Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide. In "Western" countries, most people are either diagnosed at an advanced stage, or develop a relapse after surgery with curative intent. In people with advanced disease, significant benefits from targeted therapies are currently limited to HER-2 positive disease treated with trastuzumab, in combination with chemotherapy, in first-line. In second-line, ramucirumab, alone or in combination with paclitaxel, demonstrated significant survival benefits. Thus, systemic chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Uncertainty remains regarding the choice of the regimen. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of chemotherapy versus best supportive care (BSC), combination versus single-agent chemotherapy and different chemotherapy combinations in advanced gastric cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Embase up to June 2016, reference lists of studies, and contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs). SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered only RCTs on systemic, intravenous or oral chemotherapy versus BSC, combination versus single-agent chemotherapy and different chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently identified studies and extracted data. A third investigator was consulted in case of disagreements. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information. MAIN RESULTS: We included 64 RCTs, of which 60 RCTs (11,698 participants) provided data for the meta-analysis of overall survival. We found chemotherapy extends overall survival (OS) by approximately 6.7 months more than BSC (hazard ratio (HR) 0.3, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.24 to 0.55, 184 participants, three studies, moderate-quality evidence). Combination chemotherapy extends OS slightly (by an additional month) versus single-agent chemotherapy (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.89, 4447 participants, 23 studies, moderate-quality evidence), which is partly counterbalanced by increased toxicity. The benefit of epirubicin in three-drug combinations, in which cisplatin is replaced by oxaliplatin and 5-FU is replaced by capecitabine is unknown.Irinotecan extends OS slightly (by an additional 1.6 months) versus non-irinotecan-containing regimens (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95, 2135 participants, 10 studies, high-quality evidence).Docetaxel extends OS slightly (just over one month) compared to non-docetaxel-containing regimens (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.95, 2001 participants, eight studies, high-quality evidence). However, due to subgroup analyses, we are uncertain whether docetaxel-containing combinations (docetaxel added to a single-agent or two-drug combination) extends OS due to moderate-quality evidence (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.91, 1466 participants, four studies, moderate-quality evidence). When another chemotherapy was replaced by docetaxel, there is probably little or no difference in OS (HR 1.05; 0.87 to 1.27, 479 participants, three studies, moderate-quality evidence). We found there is probably little or no difference in OS when comparing capecitabine versus 5-FU-containing regimens (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.11, 732 participants, five studies, moderate-quality evidence) .Oxaliplatin may extend (by less than one month) OS versus cisplatin-containing regimens (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98, 1105 participants, five studies, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether taxane-platinum combinations with (versus without) fluoropyrimidines extend OS due to very low-quality evidence (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.06, 482 participants, three studies, very low-quality evidence). S-1 regimens improve OS slightly (by less than an additional month) versus 5-FU-containing regimens (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.00, 1793 participants, four studies, high-quality evidence), however since S-1 is used in different doses and schedules between Asian and non-Asian population, the applicability of this finding to individual populations is uncertain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy improves survival (by an additional 6.7 months) in comparison to BSC, and combination chemotherapy improves survival (by an additional month) compared to single-agent 5-FU. Testing all patients for HER-2 status may help to identify patients with HER-2-positive tumours, for whom, in the absence of contraindications, trastuzumab in combination with capecitabine or 5-FU in combination with cisplatin has been shown to be beneficial. For HER-2 negative people, all different two-and three-drug combinations including irinotecan, docetaxel, oxaliplatin or oral 5-FU prodrugs are valid treatment options for advanced gastric cancer, and consideration of the side effects of each regimen is essential in the treatment decision. Irinotecan-containing combinations and docetaxel-containing combinations (in which docetaxel was added to a single-agent or two-drug (platinum/5-FUcombination) show significant survival benefits in the comparisons studied above. Furthermore, docetaxel-containing three-drug regimens have increased response rates, but the advantages of the docetaxel-containing three-drug combinations (DCF, FLO-T) are counterbalanced by increased toxicity. Additionally, oxaliplatin-containing regimens demonstrated a benefit in OS as compared to the same regimen containing cisplatin, and there is a modest survival improvement of S-1 compared to 5-FU-containing regimens.Whether the survival benefit for three-drug combinations including cisplatin, 5-FU, and epirubicin as compared to the same regimen without epirubicin is still valid when second-line therapy is routinely administered and when cisplatin is replaced by oxaliplatin and 5-FU by capecitabine is questionable. Furthermore, the magnitude of the observed survival benefits for the three-drug regimens is not large enough to be clinically meaningful as defined recently by the American Society for Clinical Oncology (Ellis 2014). In contrast to the comparisons in which a survival benefit was observed by adding a third drug to a two-drug regimen at the cost of increased toxicity, the comparison of regimens in which another chemotherapy was replaced by irinotecan was associated with a survival benefit (of borderline statistical significance), but without increased toxicity. For this reason irinotecan/5-FU-containing combinations are an attractive option for first-line treatment. Although they need to be interpreted with caution, subgroup analyses of one study suggest that elderly people have a greater benefit form oxaliplatin, as compared to cisplatin-based regimens, and that people with locally advanced disease or younger than 65 years might benefit more from a three-drug regimen including 5-FU, docetaxel, and oxaliplatin as compared to a two-drug combination of 5-FU and oxaliplatin, a hypothesis that needs further confirmation. For people with good performance status, the benefit of second-line chemotherapy has been established in several RCTs.

