Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recent Developments in Oral Chemotherapy Options for Gastric Carcinoma

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The incidence of carcinoma of the stomach is low in the United States, Canada, and Australia but is a significant health problem in Asia, South America, Eastern Europe, and countries of the previous Soviet Union. For patients with advanced disease, chemotherapy remains palliative. With the increasing emphasis on patients’ quality of life, convenience, and cost containment, oral chemotherapy has come into increasing focus. We review oral chemotherapy agents for use in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma.

Etoposide, given intravenously, has modest activity in gastric carcinoma. We studied oral etoposide, which was administered to 28 patients at the starting dose of 50 mg/m2/day for 21 days followed by a 7-day rest period. Five patients achieved a partial response and 4 patients achieved a minor response. The drug was well tolerated. Common toxicities included myelosuppression, alopecia, and nausea. Oral etoposide thus shows evidence of modest activity against gastric carcinoma.

In Japan, considerable advances have been made in the oral chemotherapy of gastric carcinoma. The second generation fluorouracil prodrug tegafur/uracil (UFT®) has been extensively evaluated in Japan, Korea, and Spain. Data predominantly from Japan indicate that tegafur/uracil has a response rate of approximately 20% in treatment naive patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. When combined with other active agents, tegafur/uracil has a response rate of more than 30% in these patients. The available data also suggest that tegafur/uracil is well tolerated and that patient acceptance is high. In conclusion, future clinical research is likely to focus on the development of convenient outpatient regimens with efficacy equal to that of intravenous regimens.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Parker SL, Tong T, Bolden S, et al. Cancer statistics 1997. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47: 5–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pazdur R, Coia L, Hoskins W, et al, editors. Cancer management: a multidisciplinary approach. Medical, Surgical & Radiation Oncology (1st ed.) Huntington: PRR, 1996: 87–95

    Google Scholar 

  3. Murad AM, Santiago FF, Petroianu A, et al. Modified therapy with 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and methotrexate in advanced gastric cancer. Cancer 1993; 72: 37–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pyrhonen S, Kuitunen T, Kouri M. A randomized, phase III trial comparing fluorouracil, epidoxorubicin and methotrexate (FEMTX) with best supportive care in non-resectable gastric cancer. Ann Oncol 1992; 3: 12A

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Glimelius B, Hoffmann K, Haglund U, et al. Initial or delayed chemotherapy with best supportive care in advanced gastric cancer. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 189–90

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Scheithauer W, Komek G, Zeh B, et al. Palliative chemotherapy versus supportive care in patients with metastatic gastric cancer. A randomized trial [abstract 68]. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Biology, Prevention, and Treatment of GI Malignancy; 1995 Jan 9–12; Koln, Germany

  7. Comis RL, Carter SK. Integration of chemotherapy into combined modality treatment of solid tumors. IV. Malignant melanoma. Cancer Treat Rev 1974; 1: 285–304

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kelsen DP, Magill G, Cheng E, et al. Phase II trial of etoposide (VP-16) in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal malignancies. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1982; 1: 96A

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lacave A, Izarzugaza I, Anton Aparicio LM, et al. Phase II clinical trial of cis-dichlorodiammineplatinum in gastric cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1983; 6: 35–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Cullinan SA, Moertel CG, Fleming TR, et al. A comparison of three chemotherapeutic regimens in the treatment of advanced pancreatic and gastric carcinoma: fluorouracil vs fluorouracil and doxorubicin vs fluorouracil, doxorubicin and mitomycin. JAMA 1985; 253: 2061–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Wils JA, Klein HO, Wagener DJ, et al. Sequential high-dose methotrexate and fluorouracil combined with doxorubicin —a step ahead in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a trial of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gastrointestinal Tract Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 827–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Webb A, Cunningham D, Scarffe JH, et al. Randomized trial comparing epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and methotrexate in advanced esophagogastric cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 261–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Wilke H, Wils J, Rougier P, et al. Preliminary analysis of a randomized phase III trial of FAMTX versus ELF versus cisplatin/FU in advanced gastric cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1995; 14: 206A

    Google Scholar 

  14. Slevin ML. Low-dose oral etoposide: a new role for an old drug? [editorial] J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1607–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Clark PI, Cottier B. The activity of 10-, 14-, and 21-day schedules of single-agent etoposide in previously untreated patients with extensive small cell lung cancer. Semin Oncol 1992; 19 Suppl. 14: 36–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson DH, Greco FA, Strupp J, et al. Prolonged administration of oral etoposide in patients with relapsed or refractory small-cell lung cancer. Aphase II trial. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1613–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Carney DN, Grogan L, Smit EF, et al. Single-agent oral etoposide for elderly small cell lung cancer patients. Semin Oncol 1992; 17 Suppl. 2: 49–53

    Google Scholar 

  18. Unemi N, Takeda S, Tajima K, et al. Studies on combination therapy with l-(tetrahydro-2-furanyl)-5-fluorouracil plus uracil. I. Effect of co-administration of uracil on the antitumor activity of 1-(tetrahydro-2-furanyl)-5-fluorouracil and the level of 5-fluorouracil in AH-130 bearing rats. Chemotherapy 1981; 29: 164–75

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Unemi N, Takeda S, Tajima K, et al. Studies on combination therapy with l-(tetrahydro-2-furanyl)-5-fluorouracil plus uracil. II. Chemotherapy 1981; 29: 176–84

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Pazdur R, Covington WP, Brown NS, et al. Comparative steady state pharmacokinetics of oral UFT versus protracted intravenous 5-fluorouracil. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1996; 15: 474A

