Long term (five-year) survival following radical surgical treatment plus adjuvant chemotherapy (FAM) in advanced gastric cancer: a controlled study

Several drugs and their associations are being used for adjuvant or complementary chemotherapy with the aim of improving results of gastric cancer treatment. The objective of this study was to verify the impact of these drugs on nutrition and on survival rate after radical treatment of 53 patients with gastric cancer in stage III of the TNM classification. A control group including 28 patients who had only undergone radical resection was compared to a group of 25 patients who underwent the same operative technique followed by adjuvant polychemotherapy with FAM (5-fluorouracil, Adriamycin, and mitomycin C). In this latter group, chemotherapy toxicity in relation to hepatic, renal, cardiologic, neurological, hematologic, gastrointestinal, and dermatological functions was also studied. There was no significant difference on admission between both groups in relation to gender, race, macroscopic tumoral type of tumor according to the Borrmann classification, location of the tumor in the stomach, length of the gastric resection, or response to cutaneous tests on delayed sensitivity. Chemotherapy was started on average, 2.3 months following surgical treatment. Clinical and laboratory follow-up of all patients continued for 5 years. The following conclusions were reached: 1) The nutritional status and incidence of gastrointestinal manifestation were similar in both groups; 2) There was no occurrence of cardiac, renal, neurological, or hepatic toxicity or death due to the chemotherapeutic method per se; 3) Dermatological alterations and hematological toxicity occurred exclusively in patients who underwent polychemotherapy; 4) There was no significant difference between the rate and site of tumoral recurrence, the disease-free interval, or the survival rate of both study groups; 5) Therefore, we concluded, after a 5-year follow-up, chemotherapy with the FAM regimen did not increase the survival rate.

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.

Development of targeted therapies in advanced gastric cancer: promising exploratory steps in a new era.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Many chemotherapeutic drugs, including fluoropyrimidines, platinums, CPT-11, taxanes and adriamycin have single-agent activity in advanced gastric cancer. Although combination chemotherapy has been shown to be more effective than single agents, response rates between 30 and 50% have not fulfilled their promise as progression-free survival from the best combinations ranges between 3 and 7 months and overall survival between 8 and 11 months. The development of targeted therapies in gastric cancer clearly stays behind the integration of these novel agents into new treatment concepts for patients with colorectal cancer. This review summarizes the experience and major recent advances in the development of targeted therapies in advanced gastric cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent publications on targeted therapies in gastric cancer are limited to nonrandomized phase I or II trials. The majority of agents tested were angiogenesis inhibitors or agents targeting the epidermal growth factor receptors epidermal growth factor receptor 1 and HER2. SUMMARY: Adequately powered, randomized phase III trials are necessary to define the clinical role of targeted therapies in advanced gastric cancer. Biomarker studies to correlate with treatment outcomes will be critical to identify patients who benefit most from chemotherapy and targeted therapy.

Novel Chemotherapy Combinations in Advanced Gastric Cancer: an Updated Meta-Analysis

Combination chemotherapy is widely accepted for patients with advanced gastric cancer, but uncertainty remains regarding the choice of the regimen. Objectives: To assess the effect of: Comparison 1) irinotecan versus non-irinotecancontaining regimens, comparison 2) docetaxel versus non-docetaxel-containing regimens, comparison 3) regimens including oral 5-FU prodrugs versus intravenous fluoropyrimidines, comparison 4) oxaliplatin versus cisplatin-containing regimens on overall survival. Search Strategy: We searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, proceedings from ECCO, ESMO, ASCO until December 2009. Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials on the above mentioned chemotherapy regimens in advanced or metastatic denocarcinoma of the stomach or GE-junction. Results: The meta-analysis of overall survival for comparison 1) included 4 trials, 640 patients, and results in a HR of 0.86 (95% CI 0.73-1.02) in favour of the irinotecancontaining regimens. For comparison 2) 4 trials with a total of 924 patients have been included in the analysis of overall survival. The resulting HR is 0.93 (95% CI 0.79-1.09) in favour of the docetaxel-containing regimens, with moderate heterogeneity (I2 =7%). For comparison 3 and 4, one major relevant study (Cunningham 2008) could not be included in this meta-analysis after discussion because it included patients with squamous cell cancer of the esophagus as well. Thus, for comparison 3) one relevant study (Kang 2009; 316 patients) comparing capecitabine versus 5-FU in combination with cisplatin is eligible. The resulting HR is 0.85 (95%CI 0.65-1.11) in favour of the oral regimen. For comparison 4) two eligible trials were identified (Al Batran 2008, Popov 2008; 292 patients) with a resulting HR of 0.82 (95% CI 0.47-1.45) in favour of the oxaliplatin-based regimens. For three further trials data is incomplete at present. Conclusions: Chemotherapy combinations including irinotecan, oxaliplatin, docetaxel or oral 5-FU prodrugs are alternative treatment options to cisplatin/5-FU or cisplatin/ 5-FU/anthracycline-combinations, but do not provide significant advantages in overall survival. Supported by: KKS Halle, grant number [BMBF/FKZ 01GH01GH0105]. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are essential in implementing and maintaining nationwide stage-specific diagnostic and therapeutic standards. In 2011, the first German expert consensus guideline defined the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of early and locally advanced esophagogastric cancers. Here, we compare this guideline with other national guidelines as well as current literature. METHODS: The German S3-guideline used an approved development process with de novo literature research, international guideline adaptation, or good clinical practice. Other recent evidence-based national guidelines and current references were compared with German recommendations. RESULTS: In the German S3 and other Western guidelines, adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) are classified according to formerly defined AEG I-III subgroups due to the high surgical impact. To stage local disease, computed tomography of the chest and abdomen and endosonography are reinforced. In contrast, laparoscopy is optional for staging. Mucosal cancers (T1a) should be endoscopically resected "en-bloc" to allow complete histological evaluation of lateral and basal margins. For locally advanced cancers of the stomach or esophagogastric junction (≥T3N+), preferred treatment is preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy. Preoperative radiochemotherapy is an evidence-based alternative for large AEG type I-II tumors (≥T3N+). Additionally, some experts recommend treating T2 tumors with a similar approach, mainly because pretherapeutic staging is often considered to be unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: The German S3 guideline represents an up-to-date European position with regard to diagnosis, staging, and treatment recommendations for patients with locally advanced esophagogastric cancer. Effects of perioperative chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy are still to be investigated for adenocarcinoma of the cardia and the lower esophagus.

Chemotherapy versus support cancer treatment in advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of chemotherapy and support treatment in patients with advanced non-resectable gastric cancer in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that included a comparison of chemotherapy and support care treatment in patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma, regardless of their age, gender or place of treatment. The search strategy was based on the criteria of the Cochrane Base, using the following key words: 1) randomized clinical trials and antineoplastic combined therapy or gastrointestinal neoplasm, 2) stomach neoplasm and drug therapy, 3) clinical trial and multi-modality therapy, 4) stomach neoplasm and drug therapy or quality of life, 5) double-blind method or clinical trial. The search was carried out using the Cochrane, Medline and Lilacs databases. Five studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, for a total of 390 participants, 208 (53%) receiving chemotherapy, 182 (47%) receiving support care treatment and 6 losses (1.6%). The 1-year survival rate was 8% for support care and 20% for chemotherapy (RR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.00-4.57, P = 0.05); 30% of the patients in the chemotherapy group and 12% in the support care group attained a 6-month symptom-free period (RR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.41-3.87, P < 0.01). Quality of life evaluated after 4 months was significantly better for the chemotherapy patients (34%; RR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.31-3.28, P < 0.01) with tumor mass reduction (RR = 3.32, 95% CI = 0.77-14.24, P = 0.1). Chemotherapy increased the 1-year survival rate of the patients and provided a longer symptom-free period of 6 months and an improvement in quality of life.

Docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil; docetaxel and cisplatin; and epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as systemic treatment for advanced gastric carcinoma: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

PURPOSE: This randomized phase II trial evaluated two docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to overall response rate (ORR) for comparison in a phase III trial with epirubicin-cisplatin-fluorouracil (ECF) as first-line advanced gastric cancer therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with measurable unresectable and/or metastatic gastric carcinoma, a performance status <or= 1, and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function randomly received <or= eight 3-weekly cycles of ECF (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1, cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1, and fluorouracil [FU] 200 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 21), TC (docetaxel initially 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 [later reduced to 75 mg/m(2) as a result of toxicity] and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1), or TCF (TC plus FU 300 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 14). Study objectives included response (primary), survival, toxicity, and quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: ORR was 25.0% (95% CI, 13% to 41%) for ECF, 18.5% (95% CI, 9% to 34%) for TC, and 36.6% (95% CI, 23% to 53%) for TCF (n = 119). Median overall survival times were 8.3, 11.0, and 10.4 months for ECF, TC, and TCF, respectively. Toxicity was acceptable, with one toxic death (TC arm). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurred in more treatment cycles with docetaxel (TC, 49%; TCF, 57%; ECF, 34%). Global health status/QOL substantially improved with ECF and remained similar to baseline with both docetaxel regimens. CONCLUSION: Time to response and ORR favor TCF over TC for further evaluation, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting. A trend towards increased myelosuppression and infectious complications with TCF versus TC or ECF was observed.

Docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil; docetaxel and cisplatin; and epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as systemic treatment for advanced gastric carcinoma: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research

This randomized phase II trial evaluated two docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to overall response rate (ORR) for comparison in a phase III trial with epirubicin-cisplatin-fluorouracil (ECF) as first-line advanced gastric cancer therapy.

A Phase II Biomarker-Embedded Study of Lapatinib plus Capecitabine as First-line Therapy in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Gastric Cancer

An exploratory phase II biomarker-embedded trial (LPT109747; NCT00526669) designed to determine the association of lapatinib-induced fluoropyrimidine gene changes with efficacy of lapatinib plus capecitabine as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma independent of tumor HER2 status. Tumor biopsies obtained before and after 7-day lapatinib (1,250 mg) to analyze changes in gene expression, followed by a 14-day course of capecitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily, 14/21 days) plus lapatinib 1,250 mg daily. Blood samples were acquired for pharmacokinetic analysis. Primary clinical objectives were response rate (RR) and 5-month progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives were overall survival (OS), PFS, time to response, duration of response, toxicity, and identification of associations between lapatinib pharmacokinetics and biomarker endpoints. Primary biomarker objectives were modulation of 5-FU-pathway genes by lapatinib, effects of germline SNPs on treatment outcome, and trough steady-state plasma lapatinib concentrations. Sixty-eight patients were enrolled; (75% gastric cancer, 25% gastroesophageal junction). Twelve patients (17.9%) had confirmed partial response, 31 (46.3%) had stable disease, and 16 (23.9%) had progressive disease. Median PFS and OS were 3.3 and 6.3 months, respectively. Frequent adverse events included diarrhea (45%), decreased appetite (39%), nausea (36%), and fatigue (36%). Lapatinib induced no changes in gene expression from baseline and no significant associations were found for SNPs analyzed. Elevated baseline HER3 mRNA expression was associated with a higher RR (33% vs. 0%; P = 0.008). Lapatinib plus capecitabine was well tolerated, demonstrating modest antitumor activity in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The association of elevated HER3 and RR warrants further investigation as an important player for HER-targeted regimens in combination with capecitabine

Clinical efficacy of paclitaxel in the treatment of mid-stage and advanced malignant gastric cancer, and effect of nursing interventions

Purpose: To investigate the clinical efficacy of paclitaxel combined with additional chemotherapy for mid-stage and advanced malignant tumors, and the benefits afforded by scientific nursing. Methods: Patients with mid-stage and advanced gastric cancer were randomly divided into test and control groups. Control group was given intravenous chemotherapy (400 mg/m2 fluorouracil and 2500 mg/m2 cisplatin) and nursed conventionally, while the test group was additionally treated with 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel and underwent special scientific nursing. Clinical effects and changes in the rates of apoptosis and cell proliferation were recorded. The effect of applying scientific nursing on therapeutic outcomes was also evaluated. Results: The overall rate of treatment effectiveness, clinical control rate, mean apoptosis and proliferation rates in the test group were 56.40, 92.30, (7.10 ± 3.17 and 28.70 ± 3.22 %, respectively, while, in the control group, the values were 38.50, 64.10, 25.40 ± 2.67 and 32.60 ± 2.93 %, respectively. The differences were all statistically significant (p < 0.05). In terms of nursing efficacy, the test group had a lower pain score and higher quality-of-life scores (Karnofsky performance status score) than control group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Paclitaxel has a significant effect when used to treat mid-stage and advanced gastric cancer. Moreover, additional nursing not only enhances the therapeutic effect but also improves prognosis and quality-of-life.

Preoperative serum levels of ca 72-4, cea, ca 19-9, and Alpha-fetoprotein in patients with gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION: The clinical importance of preoperative serum levels of CA 72-4, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA 19-9, and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) was prospectively evaluated in 44 patients with gastric cancer. METHOD: The serum tumor marker levels were determined by commercial radioimmunoassay kits. Positivity for CA 72-4 (>4 U/mL), CEA (>5 ng/mL), CA 19-9 (>37 U/mL), and AFP (>10 ng/mL) were correlated according to the stage, histology, and lymph node metastasis. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: CA 72-4 showed a higher positivity rate for gastric cancer (47.7%) than CEA (25%), CA 19-9 (25%), and AFP (0%). The combination of CA 72-4 with CEA and CA 19-9 increased the sensitivity to 61.4%. The positivity rates of CA 72-4 in patients at stages I and II (initial disease) and in patients at stages III and IV (advanced disease) were 9% and 60.6%, respectively (P < 0.005). No correlation was found between CEA and CA 19-9 levels and the stage of gastric cancer. There was a tendency of positivity for CA 72-4 to suggest lymph node involvement, but it was not significant (P = 0.075). Serum levels of tumor markers did not show a correlation with the histological types of gastric cancer. CONCLUSION: Preoperative serum levels of CA 72-4 provided a predictive value in indicating advanced gastric cancer.

Lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the incidence of lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer, identifying risk factors for its development. METHODS: we conducted a prospective study of patients with gastric cancer admitted to the Section of the Esophago-Gastric Surgery of the Surgery of Service HUCFF-UFRJ, from January 2006 to May 2012. RESULTS: the rate of early gastric cancer was 16.3%. The incidence of nodal metastases was 30.8% and occurred more frequently in patients with tumors with involvement of the submucosa (42.9%), in those poorly differentiated (36.4%), in tumors larger than 2 cm (33.3%) and in type III ulcerated lesions (43.8%). CONCLUSION: the incidence of lymph node metastases in patients was very high and suggests that one should keep the radicality of resection in early gastric cancer, particularly in relation to D2 lymphadenectomy, recommended for advanced gastric cancer. Conservative resections, with lymphadenectomies smaller than D2, should be performed only in selected cases, well-studied as for the risk factors of lymph node metastasis. Despite the small number of cases did not permit to relate the rate of lymph node metastasis to the risk factors considered, we noted a strong tendency for the occurrence of these metastases in the poorly differentiated, type III, larger than 2 cm tumors, and in the Lauren diffuse types.

Prevalence of helicobacter pylori infection in advanced gastric carcinoma

There is substantial evidence that infection with Helicobacter pylori plays a role in the development of gastric cancer and that it is rarely found in gastric biopsy of atrophic gastritis and gastric cancer. On advanced gastric tumors, the bacteria can be lost from the stomach. Aims - To analyze the hypothesis that the prevalence of H.pylori in operated advanced gastric carcinomas and adjacent non-tumor tissues is high, comparing intestinal and diffuse tumors according to Lauren’s classifi cation. Methods - A prospective controlled study enrolled 56 patients from “Hospital Universitário”, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil, with advanced gastric cancer, treated from February 2000 to March 2003. Immediately after partial gastrectomy, the resected stomach was opened and several mucosal biopsy samples were taken from the gastric tumor and from the adjacent mucosa within 4 cm distance from the tumor margin. Tissue sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Lauren‘s classifi cation for gastric cancer was used, to analyse the prevalence of H. pylori in intestinal or diffuse carcinomas assessed by the urease rapid test, IgG by ELISA and Giemsa staining. H. pylori infected patients were treated with omeprazole, clarithromycin and amoxicillin for 7 days. Follow-up endoscopy and serology were performed 6 months after treatment to determine successful eradication of H. pylori in non-tumor tissue. Thereafter, follow-up endoscopies were scheduled annually. Chi-square and MacNemar tests with 0.05 signifi cance were used. Results - Thirty-four tumors (60.7%) were intestinal-type and 22 (39.3%) diffuse type carcinomas. In adjacent non-tumor gastric mucosa, chronic gastritis were found in 53 cases (94.6%) and atrophic mucosa in 36 patients (64.3%). All the patients with atrophic mucosa were H. pylori positive. When examined by Giemsa and urease test, H. pylori positive rate in tumor tissue of intestinal type carcinomas was higher than that in diffuse carcinomas. In tumor tissues, 34 (60.7%) H. pylori-positive in gastric carcinomas were detected by Giemsa method. H. pylori was observed in 30 of 56 cases (53.5%) in tissues 4 cm adjacent to tumors. This difference was not signifi cant. Eradication of H. pylori in non-tumor tissue of gastric remnant led to a complete negativity on the 12th postoperative month. Conclusions - The data confi rmed the hypothesis of a high prevalence of H. pylori in tumor tissue of gastric advanced carcinomas and in adjacent non-tumor mucosa of operated stomachs. The presence of H. pylori was predominant in the intestinal-type carcinoma

Pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat sensitizes gastric cancer cells to anthracyclines via induction of CITED2

Chemotherapy modestly prolongs survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer, but strategies are needed to increase its efficacy. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors modify chromatin and can block cancer cell proliferation and promote apoptosis.

Interim endoscopy results during neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer correlate with histopathological response and prognosis

BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancer leads to major histopathological response in less than 30 % of patients. Data on interim endoscopic response assessment do not exist. This exploratory prospective study evaluates early endoscopy after 50 % of the chemotherapy as predictor for later response and prognosis. METHODS Forty-seven consecutive patients were included (45 resected; 33 R0 resections). All patients received baseline endoscopy and CT scans, after 50 % of their chemotherapy (EGD-1, CT-1) and after completion of chemotherapy (EGD-2, CT-2). Interim endoscopic response (EGD-1) was assessed after having received 50 % (6 weeks) of the planned 12 weeks of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Post-chemotherapy response was clinically assessed by a combination of CT scan (CT-2) and endoscopy (EGD-2). Histopathological response was determined by a standardized scoring system (Becker criteria). Endoscopic response was defined as a reduction of >75 % of the tumor mass. RESULTS Twelve patients were responders at EGD-1 and 13 at EGD-2. Nine patients (19.1 %) were clinical responders and 7 patients (15.6 %) were histopathological responders after chemotherapy. Specificity, accuracy, and negative predictive value of the interim EGD-1 for subsequent histopathological response were 31/38 (82 %), 36/47 (76 %), and 31/33 (93 %); and for recurrence or death, 28/30 (93.3 %), 38/47 (80.9 %), and 28/35 (80.0 %). Response at EGD-1 was significantly associated with histopathological response (p = 0.010), survival (p < 0.001), and recurrence-free survival (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS Interim endoscopy after 6 weeks predicts response and prognosis. Therefore, tailoring treatment according to interim endoscopic assessment could be feasible, but the findings of this study should be validated in a larger patient cohort.