Abstract
Aim This study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and toxicity of common regimens used as perioperative chemotherapy including ECF, DCF, FOLFOX, and FLOT to identify the most effective chemotherapy regimen with less toxicity.
Material and Methods This retrospective cohort study was based on 152 eligible gastric cancer patients recruited in a tertiary oncology hospital in Isfahan, Iran (2014-2019). All resectable gastric cancer patients who had received one of the four chemotherapy regimens including ECF, DCF, FOLFOX, or FLOT, and followed for at least one year (up to five years) were included. The primary endpoint of this study was Overall Survival (OS), Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Overall Response Rate (ORR), and R0 resection. We also considered toxicity according to CTCAE (v.4.0) criteria as a secondary endpoint. Cox -regression models were used applied to estimate OS and PFS time, controlled for relevant covariates.
Results Of included patients, 32(21%), 51(33.7%), 37(24.3%), and 32(21%) had received ECF, DCF, FOLFOX and FLOT, respectively. After the median 25 months follow-up, overall survival was higher with the FLOT regimen in comparison with other regimens (hazard ratio [HR] = 0. 052). The median OS of the FLOT regimen was not reachable in Kaplan-Meier analysis and the median OS was 28, 26, and 23 months for DCF, FOLOFX, and ECF regimens, respectively. On the other hand, a median PFS of 25, 17, 15, and 14 months was observed for FLOT, DCF, FOLFOX, and ECF regimens, respectively (Log-rank = 0. 021). FLOT regimen showed 84. 4% ORR which was notably higher than other groups (p-value<0. 01).
Conclusions For resectable gastric cancer patients, the perioperative FLOT regimen seemed to lead to a significant improvement in patients’ OS and PFS in comparison with ECF, DCF, and FOLFOX regimens. As such, the FLOT regimen could be considered as the optimal option for managing resectable gastric cancer patients.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was part of an Iranian Pharm. D thesis that has been supported by Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (Grant number: 398162).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences with the Iranian approval ID of IR.MUI.RESEARCH.REC.1398.167.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos