Laboratories and Collaborating

� Scientifically valid evaluations provided by independent experts • This fundamental requirement led to the establishment of

Study protocol of HGCSG1404 SNOW study : a phase I/II trial of combined chemotherapy of S-1, nab-paclitaxel and oxaliplatin administered biweekly to patients with advanced gastric cancer

Background: In Japan, S-1 plus cisplatin (SP) regimen has become a standard therapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Moreover, the S-1 plus oxaliplatin regimen is now a standard treatment. Nab-paclitaxel was developed for chemotherapy of gastric cancer in Japanese clinical practice. Nab-paclitaxel, created with albumin-bound paclitaxel particles, has high transferability to tumour tissues and does not cause hypersensitivity reactions because of a different chemical composition compared with docetaxel and paclitaxel. A combination of S-1, nab-paclitaxel and oxaliplatin (which we named ‘SNOW regimen’) can be a promising triplet therapy for advanced gastric cancer. Although we have to pay attention to chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, we aim to investigate the recommended dose of this regimen in a phase I study. Furthermore, we will investigate its efficacy and toxicity in a phase II study. Methods: The phase I study is a dose-escalation study using a standard 3 plus 3 design, followed by expansion cohorts. The SNOW regimen involves 28-day cycles with escalated doses of nab-paclitaxel (100-175 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15) and fixed doses of oxaliplatin (65 mg/ m2 on days 1 and 15) and S-1 (80 mg/m2/day on day 1 to 14). The primary endpoints are assessment of dose limiting toxicities and determination of maximum tolerated dose to investigate the recommended dose in the subsequent phase II study. In the phase II study, the primary endpoint is objective response rate. Secondary endpoints are assessment of safety, progression-free survival, disease control rate, overall survival and time to treatment failure. Adverse events were monitored and graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Discussion: Triplet therapies for advanced gastric cancer patients have been evaluated in clinical trials. The SNOW regimen can be a promising new triplet therapy. Trial registration: This study is performed at institutes that participate in Hokkaido Gastrointestinal Cancer Study Group (HGCSG) and registered as UMIN000016788. Registrated 16 March 2015

Open-label, randomized, comparative, phase III study on effects of reducing steroid use in combination with Palonosetron

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of a single administration of dexamethasone (DEX) on day1 against DEX administration on days1-3 in combination with palonosetron (PALO), a second-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in non-anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC) moderately-emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). This phaseIII trial was conducted with a multi-center, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority design. Patients who received non-AC MEC as an initial chemotherapy were randomly assigned to either a group administered PALO (0.75mg, i.v.) and DEX (9.9mg, i.v.) prior to chemotherapy (study treatment group), or a group administered additional DEX (8mg, i.v. or p.o.) on days2-3 (control group). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate. The CR rate difference was estimated by logistic regression with allocation factors as covariates. The non-inferiority margin was set at -15% (study treatment group - control group). From April 2011 to March 2013, 305patients who received non-AC MEC were randomly allocated to one of two study groups. Overall, the CR rate was 66.2% in the study treatment group (N=151) and 63.6% in the control group (N=154). PALO plus DEX day1 was non-inferior to PALO plus DEX days1-3 (difference, 2.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -7.8%-12.8%; P-value for non-inferiority test=0.0004). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of complete control rate (64.9 vs 61.7%) and total control rate (49.7% vs 47.4%). Anti-emetic DEX administration on days2-3 may be eliminated when used in combination with PALO in patients receiving non-AC MEC