Raltitrexed/5-fluorouracil-based combination chemotherapy regimens in anticancer therapy.

Preclinical evidence of a schedule-dependent synergism between raltitrexed and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has prompted clinical studies of this combination. We review the main preclinical and clinical results of raltitrexed/5-FU-based combination chemotherapy regimens in anticancer therapy. Promising results include: response rates of 25 and 23% with combinations of raltitrexed/5-FU/levofolinic acid (LFA) as first-line treatment and oxaliplatin/raltitrexed/5-FU/LFA as second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, respectively; and a 67% response rate in a phase I study of cisplatin/raltitrexed/5-FU/LFA as first-line treatment of advanced head and neck cancer, including a 100% response rate at the recommended dose. These combinations were well tolerated, with neutropenia as the main dose-limiting toxicity, allowing the drugs to be combined at the doses used in monotherapy. These results suggest a role for raltitrexed within combination regimens in colorectal cancer therapy, as well as other tumors such as head and neck cancer. A further potential application of raltitrexed in combination therapies is within multidisciplinary chemo-radiotherapy strategies, mainly in rectal cancer. Phase II studies are planned/ongoing to investigate these interesting possibilities.     

Docetaxel in squamous cell cancer of the head and neck

Single-agent docetaxel induces a response in 21-42% of patients with recurrent squamous cell cancer of the head and neck (SCCHN). When used in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), response rates (RRs) of between 24 and 27% have been reported. In contrast, in combination with cisplatin, docetaxel has achieved a RR of 33% in previously treated patients and 86% in a subgroup of chemotherapy-naive advanced stage patients. The docetaxel/cisplatin combination appears to be highly active. High-dose induction chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced but potentially curable SCCHN is producing promising results: following combination therapy involving docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-FU and leucovorin (TPFL), RR are high and 75% of patients are alive at 2 years. Intermediate-dose induction chemotherapy involving docetaxel is also promising: the TAX 708 trial found an excellent 93% RR in 41 evaluable patients treated with docetaxel plus cisplatin and 5-FU (TPF). The rate of pathological complete response was also high. The toxicities with TPF therapy were similar to those seen with cisplatin/5-FU regimens without docetaxel. A phase III trial of this approach is currently being conducted.     

Docetaxel: a review of its use in non-small cell lung cancer

Docetaxel, a semisynthetic member of the taxoid class of antineoplastic agents, is effective in the treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In noncomparative trials in patients with NSCLC, docetaxel 75 or 100 mg/m2 produced objective response rates of 20 to 38% and 14 to 25% as a first-line or second-line monotherapy, respectively. In Japan, docetaxel 60 mg/m2 produced objective response rates of 19 to 25% in previously untreated patients. Docetaxel 100 or 75 mg/m2 produced significantly higher response rates than either vinorelbine or ifosfamide in previously treated patients; patients treated with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 had an improved 1-year survival rate compared with those who received vinorelbine or ifosfamide. Docetaxel monotherapy in chemotherapy-naive patients produced survival rates that are similar to those reported for most platinum-containing standard combinations such as cisplatin plus vinorelbine. Combination of docetaxel with one other antineoplastic resulted in objective response rates of 20 to 54% in chemotherapy-naive patients; triple chemotherapy combinations produced responses in 51 and 60% of patients. Promising results from a few small studies and one large phase II study have also indicated a potential role for docetaxel as neoadjuvant therapy. The main dose-limiting adverse event associated with docetaxel is neutropenia, and fluid retention is common in many patients. The tolerability profile is generally acceptable in the majority of patients, although extra care has to be taken in patients with impaired liver function to minimise the risk of severe or febrile neutropenia. Conclusions. Docetaxel is generally well tolerated by patients receiving treatment for locally advanced and metastatic NSCLC, and produces response and survival rates equivalent to many current standard treatment options. Comparative studies have shown that docetaxel monotherapy provides significant survival benefits over best supportive care or treatment with vinorelbine or ifosfamide. Response and 1-year survival rates with docetaxel monotherapy are particularly encouraging in patients refractory or resistant to cisplatin or carboplatin, for whom treatment options are few. Neoadjuvant docetaxel has produced improved survival compared with local treatment alone. Combinations of docetaxel with other antineoplastic agents have produced relatively high response and 1-year survival rates; however, further comparative studies are required to confirm these benefits. In the meantime, docetaxel is a welcome addition to the options available for patients with advanced NSCLC.     

