Second-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer: Current options and future directions

doi:10.3748/wjg.v21.i41.11621

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 21, Issue 41

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (9446)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Tables (1-3) series.

Item

Count

PDF

641

WORD

366

HTML

5717

Tables (1-3)

269

Sum=6993

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

1056

Download

1397

Sum=2453

Nov 7, 2015 (publication date) through Jul 21, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (30)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastroenterology

ISSN

1007-9327

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Topic Highlight

World J Gastroenterol. Nov 7, 2015; 21(41): 11621-11635
Published online Nov 7, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i41.11621

Table 2 Phase II studies on second-line therapy (combination therapy) in metastatic gastric cancer

Study	Total /eval pts	Performance Status, n	II-line treatment,doses (mg/m²)	TreatmentORR	Median TTP (mo)	MedianPFS(mo)	MedianOS(mo)	Toxicity,grade3-4 (%)	Ref.
Irinotecan/ FU	40/38	ECOG 0/1/2 - 5/21/12	Iri/FA/FU - 180/125/400 bolus + 1200 inf over 22 h d1/d1/d1 q14	29.0%	NR	3.7	6.4	A/N/FN/I/N-E/D/As - 13/26/5/16/13/8/16	Assersohn et al[31], 2004
Irinotecan/ FU	64/57	ECOG 0/1/2 - 3/58/3	Iri/FU/FA - 150/100/1000 d1/d1/d1, 2 over 24 h q14	21.0%	2.5	NR	7.6	N/T/D/E - 11/8/3/3	Kim et al[32], 2005
Irinotecan/ FU	51/48	ECOG 0-1/2 - 35/16	Iri/FA/FU - 180/200/400 bolus + 600 inf over 22 h d1/d1/d1 q14	18.0%	NR	3.2	9.1	A/N/FN/D/Nau/E - 14/17/1/6/6/4	¹Seo et al[33], 2008
Irinotecan/ Cisplatin	32/31	ECOG 0/1/2 - 1/22/9	Iri/P - 70/30 d1, 15/d1, 15 q28	15.6%	3.7	NR	6.1	A/N/T/E/D/M/Ano - 2.6/6/4.3/1.7/1.7/3.4/5.2	Baek et al[34], 2005
Irinotecan/ Cisplatin	87/70	ECOG 0/1/2 - 29/53/5	Iri/P - 70/80 d1, 15/d1 q28	28.6%	4.3	NR	9.5	A/L/N/FN/T/D/As/Nau - 28/34/40/10/8/6/5/2	¹Takahari et al[35], 2010
Irinotecan/ Mitomycin C	38/38	KPS Median 80 (R 70-100%)	Iri/MMC - 150/8 d1, 15/d1 q28	32.0%	4.0	NR	8.0	A/L/N - 5/8/21	Giuliani et al[36], 2005
Irinotecan/ Mitomycin C	45	ECOG 0/1 - 24/21	Iri/MMC - 150/5 d1 q14	29.0%	NR	4.1	10.1	A/N/FN/D/I - 13/53/9/2/4	Hamaguchi et al[37], 2011
Irinotecan/ Capecitabine	48/46	ECOG 0/1/2 - 10/32/6	Iri/Cap - 100/1000 b.i.d d1, 8/d1-14 q21	27.1%	4.1	NR	7.6	N/FN/E/D/HFS - 8.7/4.3/4.3/17.4/4.3	Sun et al[38], 2009
Irinotecan/ Cetuximab	63/54	ECOG 0/1 - 28/35	Iri/Cet - 180/500 d1 q14	11.0%	NR	2.8	6.1	N/FN/D/F - 11/2/6/5	Schønnemann et al[39], 2012
Irinotecan vs	29 vs 30	ECOG 0/1 - 27/2 vs 27/3	Iri 150 d1 q14	17.2% vs 20.0%	NR	2.2 vs 3	5.8 vs 6.7	A/n/Leu/FN/Ano/As/D - 0/20/28/0/10/10/3 vs 10/13/37/3/13/3/7	Sym et al[40], 2013
Irinotecan/ mFOLFIRI	29 vs 30	ECOG 0/1 - 27/2 vs 27/3	Iri/mFOLFIRI 150 d1 + LV20 d1, 5-FU 2000 over 48 h	17.2% vs 20.0%	NR	2.2 vs 3	5.8 vs 6.7		Sym et al[40], 2013
Paclitaxel/ Doxifluridine	52/25	ECOG R 0-2	Dox/Ptx - 600 mg/70 d1-21/d7, 14, 21 q28	28.0%	NR	NR	5.8	L - 2	Arai et al[41], 2007
Paclitaxel/ Doxifluridine	33	ECOG 0/1/2 - 21/14/0	Dox/Ptx - 600 mg/70 d1-14/d1, 8 q21	18.2%	NR	4.0	10.7	A/L/N/D/FN/I/As/Neu - 17.1/11.4/22.9/2.9/ 2.9/2.9/2.9	Takiuchi et al[42], 2008
Paclitaxel/ Carboplatin	50/47	ECOG 0-1/2 - 25/22	Ptx/Carbo - 175/AUC 5 d1/d1 q21	27.7%	NR	NR	OS in PR/SD - 10.0/6.0	N/T - 8.5/4.2	Stathopoulos et al[43], 2002
Paclitaxel/ Cisplatin	32/30	ECOG 0-1/2 - 21/11	Ptx/P - 145/60 d1 q21	25.0%	2.9	NR	9.1	N/E/Neu - 3/9/6	Lee et al[44], 2007
Paclitaxel/ Capecitabine	26/26	ECOG 0/1/2 - 7/11/8	Ptx/Cap - 175/825 b.i.d d1/d1-14 q21	34.6%	4.5	NR	7.5	A/N/T/HFS/Neu/Ar/E - 3.8/11.5/3.8/11.5/ 11.5/7.5/3.8	Baize et al[45], 2009
Paclitaxel/ Capecitabine	36/35	KPS Median 80 (R 60-100%)	Ptx/Cap - 80/1000 b.i.d d1, d8/d1-14 q21	28.5%	NR	5.0	11.1	N/N-E/HFS - 11.1/5.6/5.6	Zhang et al[46], 2013
Paclitaxel/ S-1	30	ECOG 0-1/2 -23/7	Ptx/S-1 - 120 d1 q14 /80, 100, 120 mg/d, if BSA < 1.25 m², 1.26 m²-1.49 m², ≥ 1.50 m² b.i.d. d1-7 q14	33.3%	NR	3.6	7.2	A/Neu/T/Ano/Neu/D/F - 73.4/63.4/16.6/20/36.6/13.3/20	Zheng et al[47], 2014
Docetaxel/ Cisplatin	43/41	ECOG 0/1/2 - 1/33/9	Dtx/P - 60/60 d1/d1 q21	17.1%	NR	2.2	5.8	N/N-E/Neu/Neph - 29.3/12.2/4.9/2.3	Park et al[48], 2004
Docetaxel/ Cisplatin	30/30	KPS 50-70/ 80-100% - 14/16	Dtx/P - 60/60 d1/d1 q21	26.7%	4.5	NR	5.6	A/L/N/Nau - 3/27/27/3	Kunisaki et al[49], 2005
Docetaxel/ Cisplatin	32/32	ECOG 0/1/2 - 8/16/8	Dtx/P 70/70 d1/d1 q21	16.0%	5.0	NR	6.0	N/FN/T/D - 59/12/12/6	Polyzos et al[50], 2006
Docetaxel/ Oxaliplatin	38/37	ECOG 0/1/2 - 19/12/7	Dtx/Ox - 75/80 d1/d2 q21	10.5%	4.0	NR	8.1	N/As/Nau/Neu - 26.3/15.7/15.7/3	Barone et al[51], 2007
Docetaxel/ Oxaliplatin	48/46	ECOG 0/1/2 - 11/29/8	Dtx/Ox - 60/130 d1 q21	22.9%	4.4	NR	7.2	L/N/FN/T/N-E/D/Neu - 17.4/26/7/4.3/28.3/ 15/6.5	Zhong et al[52], 2008
Docetaxel/ Epirubicin	50/45	ECOG 0/1/2 - 12/16/22	Dtx/Epi - 75/60 d1/d1 q21	15.5%	2.4	NR	5.0	N/FN/T/N-E/S/D/Neu - 68/48/46/2/8/4/2	Nguyen et al[53], 2006
Docetaxel/ Capecitabine	28/25	ECOG 0/1/2 - 2/19/7	Dtx/Cap - 60/1000 b.i.d d1/d1-14 q21	29.0%	4.0	NR	6.0	A/N/As/D/HFS - 7/36/7/11/7	Rosati et al[54], 2007
Docetaxel/ Etoposide	32/32	ECOG 0/1/2 - 6/20/6	Dtx/Eto - 75/50 d1/d1-5 q21	9.4%	NR	3.0	6.0	N/FN/T/N-E/D/M - 29/19/3/15.6/9.4/6.2	Yildiz et al[55], 2010
Docetaxel/ Cetuximab	38/35	ECOG 0/1/2 - 15/21/2	Dtx/Cet - 30 d1, d15 q21/400 d1, then 250 d1 q7	6.0%	NR	2.1	5.4	I/FN/Ano/D/F - 11/3/16/11/29	Tebbutt et al[56], 2013
Mitomycin/ S1	43/33	ECOG 0/1/2 - 13/21/9	MMC/S-1 - 7/40 b.i.d d1/d1-28 q42	21.0%	NR	3.4	8.0	A/N/T/D/N-E/As/S - 7/5/5/10/7/12/10	Park et al[57], 2008
Mitomycin/ Capecitabine	39	ECOG 0/1/2/UNK - 6/25/5/3	MMC/Cap - 10/1000 bid d1/d1-d14 q21	10.3%	NR	2.8	5.6	Leu/T/D/F/HFS/Neu - 5.4/10.8/5.4/8.1/5.4/8.1	Miranda et al[58], 2014
Methotrexate/ FU	56/55	ECOG 0/1/2/3 - 12/30/12/2	Mtx/FU/FA - 100 bolus/600 bolus (3 h after MTX)/10, every 6 h for 6 doses (24 h after MTX) q7	9.0%	NR	NR	7.8	A/L/N/T/N-E/D/S - 9.1/5.5/6.7/1.8/3.6/ 3.6/1.8	Hamaguchi et al[59], 2008
Cisplatin/ FU	58/53	ECOG 0-1/2 - 20/33	P/FU - 20/1000 over 20 h inf d1-5/d1-5 q28	11.3%	1.8	NR	4.6	A/N/T/N-E/D/M/Neu - 8/9/9/11/4/6/1	Sencan et al[60], 2008
Oxaliplatin/ Sorafenib	40	ECOG 0/1/2 - 14/23/2	Ox/Sor - 130 d1 q21/400 mg b.i.d daily	2.8%	NR	3.0	6.5	N/T/As/D/Neu - 9.8/7.3/18/4.9/4.9	Martin-Richard et al[61], 2013

¹Retrospective study. Cap: Capeceitabine; Carbo: Carboplatin; Cet: Cetuximab; Dox: Doxifluridine; Dtx: Docetaxel; Eto: Etoposide; Epi: Epirubicin; FU: 5-fluorouracil; FA: Leucovorin; Iri: Irinotecan; Mtx: Methotrexate; MMC: MitomycinC; Ox: Oxaliplatin; P: Cisplatin; Ptx: Paclitaxel; Sor: Sorafenib; ECOG: Eastern co-operative oncology group; KPS: Karnoffsky performance status; NR: Not reported; ORR: Objective response rate; OS: Overall-survival; Pts: Patients; PR: Partial response; PFS: Progression-free survival; R: Range; SD: Stable disease; TTP: Time-to-progression; UNK: Unknown; A: Anemia; As: Asthenia; Ano: Anorexia; D: Diarrhea; E: Emesis; FN: Febrile neutropenia; HFS: Hand-foot syndrome; I: Infection; L: Leucocytopenia; M: Mucositis; N: Neutropenia; Neu: Sensory neuropathy; Nau: Nausea; N-E: Nausea and vomiting; S: Stomatitis; T: Thrombocytopenia.

Citation: Kanagavel D, Fedyanin M, Tryakin A, Tjulandin S. Second-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer: Current options and future directions. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(41): 11621-11635
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i41/11621.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i41.11621