Second- and third-line systemic therapy in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer: a systematic review of the literature

被引:0
|
作者
Emil ter Veer
Nadia Haj Mohammad
Gert van Valkenhoef
Lok Lam Ngai
Rosa M. A. Mali
Martijn G. H. van Oijen
Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven
机构
[1] University of Amsterdam,Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Centre
[2] University of Groningen,Department of Epidemiology
[3] University Medical Centre Groningen,undefined
来源
关键词
Advanced esophagogastric cancer; Chemotherapy; Targeted therapy; Second-line; Third-line; Meta-analysis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The optimal second- and third-line chemotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer is still a matter of debate. Therefore, a literature search was carried out in Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and oncology conferences until January 2016 for randomized controlled trials that compared second- or third-line therapy. We included 28 studies with 4810 patients. Second-line, single-agent taxane/irinotecan showed increased survival compared to best supportive care (BSC) (hazard ratio 0.65, 95 % confidence interval 0.53–0.79). Median survival gain ranged from 1.4 to 2.7 months among individual studies. Taxane- and irinotecan-based regimens showed equal survival benefit. Doublet chemotherapy taxane/irinotecan plus platinum and fluoropyrimidine was not different in survival, but showed increased toxicity vs. taxane/irinotecan monotherapy. Compared to BSC, second-line ramucirumab and second- or third-line everolimus and regorafenib showed limited median survival gain ranging from 1.1 to 1.4 months, and progression-free survival gain, ranging from 0.3 to 1.6 months. Third- or later-line apatinib showed increased survival benefit over BSC (HR 0.50, 0.32–0.79). Median survival gain ranged from 1.8 to 2.3 months. Compared to taxane-alone, survival was superior for second-line ramucirumab plus taxane (HR 0.81, 0.68–0.96), and olaparib plus taxane (HR 0.56, 0.35–0.87), with median survival gains of 2.2 and 4.8 months respectively. Targeted agents, either in monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy showed increased toxicity compared to BSC and chemotherapy-alone. This review indicates that, given the survival benefit in a phase III study setting, ramucirumab plus taxane is the preferred second-line treatment. Taxane or irinotecan monotherapy are alternatives, although the absolute survival benefit was limited. In third-line setting, apatinib monotherapy is preferred.
引用
收藏
页码:439 / 456
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in second- and third-line settings
    Giantonio, Bruce J.
    [J]. SEMINARS IN ONCOLOGY, 2006, 33 (05) : S15 - S18
  • [22] A phase II study of ganetespib (G) as second- or third-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC).
    Thota, Ramya
    Goff, Laura Williams
    Chan, Emily
    Berlin, Jordan
    Jones, C. Michael
    McClanahan, Pamela
    Ayers, Gregory Dan
    Cardin, Dana Backlund
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 32 (03)
  • [23] Prediction of patients with multiple myeloma eligible for second- or third-line treatment in France
    Rondeau, Virginie
    Cornet, Edouard
    Moreau, Philippe
    Troussard, Xavier
    [J]. ANNALS OF HEMATOLOGY, 2016, 95 (08) : 1307 - 1313
  • [24] A phase II trial to evaluate gefitinib as second- or third-line treatment in patients with recurring locoregionally advanced or metastatic cervical cancer
    Goncalves, A.
    Fabbro, M.
    Lhomme, C.
    Gladieff, L.
    Extra, J. -M.
    Floquet, A.
    Chaigneau, L.
    Carrasco, A. Tisseron
    Viens, P.
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2008, 108 (01) : 42 - 46
  • [25] Erlotinib Versus Docetaxel As Second- or Third-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the Era of Personalized Medicine Reply
    Kawaguchi, Tomoya
    Ando, Masahiko
    Kubo, Akihito
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 33 (05) : 526 - U205
  • [26] Second- and third-line treatments in non-small cell lung cancer
    Kumar A.
    Wakelee H.
    [J]. Current Treatment Options in Oncology, 2006, 7 (1) : 37 - 49
  • [27] SECOND-LINE THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH LOCALLY ADVANCED OR METASTATIC UROTHELIAL CANCER: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW
    Bharmal, M.
    Guenther, S.
    Rosen, G.
    Kearney, M.
    Phatak, H.
    Kempel-Waibel, A.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2017, 20 (09) : A414 - A414
  • [28] Phase II Study of Docetaxel in Combination with Everolimus for Second- or Third-Line Therapy of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
    Ramalingam, Suresh S.
    Owonikoko, Taofeek K.
    Behera, Madhusmita
    Subramanian, Janakiraman
    Saba, Nabil F.
    Kono, Scott A.
    Gal, Anthony A.
    Sica, Gabriel
    Harvey, R. Donald
    Chen, Zhengjia
    Klass, Carmen M.
    Shin, Dong M.
    Fu, Haian
    Sun, Shi-yong R.
    Govindan, Ramaswamy
    Khuri, Fadlo R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8 (03) : 369 - 372
  • [29] Prediction of patients with multiple myeloma eligible for second- or third-line treatment in France
    Virginie Rondeau
    Edouard Cornet
    Philippe Moreau
    Xavier Troussard
    [J]. Annals of Hematology, 2016, 95 : 1307 - 1313
  • [30] Bi-weekly Paclitaxel and Capecitabine as a Second- or Third-line Treatment for Advanced Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study
    Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Pirkko-Liiisa
    Tuunanen, Tuija
    Kautio, Anna-Liisa
    Lehtinen, Ilari
    Tanner, Minna
    [J]. ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2013, 33 (11) : 4941 - 4945