Current chemotherapies for recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer

Surgery and radiotherapy are generally not an option for recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Chemotherapy is the only possible treatment. The five major drugs active in monotherapy are methotrexate, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), cetuximab (an antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibody) and taxanes (paclitaxel or docetaxel). They allow 10-25% response with a median survival of approximately 6-8 months. Various chemotherapy doublets may achieve higher response rates, up to 45-50%, but overall survival remains unchanged. As recurrent patients are often symptomatic, better response is associated with better quality of life and the standard treatment for patients with performance status 0-1 is the combination of cisplatin and 5-FU. Recently, the triplet cisplatin-5-FU-cetuximab, which has been shown to result in an increased response rate and a significantly better median survival of 10.4 months, has become the new treatment standard.     

Oral chemotherapy in head and neck cancer

Chemotherapy plays an important role in the palliative treatment of head and neck cancer and in the neoadjuvant setting for larynx preservation. Together with concomitant radiotherapy, chemotherapy is also important for the curative and palliative therapy of unresectable head and neck cancer. Although issues relating to anatomical and pharmacological constraints exist, new orally administered drugs, as well as oral substitutes for the currently utilised intravenous drugs, would be extremely desirable in each of these situations. Of the oral fluorinated pyrimidines, tegafur/uracil (UFT) alone produced a complete response rate of 19%, and combination therapy of tegafur/uracil or tegafur with cisplatin or carboplatin has produced response rates comparable to those seen with intravenous fluorouracil (5-FU) plus cisplatin or carboplatin. An initial dose-finding study of 5-FU plus eniluracil indicates that further studies are warranted. The ribonuclease reductase inhibitor hydroxycarbamide (hydroxyurea) has been extensively studied in combination with 5-FU and radiotherapy (the FHX regimen) in patients with head and neck cancer, with high rates of local control. Improvement in locoregional and distant control rates may occur when FHX is combined with additional systemically active agents (cisplatin then paclitaxel) and hyperfractionated radiotherapy is used. Good candidate drugs for head and neck cancer include BMS-182751, an oral platinum complex, and capecitabine and S-1, other oral fluoropyrimidines. In addition, methotrexate and cyclophosphamide both have some activity in head and neck cancer and deserve further investigation.     

Clinical advances with topoisomerase I inhibitors in gastrointestinal malignancies

Phase III studies have shown irinotecan prolongs survival significantly when compared with either best supportive care or best infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy in patients with 5-FU-resistant colorectal cancer. Phase I/II studies are investigating the combination of irinotecan with 5-FU, with thymidylate synthase inhibitors, notably raltitrexed, and with the oral fluoropyrimidines. Preliminary results suggest irinotecan and raltitrexed can safely be combined in the clinic and that this combination is active. The combination of irinotecan with the oral fluoropyrimidines also has produced promising results. A phase I study of irinotecan plus 5-FU/folinic acid showed high activity in first-line metastatic disease and further trials using the doses of 80 mg/m2 irinotecan plus 2 g 5-FU weekly are recommended. The combination of irinotecan with the De Gramont 5-FU regimen is feasible and active in patients with 5-FU-resistant metastatic disease. Alternating exposure to irinotecan and 5-FU may be as active as either treatment alone, and has been associated with overall response rates (ORRs) greater than 30% and encouraging median survival. The combination of irinotecan with oxaliplatin is also feasible and levels of response rates are in the region of 50% (especially with a 2-weekly administration schedule). In patients with advanced gastric cancer (including those with pretreated disease) ORRs of around 50% have been reported following administration of either cisplatin plus irinotecan or cisplatin plus docetaxel.     

阿米福汀对头颈部鳞癌放、化疗疗效和血液毒性的临床观察

目的:观察阿米福汀对超分割放疗联合顺铂、多西紫杉醇和5-氟尿嘧啶治疗头颈部鳞癌的近期疗效和血液毒性。方法:37例头颈部鳞癌患者,随机分为2组,对照组19例予以超分割放疗联合顺铂、多西紫杉醇和5-氟尿嘧啶方案,保护组18例在对照组基础上加用阿米福汀,观察2组近期疗效、急慢性放射损伤及血液毒性结果。结果:保护组与对照组近期疗效有效率分别为44%、39%(P=0·683),前者急慢性放射损伤明显更轻,白细胞最低值更高,外周血毒性Ⅱ级以上毒性发生率更低。结论:阿米福汀对超分割放疗联合化疗治疗头颈部鳞癌的近期疗效无明显影响,但能减轻放疗引起的局部急慢性放射损伤,并对骨髓有一定保护作用。     

Docetaxel: an update of its use in advanced breast cancer

Docetaxel, a semisynthetic member of the taxoid class of antineoplastic agents, is effective in the treatment of patients with advanced (locally advanced or metastatic) breast cancer. Reported objective response rates for docetaxel 100 mg/m2 ranged from 54 to 69% and 53 to 82% as first-line monotherapy or combination therapy, respectively. Objective response rates of 23 to 65% and 30 to 81% have been reported for docetaxel as second-line monotherapy or combination therapy, respectively. In Japanese studies, second-line docetaxel 60 mg/m2 produced objective response rates of 42 to 55%. At the recommended dose of 100 mg/m2 given as a 1-hour intravenous (i.v.) infusion every 3 weeks, docetaxel had significantly greater efficacy than doxorubicin, mitomycin plus vinblastine and methotrexate plus fluorouracil, and similar efficacy to fluorouracil plus vinorelbine in pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer. In chemotherapy-naive patients, first-line combined therapy with docetaxel and doxorubicin had significantly greater efficacy than doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide. Promising results have been achieved in phase I/II trials of a weekly regimen of docetaxel (generally 30 to 45 mg/m2). Preliminary data indicate a potential role for docetaxel in the neoadjuvant therapy of early breast cancer. The major dose-limiting adverse event associated with docetaxel is neutropenia. Although other adverse events are common, the tolerability profile of docetaxel is generally acceptable in the majority of patients, particularly in comparison with other antineoplastic regimens. Conclusions: Although no single standard regimen has been identified as optimal for the treatment of advanced breast cancer, phase III trials have shown that docetaxel has improved efficacy over doxorubicin alone (considered one of the current gold standards), methotrexate/fluorouracil and mitomycin/vinblastine in second-line therapy. In combination with doxorubicin, docetaxel has demonstrated better efficacy than doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide in first-line therapy. These results provide a basis for therapy choice in advanced breast cancer. Clinical trials comparing docetaxel monotherapy versus paclitaxel monotherapy and versus docetaxel combination therapy are warranted. The role of docetaxel in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment of early breast cancer is being evaluated.     

Docetaxel in advanced gastric cancer

Standard chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer remains undefined. Two of the most popular regimens-ECF [epirubicin-cisplatin-5-fluorouracil (5-FU)] and PELF (cisplatin-epirubicin-5-FU-leucovorin)-have been shown to be active, but each has limitations. Phase II trials show that single-agent docetaxel is an active agent in advanced gastric cancer, producing overall response rates (ORRs) of 17.5-24%. Docetaxel has also been shown to lack cross-resistance with other drugs in gastric cancer, and is likely to be at least additive to cisplatin and 5-FU. Phase II results of docetaxel combinations in advanced gastric cancer are encouraging. Docetaxel-cisplatin has yielded response rates similar to those achieved by ECF and PELF. Adding 5-FU to docetaxel-cisplatin has achieved an ORR of 52 versus 45% for docetaxel-cisplatin in a randomized phase II trial. Docetaxel-based regimens demonstrate acceptable tolerability despite predictable hematotoxicity. Neutropenia, the major toxicity, is manageable by dose modification or by using prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor. Several phase III trials are now ongoing, including a large-scale trial of docetaxel-cisplatin-5-FU versus cisplatin-5-FU. Results will show whether docetaxel improves overall response and survival, as suggested in the phase II setting.     

New chemotherapy strategies for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer chemotherapy has entered a new era with the introduction of new drugs such as S-1, irinotecan (CPT-11), paclitaxel and docetaxel. Recent phase III studies have indicated that S-1 monotherapy, a remnant reference arm from a previous study, was not inferior to 5-FU alone, and that the combination of S-1 with cisplatin and CPT-11 showed higher efficacy than S-1 alone with tolerable side-effects for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer. In the adjuvant setting, S-1 monotherapy prolonged survival following surgery compared with surgery alone after curative extended (D2) lymph-node dissection for stage II/III gastric cancer. However, some issues remain, such as the sequence of several duplet chemotherapies, treatment following cases of S-1 failure, the relative efficacy of doublet and triplet therapies, and the impact of molecular-targeting.     

Docetaxel (Taxotere) - an update

The development of docetaxel, a member of the taxoid family, has been recent and rapid. Phase I studies recommend that a dose of 100 mg/m(2) be administered every three weeks in a 1-h infusion. These studies have also demonstrated that the major dose-limiting toxicity is neutropenia. Major clinical research projects are now being carried out for breast cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and gastric cancer. In advanced and metastatic NSCLC, Phase II studies have shown a response rate of 30 - 40%, and responses have been obtained in cis-platinum failures. In advanced and metastatic breast cancer, first-line treatment has yielded a response rate of 54 - 68%, and the rate for second-line response is only slightly lower, indicating an absence of cross-resistance. Phase II combination studies with docetaxel are in progress, and preliminary results are promising. The first Phase III study demonstrated preliminary response rates significantly higher than seen with doxorubicin, although survival data have not yet been published. Fewer results are available from SCCHN studies, but response rates have been encouraging (around 40%). Although further long-term data are needed to determine the precise role of docetaxel in combination with other drugs, it is apparent that this promising drug shows one of the best response rates for monotherapy in NSCLC and breast cancer.     

多西紫杉醇加顺铂及氟尿嘧啶化疗辅助治疗进展期胃癌

目的研究多西紫杉醇加顺铂及氟尿嘧啶(5-FU)/亚叶酸钙方案联合新辅助化疗治疗局部进展期胃癌,并评价此方案的疗效和毒副作用。方法2003-10～2004-10收治的18例局部进展期胃癌患者加入研究。入组患者术前接受的新辅助化疗方案为:多西紫杉醇75mg/m2,第1天静脉滴注;顺铂30mg/m2,第1～3天静脉滴注;5-FU500mg/m2,第1～5天静脉滴注;亚叶酸钙100mg于5-FU前30min静脉冲入;每3周为1周期,共3个周期。观察新辅助化疗后肿瘤原发病灶的缓解情况、手术后病理缓解情况以及新辅助化疗的毒副反应。结果新辅助化疗后所有患者进行了根治性手术治疗,有效10例,其中完全缓解3例,部分缓解7例;疾病稳定5例,疾病进展3例。术后病理检查2例病理水平达到完全缓解。不良反应主要为白细胞减少、恶心、脱发、呕吐及黏膜炎,其中有4例患者发生了Ⅲ～Ⅳ级的白细胞减少,但未有因此而发生严重感染和病死者。结论多西紫杉醇加顺铂及5-FU/亚叶酸钙的化疗方案在进展期胃癌的治疗中近期疗效显著,患者耐受性良好。     

Role of second-line systemic treatment post-docetaxel in metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer- current strategies and future directions

Treatment of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after progression on docetaxel chemotherapy is a challenging clinical scenario with limited availability of treatment options. Re-treatment with docetaxel, either as monotherapy or in combination with other cytotoxics or targeted agents has shown durable responses. However, most docetaxel re-treatment studies have been either retrospective or early phase non-randomised studies which have not formally assessed Quality of life or survival gain with re-treatment. Despite limited evidence for efficacy of mitoxantrone in the second-line, it continues to remain widely used, largely due to lack of available suitable alternatives. Cabazitaxel in combination with prednisolone is the only chemotherapy to have shown a significant survival benefit and receive approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for patients with mCRPC previously treated with a docetaxel-based regimen. Abiraterone acetate has recently demonstrated a significant improvement in survival when compared to placebo in patients with docetaxel-treated mCRPC. This review aims to summarize the current evidence and discuss future strategies for treatment of mCRPC patients following failure of docetaxel chemotherapy.     

Capecitabine: a review of its pharmacology and therapeutic efficacy in the management of advanced breast cancer

Capecitabine is an orally administered prodrug of fluorouracil which is indicated in the US and Europe, in combination with docetaxel, for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer failing anthracycline therapy, and as monotherapy for metastatic breast cancer resistant to paclitaxel and anthracycline therapy (US) or failing intensive chemotherapy (Europe). Capecitabine is also approved for use in metastatic colorectal cancer. Capecitabine is metabolically activated preferentially at the tumour site, and shows antineoplastic activity and synergy with other cytotoxic agents including cyclophosphamide or docetaxel in animal models. Bioavailability after oral administration is close to 100%. In patients with pretreated advanced breast cancer, capecitabine is effective as monotherapy and also in combination with other agents. Combination therapy with capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily for 2 weeks of every 3-week cycle plus intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day one of each cycle was superior to intravenous monotherapy with docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day one of each cycle. Capecitabine plus docetaxel significantly reduced the risks of disease progression and death by 35% (p = 0.0001) and 23% (p < 0.05), respectively, and significantly increased median survival (p < 0.05) and objective response rates (p < 0.01). Efficacy has also been demonstrated with capecitabine monotherapy and combination therapy in previously untreated patients in preliminary trials. The most common adverse effects occurring in patients receiving capecitabine monotherapy include lymphopenia, anaemia, diarrhoea, hand-and-foot syndrome, nausea, fatigue, hyperbilirubinaemia, dermatitis and vomiting (all >25% incidence). While gastrointestinal events and hand-and-foot syndrome occurred more often with capecitabine than with paclitaxel or a regimen of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF), neutropenic fever, arthralgia, pyrexia and myalgia were more common with paclitaxel, and nausea, stomatitis, alopecia and asthenia were more common with CMF. The incidence of adverse effects and hospitalisation was similar in patients receiving capecitabine plus docetaxel and those receiving docetaxel monotherapy. In conclusion, capecitabine, an oral prodrug of fluorouracil which is activated preferentially at the tumour site, is an effective and convenient addition to the intravenous polychemotherapeutic treatment of advanced breast cancer in pretreated patients, and also has potential as a component of first-line combination regimens. Combined capecitabine plus docetaxel therapy resulted in similar rates of treatment-related adverse effects and hospitalisation to those seen with docetaxel monotherapy. Capecitabine is also effective as monotherapy in pretreated patients and phase II data for capecitabine as first-line monotherapy are also promising. While gastrointestinal effects and hand-and-foot syndrome occur often with capecitabine, the tolerability profile was comparatively favourable for other adverse effects (notably, neutropenia and alopecia).     

Induction chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, fluorouracil and l-leucovorin for locally advanced head and neck cancers: a modified regimen for Japanese patients

Combination chemotherapy with docetaxel (T), cisplatin (P), fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin has been reported to have major activity against squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) administered as a 4-day (TPFL4) or 5-day (TPFL5) regimen. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a modified TPFL regimen (m-TPFL) for locally advanced SCCHN, consisting of a modified dosage with docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-FU and l-leucovorin (l-LV) designed for Japanese patients. Organ preservation of the primary tumor site was also assessed. Thirty-four Japanese patients with locally advanced SCCHN were eligible. Docetaxel was administered as a 1-h i.v. infusion at 48 mg/m2 on day 1; cisplatin, 24 mg/m2/day; 5-FU, 560 mg/m2/day and l-LV, 125 mg/body/day were delivered on days 1-4 by continuous i.v. infusion. This regimen was administered every 28 days. Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) after induction chemotherapy underwent radiation therapy alone. Ninety-one cycles were administered. The main hematological toxicity was neutropenia, classified as grade III or IV in 18.7% of cycles. The most common non-hematologic toxicities included anorexia, stomatitis and alopecia. The clinical overall response rate to m-TPFL was 88.2%, with 58.8% CRs and 29.4% partial responses. After definitive locoregional therapy, 25 of 34 patients were disease-free with preserved primary tumor site anatomy. Overall and progression-free survival rates at the 2-year follow-up are 92.8 and 75.3%, respectively. Our m-TPFL regimen designed for Japanese patients yielded excellent response rates with an acceptable toxicity profile in good-performance-status patients.     

Docetaxel: new indication. First-line treatment of non small-cell lung cancer: no advance

(1) The reference first-line drug therapy for patients with non-operable non small-cell lung cancer is a combination of two cytotoxic agents, one of which is a platinum compound. The survival benefit is no more than a few months. (2) The docetaxel + cisplatin combination has now been authorised in France for first-line treatment of locally advanced and metastatic non small-cell lung cancer. Evaluation data includes the results of three comparative trials. (3) In one trial the docetaxel + cisplatin combination was no more effective than the docetaxel + carboplatin combination or the vinorelbine + cisplatin combination on either the survival time (9.4 to 11.3 months) or on other endpoints. (4) Similar results were obtained in a trial versus paclitaxel + cisplatin and gemcitabine + cisplatin (median survival time 8 months in each group). (5) In a trial versus vindesine + cisplatin, the median survival time was longer with docetaxel + cisplatin (11.3 versus 9.6 months). (6) It is difficult to analyse adverse effects in these unblinded trials. Globally, the docetaxel + cisplatin combination did not appear to be safer than the comparator combinations, particularly with regard to serious events. (7) Docetaxel, like paclitaxel, is infused intravenously every three weeks. The comparator combinations tested in the three clinical trials are infused once a week. (8) In practice, for first-line treatment of inoperable non small-cell lung cancer, the docetaxel + cisplatin combination is simply one of several options, and offers no advantages in terms of survival or adverse effects.     

