HER2-positive gastric cancer Boku, Narikazu
Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association,
01/2014, Volume:
17, Issue:
1
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is involved in the pathogenesis and poor outcomes of several types of cancer, including advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer. ...Molecular-targeted drugs, such as trastuzumab, which prolong overall survival and progression-free survival in HER2-positive breast cancer, may also be beneficial in patients with HER2-positive gastric cancer. Several studies have examined this possibility, such as the Trastuzumab for Gastric Cancer trial. In this context, the first part of this review provides an update on our knowledge of HER2 in breast and gastric cancer, including the detection and prognostic relevance of HER2 in gastric cancer. The second part of the review discusses the results of pivotal clinical trials that examined the potential for using trastuzumab to treat this disease. This section also summarizes the trials that have been conducted or that are underway to determine the optimal uses of trastuzumab in gastric cancer, including its use as monotherapy and continuation beyond disease progression. The final section discusses the future prospects of other anti-HER2 drugs, including lapatinib, trastuzumab emtansine, and pertuzumab, for the treatment of HER2-positive gastric cancer. The introduction of trastuzumab led to the establishment of a new disease entity, “HER2-positive gastric cancer,” similar to HER2-positive breast cancer. It is expected that more anti-HER2 drugs will be developed and introduced into clinical practice to treat HER2-positive cancers, including gastric cancer.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive gastric cancer is a subtype for which new drugs and specific treatment strategies should be developed. Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) is a ...novel HER2-targeted antibody–drug conjugate containing topoisomerase I inhibitor as a payload. In the randomized phase 2 study (DESTINY-Gastric01) for HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (AGC), patients treated with T-DXd showed a significantly higher response rate compared with the chemotherapy of physician’s choice, associated with remarkably prolonged progression-free and overall survival. T-DXd also exhibits anti-tumor activity to HER2-negative tumor cells close to HER2-positive cells (so-called bystander killing effect). T-DXd was effective even for HER2-low expressing breast and gastric cancer in several clinical studies. Taking advantage of these strong points and synergism with other cytotoxic, molecular-targeted and immunological agents, it is expected that T-DXd will bring further progression in treatment both for strongly and weakly HER2 positive AGC in various treatment settings including perioperative chemotherapy.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors such as anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibodies have improved the overall survival of various types ...of cancers including advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Until now, two ant-PD-1 inhibitors were approved for AGC in Japan: nivolumab as third- or later-line treatment for AGC and pembrolizumab for previously treated patients with microsatellite instability-high tumours. However, a limited number of patients achieved clinical benefit, highlighting the importance of the better selection of patients or additional treatment to overcome resistance to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. This review focused on pivotal clinical trials, biomarkers and novel combination therapy of immune checkpoint inhibitors forAGC.
This study analyzed outcomes of systemic chemotherapy for advanced neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) of the digestive system. Clinical data from 258 patients with unresectable or recurrent NEC of the ...gastrointestinal tract (GI) or hepato‐biliary‐pancreatic system (HBP), who received chemotherapy, were collected from 23 Japanese institutions and analyzed retrospectively. Patients had primary sites in the esophagus (n = 85), stomach (n = 70), small bowel (n = 6), colorectum (n = 31), hepato‐biliary system (n = 31) and pancreas (n = 31). Median overall survival (OS) was 13.4 months the esophagus, 13.3 months for the stomach, 29.7 months for the small bowel, 7.6 months for the colorectum, 7.9 months for the hepato‐biliary system and 8.5 months for the pancreas. Irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) and etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) were most commonly selected for GI‐NEC and HBP‐NEC. For patients treated with IP/EP (n = 160/46), the response rate was 50/28% and median OS was 13.0/7.3 months. Multivariate analysis among patients treated with IP or EP showed that the primary site (GI vs HBP; hazard ratio HR 0.58, 95% confidence interval CI 0.35–0.97) and baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase levels (not elevated vs elevated; HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46–0.94) were independent prognostic factors for OS, while the efficacy of IP was slightly better than for EP (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.48–1.33; P = 0.389). IP and EP are the most common treatment regimens for NEC of the digestive system. HBP primary sites and elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels are unfavorable prognostic factors for survival. A randomized controlled trial is required to establish the appropriate chemotherapy regimen for advanced NEC of the digestive system. This study was registered at UMIN as trial number 000005176.
Clinical data from patients with unresectable or recurrent NEC of the gastrointestinal tract (GI) or hepato‐biliary‐pancreatic system (HBP), who received chemotherapy, were collected from 23 Japanese institutions and analyzed retrospectively. This study included 258 patients. Multivariate analysis among the patients treated with IP or EP showed that the primary site (GI vs. HBP; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35–0.97) and baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels (not elevated vs elevated; HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46–0.94) were independent prognostic factors for OS, while the efficacy of IP was slightly better than EP (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.48–1.33; P = 0.389).
