Akihito Tsuji

Lapatinib Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel Alone in the Second-Line Treatment of HER2-Amplified Advanced Gastric Cancer in Asian Populations: TyTAN— A Randomized, Phase III Study

PURPOSE In Asian countries, paclitaxel once per week is used as second-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer, including human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive tumors. The role of anti-HER2 agents, including lapatinib, in this setting and population is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS TyTAN was a two-part, parallel-group, phase III study in Asian patients. An open-label, dose-optimization phase (n = 12) was followed by a randomized phase (n = 261), in which patients who were HER2 positive by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) received lapatinib 1,500 mg once per day plus once-per-week paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) or paclitaxel alone. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), time to response, response duration, and safety. Analyses were based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and gastrectomy status, prior trastuzumab therapy, and regional subpopulations. RESULTS Median OS was 11.0 months with lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus 8.9 months with paclitaxel alone (P = .1044), with no significant difference in median PFS (5.4 v 4.4 months) or TTP (5.5 v 4.4 months). ORR was higher with lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone (odds ratio, 3.85; P < .001). Better efficacy with lapatinib plus paclitaxel was demonstrated in IHC3+ compared with IHC0/1+ and 2+ patients and in Chinese compared with Japanese patients. A similar proportion of patients experienced adverse events with each treatment (lapatinib plus paclitaxel, 100% v paclitaxel alone, 98%). CONCLUSION Lapatinib plus paclitaxel demonstrated activity in the second-line treatment of patients with HER2 FISH-positive IHC3+ advanced gastric cancer but did not significantly improve OS in the intent-to-treat population.

Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) versus fluorouracil and folinic acid plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomised phase 2/3 non-inferiority study (FIRIS study)

BACKGROUND Fluorouracil and folinic acid with either oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or irinotecan (FOLFIRI) are widely used as first-line or second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. However, infusional fluorouracil-based regimens, requiring continuous infusion and implantation of an intravenous port system, are inconvenient. We therefore planned an open-label randomised controlled trial to verify the non-inferiority of irinotecan plus oral S-1 (a combination of tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine, and potassium oxonate; IRIS) to FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS Between Jan 30, 2006, and Jan 29, 2008, 426 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer needing second-line chemotherapy from 40 institutions in Japan were randomly assigned by a computer-based minimisation method to receive either FOLFIRI (n=213) or IRIS (n=213). In the FOLFIRI group, patients received folinic acid (200 mg/m(2)) and irinotecan (150 mg/m(2)) and then a bolus injection of fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)) on day 1 and a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (2400 mg/m(2)) over 46 h, repeated every 2 weeks. In the IRIS group, patients received irinotecan (125 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 15 and S-1 (40-60 mg according to body surface area) twice daily for 2 weeks, repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, with a non-inferiority margin of 1.333. Statistical analysis was on the basis of initially randomised participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00284258. FINDINGS All randomised patients were included in the primary analysis. After a median follow-up of 12.9 months (IQR 11.5-18.2), median progression-free survival was 5.1 months in the FOLFIRI group and 5.8 months in the IRIS group (hazard ratio 1.077, 95% CI 0.879-1.319, non-inferiority test p=0.039). The most common grade three or four adverse drug reactions were neutropenia (110 [52.1%] of 211 patients in the FOLFIRI group and 76 [36.2%] of 210 patients in the IRIS group; p=0.0012), leucopenia (33 [15.6%] in the FOLFIRI group and 38 [18.1%] in the IRIS group; p=0.5178), and diarrhoea (ten [4.7%] in the FOLFIRI group and 43 [20.5%] in the IRIS group; p<0.0001). One treatment-related death from hypotension due to shock was reported in the FOLFIRI group within 28 days after the end of treatment; no treatment-related deaths were reported in the IRIS group. INTERPRETATION Progression-free survival with IRIS is not inferior to that with FOLFIRI in patients receiving second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Treatment with IRIS could be an additional therapeutic option for second-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING Taiho Pharmaceutical Co Ltd and Daiichi Sankyo Co Ltd.

Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND We evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) as an alternative to cisplatin plus S-1 (CS) in first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III study, patients were randomly assigned to receive SOX (80-120mg/day S-1 for 2 weeks with 100mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1, every 3 weeks) or CS (S-1 for 3 weeks with 60mg/m2 cisplatin on day 8, every 5 weeks). The primary end points were noninferiority in progression-free survival (PFS) and relative efficacy in overall survival (OS) for SOX using adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with stratification factors; performance status and unresectable or recurrent (+adjuvant chemotherapy) disease. RESULTS Overall, 685 patients were randomized from January 2010 to October 2011. In per-protocol population, SOX (n = 318) was noninferior to CS (n = 324) in PFS [median, 5.5 versus 5.4 months; HR 1.004, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.840-1.199; predefined noninferiority margin 1.30]. The median OS for SOX and CS were 14.1 and 13.1 months, respectively (HR 0.958 with 95% CI 0.803-1.142). In the intention-to-treat population (SOX, n = 339; CS, n = 337), the HRs in PFS and OS were 0.979 (95% CI 0.821-1.167) and 0.934 (95% CI 0.786-1.108), respectively. The most common ≥grade 3 adverse events (SOX versus CS) were neutropenia (19.5% versus 41.8%), anemia (15.1% versus 32.5%), hyponatremia (4.4% versus 13.4%), febrile neutropenia (0.9% versus 6.9%), and sensory neuropathy (4.7% versus 0%). CONCLUSION SOX is as effective as CS for AGC with favorable safety profile, therefore SOX can replace CS. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER JapicCTI-101021.BACKGROUND We evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) as an alternative to cisplatin plus S-1 (CS) in first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III study, patients were randomly assigned to receive SOX (80-120 mg/day S-1 for 2 weeks with 100 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin on day 1, every 3 weeks) or CS (S-1 for 3 weeks with 60 mg/m(2) cisplatin on day 8, every 5 weeks). The primary end points were noninferiority in progression-free survival (PFS) and relative efficacy in overall survival (OS) for SOX using adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with stratification factors; performance status and unresectable or recurrent (+adjuvant chemotherapy) disease. RESULTS Overall, 685 patients were randomized from January 2010 to October 2011. In per-protocol population, SOX (n = 318) was noninferior to CS (n = 324) in PFS [median, 5.5 versus 5.4 months; HR 1.004, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.840-1.199; predefined noninferiority margin 1.30]. The median OS for SOX and CS were 14.1 and 13.1 months, respectively (HR 0.958 with 95% CI 0.803-1.142). In the intention-to-treat population (SOX, n = 339; CS, n = 337), the HRs in PFS and OS were 0.979 (95% CI 0.821-1.167) and 0.934 (95% CI 0.786-1.108), respectively. The most common ≥grade 3 adverse events (SOX versus CS) were neutropenia (19.5% versus 41.8%), anemia (15.1% versus 32.5%), hyponatremia (4.4% versus 13.4%), febrile neutropenia (0.9% versus 6.9%), and sensory neuropathy (4.7% versus 0%). CONCLUSION SOX is as effective as CS for AGC with favorable safety profile, therefore SOX can replace CS. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER JapicCTI-101021.

Conceptual changes in cancer chemotherapy : from an oral fluoropyrimidine prodrug, UFT, to a novel oral fluoropyrimidine prodrug, S-1, and low-dose FP therapy in Japan

The conventional concept in cancer chemotherapyconsiders that no efficacy can be attained withoutprovoking adverse reactions. We presented concretedescriptions based on a novel concept allowing us toemerge from the old one. Relief of adverse reactions,e.g., diarrhea, stomatitis, anorexia, and H&Fsyndrome, not only improves QOL of the patient butalso allows prolongation of the treatment periodwithout lowering patient compliance.We describe in this paper a therapeutic modality which is basedon SRC (self-rescuing concept)featuring dual activity, i.e., effect-enhancingactivity and adverse reaction-reducing activity.We present the theory and practice of S-1, anovel oral fluoropyrimidine anticancer agent designedto enhance anticancer activity and reducegastrointestinal toxicity through the deliberatecombination of the following components: an oralfluoropyrimidine agent tegafur; a DPD inhibitor (CDHP)which is more potent than uracil used in UFT; and anORTC inhibitor (Oxo) which localizes in thegastrointestinal tract. Furthermore, we refer tocombination therapy with 5-FU (CIV) and low-doseconsecutive CDDP in which CDDP was used as a modulatorof 5-FU and to the theory and practice of combinationtherapy with 5-FU (CVI) intermittent (Monday,Wednesday, and Friday) administration and low-doseCDDP consecutive administration in which a differencein cell cycle between gastrointestinal mucosal celland tumor cell or between bone marrow cell and tumorcell was utilized. We intend in future to combinethe abovementioned therapeutic modalities provokingless adverse reactions and being gentle to patientswith cancer in an effort to further increase theirlife expectancy.