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: across the years for a standard of care

Chemotherapy is of crucial importance in advanced gastric cancer patients, in order to obtain palliation of symptoms and improve survival. The most extensively studied drugs as single agents are 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, doxorubicin, epirubicin, mitomycin C and etoposide. Newer chemotherapeutic agents include the taxanes (docetaxel and paclitaxel), oral fluoropyrimidines (capecitabine and S-1), oxaliplatin and irinotecan. Randomised trials comparing monotherapy with combination regimens have consistently shown increased response rates in favour of combination regimens, whereas only marginally improved survival rates were usually found. Several combination therapies have been developed and have been examined in Phase III trials. However, in most cases, they have failed to demonstrate a survival advantage over the reference arm. There is no internationally accepted standard of care, and uncertainty remains regarding the choice of the optimal chemotherapy regimen. The objective of this article is to review the present literature available on major Phase II - III clinical trials, in which patients suffering from advanced gastric cancer were treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy.     

Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: across the years for a standard of care

Chemotherapy is of crucial importance in advanced gastric cancer patients, in order to obtain palliation of symptoms and improve survival. The most extensively studied drugs as single agents are 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, doxorubicin, epirubicin, mitomycin C and etoposide. Newer chemotherapeutic agents include the taxanes (docetaxel and paclitaxel), oral fluoropyrimidines (capecitabine and S-1), oxaliplatin and irinotecan. Randomised trials comparing monotherapy with combination regimens have consistently shown increased response rates in favour of combination regimens, whereas only marginally improved survival rates were usually found. Several combination therapies have been developed and have been examined in Phase III trials. However, in most cases, they have failed to demonstrate a survival advantage over the reference arm. There is no internationally accepted standard of care, and uncertainty remains regarding the choice of the optimal chemotherapy regimen. The objective of this article is to review the present literature available on major Phase II – III clinical trials, in which patients suffering from advanced gastric cancer were treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy.     

The current status of docetaxel for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Docetaxel is an active single agent in both first- and second-line therapy of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Randomized trials versus best supportive care have documented an improvement in overall survival for docetaxel therapy in both settings. Docetaxel also produced a significant 1-year survival rate improvement when compared with vinorelbine or ifosfamide as second-line therapy. Docetaxel has been extensively investigated in phase I/II studies in combination with cisplatin, carboplatin, irinotecan and gemcitabine. Substantial activity has been demonstrated. In a randomized phase II trial comparing docetaxel plus cisplatin with docetaxel plus gemcitabine, the efficacy of the two regimens was almost identical (response rates 32 and 34%; 1-year survival rates 42 and 38%). However, the combination of docetaxel with gemcitabine was associated with significantly less grade III/IV neutropenia, diarrhea and nausea/vomiting. Three drug regimens combining docetaxel with, for example, gemcitabine and carboplatin or with ifosfamide and cisplatin, are producing very high response rates in phase II trials. Whether three-drug combinations including docetaxel will result in an improved outcome for patients with advanced NSCLC remains to be determined.     

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics in gastric cancer chemotherapy

Despite extensive efforts, treatment of gastric cancer by chemotherapy, the globally accepted standard, is yet undetermined, and uncertainty remains regarding the optimal regimen. Recent introduction of active “new generation agents” offers hope for improving patient outcomes. Current chemotherapeutic trials provided several regimens that may become a possible standard treatment, including docetaxel/cisplatin/5-FU (TCF) and cisplatin/S-1 for advanced and metastatic cancer and S-1 monotherapy in the adjuvant setting. Along with the development of novel active regimens, individual optimization of cancer chemotherapy has been attempted in order to reduce toxicity and enhance tumor response. Unlike the rare and limited contribution of pharmacokinetic studies, pharmacogenomic studies are increasing the potential to realize the therapeutics against gastric cancer. Despite the limited data, pharmacogenomics in gastric cancer have provided a number of putative biomarkers for the prediction of tumor response to chemotherapies and of toxicity.