Pharmaceutical Care for Patients Undergoing S-1 Plus Cisplatin Therapy for Unresectable Recurrent Gastric Cancer

Kimura, Michio; Usami, Eiseki; Yoshimura, Tomoaki; Yasuda, Tadashi; Kikuchi, Yuji; Teramachi, Hitomi; Sugiyama, Tadashi; Tsuchiya, Teruo

doi:10.1177/0897190012466897

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, during second-line therapy with S-1, the frequency of grade ≥2 fatigue and gastrointestinal toxicity was 27.0% (10̸37 cases) in patients with Alb levels <3.5 g̸dl. This result is similar to that of previous studies (15,16) and should be considered when treating patients with S-1, as it may affect the treatment course. Similarly, fatigue and gastrointestinal toxicity in APC chemotherapy patients with Alb levels <3.5 g̸dl must be carefully considered when planning the chemotherapy protocol.…”

Section: Patients Who Received Patients Who Did Not Receive Second-lisupporting

confidence: 82%

“…The frequency of AEs and treatment continuity associated with second-line S-1 chemotherapy have not been extensively investigated (11)(12)(13)(14). We previously reported that albumin (Alb) levels <3.5 g̸dl and creatinine clearance levels <78 ml̸min were risk factors for treatment discontinuation or dosage reduction of S-1 in gastric cancer chemotherapy (15,16).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neutropenia as a prognostic factor and safety of second-line therapy with S-1 for advanced or recurrent pancreatic cancer

Ikagawa

Kimura

Iwai

et al. 2016

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the safety of S-1 as second-line therapy and to evaluate the association between neutropenia occurring during first-line gemcitabine (GEM) therapy and survival for advanced or recurrent pancreatic cancer (APC). Between January, 2010 and December, 2014, 123 APC patients received chemotherapy at the Ogaki Municipal Hospital (Ogaki, Japan). Of those, 37 received GEM as first-line and S-1 as a second-line therapy (GEM→S-1 group). A further 60 patients received GEM as first-line therapy, but did not receive second-line therapy (GEM group). The median overall survival in the GEM→S-1 (n=37) and GEM (n=60) groups was 323 days [95% confidence interval (CI): 138-218.9 days] and 172 days (95% CI: 105-184.4 days), respectively (P=0.0004). The median overall survival in the mild (grade ≤2; n=63) and severe (grade ≥3; n=34) neutropenia groups was 178 days (95% CI: 182-275 days) and 330 days (95% CI: 297-514 days), respectively (log-rank test, P=0.0023). The severe non-haematological toxicities associated with S-1 as second-line therapy were nausea (2.7%) and hand-foot syndrome (2.7%). Second-line S-1 treatment was discontinued due to adverse events in 5.4% (2̸37) of the cases. In conclusion, neutropenia occurring during GEM therapy administered as first-line treatment to APC patients was strongly associated with a better prognosis. S-1 therapy as second-line treatment was associated with a low incidence of severe adverse events and the patients were able to successfully continue treatment.

show abstract

Section: Patients Who Received Patients Who Did Not Receive Second-lisupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neutropenia as a prognostic factor and safety of second-line therapy with S-1 for advanced or recurrent pancreatic cancer

Ikagawa

Kimura

Iwai

et al. 2016

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the dosage and duration of S-1 treatment may influence patient prognosis, suggesting that medication adherence and continuity of treatment are crucial. However, S-1 continuation is sometimes challenging due to adverse events (AEs) such as leukopenia, neutropenia, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and stomatitis (2)(3)(4). In particular, AEs such as malaise and anorexia may reduce patient quality of life (QOL), which may significantly reduce medication adherence, leading to subsequent medication rejection (4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usefulness of a pharmacist outpatient service for S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer

Kimura

Iwai

et al. 2017

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy is an outpatient treatment for gastric cancer. To evaluate the role of the pharmacist outpatient service in increasing medication adherence and reducing adverse events associated with S-1, the present study retrospectively analyzed prescription recommendations from pharmacists to physicians and the persistence rate of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy use in patients with gastric cancer. A total of 40 subjects who utilized the pharmacist outpatient service between November 2014 and March 2016 comprised the pharmacist group; and 94 patients who underwent S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer between September 2012 and October 2014, but not as pharmacist outpatients, comprised the control group. Data on the prescription recommendations, persistence rate of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for 1 year and relative dose intensity were collected. The number of interventions and consultations for the pharmacist outpatient group were 40 and 644, respectively. Prescription recommendations regarding dosage, drug administration interval, and supportive therapy were provided in 62, 15 and 132 cases, respectively. The prescription proposal acceptance rate was 92.5%. The persistence rate of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for 1 year was significantly higher in the pharmacist group (82.5%) compared with the control group (39.4%; P<0.0001). The discontinuation rate due to adverse events was significantly lower in the pharmacist group (7.5%) compared with the control group (31.9%; P= 0.0015). In subjects who completed S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy, the relative dose intensities in the control and pharmacist groups were 82.9 and 84.7%, respectively. In conclusion, the continued pharmaceutical intervention ensured a high persistence rate of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy.

show abstract

Association of renal function with the safety and efficacy of cisplatin plus S-1 therapy and docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: an exploratory analysis of JCOG1013

Hironaka

Sadachi

Machida

et al. 2021

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Although cisplatin and 5-chloro-2,4-dihydropyrimidine (dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor contained in S-1) are excreted into the urine, it remains unknown how creatinine clearance (CrCl) affects the safety and efficacy of cisplatin plus S-1 and docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods Among the 741 participants in JCOG1013 comparing cisplatin plus S-1 with docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1, 723 with serum creatinine levels ≤1.2 mg/dL were categorized into A1 (CrCl ≥ 80 mL/min), A2 (60 ≤ CrCl <80) and A3 (CrCl < 60) in the cisplatin plus S-1 arm and similarly B1, B2 and B3 in the docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 arm. The initial dose modification by CrCl was pre-specified in the docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 arm but not in the cisplatin plus S-1 arm. Results The numbers of patients categorized as A1/A2/A3 and B1/B2/B3 were 169/136/57 and 170/138/53, respectively. In the cisplatin plus S-1 arm, a lower CrCl was associated with higher incidences of grade 4 leukopenia (P = 0.006), neutropenia (P = 0.002), and grade 3/4 anorexia (P = 0.004) and febrile neutropenia (P = 0.049), whereas there was no association in the docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 arm. No significant differences were observed according to CrCl in the overall survival [median: 15.4/15.5/15.4 months in A1/A2/A3 (P = 0.886) and 15.3/13.7/13.7 months in B1/B2/B3 (P = 0.719)], progression-free survival [median: 7.1/6.8/6.2 months in A1/A2/A3 (P = 0.884) and 7.5/7.2/7.8 months in B1/B2/B3 (P = 0.851)] and response rates [58.9/57.8/46.9% in A1/A2/A3 (P = 0.311) and 62.0/61.5/51.5% in B1/B2/B3 (P = 0.362)]. Conclusions Renal impairment was associated with severe adverse events in cisplatin plus S-1 therapy but not with the efficacy in cisplatin plus S-1 and docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 therapy.

show abstract

Pharmaceutical Care for Patients Undergoing S-1 Plus Cisplatin Therapy for Unresectable Recurrent Gastric Cancer

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

Neutropenia as a prognostic factor and safety of second-line therapy with S-1 for advanced or recurrent pancreatic cancer

Neutropenia as a prognostic factor and safety of second-line therapy with S-1 for advanced or recurrent pancreatic cancer

Usefulness of a pharmacist outpatient service for S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer

Association of renal function with the safety and efficacy of cisplatin plus S-1 therapy and docetaxel plus cisplatin plus S-1 therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: an exploratory analysis of JCOG1013

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About