Docetaxel, oxaliplatin and capecitabine (TEX regimen) in patients with metastatic gastric or gastro-esophageal cancer: results of a multicenter phase I/II study.

UNLABELLED: Three drug taxane-based regimens have shown activity in patients with metastatic or locally advanced gastric or gastro-esophageal cancer (GC/GEC). Limited tolerability of these regimens warrants treatment modification, particularly in regard of the proven equivalence of oxaliplatin and cisplatin as well as capecitabine and 5FU. Thus, a regimen with docetaxel (T), oxaliplatin (E) and capecitabine (X) was established and evaluated. METHODS: Patients with metastatic or locally advanced GC/GEC, adequate organ function, ECOG PS 0-2 were enrolled. TEX regimen was administered as defined by the phase I trial with T 35 mg/m(2) and E 70 mg/m(2) on days (d) 1, 8 and X 800 mg/m(2) bid on d 1-14 every 22 days. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) rate after 6 months. RESULTS: Altogether 70 patients (15 phase I; 55 phase II) were eligible for analysis. Results of the phase II part were as follows: most common grade toxicities diarrhea (30%), nausea/vomiting and infections, PFS rate after 6 months 56.3%, response rate 43%, median PFS 6.9 and overall survival 13 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: The TEX regimen show similar efficacy compared to other infusional 5FU-based taxane and platinum containing triplets, but the reduced tolerability, in particular grade 3 diarrhea, limits the feasibility.

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer currently ranks second in global cancer mortality. Most patients are either diagnosed at an advanced stage, or develop a relapse after surgery with curative intent. Apart from supportive care and palliative radiation to localized (e.g. bone) metastasis, systemic chemotherapy is the only treatment option available in this situation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapy regimens in advanced gastric cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to March 2009, reference lists of studies, and contacted pharmaceutical companies and national and international experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials on systemic intravenous chemotherapy versus best supportive care, combination versus single agent chemotherapy and different combination chemotherapies in advanced gastric cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data. A third investigator was consulted in case of disagreements. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty five trials, with a total of 5726 patients, have been included in the meta-analysis of overall survival. The comparison of chemotherapy versus best supportive care consistently demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival in favour of the group receiving chemotherapy (hazard ratios (HR) 0.37; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.24 to 0.55, 184 participants). The comparison of combination versus single-agent chemotherapy provides evidence for a survival benefit in favour of combination chemotherapy (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90, 1914 participants). The price of this benefit is increased toxicity as a result of combination chemotherapy. When comparing 5-FU/cisplatin-containing combination therapy regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95, 501 participants) and 5-FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92, 1147 participants) there was a significant survival benefit for regimens including 5-FU, anthracyclines and cisplatin. Both the comparison of irinotecan versus non-irinotecan (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.02, 639 participants) and docetaxel versus non-docetaxel containing regimens (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, 805 participants) show non-significant overall survival benefits in favour of the irinotecan and docetaxel-containing regimens. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy significantly improves survival in comparison to best supportive care. In addition, combination chemotherapy improves survival compared to single-agent 5-FU. All patients should be tested for their HER-2 status and trastuzumab should be added to a standard fluoropyrimidine/cisplatin regimen in patients with HER-2 positive tumours. Two and three-drug regimens including 5-FU, cisplatin, with or without an anthracycline, as well as irinotecan or docetaxel-containing regimens are reasonable treatment options for HER-2 negative patients.

