A randomized phase II study of S-1 plus oral leucovorin versus S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of adding oral leucovorin (LV) to S-1 when compared with S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer (PC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Gemcitabine-refractory PC patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive S-1 at 40, 50, or 60 mg according to body surface area plus LV 25 mg, both given orally twice daily for 1 week, repeated every 2 weeks (SL group), or S-1 monotherapy at the same dose as the SL group for 4 weeks, repeated every 6 weeks (S-1 group). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Among 142 patients enrolled, 140 were eligible for efficacy assessment (SL: n = 69 and S-1: n = 71). PFS was significantly longer in the SL group than in the S-1 group [median PFS, 3.8 versus 2.7 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37-0.85; P = 0.003]). The disease control rate was significantly higher in the SL group than in the S-1 group (91% versus 72%; P = 0.004). Overall survival (OS) was similar in both groups (median OS, 6.3 versus 6.1 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54-1.22; P = 0.463). After adjusting for patient background factors in a multivariate analysis, OS tended to be better in the SL group (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47-1.07; P = 0.099). Both treatments were well tolerated, although gastrointestinal toxicities were slightly more severe in the SL group. CONCLUSION: The addition of LV to S-1 significantly improved PFS in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced PC, and a phase III trial has been initiated in a similar setting. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center: JapicCTI-111554.

Randomized phase III study of bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI and bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG4407G).

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRI and FOLFOX have shown equivalent efficacy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but their comparative effectiveness is unknown when combined with bevacizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: WJOG4407G was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial conducted in Japan. Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1 to receive either FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI + Bev) or mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab (mFOLFOX6 + Bev), stratified by institution, adjuvant chemotherapy, and liver-limited disease. The primary end point was non-inferiority of FOLFIRI + Bev to mFOLFOX6 + Bev in progression-free survival (PFS), with an expected hazard ratio (HR) of 0.9 and non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 0.85, one-sided α-error 0.025). The secondary end points were response rate (RR), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL) during 18 months. This trial is registered to the University Hospital Medical Information Network, number UMIN000001396. RESULTS: Among 402 patients enrolled from September 2008 to January 2012, 395 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. The median PFS for FOLFIRI + Bev (n = 197) and mFOLFOX6 + Bev (n = 198) were 12.1 and 10.7 months, respectively [HR, 0.905; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.723-1.133; P = 0.003 for non-inferiority]. The median OS for FOLFIRI + Bev and mFOLFOX6 + Bev were 31.4 and 30.1 months, respectively (HR, 0.990; 95% CI 0.785-1.249). The best overall RRs were 64% for FOLFIRI + Bev and 62% for mFOLFOX6 + Bev. The common grade 3 or higher adverse events were leukopenia (11% in FOLFIRI + Bev/5% in mFOLFOX6 + Bev), neutropenia (46%/35%), diarrhea (9%/5%), febrile neutropenia (5%/2%), peripheral neuropathy (0%/22%), and venous thromboembolism (6%/2%). The QoL assessed by FACT-C (TOI-PFC) and FACT/GOG-Ntx was favorable for FOLFIRI + Bev during 18 months. CONCLUSION: FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab was non-inferior for PFS, compared with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab, as the first-line systemic treatment for mCRC. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: UMIN000001396.

Randomised phase II trial of S-1 plus oxaliplatin vs S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This randomised, open-label, multicenter phase II study compared progression-free survival (PFS) of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) with that of S-1 alone in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with confirmed progressive disease following the first-line treatment with a gemcitabine-based regimen were randomised to receive either S-1 (80/100/120 mg day(-1) based on body surface area (BSA), orally, days 1-28, every 6 weeks) or SOX (S-1 80/100/120 mg day(-1) based on BSA, orally, days 1-14, plus oxaliplatin 100 mg m(-2), intravenously, day 1, every 3 weeks). The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS: Between January 2009 and July 2010, 271 patients were randomly allocated to either S-1 (n=135) or SOX (n=136). Median PFS for S-1 and SOX were 2.8 and 3.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR)=0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65-1.08; stratified log-rank test P=0.18). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.9 vs 7.4 months (HR=1.03; 95% CI, 0.79-1.34; stratified log-rank test P=0.82). The response rate (RR) was 11.5% vs 20.9% (P=0.04). The major grade 3/4 toxicities (S-1 and SOX) were neutropenia (11.4% and 8.1%), thrombocytopenia (4.5% and 10.3%) and anorexia (12.9% and 14.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Although SOX showed an advantage in RR, it provided no significant improvement in PFS or OS compared with S-1 alone.

Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) as an alternative to cisplatin plus S-1 (CS) in first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III study, patients were randomly assigned to receive SOX (80-120 mg/day S-1 for 2 weeks with 100 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin on day 1, every 3 weeks) or CS (S-1 for 3 weeks with 60 mg/m(2) cisplatin on day 8, every 5 weeks). The primary end points were noninferiority in progression-free survival (PFS) and relative efficacy in overall survival (OS) for SOX using adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with stratification factors; performance status and unresectable or recurrent (+adjuvant chemotherapy) disease. RESULTS: Overall, 685 patients were randomized from January 2010 to October 2011. In per-protocol population, SOX (n = 318) was noninferior to CS (n = 324) in PFS [median, 5.5 versus 5.4 months; HR 1.004, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.840-1.199; predefined noninferiority margin 1.30]. The median OS for SOX and CS were 14.1 and 13.1 months, respectively (HR 0.958 with 95% CI 0.803-1.142). In the intention-to-treat population (SOX, n = 339; CS, n = 337), the HRs in PFS and OS were 0.979 (95% CI 0.821-1.167) and 0.934 (95% CI 0.786-1.108), respectively. The most common ≥grade 3 adverse events (SOX versus CS) were neutropenia (19.5% versus 41.8%), anemia (15.1% versus 32.5%), hyponatremia (4.4% versus 13.4%), febrile neutropenia (0.9% versus 6.9%), and sensory neuropathy (4.7% versus 0%). CONCLUSION: SOX is as effective as CS for AGC with favorable safety profile, therefore SOX can replace CS. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: JapicCTI-101021.

Comparison of two different S-1 plus cisplatin dosing schedules as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic and/or recurrent gastric cancer: a multicenter, randomized phase III trial (SOS).

BACKGROUND: Five-weekly S-1 plus cisplatin (SP5) is one of the standard first-line regimens for advanced gastric cancer (GC), proven in a Japanese phase III study. To enhance the dose intensity of cisplatin, 3-weekly S-1 plus cisplatin (SP3) was developed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III study evaluated whether SP3 (S-1 80 mg/m(2)/day on days 1-14 and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1) was noninferior/superior to SP5 (S-1 80-120 mg/day on days 1-21 and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1 or 8) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic, recurrent gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either SP3 or SP5. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00915382). RESULTS: Between February 2009 and January 2012, 625 patients were randomized at 42 sites in Korea and Japan. With a median follow-up duration of 32.4 months (range, 13.3-48.6 months) in surviving patients, SP3 was not only noninferior but also superior to SP5 in terms of PFS [median 5.5 versus 4.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.99; P = 0.0418 for superiority). There was no difference in overall survival (OS) between the groups (median 14.1 versus 13.9 months; HR = 0.99; 95% CI 0.81-1.21; P = 0.9068). In patients with measurable disease, the response rates were 60% in the SP3 arm and 50% in the SP5 arm (P = 0.065). Both regimens were generally well tolerated, but grade 3 or higher anemia (19% versus 9%) and neutropenia (39% versus 9%) were more frequent in SP3. CONCLUSIONS: SP3 is superior to SP5 in terms of PFS. However, since the improvement in PFS was only slight and there was no difference in OS, both SP3 and SP5 can be recommended as first-line treatments for patients with advanced GC.

Survival analysis of platinum-refractory patients with advanced esophageal cancer treated with docetaxel or best supportive care alone: a retrospective study.

