A randomized multicenter phase II study comparing capecitabine with irinotecan or cisplatin in metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction
Background: The combination of irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil demonstrates efficacy with tolerable safety in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (mGC). This randomized phase II trial compared for the first time capecitabine with irinotecan or cisplatin in this setting. Pat...
Saved in:
Published in | Annals of oncology Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 71 - 77 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Oxford
Oxford University Press
01.01.2010
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Background: The combination of irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil demonstrates efficacy with tolerable safety in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (mGC). This randomized phase II trial compared for the first time capecitabine with irinotecan or cisplatin in this setting. Patients and methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive 3-week cycles of capecitabine 1000 mg/m2, twice daily for 14 days, with on day 1 either irinotecan 250 mg/m2 (XI) or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 (XP). The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) and secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: Of 118 patients recruited, 112 were eligible for safety analysis and 103 for efficacy analysis. In the XI and XP treatment arms, there were no marked differences in ORR, 37.7% versus 42.0%, and median PFS, 4.2 versus 4.8 months, although median OS was longer, 10.2 versus 7.9 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicity was higher in the XP regimen for thrombocytes (18.2% versus 1.8%), nausea (23.6% versus12.3%) and vomiting (16.4% versus 1.8%) and in the XI arm for diarrhea (22.8% versus 7.3%). Conclusion: The comparable activity and safety of the XI and XP regimens establish XI as a relevant platinum-free first-line treatment choice for patients with mGC. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ark:/67375/HXZ-H47J9CBJ-C istex:5F49CC6E0ECC26D731D6B25CC90EA65468C188DF |
ISSN: | 0923-7534 1569-8041 |
DOI: | 10.1093/annonc/mdp269 |