Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology 4/2016

01-08-2016 | Original Article

Meta-analysis supporting noninferiority of oxaliplatin plus S-1 to cisplatin plus S-1 in first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (G-SOX study): indirect comparison with S-1 alone

Authors: Chikuma Hamada, Yasuhide Yamada, Mizutomo Azuma, Kazuhiro Nishikawa, Masahiro Gotoh, Hideaki Bando, Naotoshi Sugimoto, Tomohiro Nishina, Kenji Amagai, Keisho Chin, Yasumasa Niwa, Akihito Tsuji, Hiroshi Imamura, Masahiro Tsuda, Hirofumi Yasui, Hirofumi Fujii, Kensei Yamaguchi, Hisateru Yasui, Shuichi Hironaka, Ken Shimada, Hiroto Miwa, Ichinosuke Hyodo

Published in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Oxaliplatin plus S-1 with Cisplatin plus S-1 in Chemotherapy-naïve Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer (G-SOX) showed the noninferiority of S-1 (an oral fluoropyrimidine-derivative dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor) plus oxaliplatin combination therapy (SOX) to S-1 plus cisplatin therapy (CS) in overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) from proportional hazard model 0.958, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.803–1.142; noninferiority margin 1.15]. To further clarify the clinical position of SOX in advanced gastric cancer (AGC), a meta-analysis including information from other reported studies was conducted.

Methods

In addition to G-SOX, Japanese phase III clinical trials including S-1 monotherapy were included in the analyses. Individual patient data for SOX (318 patients) and CS (324 patients) from G-SOX, as well as those for S-1 (160 patients) from the Randomized Phase III Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Irinotecan plus S-1 with S-1 Alone as First-line Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer (GC0301/TOP-002), were available. Published clinical information for S-1 from other studies (total 705 patients) was also collected. A Weibull distribution was assumed for overall survival time, and parameters for SOX, CS, and S-1 were estimated parametrically. Posterior HR distributions were obtained with a Bayesian approach.

Results

The HR of SOX to S-1 was 0.817 (95 % credible interval 0.704–0.939), and the probability of the HR <1.00 was 99.8 %. The HR of CS to S-1 was 0.871 (95 % credible interval; 0.754–0.998), and the probability of the HR <1.00 was 97.6 %. The HR of SOX to CS in G-SOX was 0.942 (95 % credible interval; 0.789–1.117), and the probability of HR <1.15 was 98.9 %.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis indicates that SOX was superior to S-1 and noninferior to CS in AGC.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Koizumi W, Narahara H, Hara T et al (2008) S-1 plus cisplatin versus S-1 alone for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (SPIRITS trial): a phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 9:215–221CrossRefPubMed Koizumi W, Narahara H, Hara T et al (2008) S-1 plus cisplatin versus S-1 alone for first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (SPIRITS trial): a phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 9:215–221CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Yamada Y, Higuchi K, Nishikawa K et al (2015) Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer. Ann Oncol 26:141–148CrossRefPubMed Yamada Y, Higuchi K, Nishikawa K et al (2015) Phase III study comparing oxaliplatin plus S-1 with cisplatin plus S-1 in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer. Ann Oncol 26:141–148CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference ICH Harmonised tripartite guideline, Choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials—E10, Current Step 4 version dated 20 July 2000 ICH Harmonised tripartite guideline, Choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials—E10, Current Step 4 version dated 20 July 2000
4.
go back to reference Guidance for Industry, Non-inferiority Trials—DRAFT GUIDANCE, US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. March 2010 Guidance for Industry, Non-inferiority Trials—DRAFT GUIDANCE, US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. March 2010
5.
go back to reference Guideline on the choice of the non-inferiority margin. Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP), European Medicines Agency. January 2006 Guideline on the choice of the non-inferiority margin. Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP), European Medicines Agency. January 2006
6.
go back to reference Boku N, Yamamoto S, Fukuda H et al (2009) Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 10:1063–1069CrossRefPubMed Boku N, Yamamoto S, Fukuda H et al (2009) Fluorouracil versus combination of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus S-1 in metastatic gastric cancer: a randomised phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 10:1063–1069CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Narahara H, Iishi H, Imamura H et al (2011) Randomized phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of irinotecan plus S-1 with S-1 alone as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (study GC0301/TOP-002). Gastric Cancer 14:72–80CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Narahara H, Iishi H, Imamura H et al (2011) Randomized phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of irinotecan plus S-1 with S-1 alone as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (study GC0301/TOP-002). Gastric Cancer 14:72–80CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Koizumi W, Kim YH, Fujii M et al (2014) Addition of docetaxel to S-1 without platinum prolongs survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomized study (START). J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 140:319–328CrossRefPubMed Koizumi W, Kim YH, Fujii M et al (2014) Addition of docetaxel to S-1 without platinum prolongs survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomized study (START). J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 140:319–328CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL (2002) The statistical analysis of failure time data, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc, HobokenCrossRef Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL (2002) The statistical analysis of failure time data, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc, HobokenCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kundu D (2008) Bayesian inference and life testing plan for the Weibull distribution in presence of progressive censoring. Technometrics 50:144–154CrossRef Kundu D (2008) Bayesian inference and life testing plan for the Weibull distribution in presence of progressive censoring. Technometrics 50:144–154CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Meta-analysis supporting noninferiority of oxaliplatin plus S-1 to cisplatin plus S-1 in first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (G-SOX study): indirect comparison with S-1 alone
Authors
Chikuma Hamada
Yasuhide Yamada
Mizutomo Azuma
Kazuhiro Nishikawa
Masahiro Gotoh
Hideaki Bando
Naotoshi Sugimoto
Tomohiro Nishina
Kenji Amagai
Keisho Chin
Yasumasa Niwa
Akihito Tsuji
Hiroshi Imamura
Masahiro Tsuda
Hirofumi Yasui
Hirofumi Fujii
Kensei Yamaguchi
Hisateru Yasui
Shuichi Hironaka
Ken Shimada
Hiroto Miwa
Ichinosuke Hyodo
Publication date
01-08-2016
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Oncology / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 1341-9625
Electronic ISSN: 1437-7772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-015-0938-9

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

International Journal of Clinical Oncology 4/2016 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine