Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Survival impact of post-progression chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on survival impact of post-progression chemotherapy (post-Cx) after first-line chemotherapy (1st-Cx) and after second-line chemotherapy (2nd-Cx), and survival benefit of third-line chemotherapy (3rd-Cx) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods

Phase III trials of systemic chemotherapy for AGC published in English between 2005 and 2015 or presented at annual meetings of ASCO or ESMO between 2013 and 2015 were searched. Numbers of patients, types of chemotherapy, patient baseline, proportion of patients receiving post-Cx (post-Cx%), median progression-free survival (mPFS), and median overall survival (mOS) of each treatment arm were surveyed; trials not reporting these parameters were excluded. Median post-progression survival (mPPS) was calculated as the difference between mOS and mPFS. Weighted Spearman’s correlation coefficients between post-Cx% and survival outcomes (mOS and mPPS) were calculated. The effect of post-Cx% on survival outcomes adjusted for the types of chemotherapy and patient characteristics was evaluated by meta-regression.

Results

Overall, 25 phase III trials of AGC were selected: 15 trials with 31 arms for 1st-Cx, and 10 trials with 16 arms for 2nd-Cx. Weighted Spearman’s correlation coefficients for post-Cx% and mOS/mPPS were 0.520/0.739 for 1st-Cx, and 0.767/0.823 for 2nd-Cx. Meta-regression analyses adjusting for types of chemotherapy, age, and PS showed that a 10% increase in post-Cx% was associated with prolongation of mOS by 1.033 months for 1st-Cx and 0.344 months for 2nd-Cx.

Conclusions

Post-Cx% both after 1st-Cx and 2nd-Cx were correlated with mOS/mPPS, suggesting a survival benefit of 3rd-Cx in addition to that of 2nd-Cx for AGC.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R et al (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 136(5):E359-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wagner AD, Grothe W, Haerting J, Kleber G, Grothey A, Fleig WE (2006) Chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on aggregate data. J Clin Oncol 24(18):2903–2909. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.05.0245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Thuss-Patience PC, Kretzschmar A, Bichev D et al (2011) Survival advantage for irinotecan versus best supportive care as second-line chemotherapy in gastric cancer—a randomised phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO). Eur J Cancer 47(15):2306–2314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2011.06.002

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kang JH, Lee SI, Lim do H et al (2012) Salvage chemotherapy for pretreated gastric cancer: a randomized phase III trial comparing chemotherapy plus best supportive care with best supportive care alone. J Clin Oncol 30(13):1513–1518. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.39.4585

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ford HE, Marshall A, Bridgewater JA et al (2014) Docetaxel versus active symptom control for refractory oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (COUGAR-02): an open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 15(1):78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70549-7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilke H, Muro K, Van Cutsem E et al (2014) Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 15(11):1224–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70420-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fuchs CS, Tomasek J, Yong CJ et al (2014) Ramucirumab monotherapy for previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (REGARD): an international, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 383(9911):31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)61719-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hironaka S, Ueda S, Yasui H et al (2013) Randomized, open-label, phase III study comparing irinotecan with paclitaxel in patients with advanced gastric cancer without severe peritoneal metastasis after failure of prior combination chemotherapy using fluoropyrimidine plus platinum: WJOG 4007 trial. J Clin Oncol 31(35):4438–4444. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2012.48.5805

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Shitara K, Matsuo K, Muro K, Doi T, Ohtsu A (2014) Correlation between overall survival and other endpoints in clinical trials of second-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 17(2):362–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-013-0274-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Shitara K, Muro K, Shimada Y et al (2016) Subgroup analyses of the safety and efficacy of ramucirumab in Japanese and Western patients in RAINBOW: a randomized clinical trial in second-line treatment of gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 19(3):927–938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-015-0559-z

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kang YK, Boku N, Satoh T et al (2017) Nivolumab in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer refractory to, or intolerant of, at least two previous chemotherapy regimens (ONO-4538-12, ATTRACTION-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 390:2461–2471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31827-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Takashima A, Iizumi S, Boku N (2017) Survival after failure of first-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer patients: differences between Japan and the rest of the world. Jpn J Clin Oncol 47(7):583–589. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyx044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.r-project.org/. Accessed 22 Dec 2017

  14. Van Cutsem E, Moiseyenko VM, Tjulandin S et al (2006) 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 24(31):4991–4997. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.06.8429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Al-Batran SE, Hartmann JT, Probst S et al (2008) 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 26(9):1435–1442. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.13.9378

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Koizumi W, Narahara H, Hara T et al (2008) S-1 plus cisplatin versus S-1 alone for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (SPIRITS trial): a phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 9(3):215–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(08)70035-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Boku N, Yamamoto S, Fukuda H et al (2009) Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 10(11):1063–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(09)70259-1

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ajani JA, Rodriguez W, Bodoky G et al (2010) Multicenter phase III comparison of cisplatin/S-1 with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma study: the FLAGS trial. J Clin Oncol 28(9):1547–1553. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.25.4706

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bang YJ, Van Cutsem E, Feyereislova A et al (2010) 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 376(9742):687–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(10)61121-x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Narahara H, Iishi H, Imamura H et al (2011) Randomized phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of irinotecan plus S-1 with S-1 alone as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (study GC0301/TOP-002). Gastric Cancer 14(1):72–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-011-0009-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Ohtsu A, Shah MA, Van Cutsem E et al (2011) Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy as first-line therapy in advanced gastric cancer: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study. J Clin Oncol 29(30):3968–3976. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.36.2236

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Lordick F, Kang YK, Chung HC et al (2013) Capecitabine and cisplatin with or without cetuximab for patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (EXPAND): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14(6):490–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70102-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Guimbaud R, Louvet C, Ries P et al (2014) Prospective, randomized, multicenter, phase III study of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine in advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: a French intergroup (Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive, Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer, and Groupe Cooperateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) study. J Clin Oncol 32(31):3520–3526. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.54.1011

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Koizumi W, Kim YH, Fujii M et al (2014) Addition of docetaxel to S-1 without platinum prolongs survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomized study (START). J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 140(2):319–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-013-1563-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ochenduszko S, Puskulluoglu M, Konopka K et al (2015) Comparison of efficacy and safety of first-line palliative chemotherapy with EOX and mDCF regimens in patients with locally advanced inoperable or metastatic HER2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a randomized phase 3 trial. Med Oncol 32(10):242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-015-0687-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ryu MH, Baba E, Lee KH et al (2015) Comparison of two different S-1 plus cisplatin dosing schedules as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic and/or recurrent gastric cancer: a multicenter, randomized phase III trial (SOS). Ann Oncol 26(10):2097–2101. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shen L, Li J, Xu J et al (2015) Bevacizumab plus capecitabine and cisplatin in Chinese patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: randomized, double-blind, phase III study (AVATAR study). Gastric Cancer 18(1):168–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-014-0351-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Yamada Y, Higuchi K, Nishikawa K et al (2015) Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced gastric cancer. Ann Oncol 26(1):141–148. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu472

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ohtsu A, Ajani JA, Bai YX et al (2013) Everolimus for previously treated advanced gastric cancer: results of the randomized, double-blind, phase III GRANITE-1 study. J Clin Oncol 31(31):3935–3943. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2012.48.3552

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Higuchi K, Tanabe S, Shimada K et al (2014) Biweekly irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan alone as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: a randomised phase III trial (TCOG GI-0801/BIRIP trial). Eur J Cancer 50(8):1437–1445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2014.01.020

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Satoh T, Xu RH, Chung HC et al (2014) Lapatinib plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone in the second-line treatment of HER2-amplified advanced gastric cancer in Asian populations: TyTAN—a randomized, phase III study. J Clin Oncol 32(19):2039–2049. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.53.6136

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Nishikawa K, Fujitani K, Inagaki H et al (2015) Randomised phase III trial of second-line irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to S-1 monotherapy: TRICS trial. Eur J Cancer 51(7):808–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.02.009

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Tanabe K, Fujii M, Nishikawa K et al (2015) Phase II/III study of second-line chemotherapy comparing irinotecan-alone with S-1 plus irinotecan in advanced gastric cancer refractory to first-line treatment with S-1 (JACCRO GC-05). Ann Oncol 26(9):1916–1922. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv265

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Cunningham D, Starling N, Rao S et al (2008) Capecitabine and oxaliplatin for advanced esophagogastric cancer. N Engl J Med 358(1):36–46. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa073149

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Dank M, Zaluski J, Barone C et al (2008) Randomized phase III study comparing irinotecan combined with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid to cisplatin combined with 5-fluorouracil in chemotherapy naive patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction. Ann Oncol 19(8):1450–1457. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdn166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kang YK, Kang WK, Shin DB et al (2009) Capecitabine/cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised phase III noninferiority trial. Ann Oncol 20(4):666–673. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdn717

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lee KH, Hyun MS, Kim HK et al (2009) Randomized, multicenter, phase III trial of heptaplatin 1-hour infusion and 5-fluorouracil combination chemotherapy comparing with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Cancer Res Treat 41(1):12–18. https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2009.41.1.12

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Shirao K, Boku N, Yamada Y et al (2013) Randomized Phase III study of 5-fluorouracil continuous infusion vs. sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil therapy in far advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis (JCOG0106). Jpn J Clin Oncol 43(10):972–980. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyt114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Waddell T, Chau I, Cunningham D et al (2013) Epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine with or without panitumumab for patients with previously untreated advanced oesophagogastric cancer (REAL3): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14(6):481–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70096-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hecht JR, Bang Y-J, Qin S, Chung H-C, Xu J-M, Park JO (2013) Lapatinib in combination with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOx) in HER2-positive advanced or metastatic gastric, esophageal, or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (AC): the TRIO-013/LOGiC Trial. J Clin Oncol 34(5):suppl; abstr LBA4001. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.18_suppl.lba4001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Xu R-h, Sun G-p, Lu H-s, Peng LY, Xu J-m, Zhong M-z (2013) A phase III study of S-1 plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol 31(15):suppl 4025–4025. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.15_suppl.4025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Li J, Qin S, Xu J et al (2014) Phase III study of apatinib in advanced gastric cancer: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Oncol 25(suppl_2):ii117. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu193.29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ajani JA, Abramov M, Bondar V, Bondarenko I, Shparyk YV (2015) Untreated metastatic diffuse gastric adenocarcinoma (DGAC): randomized phase III study of S-1 and cisplatin vs. 5-FU and cisplatin (the DIGEST trial). J Clin Oncol 33(15):suppl 4015–4015. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.4015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Cunningham D, Tebbutt NC, Davidenko I, Murad AM, Al-Batran S-E (2015) Phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo (P)-controlled trial of rilotumumab (R) plus epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) as first-line therapy in patients (pts) with advanced MET-positive (pos) gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer: RILOMET-1 study. J Clin Oncol 33(15):suppl 4000–4000. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.4000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Hwang IG, Lee HR, Lee HY, Ji JH, Kang JH, Lee SI (2015) First-line capecitabine (X) monotherapy versus capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC): results from the first interim analysis. J Clin Oncol 33(15):suppl 4051–4051. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.4051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nishikawa K, Yoshino S, Morita S, Takahashi T, Sakata K, Nagao J (2015) A randomized phase III study of S-1 alone versus S-1 plus immunomodulator lentinan for unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer (JFMC36–0701). Eur J Cancer 51(Supplement 3):S442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2017) Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer 20:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-016-0622-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan

    Sakura Iizumi, Atsuo Takashima & Narikazu Boku

  2. Department of Medicine, Keio University Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    Sakura Iizumi

  3. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    Kentaro Sakamaki

  4. Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan

    Satoshi Morita

Authors
  1. Sakura Iizumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Atsuo Takashima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kentaro Sakamaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Satoshi Morita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Narikazu Boku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atsuo Takashima.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This study itself does not involve any interventions on human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. Ethical approval was not required for this study because only publicly available data were used.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required for this study.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 35 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iizumi, S., Takashima, A., Sakamaki, K. et al. Survival impact of post-progression chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 81, 981–989 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-018-3569-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-018-3569-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation