Search

Background: Sitravatinib is a spectrum-selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting TAM (TYRO3, AXL, MER), VEGFR-2, KIT, and MET. SAFFRON-104 (NCT03941873) was a multicohort phase Ib/II study investigating sitravatinib with/without tislelizumab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibody, in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC)., Methods: Eligible patients had histologically/cytologically confirmed advanced HCC or GC/GEJC. Phase I determined the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of sitravatinib with/without tislelizumab. Phase II evaluated sitravatinib monotherapy in patients with pretreated HCC, and sitravatinib plus tislelizumab in anti-PD-(L)1-naïve or -treated HCC and anti-PD-(L)1-naïve GC/GEJC. Primary endpoints were safety/tolerability (phase I) and objective response rate (ORR) (phase II)., Results: At data cutoff (March 31, 2023), 111 patients were enrolled; 102 were efficacy-evaluable (median study follow-up 9.1 months [range: 0.7-36.9]). The RP2D of sitravatinib was determined as 120 mg orally once daily. In patients receiving sitravatinib monotherapy and sitravatinib in combination with tislelizumab, grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 14 (51.9%) and 42 (50.0%) patients, respectively. The ORR was 25% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.7-49.1) in patients with pretreated HCC receiving sitravatinib monotherapy. In patients receiving sitravatinib with tislelizumab, the ORR was 11.5% (95% CI 2.4-30.2) with anti-PD-(L)1-naïve HCC, 9.5% (95% CI 1.2-30.4) with anti-PD-(L)1-treated HCC, and 16.1% (95% CI 5.5-33.7) in patients with anti-PD-(L)1-naïve GC/GEJC., Conclusions: Sitravatinib with/without tislelizumab was generally well tolerated and showed preliminary antitumor activity in patients with advanced HCC and GC/GEJC., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In the FIGHT study (NCT03694522) bemarituzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody selective for fibroblast growth factor receptor 2b (FGFR2b), plus mFOLFOX6 showed clinically meaningful efficacy in patients with FGFR2b-positive (2+/3+ membranous staining by immunohistochemistry) locally advanced unresectable/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal cancer (G/GEJC). A meaningful proportion of patients in FIGHT were enrolled in East Asia, reflecting global epidemiology of G/GEJC., Methods: This subgroup analysis of the global, phase 2, double-blind FIGHT study included all patients enrolled in East Asian sites. Patients were randomized 1:1 to bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 (15 mg/kg and one 7.5 mg/kg dose on cycle 1, day 8) or matching placebo-mFOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Efficacy was evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 24 months., Results: The East Asian subgroup comprised 89 patients (57% of overall study population); 45 were randomized to bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 44 to placebo-mFOLFOX6. Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 12.9 months (8.8-17.9) with bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 8.2 months (5.6-10.3) with placebo-mFOLFOX6 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87); median OS (95% CI) was 24.7 months (13.8-33.1) vs 12.9 months (9.3-21.4), respectively (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.96). Treatment benefit was more pronounced in patients with FGFR2b-positive G/GEJC in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. No new safety signals were reported., Conclusion: In East Asian patients with FGFR2b-positive advanced/metastatic G/GEJC enrolled in the global FIGHT study, bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 showed clinically meaningful outcomes over placebo-mFOLFOX6., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The vascular endothelial growth factor pathway plays a key role in the pathogenesis of gastric cancer. In the multicenter, double-blind phase 3 FRUTIGA trial, 703 patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who progressed on fluorouracil- and platinum-containing chemotherapy were randomized (1:1) to receive fruquintinib (an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1/2/3; 4 mg orally, once daily) or placebo for 3 weeks, followed by 1 week off, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 intravenously on days 1/8/15 per cycle). The study results were positive as one of the dual primary endpoints, progression-free survival (PFS), was met (median PFS, 5.6 months in the fruquintinib arm versus 2.7 months in the placebo arm; hazard ratio 0.57; 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.68; P < 0.0001). The other dual primary endpoint, overall survival (OS), was not met (median OS, 9.6 months versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.81-1.13; P = 0.6064). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia, leukopenia and anemia. Fruquintinib plus paclitaxel as a second-line treatment significantly improved PFS, but not OS, in Chinese patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and could potentially be another treatment option for these patients. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03223376 ., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Background: We report the final results of the randomized phase 2 FIGHT trial that evaluated bemarituzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody selective for fibroblast growth factor receptor 2b (FGFR2b), plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with FGFR2b-positive (2 + /3 + membranous staining by immunohistochemistry), HER-2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC)., Methods: Patients received bemarituzumab (15 mg/kg) or placebo once every 2 weeks with an additional bemarituzumab (7.5 mg/kg) or placebo dose on cycle 1 day 8. All patients received mFOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Efficacy was evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 24 months., Results: In the bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 (N = 77) and placebo-mFOLFOX6 (N = 78) arms, respectively, 59.7% and 66.7% of patients were FGFR2b-positive in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. The median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 9.5 months (7.3-13.7) with bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 7.4 months (5.7-8.4) with placebo-mFOLFOX6 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI 0.49-1.08); median OS (95% CI) was 19.2 (13.6-24.2) and 13.5 (9.3-15.9) months, respectively (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.52-1.14). Observed efficacy in FGFR2b-positive GC in ≥ 10% of tumor cells was: PFS: HR 0.43 (95% CI 0.26-0.73); OS: HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.31-0.85). No new safety findings were reported., Conclusions: In FGFR2b-positive advanced GC, the combination of bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 led to numerically longer median PFS and OS compared with mFOLFOX6 alone. Efficacy was more pronounced with FGFR2b overexpression in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. Confirmatory phase 3 trials are ongoing (NCT05052801, NCT05111626)., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03694522., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: PD-1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy have shown efficacy in gastric or gastro-esophageal junction cancer. We compared the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy with placebo plus chemotherapy in participants with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative gastric or gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma., Methods: KEYNOTE-859 is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, done at 207 medical centres across 33 countries. Eligible participants were aged 18 years and older with previously untreated histologically or cytologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative gastric or gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive pembrolizumab or placebo 200 mg, administered intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. All participants received investigator's choice of fluorouracil (intravenous, 800 mg/m 2 per day) administered continuously on days 1-5 of each 3-week cycle plus cisplatin (intravenous, 80 mg/m 2 ) administered on day 1 of each 3-week cycle or capecitabine (oral, 1000 mg/m 2 ) administered twice daily on days 1-14 of each 3-week cycle plus oxaliplatin (intravenous, 130 mg/m 2 ) administered on day 1 of each 3-week cycle. Randomisation was done using a central interactive voice-response system and stratified by geographical region, PD-L1 status, and chemotherapy in permuted block sizes of four. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and the populations with a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of 1 or higher, and PD-L1 CPS of 10 or higher. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study intervention. Here, we report the results of the interim analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03675737, and recruitment is complete., Findings: Between Nov 8, 2018, and June 11, 2021, 1579 (66%) of 2409 screened participants were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pembrolizumab group; n=790) or placebo plus chemotherapy (placebo group; n=789). Most participants were male (527 [67%] of 790 participants in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group; 544 [69%] of 789 participants in the placebo plus chemotherapy group) and White (426 [54%]; 435 [55%]). Median follow-up at the data cutoff was 31·0 months (IQR 23·0-38·3). Median overall survival was longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group in the ITT population (12·9 months [95% CI 11·9-14·0] vs 11·5 months [10·6-12·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·70-0·87]; p<0·0001), in participants with a PD-L1 CPS of 1 or higher (13·0 months [11·6-14·2] vs 11·4 months [10·5-12·0]; 0·74 [0·65-0·84]; p<0·0001), and in participants with a PD-L1 CPS of 10 or higher (15·7 months [13·8-19·3] vs 11·8 months [10·3-12·7]; 0·65 [0·53-0·79]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-5 adverse events of any cause were anaemia (95 [12%] of 785 participants in the pembrolizumab group vs 76 [10%] of 787 participants in the placebo group) and decreased neutrophil count (77 [10%] vs 64 [8%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 184 (23%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 146 (19%) participants in the placebo group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in eight (1%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 16 (2%) participants in the placebo group. No new safety signals were identified., Interpretation: Participants in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group had a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival with manageable toxicity compared with participants in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. Therefore, pembrolizumab with chemotherapy might be a first-line treatment option for patients with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative gastric or gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma., Funding: Merck Sharp and Dohme., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests All authors report funding to their institution from Merck Sharp and Dohme to support the conduct of this study. All authors received medical writing and editorial support for the preparation of this manuscript from Merck Sharp and Dohme. SYR reports grants from Amgen, Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Merck, Roche, Zymeworks, Indivumed, MSD, Ono/Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, BI, Taiho, Lilly, SN Bioscience, and SRF; has received honoraria as an invited speaker for Lilly, Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, and Ono/Bristol Myers Squibb; has participated on advisory boards for Amgen and Indivumed; and has served as an advisor for Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, LG Biochem, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Ono/Bristol Myers Squibb, and AstraZeneca. D-YO reports grants from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Array, Eli Lilly, Servier, BeiGene, Merck Sharpe Dohme, and Handok; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Merck Serono, Bayer, Taiho, ASLAN, Halozyme, Zymeworks, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, BeiGene, Basilea, Turning Point, Yuhan, Arcus Biosciences, IQVIA, and Merck Sharpe Dohme. M-HR reports research grants from AstraZeneca; consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Ono, Lilly, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, and Astellas; and has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, or educational events from Bristol Myers Squibb, Ono, Lilly, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, and Astellas. FR reports research grants paid to his institution from Roche, Merck Serono, Amgen, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Celgene, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Astellas, and Organon; has received consulting fees and honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, or educational events from Roche, Merck Serono, Amgen, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Celgene, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, and Bayer; has received travel expenses from Roche, Amgen, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Servier, and Bayer; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory boards for Roche, Merck Serono, Amgen, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Celgene, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, and Bayer. GVA reports participation on advisory boards for Merck Sharpe Dohme. MG has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, or educational events from Pfizer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharpe Dohme; received payment for expert testimony from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharpe Dohme; and has received travel expenses from Tecnofarma. K-KS reports research grants paid to his institution from Merck Sharpe Dohme, Roche, AstraZeneca, and BioNTech; has received consulting fees from Nouscom; has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, or educational events from Merck Sharpe Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck KGaA, Nouscom, Roche, and Servier; has received travel expenses from Merck Sharpe Dohme, Merck KGaA, Nouscom, Roche, and Servier; and has received honoraria for participation on advisory boards for Bayer, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Merck KGaA, Roche, and Mirati Therapeutics. FMC has received honoraria for lectures from Merck Sharpe Dohme; participated on advisory boards for Jansen and Bayer; and has served on a steering committee for Novartis. ZAW reports grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Arcus; has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Daiichi, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Ipsen, Arcus, Astellas, Pfizer, and Seagen; has received travel expenses from Amgen and Merck; and has participated on advisory boards or data safety monitoring boards for Pfizer, Daiichi, and Compass. LY, SB and PB report full-time employment by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck (Rahway, NJ, USA), and stock ownership in Merck. LSW reports consulting fees from Amgen; and has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, or educational events from Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharpe Dohme, Roche, and Amgen. PY, YB, JLee, MGF, JLi, MAL, TC, SQ, SL, and HP declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Apatinib, a highly selective VEGFR2 inhibitor, significantly improved efficacy versus placebo as a third- and later-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer in phase 2 and 3 trials. This prospective, single-arm, multicenter phase IV AHEAD study was conducted to verify the safety and efficacy of apatinib in patients with advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma after at least two lines of systematic therapy in clinical practice settings., Methods: Patients with advanced gastric cancer who had previously failed at least two lines of chemotherapy received oral apatinib until disease progression, death or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety. The secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Adverse events were summarized by the incidence rate. Median OS and PFS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. ORR, DCR, OS at 3 and 6 months, and PFS at 3 and 6 months were calculated, and their 95% CIs were estimated according to the Clopper-Pearson method., Results: Between May 2015 and November 2019, a total of 2004 patients were enrolled, and 1999 patients who received at least one dose of apatinib were assessed for safety. In the safety population, 87.9% of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), with the most common hypertension (45.2%), proteinuria (26.5%), and white blood cell count decreased (25.3%). Additionally, 51% of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 TRAEs. Fatal TRAEs occurred in 57 (2.9%) patients. No new safety concerns were reported. Among the 2004 patients included in the intention-to-treat population, the ORR was 4.4% (95% CI, 3.6-5.4%), and DCR was 35.8% (95% CI, 33.7-38.0%). The median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI 2.2-2.8), and the median OS was 5.8 months (95% CI 5.4-6.1)., Conclusions: The findings in the AHEAD study confirmed the acceptable and manageable safety profile and clinical benefit of apatinib in patients with advanced gastric cancer as a third- or later-line of treatment., Trial Registration: This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02426034. Registration date was April 24, 2015., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

First-line chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) has poor median overall survival (OS; <1 year). We report efficacy and safety results from Chinese patients in the phase III global CheckMate 649 study of nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of GC/GEJC/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Chinese patients with previously untreated advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC were randomized to receive nivolumab (360 mg Q3W or 240 mg Q2W) plus chemotherapy (XELOX [capecitabine and oxaliplatin] Q3W or FOLFOX [oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil] Q2W), nivolumab plus ipilimumab (not reported) or chemotherapy alone. OS, blinded independent central review-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR) and safety are reported. Of 1581 patients enrolled and randomized, 208 were Chinese. In these patients, nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (14.3 vs 10.2 months; HR 0.61 [95% CI: 0.44-0.85]), median PFS (8.3 vs 5.6 months; HR 0.57 [95% CI: 0.40-0.80]), ORR (66% vs 45%) and median DOR (12.2 vs 5.6 months) vs chemotherapy, respectively. The safety profile was acceptable, with no new safety signals observed. Consistent with results from the global primary analysis of CheckMate 649, nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in OS and PFS and higher response rate vs chemotherapy and an acceptable safety profile in Chinese patients. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy represents a new standard first-line treatment for Chinese patients with non-HER2-positive advanced GC/GEJC/EAC., (© 2022 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Background: Outcomes are poor in patients with HER2-negative, advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. In this study, we investigated efficacy and safety of the first-in-class, afucosylated, humanised IgG1 anti-fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 isoform IIb (FGFR2b) monoclonal antibody bemarituzumab with modified 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) in patients with FGFR2b-selected gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma., Methods: In the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial (FIGHT), patients aged 18 years and older with HER2 non-positive, FGFR2b-selected gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were recruited from 144 clinical sites across 17 countries. Patients with previous treatment with any selective inhibitor of the FGF-FGFR pathway were excluded. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using permuted-block randomisation (block size of four) and a central interactive voice-web-based response system, stratified by geographical region, previous treatment with curative intent, and administration of mFOLFOX6 while being screened for FGFR2b status, to either bemarituzumab (15 mg/kg of bodyweight) or matched placebo intravenously every 2 weeks. All patients also received mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , leucovorin 400 mg/m 2 , and 5-fluorouracil as a 400 mg/m 2 bolus followed by 2400 mg/m 2 over approximately 46 h) intravenously every 2 weeks. Patients were given treatment until disease progression (defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours [RECIST] version 1.1), unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population (defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment). Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03694522, and is now complete., Findings: Between Nov 14, 2017, and May 8, 2020, 910 patients were screened and 155 were randomly assigned to the bemarituzumab (n=77) or placebo group (n=78). Median age was 60·0 years (IQR 51·0-67·0), 44 (28%) participants were women, 111 (72%) were men, 89 (57%) were Asian, and 61 (39%) were White. At the time of the primary analysis and at a median follow-up of 10·9 months (IQR 6·3-14·2), median progression-free survival was 9·5 months (95% CI 7·3-12·9) in the bemarituzumab group and 7·4 months (5·8-8·4) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·68 [95% CI 0·44-1·04; p=0·073). Common grade 3 or worse adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (23 [30%] of 76 in the bemarituzumab group vs 27 [35%] of 77 in the placebo group), cornea disorder (18 [24%] vs none), neutropenia (ten [13%] vs seven [9%]), stomatitis (seven [9%] vs one [1%]), and anaemia (six [8%] vs ten [13%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 24 (32%) patients in the bemarituzumab group and 28 (36%) in the placebo group. Serious mFOLFOX6 treatment-related adverse events occurred in nine (12%) patients in the bemarituzumab group and in 15 (19%) patients in the placebo group. All-grade corneal events (adverse events of special interest) occurred in 51 (67%) patients in the bemarituzumab group and eight (10%) in the placebo group; grade 3 corneal events were reported only in 18 (24%) patients in the bemarituzumab group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in three patients in the bemarituzumab group (two due to sepsis, one due to pneumonia) and none in the placebo group., Interpretation: In this exploratory phase 2 study, despite no statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival, treatment with bemarituzumab showed promising clinical efficacy. Confirmatory phase 3 trials of bemarituzumab plus mFOLFOX6 powered to demonstrate statistical significance are being investigated in patients with previously untreated, FGFR2b-overexpressing, advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma., Funding: Five Prime Therapeutics., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests ZAW reports fees for consulting or advisory roles from Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Five Prime Therapeutics, Ipsen, Lilly, Macrogenics, Merck, Merck KGaA, and Novartis; research funding paid to their institution from Five Prime Therapeutics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Plexxikon; and travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bayer, Lilly, and Merck. PCE reports fees for consulting or advisory roles from ALX Oncology, Arcus Biosciences, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Chimeric Therapeutics, Celgene, Coherus, Daiichi Sankyo, Five Prime Therapeutics, Ideava, Istari, Legend, Lilly, Loxo, Merck, Novartis, Ono, Servier, Taiho, Takeda, Turning Point Therapeutics, Xencor, and Zymeworks. Y-KK reports fees for consulting or advisory roles from ALX Oncology, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, DAEHWA Pharmaceutical, Macrogenics, Novartis, Surface Oncology, and Zymeworks. KY reports fees for consulting or advisory roles from Bristol-Myers Squibb Japan and Daiichi Sankyo; fees for speakers' bureau participation from Bristol-Myers Squibb Japan, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, Merck, Ono Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Takeda; and research funding paid to their institution from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Gilead Sciences, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Ono Pharmaceutical, Sanofi, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Yakult Honsha. AS reports fees for consulting or advisory roles from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Exelixis, Five Prime Therapeutics, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer; and research funding paid to their institution from Actuate Therapeutics, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Exelixis, Five Prime Therapeutics, KAHR Medical, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Seattle Genetics. JL reports fees for speakers' bureau participation from AstraZeneca and Lilly. AT reports fees for participation on advisory boards from Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, and Merck Serono. CB reports fees for consulting or advisory roles from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pierre Fabre, Roche, and SERVIER; research funding from Roche; and travel, accommodation, and expenses from Amgen, Bayer, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. AAU reports travel, accommodation, and expenses from Amgen, Angellini, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, and Roche. GGC reports travel, accommodation, and expenses from Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Roche. HC and YY report employment with Five Prime Therapeutics and stock and other ownership interests in Five Prime Therapeutics. SM reports employment with Five Prime Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences, and stock and other ownership interests in Five Prime Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences. DVTC reports honoraria from Amgen, Archer, Astellas Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Five Prime Therapeutics, Foundation Medicine, Genentech/Roche, Gritstone Bio, Guardant Health, Lilly, Merck, Natera, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, QED Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Tempus, and Zymeworks; fees for consulting or advisory roles from Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Genentech/Roche, Guardant Health, Lilly, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Zymeworks; and fees for speakers' bureau participation from Foundation Medicine, Genentech, Guardant Health, Lilly, Merck, and Tempus. K-WL reports honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genexine, and Lilly; fees for consulting or advisory roles from Bayer and ISU Abxis; research funding paid to their institution from ABL Bio, ALX Oncology, Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, BeiGene, Daiichi Sankyo, Five Prime Therapeutics, Green Cross, LSK BioPharma, MacroGenics, Merck KGaA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Oncologie, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Y-Biologics, and Zymeworks. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2, also known as ERBB2) amplification or overexpression occurs in approximately 20% of advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinomas 1-3 . More than a decade ago, combination therapy with the anti-HER2 antibody trastuzumab and chemotherapy became the standard first-line treatment for patients with these types of tumours 4 . Although adding the anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) antibody pembrolizumab to chemotherapy does not significantly improve efficacy in advanced HER2-negative gastric cancer 5 , there are preclinical 6-19 and clinical 20,21 rationales for adding pembrolizumab in HER2-positive disease. Here we describe results of the protocol-specified first interim analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III KEYNOTE-811 study of pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy for unresectable or metastatic, HER2-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma 22 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03615326). We show that adding pembrolizumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy markedly reduces tumour size, induces complete responses in some participants, and significantly improves objective response rate., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Real-world safety and effectiveness data for trastuzumab plus chemotherapy treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) in China are lacking., Patients and Methods: EVIDENCE was a prospective, multicenter, noninterventional registry study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of trastuzumab in five cohorts of Chinese patients with gastric cancer, stratified by HER2 status and trastuzumab treatment. Effectiveness was analyzed for cohorts I (HER2-positive, trastuzumab treated), II (HER2-positive, trastuzumab untreated), and IV (HER2-negative, trastuzumab untreated); trastuzumab-related adverse events (AEs) were analyzed for cohort I., Results: Cohorts I, II, and IV included 174, 113, and 422 patients, respectively. Most patients received first-line chemotherapy (87.6%). Median overall survival (OS1) for first-line treatment was 22.3, 17.2, and 17.4 months in cohorts I, II, and IV, respectively. After excluding patients who had surgery, respective median OS1 was 19.9, 15.3, and 12.9 months. Respective first-line progression-free survival (PFS1) was 8.2, 6.9, and 6.2 months; and respective first-line response rates (RR) were 51.7%, 18.4%, and 32.8%. Cohort I was significantly favored over cohort II for propensity score-matched first-line median OS1 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61), PFS1 (HR, 0.64), and RR (odds ratio, 4.93). Trastuzumab-related AEs, grade 3-5 AEs, serious AEs, and AEs with a fatal outcome occurred in 23.6%, 3.4%, 2.3%, and 0.6% of cohort I patients, respectively., Conclusion: Safety profiles were consistent with those known for trastuzumab and chemotherapy; trastuzumab treatment improved outcomes. Our study provides real-world data supporting first-line trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in Chinese patients with HER2-positive mGC., Implications for Practice: This prospective, noninterventional registry study aimed to provide safety and effectiveness data for the use of trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy in Chinese patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) from the real-world clinical setting. Trastuzumab plus first-line chemotherapy was shown to be safe and to improve outcomes when compared with patients treated with chemotherapy alone. Trastuzumab was effective within a range of treatment regimens; subgroup analysis showed that trastuzumab paired most effectively with the XELOX regimen. This study provides real-world clinical safety and effectiveness data supporting the use of trastuzumab in the treatment of Chinese patients with HER2-positive mGC., (© 2021 AlphaMed Press.)

Background: The JACOB trial (NCT01774786) was a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter, international, phase III trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy in first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC). The aim of this analysis was to investigate efficacy and safety outcomes in the Chinese subpopulation from the JACOB trial., Methods: This post hoc subpopulation analysis included all patients recruited in mainland China (n = 163; 20.9%) between June 2013 and January 2016. The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy (pertuzumab group; n = 82) or placebo plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy (control group; n = 81). Intravenous pertuzumab (840 mg) and trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading and 6 mg/kg maintenance doses) were given every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Chemotherapy was given as per standard regimens/doses of capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), and overall objective response rate (ORR)., Results: The median OS was 18.7 months in the pertuzumab group and 16.1 months in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49 to 1.14). The median PFS was 10.5 and 8.6 months in the pertuzumab and control groups, respectively (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.21), and the median ORRs were 68.9% and 55.7%, respectively. The treatment effect in this Chinese subpopulation showed consistency with that in the global ITT population with numerically lower HR for OS and PFS compared with the control group. The safety profiles of the pertuzumab and control groups in this Chinese subpopulation analysis were generally comparable. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were neutropenia, anemia, and leukopenia. However, due to the nature of being a post hoc subgroup analysis, the results presented here are descriptive only and need to be interpreted with caution., Conclusions: OS and PFS were numerically improved by adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy as first-line treatment in Chinese HER2-positive gastric cancer/GEJC patients, and this regimen demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01774786. Registered on 24 January 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01774786.

Gastric carcinoma (GC) is a common gastrointestinal malignancy with high incidence and mortality worldwide, and most patients are diagnosed in the late stages of disease. Palliative chemotherapy provides a survival benefit for patients with inoperable advanced GC. However, elderly patients who are unable to tolerate chemotherapy had worse prognosis due to lack of effective treatment. Herein we reported a Chinese elderly GC patient using next generation sequencing (NGS)-based tumor DNA analysis. Valuable gene variants of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) A gene amplification were detected. Additionally, a novel NOTCH1-BPHL fusion has been identified. He received antiangiogenic drug apatinib and showed both good clinical and radiographic response, but eventually died of non-cancer related cause, with progression free survival time (PFS) and overall survival time (OS) up to 9.53 months. This was the first GC case with apatinib usage as first-line treatment under the guidance of NGS gene profiling.

Background: Olaparib combined with paclitaxel has previously shown a significant improvement in overall survival versus placebo plus paclitaxel as second-line therapy in a phase 2 study in Asian patients with advanced gastric cancer, especially in those with ataxia-telangiectasia mutated protein (ATM)-negative tumours. Here, we report the primary efficacy and safety analyses from a subsequent phase 3 trial., Methods: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (GOLD) recruited Asian patients aged 18 years or older (≥20 years if Japanese) with advanced gastric cancer that had progressed following, or during, first-line chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral olaparib (100 mg twice daily) plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 intravenously) or matching placebo plus paclitaxel. Randomisation was done through an interactive voice response system and no stratification factors were used. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Two co-primary populations were assessed: the overall population of all patients and patients whose tumours were ATM-negative (identified after randomisation, before the data cutoff date, March 28, 2016). The primary endpoint in both populations was overall survival (defined as the time from the date of randomisation until death from any cause before data cutoff); a significant difference was defined as p<0·025. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat populations and safety in patients who received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01924533 (study ID, D081BC00004), and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants., Findings: Between Sept 3, 2013, and March 28, 2016, 643 patients were enrolled from 58 study sites in hospitals and medical centres in China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. 525 eligible patients were randomly assigned: 263 to receive olaparib plus paclitaxel and 262 to receive placebo plus paclitaxel. 94 patients were determined to have ATM-negative tumours before unmasking for the primary analysis (48 in the olaparib plus paclitaxel group and 46 in the placebo plus paclitaxel group). Overall survival did not differ between treatment groups in the overall patient population (median overall survival 8·8 months [95% CI 7·4-9·6] in the olaparib group vs 6·9 months [6·3-7·9] in the placebo group; HR 0·79 [97·5% CI 0·63-1·00]; p=0·026) or in the ATM-negative population (12·0 months [7·8-18·1] vs 10·0 months [6·4-13·3]; 0·73 [0·40-1·34]; p=0·25). In the overall patient population, the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the olaparib plus paclitaxel group were neutropenia (78 [30%] of 262 patients), leucopenia (42 [16%]), and decreased neutrophil count (40 [15%]); in the placebo plus paclitaxel group, they were neutropenia (59 [23%] of 259 patients), leucopenia (27 [10%]), and decreased white blood cell count (21 [8%]). Adverse events with an outcome of death causally related to study treatment (according to investigator assessment) were reported in two patients: liver injury in one patient (<1%) in the olaparib plus paclitaxel group and cardiac failure in one patient (<1%) in the placebo plus paclitaxel group., Interpretation: The GOLD study did not meet its primary objective of showing a significant improvement in overall survival with olaparib in the overall or ATM-negative population of Asian patients with advanced gastric cancer. The study generated informative efficacy and safety data regarding the use of olaparib in combination with a chemotherapeutic agent and provides a foundation for future studies in this difficult-to-treat patient population., Funding: AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reliable biomarkers of apatinib response in gastric cancer (GC) are lacking. We investigated the association between early presence of common adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes in metastatic GC patients., Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data on 269 apatinib-treated GC patients in two clinical trials. AEs were assessed at baseline until 28 days after the last dose of apatinib. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without hypertension (HTN), proteinuria, or hand and foot syndrome (HFS) in the first 4 weeks. Time-to-event variables were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazard regression models. Binary endpoints were assessed using logistic regression models. Landmark analyses were performed as sensitivity analyses. Predictive model was analyzed, and risk scores were calculated to predict overall survival., Results: Presence of AEs in the first 4 weeks was associated with prolonged median overall survival (169 vs. 103 days, log-rank p = 0.0039; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.84, p = 0.001), prolonged median progression-free survival (86.5 vs. 62 days, log-rank p = 0.0309; adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.91, p = 0.007), and increased disease control rate (54.67 vs. 32.77%; adjusted odds ratio 2.67, p < 0.001). Results remained significant in landmark analyses. The onset of any single AE or any combinations of the AEs were all statistically significantly associated with prolonged OS, except for the presence of proteinuria. An AE-based prediction model and subsequently derived scoring system showed high calibration and discrimination in predicting overall survival., Conclusion: Presence of HTN, proteinuria, or HFS during the first cycle of apatinib treatment was a viable biomarker of antitumor efficacy in metastatic GC patients.

Importance: Capecitabine is an oral cytotoxic chemotherapeutic commonly used across cancer subtypes. As with other oral medications though, it may suffer from drug interactions that could impair its absorption., Objective: To determine if gastric acid suppressants such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may impair capecitabine efficacy., Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of TRIO-013, a phase III randomized trial, compares capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) with or without lapatinib in 545 patients with ERBB2/HER2-positive metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (GEC); patients were randomized 1:1 between CapeOx with or without lapatinib. Proton pump inhibitor use was identified by medication records. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Specific subgroups were accounted for, such as younger age (<60 years), Asian ethnicity, female sex, and disease stage (metastatic/advanced) in multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling. The TRIO-013 trial accrued and randomized patients between June 2008 and January 2012; this analysis took place in January 2014., Interventions: Patients were divided based on PPI exposure., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary study outcome was PFS and OS between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Secondary outcomes included disease response rates and toxicities., Results: Of the 545 patients with GEC (median age, 60 years; 406 men [74%]) included in the study, 229 received PPIs (42.0%) and were evenly distributed between arms. In the placebo arm, PPI-treated patients had poorer median PFS, 4.2 vs 5.7 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.29-1.81, P < .001); OS, 9.2 vs 11.3 months (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.62; P = .04); and disease control rate (83% vs 72%; P = .02) vs patients not treated with PPIs. In multivariate analysis considering age, race, disease stage, and sex, PPI-treated patients had poorer PFS (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.42-1.94; P < .001) and OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71; P = .001). In patients treated with CapeOx and lapatinib, PPIs had less effect on PFS (HR, 1.08; P = .54) and OS (HR, 1.26; P = .10); however, multivariate analysis in this group demonstrated a significant difference in OS (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.06-1.66; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: Proton pump inhibitors negatively effected capecitabine efficacy by possibly raising gastric pH levels, leading to altered dissolution and absorption. These results are consistent with previous erlotinib and sunitinib studies. Whether PPIs affected lapatinib is unclear given concurrent capecitabine. Given capecitabine's prevalence in treatment breast cancer and colon cancer, further studies are under way., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00680901.

Apatinib is reported to significantly improve the overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced gastric cancer who have previously failed second-line chemotherapy. However, it is not well understood whether apatinib acts by improving progression or by prolonging post-progression survival. Here, based on phase III clinical trial data, the mediating effect of apatinib on patient overall survival was systematically quantified, through progression-free survival (PFS), post-progression survival (PPS), and the disease control rate (DCR). PFS was the primary mediator of the association between apatinib treatment and OS, with an indirect-effect mean survival time ratio of 1.63 (95%CI 1.35-1.97), which mediated 93.5% of the treatment effect. The DCR was also a significant mediator among secondary efficacy endpoints, and had an indirect-effect mean survival time ratio of 1.47 (95%CI 1.20-1.79, 50.9% mediated). Both primary and other targets of the DCR had similar results. The results indicated that apatinib treatment prolongs progression-free survival rather than post-progression survival, and in turn, leads to improved overall survival. Additionally, our study highlights the value of mediation analysis in clinical trials in providing additional information to build upon traditional primary analysis.

Purpose: There is currently no standard treatment strategy for patients with advanced metastatic gastric cancer experiencing progression after two or more lines of chemotherapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of apatinib, a novel vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma for whom at least two lines of prior chemotherapy had failed., Patients and Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Patients from 32 centers in China with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, for whom two or more prior lines of chemotherapy had failed, were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to oral apatinib 850 mg or placebo once daily. The primary end points were overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Between January 2011 and November 2012, 267 patients were enrolled. Median OS was significantly improved in the apatinib group compared with the placebo group (6.5 months; 95% CI, 4.8 to 7.6 v 4.7 months; 95% CI, 3.6 to 5.4; P = .0149; hazard ratio, 0.709; 95% CI, 0.537 to 0.937; P = .0156). Similarly, apatinib significantly prolonged median PFS compared with placebo (2.6 months; 95% CI, 2.0 to 2.9 v 1.8 months; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9; P < .001; hazard ratio, 0.444; 95% CI, 0.331 to 0.595; P < .001). The most common grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic adverse events were hand-foot syndrome, proteinuria, and hypertension., Conclusion: These data show that apatinib treatment significantly improved OS and PFS with an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to two or more lines of prior chemotherapy., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of adding lapatinib to capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) in patients with previously untreated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -amplified advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma., Patients and Methods: Patients with HER2-positive advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to CapeOx plus lapatinib 1,250 mg or placebo daily. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) in patients with centrally confirmed HER2 amplification in the primary efficacy population., Results: A total of 545 patients were randomly assigned, and 487 patients comprised the primary efficacy population. Median OS in the lapatinib and placebo arms was 12.2 (95% CI, 10.6 to 14.2) and 10.5 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 11.3), respectively, which was not significantly different (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12). Median progression-free survival in the lapatinib and placebo arms was 6.0 (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.0) and 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.7), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.00; P = .0381). Response rate was significantly higher in the lapatinib arm: 53% (95% CI, 46.4 to 58.8) compared with 39% (95% CI, 32.9 to 45.3) in the placebo arm (P = .0031). Preplanned exploratory subgroup analyses showed OS in the lapatinib arm was prolonged in Asian and younger patients. No correlation was observed between HER2 immunohistochemistry status and survival. There were increased toxicities in the lapatinib arm, particularly diarrhea., Conclusion: Addition of lapatinib to CapeOx did not increase OS in patients with HER2-amplified gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. There were clear differences in the effect of lapatinib depending on region and age. Future studies could examine this correlation., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: The ToGA study showed that trastuzumab plus chemotherapy prolonged median survival in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced gastric cancer. Among chemotherapy options, oxaliplatin might be as effective as cisplatin but has shown to be more tolerable. To further improve treatment options for patients with advanced gastric cancer, we initiated a study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab plus oxaliplatin/capecitabine in patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer., Methods: CGOG1001 was an open-label, multicenter, prospective phase II study. Patients with chemotherapy-naive HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer were eligible. Trastuzumab was administered at a loading dose of 8 mg/kg followed by 6 mg/kg infusion every 3 weeks (q3w). Oxaliplatin was administrated as a 130 mg/m(2) infusion, q3w, for up to 6 cycles. Capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) was given orally twice daily on days 1-14 followed by a 7-day rest interval. Trastuzumab and capecitabine were continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Simon two-stage design (H0 = 40%, H1 = 60%, α = 0.05, β = 0.2) by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors 1.0 was applied., Results: Fifty-one patients were enrolled. Confirmed response was recorded in 46 patients. One patient achieved complete response and 33 patients achieved partial response (response rate 34/51 [66.7%] in the intent-to-treat population). Median follow-up time was 28.6 months, with a median progression-free survival of 9.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.5-11.6) and a median overall survival (OS) of 19.5 months (95% CI: 15.5-26.0). Patients with a HER2/CEP17 ratio of greater than five achieved improved OS (20.9 vs 19.5 months, p = 0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or above were thrombocytopenia (21.6%), neutropenia (13.7%), anemia (5.9 %) and leucopenia (3.9%)., Conclusion: The addition of trastuzumab to oxaliplatin/capecitabine was well tolerated and the results demonstrated encouraging efficacy., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01364493.

Background: The V325 study showed that docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) prolonged overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced gastric cancer, but with a high incidence of dose-limiting toxicities. We investigated the efficacy and safety of a modified DCF (mDCF) regimen for Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer., Methods: Untreated advanced gastric cancer patients randomly received docetaxel and cisplatin at 60 mg/m(2) (day 1) followed by fluorouracil at 600 mg/m(2)/day (days 1-5; mDCF regimen) or cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) (day 1) followed by fluorouracil at 600 mg/m(2)/day (days 1-5; CF) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary end points were OS, overall response rate (ORR), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and safety., Results: In total, 243 patients were randomized to treatment (mDCF regimen 121; CF 122). Compared with CF, the mDCF regimen significantly improved PFS and OS: the median PFS was 7.2 and 4.9 months, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, log-rank P = 0.0008], and the median OS was 10.2 and 8.5 months, respectively (HR = 0.71, P = 0.0319). Additionally, the mDCF regimen improved the parameters used as secondary objectives: the ORR was 48.7% with the mDCF regimen versus 33.9% with CF (P = 0.0244); the median TTF was 3.4 months with the mDCF regimen and 2.4 months with CF (HR = 0.67, P = 0.0027). Grade 3 and grade 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 77.3 % of patients who received the mDCF regimen versus 46.1% of patients who received CF (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: The mDCF regimen, compared with CF, significantly prolonged PFS and OS and enhanced ORR of Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer. The mDCF regimen achieved efficacy comparable to that of DCF but with fewer toxicities, which is appropriate for the Chinese population.

