Combination therapy with docetaxel and S-1 as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer: a retrospective analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We performed a single-institution retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicities of combination therapy with docetaxel and S-1 in patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eighty-six patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer were enrolled. Patients received docetaxel, 40 mg/m², on day 1 and oral S-1, 80 mg/m²/day, on days 1 to 14 every 3 weeks.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All 84 patients were assessable for response. The overall response rate was 52.4% (44/84) and the disease control rate was 96.4% (81/84). Median time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were 6.5 (95% CI, 4.8-8.1 months) and 15.1 months (95% CI, 11.7-18.5 months), respectively. The major toxicities were neutropenia, leukopenia, alopecia and anorexia. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia in 31 patients (36.0%), leukopenia in 27 (31.7%), febrile neutropenia in four (4.7%), and anemia in one (1.2%). Other grade 3 toxicities included anorexia in five patients (5.8%), and stomatitis, diarrhea and nausea in one each (1.2%). There was one treatment-related death (1.2%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The combination of docetaxel and S-1 had good clinical activity with acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer.</p

Phase II study of capecitabine and cisplatin as first-line combination therapy in patients with gastric cancer recurrent after fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine and cisplatin in patients with recurrent gastric cancer after fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant therapy. Patients with histologically confirmed and measurable advanced gastric cancer that had relapsed after fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy received oral capecitabine (1250 mg m−2 twice daily, days 1–14) and intravenous cisplatin (60 mg m−2 over 1 h, day 1) every 3 weeks. In total, 32 patients were enrolled, of whom 30 were evaluable for efficacy and 32 for safety. A median of 5 cycles (range 1–10) was administered. One patient achieved a complete response and eight had partial responses, giving an overall response rate of 28% (95% CI, 13–44%). The median time to progression and median overall survival were 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.1–7.5 months) and 11.2 months (95% CI, 5.5–16.9 months), respectively. Grade 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were observed in 38 and 6% of patients, respectively. Grade 2/3 nonhaematological toxicities included diarrhoea (19%), stomatitis (19%) and hand-foot syndrome (31%). No grade 4 toxicity, neutropenic fever or treatment-related deaths occurred. Capecitabine in combination with cisplatin was effective and well tolerated as first-line treatment in patients with recurrent gastric cancer after fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy

A meta-analysis of two randomised trials of early chemotherapy in asymptomatic metastatic colorectal cancer

This report constitutes a prospectively planned meta-analysis combining two almost identical trials undertaken in Australasia and Canada to study the effect of starting chemotherapy immediately in asymptomatic patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients (n=168) were randomised to receive either immediate or delayed treatment (at onset of predefined symptoms). Australasian patients received either weekly 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (500 and 20 mg m−2, respectively) (n=59) or the daily × 5 Mayo Clinic schedule (425 and 20 mg m−2, respectively) (n=42). Canadian patients were treated with the Mayo schedule (n=67). Otherwise, the two studies were almost identical in design and each used the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 instrument for measuring quality of life (QoL). Treatment was continued until 6 months had elapsed or disease progression occurred. Low accrual led to trial suspension before the predetermined sample size for either study was reached. Median survival was not significantly better with immediate treatment (median 13.0 vs 11.0 months; hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79–1.72; P=0.49). There was no statistically significant difference in progression-free survival (time from randomisation until first evidence of progression after chemotherapy, 10.2 vs 10.8 months; hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% CI 0.71–1.64; P=0.73). There was no difference in overall QoL or its individual domains between the two treatment strategies at baseline or at any subsequent time point. Early treatment of asymptomatic patients with metastatic colorectal cancer did not provide a survival benefit or improved QoL compared to withholding treatment until symptoms occurred

Marimastat as maintenance therapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised trial

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to evaluate the ability of the orally administered matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor, marimastat, to prolong survival in patients with non-resectable gastric and gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Three hundred and sixty-nine patients with histological proof of adenocarcinoma, who had received no more than a single regimen of 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, were randomised to receive either marimastat (10 mg b.d.) or placebo. Patients were treated for as long as was tolerable. The primary endpoint was overall survival with secondary endpoints of time to disease progression and quality of life. At the point of protocol-defined study completion (85% mortality in the placebo arm) there was a modest difference in survival in the intention-to-treat population in favour of marimastat (P=0.07 log-rank test, hazard ratio=1.23 (95% confidence interval 0.98–1.55)). This survival benefit was maintained over a further 2 years of follow-up (P=0.024, hazard ratio=1.27 (1.03–1.57)). The median survival was 138 days for placebo and 160 days for marimastat, with 2-year survival of 3% and 9% respectively. A significant survival benefit was identified at study completion in the pre-defined sub-group of 123 patients who had received prior chemotherapy (P=0.045, hazard ratio=1.53 (1.00–2.34)). This benefit increased with 2 years additional follow-up (P=0.006, hazard ratio=1.68 (1.16–2.44)), with 2-year survival of 5% and 18% respectively. Progression-free survival was also significantly longer for patients receiving marimastat compared to placebo (P=0.009, hazard ratio=1.32 (1.07–1.63)). Marimastat treatment was associated with the development of musculoskeletal pain and inflammation. Events of anaemia, abdominal pain, jaundice and weight loss were more common in the placebo arm. This is one of the first demonstrations of a therapeutic benefit for a matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor in cancer patients. The greatest benefit was observed in patients who had previously received chemotherapy. A further randomised study of marimastat in these patients is warranted

Multicenter phase II study of docetaxel plus oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: Daegu Gyeongbuk Oncology Group

The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination regimen of docetaxel plus oxaliplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Patients with previously untreated metastatic or recurrent, measurable gastric cancer received intravenous docetaxel 65 mg m−2 plus oxaliplatin 120 mg m−2 on day 1 based on a 3-week cycle. Forty-two patients were enrolled in the current study, among whom 39 were assessable for efficacy and all assessable for toxicity. One complete response and 18 partial responses were confirmed, giving an overall response rate of 45.2% (95% confidence interval (CI); 31.7–59.7%). At a median follow-up of 7.7 months, the median time to progression and median overall survival was 5.7 (95% CI; 4.3–7.2) months and 9.9 (95% CI; 7.8–12.0) months, respectively. Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 11 patients (26.1%) and febrile neutropenia was observed in four patients (9.5%). The common non-haematologic toxicity was fatigue (grade 1/2, 61.9%) and nausea (grade 1/2, 47.7%). The combination of docetaxel and oxaliplatin was found to be well tolerated and effective in patients with advanced gastric cancer

Phase I study of epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine plus matuzumab in previously untreated patients with advanced oesophagogastric cancer

To evaluate the safety, tolerability, efficacy, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the humanised antiepidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody matuzumab combined with epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) in patients as first-line treatment for advanced oesophagogastric cancer that express epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). This was a phase I dose escalation study of matuzumab at 400 and 800 mg weekly and 1200 mg every 3 weeks combined with ECX (epirubicin 50 mg m−2, cisplatin 60 mg m−2 on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg m−2 daily). Patients were treated until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or for a maximum of eight cycles. Twenty-one patients were treated with matuzumab at three different dose levels (DLs) combined with ECX. The main dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was grade 3 lethargy at 1200 mg matuzumab every 3 weeks and thus 800 mg matuzumab weekly was the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD). Other common toxicities included rash, nausea, stomatitis and diarrhoea. Pharmacokinetic evaluation demonstrated that the coadministration of ECX did not alter the exposure of matuzumab. Pharmacodynamic studies on skin biopsies demonstrated inhibition of the EGFR pathway. Objective response rates of 65% (95% confidence interval (CI): 43–82), disease stabilisation of 25% (95% CI: 11–47) and a disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 90% were achieved overall. The MTD of matuzumab in combination with ECX was 800 mg weekly, and at this DL it was well-tolerated and showed encouraging antitumour activity. At the doses evaluated in serial skin biopsies, matuzumab decreased phosphorylation of EGFR and MAPK, and increased phosphorylation of STAT-3

Vaccination of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients with autologous tumour-derived vitespen vaccine: clinical findings

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy as determined by time to progression and response rate (RR) of autologous vitespen (formerly HSPPC-96; Oncophage, Antigenics Inc., New York, NY, USA) with and without interleukin-2 (IL-2; Proleukin: Chiron, Emoryville, CA, USA) in stage IV metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients undergoing nephrectomy. Eighty-four patients were enrolled on study, and then underwent nephrectomy and harvest of tumour tissue for use in autologous vaccine manufacture. Initial treatment schedule started approximately 4 weeks after surgery and consisted of six injections: once weekly for 4 weeks, then two injections biweekly (vaccines administered at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8), followed by restaging at or around week 10. Patients who had stable or responsive disease continued to receive vaccine, with four more vaccinations biweekly (at weeks 10, 12, 14, 16). Patients who had progressive disease at week-10 evaluation received four consecutive 5-day-per-week courses of 11 × 106 U of IL-2 subcutaneously (weeks 10, 11, 12, 13), with four doses of vitespen at 2-week intervals (at weeks 10, 12, 14, 16). At the next evaluation (week 18), patients with a complete response received two further cycles of vitespen (with IL-2 if also received during prior cycle) or until vaccine supply was exhausted. Patients with stable disease or partial response repeated their prior cycle of therapy. Disease progressors who had not yet received IL-2 began IL-2 treatment, and progressors who had already received IL-2 came off study. Of 60 evaluable patients, 2 demonstrated complete response (CR), 2 showed partial response (PR), 7 showed stable disease, and 33 patients progressed. Sixteen patients had unconfirmed stable disease. Two patients who progressed on vaccine alone experienced disease stabilisation when IL-2 was added. Treatment with vitespen did not result in a discernable benefit in the majority of patients with metastatic RCC treated in this study. Use in combination with immunoregulatory agents may enhance the efficacy of vitespen