No abstract

Both treatments were generally well-tolerated. Clinically significant AEs were observed in 35.1% of patients in the GC arm and 29.9% in the GS arm.Conclusions: GS, which does not require hydration, should be considered a new, convenient standard of care option for patients with advanced/recurrent BTC.Clinical Trial number: This trial has been registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index. htm), number UMIN000010667.

No abstract

Summary Background This first-in-human phase 1 study assessed the safety of TAS-114, a novel deoxyuridine triphosphatase inhibitor, combined with S-1 to determine its maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD). Methods In this dose-escalation study with a 3 + 3 design, TAS-114 and S-1 were concurrently administered orally under fasting conditions at 5–240 mg/m 2 and 30–36 mg/m 2 , respectively, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics (PK) were evaluated. Results Seventy-six patients were enrolled. The MTD and RD were TAS-114 200 mg/m 2 plus S-1 36 mg/m 2 and TAS-114 240 mg/m 2 plus S-1 30 mg/m 2 , respectively. Common treatment-related adverse events were anemia, lymphocytopenia, leukopenia, neutropenia, decreased appetite, rash, nausea, and pigmentation disorder. Partial response (PR) was observed in 10 patients (non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], n = 5; pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, n = 2; gastric cancer, n = 2; gallbladder cancer, n = 1). Of these, four patients achieved PR despite prior treatment history with S-1. Patients administered TAS-114 exhibited linear PK and CYP3A4 induction, with no effect on the PK of S-1. Conclusion TAS-114 plus S-1 showed tolerable, safe, and potentially effective results. To confirm safety and efficacy, two phase 2 studies are ongoing in NSCLC and gastric cancer patients. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01610479 ) . Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10637-018-0697-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Hepatectomy is standard treatment for colorectal liver metastases; however, it is unclear whether liver metastases from other primary cancers should be resected or not. The Japanese Society of Hepato‐Biliary‐Pancreatic Surgery therefore created clinical practice guidelines for the management of metastatic liver tumors. Methods Eight primary diseases were selected based on the number of hepatectomies performed for each malignancy per year. Clinical questions were structured in the population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) format. Systematic reviews were performed, and the strength of recommendations and the level of quality of evidence for each clinical question were discussed and determined. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. Results The eight primary sites were grouped into five categories based on suggested indications for hepatectomy and consensus of the guidelines committee. Fourteen clinical questions were devised, covering five topics: (1) diagnosis, (2) operative treatment, (3) ablation therapy, (4) the eight primary diseases, and (5) systemic therapies. The grade of recommendation was strong for one clinical question and weak for the other 13 clinical questions. The quality of the evidence was moderate for two questions, low for 10, and very low for two. A flowchart was made to summarize the outcomes of the guidelines for the indications of hepatectomy and systemic therapy. Conclusions These guidelines were developed to provide useful information based on evidence in the published literature for the clinical management of liver metastases, and they could be helpful for conducting future clinical trials to provide higher‐quality evidence.