Search

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of lobaplatin (LBP) plus S-1 for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and determine the potential role of circulating tumor cells (CTC) for predicting the therapeutic response and prognosis. Methods: From January 2014 to February 2015, 64 consecutive patients with AGC received lobaplatin plus S-1 chemotherapy in Liaocheng People's Hospital. The clinical features, clinical response, adverse effects, prognosis and CTC pre- and post-treatment were retrospectively analyzed. The correlation between CTC and patients' disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) as well as overall survival (OS) were investigated. Results: All 64 patients completed 2 cycles of chemotherapy.The number of patients who achieved complete regression, partial regression, stable and progression were 0, 24 (37.5%), 18 (28.1%) and 22 (34.4%), respectively. ORR was 37.5% and DCR was 65.6%. The median PFS was 10.8 months(95% CI 7.1-12.0) and the median OS was 16.1 months(95% CI 12.4-18.8). The ORR and PFS were not significantly different between patients with baseline CTC≥2 and CTC<2 (25.0% vs 53.6%, P =0.150; 6.2 months vs 7.5 months, P =0.780), while the DCR and OS were significantly different (45.9% vs 90.0%, P =0.008; 10.5 months vs 17.2 months, P <0.001). After 2 cycles of chemotherapy, the ORR and DCR in patients with CTC≥2 were 16.7% and 45.9%, respectively, which were significantly lower than those observed in patients with CTC<2 (50.0% and 90.0%, respectively). The former also had shorter median PFS and OS (6.6 months vs 8.9 months, 8.4 months vs 15.0 months, respectively). Patients with persistently CTC<2 or those exhibiting an conversion to CTC<2 following chemotherapy had an improved PFS and OS, while patients with persistently CTC≥2 or those exhibiting an conversion to CTC≥2 following therapy had shorter PFS and OS.The most frequent adverse effects were grade 1 or 2 gastrointestinal discomfort and myelosuppression. No patients discontinued chemotherapy because of adverse events. Conclusions: Lobaplatin plus S-1 had manageable safety profile and promising antitumor activity in patients with AGC. CTC could be used as a biomarker in evaluating therapeutic response and predicting their prognosis.

Background: There is no standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after the failure of two lines of chemotherapy, S-1 as the third generation of fluorouracil derivate with well safety and low toxicity, presented some efficacy in lung cancer treatment. The aim of this study is to explore the efficacy of S-1 for advanced NSCLC patients treated with two or more prior chemotherapy regimens., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 105 NSCLC patients treated with S-1 monotherapy or S-1 contained chemotherapy as the third or more line of treatment in our hospital from January 2014 to April 2017. S-1 was administrated orally twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by one week of rest, the dose of drug was determined by body surface area (<1.25 m2, 80 mg/d; 1.25 m2-1.5 m2, 100 mg/d; ≥1.5 m2, 120 mg/d), platinum or the third-generation chemotherapy drugs could be combinedly used. Clinical response was assigned every cycle according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: 42 patients received S-1 monotherapy, the other 63 patients received combined regimens, the median treatment line was 4 (3-11) and the median treatment cycle was 2 (1-14). No complete response (CR) were observed, there were 4 patients with partial response (PR), 34 patients with stable disease (SD) and 67 patients with progressive disease (PD), the objective response rate (ORR) was 3.81%, disease control rate (DCR) was 36.19%. The median PFS was 1.90 months (0.67 months-10.83 months), no difference between monotherapy and combined group (DCR: 28.56% vs 41.27%, P=0.185), the liver metastasis showed poorer PFS (1.40 months vs 1.93 months , P=0.042)., Conclusions: S-1 presented some activity in advanced NSCLC treated with more than two lines of treatment. The addition of other drugs cannot improve efficacy. S-1 monotherapy can be used as a choice for heavily-treated patients.

Objective: To investigate the safety, efficacy and prognostic factors of S-1 versus capecitabine in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC). Methods: From January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014, 154 ABC patients with pathological diagnosis were separated into two groups: S-1 with or without the 3rd generation chemotherapy drug (group S-1) and capecitabine with or without the 3rd generation chemotherapy drug (Group capecitabine). The efficacy, side effects and prognostic factors were compared between the two groups. Results: There were 70 patients in group S-1 and 84 patients in group capecitabine. The objective response rates (ORR) were 31.4% (22/70) in group S-1 and 28.6% (24/84) in group capecitabine. The disease control rates (DCR) were 74.3% (52/70) and 83.3% (70/84), respectively. There were no significant differences in DCR and ORR between two groups ( P >0.05). The DCR of patients treated with capecitabine monotherapy was significantly higher than that of S-1 monotherapy [94.4%(17/18) and 64.0%(16/25), P =0.028]. The median PFS was 7.5 and 8.9 months for the patients in the group S-1 and group capecitabine, with no statistically significant difference ( P =0.423). The 1-year survival rates of group S-1 and group capecitabine were 81.4% and 66.7%, respectively, with no significant differences( P =0.020). Univariate analysis showed that ER and/or PR status ( P =0.004), T stage ( P =0.041), and molecular typing ( P =0.046) were associated with PFS. Multivariate analysis showed ER and/or PR status ( P =0.034) was an independent prognostic factor related with PFS. The incidence of hemoglobin reduction was 14.3% (10/70) and 36.9% (31/84) in the group S-1 and group capecitabine, and the differences were statistically significant ( P =0.002). There was no significant difference in the incidence of leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and hand-foot syndrome between the two groups( P >0.05). Conclusions: S-1 and capecitabine are both effective for advanced breast cancer. Neither ORR nor DCR were significantly different between these two groups. The incidence of gastrointestinal reactions and thrombocytopenia of S-1 was slightly lower than that of capecitabine.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Xiaoaiping combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced esophageal cancer. Methods: This is a multi-center, randomized, open label and parallel controlled study. A total of 124 advanced esophageal cancer patients with Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score ≥60 and expected survival time≥3 months were enrolled. We adopted design and divided the patients into study and control group. The patients in study group received Xiaoaiping combined with S-1 and cisplatin. The control group received S-1 and cisplatin. Each group included 62 patients and 21 days as a treatment cycle. The efficacy and adverse events in patients of the two groups were observed and compared. Results: 57 patients in the study group and 55 in the control group were included in efficacy assessment. The response rate was 54.4% and 34.5% in the study group and control group, respectively( P <0.05). Disease control rates were 86.0% and 69.1%, respectively( P <0.05). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.97 in the study group and 6.43 months in the control group( P <0.05). The median overall survival(OS) was 12.93 in the study group and 10.93 months in the control group( P <0.05). The most common adverse events in the two groups were nausea and vomiting, thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, liver damage, pigmentation, oral mucositis, renal impairment and diarrhea. The incidences of nausea, vomiting, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, neutropenia and diarrhea in the study group were significantly higher than those in the control group( P <0.05). Conclusion: Xiaoaiping combined with S-1 and cisplatin significantly increased response rate, and prolongedpatients' survival in patients with advanced esophageal cancer.

Objective: To observe the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy regimens oxaliplatin combined with capecitabine (CAPOX) or oxaliplatin combined with tegafur, gimeracil and oteracil potassium capsules (S-1)(SOX), and to investigate the value of expression of thymidine phosphorylase (TP) and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) proteins in tumor tissue for predicting the efficacy of CAPOX and SOX regimens in advanced gastric cancer patients., Methods: A total of 107 newly-diagnosed, stage Ⅲc/Ⅳ gastric cancer patients (no surgical indication, ECOG performance scores 0-2 and expected survival time ≥3 months) were recruited with 101 patients evaluated. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. One was study group in which the patients received CAPOX regimen. The other was control group received SOX regimen. Each patient received four cycles, at least two cycles chemotherapy every three weeks and followed up until death or lost. Tumor biopsies were obtained by gastroscopy for immunohistochemical examination of the expression of TP and DPD proteins before chemotherapy. Response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and time to tumor progression (TTP) of the patients were assessed., Results: The objective response rate (ORR) of the study and control groups was 49.0% (5/51) vs. 46.0% (23/50), respectively (P>0.05). The overall survival (OS) was 357.36±24.69 days in the study group and 349.87±22.63 days in the control group, and the time-to-progression (TTP) was 216.75±19.32 days in the study group and 220.54±18.47 days in the control group (P>0.05 for both). Stratified analysis showed that the ORR of TP-positive patients in the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group (72.0 % vs. 41.7 %, P=0.032). There was no significant difference in ORR between the TP-negative patients in the study and control groups (26.9% vs. 50.0%, P=0.087), while the ORR of DPD-positive patients in the control group was significantly higher than that of the study group (51.9% vs. 34.6%, P=0.046). There was no significant difference in the ORR between DPD-negative patients in the study and control groups (64.0% vs. 39.1%, P=0.084). The follow-up showed that the OS (378.42±22.56 days) and TTP (271.77±24.92 days) in the TP-positive patients of the study group were significantly longer than those of the control group (OS: 326.57±19.84 days, and TTP: 229.13±22.68 days)( P<0.05). The OS was 371.25±23.97 days and TTP was 264.66±21.36 days in the DPD-positive patients of control group, significantly longer than those of the study group (OS: 334.73±21.47days, and TTP: 208.58±20.70 days) (P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in the OS and TTP between the TP- and DPD-negative patients in the two groups (P>0.05). In respect of adverse events, both the rates of hematological and non-hematological toxicities were low and similar between the two groups (P>0.05), and well-tolerated by the patients., Conclusions: Both CAPOX and SOX regimens are effective chemotherapeutic protocols in treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer. The expression levels of TP and DPD in tumor tissue can be used as a predictive factor for the efficacy of capecitabine or tegafur, gimeracil and oteracil potassium capsules combined with oxaliplatin regimens. CAPOX chemotherapy regimen is more suitable for the TP-positive gastric cancer patients, and SOX regimen is more suitable for the DPS-positive gastric cancer patients.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine combined with S-1 in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer., Methods: A retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 49 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, who did not receive radiotherapy and chemotherapy, were divided into two groups: the study group (25 cases), and control group (24 cases). Patients in the study group received gemcitabine 1 000 mg/m² via intravenous drip at the first and 8th days, and received S-1 80 mg/m², morning and evening (twice a day) for the first 14 days, and 21 days as a treatment cycle of chemotherapy.The control group was given GEMOX regimen: Gemcitabine 1 000 mg/m² via intravenous drip at the first and 8 days, and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² via intravenous drip at the first day, and 21 d for a treatment cycle of chemotherapy. The efficacy and adverse reactions in patients of the study and control groups were observed and compared., Results: The efficiency of the study group was 32.0% and disease control rate was 72.0%. The efficiency of the control group was 25.0% and disease control rate was 58.3%. The differences between the two groups were statistically not significant (P > 0.05 for all). The clinical benefit rate in the study group and control group were 80.0% and 50.0%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P < 0.05). The median survival time was 9.7 months in patients of the study group and 9.0 months in the control group, with a significant difference (P < 0.05). The drug toxicity was well tolerated in both groups, and no chemotherapy-related death occurred. The major adverse reactions were myelosuppression and digestive tract reactions, and the adverse reactions in the study group were lower than those in the control group., Conclusions: Gemcitabine combined with S-1 is effective and safe in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer, with less side effects, and can be tolerated by the patients.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly paclitaxel combined with S-1 or fluorouracil in the first line treatment of advanced gastric carcinoma., Methods: Two hundred and forty patients with untreated advanced gastric carcinoma were randomized into two arms, patients in the experimental arm were given paclitaxel and S-1, while those in the control arm received paclitaxel and fluorouracil. The regimen of experimental arm was paclitaxel 60 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion, day 1, 8, 15; S-1 80 - 120 mg/day given by oral administration, day 1 - 14. The regimen of control arm was fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion continuously, day 1 - 5; CF 20 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion, day 1 - 5. The regimens in both arms were repeated every 28 days. The efficacy and safety of both arms were assessed., Results: Two hundred and twenty-eight patients were analyzed in the full analysis set, and 192 patients were analyzed in per-protocol set (experimental arm 100 patients, control arm 92 patients). The overall response rates of experimental and control arms were 50.0% and 28.3% (P = 0.002), and the disease control rates were 82.0% and 70.7% (P = 0.064), respectively. The primary endpoints of experimental arm were non-inferior to that of the control arm. The secondary endpoint of experimental arm in terms of median progression free survival was significantly better than that of control arm (5 months versus 4 months, P = 0.006). The experimental arm had a higher incidence of grade III-IV bone marrow suppression than the control arm, but the incidence of fever in both arms was not significantly different., Conclusions: Oral administration of S-1 is an alternative option of venous infusional fluorouracil. Weekly paclitaxel combined with S-1 is a safe regimen and has a promising efficacy.

Objective: The combination of oxaliplatin and S-1 is effective in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety and compliance of this combination regimen as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer., Methods: Clinical data of 71 patients with gastric cancer treated with oxaliplatin plus S-1 as adjuvant chemotherapy in the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) from Jan 1(st), 2010 to Jan 1(st), 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. The types and incidence rate of adverse events related to chemotherapy and the results of follow up of the patients were analyzed., Results: Among the 71 cases, 17 were treated with oxaliplatin biweekly, while 54 with oxaliplatin triweekly. The most common adverse events were neutropenia (n = 49, 69.0%), nausea/vomiting (n = 51, 71.8%), and anorexia (n = 49, 69.0%). The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (n = 13, 18.3%), thrombocytopenia (n = 10, 14.1%), anorexia (n = 5, 7.0%) and nausea/vomiting (n = 4, 5.6%). Seven (87.5%) of the 8 patients previously treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy experienced thrombocytopenia in the postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, and four (50%) of the 8 patients experienced grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia. The rates of grade 3-4 adverse events in patients aged 65-years or older were similar to that in younger patients., Conclusions: The combination of oxaliplatin and S-1 used as adjuvant chemotherapy is well tolerated by patients with gastric cancer. Neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea/vomiting and anorexia are the major treatment-related adverse events. Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy do not well tolerate this regimen as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. This combination regimen has a manageable tolerability profile in adjuvant setting in patients ≥ 65 years old.

Objective: To observe the efficacy and side effects of the combination therapy of oxaliplatin and S-1 in treating postoperative colorectal cancer patients., Methods: 54 postoperative colorectal cancer patients received the combination therapy of oxaliplatin and S-1 regimen, repeated every 3 weeks, and evaluate the efficacy after 3 cycles., Results: All of the 54 patients but 2 (changed the chemotherapy regimen after the first cycle because of economic reason) finished 6 cycles of the chemotherapy treatment. There were 6 cases (11.5%) with complete response (CR), 28 cases (53.8%) with partial response (PR), and the overall response rate was 65.4%. Major adverse effects were hematological toxicities, gastrointestinal disturbance, neurosensory toxicity. There were no chemotherapy-related deaths., Conclusions: Oxaliplatin combined with S-1 is an effective and better tolerated chemotherapy treatment for postoperative colorectal cancer patients, with no serious side effects for liver and kidney. Therefore, it can be used as an alternative chemotherapy regimen for postoperative colorectal cancer patients.