Comparison of safety and efficacy of S-1 monotherapy and S-1 plus cisplatin therapy in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer

Background

Although S-1 plus cisplatin (SP) therapy is recognized as the standard treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) in Japan, its safety and efficacy in elderly patients have not been investigated sufficiently.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 58 patients with AGC selected from 82 consecutive patients who were ≥70 years old and were treated with SP or S-1 monotherapy as the first-line therapy. In SP, S-1 (40 mg/m², bid) was administered for 3 weeks and cisplatin (60 mg/m²) on day 8, every 5 weeks. In S-1 monotherapy, S-1 (40 mg/m², bid) was administered for 4 weeks, every 6 weeks.

Results

SP and S-1 was administered in 21 and 37 patients, respectively. There were some differences in patient characteristics between the treatment groups, such as histological type (P = 0.16); the presence of liver metastasis (P = 0.07); and the presence of peritoneal metastasis (P = 0.02). The incidences of grade 3/4 hematological toxicities were 57% (12/21) in the SP and 35% (13/37) in the S-1 group (P = 0.17). Those of non-hematological toxicities were 14% (3/21) and 14% (5/37) for anorexia, 10% (2/21) and 14% (5/37) for fatigue, and 5% (1/21) and 5% (2/37) for nausea in the SP and S-1 groups, respectively. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival in the SP and S-1 groups were 5.0 and 5.2 months, and 14.4 and 10.9 months, respectively.

Conclusion

SP and S-1 therapy were both feasible in elderly patients, though there is the risk of a high incidence of hematological toxicities.     

Phase I/II and pharmacokinetic study of S-1 and oxaliplatin in previously untreated advanced gastric cancer

Background

We aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of S-1 when given with oxaliplatin, to evaluate S-1 pharmacokinetics, and to determine the efficacy and safety of this regimen as a first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods

Oxaliplatin was fixed at a dose of 130 mg/m² on day 1 (D1). S-1 was administered from D1 to D14 of a 3-week cycle, and escalated by 10 mg/m² per day from 70 mg/m² per day up to 100 mg/m² per day. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed following a single dose of S-1 on D-5 and D1 of the first cycle.

Results

In phase I (n = 18), MTD was not defined. In phase II (n = 47) with the planned maximum dose, partial response was achieved in 26 patients (55.3%) and stable disease in 14 patients (29.8%). The median time to progression was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.0–9.2 months) and the median overall survival was 12.5 months (95% CI 9.2–15.9 months). Frequent grade 3/4 toxicities included thrombocytopenia (39%), neutropenia (28%), anemia (17%), and leukopenia (13%). There was one grade 5 febrile neutropenia during the first cycle.

Conclusions

The pharmacokinetics of S-1 was not influenced by oxaliplatin. S-1/Oxaliplatin combination therapy is highly active against AGC and has a favorable toxicity profile.     

Randomized phase II study comparing paclitaxel with S-1 vs. S-1 as first-line treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer

Purpose

This randomized phase II study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel with S-1 (PS) vs. S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods

Eighty-two (82) patients were 1:1 randomly assigned to oral S-1 (daily for 2 weeks, every 4 weeks’ cycle) or S-1 (daily for 2 weeks, every 4 weeks’ cycle) plus paclitaxel (on day 1, 8 and 15 of a 4 weeks’ cycle). S-1 was orally administered with a fixed quantity according to body surface area (BSA), while paclitaxel was given 60 mg/m² i.v. daily through an implanted catheter. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall responsible rates and safety.

Results

The median OS with PS versus S-1 monotherapy was 14.0 versus 11.0 months (P = 0.02), survival at 12 months was 61.0 % in the PS group and 46.3 % in the S-1 group. Median PFS was also significantly longer in the PS group (6.0 months) than in the S-1 group (4.0 months). The overall response rate was determined in 82 evaluable patients, and was significantly higher (P = 0.04) with PS (19 patients, 46.3 %) than with S-1 monotherapy (10 patients, 24.4 %). PS was well tolerated with no treatment-related deaths, all were grade 3–4 gastrointestinal toxicities, including anorexia, nausea, and diarrhea developed in less than 10 % of the patients.

