Mustafa Gürbüz1, Erman Akkuş2, Abdullah Sakin3, Semiha Urvay4, Atike Gökçen Demiray5, Süleyman Şahin6, Teoman Şakalar7, Cihan Erol8, Mehmet Ali Nahit Şendur8, Ahmet Bilgehan Şahin9, Erdem Çubukçu9, Deniz Can Güven10, Saadettin Kılıçkap10, Yakup Ergün11, Doğan Uncu11, Nazım Serdar Turhal12, Necdet Üskent12, Havva Yeşil Çınkır13, Atakan Demir14, Ramazan Acar15, Nuri Karadurmuş15, Sema Türker16, Mustafa Altınbaş16, Mert Karaoğlan2, Filiz Çay Şenler17. 1. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey. mgurbuz@ankara.edu.tr. 2. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey. 3. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Van Yüzüncü Yıl University, Van, Turkey. 4. Department of Medical Oncology, Kayseri Acıbadem Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey. 5. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Van Training and Research Hospital, Van, Turkey. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, Necip Fazıl City Hospital, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey. 8. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Ankara, Turkey. 9. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Uludağ University, Bursa, Turkey. 10. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. 11. Department of Medical Oncology, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. 12. Anadolu Medical Center, Department of Medical Oncology, Kocaeli, Turkey. 13. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Gaziantep University, Gaziantep, Turkey. 14. Department of Medical Oncology, Maslak Acıbadem Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 15. Department of Medical Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Gülhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. 16. Department of Medical Oncology, Diskapi Yildirim Beyazid Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. 17. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Oncology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the ToGA trial for HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer, cisplatin plus fluoropyrimidine was given for 6 cycles; trastuzumab was given until disease progression. However, there is a lack of real-life data about trastuzumab maintenance after 6 cycle chemotherapy. This study aims to present real-life data of trastuzumab ± capecitabine maintenance after 6 cycles of platinum, fluoropyrimidine, and trastuzumab in non-progressive patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter study of the Turkish Oncology Group. A total of 35 HER2-positive, inoperable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma patients being non-progressive at the end of 6 cycle chemotherapy and being given trastuzumab ± capecitabine as maintenance treatment were included from sixteen oncology centers. Baseline characteristics, objective tumor responses, progression free and overall survival data, and toxicities were determined. RESULTS: About 68% of the patients were given CF, and 32% were given FOLFOX with trastuzumab as the first-line treatment. The best response in 6 cycle chemotherapy was complete 8 (22%), partial 24 (68%), and stable disease 3 (8%). All patients had trastuzumab maintenance (median cycle 13; range 7-51), and 49% of the patients had capecitabine with trastuzumab (median capecitabine cycle 6; range 2-30). The median PFS of the patients was 12.0 months (95% CI 10.3-13.7), and median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI 15.2-19.5). There were 2 patients with grade 1 cardiotoxicity. CONCLUSION: Trastuzumab maintenance ± capecitabine after 6 cycles of trastuzumab plus combined chemotherapy treatment revealed efficacy and safety in non-progressive HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer.
PURPOSE: In the ToGA trial for HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer, cisplatin plus fluoropyrimidine was given for 6 cycles; trastuzumab was given until disease progression. However, there is a lack of real-life data about trastuzumab maintenance after 6 cycle chemotherapy. This study aims to present real-life data of trastuzumab ± capecitabine maintenance after 6 cycles of platinum, fluoropyrimidine, and trastuzumab in non-progressive patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter study of the Turkish Oncology Group. A total of 35 HER2-positive, inoperable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma patients being non-progressive at the end of 6 cycle chemotherapy and being given trastuzumab ± capecitabine as maintenance treatment were included from sixteen oncology centers. Baseline characteristics, objective tumor responses, progression free and overall survival data, and toxicities were determined. RESULTS: About 68% of the patients were given CF, and 32% were given FOLFOX with trastuzumab as the first-line treatment. The best response in 6 cycle chemotherapy was complete 8 (22%), partial 24 (68%), and stable disease 3 (8%). All patients had trastuzumab maintenance (median cycle 13; range 7-51), and 49% of the patients had capecitabine with trastuzumab (median capecitabine cycle 6; range 2-30). The median PFS of the patients was 12.0 months (95% CI 10.3-13.7), and median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI 15.2-19.5). There were 2 patients with grade 1 cardiotoxicity. CONCLUSION: Trastuzumab maintenance ± capecitabine after 6 cycles of trastuzumab plus combined chemotherapy treatment revealed efficacy and safety in non-progressive HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer.
Authors: A Ilhan-Mutlu; H Taghizadeh; A Beer; W Dolak; A Ba-Ssalamah; S F Schoppmann; M Hejna; P Birner; M Preusser Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 4.742
Authors: Emil Ter Veer; Aafke Creemers; Laura de Waal; Martijn G H van Oijen; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 508.702