Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer
Top Cited Papers
- 14 October 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Elsevier BV in Annals Of Oncology
- Vol. 26 (1), 141-148
- https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu472
Abstract
We evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) as an alternative to cisplatin plus S-1 (CS) in first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). In this randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III study, patients were randomly assigned to receive SOX (80–120 mg/day S-1 for 2 weeks with 100 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1, every 3 weeks) or CS (S-1 for 3 weeks with 60 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 8, every 5 weeks). The primary end points were noninferiority in progression-free survival (PFS) and relative efficacy in overall survival (OS) for SOX using adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with stratification factors; performance status and unresectable or recurrent (+adjuvant chemotherapy) disease. Overall, 685 patients were randomized from January 2010 to October 2011. In per-protocol population, SOX (n = 318) was noninferior to CS (n = 324) in PFS [median, 5.5 versus 5.4 months; HR 1.004, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.840–1.199; predefined noninferiority margin 1.30]. The median OS for SOX and CS were 14.1 and 13.1 months, respectively (HR 0.958 with 95% CI 0.803–1.142). In the intention-to-treat population (SOX, n = 339; CS, n = 337), the HRs in PFS and OS were 0.979 (95% CI 0.821–1.167) and 0.934 (95% CI 0.786–1.108), respectively. The most common ≥grade 3 adverse events (SOX versus CS) were neutropenia (19.5% versus 41.8%), anemia (15.1% versus 32.5%), hyponatremia (4.4% versus 13.4%), febrile neutropenia (0.9% versus 6.9%), and sensory neuropathy (4.7% versus 0%). SOX is as effective as CS for AGC with favorable safety profile, therefore SOX can replace CS. JapicCTI-101021.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Combination of cisplatin/S-1 in the treatment of patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: Results of noninferiority and safety analyses compared with cisplatin/5-fluorouracil in the First-Line Advanced Gastric Cancer StudyEuropean Journal of Cancer, 2013
- Multicenter Phase III Comparison of Cisplatin/S-1 With Cisplatin/Infusional Fluorouracil in Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma Study: The FLAGS TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2010
- Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 studyThe Lancet Oncology, 2009
- Capecitabine/cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised phase III noninferiority trialAnnals Of Oncology, 2009
- Development History and Concept of an Oral Anticancer Agent S-1 (TS-1(R)): Its Clinical Usefulness and Future VistasJapanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2008
- Phase III Trial in Metastatic Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma with Fluorouracil, Leucovorin Plus Either Oxaliplatin or Cisplatin: A Study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische OnkologieJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2008
- S-1 plus cisplatin versus S-1 alone for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (SPIRITS trial): a phase III trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2008
- Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin for Advanced Esophagogastric CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- 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 GroupJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2006
- Long-term survival after epirubicin, cisplatin and fluorouracil for gastric cancer: results of a randomized trialBritish Journal of Cancer, 1999