Conclusions

Combination chemotherapy of paclitaxel with S-1 is well tolerated and active in AGC patients. Further investigation with comparative trials is needed for confirmation.     

A phase II study of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy in potentially resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

Purpose

Adjuvant chemotherapy trial of TS-1 for gastric cancer study demonstrated that postoperative S-1 chemotherapy for 1 year improved overall survival of locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients. The goals of this study were to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and S-1 (DOS) chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy.

Methods

In this single-center, open-label, phase II study, patients with potentially resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were eligible. For neoadjuvant chemotherapy, docetaxel 50 mg/m² on day (D) 1, oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² on D1, and S-1 40 mg/m² bid orally on D1–14 were administrated every 3 weeks for three cycles. After DOS chemotherapy, gastrectomy was performed, and then, adjuvant S-1 40 mg/m² bid was given on D1–28 every 6 weeks for 1 year. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who did not experience grade 3 or 4 toxicities (except grade 3 neutropenia) and R0 resection rates.

Results

A total of 41 patients were enrolled. All patients completed three planned cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy without disease progression. Eighteen patients (43.9 %) did not experience any grade 3–4 toxicity (except grade 3 neutropenia) during the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All patients underwent surgery, and R0 resection was achieved in 40 patients (97.6 %).

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant DOS chemotherapy could be performed safely with a high R0 resection rate in LAGC patients. A phase III trial is currently underway.     

A phase II trial of capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) for patients with advanced gastric cancer with early relapse after S-1 adjuvant therapy: XParTS-I trial

Backgrounds

In Japan, standard regimens for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) include S-1 chemotherapy. The standard treatment for early relapse after adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine alone is platinum-based chemotherapy, while the standard treatment for early relapse after adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine plus platinum is second-line chemotherapy. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) treatment for AGC patients who relapse within 6 months after S-1-based therapy, we conducted a multicenter phase II trial (NCT01412294).

Methods

HER2-negative gastric cancer patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy including S-1 for more than 12 weeks and relapsed within 6 months were treated with capecitabine 1000 mg/m² bid for 14 days plus cisplatin 80 mg/m² on day 1 of a 3-week cycle. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were OS, time to treatment failure, overall response rate (ORR) and safety.

Results

Forty patients (median age 64) were enrolled; of those, 37 (92.5%) received adjuvant S-1 monotherapy. Median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI 3.6–5.1), which was longer than the 2-month protocol-specified threshold (p < 0.001). Median OS was 13.7 months (95% CI 9.0–17.7) and ORR was 8/30 (26.7%) (95% CI 14.2–44.4). Most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were neutropenia (23%), anemia (18%), elevated serum creatinine (18%), fatigue (13%), diarrhea (7.5%), and anorexia (7.5%).

Conclusions

XP was safe and effective in patients with early relapse after S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for curatively resected gastric cancers. XP may be a good option for the treatment of patients after early failure after adjuvant S-1.

Trial registration

NCT01412294.

     

A randomized phase II study comparing S-1 plus weekly split-dose cisplatin with S-1 plus standard-dose cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

Background

S-1 plus weekly split-dose cisplatin demonstrated promising results in previous phase I and II studies for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients.

Methods

In this randomized phase II study, the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus weekly split-dose cisplatin (SWP, S-1 daily oral dose of 80–120 mg according to body surface area on days 1–14, and cisplatin 20 mg/m² i.v. on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) were compared with those of S-1 plus standard-dose cisplatin (SP) as first-line chemotherapy for AGC patients. The primary endpoint was 1-year survival rate.

Results

Patients were randomized into two groups: 18 in the SWP arm and 19 in the SP arm. This trial was terminated early because of low patient enrollment. The 1-year survival rate was 61 % [95 % confidence interval (CI), 36–86 %] and 53 % (95 % CI, 30–75 %) in the SWP and SP arms, respectively. However, the median survival time was 12.3 months (9.9–14.6 months) and 15.7 months (4.0–27.4 months), respectively (P = 0.064). Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the SWP arm than in the SP arm (P = 0.047). Toxicity tended to be milder in the SWP arm than in the SP arm. For approximately 40 % of patients in the SWP arm, cisplatin was omitted on day 8 and treatment delayed because of prolonged myelosuppression.

