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.

Randomized phase III trial of standard D2 versus D2 + para-aortic lymph node (PAN) dissection (D) for clinically M0 advanced gastric cancer: JCOG9501

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA4015-LBA4015 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Sasako ◽  
T. Sano ◽  
S. Yamamoto ◽  
A. Nashimoto ◽  
A. Kurita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Curative Intent

LBA4015 Background: The INT-0116 study proved the efficacy of radiochemotherapy after R0 resection for gastric cancer and thus the importance of the local control and the insufficiency of D0/1 surgery. Recently D2 surgery was for the first time proven to improve the survival compared with D1 in a Taiwanese RCT (Lancet Oncol 2006). In our study, D2+PAND was compared with D2 in a RCT. Low operative mortality has been reported (Sano et al. J Clin Oncol 2004) and we now present the survival results. Methods: Eligibility criteria included; histologically proven adenocarcinoma, cT2b-T4, cM0, no macroscopic metastasis to the PAN, negative lavage cytology, adequate organ function, and age <76. Linitis plastica was excluded. Eligible pts were randomly assigned to D2 with or without PAND during surgery. All patients were followed without adjuvant therapy until recurrence. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) to be compared by stratified log-rank test. Assuming 256 eligible pts in each arm, the study had 75% power to detect 0.73 hazard ratio for D2+PAND to D2 in OS at 0.05 one-sided alpha. Results: Between 07/1995 and 04/2001, 523 pts were randomized (263 to D2 and 260 to D2+PAND). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the arms. At the time of the final analysis on 23/03/06, 191 (96 and 95, in D2 and D2+PAND, respectively) had died. The 3- and 5-year OS were 76% and 69% in D2 and 76% and 70% in D2+PAND, respectively (p = 0.57, Hazard ratio was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.77–1.37)). Disease free survival did not show any difference between the groups as well. Median operation time was 63 minutes longer and median blood loss was 230 ml larger in D2+PAND than in D2. There was no difference in the incidence of major surgical complications and hospital mortality (0.8% in both arms). Conclusions: D2 or D2+PAND could be carried out safely and showed excellent survival for advanced gastric cancer treated with curative intent. PAND could not improve the survival achieved by D2. General use of PAND should be avoided. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Randomized phase III study of S-1 alone versus S-1 + cisplatin in the treatment for advanced gastric cancer (The SPIRITS trial) SPIRITS: S-1 plus cisplatin vs S-1 in RCT in the treatment for stomach cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4514-4514 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Narahara ◽  
W. Koizumi ◽  
T. Hara ◽  
A. Takagane ◽  
T. Akiya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
High Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Phase Iii Study

4514 Background: S-1 has been widely used against advanced gastric cancer (AGC) not only as monotherapy but also in combination with other cytotoxic compounds. Results of a phase I/II study combining S-1 + cisplatin (CDDP) were very encouraging with a high response rate (RR) of 76%, and the MST (Median Survival Time) of 383 days (Koizumi W et al, Br J Cancer, 2003). Based on these results, a phase III study comparing S-1 alone with S-1 + CDDP has been conducted to further evaluate the efficacy and safety for S-1 + CDDP as a standard treatment for AGC. Methods: This is a randomized, controlled, open-label, parallel, multicenter study. Patients (pts) are randomized to one of two treatment arms. Arm A: Pts receive oral S-1 (40 mg/m2) twice daily 28 days followed by 14 days rest. Arm B: Pts receive oral S-1 (40 mg/m2) twice daily 21 days followed by 14 days rest plus CDDP (60 mg/m2) iv on day 8. Eligibility criteria included unresectable/recurrent AGC, age 20–74, no prior chemotherapy for AGC. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Main secondary endpoints included RR, time to treatment failure (TTF) and toxicity. Based on planned sample size of 284 pts, the trial was designed to have 90% power to detect an improvement in median OS from 8 to 12 months (2-sided log-rank test; significance level 0.05). Results: 305 pts (Arm A/B, 152/153) were randomized between Mar 2002 and Nov 2004. The eligible pts were 299 (Arm A/B, 150/149). Median age was 62.0/61.5 yrs. At a 2 yrs follow-up since last patient in, the MST for Arm A was 335.5 days (95%CI: 292.0 - 402.0) and for Arm B was 396.0 days (95%CI: 342.0 - 471.0). The OS for Arm B was superior to Arm A (log-rank p=0.0366, hazard ratio: 0.774, 95% CI: 0.608 - 0.985). RR was 31.1% for Arm A and 54.0% for Arm B. In Arm A vs Arm B, the most common grade 3/4 toxicities were: leucopenia, 2.0% vs 11.5%; neutropenia, 10.7% vs 39.9%; anemia (decreased Hb), 4.0% vs 25.7%; nausea, 1.3% vs 11.5%; anorexia, 6.0% vs 30.4%. No treatment related death was observed. Conclusions: The combination treatment of S-1 and CDDP met primary endpoint of OS, and was found to be effective and well tolerated in pts with AGC. Accordingly, this regimen can be regarded as one of first-line standard treatment for AGC. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Updated analysis of HERBIS-1: A phase ll study of trastuzumab (T-mab) in combination with tri-weekly S-1 plus CDDP in HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 98-98
Author(s):  
Makio Gamoh ◽  
Naotoshi Sugimoto ◽  
Hiroto Miwa ◽  
Masahiro Tsuda ◽  
Shinichi Nishina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Antitumor Activity ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Event Analysis ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma

98 Background: The HERBIS study demonstrated the promising antitumor activity and manageable toxicities of S-1 plus cisplatin and T-mab (SPT) regimen in patients (pts) with HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer (AGC) (Sugimoto et al. ASCO GI 2012, Abstract 70). We report the updated time-to event analysis. Methods: Main eligibility criteria were gastric or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma, HER2-positive, unresectable or recurrent, measurable lesion, no history of chemotherapy or radiotherapy, ECOG PS of 0-1 and adequate organ function. Pts received S-1(80-120mg / day) on days 1-14, cisplatin 60 mg/m2on day 1 and T-mab 8 mg/ kg on day 1 (6 mg/ kg from 2nd course) repeated every 3 weeks until disease progression. Primary endpoint was response rate (RR) and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF) and adverse events. The planned sample size was 50 pts. Results: A total of 56 pts were enrolled from July 2011 to May 2012. Two pts were ineligible and one patient did not receive any treatment. Therefore, the efficacy and safety analyses were conducted in the full analysis set of 53 pts. The confirmed response rate was 67.9% (95% CI: 53.7-80.1), and the disease control rate was 94.3% (95% CI: 84.3-98.9). Median OS was 16.0 months (95% CI: 13.3 - NaN), median PFS was 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.0 – 8.8) and median TTF was 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.2 - 7.1), respectively at the median follow-up time of 13.5 months. The main grade 3/4 adverse events were leukopenia 8%, neutropenia 36%, anemia 15%, increased creatinine 6%, hypoalbuminemia 9%, anorexia 23%, diarrhea 8% and vomiting 6%. Conclusions: SPT have promising antitumor activity and manageable toxicities in pts with HER2-positive AGC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000005739.

Randomized phase III study of 5-fluorouracil continuous infusion (5FUci) versus methotrexate and 5-FU sequential therapy (MF) in gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis (JCOG0106)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4545-4545 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Shirao ◽  
N. Boku ◽  
Y. Yamada ◽  
K. Yamaguchi ◽  
T. Doi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Peritoneal Metastasis ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Sequential Therapy ◽  
Nutrition Support ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Intestinal Stenosis ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Phase Iii Study

4545 Background: Gastric cancer (GC) with peritoneal metastasis (PM) often complicates ascites or intestinal stenosis and the prognosis is still poor. Anti-cancer drugs generally can not be administered for such patients (pts) due to the risk of serious and prolonged adverse events. However, 5FU-based chemotherapy is reportedly relatively safe for PM. We conducted a phase III study to investigate the superiority of MF over 5FUci for GC with PM with a primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints of toxicities, ingestion-possible survival (IPS) in pts with initially possible ingestion and proportion of ingestive improvement (%II) in pts requiring nutrition support. Methods: Eligibility criteria included pts with histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma; inoperable or recurrent GC; PM with radiologically confirmed intestinal stenosis or ascites; 20–75 years old; PS 0–2; no prior treatment except surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment with 5FUci (800mg/m2/d, civ, d1–5, q4w) or MF (methotrexate, 100mg/m2, iv, followed 3 h later by 5FU, 600mg/m2, iv, with leucovorin rescue, q1w) were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicities. Projected sample size was 236 in total, which had 80% power to detect 40% increase of median OS in MF with 1-sided alpha 0.05. Results: A total of 237 pts were randomized between Oct 2002 and Apr 2007. Final analysis was performed in Dec 2008 when 224 pts (95%) were dead. Results of OS are shown in Table . Median IPS was 8.1M for 5FUci(n=102) and 9.0M for MF(n=103) (p=0.60). %II was 41%(7/17) for 5FUci and 57%(8/14) for MF (p=0.48). Frequencies (%) of grade 4 neutropenia, grade >3 febrile neutropenia, infection with neutropenia, anemia, anorexia, diarrhea, abdominal pain within 6M, and treatment related death (5-FUci/MF) were 0/9, 0/3, 0/5, 10/16, 27/34, 1/10, 5/10 and 2/1, respectively. Conclusions: MF could not become new standard therapy for GC with PM. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document