[Evaluation of the Leftover Capecitabine Tablets in Adjuvant CAPOX Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer].

Since it is important that patients take their oral anticancer therapy as prescribed, pharmacists need to assess adherence. In addition, oral anticancer drugs are expensive, and reuse of leftover drugs at outpatient pharmacy clinics is useful in reducing drug costs. The present study aimed to clarify when and why patients have leftover capecitabine tablets, and the cost of leftover capecitabine tablets reused at an outpatient pharmacy clinic, focusing on adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) chemotherapy for gastric cancer. We retrospectively studied patients who received adjuvant CAPOX chemotherapy for gastric cancer between November 1, 2015, and April 30, 2021, at the Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research. The cost of leftover capecitabine reused by pharmacists was calculated based on the National Health Insurance drug price standard for the study period. This study included 64 patients who received adjuvant CAPOX chemotherapy. Thirty-seven patients had 152 leftover capecitabine tablets. The most common reasons for leftover capecitabine tablets were nausea and vomiting (21.7%), missed doses (18.4%), and diarrhea (13.2%). The leftover capecitabine tablets for 25 patients were reused at the outpatient pharmacy clinic at a cost of JPY 604142.8 (JPY 24165.7 per patient). The study results suggest that evaluating capecitabine adherence and the reasons for leftover capecitabine tablets at outpatient pharmacy clinics as well as reusing leftover medication can contribute to reducing drug costs.

Perioperative immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers: a review of current approaches and future perspectives.

Metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers have been treated with chemotherapy, but the landscape of cancer treatment is rapidly shifting towards immune-based therapies. As established by the CheckMate 649 and ATTRACTION-4 trials, combination therapy with fluorouracil, platinum, and nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, is now recognized as the standard first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer. The potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors extends beyond metastatic disease. For locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer, perioperative chemotherapy with gastrectomy has been regarded as the standard of care, especially in Western nations. Besides, the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors as neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments is currently underway, indicating a significant paradigm shift in the treatment strategies. This review summarizes the clinical developments and future perspectives of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy with or without chemotherapy as perioperative treatment for gastric, esophageal, and gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Safety and efficacy of adjuvant therapy with oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil after mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for stage iii lower rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard treatment for stage III lower rectal cancer worldwide. However, in Japan, the standard treatment is TME with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLD) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. We examined the safety and efficacy of adjuvant therapy with oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and 5-fluorouracil (modified FOLFOX6) after TME with LPLD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 33 patients who received modified FOLFOX6 after TME with LPLD for stage III lower rectal cancer. RESULTS: The overall completion rate of 12 cycles of adjuvant modified FOLFOX6 was 76%. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was observed in eight patients (24%). Sensory neuropathy was observed in 32 patients (97%) with 4 (12%) having a grade 3 event. The disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 45% at 3 years. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant modified FOLFOX6 was feasible in patients with stage III lower rectal cancer after TME with LPLD.

Leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab versus S-1 and oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (SOFT): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies done in Asia have shown that a regimen of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) has promising efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We aimed to establish whether SOX plus bevacizumab is non-inferior to mFOLFOX6 (modified regimen of leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) plus bevacizumab as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: We undertook an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised phase 3 trial in 82 sites in Japan. We enrolled individuals aged 20-80 years who had metastatic colorectal cancer, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had assessable lesions, had received no previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy, could take drugs orally, and had adequate organ function. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (on day 1 of each 2-week cycle, 5 mg/kg intravenous infusion of bevacizumab and a simultaneous intravenous infusion of 85 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m(2)l-leucovorin, 400 mg/m(2) bolus fluorouracil, and 2400 mg/m(2) infusional fluorouracil) or SOX plus bevacizumab (on day 1 of each 3-week cycle, 7·5 mg/kg intravenous infusion of bevacizumab and 130 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion of oxaliplatin; assigned dose of S-1 twice a day from after dinner on day 1 to after breakfast on day 15, followed by 7-day break). Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation method, with stratification by institution and whether postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy had been given. Participants, investigators, and data analysts were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), which was defined as the interval between enrolment and progressive disease (≥20% increase in sum of longest dimensions of target lesions from baseline, or appearance of new lesions) or death, whichever came first. The primary analysis was done by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center, number JapicCTI-090699. FINDINGS: Between Feb 1, 2009, and March 31, 2011, 512 patients underwent randomisation. 256 patients assigned to receive SOX plus bevacizumab and 255 assigned to receive mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab were included in the primary analysis. Median PFS was 11·5 months (95% CI 10·7-13·2) in the group assigned to mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab and 11·7 months (10·7-12·9) in the group assigned to SOX plus bevacizumab (HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·86-1·27; less than non-inferiority margin of 1·33, pnon-inferiority=0·014). The most common haematological adverse events of grade 3 or higher were leucopenia (21 [8%] of 249 patients given mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab included in safety analysis vs six [2%] of 250 given SOX plus bevacizumab; p=0·0029) and neutropenia (84 [34%] vs 22 [9%]; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or higher anorexia (13 [5%] vs three [1%]; p=0·019) and diarrhoea (23 [9%] vs seven [3%]; p=0·0040) were significantly more common in patients given SOX plus bevacizumab than in those given mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab. We recorded seven treatment-related deaths (three in the group given mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab; four in that given SOX plus bevacizumab). INTERPRETATION: SOX plus bevacizumab is non-inferior to mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab with respect to PFS as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer, and could become standard treatment in Asian populations. FUNDING: Taiho.

[Clinical administration of oxaliplatin for patients previously treated for refractory advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer].

Oxaliplatin (L-OHP) was administered to 10 patients previously treated for refractory advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer. The number of times each had received previous chemotherapy treatment ranged from 1 to 5 (median 3) for durations of 2.5 to 52.8 (median 11.7) months. At the time, L-OHP was not yet approved for sale in Japan, and could only be imported from overseas for personal use. As this made it very expensive,we used a low L-OHP dose of 100 mg/body. Combinations with 5-FU were administered differently from previous regimens; these included chronotherapy, weekly high-dose, FOLFOX 4, and FOLFOX 6. L-OHP was administered from 1 to 14 times (median 4.5), and the response to treatment was PR in 2 patients and NC in 5. The response rate was 22.2%. Although in NC there was a tendency toward tumor reduction in 2 of the 5 patients, the treatment had to be suspended because of their financial situations. Overall survival from commencement of the first treatment was 3.1 to 58.7 months (median 17.6+) and after starting L-OHP was 0.6 to 17.2 months (median 6.4+). Adverse events included bone marrow suppression in three patients, 3 cases of leukocytopenia (grade 3 in two patients and grade 4 in one), grade 4 thrombocytopenia in one patient,grade 3 sensory disturbance in one patient,and grade 3 anorexia in two patients. All reactions were able to be controlled except for one patient with Grade 4 thrombocytopenia. In summary,treatment with L-OHP as salvage chemotherapy can possibly contribute to prolongation of survival time in cases of refractory advanced colorectal cancer. It is useful to combine L-OHP with high-dose continuous administration of 5-FU,namely FOLFOX regimens.FOLFOX 6 is the most useful of the FOLFOX regimens because it is simple and can be administered on an outpatient basis.