4.6 Article

Phase I/II study of a combination of capecitabine, cisplatin, and intraperitoneal docetaxel (XP ID) in advanced gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis

Journal

GASTRIC CANCER
Volume 20, Issue 6, Pages 970-977

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10120-017-0710-0

Keywords

Gastric cancer; Chemotherapy; Peritoneal metastasis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background This study was conducted to determine the recommended dose (RD) of intraperitoneal docetaxel (ID) in combination with systemic capecitabine and cisplatin (XP) and to evaluate its efficacy and safety at the RD in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients with peritoneal metastasis. Methods AGC patients with peritoneal metastasis received XP ID, which consists of 937.5 mg/m(2) of capecitabine twice daily on days 1-14, 60 mg/m(2) of intravenous cisplatin on day 1, and intraperitoneal docetaxel at 3 different dose levels (60, 80, or 100 mg/m(2)) on day 1, every 3 weeks. In the phase I study, the standard 3 + 3 method was used to determine the RD of XP ID. In the phase II study, patients received RD of XP ID. Results In the phase I study, ID 100 mg/m(2) was chosen as the RD, with one dose-limiting toxicity (ileus) out of six patients. The 39 AGC patients enrolled in the phase II study received the RD of XP ID. The median progressionfree survival was 11.0 months (95% CI 6.9-15.1), and median overall survival was 15.1 months (95% CI 9.1-21.1). The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (38.6%) and abdominal pain (30.8%). The incidence of abdominal pain cumulatively increased in the later treatment cycles. Conclusions Our study indicated that XP ID was effective, with manageable toxicities, in AGC patients with peritoneal metastasis. As the cumulative incidence of abdominal pain was probably related to bowel irritation by ID, it might be necessary to modify the dose.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available