Background: In the AVAGAST study, fluoropyrimidine and cisplatin plus bevacizumab did not significantly improve overall survival (OS) versus fluoropyrimidine and cisplatin plus placebo in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Geographic differences in efficacy were observed in AVAGAST, but the study only included 12 Chinese patients. AVATAR, a study similar in design to AVAGAST, was a randomized, double-blind, phase III study conducted in Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer., Methods: Patients more than 18 years of age with gastric adenocarcinoma were randomized 1:1 to capecitabine-cisplatin plus either bevacizumab or placebo. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety., Results: In total, 202 patients were included (placebo n = 102; bevacizumab n = 100). Baseline characteristics were well balanced. The primary analysis result did not show a difference in OS for the bevacizumab arm compared to the placebo arm [hazard ratio, 1.11 (95% CI, 0.79-1.56); P = 0.5567]. Median PFS was also similar in both arms. Bevacizumab plus capecitabine-cisplatin was well tolerated. Grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 60% of bevacizumab-treated and 68% of placebo-treated patients, respectively. Grade 3-5 AEs of special interest with bevacizumab occurred in 8% of bevacizumab-treated patients and 15% of placebo-treated patients, mainly grade 3-5 hemorrhage (bevacizumab 4%, placebo 12%)., Conclusions: Addition of bevacizumab to capecitabine-cisplatin in Chinese patients with advanced gastric cancer did not improve outcomes in AVATAR. There was no difference in OS between the two arms and PFS was similar in both arms. Safety findings were as previously experienced with bevacizumab, including AVAGAST; no new safety signals were reported.

Purpose: Patients with metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) who do not respond to or who experience progression with second-line chemotherapy have no treatment options that clearly confer a survival benefit. This trial investigated the safety and efficacy of apatinib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, as a treatment option for heavily pretreated patients with mGC., Patients and Methods: Patients who experienced treatment failure with at least two chemotherapeutic regimens were randomly assigned to receive placebo (group A), apatinib 850 mg once daily (group B), or apatinib 425 mg twice daily (group C)., Results: We enrolled 144 patients onto this study. In groups A, B, and C, the median overall survival (OS) times were 2.50 months (95% CI, 1.87 to 3.70 months), 4.83 months (95% CI, 4.03 to 5.97 months), and 4.27 months (95% CI, 3.83 to 4.77 months), respectively, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) times were 1.40 months (95% CI, 1.20 to 1.83 months), 3.67 months (95% CI, 2.17 to 6.80 months), and 3.20 months (95% CI, 2.37 to 4.53 months), respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the apatinib and placebo groups for both PFS (P < .001) and OS (P < .001 and P = .0017). Nine patients had a partial response (three patients in group B and six patients in group C). Toxicities were tolerable or could be clinically managed. The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were hand-foot syndrome and hypertension. Hematologic toxicities were moderate, and grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities were rare., Conclusion: Apatinib showed improved PFS and OS in heavily pretreated patients with mGC who had experienced treatment failure with two or more chemotherapy regimens.

Many tumors metabolise the majority of the glucose that they take up through glycolysis even in the presence of an adequate oxygen supply. Lactate dehydrogenase A (LDH-A) is the critical enzyme that catalyses the transformation of pyruvate to lactate. We demonstrate that LDH-A reduction can suppress the tumorigenicity of intestinal-type gastric cancer (ITGC) cells by downregulating Oct4 both in vitro and in vivo. A statistical analysis of 661 ITGC specimens showed a significant correlation between LDH-A and Oct4 expression. Moreover, patients with low LDH-A/negative Oct4 expression exhibited better overall survival than patients with other combinations. We conclude that the close correlation of LDH-A and Oct4 may offer a promising therapeutic strategy for ITGC., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This phase II, open-label, multicenter study assessed the oral, multitargeted, tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib in patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who had received prior chemotherapy., Experimental Design: Patients received sunitinib 50 mg/day on Schedule 4/2 (4 weeks on treatment, followed by 2 weeks off treatment). The primary endpoint was objective response rate; secondary endpoints included clinical benefit rate, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety and tolerability, and quality of life., Results: Of 78 patients enrolled, most had gastric adenocarcinoma (93.6%) and metastatic disease (93.6%). All were evaluable for safety and efficacy. Two patients (2.6%) had partial responses and 25 patients (32.1%) had a best response of stable disease for ≥6 weeks. Median PFS was 2.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-2.6 months) and median OS was 6.8 months (95% CI, 4.4-9.6 months). Grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were reported in 34.6% and 29.4% of patients, respectively, and the most common non-hematologic adverse events were fatigue, anorexia, nausea, diarrhea, and stomatitis. Pharmacokinetics of sunitinib and its active metabolite were consistent with previous reports. There were no marked associations between baseline soluble protein levels, or changes from baseline, and measures of clinical outcome., Conclusions: The progression-delaying effect and manageable toxicity observed with sunitinib in this study suggest that although single-agent sunitinib has insufficient clinical value as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer, its role in combination with chemotherapy merits further study.