Combination phase I trial of a novel oral fluorouracil derivative S-1 with low-dose cisplatin for unresectable and recurrent gastric cancer (JFMC27-9902).

Purpose: The Japanese Foundation for Multidisciplinary Treatment of Cancer conducted a Phase I study of a novel oral fluorouracil derivative, S-1, combined with a low dose of cisplatin in unresectable and recurrent gastric cancer. Experimental Design: S-1 was administered orally at 80–120 mg/body/day, depending on body surface area. One course consisted of consecutive administration for 28 days followed by a rest of 14 days. Low-dose cisplatin was given i.v. on days 1–5, 8–12, 15–19, and 22–26 of each course. The dose escalation of cisplatin began with an initial dose of 1 mg/m2/day as level 1 and was stepped up to 2, 3, 4, and 6 mg/m2/day as level 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The regimen was repeated for at least two courses. Results: A total of 24 patients was entered in the study. There was no treatment-related death. At level 5, consisting of 5 evaluable patients, dose-limiting toxicity was experienced as grade 3 appetite loss in 2 patients and grade 4 neutropenia in 1 patient. The maximum-tolerated dose of cisplatin was estimated to be 6 mg/m2/day. We decided on a recommended dose of cisplatin of 4 mg/m2/day because the dosage was one level under the maximum-tolerated dose. All 3 patients at level 4 showed partial response, suggesting promising clinical efficacy with this dosage. The serum concentration of cisplatin at level 4 was 918 ± 92 ng/ml on day 26 of the first course. Conclusions: S-1 with low-dose cisplatin may become an effective regimen with acceptable toxicity for gastric cancer.

Phase II trial of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy for unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer

This multicenter phase II study first investigated the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin‐bound paclitaxel (nab‐paclitaxel) when given every 3 weeks to patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer who had received a prior round of fluoropyrimidine‐containing chemotherapy. Patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer who experienced progression despite fluoropyrimidine‐containing treatment were studied. Nab‐paclitaxel was given i.v. at 260 mg/m2 on day 1 of each 21‐day cycle without anti‐allergic premedication until disease progression or study discontinuation. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate. The secondary endpoints were the disease control rate, progression‐free survival, overall survival, and safety. From April 2008 to July 2010, 56 patients were enrolled, 55 patients received the study treatment, and 54 patients were evaluable for responses. According to an independent review committee, the overall response rate was 27.8% (15/54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 16.5–41.6) and the disease control rate was 59.3% (32/54; 95% CI, 45.0–72.4). One patient had a complete response. The median progression‐free survival and overall survival were 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.4–3.6) and 9.2 months (95% CI, 6.9–11.4), respectively. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (49.1%), leucopenia (20.0%), lymphopenia (10.9%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (23.6%). There were no treatment‐related deaths. Nab‐paclitaxel, given every 3 weeks, showed promising activity against previously treated unresectable or recurrent gastric cancers, with well‐tolerated toxicities. (Trial registration, ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00661167).

Impact of excision repair cross-complementing gene 1 (ERCC1) on the outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer: correlative study in Japan Clinical Oncology Group Trial JCOG9912

BACKGROUND Since the best chemotherapy regimen for each patient with advanced gastric cancer is uncertain, we aimed to identify molecular prognostic or predictive biomarkers from biopsy specimens in JCOG9912, a randomized phase III trial for advanced gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Endoscopic biopsy specimens from primary lesions were collected in 445 of 704 randomized patients in JCOG9912. We measured the mRNA expression of excision repair cross-complementing group 1 (ERCC1), thymidylate synthase, dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, and five other genes, then, categorized them into low and high groups relative to the median, and examined whether gene expression was associated with efficacy end point. RESULTS Multivariate analyses showed that high ERCC1 expression [HR 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.75; P = 0.010], performance status ≥ 1 (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.13-1.86; P = 0.004), and number of metastatic sites ≥ 2 (HR 1.66; 95% CI 1.28-1.86; P < 0.001) were associated with a poor prognosis, and recurrent disease (versus unresectable; HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.56-1.00; P = 0.049) was associated with a favorable prognosis. None of these molecular factors were a predictive marker for choosing irinotecan plus cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil rather than S-1. CONCLUSION These correlative analyses suggest that ERCC1 is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in the first-line treatment of gastric cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER C000000062, www.umin.ac.jp.

