Alternate‑day administration of S‑1 for elderly patients with advanced non‑small‑cell lung carcinoma: A prospective feasibility study

  • Authors:
    • Takeshi Masuda
    • Masako Watanabe
    • Kazunori Fujitaka
    • Kosuke Hamai
    • Nobuhisa Ishikawa
    • Mihoko Doi
    • Soichi Kitaguchi
    • Kakuhiro Yamaguchi
    • Shinjiro Sakamoto
    • Yasushi Horimasu
    • Shintaro Miyamoto
    • Taku Nakashima
    • Tadashi Senoo
    • Hiroshi Iwamoto
    • Hironobu Hamada
    • Noboru Hattori
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: August 24, 2018     https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2018.1705
  • Pages: 539-544
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

S‑1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine agent used for the treatment of non‑small‑cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although S‑1 monotherapy has been reported to exhibit lesser hematotoxicity compared with other third‑generation chemotherapeutics, digestive toxicity was also frequently observed. Alternate‑day administration of S‑1 has shown a lower rate of severe digestive toxicity than the daily standard administration in patients with NSCLC. However, the safety of alternate‑day S‑1 therapy in elderly patients aged 75 years or older has not been investigated. The present study was a multi‑center and prospective feasibility study aimed to evaluate the safety of alternate‑day S‑1 therapy in elderly patients with NSCLC. The patients received S‑1 orally twice daily for 4 days (Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday) every week until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety, which was evaluated as the number of grade ≥3 adverse events, and the secondary endpoints were progression‑free survival (PFS), 1‑year survival, and disease control rate (DCR). A total of 10 patients were enrolled, but 2 patients failed to initiate the treatment protocol. Finally, 8 patients were treated with the study protocol regimen. No grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed. Four (50%) and 1 (12.5%) patient had grade 2 or lower digestive symptoms such as anorexia, diarrhea, or stomatitis and grade 1 lacrimation, respectively. Moreover, 2 (25%), 1 (12.5%), and 1 (12.5%) patients had grade 2 renal dysfunction, grade 2 ileus, and elevated blood bilirubin, respectively. The median PFS was 1.5 months (95% confidence interval: 0.9‑1.8), and the 1‑year survival rate was 42.9%. The DCR was 12.5%. In conclusion, alternate‑day S‑1 administration can be a safe treatment regimen for elderly patients with NSCLC, but its therapeutic efficacy and safety for elderly patients with NSCLC should be compared against the standard S‑1 administration in a large‑scale study.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

November 2018
Volume 9 Issue 5

Print ISSN: 2049-9450
Online ISSN:2049-9469

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
APA
Masuda, T., Watanabe, M., Fujitaka, K., Hamai, K., Ishikawa, N., Doi, M. ... Hattori, N. (2018). Alternate‑day administration of S‑1 for elderly patients with advanced non‑small‑cell lung carcinoma: A prospective feasibility study. Molecular and Clinical Oncology, 9, 539-544. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2018.1705
MLA
Masuda, T., Watanabe, M., Fujitaka, K., Hamai, K., Ishikawa, N., Doi, M., Kitaguchi, S., Yamaguchi, K., Sakamoto, S., Horimasu, Y., Miyamoto, S., Nakashima, T., Senoo, T., Iwamoto, H., Hamada, H., Hattori, N."Alternate‑day administration of S‑1 for elderly patients with advanced non‑small‑cell lung carcinoma: A prospective feasibility study". Molecular and Clinical Oncology 9.5 (2018): 539-544.
Chicago
Masuda, T., Watanabe, M., Fujitaka, K., Hamai, K., Ishikawa, N., Doi, M., Kitaguchi, S., Yamaguchi, K., Sakamoto, S., Horimasu, Y., Miyamoto, S., Nakashima, T., Senoo, T., Iwamoto, H., Hamada, H., Hattori, N."Alternate‑day administration of S‑1 for elderly patients with advanced non‑small‑cell lung carcinoma: A prospective feasibility study". Molecular and Clinical Oncology 9, no. 5 (2018): 539-544. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2018.1705