Purpose Intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy demonstrated promising clinical effects in patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis. We aimed to verify its superiority over standard systemic chemotherapy in overall survival. Patients and Methods This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis who had received no or short-term (< 2 months) chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive intraperitoneal and intravenous paclitaxel plus S-1 (IP; intraperitoneal paclitaxel 20 mg/m and intravenous paclitaxel 50 mg/m on days 1 and 8 plus S-1 80 mg/m per day on days 1 to 14 for a 3-week cycle) or S-1 plus cisplatin (SP; S-1 80 mg/m per day on days 1 to 21 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m on day 8 for a 5-week cycle), stratified by center, previous chemotherapy, and extent of peritoneal metastasis. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were response rate, 3-year overall survival rate, and safety. Results We enrolled 183 patients and performed efficacy analyses in 164 eligible patients. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the arms, except that patients in the IP arm had significantly more ascites. The median survival times for the IP and SP arms were 17.7 and 15.2 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.04; stratified log-rank P = .080). In the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline ascites, the hazard ratio was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = .008). The 3-year overall survival rate was 21.9% (95% CI, 14.9% to 29.9%) in the IP arm and 6.0% (95% CI, 1.6% to 14.9%) in the SP arm. Both regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion This trial failed to show statistical superiority of intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy. However, the exploratory analyses suggested possible clinical benefits of intraperitoneal paclitaxel for gastric cancer.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for stage I esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). We conducted a single-arm prospective study to confirm the efficacy and safety of selective chemoradiotherapy (CRT) based on findings from endoscopic resection (ER). METHODS: We performed a prospective study of patients with T1b (SM1-2) N0M0 thoracic ESCC from December 2006 through July 2012; 176 patients underwent ER. Based on the findings from ER, patients received the following: no additional treatment for patients with pT1a tumors with a negative resection margin and no lymphovascular invasion (group A); prophylactic CRT with 41.4 Gy delivered to locoregional lymph nodes for patients with pT1b tumors with a negative resection margin or pT1a tumors with lymphovascular invasion (group B); or definitive CRT (50.4 Gy) with a 9-Gy boost to the primary site for patients with a positive vertical resection margin (group C). Chemotherapy comprised 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin. The primary end point was 3-year overall survival in group B, and the key secondary end point was 3-year overall survival for all patients. If lower limits of 90% confidence intervals for the primary and key secondary end points exceeded the 80% threshold, the efficacy of combined ER and selective CRT was confirmed. RESULTS: Based on the results from pathology analysis, 74, 87, and 15 patients were categorized into groups A, B, and C, respectively. The 3-year overall survival rates were 90.7% for group B (90% confidence interval, 84.0%-94.7%) and 92.6% in all patients (90% confidence interval, 88.5%-95.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective study of patients with T1b (SM1-2) N0M0 thoracic ESCC, we confirmed the efficacy of the combination of ER and selective CRT. Efficacy is comparable to that of surgery, and the combination of ER and selective CRT should be considered as a minimally invasive treatment option. UMIN-Clinical Trials Registry no.: UMIN000000553.
The findings suggest that triple therapy with PPI, AMPC, and STFX for one week would be an effective standard third-line eradication regimen for H. pylori in Japan.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.