The survival benefit of second-line chemotherapy with docetaxel in platinum-refractory patients with advanced esophageal cancer (AEC) remains unclear. A retrospective analysis of AEC patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS)≤2 was performed, and major organ functions were preserved, who determined to receive docetaxel or best supportive care (BSC) alone after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy. The post-progression survival (PPS), defined as survival time after disease progression following platinum-based chemotherapy, was analyzed by multivariate Cox regression analysis using factors identified as significant in univariate analysis of various 20 characteristics (age, sex, PS, primary tumor location, etc) including Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), which is a well-known prognostic factor in many malignant tumors. Sixty-six and 45 patients were determined to receive docetaxel and BSC between January 2007 and December 2011, respectively. The median PPS was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8-6.0) in the docetaxel group and 3.3 months (95% CI 2.5-4.0) in the BSC group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, 95% CI 0.38-0.84, P=0.005). Univariate analysis revealed six significant factors: treatment, PS, GPS, number of metastatic organs, liver metastasis, and bone metastasis. Multivariate analysis including these significant factors revealed three independent prognostic factors: docetaxel treatment (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.99, P=0.043), better GPS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81, P=0.001), and no bone metastasis (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.68, P=0.003). There was a trend for PPS in favor of the docetaxel group compared with patients who refused docetaxel treatment in the BSC group (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.29-1.29, P=0.20). Docetaxel treatment may have prolonged survival in platinum-refractory patients with AEC.

A phase II study to explore biomarkers for the use of mFOLFOX6/XELOX plus bevacizumab as a first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG7612GTR).

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the ability of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor-A short isoforms (pVEGF-Asi) to predict bevacizumab (BV) efficacy and to explore other circulating biomarkers in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with modified FOLFOX6/XELOX plus BV (mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pre-treatment plasma samples were collected from 100 mCRC patients receiving first-line chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV. The plasma levels of 11 angiogenesis-associated molecules, including pVEGF-Asi and 22 cancer-associated gene mutations in circulating tumor DNA, were analyzed. For the primary endpoint, we assumed that the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model was <1.15, comparing patients with a high versus those with a low pVEGF-Asi level divided according to the median pVEGF-Asi value. RESULTS: The median value of pVEGF-Asi was 37 (range 6.5-262) pg/ml. The HR for PFS between the high and low pVEGF-Asi patient groups was 1.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8-2.1; log rank, P = 0.25], which was larger than the predefined threshold of 1.15. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that PFS was significantly associated with plasma intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (pICAM-1) (≥190.0 versus <190.0 ng/ml; HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.3-3.5), RAS (mutant versus wild; HR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5-4.3), and FBXW7 (mutant versus wild; HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.2-6.8), whereas overall survival was significantly associated with pICAM-1 (HR 2.0; 95% CI 1.1-3.7) and RAS (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.5-4.6). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of BV was unable to compensate for the poor PFS associated with a high pVEGF-Asi level, suggesting that pVEGF-Asi is unlikely to be a good predictive biomarker of the efficacy of mFOLFOX6/XELOX + BV therapy. The clinical significance of circulating ICAM-1, mutant RAS, and mutant FBXW7 levels should be studied further.

Phase II study of S-1 plus leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: S-1, a novel oral fluoropyrimidine, is well tolerated in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The response rate of S-1 for colorectal cancer is high, ranging from 35% to 40%. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of S-1 combined with oral leucovorin (LV) to enhance antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: S-1 was given orally twice daily for two consecutive weeks at a daily dose of 80-120 mg, followed by a 2-week rest period, within a 4-week cycle. LV was given orally twice a day at a daily dose of 50 mg, simultaneously with S-1. RESULTS: Of the 56 patients with previously untreated mCRC, 32 (57%) had partial responses. The median follow-up period was 27.2 months. The median time to progression was 6.7 months (95% confidence interval 5.4-7.9). The median survival time was 24.3 months. There was no treatment-related death or grade 4 toxicity. The most common grade 3 toxic effects were diarrhea (32%), anorexia (21%), stomatitis (20%), and neutropenia (14%). CONCLUSION: S-1 combined with LV therapy demonstrated promising efficacy and acceptable safety in chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRC without the concurrent use of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, or molecular-targeted drugs.

Psychological and behavioral mechanisms influencing the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: This study explored the psychological and behavioral mechanisms of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in Japanese cancer patients using two applied behavioral models, the transtheoretical model (TTM), and theory of planned behavior (TPB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to 1100 patients at three cancer treatment facilities in Japan and data on 521 cancer patients were used in the final analysis. The questionnaire included items based on TTM and TPB variables, as well as three psychological batteries. RESULTS: According to the TTM, 88 patients (17%) were in precontemplation, 226 (43%) in contemplation, 33 (6%) in preparation, 71 (14%) in action, and 103 (20%) in maintenance. The model derived from structural equation modeling revealed that the stage of CAM use was significantly affected by the pros, cons, expectation from family, norms of medical staff, use of chemotherapy, period from diagnosis, and place of treatment. The primary factor for the stage of CAM use was the expectation from family. CONCLUSIONS: The findings revealed the existence of a number of psychologically induced potential CAM users, and psychological variables including positive attitude for CAM use and perceived family expectation greatly influence CAM use in cancer patients.

Phase II study of a combination of irinotecan and cisplatin against metastatic gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: A phase II study of a combination chemotherapy regimen of cisplatin (CDDP) and irinotecan (CPT-11) was conducted to assess its efficacy and feasibility in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria included the following: (1) histologically proven gastric cancer with measurable metastatic lesions, (2) performance status of 2 or less, (3) age of 75 years or younger, (4) one or no prior chemotherapy regimens, (5) adequate bone marrow, liver, renal, and cardiac functions, and (6) written informed consent. The treatment consisted of CPT-11 (70 mg/m2) on day 1 and day 15 and CDDP (80 mg/m2) on day 1, repeated every 4 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were entered onto the study. The overall response rate was 48% (21 of 44 patients, 95% confidence interval [CI], 33% to 63%) and included one complete remission (2%). The response rate of the patients who had not received prior chemotherapy was 59% (17 of 29 patients, 95% CI, 39% to 77%). The median survival time was 272 days for all patients and 322 days for the 29 patients who had not received prior chemotherapy. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 25 patients (57%), and grade 3 or 4 diarrhea was observed in nine patients (20%). Other adverse reactions were mild. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: This combination chemotherapy regimen is active and well tolerated. It may be an appropriate regimen for future phase III trials.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of a new taxoid, RPR 109881A, given as a 1-hour intravenous infusion in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: RPR 109881A is a new semisynthetic taxoid compound that has a similar mechanism of action to docetaxel. The purpose of this phase I study was to characterize the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), toxicity profile, pharmacokinetic profile, and antitumor effects of this agent. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nineteen eligible patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled. RPR 109881A was administered as a 1-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks at doses ranging from 15 to 75 mg/m(2). Pharmacokinetic evaluation was performed at the first cycle. RESULTS: Neutropenia (febrile neutropenia) and fatigue were dose-limiting toxicities at doses of 60 and 75 mg/m(2) and seemed to be dose-related. Both thrombocytopenia and anemia were infrequent. Nonhematologic toxicities were generally mild. Pharmacokinetic studies indicated that RPR 109881A plasma disposition was bi- or triphasic, with a high total plasma clearance, a large volume of distribution, and a long terminal half-life. The area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and the peak concentration of RPR 109881A seemed to increase with increasing dose proportionally, suggesting linear pharmacokinetics. Urinary excretion over 48 hours was low, with a mean of 0.8 +/- 0.36% of the administered dose. A significant relationship existed between the percentage decrease of neutrophil counts and the AUC of RPR 109881A. Among 18 assessable patients, two partial and two minor responses were documented. CONCLUSION: RPR 109881A was found to be a well-tolerated and promising taxoid agent. The MTD was 75 mg/m(2), and the recommended dose for phase II study was 60 mg/m(2) as a 1-hour infusion every 3 weeks.

Comparison of the efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacokinetics of a uracil/tegafur (UFT) plus oral leucovorin (LV) regimen between Japanese and American patients with advanced colorectal cancer: joint United States and Japan study of UFT/LV.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, toxicities, and pharmacokinetics of an oral regimen consisting of uracil/tegafur (UFT) and leucovorin (LV) between Japanese patients and patients in the United States with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-four Japanese patients and 45 patients in the United States were enrolled in concurrent nonrandomized phase II trials. UFT 300 mg/m2/d and leucovorin 75 mg/d were administered orally for 28 days followed by a 7-day rest period. The total daily dose of each drug was divided into three equal doses. Treatment was repeated every 5 weeks until disease progression. Blood samples for the pharmacokinetic study were obtained after the initial dose on day 1 of the first course. RESULTS: The response rate for the Japanese patients and the patients in the United States was 36.4% (95% CI, 22.4% to 52.2%) and 34.1% (95% CI, 20.5% to 49.9%), respectively. The only major toxicity was diarrhea, and other toxicities were mild in both populations. The incidence of grade 3 or higher diarrhea in the Japanese and Americans was 9% and 22%, respectively. Although the area under the curve and maximum concentration of fluorouracil were found to be slightly higher in the Japanese patients than the patients in the United States, and area under the curve-adjusted body surface area appeared to be comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and pharmacokinetic parameters of UFT and LV are comparable in Japanese and American patients; however, a difference in toxicity profile, specifically diarrhea, was noted. This oral regimen of UFT and LV is considered to have similar activity against metastatic colorectal cancer and to have acceptable toxicity in patients in both countries.

Clinical significance of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor in gastrointestinal cancer.

Circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) was measured in gastric and colorectal cancer patients using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Firstly, serum and plasma samples were collected from 20 normal controls to compare the values of VEGF and to determine which specimen type was most suitable for detecting circulating VEGF. Seventeen of 20 normal controls had plasma VEGF levels under the limit of detection (15 pg/ml) and the levels of the remaining three controls were 21, 22 and 38 pg/ml. In contrast, all serum samples indicated high levels of VEGF (mean 238 pg/ml), ranging from 44 to 450 pg/ml. In a time-course test of two normal controls serum VEGF values increased markedly between 30 and 60 min and remained high, whilst plasma VEGF values were low up to 480 min. Thus, plasma samples are more suitable for the measurement of circulating VEGF. Next, plasma VEGF levels were examined in 44 patients with gastric cancer (8 early, 7 advanced without remote metastasis and 29 metastatic), 13 with colorectal adenoma (2 with focal cancer) and 26 with colorectal carcinoma (8 advanced without metastasis and 18 metastatic) before treatment. An extremely high plasma concentration of VEGF was seen in some cancer patients with metastasis. To discriminate these patients, a cut-off level was determined, considering both the distribution of the sample concentration and the upper limit of 95% confidence area of VEGF in the cancer patients without metastasis. The cut-off value was 108 pg/ml and most cancer patients without metastases had VEGF levels below the cut-off value. In 11 of 29 metastatic gastric cancer patients (38%) and 9 of 18 metastatic colorectal cancer patients (50%), plasma VEGF levels were higher than the cut-off value. Survival was also analysed in the patients with metastasis. It was significantly longer in the patients with low VEGF levels (below the cut-off) than in those with high VEGF levels (logrank test, P = 0.042). 34 patients with metastasis (19 gastric cancer and 15 colorectal cancer) were treated with systemic chemotherapy, and their pretreatment levels of plasma VEGF and conventional tumour markers (CEA and CA19-9) were evaluated in relation to response. The response to chemotherapy was significantly higher in patients with low VEGF levels (< or = 108 pg/ml) than in those with high VEGF levels (P = 0.047). Such a difference was not observed with CEA/CA19-9. In conclusion, plasma VEGF is a useful marker for tumour metastasis and patient survival, and a possible predictive factor for the response of patients with gastrointestinal cancer to chemotherapy.

A phase I study of S-1 combined with weekly cisplatin for metastatic gastric cancer in an outpatient setting.

A dose-escalation study was conducted for patients with metastatic gastric cancer to determine the recommended dose of weekly intravenous (i.v.) cisplatin combined with a fixed dose of a new oral dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase-inhibitory fluoropyrimidine, S-1, on an outpatient basis. Secondary endpoints were to define the toxicity profile and to determine tumour responses. S-1 was fixed at a dose of 70 mg/m(2)/day and was administered for 2 weeks followed by a 1-week rest. Three dose levels of cisplatin (10, 15 and 20 mg/m(2)) were studied. Cisplatin was infused over 30 min on days 1 and 8. 20 patients were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were recorded during the administration of cisplatin up to 20 mg/m(2), except for grade 3 diarrhoea and stomatitis in one patient at dose level 3. No grade 4 adverse events occurred. However, grade 2 gastrointestinal adverse reactions, such as nausea and anorexia, were seen in 7 of 13 patients at dose level 3 within the first two treatment cycles. This was determined to be the maximum acceptable level that would not negate the advantages observed with use of an oral drug such as S-1. An objective tumour response was seen at all dose levels, and the overall response rate in the 18 patients evaluated was 61%. A higher response rate of 78% was observed in 9 patients who had received no prior chemotherapy. Oral S-1 with weekly cisplatin is a feasible and promising combination regimen that is appropriate for an outpatient setting. A randomised phase II study comparing this combination with S-1 alone in chemo-nai;ve patients is warranted.

