Novel chemotherapy combinations for metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (mAGC): An updated meta-analysis.

Authors

null

Anna Dorothea Wagner

Department of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland

Anna Dorothea Wagner , Markus Moehler , Wilfried Grothe , Johannes Haerting , Susanne Unverzagt

Organizations

Department of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland, First Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany, Asklepios Klinik Harburg, Hamburg, Germany, Institute of Medical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Informatics, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle/Saale, Germany

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: Despite the successful integration of targeted therapies, chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for mAGC. Uncertainty remains regarding the choice of the regimen. Methods: We searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE until February 2014; proceedings from ECCO, ESMO, ASCO until June 2014 with Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials on chemotherapy in mAGC. Objectives: To assess and compare the effects on overall survival of regimens containing: 1) irinotecan (I) vs non-I, 2) docetaxel (D) vs non-D, 3) capecitabine (C) vs 5-FU, 4) S-1 vs 5-FU, 5) oxaliplatin (O) vs the same regimen containing cisplatin. For 1) and 2), substitutive (other chemotherapy substituted by I or D) and additive comparisons (I or D added) were analyzed separately. Results: The meta-analyses of overall survival included: Comparison 1) a. Substitutive: 5 trials, 724 patients (pts), with a HR of 0.85 (95% CI 0.73-0.99), b. Additive: 3 trials, 500 pts, with a HR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.76-1.03), both in favor of the I-containing regimens. Comparison 2) In total, 6 trials, 1702 pts, with a HR of 0.89 (95% CI 0.80-0.99) in favor of patients treated with D. a. Substitutive: 3 trials, 479 pts, with a HR of 1.05 (95% CI 0.87-1.27) in favor of patients treated without D. b. Additive: 3 trials, 1223 pts, with a HR of 0.82 (95% CI 0.87-0.93), in favor of D-containing regimens. If only studies (2 trials, 588 pts) are considered, in which D is added to a platinum/5-FU doublet, the HR is 0.79 (95% CI 0.64-0.98) in favor of the D-containing regimen. Comparison 3) 2 trials, 401 pts, with a HR of 0.85 (95% CI 0.68-1.06) in favor of the C-containing-regimen. Comparison 4) 2 trials, 1497 pts, with a HR of 0.89 (95% CI 0.80-1.0) in favor of the S-1-containing regimen. Comparison 5) 1 trial, 220 pts, with a HR of 0.82 (0.47-1.45) in favor of the O-containing regimen. Conclusions: All different chemotherapy combinations including I, D, O or oral 5-FU prodrugs are valid treatment options for mAGC. Among the comparisons analyzed above, only D-containing combinations, in which D wasadded to a single-agent or two-drug (platinum/5-FU) combination show a significant advantage in overall survival as compared to regimens without D.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2015 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session A: Cancers of the Esophagus and Stomach

Track

Cancers of the Esophagus and Stomach

Sub Track

Multidisciplinary Treatment

Citation

J Clin Oncol 33, 2015 (suppl 3; abstr 125)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2015.33.3_suppl.125

Abstract #

125

Poster Bd #

C23

Abstract Disclosures