
Novel Agent S-1 Has Similar Efficacy to 5-FU in Certain Gastric Cancers
Results of a phase III trial suggest that the combination of the contemporary oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 and cisplatin offers similar efficacy to 5-flourouracil and cisplatin in patients with chemotherapy-naive diffuse type adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction or stomach.
Though its primary endpoint was not met, a new phase III trial’s results suggest that the combination of the contemporary oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 and cisplatin offers similar efficacy to 5-flourouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin in patients with chemotherapy-naive diffuse type adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction or stomach.
“While age, tumor size, stage, and location are known prognostic factors [in gastric adenocarcinoma], histology is also important,” wrote study authors led by Jaffer A. Ajani, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. “However, no histology-based treatment regimen is established.” For HER2-negative tumors, a combination of a fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based therapy is standard.
S-1 was designed to improve the antitumor activity of 5-FU and to reduce its toxic effects. It is comprised of tegafur, a prodrug of 5-FU, and two 5-FU modulators, gimeracil and oteracil potassium. In the new open-label, phase III, randomized trial, the investigators enrolled 361 patients with untreated, advanced diffuse adenocarcinoma of the esophageal junction or stomach. Results of the analysis were
A total of 239 patients were randomized to the S-1 group, and 122 to the 5-FU group. Most patients had stomach adenocarcinoma (94.2%), and most had more than one metastatic site (77%). The median age in the study was 56 years. Enrollment to the trial was closed early due to slow accrual, which led to a smaller total cohort than was planned.
The primary endpoint was overall survival, and the trial did not meet that endpoint. The median overall survival with S-1 and cisplatin was 7.5 months, compared with 6.6 months with 5-FU and cisplatin, for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.76–1.28; P = .9312). A multivariate analysis that adjusted for various prognostic factors did not change the outcome, with an HR of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.75–1.25; P = .80).
The S-1 group did fare better with regard to overall response rate, at 34.7% vs 19.8% (P = .0122). This did not, however, translate to an improvement in progression-free survival (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.65–1.14; P = .3039) or in time to treatment failure (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.66–1.08; P = .1683).
The toxicity profiles of the treatments were also similar. In the S-1 group, 68.3% of patients had at least one adverse event (AE) of grade 3 or higher; in the 5-FU group, 66.1% had at least one such AE. In the S-1 group, 27.4% had at least one serious adverse event, compared with 26.3% of the 5-FU group. The S-1 patients more commonly experienced abdominal pain, vomiting, and decreased appetite, while 5-FU patients were more likely to have stomatitis, mucosal inflammation, and asthenia.
Though the study was clearly limited by its early closure, “data obtained during accrual and follow-up suggest that first-line chemotherapy with S-1/cisplatin and 5-FU/cisplatin are comparable with respect to efficacy and safety in patients with diffuse adenocarcinoma,” the authors concluded.






