Total necrosis of hepatocellular carcinoma with a combination therapy of arterial infusion of chemotherapeutic lipiodol and transcatheter arterial embolization: report of 14 cases.

Combination therapy consisting of Lipiodol (Laboratoire Guerbet, Villepinte, France) containing styrene maleic acid neocarzinostatin and transcatheter arterial embolization (L-TAE) has been an important conservative therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We examined the clinical and pathologic characteristics of 14 HCC cases that achieved total tumor necrosis in response to L-TAE. The HCCs of all cases were resected 45 +/- 17 days after L-TAE and were confirmed to be totally necrotic. Ultrasonography showed a mean tumor size of 2.5 +/- 1.0 cm, often with a halo formation around the tumor. Angiographically, neovascularity and clear tumor stains were observed in all cases. Computed tomography portography showed nodular perfusion defects in all the cases examined. There were portal invasions in two cases. On Lipiodol-computed tomography, Lipiodol was densely and homogeneously retained within the whole tumor. The number of tumors was single in all diagnostic images. Macroscopic view of HCCs were single nodular type in nine cases and single nodular type with extra growth in four cases. Clear capsular formation was seen in each HCC nodule. Soft x-rays were taken to observe the exact distribution of Lipiodol in the operative specimens. Microscopic intrahepatic metastases were found histologically in four cases. Histologic examination showed the trabecular pattern with broad blood spaces in which Lipiodol was positive with Sudan III staining. Necrosis was seen not only in the main tumor, but also in the capsular invasions and microscopic metastases with Lipiodol deposition. The characteristics of the cases with total tumor necrosis were as follows. Deposition of Lipiodol throughout the tumor was essential, and clinically the cases showed a single HCC tumor with a diameter of more than 5 cm and arterial hypervascularity. The pathologic findings included expansive growth with capsular formation and trabecular-type HCC with abundant blood spaces. These findings are important for evaluating the radical efficacy of L-TAE.

Analysis of genetic alterations in salivary gland tumors by comparative genomic hybridization.

In order to define and map chromosomal copy number alterations in salivary gland tumors (SGTs), a comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) technique was applied to two pleomorphic adenomas (PAs), one adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC), and one basal cell adenocarcinoma (BCAC). The PAs exhibited regional copy number losses at 5q12.4-q14.1, 9q12-q21.13, and 16q11.2, as well as a gain at 20p12.1; among these, the losses at the 9q12-q21.11 and 16q11.2 regions were common to both PAs. The ACC showed overrepresentations of the entire regions of chromosomes 16 and 20, a regional gain at 22q12.3-q13.1, and no losses. In the BCAC, regional gains at 9p21.1-pter, 18q21.1-q22.3, and 22q11.23-q13.31 as well as losses at 2q24.2 and 4q25-q27 were seen; the gain at 22q12.3-q13.1 was common in both the ACC and the BCAC. These CGH data indicate that different genetic alterations are present in the different types of SGTs, and that the alterations involve several chromosomes. The discovery of common alterations in the same and/or different types of tumors might be important in the understanding of the development and progression of the SGTs.

Plasma level of basic fibroblast growth factor increases with progression of chronic liver disease.

Basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF) is thought to be involved in carcinogenesis and, to clarify its clinical significance, the study of its blood level in cancer patients is important. Plasma levels of basic FGF are reported to be elevated in some cancers. However, little is known of basic FGF levels in plasma in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this study, we measured basic FGF plasma levels in patients with chronic liver disease and compared the levels in chronic hepatitis (CH), liver cirrhosis (LC), and HCC. We also examined whether these levels were related to serum levels of asparate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, alkaline phosphatase, leucine aminopeptidase, total bilirubin, total protein, and albumin, and to the indocyanine green test (i.e., liver function tests) and to type III procollagen. 7S domain of IV type collagen, and hyaluronic acid (i.e., markers of liver fibrosis). Levels of basic FGF, determined by a quantitative "sandwich" enzyme immunoassay, were significantly elevated with the progression of liver disease; being 3.67 +/- 2.37 (mean +/- SD). 7.78 +/- 6.61, and 12.37 +/- 7.67 pg/ml in the CH, LC, and HCC groups, respectively. FGF levels were elevated to a greater extent in the HCC patients than in the CH (P < 0.0001) and LC patients (P = 0.0117). Levels were higher in LC than in CH (P = 0.0204). None of the liver function test findings or levels of markers of liver fibrosis were correlated with levels of basic FGF. These results suggest that circulating basic FGF could serve as a new indicator of the progression of chronic liver disease. The extremely elevated plasma of level basic FGF in the HCC group suggests that basic FGF may be related to the development of HCC.

