A scoring system for selecting nivolumab or irinotecan in the later-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: A Japanese multicenter retrospective study.

Authors

null

Yusuke Amanuma

Department of Clinical Trial Promotion, Chiba Cancer Center, Chiba, Japan

Yusuke Amanuma , Takeshi Suzuki , Takeshi Kawakami , Masahiko Aoki , Yoshiyuki Yamamoto , Keitaro Shimozaki , Hironaga Satake , Masanori Nojima , Narikazu Boku , Daisuke Takahari

Organizations

Department of Clinical Trial Promotion, Chiba Cancer Center, Chiba, Japan, Department of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan, Division of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan, Division of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, Division of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba-Shi, Japan, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan, Cancer Treatment Center, Kansai Medical University Hospital, Hirakata, Japan, Center for Translational Research, The Institute of Medical Science Hospital, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, Gastroenterological Oncology, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Koto City, Tokyo, Japan

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: Although Nivolumab (NIVO) or Irinotecan (IRI) monotherapy is one of the later-line chemotherapies for the advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients, there are no prospective data of their comparison, and no indicators for selection of them. Methods: Clinical data of AGC patients treated with NIVO or IRI as later-line were collected from 7 institutions between September 2015 and September 2018. Efficacy of the two treatment groups was compared in the entire cohort and in the propensity score matching cohort. Factors which affect the prognosis were explored by multivariate analyses and the scoring system was developed using Cox regression. Results: In the analysis of entire cohort (317 patients), the median OS was 4.8 months (95% CI: 3.6–5.8) in the NIVO group and 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.9–7.2) in the IRI group, and those were 4.8 months (95% CI: 3.6–5.7) and 6.0 months (95% CI: 4.5–7.2) in the analysis of the propensity score matching cohort (248 patients), respectively. There were no differences in OS. We developed a risk score involving 1-Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), 2-age, 3-ECOG performance status, 4-peritoneal metastasis, 5-gastrectomy, and 6-liver metastasis to assess potential effect modification. Based on the result, IRI was favored in the higher-risk group (≥4 points, with double weight to 2, 3, and 4) for both OS/PFS. In contrast, NIVO was better OS/PFS in the lower-risk group (<1 point). Conclusions: According to the real-world data from multicenter in Japan, NIVO and IRI generally showed equivalent outcomes. The scoring system we explored may be useful for selecting appropriate later-line chemotherapy, either NIVO or IRI.

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

2024 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A: Cancers of the Esophagus and Stomach and Other Gastrointestinal Cancers

Track

Esophageal and Gastric Cancer,Other GI Cancer

Sub Track

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Real-World Evidence

Citation

J Clin Oncol 42, 2024 (suppl 3; abstr 266)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2024.42.3_suppl.266

Abstract #

266

Poster Bd #

C4

Abstract Disclosures