S-1 plus leucovorin versus S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin versus S-1 plus cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND Although leucovorin enhances the efficacy of fluorouracil, the anti-tumour activity of S-1 and leucovorin and their combination with oxaliplatin for patients with advanced gastric cancer is unknown. We compared the activity and safety of S-1 plus leucovorin, S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin, and S-1 plus cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial, we recruited chemotherapy-naive patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer with measurable lesions aged 20 years or older from 25 general hospitals and specialist centres in Japan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally to receive S-1 plus leucovorin (S-1 40-60 mg orally plus oral leucovorin 25 mg twice a day for 1 week, every 2 weeks), S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin (S-1 plus leucovorin and intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1, every 2 weeks), or S-1 plus cisplatin (S-1 40-60 mg orally twice a day for 3 weeks, plus intravenous cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 8, every 5 weeks). Randomisation was done with the minimisation method using performance status (0 vs 1) and tumour stage (stage IV vs recurrent) as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was independently reviewed overall response in the full analysis set. This trial is registered with Japic CTI, number 111635. FINDINGS Between Oct 20, 2011, and Dec 17, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 145 patients: 49 patients were assigned to S-1 plus leucovorin, 47 to S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin, and 49 to S-1 plus cisplatin. An objective response assessed by the independent review committee was achieved in 20 (43% [95% CI 28·3-57·8]) of the 47 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin group, 31 (66% [50·7-79·1]) of the 47 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin group, and 22 (46% [31·4-60·8]) of the 48 patients in the S-1 plus cisplatin group (Fishers exact test, p=0·84 for S-1 plus leucovorin vs S-1 plus cisplatin, p=0·063 for S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin vs S-1 plus cisplatin, and p=0·038 for S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin vs S-1 plus leucovorin). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (three [6%] of 48 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin group vs 12 [26%] of 47 patients in the S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin group vs 17 [35%] of 49 patients in the S-1 plus cisplatin group), decreased appetite (six [13%] vs 14 [30%] vs 12 [24%]), anaemia (five [10%] vs seven [15%] vs 13 [27%]), and hyponatraemia (two [4%] vs two [4%] vs nine [18%]). INTERPRETATION S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin was more active than S-1 plus leucovorin or S-1 plus cisplatin with acceptable toxic effects for patients with advanced gastric cancer. A phase 3 trial comparing S-1 plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin with S-1 plus cisplatin is underway. FUNDING Taiho Pharmaceutical.

Recurrent rectal GIST resected successfully after preoperative chemotherapy with imatinib mesylate

A 60-year-old-man underwent initial resection of a rectal tumor, with a transanal approach, on December 6, 2000. The tumor was diagnosed as a gastrointestinal stromal tumor(GIST) by KIT and CD34 immunohistochemistry. In June 2003, a third recurrence in the rectum was discovered, at the same location as the initial tumor, and he was referred to our hospital. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a tumor 3.0 cm in diameter, compressing the prostate anteriorly. After the oral administration of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec, Glivec) at a dose of 400 mg per day for 3 months, the size of the tumor had decreased to 1.2 cm in diameter. On December 12, 2003, a fourth operation was performed successfully, with a perineal approach, preserving sphincter function. More than 40 months after the fourth operation, neither local recurrence nor distant metastasis was detected. Our strategy of treatment with imatinib allows not only complete excision of the tumor but it also reduces postoperative impediments in patients with recurrent rectal GIST.

Clinical benefit of high-sensitivity KRAS mutation testing in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with anti-EGFR antibody therapy.

Objective: We compared high-sensitivity KRAS mutation testing with direct sequencing for predicting the efficacy of antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibodies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: We analyzed the KRAS status in 61 tumors from cetuximab-treated mCRC patients by both direct sequencing and a high-sensitivity method: 2-step PCR restriction fragmentation length polymorphism (RFLP). Therapeutic effects in each mutational status were evaluated. Results: The incidences of KRAS mutations determined by direct sequencing and 2-step PCR RFLP were 34.4 and 52.5%, respectively (p = 0.02). Patients were categorized into 3 groups [W/W, wild-type by both methods (n = 29); W/M, wild-type by direct sequencing, detected mutation by 2-step PCR RFLP (n = 11); M/M, mutant-type by both methods (n = 21)]. The response rate for cetuximab in the W/M group (0%) was the same as that in the M/M group, and was significantly lower than in the W/W group (41.4%) (p < 0.001). Progression-free survival in the W/M group (11.0 weeks) was similar to that in the M/M group (8.0 weeks), and was significantly shorter than in the W/W group (18.0 weeks) (p < 0.002). Conclusion: High-sensitivity KRAS mutation testing is useful for selecting true responders to cetuximab.