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
Background
Nivolumab showed improvement in overall survival (OS) in ATTRACTION-2, the first phase 3 study in patients with gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer treated with ≥ 2 ...chemotherapy regimens. The 2-year follow-up results of ATTRACTION-2 are presented herein.
Methods
ATTRACTION-2 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (49 sites; Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan). The median (min–max) follow-up period was 27.3 (24.1–36.3) months. The primary endpoint was OS. A subanalysis of OS was performed based on best overall response and tumor-programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression status.
Results
Overall, 493 of 601 screened patients were randomized (2:1) to receive nivolumab (330) or placebo (163). OS (median 95% confidence interval; CI) was significantly longer in the nivolumab group (5.26 4.60–6.37 vs 4.14 3.42–4.86 months in placebo group) at the 2-year follow-up (hazard ratio 95% CI, 0.62 0.51–0.76;
P
< 0.0001). A higher OS rate was observed in the nivolumab vs placebo group at 1 (27.3% vs 11.6%) and 2 years (10.6% vs 3.2%). The OS benefit was observed regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Among patients with a complete or partial response (CR or PR) in the nivolumab group, the median OS (95% CI) was 26.6 (21.65—not applicable) months; the OS rates at 1 and 2 years were 87.1% and 61.3%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified.
Conclusions
Nivolumab treatment resulted in clinically meaningful long-term improvements in OS in patients with previously treated G/GEJ cancer. The long-term survival benefit of nivolumab was most evident in patients with a CR or PR.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Background
Specific treatment strategies are sorely needed for scirrhous-type gastric cancer still, which has poor prognosis. Based on the promising results of our previous phase II study (JCOG0210), ...we initiated a phase III study to confirm the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in type 4 or large type 3 gastric cancer.
Methods
Patients aged 20–75 years without a macroscopic unresectable factor as confirmed via staging laparoscopy were randomly assigned to surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 (Arm A) or NAC (S-1plus cisplatin) followed by D2 gastrectomy plus adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 (Arm B). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).
Results
Between October 2005 and July 2013, 316 patients were enrolled, allocating 158 patients to each arm. In Arm B, in which NAC was completed in 88% of patients. Significant downstaging based on tumor depth, lymph node metastasis, and peritoneal cytology was observed using NAC. Excluding the initial 16 patients randomized before the first revision of the protocol, 149 and 151 patients in arms A and B, respectively, were included in the primary analysis. The 3-year OS rates were 62.4% 95% confidence interval (CI) 54.1–69.6 in Arm A and 60.9% (95% CI 52.7–68.2) in Arm B. The hazard ratio of Arm B against Arm A was 0.916 (95% CI 0.679–1.236).
Conclusions
For type 4 or large type 3 gastric cancer, NAC with S-1 plus cisplatin failed to demonstrate a survival benefit. D2 surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy remains the standard treatment.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Background
Endoscopic resection has been limited to intestinal-type gastric cancer (cT1a) with a low risk of lymph node metastasis (T1a ≤2 cm, without ulcers). This single-arm confirmatory trial ...evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for >2 cm ulcer-negative and ≤3 cm ulcer-positive intestinal-type gastric cancer (cT1a).
Methods
The eligibility criteria included endoscopically diagnosed cT1a, a single primary intestinal-type gastric adenocarcinoma, an ulcer-negative lesion of any size or a ≤3 cm ulcer-positive lesion, cN0M0, and no prior treatment. If ESD resulted in noncurative resection, surgical resection was added. The primary endpoint was the 5-year overall survival (OS) (planned sample size was 470, with a one-sided alpha level of 2.5%). The threshold 5-year OS was 86.1%.
Results
We enrolled 470 early gastric cancer patients median tumor size, 25 (5–130) mm from 29 institutions between June 2007 and October 2010. These patients had 152 ulcer-negative lesions (>2 and ≤3 cm), 111 ulcer-negative lesions (>3 cm), and 207 ulcer-positive lesions (≤3 cm). The success rate for en block resection was 99.1% (466/470). Additional gastrectomy was conducted in 131 patients (28%) who did not fulfill the curative resection criteria. The 5-year OS of all patients was 97.0% (95% confidence interval, 95.0–98.2%), which was higher than the threshold 5-year OS (86.1%). The 317 patients who satisfied the curative resection criteria had no recurrence. There were no ESD-related grade 4 adverse events.
