Takuhiro Yamaguchi

Purpose Intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy demonstrated promising clinical effects in patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis. We aimed to verify its superiority over standard systemic chemotherapy in overall survival. Patients and Methods This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis who had received no or short-term (< 2 months) chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive intraperitoneal and intravenous paclitaxel plus S-1 (IP; intraperitoneal paclitaxel 20 mg/m 2 and intravenous paclitaxel 50 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8 plus S-1 80 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 to 14 for a 3-week cycle) or S-1 plus cisplatin (SP; S-1 80 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 to 21 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m 2 on day 8 for a 5-week cycle), stratified by center, previous chemotherapy, and extent of peritoneal metastasis. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were response rate, 3-year overall survival rate, and safety. Results We enrolled 183 patients and performed efficacy analyses in 164 eligible patients. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the arms, except that patients in the IP arm had significantly more ascites. The median survival times for the IP and SP arms were 17.7 and 15.2 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.04; stratified log-rank P = .080). In the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline ascites, the hazard ratio was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = .008). The 3-year overall survival rate was 21.9% (95% CI, 14.9% to 29.9%) in the IP arm and 6.0% (95% CI, 1.6% to 14.9%) in the SP arm. Both regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion This trial failed to show statistical superiority of intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy. However, the exploratory analyses suggested possible clinical benefits of intraperitoneal paclitaxel for gastric cancer.

Unrelated cord blood transplantation (CBT) has now become more common, but as yet there have been only a few reports on its outcome compared with bone marrow transplantation (BMT), especially for adults. We studied the clinical outcomes of 113 adult patients with hematologic malignancies who received unrelated BM transplants (n = 45) or unrelated CB transplants (n = 68). We analyzed the hematopoietic recovery, rates of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), risks of transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and relapse, and disease-free survival (DFS) using Cox proportional hazards models. The time from donor search to transplantation was significantly shorter among CB transplant recipients (median, 2 months) than BM transplant recipients (median, 11 months; P < .01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated slow neutrophil (P < .01) and platelet (P < .01) recoveries in CBT patients compared with BMT patients. Despite rapid tapering of immunosuppressants after transplantation and infrequent use of steroids to treat severe acute GVHD, there were no GVHD-related deaths among CB transplant recipients compared with 10 deaths of 24 among BM transplant recipients. Unrelated CBT showed better TRM and DFS results compared with BMT (P = .02 and P < .01, respectively), despite the higher human leukocyte antigen mismatching rate and lower number of infused cells. These data strongly suggest that CBT could be safely and effectively used for adult patients with hematologic malignancies.

We studied the clinical outcomes of 171 adults with hematologic malignancies who received unrelated cord blood transplantation (CBT) as a primary unrelated stem-cell source (n=100), or bone marrow transplant (BMT) or peripheral blood stem-cell transplant (PBSCT) from related donors (n=71, 55 BMT and 16 PBSCT). All patients received myeloablative regimens including 12 Gy total body irradiation. We analyzed the hematologic recovery, and risks of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and relapse, and disease-free survival (DFS) using Cox proportional hazards models. Significant delays in engraftment occurred after cord blood transplantation; however, overall engraftment rates were almost the same for both grafts. The cumulative incidences of grades III to IV acute and extensive-type chronic GVHDs among CBT recipients were significantly lower than those among BMT/PBSCT recipients. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no apparent differences in TRM (9% in CBT and 13% in BMT/PBSCT recipients), relapse (17% in CBT and 26% in BMT/PBSCT recipients), and DFS (70% in CBT and 60% in BMT/PBSCT recipients) between both groups. These data suggest that unrelated cord blood could be as safe and effective a stem-cell source as related bone marrow or mobilized peripheral blood for adult patients when it is used as a primary unrelated stem-cell source.