| Literature DB >> 28765618 |
Paula Jiménez Fonseca1, Alberto Carmona-Bayonas2, Raquel Hernández3, Ana Custodio4, Juana Maria Cano5, Alejandra Lacalle6, Isabel Echavarria7, Ismael Macias8, Monserrat Mangas9, Laura Visa10, Elvira Buxo11, Felipe Álvarez Manceñido12, Antonio Viudez6, Carles Pericay8, Aitor Azkarate13, Avinash Ramchandani14, Carlos López15, Eva Martinez de Castro15, Ana Fernández Montes16, Federico Longo17, Rodrigo Sánchez Bayona18, Maria Luisa Limón19, Asun Diaz-Serrano20, Alfonso Martin Carnicero21, David Arias16, Paula Cerdà22, Fernando Rivera15, Jose Maria Vieitez1, Manuel Sánchez Cánovas2, M Garrido23, J Gallego24.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The choice of chemotherapy in HER2-negative gastric cancer is based on centre's preferences and adverse effects profile. No schedule is currently accepted as standard, nor are there any factors to predict response, other than HER2 status. We seek to evaluate whether Lauren type influences the efficacy of various chemotherapies and on patient overall survival (OS).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28765618 PMCID: PMC5589993 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Figure 1Flowchart of patients in the registry. HER2=human epidermal growth factor receptor 2.
Baseline characteristics of the patients analysed for survival-related end points
| Sex, male | 880 (68%) |
| Age, mean±s.d. | 63±12 |
| Albumin, <3.5 g dl−1 | 317 (24%) |
| ECOG-PS ⩾2 | 188 (14%) |
| Primary tumour site | |
| Gastroesophageal junction | 138 (11%) |
| Stomach | 1165 (89%) |
| Stage at diagnosis, metastatic | 1236 (95%) |
| Surgery of primary tumour | 494 (38%) |
| Chemotherapy schedules | |
| Oxaliplatin-based | 459 (35%) |
| Anthracycline-based | 344 (26%) |
| Cisplatin-based | 191 (15%) |
| Docetaxel-based | 213 (16%) |
| Irinotecan-based | 29 (2%) |
| Other | 67 (5%) |
| Prior perioperative treatment | 155 (12%) |
| Lauren classification | |
| Intestinal | 482 (37%) |
| Diffuse | 652 (50%) |
| Indeterminate | 169 (13%) |
| Histological grade | |
| Grade 1 | 102 (8%) |
| Grade 2 | 340 (26%) |
| Grade 3 | 580 (44%) |
| Not available | 281 (22%) |
| Presence of signet ring cells | |
| No signet ring cells | 660 (50%) |
| Signet ring cells (<50%) | 103 (8%) |
| Signet ring cells (⩾50%) | 152 (12%) |
| Signet ring cells present with unknown percentage | 202 (16%) |
| Not available | 186 (14%) |
| Site of metastases | |
| Liver | 414 (32%) |
| Peritoneum | 641 (49%) |
| Bone | 128 (10%) |
| Lung | 98 (8%) |
| Tumour measurability | |
| Only non-measurable disease | 376 (29%) |
| Measurable disease | 927 (71%) |
| Measurable disease & response assessment available at 3 months | 730 (56%) |
Abbreviations: ECOG-PS=Eastern Cooperative Group Performance Status; g dl−1=grams per decilitre.
Figure 2Overall response rate according to chemotherapy regimens and Lauren histological type. Data set: subjects with response-evaluable (at 3 months) and initially measurable disease (n=730). DT=diffuse type; IT=intestinal type; ORR=overall response rate.
Pairwise comparisons of ORR in different chemotherapy regimens
| Oxaliplatin | IT | 44.4% | 1.0000 |
| DT | 40.7% | 0.1692 | |
| Anthracyclines | IT | 60.0% | 0.0048 |
| DT | 40.8% | 1.0000 | |
| Docetaxel | IT | 61.5% | 0.0124 |
| DT | 51.0% | 0.3796 | |
| Docetaxel | IT | 61.8% | 0.8597 |
| DT | 51.0% | 0.9791 |
Abbreviations: DT=diffuse type; IT=intestinal type; ORR=overall response rate. Data set: subjects with response-evaluable (at 3 months) and initially measurable disease (n=730). Test used: χ2; P-values were corrected using the Holm–Bonferroni method.
Figure 3Forest plot exhibiting the effect of treatment subgroups (hazard ratio for overall survival) according to Lauren histological type. Data set used: patients without indeterminate tumours (n=1134). Test used: HRs are derived from multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for gender, ECOG-PS, albumin, histological grade, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, stage, ascites, bone metastases, lung metastases, and number of metastatic sites (see Materials and Methods section); the effect of subgroups is based on the interaction between Lauren classification (IT & DT) and chemotherapy. The Holm–Bonferroni method was used for multiple comparisons. HR=hazard ratio; N/n=population/events; OS=overall survival.
Figure 4Forest plot exhibiting the effect of subgroups del treatment (hazard ratio for progression-free survival) according to Lauren histological type. Data set used: patients without indeterminate tumours (n=1134). Test used: HRs are derived from multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for ECOG-PS, albumin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, ascites, bone metastases, lung metastases, and number of metastatic sites (see Materials and Methods section); the effect of subgroups is based on the interaction between Lauren classification (IT & DT) and chemotherapy. The Holm–Bonferroni method was used for multiple comparisons. HR=hazard ratio; N/n=population/events; PFS=progression-free survival.