Conclusion
ESD for early gastric cancers that met the expanded criteria for intestinal-type gastric cancer (cT1a) was acceptable and should be the standard treatment instead of gastrectomy.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Liquid biopsy of circulating tumor cells (CTC) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is gaining attention as a method for real‐time monitoring in cancer patients. Conventional methods based upon ...epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) expression have a risk of missing the most aggressive CTC subpopulations due to epithelial‐mesenchymal transition and may, thus, underestimate the total number of actual CTC present in the bloodstream. Techniques utilizing a label‐free inertial microfluidics approach (LFIMA) enable efficient capture of CTC without the need for EpCAM expression. In this study, we optimized a method for analyzing genetic alterations using next‐generation sequencing (NGS) of extracted ctDNA and CTC enriched using an LFIMA as a first‐phase examination of 30 patients with head and neck cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer and colorectal cancer (CRC). Seven patients with advanced CRC were enrolled in the second‐phase examination to monitor the emergence of alterations occurring during treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)‐specific antibodies. Using LFIMA, we effectively captured CTC (median number of CTC, 14.5 cells/mL) from several types of cancer and detected missense mutations via NGS of CTC and ctDNA. We also detected time‐dependent genetic alterations that appeared during anti–EGFR therapy in CTC and ctDNA from CRC patients. The results of NGS analyses indicated that alterations in the genomic profile revealed by the liquid biopsy could be expanded by using a combination of assays with CTC and ctDNA. The study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (ID: UMIN000014095).
In summary, we optimized the efficiency of a platform for capturing circulating tumor cells (CTC) using a label‐free inertial microfluidics approach and revealed the importance of both CTC and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as diagnostic tools. In addition, our data suggest that both CTC and ctDNA can be used to closely monitor the emergence of molecular changes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
Summary Background Although adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine is standard care for resected pancreatic cancer, S-1 has shown non-inferiority to gemcitabine for advanced disease. We aimed to ...investigate the non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer in terms of overall survival. Methods We did a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority phase 3 trial undertaken at 33 hospitals in Japan. Patients who had histologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas, pathologically documented stage I–III, and no local residual or microscopic residual tumour, and were aged 20 years or older were eligible. Patients with resected pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 , intravenously administered on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks one cycle, for up to six cycles) or S-1 (40 mg, 50 mg, or 60 mg according to body-surface area, orally administered twice a day for 28 days followed by a 14 day rest, every 6 weeks one cycle, for up to four cycles) at the data centre by a modified minimisation method, balancing residual tumour status, nodal status, and institutions. The primary outcome was overall survival in the two treatment groups, assessed in the per-protocol population, excluding ineligible patients and those not receiving the allocated treatment. The protocol prespecified that the superiority of S-1 with respect to overall survival was also to be assessed in the per-protocol population by a log-rank test, if the non-inferiority of S-1 was verified. We estimated overall and relapse-free survival using the Kaplan-Meier methods, and assessed non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine using the Cox proportional hazard model. The expected hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 0·87 with a non-inferiority margin of 1·25 (power 80%; one-sided type I error 2·5%). This trial is registered at UMIN CTR (UMIN000000655). Findings 385 patients were randomly assigned to treatment between April 11, 2007, and June 29, 2010 (193 to the gemcitabine group and 192 to the S-1 group). Of these, three were exlcuded because of ineligibility and five did not receive chemotherapy. The per-protocol population therefore consisted of 190 patients in the gemcitabine group and 187 patients in the S-1 group. On Sept 15, 2012, following the recommendation from the independent data and safety monitoring committee, this study was discontinued because the prespecified criteria for early discontinuation were met at the interim analysis for efficacy, when all the protocol treatments had been finished. Analysis with the follow-up data on Jan 15, 2016, showed HR of mortality was 0·57 (95% CI 0·44–0·72, pnon-inferiority <0·0001, p<0·0001 for superiority), associated with 5-year overall survival of 24·4% (18·6–30·8) in the gemcitabine group and 44·1% (36·9–51·1) in the S-1 group. Grade 3 or 4 leucopenia, neutropenia, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase were observed more frequently in the gemcitabine group, whereas stomatitis and diarrhoea were more frequently experienced in the S-1 group. Interpretation Adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 can be a new standard care for resected pancreatic cancer in Japanese patients. These results should be assessed in non-Asian patients. Funding Pharma Valley Center, Shizuoka Industrial Foundation, Taiho Pharmaceutical.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
This phase III study compared treatment with weekly paclitaxel and biweekly irinotecan in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to treatment with fluoropyrimidine plus platinum.
Patients ...were randomly assigned to receive either paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks) or irinotecan (150 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15, every 4 weeks). Primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, adverse events, and proportion of patients who received third-line chemotherapy.
Of 223 patients, 219 were eligible for analysis. Median OS was 9.5 months in 108 patients allocated to the paclitaxel group and 8.4 months in 111 patients allocated to the irinotecan group (hazard ratio HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.49; P = .38). Median PFS was 3.6 months in the paclitaxel group and 2.3 months in the irinotecan group (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.49; P = .33). Response rate was 20.9% in the paclitaxel group and 13.6% in the irinotecan group (P = .24). Common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were neutropenia (paclitaxel group, 28.7%; irinotecan group, 39.1%), anemia (21.3%; 30.0%), and anorexia (7.4%; 17.3%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two patients (1.8%) in the irinotecan group. Third-line chemotherapy was administered in 97 patients (89.8%) after paclitaxel treatment and in 80 patients (72.1%) after irinotecan treatment (P = .001).
No statistically significant difference was observed between paclitaxel and irinotecan for OS. Both are reasonable second-line treatment options for advanced gastric cancer.
PDF
