***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Background : Docetaxel and irinotecan chemotherapy have shown good efficacy in the treatment of advanced oesophago-gastric cancer . This r and omised phase II study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity profile of two non-platinum docetaxel-based doublet regimens in advanced oesophago-gastric cancer . Methods : Chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced oesophago-gastric cancer were r and omised to receive either 3-weekly DI ( docetaxel 60 mg m−2 plus irinotecan 250 mg m−2 ( Day 1 ) ) or 3-weekly DF ( docetaxel 85 mg m−2 ( Day 1 ) followed by 5-fluorouracil 750 mg m−2 per day as a continuous infusion ( Days 1–5 ) ) . Results : A total of 85 patients received DI ( n=42 ) or DF ( n=43 ) . The primary endpoint was overall response rate ( ORR ) . The ORR and time to progression ( TTP ) in the evaluable population ( n=65 ) were 37.5 % ( DI ) vs 33.3 % ( DF ) , and 4.2 months vs 4.4 months , respectively . In the intent-to-treat population , the observed ORR , TTP and median overall survival were similar between the two groups . Grade 3–4 neutropenia , febrile neutropenia and diarrhoea were more frequent in the DI arm as compared with the DF arm ( 83.3 % vs 69.8 % , 40.5 % vs 18.6 % , and 42.9 % vs 16.3 % , respectively ) . Conclusion : Both docetaxel-based doublet regimens show comparable efficacy ; however , the DF regimen was associated with a better toxicity profile and is an alternative treatment option for patients in whom platinum-based regimens are unsuitable We report the final results of a prospect ively r and omized study that compared the combination of epirubicin , cisplatin and protracted venous infusion fluorouracil ( 5-FU ) ( ECF regimen ) with the st and ard combination of 5-FU , doxorubicin and methotrexate ( FAMTX ) in previously untreated patients with advanced oesophagogastric cancer . Between 1992 and 1995 , 274 patients with adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma were r and omized from eight oncology centres in the UK and analysed for response and survival . The overall response rate was 46 % ( 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) , 37–55 % ) with ECF , and 21 % ( 95 % CI , 13–28 % ) with FAMTX ( P = 0.00003 ) . The median survival was 8.7 months with ECF and 6.1 months with FAMTX ( P = 0.0005 ) . The 2-year survival rates were 14 % ( 95 % CI , 8–20 % ) for the ECF arm , and 5 % ( 95 % CI , 2–10 % ) for the FAMTX arm ( P = 0.03 ) . Histologically complete surgical resection following chemotherapy was achieved in ten patients in the ECF arm ( three pathological complete responses to chemotherapy ) and three patients in the FAMTX arm ( no pathological complete responses ) . The ECF regimen result ed in a response and survival advantage compared with FAMTX chemotherapy . The probability of long-term survival following surgical resection of residual disease is increased by this treatment . The high response rates seen with ECF support its use in the neoadjuvant setting Background Irinotecan hydrochloride and S-1 , an oral fluoropyrimidine , have shown antitumor activity against advanced gastric cancer as single agents in phase I/II studies . The combination of irinotecan and S-1 ( IRI-S ) is also active against advanced gastric cancer . This study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of IRI-S versus S-1 monotherapy in patients with advanced or recurrent gastric cancer . Methods Patients were r and omly assigned to oral S-1 ( 80 mg/m2 daily for 28 days every 6 weeks ) or oral S-1 ( 80 mg/m2 daily for 21 days every 5 weeks ) plus irinotecan ( 80 mg/m2 by intravenous infusion on days 1 and 15 every 5 weeks ) ( IRI-S ) . The primary endpoint was overall survival . Secondary endpoints included the time to treatment failure , 1- and 2-year survival rates , response rate , and safety . Results The median survival time with IRI-S versus S-1 monotherapy was 12.8 versus 10.5 months ( P = 0.233 ) , time to treatment failure was 4.5 versus 3.6 months ( P = 0.157 ) , and the 1-year survival rate was 52.0 versus 44.9 % , respectively . The response rate was significantly higher for IRI-S than for S-1 monotherapy ( 41.5 vs. 26.9 % , P = 0.035 ) . Neutropenia and diarrhea occurred more frequently with IRI-S , but were manageable . Patients treated with IRI-S received more courses of therapy at a relative dose intensity similar to that of S-1 monotherapy . Conclusions Although IRI-S achieved longer median survival than S-1 monotherapy and was well tolerated , it did not show significant superiority in this study AIM To compare the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel combined with fluorouracil plus cisplatin ( PCF ) , and oxaliplatin combined with fluorouracil plus leucovorin ( FOLFOX-4 ) regimens for advanced gastric cancer ( AGC ) . METHODS Ninety-four patients with AGC were r and omly assigned to receive paclitaxel ( 50 mg/m(2 ) iv ) on days 1 , 8 and 15 , cisplatin ( 20 mg/m(2 ) iv ) and fluorouracil ( 750 mg/m(2 ) iv ) on days 1 - 5 , or oxaliplatin ( 85 mg/m(2 ) iv ) and leucovorin ( 200 mg/m(2 ) iv ) on day 1 , followed by bolus fluorouracil ( 400 mg/m(2 ) iv ) and fluorouracil ( 600 mg/m(2 ) iv ) on days 1 and 2 . The primary end point was the 1-year survival time . RESULTS The overall response rate ( ORR ) of the patients was 48.0 % and 45.5 % to PCF and FOLFOX-4 , respectively . The disease control rate ( DCR ) of PCF and FOLFOX-4 was 82.0 % and 81.8 % , respectively . The median survival times ( MSTs ) of the patients were 10.8 and 9.9 mo , respectively , after treatment with PCF and FOLFOX-4 . The 1-year survival rate of the patients was 36.0 % and 34.1 % , respectively , after treatment with PCF and FOLFOX-4 . No significant difference was observed in ORR , DCR , MST or 1-year survival rate between the two groups . The most common adverse events were anemia , nausea and vomiting , and grade 3/4 alopecia in PCF treatment group , and anemia , grade 1/2 neurotoxic effect and grade 3/4 neutropenia in FOLFOX-4 treatment group . CONCLUSION Patients with AGC have a similar response rate to PCF and FOLFOX-4 regimens with a similar survival rate . The PCF and FOLFOX-4 regimens are efficacious and tolerable as a promising therapy for AGC BACKGROUND To compare capecitabine/cisplatin with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer ( AGC ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS In this r and omised , open-label , phase III study , patients received cisplatin ( 80 mg/m(2 ) i.v . day 1 ) plus oral capecitabine ( 1000 mg/m(2 ) b.i.d . , days 1 - 14 ) ( XP ) or 5-FU ( 800 mg/m(2)/day by continuous infusion , days 1 - 5 ) ( FP ) every 3 weeks . The primary end point was to confirm noninferiority of XP versus FP for progression-free survival ( PFS ) . RESULTS A total of 316 patients were r and omised to XP ( n = 160 ) or FP ( n = 156 ) . In the per- protocol population , median PFS for XP ( n = 139 ) versus FP ( n = 137 ) was 5.6 versus 5.0 months . The primary end point was met with an unadjusted hazard ratio ( HR ) of 0.81 [ 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) 0.63 - 1.04 , P < 0.001 versus noninferiority margin of 1.25 ] . Median overall survival was 10.5 versus 9.3 months for XP versus FP ( unadjusted HR = 0.85 , 95 % CI 0.64 - 1.13 , P = 0.008 versus noninferiority margin of 1.25 ) . The most common treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events in XP versus FP patients were as follows : neutropenia ( 16 % versus 19 % ) , vomiting ( 7 % versus 8 % ) , and stomatitis ( 2 % versus 6 % ) . CONCLUSIONS XP showed significant noninferiority for PFS versus FP in the first-line treatment of AGC . XP can be considered an effective alternative to FP BACKGROUND We evaluated the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin ( SOX ) as an alternative to cisplatin plus S-1 ( CS ) in first-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer ( AGC ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS In this r and omized , open-label , multicenter phase III study , patients were r and omly assigned to receive SOX ( 80 - 120 mg/day S-1 for 2 weeks with 100 mg/m(2 ) oxaliplatin on day 1 , every 3 weeks ) or CS ( S-1 for 3 weeks with 60 mg/m(2 ) cisplatin on day 8 , every 5 weeks ) . The primary end points were noninferiority in progression-free survival ( PFS ) and relative efficacy in overall survival ( OS ) for SOX using adjusted hazard ratios ( HRs ) with stratification factors ; performance status and unresectable or recurrent ( + adjuvant chemotherapy ) disease . RESULTS Overall , 685 patients were r and omized from January 2010 to October 2011 . In per- protocol population , SOX ( n = 318 ) was noninferior to CS ( n = 324 ) in PFS [ median , 5.5 versus 5.4 months ; HR 1.004 , 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) 0.840 - 1.199 ; predefined noninferiority margin 1.30 ] . The median OS for SOX and CS were 14.1 and 13.1 months , respectively ( HR 0.958 with 95 % CI 0.803 - 1.142 ) . In the intention-to-treat population ( SOX , n = 339 ; CS , n = 337 ) , the HRs in PFS and OS were 0.979 ( 95 % CI 0.821 - 1.167 ) and 0.934 ( 95 % CI 0.786 - 1.108 ) , respectively . The most common ≥ grade 3 adverse events ( SOX versus CS )  were neutropenia ( 19.5 % versus 41.8 % ) , anemia ( 15.1 % versus 32.5 % ) , hyponatremia ( 4.4 % versus 13.4 % ) , febrile neutropenia ( 0.9 % versus 6.9 % ) , and sensory neuropathy ( 4.7 % versus 0 % ) . CONCLUSION SOX is as effective as CS for AGC with favorable safety profile , therefore SOX can replace CS . CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER JapicCTI-101021 BACKGROUND We aim ed to establish the superiority ( or noninferiority if superiority was not achieved ) in terms of time to progression ( TTP ) of irinotecan/5-fluorouracil ( IF ) over cisplatin/5-fluorouracil ( CF ) in chemonaive patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach/esophagogastric junction . PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received either IF : i.v . irinotecan 80 mg/m(2 ) 30 min , folinic acid 500 mg/m(2 ) 2 h , 5-fluorouracil ( 5-FU ) 2000 mg/m(2 ) 22 h , for 6/7 weeks or CF : cisplatin 100 mg/m(2 ) 1 - 3 h , with 5-FU 1000 mg/m(2)/day 24 h , days 1 - 5 , every 4 weeks . RESULTS In all , 333 patients were r and omized and treated ( IF  
    Output:
    
Anthracycline-containing triplets ( A-triplets : ACF , AFOx , AFM ) and TCF triplet showed no benefit over F-doublets in OS and PFS .
Based on efficacy and toxicity , F-doublets FOx , FI , and FT are preferred as first-line treatment for AEGC compared with C-doublets , A-triplets , and TCF .
FOxT is the most promising triplet