    Google Scholar 

  21. Namatame K, Sasaki E, Ko Y, et al. A double-blind comparison of Fura plasma concentration by oral (UFT) vs continuous intravenous infusion (5-FU) [in Japanese]. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1993; 20: 2417–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ota K, Taguchi T, Kimura K. Report on nationwide pooled data and cohort investigation in UFT phase II study. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1988; 22: 333–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Murakami M, Ota K. Clinical results of UFT therapy for malignant tumors under cooperative study. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1980; 7: 1579–86

    Google Scholar 

  24. Watanabe H, Yamamoto S, Naito T. Clinical results of oral UFT therapy under cooperative study. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1980; 7: 1588–96

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nakano Y, Taguchi T, Sakai K, et al. Clinical phase II study of UFT by cooperative study group. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1980; 7: 1569–78

    Google Scholar 

  26. Takino T, Misawa S, Edagawa J, et al. Clinical studies on the chemotherapy of advanced cancer with UFT. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1980; 7: 1804–12

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shirakawa S, Uehara N, Kita K, et al. Clinical trial on the effect of UFT. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1981; 8: 101–5

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tamura Y, Okino M, Hongo H, et al. Phase II study of UFT by collaborative study. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1981; 8: 302–7

    Google Scholar 

  29. Yakeishi Y, Yoshida H, Yokota H, et al. Clinical trial of UFT against malignant tumors. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1981; 8: 414–21

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nakajima O, Ihara K, Isoda T, et al. Phase I and II studies on a mixture of l-(2-tetrahydrofuryl)-5-fluorouracil and uracil (UFT). Jap J Cancer Chemother 1980; 7: 1558–68

    Google Scholar 

  31. Nishioka K, Nomura K, Hashimoto S, et al. Clinical effect of UFT on the advanced cancer with special reference to lung cancer. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1981; 8: 294–301

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fukui Y, Imabayashi N, Nishi M, et al. Clinical study on the enhancement of drug delivery into tumor tissue by using UFT. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1980; 7: 2124–9

    Google Scholar 

  33. Data on file. Taiho Pharmaceutical Company, Tokyo, Japan

  34. Malik ST, Talbot D, Clarke PI, et al. Phase II trial of UFT in advanced colorectal and gastric cancer. Br J Cancer 1990; 62: 1023–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kurihara M, Izumi T, Yoshida S, et al. A cooperative randomized study on tegafur plus mitomycin C versus combined tegafur and uracil plus mitomycin C in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. Jpn J Cancer Res 1991; 82: 613–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sato A, Hasegawa K, Kurihara M, et al. Combination chemotherapy with tegafur-uracil (UFT) and cisplatin (CDDP) for advanced gastric cancer. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1995; 22: 1355–62

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Tanaka S, Umeno T, Mitsuishi K, et al. UFT/CDDP preoperative chemotherapy for progressive gastric cancer —histological antitumor effects and thymidylate synthase inhibition rate. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1995; 22: 1947–51

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Shirasaka T, Shimamoto Y, Ohshima H, et al. Metabolic basis of the synergistic antitumor activities of 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin in rodent tumor models in vivo. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1993; 32: 167–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Oie S, Okabe H, Takeda S, et al. Analysis of the mechanism of increased antitumor activity of UFT after combined treatment with CDDP. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1990; 17: 1321–6

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Sawa T, Kinoshita K, Takekawa S, et al. Effect of PMUE therapy (CDDP, MMC, UFT, etoposide) in terminal gastric cancer. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1990; 17: 2381–6

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Hayakawa M, Morise K, Sakai T, et al. Combination chemotherapy with UFT, etoposide, CDDP, adriamycin (FEPA) in advanced gastric cancer. Jap J Cancer Chemother 1989; 16: 3393–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Feliu J, Gonzalez Baron M, Zamora P, et al. Experience of Oncopaz Cooperative Group with oral fluoropyrimidines in tumors of the stomach, lung, head and neck, and breast. Oncology 1997; 54 Suppl. 1: 30–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Kim YH, Shin SW, Park YT, et al. A phase II trial. Oral UFT and leucovorin in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. Oncology 1997; 11: 119–23

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Hattori T, Inokuchi K, Taguchi T, et al. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer, the second report. Analysis of data on 2873 patients followed for five years. Jap J Surg 1986; 16: 175–80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Inokuchi K, Hattori T, Taguchi T, et al. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric carcinoma. Analysis of data on 1805 patients followed for 5 years. Cancer 1984; 53: 2393–7

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Arima S, Ohsato K, Hisatsugu T, et al. Multicentre randomised study of adjuvant chemotherapy with mitomycin C and tegafur or tegafur-uracil in gastric cancer. Eur J Surg 1994; 160: 227–32

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Maehara Y, Watanabe A, Kakeji Y, et al. Postgastrectomy prescription of mitomycin C and UFT for patients with stage IV gastric carcinoma. Am J Surg 1990; 160: 242–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Ohtsu A, Sakata M, Taguchi T, et al. A phase II study of S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1998; 17: 262A

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology and Digestive Diseases, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Box 78, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, Texas, 77030-4095, USA

    Jaffer A. Ajani & Hiroya Takiuchi

Authors
  1. Jaffer A. Ajani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiroya Takiuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaffer A. Ajani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ajani, J.A., Takiuchi, H. Recent Developments in Oral Chemotherapy Options for Gastric Carcinoma. Drugs 58 (Suppl 3), 85–90 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-199958003-00012

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-199958003-00012

Keywords

Search

Navigation