Narikazu Boku

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2010 for the treatment of colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is a major cause of death in Japan, where it accounts for the largest number of deaths from malignant neoplasms among women and the third largest number among men. Many new methods of treatment have been developed during recent decades. The Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum Guidelines 2014 for treatment of colorectal cancer (JSCCR Guidelines 2014) have been prepared as standard treatment strategies for colorectal cancer, to eliminate treatment disparities among institutions, to eliminate unnecessary treatment and insufficient treatment, and to deepen mutual understanding among health-care professionals and patients by making these guidelines available to the general public. These guidelines have been prepared as a result of consensuses reached by the JSCCR Guideline Committee on the basis of careful review of evidence retrieved by literature searches and taking into consideration the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice in Japan. They can, therefore, be used as a guide for treating colorectal cancer in clinical practice. More specifically, they can be used as a guide to obtaining informed consent from patients and choosing the method of treatment for each patient. As a result of the discussions of the Guideline Committee, controversial issues were selected as clinical questions, and recommendations were made. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of the evidence and a classification of recommendation categories, on the basis of consensus reached by Guideline Committee members. Here we present the English version of the JSCCR Guidelines 2014.

Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study

BACKGROUND The best chemotherapy regimen for metastatic gastric cancer is uncertain, but promising findings have been reported with irinotecan plus cisplatin and S-1 (tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydropyrimidine, and potassium oxonate). We aimed to investigate the superiority of irinotecan plus cisplatin and non-inferiority of S-1 compared with fluorouracil, with respect to overall survival, in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. METHODS We undertook a phase 3 open label randomised trial in 34 institutions in Japan. We enrolled patients aged 20-75 years or younger, who had histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma, and randomly assigned them by minimisation to receive either: a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (800 mg/m(2) per day, on days 1-5) every 4 weeks (n=234); intravenous irinotecan (70 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 15) and cisplatin (80 mg/m(2), on day 1) every 4 weeks (n=236); or oral S-1 (40 mg/m(2), twice a day, on days 1-28) every 6 weeks (n=234). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00142350, and with UMIN-CTR, number C000000062. FINDINGS All randomised patients were included in the primary analysis. Median overall survival was 10.8 months (IQR 5.7-17.8) for individuals assigned fluorouracil, 12.3 months (8.1-19.5) for those allocated irinotecan plus cisplatin (hazard ratio 0.85 [95% CI 0.70-1.04]; p=0.0552), and 11.4 months (6.4-21.3) for those assigned S-1 (0.83 [0.68-1.01]; p=0.0005 for non-inferiority). Three treatment-related deaths occurred in the irinotecan plus cisplatin group and one was recorded in the S-1 group. INTERPRETATION S-1 is non-inferior to fluorouracil and, in view of the convenience of an oral administration, could replace intravenous fluorouracil for treatment of unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer, at least in Asia. Irinotecan plus cisplatin is not superior to fluorouracil in this setting.

Randomized phase III trial of fluorouracil alone versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus uracil and tegafur plus mitomycin in patients with unresectable, advanced gastric cancer : The Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study (JCOG9205)

PURPOSE To compare fluorouracil (FU) alone with FU plus cisplatin (FP) and with uracil and tegafur plus mitomycin (UFTM) for patients with advanced gastric cancer in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 280 patients with advanced gastric cancer were randomly allocated and analyzed for survival, response, and toxicity. The survival curves were compared between groups by log-rank test on an intent-to-treat basis. RESULTS At the interim analysis, the UFTM arm showed a significantly inferior survival with higher incidences of hematologic toxic effects than did control arm FU alone, and the registration to UFTM was terminated. Both investigational regimens, FP and UFTM, had a significantly higher incidence of hematologic toxic effects than FU alone, although the effects were manageable. The overall response rates of the FU-alone, FP, and UFTM arms were 11%, 34%, and 9%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 1.9 months with FU alone, 3.9 months with FP, and 2.4 months with UFTM, respectively. Although FP demonstrated a higher response rate (P <.001) and longer progression-free survival than did FU alone (P <.001), no differences in overall survival were observed between the arms. The median survival times and 1-year survival rates were 7.1 months and 28% with FU, 7.3 months and 29% with FP, and 6.0 months and 16% with UFTM, respectively. CONCLUSION Neither investigational regimen, FP nor UFTM, showed a survival advantage as compared with FU alone. FU alone will remain a reference arm in our future trial for advanced gastric cancer.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy for T4 and/or M1 lymph node squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.

PURPOSE To investigate the efficacy and feasibility of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced carcinoma of the esophagus. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifty-four patients with clinically T4 and/or M1 lymph node (LYM) squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus were enrolled. Patients received protracted infusion of fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2)/24 hours on days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12, 2-hour infusion of cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, and concurrent radiation therapy at a dose of 30 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks. Filgrastim was prophylactically administered to 35 patients. This schedule was repeated twice every 5 weeks, for a total radiation dose of 60 Gy, followed by two courses of fluorouracil (800 mg/m(2)/24 hours for 5 days) and cisplatin (80 mg/m(2) on day 1). RESULTS There were 21 patients with T4M0 disease, one with T2M1 LYM, 17 with T3M1 LYM, and 15 withT4M1 LYM. Forty-nine patients (91%) completed at least the chemoradiotherapy segment. The 18 patients (33%) who achieved a complete response included nine (25%) of the 36 with T4 disease and nine (50%) of the 18 with non-T4 disease. Major toxicities were leukocytopenia and esophagitis; there were four (7%) treatment-related deaths. Prophylactic filgrastim reduced the incidence of grade 3 or worse leukopenia without improving dose-intensity or response. With a median follow-up duration of 43 months, median survival time was 9 months. The 3-year survival rate was 23%. CONCLUSION Despite its significant toxicity, this combined modality seemed to have curative potential even in cases of locally advanced carcinoma of the esophagus.

Long-Term Toxicity After Definitive Chemoradiotherapy for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Thoracic Esophagus

PURPOSE To assess the long-term toxicity after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the esophagus. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients newly diagnosed with SCC of the esophagus and treated with definitive CRT between 1992 and 1999 in our institution were recruited from our database on the basis of the following criteria: age </= 75 years, performance status (PS; based on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale) 0 to 2, and clinical tumor-node-metastasis system stage I to IVA. The CRT consisted of two cycles of cisplatin 40 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, and continuous infusion of fluorouracil 400 mg/m2/d on days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12, repeated every 5 weeks with concurrent radiotherapy of 60 Gy in 30 fractions. For the assessment of toxicity, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer late radiation morbidity scoring scheme was adopted. RESULTS A total of 139 patients were recruited, and their characteristics were as follows: median age, 62 years (range, 38 to 75 years); 121 males and 18 females; 96 patients PS 0, 42 patients PS 1, and one patient PS 2; 15 patients T1, 11 patients T2, 60 patients T3, and 53 patients T4; and 101 patients M0, 38 patients M1a. With a median follow-up of 53 months, the median survival time and 5-year survival rate were 21 months and 29%, respectively. Of 78 patients with complete remission, two patients died as a result of acute myocardial infarction. Grade 2, 3, and 4 late toxicities occurred with the following incidences: pericarditis in eight patients, seven patients, and one patient, respectively; heart failure in zero, zero, and two patients; pleural effusion in seven, eight, and zero patients; and radiation pneumonitis in one patient, three patients, and zero patients, respectively. CONCLUSION Definitive CRT for SCC of the esophagus is effective with substantial toxicities. Additional investigation to minimize the normal tissue toxicities is warranted.

Randomized Phase III Study of Gemcitabine Plus S-1, S-1 Alone, or Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Locally Advanced and Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer in Japan and Taiwan: GEST Study

PURPOSE The present phase III study was designed to investigate the noninferiority of S-1 alone and superiority of gemcitabine plus S-1 compared with gemcitabine alone with respect to overall survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS The participants were chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to receive only gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle), only S-1 (80, 100, or 120 mg/d according to body-surface area on days 1 through 28 of a 42-day cycle), or gemcitabine plus S-1 (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus S-1 60, 80, or 100 mg/d according to body-surface area on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle). RESULTS In the total of 834 enrolled patients, median overall survival was 8.8 months in the gemcitabine group, 9.7 months in the S-1 group, and 10.1 months in the gemcitabine plus S-1 group. The noninferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine was demonstrated (hazard ratio, 0.96; 97.5% CI, 0.78 to 1.18; P < .001 for noninferiority), whereas the superiority of gemcitabine plus S-1 was not (hazard ratio, 0.88; 97.5% CI, 0.71 to 1.08; P = .15). All treatments were generally well tolerated, although hematologic and GI toxicities were more severe in the gemcitabine plus S-1 group than in the gemcitabine group. CONCLUSION Monotherapy with S-1 demonstrated noninferiority to gemcitabine in overall survival with good tolerability and presents a convenient oral alternative for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Phase II Study of a Combination of Irinotecan and Cisplatin Against Metastatic Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE A phase II study of a combination chemotherapy regimen of cisplatin (CDDP) and irinotecan (CPT-11) was conducted to assess its efficacy and feasibility in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligibility criteria included the following: (1) histologically proven gastric cancer with measurable metastatic lesions, (2) performance status of 2 or less, (3) age of 75 years or younger, (4) one or no prior chemotherapy regimens, (5) adequate bone marrow, liver, renal, and cardiac functions, and (6) written informed consent. The treatment consisted of CPT-11 (70 mg/m2) on day 1 and day 15 and CDDP (80 mg/m2) on day 1, repeated every 4 weeks. RESULTS Forty-four patients were entered onto the study. The overall response rate was 48% (21 of 44 patients, 95% confidence interval [CI], 33% to 63%) and included one complete remission (2%). The response rate of the patients who had not received prior chemotherapy was 59% (17 of 29 patients, 95% CI, 39% to 77%). The median survival time was 272 days for all patients and 322 days for the 29 patients who had not received prior chemotherapy. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 25 patients (57%), and grade 3 or 4 diarrhea was observed in nine patients (20%). Other adverse reactions were mild. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION This combination chemotherapy regimen is active and well tolerated. It may be an appropriate regimen for future phase III trials.

Phase I/II study of S-1 combined with cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer

A dose-escalation study of cisplatin (CDDP) combined with S-1, a new oral dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitory fluoropyrimidine, was performed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), recommended dose (RD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and objective response rate (RR) in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). S-1 was given orally at 40 mg m−2 b.i.d. for 21 consecutive days following a 2-week rest. CDDP was planned to be given intravenously on day 8, at a dose of 60, 70, or 80 mg m−2 depending on the DLT. Treatment was repeated every 5 weeks, unless disease progression was observed. In the phase I portion, the MTD of CDDP was presumed to be 70 mg m−2, because 33.3% of patients (2/6) developed DLTs, mainly neutropenia. Therefore, the RD of CDDP was estimated as 60 mg m−2. In the phase II portion, 19 patients including six patients of the RD phase I portion were evaluated. The median administered courses was four (range: 1–8). The incidences of severe (grades 3–4) haematological and nonhaematological toxicities were 15.8 and 26.3%, respectively, but all were manageable. The RR was 74% (14/19, 95% confidence interval: 54.9−90.6%), and the median survival day was 383. This regimen is considered to be active against AGC with acceptable toxicity.

Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Study Comparing Irinotecan With Paclitaxel in Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer Without Severe Peritoneal Metastasis After Failure of Prior Combination Chemotherapy Using Fluoropyrimidine Plus Platinum: WJOG 4007 Trial

PURPOSE This phase III study compared treatment with weekly paclitaxel and biweekly irinotecan in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to treatment with fluoropyrimidine plus platinum. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive either paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks) or irinotecan (150 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15, every 4 weeks). Primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, adverse events, and proportion of patients who received third-line chemotherapy. RESULTS Of 223 patients, 219 were eligible for analysis. Median OS was 9.5 months in 108 patients allocated to the paclitaxel group and 8.4 months in 111 patients allocated to the irinotecan group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.13; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.49; P = .38). Median PFS was 3.6 months in the paclitaxel group and 2.3 months in the irinotecan group (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.49; P = .33). Response rate was 20.9% in the paclitaxel group and 13.6% in the irinotecan group (P = .24). Common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were neutropenia (paclitaxel group, 28.7%; irinotecan group, 39.1%), anemia (21.3%; 30.0%), and anorexia (7.4%; 17.3%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two patients (1.8%) in the irinotecan group. Third-line chemotherapy was administered in 97 patients (89.8%) after paclitaxel treatment and in 80 patients (72.1%) after irinotecan treatment (P = .001). CONCLUSION No statistically significant difference was observed between paclitaxel and irinotecan for OS. Both are reasonable second-line treatment options for advanced gastric cancer.

Nonrandomized comparison between definitive chemoradiotherapy and radical surgery in patients with T2–3Nany M0 squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus

PURPOSE To compare the treatment results between radical surgery and definitive chemoradiotherapy for resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus and to identify useful clinicopathologic and biologic markers to select better treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between August 1992 and April 1999, 98 consecutive patients were selected for this study; 53 were treated with chemoradiotherapy and 45 with surgery. The patients in the chemoradiotherapy group received 5-fluorouracil combined with cisplatin plus 60 Gy of radiation, and those in the surgery group received an esophagectomy with radical node dissection. Biologic markers were investigated immunohistochemically using pretreatment biopsy specimens. RESULTS The baseline clinical TNM stage was more advanced in the chemoradiotherapy group than in the surgery group. With a median follow-up period of 43 months, the 5-year survival rate was 46% in the chemoradiotherapy and 51% in the surgery group, without statistical significance (p = 0.47, log-rank test). Cox regression analysis for prognosis revealed that epidermal growth factor receptor positivity, high microvessel density, and cyclin D1 positivity yielded a low value for relative risk (0.66, 0.54, and 0.62, respectively), which favored chemoradiotherapy over surgery, without statistical significance. CONCLUSION This nonrandomized study showed a trend for the chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of esophageal carcinoma, but the results need to be confirmed by additional study.