Systematic Review

Third- and later-line treatment in advanced or metastatic gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

*Author for correspondence: Tel.: +39 051 2144078; Fax: +39 051 6364037;

E-mail Address: rizzo.alessandro179@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5257-8678

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Veronica Mollica

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Angela Dalia Ricci

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Ilaria Maggio

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Maria Massucci

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Fabiola Lorena Rojas Limpe

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Francesca Di Fabio

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Andrea Ardizzoni

Division of Medical Oncology, S Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:3 Dec 2019https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2019-0429

View article

Abstract

Aim: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of third-line (TLT) and salvage treatment (ST) in advanced or metastatic gastric cancer. Materials & methods: Eligible studies included randomized clinical trials assessing TLT and ST versus placebo or best supportive care. Outcomes of interest included: overall survival, objective response rate and disease control rate in TLT; progression-free survival in ST; grade 3–4 adverse events in ST. Results: The use of TLT and ST was superior to placebo or best supportive care in terms of prolonging overall survival and progression-free survival. Hematological toxicities were more frequent in ST. Conclusion: TLT and ST are considerable and tolerable treatment options for patients with advanced or metastatic gastric cancer. Given the substantial heterogeneities affecting the efficacy analyses, these results have to be interpreted cautiously.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: •• of considerable interest

References

1. Salati M, Di Emidio K, Tarantino V, Cascinu S. Second-line treatments: moving towards an opportunity to improve survival in advanced gastric cancer? ESMO Open 2(3), e000206 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68(6), 394–424 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Van Cutsem E, Sagaert X, Topal B, Haustermans K, Prenen H. NCCN Gastric cancer 2017 V1. Lancet 388(10060), 2654–2664 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4. Wagner AD, Grothe W, Behl S et al. Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer – art. no. CD004064.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. (2), CD004064 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5. Ilson DH. Advances in the treatment of gastric cancer. Curr. Opin. Gastroenterol. 34(6), 465–468 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
6. Van Cutsem E, Moiseyenko VM, Tjulandin S et al. Phase III study of docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil compared with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a report of the V25 study group. J. Clin. Oncol. 24(31), 4991–4997 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7. Tabernero J, Van Cutsem E, Bang Y-J et al. Pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma: the Phase III KEYNOTE-062 study. J. Clin. Oncol. 37(Suppl. 18), LBA4007–LBA4007 (2019). •• New option as first-line treatment.
Google Scholar
8. Bang YJ, Van Cutsem E, Feyereislova A et al. Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a Phase III, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 376(9742), 687–697 •• Practice-changing study.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
9. Fuchs CS, Tomasek J, Yong CJ et al. Ramucirumab monotherapy for previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (REGARD): an international, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial. Lancet 383(9911), 31–39 (2014). •• Practice-changing study in second-line treatment.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Wilke H, Muro K, Van Cutsem E et al. Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised Phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 15(11), 1224–1235 (2014). •• Practice-changing study in second-line treatment.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
11. Thuss-Patience PC, Kretzschmar A, Bichev D et al. Survival advantage for irinotecan versus best supportive care as second-line chemotherapy in gastric cancer – a randomised Phase III study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO). Eur. J. Cancer 47(15), 2306–2314 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12. Ford HE, Marshall A, Bridgewater JA et al. Docetaxel versus active symptom control for refractory oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (COUGAR-02): an open-label, Phase III randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 15(1), 78–86 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13. Fanotto V, Uccello M, Pecora I et al. Outcomes of advanced gastric cancer patients treated with at least three lines of systemic chemotherapy. Oncologist 22(12), 1463–1469 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Moon YW, Rha SY, Jeung HC et al. Outcomes of multiple salvage chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: implications for clinical practice and trial design. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 66(4), 797–805 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
15. Park SH, Choi EY, Bang SM et al. Salvage chemotherapy with irinotecan and cisplatin in patients with metastatic gastric cancer failing both 5-fluorouracil and taxanes. Anticancer Drugs 16(6), 621–625 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16. Shimoyama R, Yasui H, Boku N et al. Weekly paclitaxel for heavily treated advanced or recurrent gastric cancer refractory to fluorouracil, irinotecan, and cisplatin. Gastric Cancer 12(4), 206–211 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17. Tarazona N, Smyth EC, Peckit C et al. Efficacy and toxicity of salvage weekly paclitaxel chemotherapy in non-Asian patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 8(2), 104–112 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Shim HJ, Yun JY, Hwang JE, Bae WK, Cho SH, Chung IJ. Prognostic factor analysis of third-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 14(3), 249–256 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19. Kang JH, Lee S Il, Lim DH et al. Salvage chemotherapy for pretreated gastric cancer: a randomized Phase III trial comparing chemotherapy plus best supportive care with best supportive care alone. J. Clin. Oncol. 30(13), 1513–1518 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
20. Li J, Qin S, Xu J et al. Apatinib for chemotherapy-refractory advanced metastatic gastric cancer: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-Arm, Phase II trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 31(26), 3219–3225 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Li J, Qin S, Xu J et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial of apatinib in patients with chemotherapy-refractory advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. J. Clin. Oncol. 34(13), 1448–1454 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22. Shitara K, Doi Toshihiko TJ. Trifluridine / tipiracil versus placebo in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer (TAGS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo- controlled, Phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 19(11), 1437–1448 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Kang YK, Boku N, Satoh T et al. Nivolumab in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer refractory to, or intolerant of, at least two previous chemotherapy regimens (ONO-4538-12, ATTRACTION-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial. Lancet 390(10111), 2461–2471 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Ohtsu A, Ajani JA, Bai YX et al. Everolimus for previously treated advanced gastric cancer: results of the randomized, double-blind, Phase III GRANITE-1 study. J. Clin. Oncol. 31(31), 3935–3943 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25. Pavlakis N, Sjoquist KM, Martin AJ et al. Regorafenib for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (INTEGRATE): a multinational placebo-controlled phase II Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 34(23), 2728–2735 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26. Takahari D. Second-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 20(3), 395–406 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
27. Fanotto V, Cordio S, Pasquini G et al. Prognostic factors in 868 advanced gastric cancer patients treated with second-line chemotherapy in the real world. Gastric Cancer 20(5), 825–833 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Pietrantonio F, Barretta F, Fanotto V et al. Estimating survival probabilities of advanced gastric cancer patients in the second-line setting: the gastric life nomogram. Oncology 95(6), 344–352 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Chen LT, Oh DY, Ryu MH et al. Anti-angiogenic therapy in patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Res. Treat. 49(4), 851–868 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
30. Mizrak Kaya D, Harada K, Shimodaira Y, Amlashi FG, Lin Q, Ajani JA. Advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: optimizing therapy options. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 10(3), 263–271 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31. Satoh T, Bang YJ, Gotovkin Ea et al. Quality of life in the trastuzumab for gastric cancer trial. Oncologist 19(7), 712–719 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Korkeila EA, Salminen T, Kallio R et al. Quality of life with biweekly docetaxel and capecitabine in advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer. Support Care Cancer 25(9), 2771–2777 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Zheng Y, Zhu XQ, Ren XG. Third-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 96(24), e6884 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Chan WL, Yuen KK, Siu SW, Lam KO, Kwong DL. Third-line systemic treatment versus best supportive care for advanced/metastatic gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 116, 68–81 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
35. Chia NY, Tan P. Molecular classification of gastric cancer. Ann. Oncol. 27(5), 763–769 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
36. Johnston FM, Beckman M. Updates on management of gastric cancer. Curr. Oncol. Rep. 21(8), 67 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
37. Alsina M, Moehler M, Hierro C, Guardeño R, Tabernero J. Immunotherapy for gastric cancer: a focus on immune checkpoints. Target. Oncol. 11(4), 469–477 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
38. Dolcetti R, De Re V, Canzonieri V. Immunotherapy for gastric cancer: time for a personalized approach? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 19(6), 1602 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
39. Bonotto M, Garattini SK, Basile D et al. Immunotherapy for gastric cancers: emerging role and future perspectives. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 10(6), 609–619 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar

Vol. 16, No. 2

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 316 times

History

Received 22 July 2019

Accepted 12 November 2019

Published online 3 December 2019

Published in print January 2020

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/fon-2019-0429

Author contributions

A Rizzo has made substantial contributions to conception of the study, analyzed the data and drafted the manuscript; V Mollica has made substantial contributions to conception of the study, analyzed the data and has been involved in revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content; AD Ricci has made substantial contributions to conception of the study and has given final approval of the version to be published; I Maggio has helped to draft and revised the manuscript; M Massucci has helped to draft and revised the manuscript; FLR Limpe revised the manuscript; F De Fabio has made substantial contributions to conception of the study and revised the manuscript; A Ardizzoni has been involved in revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content and has given final approval of the version to be published. All authors critically revised the manuscript, approved the final version to be published and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download