Multiple genetic variants predict the progression-free survival of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: A retrospective study.

ABSTRACT: Bevacizumab (BV) plus chemotherapy is broadly used in advanced ovarian cancer (OC). However, the efficacy of BV-based regimens for advanced OC patients is not satisfactory. Therefore, it is urgent to explore the predictive genetic biomarkers for BV.Tumor tissues from advanced OC patients receiving BV-based regimens were analyzed with a 150-gene targeted panel for next generation sequencing. The associations between gene alterations or clinicopathology features and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves or Cox regression. The association of the genetic alteration in potential predictive genes and expressions of 11 vascular endothelial growth factor-related genes were analyzed in The Cancer Genome Atlas cohort using 292 OC cases.Sixty two Chinese advanced OC patients treated with BV-based therapy were included. The median PFS of was 6.9 months, and objective response rate was 14.5%. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the status of endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) (hazard ratio = 6.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.25-18.13, P < .001) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) (hazard ratio = 3.58, 95% CI 1.27-10.08, P = .016) were significantly correlated with PFS. MYC Proto-Oncogene amplification seemed to have a positive trend (hazard ratio = 0.21, 95% CI 0.05-1.02, P = .052). Moreover, EGFR and HER2 alterations were not prognostic factors of overall survival for OC in The Cancer Genome Atlas OC cohort. The vascular endothelial growth factor-related signature analysis indicated vascular endothelial factor A expression was upregulated with EGFR alterations (P = .034) which may be involved in BV resistance, and HER2 alterations were associated with hypoxia inducible factor 1 subunit alpha overexpression significantly (P = .029).EGFR or HER2 alterations are negative predictors of PFS for OC patient treated with BV plus chemotherapy. Therefore, the clinicians may consider to use alternative regimens such as anti-EGFR or anti-HER2 targeted therapy instead of BV-based regimens on these patients when standard care fail.

A multicentre randomised trial comparing weekly paclitaxel + S-1 with weekly paclitaxel + 5-fluorouracil for patients with advanced gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of weekly paclitaxel plus S-1 with weekly paclitaxel plus 5-fluorouracil in treating advanced gastric cancer as first line regimen. The primary end-point was disease control rate (DCR). METHODS: Patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer were randomly assigned to an experimental arm or a control arm. The experimental arm's dosage schedule was paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 (intravenous infusion) on days 1, 8 and 15 and S-1 80-120 mg/d (oral administration) on days 1-14. Control arm patients were given the same paclitaxel, combined with 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 (continuous intravenous infusion) on days 1-5; and leucovorin 20 mg/m2 (intravenous infusion) on days 1-5. All schedules were repeated every 28 d. RESULTS: A total of 240 patients were enrolled and equally randomised into two arms. The overall response rate and DCR of the experimental arm was non-inferior to that of the control arm both in the per-protocol set and the full analysis set. The secondary end-point median progression-free survival (PFS) of the experimental and control arms was 153 and 129 d, with the hazard ratio of 0.641 (95% CI: 0.473-0.868, P = 0.004). The hazard ratio of the time to treatment failure of the two arms was 1.449 (95% CI: 0.705-2.980, P = 0.229). The six-month PFS rates of both arms were similar (31.3% versus 31.8%, P = 0.94). Cox regression analysis indicated that only treatment regimen and age were independent predictive factors for PFS. The most common adverse events were haematological and gastrointestinal. The rates of grade 3-4 adverse events were not significantly different between the two study arms and were mostly lower than 5%. CONCLUSION: Weekly paclitaxel combined with S-1 is an active and well-tolerated regimen, supporting the view that S-1 can be an alternative for infusional 5-fluorouracil for advanced gastric cancer.

Safety analysis of weekly paclitaxel plus S-1 versus paclitaxel plus 5-fluorouracil/calcium folinate as first-line therapy in advanced gastric cancer: a multicenter open random phase II trial.

PURPOSE: To report the results of a safety analysis from a phase II trial comparing administration of weekly paclitaxel plus S-1 (TS) versus paclitaxel plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/calcium folinate (LV) (TLF) as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients (n = 240) with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer were randomly assigned to receive either TS or TLF in a 28-day cycle for six cycles. RESULTS: The clinical features of both sets of patients were similar, with the exception of the incidence of prior chemotherapy (P>0·05). Most treatment-related adverse events occurred at similar rates in both treatment arms. However, patients receiving TS experienced an increase in all-grade especially grade 3/4 neutropenia, with an incidence of 43·7% in the TS arm and 16·3% in the TLF arm, respectively (P<0·05). Other severe adverse events were infrequent and not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSION: The safety and tolerance of weekly paclitaxel plus S-1 or 5-FU/LV is well in untreated advanced gastric cancer patients.

[A phase II prospective randomized controlled trial of weekly paclitaxel combined with S-1 or fluorouracil for advanced gastric carcinoma].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly paclitaxel combined with S-1 or fluorouracil in the first line treatment of advanced gastric carcinoma. METHODS: Two hundred and forty patients with untreated advanced gastric carcinoma were randomized into two arms, patients in the experimental arm were given paclitaxel and S-1, while those in the control arm received paclitaxel and fluorouracil. The regimen of experimental arm was paclitaxel 60 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion, day 1, 8, 15; S-1 80 - 120 mg/day given by oral administration, day 1 - 14. The regimen of control arm was fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion continuously, day 1 - 5; CF 20 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion, day 1 - 5. The regimens in both arms were repeated every 28 days. The efficacy and safety of both arms were assessed. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight patients were analyzed in the full analysis set, and 192 patients were analyzed in per-protocol set (experimental arm 100 patients, control arm 92 patients). The overall response rates of experimental and control arms were 50.0% and 28.3% (P = 0.002), and the disease control rates were 82.0% and 70.7% (P = 0.064), respectively. The primary endpoints of experimental arm were non-inferior to that of the control arm. The secondary endpoint of experimental arm in terms of median progression free survival was significantly better than that of control arm (5 months versus 4 months, P = 0.006). The experimental arm had a higher incidence of grade III-IV bone marrow suppression than the control arm, but the incidence of fever in both arms was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Oral administration of S-1 is an alternative option of venous infusional fluorouracil. Weekly paclitaxel combined with S-1 is a safe regimen and has a promising efficacy.