4.2 Article

Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 is active and well tolerated in patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer:: a phase II trial

Journal

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 32, Issue 7, Pages 248-254

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyf057

Keywords

chemotherapy; docetaxel; advanced gastric cancer

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of the present study was to confirm the efficacy and tolerability of docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) in a population of Korean patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods: Patients with metastatic or locally recurrent gastric cancer received docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. Objective response rate was the primary endpoint. Results: Forty-five patients were enrolled. Most showed adenocarcinomas of the gastric antrum and/or body of the stomach. All showed metastases and two-thirds retained the primary tumour. Forty-four patients received at least one docetaxel infusion ('treated' population), with 40 patients evaluable for response. A total of 159 cycles (median three cycles) were administered, with mean duration of treatment 10.9 weeks. The objective response rate in the treated population was 15.9% (17.5% in the per protocol population), with stable disease in 25.0% of patients and progressive disease in 50.0%. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 36 (81.8%) patients and 36.1% of cycles. However, febrile neutropenia occurred in only two (4.5%) patients and 1.3% of cycles. Grade 3 anorexia, experienced by two patients (4.5%) and during 1.9% of cycles, was the most frequent non-haematological adverse event possibly or probably related to docetaxel. No grade 4 non-haematological events occurred. Conclusion: This study suggests that docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) is active in metastatic or locally recurrent adenocarcinoma with a low incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events. Docetaxel warrants further study in combination regimens for advanced gastric cancer.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available