Conclusions

No clear benefits of adding cisplatin to S-1 in the SWP arm were demonstrated in this study. At this point, split-dose cisplatin combined with S-1 cannot be recommended for use in clinical practice.     

Preoperative S-1 and docetaxel combination chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer

Purpose

The combination of docetaxel and S-1 (DS) therapy is effective in patients with unrespectable gastric cancer and is expected to be a regimen in neoadjuvant setting for advanced gastric cancer. This study was held to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DS followed by surgery.

Methods

Patients with resectable gastric cancer received 2 courses of docetaxel 40 mg/m² on days 1, 15 and S-1 40 mg/m² bid orally on days 1–7, 15–21 every 4 weeks, followed by standard radical gastrectomy. Primary end point was the pathological response rate: rate of tumors in which one-third or more parts were affected.

Results

Fourteen patients were enrolled. Thirteen (92.8 %) patients completed two courses of chemotherapy. Grade 3 adverse events were neutropenia in 3 (21.4 %) patients, anemia in 1 (6.2 %) patient and diarrhea in 1 (6.2 %) patient. There were no grade 4 adverse event and febrile neutropenia. All patients underwent R0 resection, and pathological response was found in 50.0 % of patients. There were no major surgical complications and no treatment-related mortality.

Conclusions

The neoadjuvant chemotherapy with DS was effective for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer with manageable toxicities. Further study to confirm the usefulness of this regimen is needed.     

Phase I study of 3-weekly docetaxel, capecitabine and oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer

Purpose

Adding docetaxel to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (DCF) significantly improved clinical efficacy in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). To further improve the efficacy and tolerability, we substituted oxaliplatin for cisplatin and capecitabine for 5-FU in the DCF regimen and performed a phase I study to determine the recommended dose (RD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of docetaxel, capecitabine and oxaliplatin (DXO) combination in patients with AGC.

Materials and methods

Previously untreated patients with histologically proven metastatic AGC and ECOG performance status 0–2 were enrolled. Docetaxel and oxaliplatin were administered i.v. on day 1. Capecitabine was administered orally bid on days 1–14. Each cycle was repeated every 3 weeks. DLTs were evaluated during the first two cycles of treatment.

Results

Twenty-one patients were enrolled: 15 patients in dose-escalation phase and 6 patients in the extension at the RD. Median age was 50 years (range 21–65 years). At dose level 3 (60 mg/m² docetaxel, 1,000 mg/m² capecitabine, 100 mg/m² oxaliplatin), 1 diarrhea (DLT) was found among 6 patients while at dose level 4 (60 mg/m² docetaxel, 800 mg/m² capecitabine, 130 mg/m² oxaliplatin), 2 DLTs (febrile neutropenia and diarrhea) were observed among 3 patients. Therefore, the dose level 3 was determined as RD. DLTs include grade 3 diarrhea and febrile neutropenia. Cumulative (all cycles) grade 3/4 toxicity included neutropenia (75%), leucopenia (50%), febrile neutropenia (25%), diarrhea (17%), and neuropathy (17%). Of 14 patients with measurable lesions, 11 achieved partial response and 3 showed stable disease.

Conclusion

The RD of the DXO regimen in patients with AGC is capecitabine 1,000 mg/m² twice daily on days 1–14, in combination with decetaxel 60 mg/m² (day 1) and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² (day 1) repeated every 3 weeks. The DXO regimen seems to have promising activity and offers an easy alternative to DCF. The toxicities appear to be still substantial, but manageable.     

A phase IB dose-finding trial of liposomal doxorubicin in combination with capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer

Purpose

Anthracyclines and fluoropyrimidines are very active in breast cancer, while liposomal doxorubicin has low cardiotoxicity. We conducted a dose-finding study of the combination of liposomal doxorubicin and capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer.

Patients and methods

Patients received liposomal doxorubicin 60 mg/m² on day 1 plus capecitabine 825 mg/m² bid (level 0) or 1,000 mg/m² bid (level 1) on days 1–14 of each 21-day cycle to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and cardiac safety.

Results

Nine patients were enrolled and a total of 52 courses were delivered (median 6 cycles per patient [range 4–7]). Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 15% of cycles, with one episode of febrile neutropenia; most nonhematological toxicities were mild or moderate. No formal MTD was established, and the study was closed because two cardiac events were observed at dose level 1 and another at dose level 0 in patients pretreated with epirubicin ≥ 560 mg/m².

Conclusions

The recommended dose for phase II studies is liposomal doxorubicin 60 mg/m² on day 1 plus capecitabine 825 mg/m²/bid on days 1–14 of each 21-day cycle. Despite the lower cardiotoxicity of liposomal doxorubicin, the risk of cardiac damage persists in anthracycline-pretreated individuals and mandates close cardiac monitoring and careful evaluation of the overall cumulative dose.     

A phase I trial of S-1 with concurrent radiotherapy in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

Background

The purpose of this phase I trial of S-1 chemotherapy in combination with pelvic radiotherapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended dose (RD), and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of S-1.

Methods

We enrolled 9 patients between April 2005 and March 2009. Radiotherapy (total dose, 60 Gy in 30 fractions) was given to the gross local recurrent tumor and pelvic nodal metastases using three-dimensional radiotherapy planning. We administered oral S-1 twice a day on days 1–14 and 22–35 during radiotherapy. The dose of S-1 was initially 60 mg/m²/day and was increased to determine the MTD and RD for this regimen.

Results

DLT appeared at dose level 2 (70 mg/m²/day) in 2 patients, who experienced grade 3 enterocolitis and consequently required suspension of S-1 administration for longer than 2 weeks. Hematological toxicity was mild and reversible. At the initial evaluation, complete regression and partial regression were seen in 1 patient (11%) and 2 patients (22%), respectively.

Conclusion

This phase I trial of S-1 chemotherapy with pelvic radiotherapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer revealed that the MTD for S-1 was 70 mg/m²/day and the RD was 60 mg/m²/day.     

Three-week combination chemotherapy with S-1 and cisplatin as first-line treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective study with 159 patients

Background

Doses and schedules of the combination of S-1 and cisplatin for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) have not been standardized. We therefore evaluated the efficacy and feasibility of a 3-week schedule of S-1 and cisplatin in patients with AGC, as well as assessing factors prognostic of patient outcomes.

Methods

A total of 159 patients with AGC were treated with S-1 (40?mg/m² bid on days?1–14) and cisplatin (60?mg/m² IV on day?1) between January 2004 and December 2008.

Results

Median follow-up duration was 20.0?months (range, 11.4–48.5?months), during which time 129 patients (81.1%) died. Patients received a median 6 cycles of chemotherapy (range, 1–19 cycles). Among the 59 patients with measurable disease, 1 achieved a complete response (1.7%) and 24 (40.7%) had partial responses, giving an overall response rate of 42.4% (95% CI, 23.0–61.8%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8?months (95% CI, 4.8–6.9?months), and the median overall survival (OS) was 11.3?months (95% CI, 9.6–13.0?months). Multivariate analysis showed that initial metastasis, bone metastasis, and liver metastasis were independent prognostic factors for reduced PFS, whereas poor performance status, initial metastasis, and bone metastasis were prognostic for reduced OS. Application of a previous prognostic model showed that observed PFS and OS survival curves for patients in various risk groups differed significantly (P?Conclusions A 3-week regimen of S-1 plus cisplatin was active and well tolerated as first-line treatment in patients with AGC. Disease status and bone metastasis were the most important prognostic factors.     

Feasibility study of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer

Background

We evaluated the safety, efficacy, and compliance of 1-year treatment with S-1 in patients with stage II/III resectable colorectal cancer.

Methods

S-1 was administered orally in two divided doses daily. The dose was assigned according to body surface area (BSA) as follows: BSA <1.25 m², 80 mg/day; BSA ≥1.25 to <1.5 m², 100 mg/day; and BSA ≥1.5 m², 120 mg/day. S-1 was given for 28 consecutive days, followed by a 14-day rest. The study objects were the rate of completion of treatment as planned at 1 year, the ratio of the actually administered dose to the planned dose at 1 year, and the total number of days of treatment.

Results

At 1 year, the rate of completion of treatment as planned was 77.7 % (42/54 patients), and the ratio of the actually administered dose to the planned dose was 82.9 %. The mean and median total numbers of days of treatment were 209 and 252, respectively. Grade 3 or higher toxicity (watery eyes) occurred in only 1 patient.

Conclusion

S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy had acceptable compliance, safety, and efficacy in patients with colorectal cancer. S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy is considered a possible standard treatment regimen for colorectal cancer.     

Phase II trial of gemcitabine and S-1 for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined gemcitabine and S-1 as first-line chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Methods

This study included patients who had been diagnosed with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma arising from the pancreas, which was histologically or cytologically confirmed and involved at least 1 unidimensionally measurable lesion. The regimen consisted of intravenous 1,000 mg/m² gemcitabine on day 1 and 8 combined with oral S-1 on days 1–14 every 21 days. The dosage of S-1 was based on the body surface area (BSA) as follows: 40 mg bid (total 80 mg/day) for a BSA of <1.25, 50 mg bid (total 100 mg/day) for a BSA of ≥1.25 but <1.5, and 60 mg bid (total 120 mg/day) for a BSA of ≥1.5. Treatment consisted of at least 2 courses unless rapid disease progression was noted. The primary end points were the response and disease control rates, and the secondary end points were toxicity and survival.

Results

Thirty-seven patients were enrolled between August 2005 and December 2010. The median number of chemotherapy cycles was 4 (range 1–28 cycles). Response to treatment could be evaluated in 31 patients. None of the patients showed complete response, but 5 achieved partial response. The response rate was thus 13.5 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.7–24.3 %] in the intent-to-treat population. Sixteen patients (43.2 %; 95 % CI 27–59.5 %) showed stable disease, and the overall disease control rate was 56.8 % (95 % CI 40.6–72.9 %). For all 37 patients, the median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95 % CI 1.8–7.6 month), and the median overall survival was 9.4 month (95 % CI 5.8–12.6 month). Chemotherapy-related grade 3/4 hematological toxicities were neutropenia (36.1 %), leucopenia (22.2 %), and anemia (13.9 %). The non-hematological toxicities were generally mild.

Conclusions

Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 was effective, convenient, and safe in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.     

Safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of S-1 in a hemodialysis patient with advanced gastric cancer

Purpose

The safety and efficacy of S-1 in hemodialysis patients have not been established. We evaluated the safety and efficacy and pharmacokinetics of S-1 in a hemodialysis patient with advanced gastric cancer.

Patient

A 66-year-old Japanese man with chronic renal failure, who had undergone hemodialysis three times a week for 3 years. Based on the diagnosis of stage IV gastric cancer, S-1 therapy was started. S-1 was administered 11 times at a daily dose of 23.5 mg/m² (40 mg/body) after hemodialysis, followed by a rest. One course was a period of 28 days. Blood samples were obtained after the first administration of S-1 and before beginning the fourth course. The concentration of 5-FU was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography.

Results

Area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) of 5-FU was 2647.2 ng h/mL after administration of S-1 of 23.5 mg/m² (40 mg/body). During the S-1 treatment, serious adverse events such as neutropenia were not observed; however, decreases in hemoglobin level were observed (grade 3). The treatment was well tolerated. After the second course of chemotherapy, the primary lesion showed a partial response and lymph node metastases and liver metastases showed stable disease.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that S-1 is an important treatment option for patients with hemodialysis with advanced gastric cancer.     

Pharmacokinetic interaction between sorafenib and prednisolone in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma

Purpose

Sorafenib is primarily metabolized in the liver, by CYP3A4-mediated oxidation and UGT1A9-mediated glucuronidation. However, there is little information about the pharmacokinetic interaction of sorafenib. Here, we report a pharmacokinetic interaction between sorafenib and the CYP3A4 inducer prednisolone in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Patients and methods

The patient was a 72-year-old woman diagnosed with HCC. She was treated with sorafenib at 400 mg daily. On day 9, sorafenib was discontinued due to drug eruption. Nine months later, she was rechallenged with sorafenib at 400 mg daily concurrently with oral prednisolone. Prednisolone was started at 20 mg daily and was tapered by 5 mg every 14 days. We assessed the pharmacokinetics of sorafenib and its major metabolite M-2.

Results

The concentration of sorafenib was gradually increased following tapering of prednisolone. On day 56 after rechallenge, she developed G3 oral mucositis. At this time, serum trough concentrations of sorafenib and M-2 were at 5.9 and 1.1 μg/ml, respectively. Consequently, sorafenib dosage was reduced to 200 mg daily, and the oral mucositis was attenuated. The subsequent concentrations of sorafenib and M-2 obtained with a dose of 200 mg daily ranged from 1 to 3 μg/ml and from 0.1 to 0.4 μg/ml, respectively. Computed tomography scan showed a complete response of the liver tumor with no further recurrence of the rash.

Conclusions

We have demonstrated for the first time that prednisolone stimulates the sorafenib metabolism and that therapeutic drug monitoring could be useful during sorafenib therapy.     

Moderate renal dysfunction may not require a cisplatin dose reduction: a retrospective study of cancer patients with renal impairment

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the tolerability of cisplatin (CDDP) in patients with moderate renal dysfunction.

Methods

To investigate the relationship between CDDP dose and nephrotoxicity, a retrospective chart review was conducted of patients with a creatinine clearance (Ccr) of 30–60 mL/min. Subjects were classified into three groups according to the CDDP dose, as determined by the physician, and the nephrotoxicity among these groups was compared. Additionally, we investigated the correlation coefficients between maximum serum creatinine (Scr) level or minimum estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and baseline Ccr.

Results

Fifty-six patients were included in this study. Among these patients, 13 patients received 30–40 mg/m² CDDP (group I), 18 patients received 40–70 mg/m² (group II), and 25 patients received 70–80 mg/m² (group III). No significant difference in nephrotoxicity was observed (median Scr 1.53, 1.61, and 1.53 mg/dL, respectively), and no correlation was observed between baseline Ccr and maximum Scr (r = 0.004, p = 0.979) or minimum eGFR (r = 0.21, p = 0.119). Only two patients (3.5 %) experienced grade 3 or 4 Scr elevation—one patient with a Ccr of 52.6 mL/min received 60 mg/m² CDDP, and the other patient with a Ccr of 52.1 mL/min received 70 mg/m² of CDDP. Hemodialysis was not observed.

Conclusion

CDDP was tolerated at doses of 35–80 mg/m² among patients with moderate renal impairment. Empiric dose reduction might create a risk of under-treatment.     

Phase II trial of sequential subcutaneous interleukin-2 plus interferon alpha followed by sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma (RCC)

Purpose

Immunotherapy (IL-2 and INF-α) was the treatment of choice for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) until antiangiogenic therapy with tyrosin kinase inhibitors was developed in the early 2000s. This clinical trial explored the efficacy and toxicity of sequential treatment of IL-2 plus INF-α followed by sorafenib.

Methods

Eligibility criteria included measurable, non-resectable, histologically confirmed predominantly clear cell RCC, no prior systemic treatment, and ECOG PS 0–2. The treatment regimen was a 6-week cycle of subcutaneous IL-2 at 9 × 10⁶ IU on days 1–6 of weeks 1, 2, 4 and 5 plus s.c. INF-α at 6 × 10⁶ IU on days 1, 3 and 5 of weeks 1–6. Responders received 6 additional weeks of this regimen. All patients received oral sorafenib (400 mg bid) after immunotherapy until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival.

Results

Forty-one patients were enrolled, median age 57 years. ECOG was 0/1 in 17/20 patients, 35 patients had prior nephrectomy and 18 patients pure clear cell cancer. Median PFS was 7.4 months (95 % CI 6.5–13.1) and OS was 16.6 months (95 % CI not reached). In 36 patients evaluable for response, ORR was 44.4 % and control rate was 94.4 %. Most adverse events (AEs) were Grade 1 or 2 toxicities (84.7 %). During immunotherapy the most common AEs were pyrexia (82.9 %), asthenia (56.1 %) and anorexia (46.3 %), whereas during sorafenib were diarrhoea (48.8 %) and hand–foot syndrome (46.3 %).

Conclusions

A sequential regimen of IL-2 and INF-α followed by sorafenib showed effectiveness and manageable toxicity in patients with advanced RCC.     

奥沙利铂联合替吉奥胶囊治疗晚期胃癌患者62例的临床观察(英文)

Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of DeFazio(S-1)combined with oxaliplatin against unresectable advanced or metastatic gastric cancer.Methods:Oxaliplatin was given intravenously at 130mg/m2for 2 h on d1 and S-1 was administered bid.at 80 mg/m2/day on d1–14 followed by a 7-day rest during the 3-week schedule.Results:All 62 patients were assessed for efficacy and adverse events.The response and disease control rates were 47.3%and 80.8%,respectively.The median time to progression was 7.8 months,and the median overall survival was11.6 months.The grade 3/4 adverse events were hematological toxicities,including neutropenia(11.3%),thrombocytopenia(9.7%)and gastrointestinal reactions(6.5%).Conclusion:The SOX regimen(oxaliplatin,130 mg/m2d1;S-1,80 mg/m2/day,bid.d1-14,q3w)provide a favorable efficacy and safety profile in patients with advanced gastric cancer.     

Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic/pharmacogenetic study of a triplet regimen of S-1/irinotecan/oxaliplatin in patients with metastatic colorectal or gastric cancer

Purpose

We conducted a phase I study of S-1 combined with irinotecan and oxaliplatin (TIROX) to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD) and to assess its safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacogenetics, and preliminary efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) or metastatic gastric cancer (MGC).

Methods

Patients received escalating doses of S-1 (30–40 mg/m² b.i.d.) orally on days 1–14, an escalating dose of intravenous irinotecan (120–150 mg/m²) on day 1, and a fixed dose of intravenous oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²) on day 1 every 3 weeks.

Results

Twenty-three patients (10 MCRC, 13 MGC; 13 chemonaive, 10 previously treated for metastatic disease) were treated across six dose levels. Because only one patient experienced a dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 anorexia at the highest dose level (S-1 40 mg/m² b.i.d., irinotecan 150 mg/m², and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m²) (n = 8), the MTD was not obtained, and this level was established as the RD. With a median of 10 cycles per patient, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included neutropenia (43 %), diarrhea (13 %), and nausea (13 %). In 22 efficacy-evaluable patients, the objective tumor response rate was 59.1 % (75 % for both MCRC and MGC in the first-line setting) and the disease control rate was 100 %. The exploratory pharmacokinetic/pharmacogenetic study showed that CYP2A6 variants (*4, *7, *9) are associated with a lower metabolic ratio of S-1 (exposure ratio of 5-fluorouracil to tegafur).

Conclusions

The new triplet TIROX regimen has shown promising antitumor activity and a favorable toxicity profile in patients with MCRC and MGC.     

Phase I/II study of amrubicin in combination with S-1 as second-line chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutation

Introduction

Both amrubicin (Am) and S-1 are effective against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and preclinical studies have demonstrated that the effect of tegafur/uracil, the original compound of S-1, in combination with Am significantly inhibits tumor growth.

Methods

We conducted a phase I/II study of Am and S-1 against pretreated NSCLC without EGFR mutation. We fixed the dose of S-1 at 40 mg/m² on days 1–14 and escalated the Am dose in increments of 5 mg/m² from a starting dose of 30 mg/m²/day on days 1–3 and repeated the cycle every 4 weeks.

Results

Twenty-six patients were registered. In phase I, at an Am dose of 35 mg/m²/day, three patients experienced grade 2 leukopenia during S-1 administration, and S-1 was withdrawn. Another patient developed grade 2 serum bilirubin in the first cycle. DLTs were observed in four of six patients at this dose level, and therefore, 30 mg/m²/day was set as the recommended dose for Am. Twenty patients received this recommended Am dose. Febrile neutropenia was observed in two patients, and one patient developed a grade 4 increase in serum creatinine. Grade 3 vomiting, infection, hypotension, and urinary retention were observed in one patient each, respectively. Other toxicities were mild, and there were no treatment-related deaths. Two patients showed a CR, three showed a PR, and the overall response rate was 25.0 %. The median progression-free and the median survival times were 3.8 and 15.6 months, respectively, and the 1-year survival rate was 60 %.

Conclusion

Am and S-1 every 4 weeks is an effective combination for pretreated NSCLC without EGFR mutation.