Optimal indications for second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer
Departments of Gastroenterology, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan. Anti-cancer drugs
(Impact Factor: 1.78).
04/2012; 23(4):465-70. DOI: 10.1097/CAD.0b013e3283504442
As it remains uncertain whether patients with advanced gastric cancer who progress after first-line chemotherapy should receive second-line chemotherapy, we attempted to identify the optimal indications for second-line chemotherapy. In this retrospective study, 101 patients were included in univariate and multivariate analyses to identify clinicopathological variables independently associated with longer survival postprogression (SPP), defined as the time from recognition of disease progression on first-line chemotherapy to death from any cause or last follow-up. The median SPP was 340 days. On multivariate analysis, performance status 2 [hazard ratio (HR), 14.234; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.766-73.258], serum albumin level less than 3.5 g/dl (HR, 2.088; 95% CI, 1.047-4.060) at initiation of second-line chemotherapy, and time to progression less than 170 days on first-line chemotherapy (HR, 2.497; 95% CI, 1.227-5.083) were identified as independent prognostic factors associated with shorter SPP. The median SPP was 496, 375, and 232 days in patients with 0, 1, and 2 of these 3 negative prognostic factors, respectively (P=0.0002). The present study suggests that second-line chemotherapy would not be beneficial in patients with two or more of the following three negative prognostic factors: performance status 2, serum albumin less than 3.5 g/dl at initiation of second-line chemotherapy and time to progression less than 170 days on first-line chemotherapy.
Available from: PubMed Central
- "Since PS is a well-known prognostic factor for AGC , decreased survival rates would be expected in patients with a poorer PS. Our data supported this hypothesis, showing that PS was independently associated with patients' survival in multivariate analysis. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Little is known about outcomes in the use of third-line chemotherapy in cases of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The primary aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate outcomes of docetaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with AGC that progressed after both oxaliplatin-based and irinotecan-based regimens.
Eligible patients were those with AGC who had previous chemotherapy including fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin as well as fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan and who received subsequent docetaxel-based chemotherapy. Thirty-five patients were retrospectively recruited from 5 medical centers in Korea. Patients received either weekly or 3 weekly with docetaxel +/- cisplatin.
Thirty-one out of 35 patients were evaluated for treatment response. A total of 94 cycles of chemotherapy (median, 2; range, 1 to 7) were administered. The overall response rate was 14.3%, and the disease control rate was 45.7%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.7 months). The median overall survival (OS) was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.4 months). PFS and OS were significantly prolonged in patients of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, with performance status of 0 or 1 in multivariate analysis (PFS: hazard ratio[HR], 0.411; 95% CI, 0.195 to 0.868; p=0.020 and OS: HR, 0.390; 95% CI, 0.184 to 0.826; p=0.014, respectively). Four of the 35 patients enrolled in the study died due to infection associated with neutropenia.
Our findings suggest that salvage docetaxel-based chemotherapy is a feasible treatment option for AGC patients with good performance status (PS), whereas chemotherapy for patients with poor PS (PS≤2) should be undertaken with caution for those who previously failed oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based regimens.
Cancer Research and Treatment 12/2012; 44(4):235-41. DOI:10.4143/crt.2012.44.4.235 · 3.32 Impact Factor
Available from: Matilde Saggese
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Gastric cancer and cancer of the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) are the 4th most common cancer diagnoses worldwide with regional differences in incidence rates. The treatment of gastric and GOJ cancers is complex and requires multimodality treatment including chemotherapy treatment, surgery, and radiotherapy. During the past decade considerable improvements were achieved by advanced surgical techniques, tailored chemotherapies/radiotherapy and technical innovations in clinical diagnostics. In patients with advanced or metastatic gastric/GOJ cancer systemic chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine/platinum-based regimens (+/-human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 antibody) is the mainstay of treatment. Despite these improvements, the clinical outcome for patients with advanced or metastatic disease is generally poor with 5-year survival rates ranging between 5%-15%. These poor survival rates may to some extent be related that standard therapies beyond first-line therapies have never been defined. Considering that this patient population is often not fit enough to receive further treatments there is an increasing body of evidence from phase-2 studies that in fact second-line therapies may have a positive impact in terms of overall survival. Moreover two recently published phase-3 studies support the use of second-line chemotherapy. A South Korean study compared either, irinotecan or docetaxel with best supportive care and a German study compared irinotecan with best supportive care-both studies met their primary endpoint overall survival. In this "Field of Vision" article, we review these recently published phase-3 studies and put them into the context of clinical prognostic factors helping to guide treatment decisions in patients who most likely benefit.
World Journal of Gastroenterology 11/2012; 18(44):6376-8. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v18.i44.6376 · 2.37 Impact Factor
European journal of radiology 05/2013; 82(9). DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.04.002 · 2.37 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.