4.4 Article

A randomized phase II study of weekly docetaxel/cisplatin versus weekly docetaxel/oxaliplatin as first-line therapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer

Journal

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 73, Issue 1, Pages 163-169

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00280-013-2334-3

Keywords

Gastric cancer; Chemotherapy; Docetaxel; Cisplatin; Oxaliplatin

Funding

  1. Gachon University Gil Hospital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Docetaxel, in combination with cisplatin or oxaliplatin, has demonstrated efficacy in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This randomized, non-comparative phase II trial evaluated two weekly docetaxel-based regimens to determine which is the most promising in terms of efficacy and safety as a front-line therapy in AGC. Chemotherapy-na < ve patients with measurable unresectable and/or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel (35 mg/m(2)) weekly on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle plus either cisplatin (60 mg/m(2) on day 1) (wDP) or oxaliplatin (120 mg/m(2) on day 1) (wDO). Of the 77 randomly assigned patients, 76 patients (38 per arm) received one of the study treatments. Overall, response rate (ORR) was 37 % for wDP and 41 % for wDO. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.9 and 4.4 months for wDP and wDO, respectively, and median overall survival (OS) was 9.7 and 12.3 months, respectively. Exploratory analyses showed no significant difference between wDP and wDO in terms of ORR (P = 0.707), PFS (P = 0.324), or OS (P = 0.581). The main grade 3 or 4 toxicity in the wDP and wDO groups was neutropenia (47 % in both groups). wDO was less associated with nausea (66 vs. 82 %) and vomiting (39 vs. 63 %), but more associated with peripheral neuropathy (68 vs. 39 %) than wDP. Rates of overall grade 3 or 4 adverse events were similar (wDP 66 vs. wDO 68 %). wDP and wDO were found to be equally active and tolerable as front-line treatments in AGC.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available