Addition of taxanes to combination chemotherapy in distal intestinal gastric cancer is more beneficial than proximal ones: A multicenter retrospective study of Turkish Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: Advanced gastric cancer has a dismal prognosis. Platin/5-fluorouracil (PF) combination chemotherapy is the main treatment modality for metastatic gastric cancer patients. Third drug addition to PF is a controversial issue. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive role of tumor localization and histopathology on choosing three- or two-drug combination regimens. METHODS: This study was designed as a hospital-based retrospective observational case-series study. A total of 516 patients with advanced gastric cancer has been treated at eight different oncology centers in Turkey between 2006 and 2016. Laboratory results and demographic data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: The median patient age was 59 years (range 25-85). Proximal intestinal and distal intestinal cancers were found in 357 (69.2 %) and 159 (30.8 %) patients, respectively. 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and cisplatin (PF) and cisplatin+5FU+docetaxel (PFtax, also known as DCF) were administered to 240 (46.5%) and 276 (53.5%) patients, respectively. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 5.0 (95% CI 4.21-5.29) and 8 months (95% CI 7.22-8.77) for PF and PFtax groups, respectively (p=0.000). When tumor localization was used as stratum in PFS survival, PFtax produced significantly higher PFS rates only in distal intestinal type gastric cancer compared to PF (p=0.000). Median overall survival (OS) was 12 (95% CI 9.8-14.2) and 16 months (95% CI 13.6-18.4) for the PF and PFtax groups, respectively (p=0.01). When tumor localization was used as stratum in OS, PFtax showed significantly higher OS rates only in the distal intestinal type gastric cancer compared to PF (p=0.01) Conclusion: Pathology and tumor location in gastric cancer may affect the outcome. Addition of taxanes as a third drug may significantly increase PFS and OS rates only in distal intestinal type gastric cancer but not in patients with proximal type gastric cancer.

The clinicopathological and survival differences between never and ever smokers with non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Cigarette smoking was regarded as the most important carcinogenic factor of lung cancer, yet in recent years lung cancer in never-smokers is an increasingly prominent public health issue. The aim of this study was to assess the epidemiological and clinicopathological characteristics of never-smoker patients with non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), focusing on clinical risk factors and survival. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 290 NSCLC patients who presented between 2006 and 2011. Differences in clinical features and survival between never- and ever- smoker patients were analyzed. Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to assess the significance of the variables between the groups. Survival curves were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratio (HR) for death and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: There were 243 (83.8%) ever-smokers and 47 (16.2%) never-smokers. In never-smokers females predominated (80.9%) as well as patients with adenocarcinomas (78.7%). At the time of analysis 143 (49.3%) patients had died. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were not significantly different between never- and ever-smokers (p=0.410) . The median OS of all patients was 26 months (95% CI: 16.8-35.2). The median OS was 23 months (95% CI: 11.8- 34.2) for never-smokers and 30 months ∥95% CI: 19.7-40.3) for ever-smokers (p=0.410). Never-smokers tended to present with more advanced disease than ever-smokers (p<0.004) and also with more advanced age (p<0.001). The HR for death increased with poorer Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ( ECOG ) performance status (PS) (ECOG 2=3), advanced stage (stage 3=4) and untreated patients. Slightly lower risk for death was registered in patients with adenocarcinoma vs those with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). CONCLUSION: Although no difference in survival was seen, definite epidemiologic differences do exist between never- smokers and ever-smokers patients with NSCLC. Future efforts should focus on the underlying biological differences, and on identifying potential non-tobacco related risk factors in order to improve treatment strategies for these two groups of NSCLC patients.