Safety and continuity of second‑ and third‑line therapy with paclitaxel or irinotecan for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer

  • Authors:
    • Michio Kimura
    • Eiseki Usami
    • Tetsufumi Kanematsu
    • Mina Iwai
    • Tomoaki Yoshimura
    • Hiromi Mori
    • Tadashi Sugiyama
    • Hitomi Teramachi
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: February 14, 2014     https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.260
  • Pages: 466-472
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

In the treatment of advanced or recurrent gastric cancer, the prolongation of survival depends on the use of second‑line therapy, with paclitaxel (PTX) or irinotecan (CPT‑11) as the key agents. The present study aimed to retrospectively investigate the safety and continuity of weekly PTX and CPT‑11 monotherapy as second‑ or third‑line treatment for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer. A total of 62 patients who had received PTX or CPT‑11 for gastric cancer at the Ogaki Municipal Hospital (Ogaki, Japan) were retrospectively reviewed. Of the 47 patients who received PTX as second‑line therapy, 13 (27.7%) received third‑line therapy with CPT‑11. Second‑line PTX and third‑line CPT‑11 were discontinued due to progressive disease (PD) in 27 and 7 cases, respectively, and deterioration in the performance status (PS) in 20 and 4 cases, respectively. Only 1 case of discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) was reported for third‑line CPT‑11. Furthermore, of the 15 patients who received CPT‑11 as second‑line treatment, 11 (73.3%) then received PTX as third‑line treatment. Second‑line CPT‑11 and third‑line PTX were discontinued due to PD in 9 and 6 cases, respectively, and deterioration in the PS in 4 and 5 cases, respectively, whereas there was only 1 case of discontinuation due to AEs for second‑line CPT‑11. Severe AEs for PTX and CPT‑11 were infrequent; however, the frequency of diarrhea was high when PTX was administered as third‑line therapy (63.6%), whereas the frequency of malaise was high when CPT‑11 was administered as second‑ (73.3%) and third‑line (76.9%) therapy. In conclusion, severe AEs due to PTX and CPT‑11 as second‑ and third‑line treatment for advanced or recurrent gastric cancer are infrequent and patients are generally able to continue treatment. However, the possibility of diarrhea with third‑line PTX and malaise with second‑ and third‑line CPT‑11 treatment should be considered when planning chemotherapy.
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

May-June 2014
Volume 2 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 2049-9450
Online ISSN:2049-9469

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Kimura M, Usami E, Kanematsu T, Iwai M, Yoshimura T, Mori H, Sugiyama T and Teramachi H: Safety and continuity of second‑ and third‑line therapy with paclitaxel or irinotecan for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer. Mol Clin Oncol 2: 466-472, 2014.
APA
Kimura, M., Usami, E., Kanematsu, T., Iwai, M., Yoshimura, T., Mori, H. ... Teramachi, H. (2014). Safety and continuity of second‑ and third‑line therapy with paclitaxel or irinotecan for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer. Molecular and Clinical Oncology, 2, 466-472. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.260
MLA
Kimura, M., Usami, E., Kanematsu, T., Iwai, M., Yoshimura, T., Mori, H., Sugiyama, T., Teramachi, H."Safety and continuity of second‑ and third‑line therapy with paclitaxel or irinotecan for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer". Molecular and Clinical Oncology 2.3 (2014): 466-472.
Chicago
Kimura, M., Usami, E., Kanematsu, T., Iwai, M., Yoshimura, T., Mori, H., Sugiyama, T., Teramachi, H."Safety and continuity of second‑ and third‑line therapy with paclitaxel or irinotecan for advanced and recurrent gastric cancer". Molecular and Clinical Oncology 2, no. 3 (2014): 466-472. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.260