thereafter) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle until one of the criteria for withdrawal of the study treatment occurred. The primary end-point was the response rate (RR). Adverse events were recorded based on the NCI-CTCAE Vers.4.0. The threshold response rate was defined as 50%, and the expected rate was set at 70%, with an 80% power and a 1-sided alpha value of 0.05. The calculated sample size was 37 patients. Results: For this study, 42 patients (median age, 66 years) were enrolled from June 2015 to May 2016. Three patients were excluded owing to ineligibility. Efficacy and safety analyses were conducted in the full analysis set of 39 patients. The proportion of patients with IHC 3+ was 87%. The confirmed RR assessed by the independent review committee was 82.1(32/39) % (95% confidence interval [CI]: 67.3–91.0), and the disease control rate was 87.2(34/39) % (95% CI: 73.3–94.4). The incidence rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were as follows: neutropenia, 12.8%; thrombocytopenia, 17.9%; anemia, 10.3%; sensory neuropathy, 5.1%; anorexia, 17.9%; diarrhea, 7.7%; and teary eyes, 2.6%. Conclusions: HER-SOX130 demonstrated encouraging efficacy with a favorable safety profile. The survival benefit of this regimen needs to be validated by conducting further follow-up of patients. Clinical trial information: 000017552.

Phase III study of individualized intraperitoneal/intravenous/oral chemotherapy compared with standard intravenous/oral chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4021-4021
Author(s):  
Yang Yang ◽  
Jia Wei ◽  
Juan Du ◽  
Lixia Yu ◽  
Hanqing Qian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Mrna Expression ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Oral Chemotherapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Gastric Cancer Patients

4021 Background: Tumor mRNA expression levels may have a promising role as potential predictive biomarkers for chemotherapy. Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy provides sustained high local concentrations, and its efficacy has been shown in ovarian cancer and gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis. We developed a regimen combining IP/intravenous(IV)/oral chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer patients with individualized chemotherapeutics according to mRNA expression. This multicenter phase III study evaluated the efficacy of individualized multi-route chemotherapy compared to standard systemic chemotherapy. Methods: Eligibility criteria included pathologically confirmed advanced gastric adenocarcinoma, and no prior chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 3:1 to an individualized arm (IN) and standard arm (ST). Randomization was stratified by center. Patients in individualized arm first underwent mRNA expression (BRCA1/TOPO1/TS) to choose sensltive chemotherapeutics from oxaliplatin/cisplatin/docetaxel/irinotecan/S-1 and then received individualized IP/IV/oral chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: Between April 2013 and December 2015, 231 patients were enrolled, and 218 patients were included in the efficacy analysis. Baseline patient characteristics were balanced between the two arms. The median OS for IN and ST were 16.3 and 14.1 months, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.98, p < 0.05). The overall response rate was 44.0% in the IN arm, and 33.9% in the ST arm (p < 0.05). Both regimens were tolerable. Conclusions: The primary analysis showed the statistical superiority of the individualized multi-route regimen. It suggested clinical efficacy of this regimen in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR-IPR-15006201.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document