Cargando…

The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: S-1 is first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in Asia and is used with increased frequency in Western counties. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of S-1-based therapy compared with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based therapy and S-1-based...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: ter Veer, Emil, Mohammad, Nadia Haj, Lodder, Paul, Ngai, Lok Lam, Samaan, Mary, van Oijen, Martijn G. H., van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Japan 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4906062/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26754295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10120-015-0587-8
_version_ 1782437352148303872
author ter Veer, Emil
Mohammad, Nadia Haj
Lodder, Paul
Ngai, Lok Lam
Samaan, Mary
van Oijen, Martijn G. H.
van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M.
author_facet ter Veer, Emil
Mohammad, Nadia Haj
Lodder, Paul
Ngai, Lok Lam
Samaan, Mary
van Oijen, Martijn G. H.
van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M.
author_sort ter Veer, Emil
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: S-1 is first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in Asia and is used with increased frequency in Western counties. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of S-1-based therapy compared with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based therapy and S-1-based combination therapy compared with S-1 monotherapy. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting abstracts, European Society for Medical Oncology meeting abstracts and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized clinical trials until May 2015. Data were extracted for overall survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and grade 1–2 and grade 3–4 adverse events. Stratified OS data for subgroups were extracted. RESULTS: S-1 was not different from 5-FU (eight studies, n = 2788) in terms of OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.85–1.01] and PFS (HR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.73–1.04), whereas ORR was higher (risk ratio 1.43, 95 % CI 1.05–1.96). There was no subgroup difference in efficacy among Asian and Western patients, but in Western patients S-1 was associated with a lower rate of febrile neutropenia, toxicity-related deaths and grade 3–4 stomatitis and mucositis compared with 5-FU. S-1 showed no difference in efficacy compared with capecitabine (three studies, n = 329), but was associated with a lower rate of grade 3–4 neutropenia and grade 1–2 hand–foot syndrome. S-1-combination therapy was superior to S-1 monotherapy (eight studies, n = 1808) in terms of OS (HR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.65–0.90), PFS (HR 0.68, 95 % CI 0.56–0.82) and ORR (risk ratio 1.20, 95 % CI 1.04–1.38) but was more toxic. Survival benefit of S-1 combination therapy over S-1 monotherapy was most pronounced in patients with non-measurable disease, diffuse-type histological features and peritoneal metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: S-1 is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in both Asian and Western countries. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10120-015-0587-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4906062
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Japan
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49060622016-06-30 The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis ter Veer, Emil Mohammad, Nadia Haj Lodder, Paul Ngai, Lok Lam Samaan, Mary van Oijen, Martijn G. H. van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M. Gastric Cancer Review Article BACKGROUND: S-1 is first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in Asia and is used with increased frequency in Western counties. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of S-1-based therapy compared with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based therapy and S-1-based combination therapy compared with S-1 monotherapy. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting abstracts, European Society for Medical Oncology meeting abstracts and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized clinical trials until May 2015. Data were extracted for overall survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and grade 1–2 and grade 3–4 adverse events. Stratified OS data for subgroups were extracted. RESULTS: S-1 was not different from 5-FU (eight studies, n = 2788) in terms of OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.85–1.01] and PFS (HR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.73–1.04), whereas ORR was higher (risk ratio 1.43, 95 % CI 1.05–1.96). There was no subgroup difference in efficacy among Asian and Western patients, but in Western patients S-1 was associated with a lower rate of febrile neutropenia, toxicity-related deaths and grade 3–4 stomatitis and mucositis compared with 5-FU. S-1 showed no difference in efficacy compared with capecitabine (three studies, n = 329), but was associated with a lower rate of grade 3–4 neutropenia and grade 1–2 hand–foot syndrome. S-1-combination therapy was superior to S-1 monotherapy (eight studies, n = 1808) in terms of OS (HR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.65–0.90), PFS (HR 0.68, 95 % CI 0.56–0.82) and ORR (risk ratio 1.20, 95 % CI 1.04–1.38) but was more toxic. Survival benefit of S-1 combination therapy over S-1 monotherapy was most pronounced in patients with non-measurable disease, diffuse-type histological features and peritoneal metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: S-1 is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer in both Asian and Western countries. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10120-015-0587-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Japan 2016-01-11 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4906062/ /pubmed/26754295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10120-015-0587-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review Article
ter Veer, Emil
Mohammad, Nadia Haj
Lodder, Paul
Ngai, Lok Lam
Samaan, Mary
van Oijen, Martijn G. H.
van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M.
The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort efficacy and safety of s-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4906062/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26754295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10120-015-0587-8
work_keys_str_mv AT terveeremil theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mohammadnadiahaj theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lodderpaul theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ngailoklam theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT samaanmary theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanoijenmartijngh theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanlaarhovenhannekewm theefficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT terveeremil efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mohammadnadiahaj efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lodderpaul efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ngailoklam efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT samaanmary efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanoijenmartijngh efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanlaarhovenhannekewm efficacyandsafetyofs1basedregimensinthefirstlinetreatmentofadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis