Changing strategies for target therapy in gastric cancer

Table 1 Clinical trials with agents targeting ERBB family receptors

Study	n	Design	Line	Treatment	Primary end point	Results	P value
EXPAND[19]	904	Phase 3, RCT	First	Cetuximab + XP vs Placebo + XP	PFS	HR = 1.09; 95%CI: 0.92-1.29	0.320
REAL3[22]	553	Phase 3, RCT	First	Anitumumab + mEOC vs EOC	OS	HR = 1.37; 95%CI: 1.07-1.76	0.013
TOGA[3]	594	Phase 3, RCT	First	Trastuzumab + XP vs XP	OS	HR = 0.74; 95%CI: 0.60-0.91	0.005
HERBIS-1[29]	56	Phase 2, non-RCT	First	Trastuzumab + S-1 + Cisplatin	RR	RR = 68%; 95%CI: 0.54-0.80
TyTAN[38]	261	Phase 3, RCT	Salvage	Lapatinib + Paclitaxel vs Paclitaxel	OS	HR = 0.84; 95%CI: 0.64-1.11	0.350
LOGiC[39]	545	Phase 3, RCT	First	Lapatinib + CapeOx vs Placebo + CapeOx	OS	HR = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.73-1.12	0.104

RCT: Randomized controlled trial; XP: Capecitabine plus Cisplatin; PFS: Progression free survival; RAM: Ramucirumab; OS: Overall survival.

Table 2 Clinical trials with angiogenesis targeting agents

Study	n	Design	Line	Treatment	Primary end point	Results	P value
AVAGAST[59]	774	Phase 3, RCT	First	Bevacizumab + XP vs Placebo + XP	OS	HR = 0.87; 95%CI: 0.73-1.03	0.1002
REGARD[61]	355	Phase 3, RCT	Second	RAM vs Placeb	OS	HR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.68-0.96	0.0470
RAINBOW[62]	665	Phase 3, RCT	Second	RAM + paclitaxel vs Placebo + paclitaxel	OS	HR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.68-0.96	0.0170
Qin et al[63]	270	Phase 3, RCT	Third	Apatinib vs placebo	OS	HR = 0.71; 95%CI: 0.54-0.94	0.0160

RCT: Randomized controlled trial; XP: Capecitabine plus Cisplatin; RAM: Ramucirumab; OS: Overall survival.