Randomized phase III study of S-1 alone versus S-1 + cisplatin in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer ( The SPIRITS trial ) SPIRITS: S-1 plus cisplatin.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (bev) vs FOLFIRI plus bev
Advertisements

I I. B.- T R E A T M E N T P L A N: DOCETAXEL 75 mg/m2 40 mg/m2 THORACIC RT (66 Gys: 180 cGy/d) CISPLATIN 40 mg/m2 Days E V A L U A.
Questions and answers about PARAMOUNT: phase III study of pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy in advanced non-squamous NSCLC.
1 N9841: A Randomized Phase III Equivalence Trial of Irinotecan (CPT-11) versus FOLFOX4 in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Carcinoma Previously Treated.
Upper Gastrointestinal Overview : Practical Implications of the Newest Data Esophageal and Gastric Cancers Johanna Bendell, MD Sarah Cannon Research.
Dr. LP Si Tseung Kwan O Hospital. Introduction CA stomach is the 4 th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide 2 nd most common cause of cancer-related.
Phase III Study Comparing Gemcitabine plus Cetuximab versus Gemcitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Southwest.
First-Line TKI Use in EGFR Mutation-Positive NSCLC
Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil-based (neo-)adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: Long term results.
Phase III study of first-line XELOX plus bevacizumab (BEV) for 6 cycles followed by XELOX plus BEV or single agent (s/a) BEV as maintenance therapy in.
Intergroup trial CALGB 80101
Taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC): investigational agents TTP = median time to disease progression OS = median overall survival.
Efficacy results from the ToGA trial: a phase III study of trastuzumab added to standard chemotherapy in first-line human epidermal growth factor receptor.
Phase III studies of Xeloda® in colorectal cancer (CRC)
Copyright © 2011 Research To Practice. All rights reserved. Case presented by Dr Schwartz 44 yo woman with 4 mo hx of abdominal pain –Imaging = pancreatic.
A Phase III trial of 5-FU/l-leucovorin/ irinotecan (FOLFIRI) versus irinotecan/S-1 (IRIS) as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.
What is the reference cytotoxic regimen in advanced gastric cancer? Florian Lordick Klinikum Braunschweig Germany.
Capecitabine versus Bolus 5-FU/Leucovorin as Adjuvant Therapy for Colon Cancer: X-ACT Trial Results James Cassidy, MD Colorectal Cancer Update Think Tank.
1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib.
Better Regimens & Predictive Markers For Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer? Peter C. Enzinger, M.D. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Medical School.
Results of Docetaxel Plus Oxaliplatin (DOCOX) +/- Cetuximab in Patients with Metastatic Gastric and/or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results.
Poster #382 XELOX-1/NO16966, a randomized phase III trial of first-line XELOX vs. FOLFOX-4 for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC): Updated.
Phase III Trial of Pazopanib in Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Sternberg CN et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Oral Presentation)
N. Boku, S. Yamamoto, K. Shirao, T. Doi, A. Sawaki, W. Koizumi, H. Saito, K. Yamaguchi, A. Kimura, A. Ohtsu Gastrointestinal Oncology Study Group of Japan.
This house believes that FOLFIRINOX is the best treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma Pro Marc YCHOU Montpellier.
11 One vs Three Years of Adjuvant Imatinib for Operable Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor A Randomized Trial Joensuu H, Eriksson M, Sundby Hall K, et al.
Axel Grothey, MD Professor of Oncology Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota Strategies to Improve Patient Outcomes in Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction.
Phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without irinotecan in the front-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in elderly patients. FFCD
Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing FOLFIRINOX (F: 5FU/Leucovorin [LV], Irinotecan [I], and Oxaliplatin [O]) versus Gemcitabine (G) as First-Line Treatment.
BASED ON PROTOCOL VERSION 1 SEPTEMBER 2012 A new study evaluating an investigational drug to treat patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastroesophageal.
Taiwan 2000 Comparative evaluation in tolerance of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant docetaxel based chemotherapy in resectable gastric cancer in a randomized.
Phase I/II Trial of Docetaxel plus Oxaliplatin and 5-Fluorouracil (D-FOX) in Patients with Untreated, Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Cancer Jaffer.
Gemcitabine + Cisplatin +/- Bevacizumab as 1st-line Treatment of Advanced NSCLC: AVAiL Study Manegold PASCO 25:#7514, 2007/Ann.
Quality of life results from a Phase III trial of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in first-line HER2-positive advanced gastric and GE junction cancer Taroh.
Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemo-bevacizumab therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized.
MAX: International multi-centre randomised phase II/III study of capecitabine (Cap), bevacizumab (Bev) and mitomycin C (MMC) as first-line treatment for.
Final Analysis of Overall Survival for the Phase III CONFIRM Trial: Fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg Di Leo A et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-4.
XELOX vs. FOLFOX4: survival and response results from XELOX-1 / NO16966, a randomized phase III trial of first-line treatment for patients with metastatic.
Final Efficacy Results from OAM4558g, a Randomized Phase II Study Evaluating MetMAb or Placebo in Combination with Erlotinib in Advanced NSCLC Spigel DR.
AVADO TRIAL David Miles Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, United Kingdom A randomized, double-blind study of bevacizumab in combination with docetaxel.
Cmab might have therapeutic benefit in Japanese patients with KRAS p.G13D mutant colorectal cancer. Limitations of this study are its retrospective design.
ECCO ESMO 2011 GI Cancer Updates TAS102 and BSC vs. Placebo and BSC Reviewer: Dr. Scott Berry Date posted: October 2011.
Rituximab plus Lenalidomide Improves the Complete Remission Rate in Comparison with Rituximab Monotherapy in Untreated Follicular Lymphoma Patients in.
Preliminary Results from a Phase II study of FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab as First Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Abstract #3579) S. Kopetz,
Results of a Randomized Phase 2 Study of PD , a Cyclin ‐ Dependent Kinase (CDK) 4/6 Inhibitor, in Combination with Letrozole vs Letrozole Alone.
Frontline Chemoimmunotherapy with Fludarabine (F), Cyclophosphamide (C), and Rituximab (R) (FCR) Shows Superior Efficacy in Comparison to Bendamustine.
Kang Y et al. Proc ASCO 2010;Abstract LBA4007.
Dasatinib Compared to Imatinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP): Twelve- Month Efficacy and Safety.
Phase II trial of chemotherapy with high-dose FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the front-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)
CV-1 Trial 709 The ISEL Study (IRESSA ® Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer) Summary of Data as of December 16, 2004 Kevin Carroll, MSc Summary of Data.
Gemcitabine With or Without Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer (ABC): Results of a Multicentre, Randomized Phase III.
until tumour progression until tumour progression
Tolerability of fluoropyrimidines differs by region Daniel G. Haller on behalf of: Cassidy J, Clarke S, Cunningham D, Van Cutsem E Hoff P, Rothenberg M,
CALYPSO Trial: Carboplatin & Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD) versus Carboplatin & Paclitaxel in Relapsed, Platinum- Sensitive Ovarian Cancer Pujade-Lauraine.
Low Dose Decitabine Versus Best Supportive Care in Elderly Patients with Intermediate or High Risk MDS Not Eligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: Final Results.
A Phase II Study of Sorafenib Combining with Docetaxel and Cisplatin in the Treatment of Metastatic or Advanced Unresectable Gastric and Gastroesophageal.
1 A Randomized, Multi-Center Phase III Trial of Irinotecan in Combination with Three Different Methods of Administration of Fluoropyrimidine with Celecoxib.
Results from a Randomized Phase III Trial of Decitabine versus Supportive Care or Low-Dose Cytarabine for the Treatment of Older Patients with Newly Diagnosed.
A Phase III, Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter Study of Eribulin Mesylate versus Capecitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast.
Phase I/II study of oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 plus oral Leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer T. Yoshino 1, W. Koizumi 2,
North Central Cancer Treatment Group Randomized Phase II Trial of Panitumumab, Erlotinib, and Gemcitabine (PGE) versus Erlotinib-Gemcitabine (GE) in Patients.
Mok TS, Wu SL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361: Gefitinib Superior.
Y-K Kang, A Ohtsu, E Van Cutsem, SY Rha, A Sawaki SR Park, H-Y Lim, J Wu, B Langer, MA Shah on behalf of AVAGAST investigators AVAGAST: a randomized, double-blind.
CCO Independent Conference Highlights
Gajria D et al. Proc SABCS 2010;Abstract P
ESPAC-4: Adjuvant Gemcitabine/ Capecitabine Improves 5-Yr Survival vs Gemcitabine Alone in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Carcinoma CCO Independent Conference.
until tumour progression until tumour progression
Randomized phase III study of irinotecan (IRI) versus weekly paclitaxel (wPTX) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) refractory to combination chemotherapy.
LV5FU2-cisplatin followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: Preliminary results of a randomized phase III trial (FFCD.
GASTRIC CANCER 2007 #New Cases (rank) # Deaths (rank)
Presentation transcript:

Randomized phase III study of S-1 alone versus S-1 + cisplatin in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer ( The SPIRITS trial ) SPIRITS: S-1 plus cisplatin vs S-1 in RCT in the treatment of stomach cancer H. Narahara 1, W. Koizumi 2, T. Hara 3, A. Takagane 4, T. Akiya 5, M. Takagi 6, K. Miyashita 7, T. Nishizaki 8, O. Kobayashi 9, S-1 Advanced Gastric Cancer (AGC) Clinical Trial Group; 1 Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and CV Diseases, Osaka, JAPAN, 2 Kitasato University East Hospital, Kanagawa, JAPAN, 3 Kouseiren Takaoka Hospital, Toyama, JAPAN, 4 Iwate Medical University, Iwate, JAPAN, 5 Gunma Prefectural Cancer Center, Gunma, JAPAN, 6 Shizuoka General Hospital, Shizuoka, JAPAN, 7 National Hospital Organization Nagasaki Medical Center, Nagasaki, JAPAN, 8 Matsuyama Red Cross Hospital, Ehime, JAPAN, 9 Kanagawa Cancer Center, Kanagawa, JAPAN.

F-  -Ala Neuro Toxicity GI toxicity Myelotoxicity 5-FU Anti-tumoractivity Background-1  S-1 is : an oral fluoropyrimidine widely used for AGC in Japan. an oral fluoropyrimidine widely used for AGC in Japan. an oral formulation of Tegafur, CDHP, and Oxo at a molar an oral formulation of Tegafur, CDHP, and Oxo at a molar ratio 1:0.4:1. ratio 1:0.4:1. observed high RR and MST of % and days observed high RR and MST of % and days in two independent phase II trials 1,2 in two independent phase II trials 1,2 1: Y Sakata et al. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: : W Koizumi et al. Oncology 2000; 58: DPD Tegafur CDHP OPRT Oxo inhibit inhibit

Background-2 regimenptsRR(%)PFS(M)OS(M) P value(OS) 5FUUFT+MMC5FU+CDDP(FP) NS  JCOG9205 1) 1): A. Ohtsu et al. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21:54-59 FP arm demonstrated significantly longer PFS FP arm demonstrated significantly longer PFS than 5FU arm. (P<0.001) than 5FU arm. (P<0.001) There were no significant differences between There were no significant differences between the arms with respect to OS the arms with respect to OS In Japan, recommended regimen for AGC was In Japan, recommended regimen for AGC was 5-FU alone

Background-3  JCOG FU S-1 CPT-11+CDDP Non-inferiority Boku et al. ASCO2007 abstract#: LBA4513

Background-4  S-1+CDDP Phase I/II Study 1) S mg BID for 3wks Day 1 Day 8 Day 15 Day 22 Day 29 Day 36 CDDP 60mg/m 2 on Day 8 S-1regimenPts(RD)RR(%)TTP(Day)MST(Day)S-1+CDDP : W Koizumi et al. Br J Cancer 2003; 89: Dosage of S-1 was based on patient’s body surface area (BSA) Dosage of S-1 was based on patient’s body surface area (BSA) BSA < 1.25 : 40 mg BID BSA < 1.25 : 40 mg BID < 1.50 : 50 mg BID < 1.50 : 50 mg BID < BSA : 60 mg BID < BSA : 60 mg BID

Study Design AGC No prior Chemo. R S-1 alone S-1: mg BID for 28 days q6wks S-1 + CDDP S-1: mg BID for 21 days q5wks CDDP: 60 mg/m 2 iv on day 8 Central Randomization (dynamic balancing) (dynamic balancing) Adjustment Factors: Institute PS PS Unresectable vs Recurrent Unresectable vs Recurrent

Endpoints  Primary Endpoint Overall Survival Overall Survival Estimated OS (S-1/S-1+CDDP) : 8/12 months Estimated OS (S-1/S-1+CDDP) : 8/12 months N=142 in each arm for 90% power to establish N=142 in each arm for 90% power to establish superiority in OS (Two-sided log-rank  =0.05). superiority in OS (Two-sided log-rank  =0.05). Follow up: 2 years Follow up: 2 years  Secondary Endpoints Progression Free Survival Progression Free Survival Time to Treatment Failure Time to Treatment Failure Overall Response Overall Response Safety Safety 142 pts in each arm

Inclusion Criteria  Histologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinoma (unresectable/recurrent gastric cancer) (unresectable/recurrent gastric cancer)  No prior chemotherapy  PS (ECOG scale) 0-2  Age  Expected survival > 3 months  Adequate organ function (bone marrow, liver, renal function) (bone marrow, liver, renal function)  Written informed consent

Patient Characteristics -1  Randomized : 305 pts (S-1/S-1+CDDP : 152/153) between Mar/2002 and Nov/2004 between Mar/2002 and Nov/2004  FAS : 298 pts (S-1/S-1+CDDP : 150/148) No. of pts S-1S-1+CDDPP-value Gender M / F 116 / / Age, years Median (range) 62.0 (28 – 74) 61.5 (33 – 74) ECOG PS, 0 / 1 / / 39 / / 38 / Primary lesion - / + - / + 58 / /

Patient Characteristics -2 No. of pts S-1S-1+CDDPP-value Diagnosis Unresectable Unresectable Recurrent Recurrent Adjuvant chemotherapy Adjuvant chemotherapy - / + - / + 23 / 8 20 / Histology Diffuse Diffuse Intestinal Intestinal Unknown Unknown No. of organs involved 1 / 2 / >3 1 / 2 / >3 39 / 54 / / 36 / Metastasis of peritoneum - / + - / / /

Months Estimated probability (%) Overall Survival S-1S-1+CDDP No. of pts MST yr survival 46.7 % 54.1 % 2 yr survival 15.3 % 23.6 % Log-rank p-value: HR: [ 95% CI: – 0.985] Median follow-up time (M): 34.6

Progression-Free Survival Log-rank p-value: < HR: [ 95% CI: – 0.734] Estimated probability (%) Months S-1S-1+CDDP No. of pts PFS4.06.0

Time to Treatment Failure Log-rank p-value: HR: [ 95% CI: – 0.912] Estimated probability (%) Months S-1S-1+CDDP No. of pts TTF3.94.8

Overall Response No. Response Overall RR CRPRSDPDNE S % S-1+CDDP %  Criteria : RECIST (Extramural Review) Fisher’s Exact Test p-value:

Adverse Drug Reactions-1 S-1 N = 150 S-1+CDDP N = 148 All Gr. N (%) Gr. 3/4 N (%) All Gr. N (%) Gr. 3/4 N (%) Haematological Leucopenia Leucopenia 57 (38) 3 (2) 104 (70) 17 (12) Neutropenia Neutropenia 63 (42) 16 (11) 110 (74) 59 (40) Anemia Anemia 49 (33) 6 (4) 100 (68) 38 (26) Thrombocytopenia Thrombocytopenia 27 (18) 0 (0) 72 (49) 8 (5) Non-haematological T-bil T-bil 30 (20) 2 (1) 36 (24) 1 (1) AST AST 17 (11) 3 (2) 15 (10) 0 (0) ALT ALT 14 (9) 1 (1) 18 (12) 0 (0) ALP ALP 8 (5) 1 (1) 8 (5) 1 (1) Creatinine Creatinine 3 (2) 0 (0) 32 (22) 0 (0) Criteria : NCI-CTC ver. 2.0

Adverse Drug Reactions-2 S-1 N = 150 S-1+CDDP N = 148 All Gr. N (%) Gr. 3/4 N (%) All Gr. N (%) Gr. 3/4 N (%) General Fatigue Fatigue 49 (33) 2 (1) 84 (57) 6 (4) Gastrointestinal Anorexia Anorexia 55 (37) 9 (6) 107 (72) 45 (30) Nausea Nausea 39 (26) 2 (1) 99 (67) 17 (12) Vomiting Vomiting 21 (14) 3 (2) 54 (37) 6 (4) Diarrhea Diarrhea 34 (23) 5 (3) 51 (35) 6 (4) Stomatitis Stomatitis 32 (21) 0 (0) 43 (29) 1 (1) Skin Pigmentation Pigmentation 60 (40) 0 (0) 53 (36) 0 (0) Rash Rash 28 (19) 2 (1) 32 (22) 3 (2) Hand-foot syndrome Hand-foot syndrome 18 (12) 0 (0) 14 (10) 0 (0) No treatment-related death was observed No treatment-related death was observed Criteria : NCI-CTC ver. 2.0

Phase III trials in AGC GroupregimenptsRR(%)PFS(M)OS(M) P value (OS) SPIRITSS-1S-1+CDDP E Van Cutsem, et al 1) (2006)CFDCF *5.6* D Cunningham, et al 2) (2006) ECFEOFECXEOX NS YK Kang, et al 3) (2006)FPXP NS *TTP 3) Proc ASCO 2006; Vol 24, No. 18S: LBA4018 1) J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 4991 – ) Proc ASCO 2006; Vol 24, No. 18S: LBA4017

Conclusions The OS of S-1+CDDP is superior to S-1 alone  The OS of S-1+CDDP is superior to S-1 alone 11.0 M, The median survival time of S-1 was 11.0 M, 13.0 M moreover, that of S-1+CDDP was 13.0 M  S-1+CDDP is well tolerated and no treatment- related death was observed  S-1+CDDP regimen can be regarded as the first-line standard treatment for AGC

Future Perspectives In Red : FP vs S-1+CDDP (FLAGS: on-going) In Red : FP vs S-1+CDDP (FLAGS: on-going) In Yellow : S-1 vs S-1+CDDP (SPIRITS) In Yellow : S-1 vs S-1+CDDP (SPIRITS) In near future, the clinical characteristics of S-1+CDDP for AGC will become clear

Acknowledgements Participating Inst. Kitasato University East Hospital Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and CV Diseases Kouseiren Takaoka Hospital Iwate Medical University Gunma Prefectural Cancer Center Shizuoka General Hospital National Hospital Organization Nagasaki Medical Center Matsuyama Red Cross Hospital Kanagawa Cancer Center (Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery) Hiroshima City Asa Hospital National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center Aso Iizuka Hospital Kanagawa Cancer Center(Department of Gastroenterology) Aichi Cancer Center Wakayama Medical University Saga Prefectural Hospital KOSEIKAN National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital Aichi Cancer Center Aichi Hospital The Fraternity Memorial Hospital University of Tokai School of Medicine Gifu Municipal Hospital Toranomon Hospital Kumamoto Rosai Hospital Showa University Northern Yokohama Hospital Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital Kawaguchi Municipal Medical Center Nara Prefectural Nara Hospital Chikushi Hospital, Fukuoka University Kanto Medical Center, NTT EC Kyoto University Kinki University School of Medicine Yamagata Prefectural Central Hospital National Hospital Organization Fukuoka-Higashi Medical Center Kouri Hospital, Kansai Medical University Sendai Kousei Hospital Tokyo Women's Medical University Medical Center East Kokura Memorial Hospital Niigata City General Hospital This study was sponsored by TAIHO Pharmaceutical, co. ltd.