Safety and efficacy of weekly 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid/oxaliplatin/irinotecan in the first-line treatment of gastrointestinal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) or gastric cancer (GC) consists of two-drug, usually fluoropyrimidine-based, combinations, with or without the addition of biological agents. Studies of triple-drug regimens combining 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) with both oxaliplatin and irinotecan have shown promising efficacy in studies of patients with mCRC or GC. However, improved efficacy has often been achieved at the expense of high rates of grade 3 or 4 toxicities such as neutropenia and diarrhoea, occasionally even resulting in toxic deaths. OBJECTIVE/METHODS: We performed a phase II study of previously untreated patients with mCRC or GC to assess the safety and efficacy of our 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid/oxaliplatin/irinotecan (FUFOXIRI) regimen with weekly administration of irinotecan 70 mg/m(2), oxaliplatin 50 mg/m(2), FA 500 mg/m(2) and 5-FU 2000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 and 22, repeated from day 36. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients were enrolled, 11 each with mCRC and GC receiving a median of four cycles per patient. The FUFOXIRI regimen was generally well tolerated with no toxic deaths, neutropenic fever or grade 4 toxicities. Most common grade 3 side effects were diarrhoea and neutropenia each affecting 24% of patients. Dose reductions due to toxicity were performed in 48% of all and 60% of patients having received at least two cycles of FUFOXIRI. The overall response rate was 46% (all partial responses), 55% and 36% for patients with mCRC and GC, respectively. Median progression-free survival for all patients, mCRC and GC patients was 9.5, 10.0 and 8.0 months, respectively. The median overall survival for all patients was 16.5, 18.0 and 15.0 months for patients with mCRC and GC, respectively. CONCLUSION: These data show excellent tolerance and efficacy of the FUFOXIRI regimen in both mCRC and GC. Therefore, FUFOXIRI is a promising backbone for future studies incorporating biologic 'targeted' agents for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancers.

Neurotoxicity upon infusion of dimethylsulfoxide-cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells in patients with and without pre-existing cerebral disease.

OBJECTIVE: Toxicity related to the infusion of dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO)-cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells (DMSO-PBSC) mainly comprises cardiovascular events. Fatal neurotoxicity has been reported in a few cases. DMSO represents the putative causative agent of such rare toxicities and elaborate strategies to replace DMSO would benefit from the identification of predisposing factors for DMSO-related toxicities. METHODS: Here, we report on DMSO-related neurotoxicity in a series of patients (n = 51) receiving DMSO-PBSC. The analyzed patient-series included eight patients with pre-existing cerebral disease, partially with a history of epileptic seizures. RESULTS: Neurotoxicity was observed in only one patient who suffered from a generalized tonic seizure upon infusion of DMSO-PBSC and for which the clinical course is reported herein. No neurotoxicity was observed in the group of patients with pre-existing neurological disease. Furthermore, no neurotoxicity was observed in patients who received particularly large volumes of DMSO. In all patients, mild non-neurological side effects occurred but besides the reported seizure no other severe adverse events were observed upon PBSC-infusion. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first report addressing the identification of predisposing factors for DMSO-related neurotoxicty. We conclude that infusion of DMSO-PBSC can be performed safely in patients with pre-existing cerebral disease despite the rare occurrence of severe neurotoxicity. Retrospective multicenter studies are warranted to identify patients who would benefit from elaborate methods of DMSO-replacement.

Chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on aggregate data.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: Randomized phase II and III clinical trials on first-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer were identified by electronic searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and Cancerlit; hand searches of relevant abstract books and reference lists; and contact to experts. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed-effect model. Overall survival, reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI, was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Analysis of chemotherapy versus best supportive care (HR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52) and combination versus single agent, mainly fluorouracil (FU) -based chemotherapy (HR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.93) showed significant overall survival benefits in favor of chemotherapy and combination chemotherapy, respectively. In addition, comparisons of FU/cisplatin-containing regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.95) and FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.91) both demonstrated a significant survival benefit for the three-drug combination. Comparing irinotecan-containing versus nonirinotecan-containing combinations (mainly FU/cisplatin) resulted in a nonsignificant survival benefit in favor of the irinotecan-containing regimens (HR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.06), but they have never been compared against a three-drug combination. CONCLUSION: Best survival results are achieved with three-drug regimens containing FU, an anthracycline, and cisplatin. Among these, regimens including FU as bolus exhibit a higher rate of toxic deaths than regimens using a continuous infusion of FU, such as epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous-infusion FU.

Successful treatment of mediastinal lymphomatoid granulomatosis with rituximab monotherapy.

Lymphomatoid granulomatosis is a rare Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-positive-B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder. Treatment options include corticosteroids, antiviral therapy, interferon-alpha and chemotherapy. However, long-term prognosis is poor and no therapeutic standard has been established yet. In a 21-year-old woman, a biopsy of mediastinal mass revealed lymphomatoid granulomatosis. Combined therapy with valganciclovir and interferon-alpha proved ineffective. In view of the CD20 expression of the tumor cells, monotherapy with rituximab was intiated. After 3 months a complete remission was achieved. Rituximab was continued for another 6 months with subsequent consolidation radiotherapy. This is the first report of an enduring complete remission (20 months) of a non-CNS lymphomatoid granulomatosis treated with rituximab.