Evaluation of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with and without simultaneous ligation for the treatment of esophageal varices.

For more effective and simple endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) for esophageal varices, we developed an EIS procedure with ligation (EISL) that is non-invasive, in which EIS and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) are performed simultaneously. In this study, we compared EISL and EIS in a randomized sample of patients (n = 14 for each procedure). For EISL, EVL was performed, including the injection site, after the injection of 5% ethanolamine oleate with iopamidol (EOI) into a varix. The mean number of treatment sessions required for eradication of esophageal varices was 2.3+/-0.5 for EISL and 3.9+/-0.8 for EIS (P < 0.001); the mean number of treatment sites was 6.2+/-2.2 for EISL and 14.0+/-5.0 for EIS (P < 0.001); the mean total amount of EOI used was 13.8+/-5.2ml for EISL and 26.3+/-9.8ml for EIS (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in rates of recurrence of varices or in bleeding between the two groups. For EISL, fewer treatment sessions and less sclerosant were sufficient, probably because the sclerosants were more effective due to the blockage of variceal blood flow by the ligation. This method should provide a novel modification of EIS.

Circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a possible tumor marker for metastasis in human hepatocellular carcinoma.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is closely related to angiogenesis in various human cancers. However, little is known of its circulating levels in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We examined circulating VEGF levels in chronic liver disease to assess their clinical significance. Plasma VEGF concentrations were determined, by enzyme immunoassay, in patients with chronic hepatitis (CH; n = 36), liver cirrhosis (LC; n = 77), and HCC (n = 86) for a cross-sectional study. Plasma VEGF levels in healthy controls (n = 20) and CH, LC, and HCC patients were 17.7 +/- 5.4 (mean +/- SD), 30.6 +/- 22.8, 34.4 +/- 27.0, and 51.1 +/- 71.9 pg/ml, respectively. The levels were significantly elevated in the HCC group, compared with the control, CH, and LC groups. Plasma VEGF levels in stage I, II, III, IVA, and IVB HCC patients were 27.6 +/- 16.1, 26.5 +/- 13.7, 35.8 +/- 15.3, 45.4 +/- 39.4, and 103.1 +/- 123.2 pg/ml, respectively. The stage IVB patients with remote metastasis showed significantly marked elevation compared with the patients at the other stages. Platelet numbers were weakly correlated with plasma VEGF levels in the HCC group. Plasma VEGF level was highly elevated in patients with HCC, particularly those with metastatic disease. We consider that plasma VEGF is a possible tumor marker for metastasis of HCC. Circulating VEGF may be derived mainly from the large burden of tumor cells, and partly from platelets activated by the vascular invasion of HCC cells.

Serum soluble Fas antigen in gastric MALT (mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue) lymphoma patients.

We measured the serum level of soluble Fas (sFas) antigen in gastric MALT (mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue) lymphoma patients to investigate immune response of B lymphoma cells in gastric MALT lymphoma. The serum sFas antigen levels in 21 patients with Helicobacter pylori (HP)-positive MALT lymphoma were 4.51+/-0.25 (mean+/-SD) in the high grade malignant group (n=9) that demonstrated diffuse large cell (DL) components and 2.53+/-0.46 (mean+/-SD) in the low grade malignant group (n=12) that did not demonstrate DL components. Among 12 patients who underwent HP eradication therapy, the blood sFas antigen level lowered after eradication in 7 out of 10 patients who showed complete response or partial response, while sFas antigen level did not decrease in the 2 patients who showed no change or progression of the disease. In the high grade malignant group, 2 of 3 patients who underwent HP eradication treatment showed a mild decrease in the sFas antigen level as well as an improvement on endoscopic and histological examinations, but these sFas level were not normalized. The blood sFas antigen level tended to coincide with pathological activity and malignancy, suggesting that the sFas antigen level may be a prognostic indicator and useful index for the response of HP eradication treatment in gastric MALT lymphoma.