The Comparison of mDCF and mFOLFOX-6 as First-Line Treatment in Metastatic Gastric Cancer

Introduction: Fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy regimens are widely accepted for metastatic gastric cancer (GC). Because of drug toxicity, a combined two-drug cytotoxic drug regimen is recommended for first-line therapy, while three-drug cytotoxic regimens are recommended for patients with medically fit and better performance status. In this study, it was aimed to compare modified FOLFOX-6 (mFOLFOX-6) and modified DCF (mDCF) regimens in terms of survival and side effects in first-line treatment in metastatic GC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical record of patients with metastatic gastric or gastro-esophageal junction cancer who had received mDCF or mFOLFOX-6 as the first-line treatment, and followed up in our center between February 2013 and December 2020. The data were collected from the patients' registration database of the hospital and oncologic follow-up files of our center. In the mDCF arm, docetaxel 60 mg/m(2 )and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1 intravenous (i.v.) infusion, and 600 mg/m(2) 5-fluorouracil (FU) as a continuous infusion for five days were administrated every three weeks for up to six cycles. In the mFOLFOX-6 arm, 85 mg/m(2 )oxaliplatin and 400 mg/m(2) LV as an i.v. infusion over two hours and a 5-FU bolus of 400 mg/m(2) as a 10-minute infusion, followed by 2.400 mg/m(2) 5-FU as a 46-hour continuous infusion were administrated every two weeks for up to six cycles. Univariate and multivariate analyses for overall survival (OS) were performed by Cox proportional hazards regression model. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method with the Long-rank test. P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 70 patients included into the study. Of those, 40 (57%) patients had received mDCF and 30 (43%) had received FOLFOX-6 regimens as first-line treatment. There were no complete responses in both groups. The partial response rate was 28% and 27% for mDCF and mFOLFOX-6, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference regarding treatment response for both groups (p=0.787). The median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI: 7.5-20.4) in the mDCF arm, and 10.4 months (95% CI: 6.4-14.4) in the mFOLFOX-6 arm (p=0.409). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.2 months (95% CI: 3.6-6.9) in the mDCF arm, and 6.4 months (3.2-9.6) in the FOLFOX-6 arm (p=0.126). The ratio of dose reduction, treatment delay, and neutropenic fever were not statistically different between treatment arms. Conclusion: The present study demonstrated that proper patient selection for metastatic GC may give rise to comparable survival rates without increased toxicity. mFOLFOX-6 and mDCF had similar response rates, OS, PFS, and side effect profiles.