Dataset Information

A randomized phase II trial to elucidate the efficacy of capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) and S-1 plus cisplatin (SP) as a first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: XP ascertainment vs. SP randomized PII trial (XParTS II).

ABSTRACT: On the basis of international clinical trials, capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) as a first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer is considered a global standard regimen. However, the usefulness of XP as compared with S-1 plus cisplatin (SP), which is considered standard therapy in Japan, has not yet been assessed.This is a multicenter randomized phase II trial to elucidate the efficacy of XP as compared with SP for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer, 20-74?years of age and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)-negative status, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either S-1 40?mg/m2 bid for 21?days plus cisplatin 60?mg/m2 (day 8) every 5-week cycle or capecitabine 1000?mg/m2 bid for 14?days plus cisplatin 80?mg/m2 (day 1) every 3-week cycle. Patients will be also asked to the analysis of tumor tissues for translational investigations. The Primary endpoint is progression-free survival and secondary endpoints are overall survival, time to treatment failure, tumor response rate and safety. These comparisons will also be evaluated in terms of biomarkers. Planned sample size is 100 (50 in each arm), which is appropriate for this trial.Fluoropyrimidine plus cisplatin combination is the standard regimen of the first line treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Both S-1 and capecitabine are the prodrug of 5-FU but differ from their process of metabolism. Result of this trial and translational research will provide the important clues to prepare the individualized therapy for advanced gastric cancer in the near future.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01406249.

SUBMITTER: Tsuburaya A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3488329 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized phase II trial to elucidate the efficacy of capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) and S-1 plus cisplatin (SP) as a first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: XP ascertainment vs. SP randomized PII trial (XParTS II).

Tsuburaya Akira A Morita Satoshi S Kodera Yasuhiro Y Kobayashi Michiya M Shitara Kohei K Yamaguchi Kensei K Yoshikawa Takaki T Yoshida Kazuhiro K Yoshino Shigefumi S Sakamoto Jun-ichi J

BMC cancer 20120723

<h4>Background</h4>On the basis of international clinical trials, capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) as a first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer is considered a global standard regimen. However, the usefulness of XP as compared with S-1 plus cisplatin (SP), which is considered standard therapy in Japan, has not yet been assessed.<h4>Methods/design</h4>This is a multicenter randomized phase II trial to elucidate the efficacy of XP as compared with SP for first-line treatment of advanced ga ...[more]

PMID: 22824079

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients with advanced biliary tract cancer who progress on first-line therapy have limited treatment options. The TreeTopp study assessed varlitinib, a reversible small molecule pan-human epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, plus capecitabine in previously treated advanced biliary tract cancer.Patients and methodsThis global, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase II study enrolled patients with confirmed unresectable or metastatic biliary tract cancer and disease progression after one prior line of gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy. Patients received oral varlitinib 300 mg or placebo twice daily (b.i.d.) for 21 days, plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 b.i.d. on days 1-14, in 21-day treatment cycles. Co-primary endpoints were objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST v1.1 by Independent Central Review.ResultsIn total, 127 patients received varlitinib plus capecitabine (n = 64) or placebo plus capecitabine (n = 63). The objective response rate was 9.4% with varlitinib plus capecitabine versus 4.8% with capecitabine alone (odds ratio 2.28; P = 0.42). Median PFS was 2.83 versus 2.79 months [hazard ratio (HR), 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-1.37; P = 0.63] and overall survival was 7.8 versus 7.5 months (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.69-1.79; P = 0.66), respectively. In a subgroup analysis, the addition of varlitinib appeared to provide a PFS benefit in female patients (median, 4.1 versus 2.8 months; HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.28-1.23) and those with gallbladder cancer (median, 2.9 versus 1.6 months; HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.26-1.19). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 65.6% of patients receiving varlitinib plus capecitabine versus 58.7% of those receiving capecitabine alone.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced biliary tract cancer, second-line treatment with varlitinib plus capecitabine was well tolerated but did not improve efficacy versus capecitabine alone. A PFS benefit was suggested in female patients and those with gallbladder cancer.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In recent years, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been investigated at high-dose to modulate tumor microenvironment acidification thus restoring chemotherapeutic sensitivity. This is the first trial to study activity and safety of repurposing high dose rabeprazole combined with metronomic capecitabine (mCAP). METHODS:A phase II study in which patients with gastrointestinal cancer, refractory to standard treatments, who had a life expectancy >3 months, were blind randomized 1:1 to mCAP, 1500 mg/daily, continuously with or without rabeprazole 1.5 mg/kg bid, three days a week. The primary endpoint was 3-months progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were clinical benefit (CB) and overall survival (OS). Safety and plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites (5'-DFUR and 5-FU) were also evaluated. RESULTS:Sixty-seven (median age 69 years; 63% male; 84% colorectal cancer, 76% ECOG-PS ? 1; 84% pretreated with two or more lines of chemotherapy) out of 90 patients screened for eligibility, were randomized to receive mCAP+rabeprazole (n = 32) vs. mCAP (n = 35). All patients were evaluable for response. No significant difference between mCAP+rabeprazole vs. mCAP, in terms of 3-months PFS rate (HR = 1.43, 95%CI 0.53-3.85; p = 0.477), median PFS (HR = 1.22, 95%CI 0.75-2.00, p = 0.420), CB (RR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.29-2.44; p = 0.786) and median OS (HR = 0.89, 95%CI 0.54-1.48; p = 0.664) was observed. However, a 3-year OS rate of 10% and 12% was reported in the mCAP-rabeprazole and mCAP groups, respectively. Overall, no grade 3 or 4 toxicity occurred but grade 1 or 2 adverse event of any type were more frequently in the mCAP+rabeprazole group than in the mCAP (OR 2.83, 95%CI 1.03-7.79; p = 0.043). Finally, there was not statistically significant difference in the plasma concentration of capecitabine and its metabolites between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS:Although the adjunct of high dose rabeprazole to mCAP was not shown to affect mCAP activity, as PPI are being investigated worldwide as drugs to be repositioned in cancer treatment and also considering the limited sample size as well as the favorable safety profile of the combination in the present study, further clinical investigations are desirable.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Combination chemotherapy regimens including fluoropyrimidines as well as albumin-bound paclitaxel have shown promising results in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPC). Based on the recently described excellent therapeutic index of capecitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in metastatic breast cancer, the present phase II trial was initiated. METHODS:Patients with previously untreated mPC were treated with capecitabine (825 mg/m(2) orally bid on days 1-15) and nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8) every 3 weeks. In patients without clinically relevant adverse reactions after the 1st treatment course (? grade 2 toxicities according to NCI-CTC vs. 4.0, exuding alopecia and fatigue of any degree) and adequate bone marrow function, the nab-paclitaxel dose was escalated to 100 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of each cycle; this intra-individual dose escalation was maintained during subsequent treatment courses if tolerated. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST criteria, assessed by an independent radiological review committee with evaluation performed every 2 months. RESULTS:Between 12/2013 and 01/2015, 30 patients were entered in this monocentric academic phase II trial. All patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 80% had liver metastases and 23% had biliary stents in place at time of study initiation. Median CA19-9 was 1,004 U/mL (0.9-100.000 U/mL). In all patients except 2, a dose escalation of nab-paclitaxel after the 1st treatment course could be accomplished. The most common grade 3 adverse events (AEs) included transient sensory neuropathy (23%), (afebrile) neutropenia (17%), hand-foot-syndrome (13%) and phototoxic skin reaction (10%). Among 29 RECIST-response assessable patients, the ORR was 41.4% and stable disease (SD) was noted in 34.5%, resulting in a disease control rate (DCR) of 76%. After a median follow-up duration of 10.3 months (range, 1.9-19.0 months), 13/30 patients (43.3%) are presently being alive. CONCLUSIONS:The combination of capecitabine + nab-paclitaxel at these doses and scheduling was well tolerated and showed substantial antitumor efficacy.

Dataset Information

A randomized phase II trial to elucidate the efficacy of capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) and S-1 plus cisplatin (SP) as a first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: XP ascertainment vs. SP randomized PII trial (XParTS II).

Publications

A randomized phase II trial to elucidate the efficacy of capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) and S-1 plus cisplatin (SP) as a first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: XP ascertainment vs. SP randomized PII trial (XParTS II).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets