Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition).
Vol 25, No 18S (June 20 Supplement), 2007: 4546
© 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kang, Y. Articles by Shin, D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Kang, Y. Articles by Shin, D.

Abstract

A randomized multi-center phase II trial of capecitabine (X) versus S-1 (S) as first-line treatment in elderly patients with metastatic or recurrent unresectable gastric cancer

Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Ulsan University Hospital, UUMC, Ulsan, Republic of Korea; Yeungnam University Medical Center, YUMC, Taegu, Republic of Korea; Hallym University Medical Center, HUCM, Anyang, Republic of Korea; Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Scienc, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Kyungpook National University Hospital, Taegu, Republic of Korea; National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea; Samsung Medical Center, SKKUSM, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Gachon Medical School, Incheon, Republic of Korea

4546

Background: Although the combination chemotherapy is the standard of care for young patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer (AGC), single agent chemotherapy may be a good alternative for elderly pts. Recent introduction of two new generation oral fluoropyrimidines, capecitabine and S-1, prompted us to investigate the activity and safety of these agents in elderly pts with AGC in a randomized multi-center phase II design. (NCT00278863) Methods: Elderly chemo-naïve pts (= 65 years) with measurable metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer were randomly assigned to receive capecitabine (1,250 mg/m² bid, D1–14 every 3 weeks, arm X) or S-1 (4060 mg bid according to BSA, D1–28 every 6 weeks, arm S). The primary endpoint was the response rate (RR). Results: From Oct 2004 to Apr 2006, 96 pts were enrolled. Excluding 5 pts who did not fit inclusion criteria, 91 pts were randomized to arm X (N=46) or arm S (N=45). Median age was 70.5 years for arm S and 71.0 years for arm X. Other clinical and tumor characteristics were well balanced across the two treatment arms. Among 44 assessable pts in arm X, 13 attained partial response (PR, 29.5%), 17 stable disease (SD, 38.6%) and 10 progressive disease (PD); 4 pts were not evaluable (NE). The corresponding disease responses in the 45 assessable pts in arm S were: 1 complete response (2.2%), 12 PR (26.7%), 18 SD (40.0%), 10 PD, and 4 NE. The incidence of grade 3–4 granulocytopenia was 6.8% in arm X and 4.8% in arm S. One episode of febrile neutropenia was observed in arm X. Grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicities were as follows (arm X vs. S): asthenia (0% vs. 7.2%), anorexia (6.8% vs. 9.5%), diarrhea (2.3% vs. 0%), and HFS (6.8% vs. 0%). With a median follow up of 13.5 months (mo) for survivors (range, 8.121.9), median time to progression and time to treatment failure were 4.8 mo (95% CI, 3.0–6.5) and 4.4 mo (3.6–5.3) for arm X and 4.2 mo (1.5–6.9) and 3.0 mo (1.5–4.5) for arm S. Median overall survival was 10.0 mo (8.0–12.0) for arm X and 7.9 mo (4.1–11.7) for arm S. Conclusions: Both treatments were active and tolerable as a 1^st line treatment for elderly pts with AGC.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract presentation from the 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting