Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Efficacy of a triplet and doublet-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-negative metastatic gastric cancer: a retrospective analysis from the clinical practice

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The best choice of chemotherapy regimen for patients with metastatic gastric cancer is still debated. Although several studies support a superior efficacy of a triplet chemotherapy regimen over a doublet-based regimen, the magnitude of this benefit appears small and accompanied by an increased toxicity. Based on this background, we evaluated the outcome of patients with HER2-negative metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) who received in the clinical practice a triplet or doublet regimen as first-line therapy. A total of 165 patients (pts) with HER2-negative mGC treated outside of clinical trials at our department with FOLFOX-4 or ECX from 2012 and 2015 were included in our retrospective analysis: FOLFOX-4: 86 pts; ECX: 79 pts. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.1 months for FOLFOX-4 and 5.6 months for ECX regimen, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 10.3 months for FOLFOX-4 and 10.9 months for ECX regimens. Toxicity: grade 3–4 vomiting (12.6%), neutropenia (31.6%), mucositis (11.3%) and fatigue (22.7%) occurred more frequently in ECX regimen, while grade 3–4 peripheral neuropathy was more common with FOLFOX-4 (19.7%). Both evaluated regimens are active and safe in the palliation of HER2-negative mGC in the first-line setting: Three-drug chemotherapy regimen appear more active but offer only a slight improvement in OS with an increased G3–G4 toxicity. Our data suggest that a doublet therapy should be preferred in the clinical practice, preferentially reserving a three-drug combination to pts with bulky disease and/or to pts with initially unresectable locally advanced disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010;127:2893–917.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pyrhonen T, et al. Randomised comparison of fluorouracil, epidoxorubicin and methotrexate (FEMTX) plus supportive care with supportive care alone in patients with non-resectable gastric cancer. Br J Cancer. 1995;71(3):587–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Glimelius B, et al. Randomized comparison between chemotherapy plus best supportive care with best supportive care in advanced gastric cancer. Ann Oncol. 1997;8(2):163–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wagner AD, et al. Chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on aggregate data. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2903–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Cutsem E, V325 Study Group, et al. Phase III study of docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil compared with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a report of the V325 Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4991–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cunningham D, et al. Upper Gastrointestinal Clinical Studies Group of the National Cancer Research Institute of the United Kingdom. Capecitabine and oxaliplatin for advanced esophagogastric cancer. New Engl J Med. 2008;358:36–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Cutsem E, et al. Docetaxel plus oxaliplatin with or without fluorouracil or capecitabine in metastatic or locally recurrent gastric cancer: a randomized phase II study. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(1):149–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wagner AD, et al. Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;3:CD004064.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ajani JA, et al. Gastric cancer, version 3.2016 NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Nat Compr Canc Netw. 2016;14:1286–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Smyth EC, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow up. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:v38–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cutsem Van, et al. Phase III study of Docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil compared with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first line therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a report of te V-325 Stud group. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4991–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Okines AF, et al. Meta-analysis of the REAL-2 and ML17032 trials: evaluating capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy and infused 5-fluorouracil-based combination chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced oesophago-gastric cancer. Ann Oncol. 2009;20(9):1529–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Al-Batran SE, et al. Phase III trial in metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma with fluorouracil, leucovorin plus either oxaliplatin or cisplatin: a study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(9):1435–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. De Vita F, et al. A phase II study of biweekly oxaliplatin plus infusional 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid (FOLFOX-4) as first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2005;92(9):1644–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Bang YJ, Van Cutsem E, et al. ToGA Trial Investigators. Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;376:687–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Networks, Bass AJ, et al. Comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric adenocarcinoma. Nature. 2014;513(7517):202–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

MML, LP and FDV contributed to conception and design, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data and writing the manuscript. AP, GT, AP, NDM, MO, TT contributed to conception and design, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data and revising the manuscript. FC and FDV contributed to revising the manuscript, final approval of the final version to be published. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ferdinando De Vita.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors MML, LP, AP, GT, AP, MO, TT, FC, NDM and FDV declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Ethical approval

All patients, at the time of therapy, signed informed consent about the use of their data for future medical research. The analysis was carried out with the approval of the Ethical Committee of AOU Università della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli,” of our institution.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laterza, M.M., Pompella, L., Petrillo, A. et al. Efficacy of a triplet and doublet-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-negative metastatic gastric cancer: a retrospective analysis from the clinical practice. Med Oncol 34, 186 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-017-1046-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-017-1046-7

Keywords

Navigation