Randomized phase III study of gemcitabine plus S-1 combination therapy versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin combination therapy in advanced biliary tract cancer: A Japan Clinical Oncology Group study (JCOG1113, FUGA-BT).

Abstract

205 Background: Gemcitabine (GEM) plus cisplatin (GC) is the standard of care for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). However, GC is considered to be toxic because of nausea, vomiting, and appetite loss, and inconvenient due to requiring hydration before and after administration. GEM plus S-1 (GS) was reported to be promising with preferable efficacy and acceptable toxicity profile (UMIN000001685). This phase III study aimed to confirm the non-inferiority of GS to GC in terms of overall survival (OS). Methods: Eligibility criteria included chemotherapy-naïve patients with recurrent or unresectable biliary tract adenocarcinoma (gallbladder, intrahepatic biliary tract, extrahepatic biliary tract, or ampulla of Vater), an ECOG-PS of 0–1, and adequate organ function. In the GC arm, 1 g/m2 of GEM and 25 mg/m2 of cisplatin was infused on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the GS arm, 1 g/m2 of GEM was infused on days 1 and 8, and S-1 60, 80, or 100 mg/day according to body-surface area was administered from days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was OS and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), adverse events (AEs), clinically relevant AEs defined as any of grade 2 or more fatigue, appetite loss, nausea, vomiting, oral mucositis, and diarrhea. The sample size was calculated to be 350 with a one-sided alpha of 5%, a power of 80%, non-inferiority margin of 1.155 in terms of hazard ratio (HR). Results: From May 2013 to March 2016, 354 patients were enrolled. The non-inferiority of GS to GC was demonstrated (median OS: 13.4 months (m) in GC and 15.1 m in GS, HR 0.95; 90% confidence interval (CI), 0.78 to 1.15; P = 0.046 for non-inferiority). Median PFS was 5.8 m in GC and 6.8 m in GS (HR 0.86, 95% CI, 0.70-1.07). RR was 32.4% in GC and 29.8% in GS. Preliminary AEs data demonstrated that both treatments were generally well tolerated, although clinically relevant AEs were observed 34.7% in GC and 31.2 % in GS. Conclusions: GS demonstrated non-inferiority to GC in OS with good tolerability and was considered as new convenient option of standard of care without hydration for advanced BTC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000010667.