Randomized trial on adjuvant treatment with FOLFIRI followed by docetaxel and cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid for radically resected gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Some trial have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant fluoropirimidine with or without platinum compounds compared with surgery alone. ITACA-S study was designed to evaluate whether a sequential treatment of FOLFIRI [irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/LV)] followed by docetaxel plus cisplatin improves disease-free survival in comparison with 5-FU/LV in patients with radically resected gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) day 1, LV 100 mg/m(2) as 2 h infusion and 5-FU 400 mg/m(2) as bolus, days 1 and 2 followed by 600 mg/m(2)/day as 22 h continuous infusion, q14 for four cycles) followed by docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1, q21 for three cycles (sequential arm) or De Gramont regimen (5-FU/LV arm). RESULTS: From February 2005 to August 2009, 1106 patients were enrolled, and 1100 included in the analysis: 562 in the sequential arm and 538 in the 5-FU/LV arm. With a median follow-up of 57.4 months, 581 patients recurred or died (297 sequential arm and 284 5-FU/LV arm), and 483 died (243 and 240, respectively). No statistically significant difference was detected for both disease-free [hazard ratio (HR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85-1.17; P = 0.974] and overall survival (OS) (HR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82-1.18; P = 0.865). Five-year disease-free and OS rates were 44.6% and 44.6%, 51.0% and 50.6% in the sequential and 5-FU/LV arm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A more intensive regimen failed to show any benefit in disease-free and OS versus monotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01640782.

A phase I/II trial of non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, docetaxel and trastuzumab as first-line treatment in HER-2-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

AIM: To assess the activity and safety of non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet®) in combination with docetaxel and trastuzumab as first-line treatment of patients with HER-2/neu-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The maximum tolerated dose of the combination was defined in the phase I part of the study. In the phase II part, 45 HER-2/neu-positive MBC patients were enrolled to receive 6-8 cycles of Myocet® 50 mg/m2 (day 1), docetaxel 30 mg/m2 (days 2 and 9) plus trastuzumab (day 2, 4 mg/kg followed by 2 mg/kg/week) every 21 d until unacceptable toxicity or progression occurred. Objective response (primary end-point) and treatment tolerability were assessed according to World Health Organisation criteria. Cardiotoxicity was defined as signs and/or symptoms of congestive heart failure and/or a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 55.6% (complete response 8.9%, partial response 46.7%), with a median time-to-progression of 10.9 months (C.I. 8.7-15.0). Median overall survival was not reached. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were granulocytopaenia (60.0%), leukocytopenia (43.2%) and alopecia (35.6%). Grade 3-4 diarrhoea, pain, oral and skin toxicity (4.4%, each) and nausea/vomiting, thrombocytopenia and elevated alkaline phosphatase (2.2%, each) were also reported. In 2 patients LVEF fell to <50%, with a decrease from baseline>15%. LVEF median values remained stable from baseline to the end of the study (60%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of Myocet®, docetaxel and trastuzumab is safe and shows promising activity as first-line treatment of HER-2-positive MBC.

Preoperative weekly cisplatin, epirubicin, and paclitaxel (PET) improves prognosis in locally advanced breast cancer patients: an update of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG) randomised trial 9908.

BACKGROUND: The present article reports the updated survival outcome of the 200 patients enrolled in the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group 9908 trial, which compared 12 weekly cycles of cisplatin-epirubicin-paclitaxel (PET) with 4 triweekly (once every 3 weeks) cycles of epirubicin-paclitaxel (ET) in patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). METHODS: The effects of treatment, pathologically documented response (pathological response), pre- and post-treatment biomarkers on relapse-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) are analysed. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 74 (range 48-105 months) months, the 5-year RFS, DMFS, and OS were 64 % versus 53% (P = 0.11), 73% versus 55% (P = 0.04), and 82% versus 69% (P = 0.07) in PET and ET, respectively. At multivariate analysis, after adjusting treatment effect for pretreatment biomarkers, PET independently predicted better DMFS (P = 0.018) and OS (P = 0.03), whereas the impact on RFS was of borderline significance (0.057). PET treatment was significantly better than ET treatment only in high-grade or highly proliferating tumours. The better outcome in PET arm was the results of both the higher rate of patients with optimal pathological response and the lower rate of patients with biologically aggressive residual tumour. CONCLUSIONS: The PET weekly regimen significantly improves both DMFS and OS in LABC patients, compared with the triweekly ET combination. The therapeutic advantage is limited to patients with highly aggressive tumours.

Preoperative weekly cisplatin-epirubicin-paclitaxel with G-CSF support in triple-negative large operable breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Findings from our previously published phase II study showed a high pathologic complete remission (pCR) rate in patients with triple-negative large operable breast cancer after the administration of eight cisplatin-epirubicin-paclitaxel (PET) weekly cycles. The safety and efficacy data of the initial population were updated, with inclusion of additional experience with the same therapy. METHODS: Patients with triple-negative large operable breast cancer (T2-T3 N0-1; T > 3 cm) received eight preoperative weekly cycles of cisplatin 30 mg/m2, epirubicin 50 mg/m2, paclitaxel (Taxol) 120 mg/m2, with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (5 microg/kg days 3-5) support. RESULTS: Overall 74 consecutive patients (T2/T3 = 35/39; N0/N+ = 26/48) were treated, from May 1999 to May 2008. At pathological assessment, 46 women (62%; 95% confidence interval 50-73) showed pCR in both breast and axilla. At a 41-month median follow-up (range 3-119), 13 events (nine distant metastases) had occurred, 5-year projected disease-free survival (DFS) and distant disease-free survival being 76% and 84%, respectively. Five-year DFS was 90% and 56% in pCRs and non-pCRs, respectively. Severe neutropenia and anemia occurred in 23 (31%) and eight (10.8%) patients, respectively. Severe non-hematological toxicity was recorded in <20% of patients. Peripheral neuropathy was quite frequent but never severe. CONCLUSIONS: Eight weekly PET cycles are a highly effective primary treatment in women with triple-negative large operable breast cancer. This approach results in a very promising long-term DFS in this poor prognosis population. This triplet regimen is worthy of evaluation in phase III trials.

Weekly cisplatin, epirubicin, and paclitaxel with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support vs triweekly epirubicin and paclitaxel in locally advanced breast cancer: final analysis of a sicog phase III study.

The present study aimed at evaluating whether a weekly cisplatin, epirubicin, and paclitaxel (PET) regimen could increase the pathological complete response (pCR) rate in comparison with a tri-weekly epirubicin and paclitaxel administration in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) patients. Patients with stage IIIB disease were randomised to receive either 12 weekly cycles of cisplatin 30 mg m(-2), epirubicin 50 mg m(-2), and paclitaxel 120 mg m(-2) (PET) plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support, or four cycles of epirubicin 90 mg m(-2)+paclitaxel 175 mg m(-2) (ET) every 3 weeks. Overall, 200 patients (PET/ET=100/100) were included in this study. A pCR in both breast and axilla occurred in 16 (16%) PET patients and in six (6%) ET patients (P=0.02). The higher activity of PET was evident only in ER negative (27.5 vs 5.4%; P=0.026), and in HER/neu positive (31 vs 5%; P=0.037) tumours. The two arms yielded similar pCR rate in ER positive (PET/ET=7.5/7.1%) and HER/neu negative (PET/ET=10/6%) patients. At a 39 months median follow-up, 70 patients showed a progression or relapses (PET, 32 vs ET, 38). Anaemia, mucositis, peripheral neuropathy, and gastrointestinal toxicity were substantially more frequent in the PET arm. The PET weekly regimen is superior to ET in terms of pCR rate in LABC patients with ER negative and/or HER2 positive tumours Mature data in terms of disease-free and overall survival are needed to ascertain whether this approach could improve the prognosis of these subsets of LABC patients.

Weekly docetaxel and gemcitabine as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: results of a multicenter phase II study.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a multicenter phase II study to evaluate the clinical efficacy, toxicity, and dose intensity of a new weekly schedule of docetaxel and gemcitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients. METHODS: We enrolled 58 patients, 52% of whom had received a previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. The treatment schedule was: docetaxel 35 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 8, 15 every 28 days. RESULTS: All patients were assessable for toxicity and 56 for efficacy. Overall response rate was 64.3% with 16.1% of complete responses and 48.2% of partial responses. Median survival was 22.10 months (95% CI: 15.53-28.67) and median time to tumor progression was 13.6 months (95% CI: 10.71-16.49). The most common hematological toxicity was neutropenia (no febrile neutropenia), which occurred in 28 patients (48.3%) but grade 3-4 in only 8 patients (14%). Alopecia, the most common nonhematological toxicity, occurred in 20 (34.5%) patients, but only 5 patients (8.6%) experienced grade 3 alopecia. CONCLUSION: The activity of docetaxel and gemcitabine in metastatic breast cancer is confirmed. The promising results of the employed schedule, in agreement with other published studies, need to be further confirmed within a phase III study.

A 2-month cisplatin-epirubicin-paclitaxel (PET) weekly combination as primary systemic therapy for large operable breast cancer: a phase II study.

PURPOSE: The present study aimed to define the antitumor activity of eight cisplatin-epirubicin-paclitaxel (PET) weekly cycles with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support in patients with large operable breast cancer. METHODS: Operable breast cancer (T2-3 N0-1; T >3 cm) patients received eight preoperative weekly cycles of cisplatin 30 mg/m2, epirubicin 50 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 120 mg/m2, with G-CSF (5 microg/kg, days 3-5) support. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients (T2/T3=30/33; N0/N+=8/55) were enrolled. Thirty-one clinical complete (49%) and 30 partial (48%) responses were recorded, giving a 97% response rate (95% confidence interval 89% to 100%). Breast-sparing surgery was performed in 32/63 (51%) patients. At pathological assessment, 28 patients (45%) showed absence of invasive residual disease in breast and 34 (55%) had negative axilla. In 20 women (32%) both breast and axilla were found to be disease-free. At a 23-month median follow-up (range 4-63), only eight relapses and two deaths had occurred, with the 4-year projected relapse-free and overall survival being 59% and 95%, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia and anemia occurred in 24% and 5% of patients, respectively. Emesis, diarrhea and mucositis were the main non-hematological toxicities; however, only nine (14%) patients experienced one or more episodes of severe non-hematological toxicity. Peripheral neuropathy was frequent, but never severe. CONCLUSIONS: A 2-month weekly treatment with PET represents a well tolerated and highly effective approach in large operable breast cancer patients. In spite of the short duration of chemotherapy, one-third of patients achieved a complete eradication of the tumor in both breast and axilla.

Gemcitabine versus FLEC regimen given intra-arterially to patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer: a prospective, randomized phase III trial of the Italian Society for Integrated Locoregional Therapy in Oncology.

Gemcitabine is considered the gold standard treatment for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Intra-arterial drug administration had shown some interesting results in small phase II studies. In this study, patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine at a dose of 1,000 mg/m2 over 30 minutes intravenously weekly for 7 weeks, followed by 1 week of rest, then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks or FLEC: 5-fluoruracil 1,000 mg/m2, leucovorin 100 mg/m2, epirubicin 60 mg/m2, carboplatin 300 mg/m2 infused bolus intra-arterially into celiac axis at a 3-week interval 3 times or 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 plus folinic acid 20 mg/m2 for 5 days every 4 weeks for 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival, while time to treatment failure, response rate, clinical benefit response were secondary endpoints. Sixty-seven patients were randomly allocated gemcitabine and 71 were allocated FLEC intra-arterially. Patients treated with FLEC lived for significantly longer than patients on gemcitabine (p=0.036). Survival at 1 year increased from 21% in the gemcitabine group to 35% in the FLEC group. Median survival was 7.9 months in the FLEC group and 5.8 months in the gemcitabine group. Median time to treatment failure was longer with FLEC (5.3 vs 4.2 months for FLEC vs gemcitabine respectively; p=0.013). Clinical benefit was similar in both groups (17.9% for gemcitabine and 26.7% for FLEC; p=NS). CT-scan partial response was similar in both groups (5.9% for gemcitabine and 14% for FLEC; p=NS). Toxicity profiles were different. Compared with gemcitabine, the FLEC regimen given intra-arterially improved survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Microsatellite instability and mutation analysis among southern Italian patients with colorectal carcinoma: detection of different alterations accounting for MLH1 and MSH2 inactivation in familial cases.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is due to defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR) and has been detected at various rates in colorectal carcinoma (CRC). The role of MSI in colorectal tumorigenesis was assessed further in this study by both microsatellite analysis of two CRC subsets [unselected patients (n = 215) and patients <50 years of age (n = 95)], and mutation screening of the two major MMR genes MLH1 and MSH2 among familial CRC cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PCR-based microsatellite analysis was performed on paraffin-embedded tissues. In CRC families, MLH1/MSH2 mutation analysis and MLH1/MSH2 immunostaining were performed on germline DNA and MSI+ tumour tissues, respectively. RESULTS: The MSI+ phenotype was detected in 75 (24%) patients, with higher incidence in early-onset or proximally located tumours. Among 220 patients investigated for family cancer history, MSI frequency was markedly higher in familial [18/27 (67%)] than in sporadic [32/193 (17%)] cases. Three MLH1 and six MSH2 germline mutations were identified in 14 out of 36 (39%) CRC families. Prevalence of MLH1/MSH2 mutations in CRC families was significantly increased by the presence of: (i) fulfilled Amsterdam criteria; (ii) four or more CRCs; or (iii) one or more endometrial cancer. While MSH2 was found mostly mutated, almost all [8/9 (89%)] familial MSI+ cases with loss of the MLH1 protein were negative for MLH1 germline mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Both genetic (for MSH2) and gene-silencing (for MLH1) alterations seem to be involved in CRC pathogenesis.

[Early evaluation using PET-FDG of the efficiency of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy treatment in locally advanced neoplasia of the lower rectum]. / Valutazione precoce con PET-FDG della efficacia del trattamento radiochemioterapico neoadiuvante nelle neoplasie del retto inferiore localmente avanzate.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Preoperative chemoradiation allows downstaging of locally advanced rectal cancer and in selected patients also a sufficient downsizing to ensure sphincter preservation. Selection of patients warranting a preoperative approach is improved by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) which is able to define the involvement of mesorectal circumferential margin. Similarly it would be crucial to define the response to chemoradiation during the treatment but traditional morphologic imaging techniques may fail in differentiating neoplastic tissue from scarring. PET-FDG has been successfully used in the detection of metastatic colorectal cancer allowing imaging of deposits as small as 0.5 cm and may have a role in evaluating early response to chemoradiation. METHODS: In the present study, in patients with T3-T4 rectal cancer undergoing preoperative chemoradiation PET-FDG and flow cytometry analysis on endoscopic biopsy specimen have been performed before, during and after preoperative chemoradiation. RESULTS: Chemoradiation treatment has been successful in terms of downsizing and downstaging of the tumor. PET-FDG was able to demonstrate local response at only ten-fifteen days after the beginning of neoadjuvant therapy, also identifying non responding patients. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET may have a role in defining the response to chemoradiation and modulate the treatments strategy in patients with advanced rectal cancer.

Results of randomised phase II studies comparing S16020 with methotrexate in patients with recurrent head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to carry out two randomised phase II trials of S16020, a new olivacine derivative, tested as a single agent in patients with recurrent head and neck cancer, using methotrexate as the control arm to validate the results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: S16020 at either 80 or 100 mg/m2 was administered as a 3-h infusion every 3 weeks. Methotrexate, 40 or 50 mg/m2, was given by bolus injection, weekly for a minimum of 6 weeks. In total, 36 patients were entered in the randomised studies (25 in an initial study, 11 in a confirmatory study) of whom 24 received S16020 and 12 received methotrexate. RESULTS: A scheduled interim analysis showed one patient having a non-confirmed objective response with S16020 and three patients having a confirmed objective response with methotrexate. In the methotrexate group, there were no patients with severe non-haematological toxicity. With S16020, there was a high incidence of severe non-haematological toxicities, including asthenia, oedema of the face, oedema and pain at the tumour sites and erythematous rash; consequently, both studies were stopped. CONCLUSIONS: Both studies were stopped due to the poor anticipated benefit/risk ratio for S16020, although time to progression and overall survival time were similar in both treatment arms.

Randomised trial of gemcitabine versus flec regimen given intra-arterially for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Gemcitabine is considered the golden standard treatment for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Intra-arte-rial drug administration had shown a deep rationale with some interesting results. In a multicenter phase III trial, we compared gemcitabine given weekly with a combination of 5-fluoruracil, leucovorin, epirubicin, carboplatin (FLEC) administered intra-arteriously as first-line therapy in unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine at a dose of 1,000 mg/m2 over 30 minutes intravenously weekly for 7 weeks, followed by 1 week of rest, then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks or 5-fluoruracil 1,000 mg/m2, leucovorin 100 mg/m2, epirubicin 60 mg/m2, carboplatin 300 mg/m2 infused bolus intra-arteriously at three-weekly interval for 3 times. The primary end point was overall survival, while time to treatment failure, response rate, clinical benefit response were secondary endpoints. Sixty-seven patients were randomly allocated gemcitabine and 71 were allocated FLEC intra-arterially. Patients treated with FLEC lived for significantly longer than patients on gemcitabine (p=.036). Survival at 1 year was increased from 21% in the gemcitabine group to 35% in the FLEC group. Median survival was 7.9 months in the FLEC group and 5.8 months in the gemcitabine group. Median time to treatment failure was longer with FLEC (5.3 vs 4.2 months for FLEC vs gemcitabine respectively; p=.013). Clinical benefit was similar in both groups (17.9% for gemcitabine and 26.7% for FLEC; p=NS). CT-scan partial response was similar in both group (5.9% for gemcitabine and 14% for FLEC; p=NS). Toxicity profiles were different. Compared with gemcitabine, FLEC regimen given intra-arteriously, improved survival in patient with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Oxaliplatin plus irinotecan and leucovorin-modulated 5-fluorouracil triplet regimen every other week: a dose-finding study in patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin (OXA) and irinotecan (IRI) are active drugs in first-line as well as second-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer patients, their toxicity profiles are not overlapping, and both drugs have shown synergism with folinic acid-modulated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). We planned this phase I study to define the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs), and the recommended doses (RDs) for a triplet regimen including OXA plus IRI on day 1, and 6S-folinic acid (LFA) plus 5-FU on day 2, every 2 weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODS: At least three patients had to be treated at each dose level, and the trial proceeded if no more than 33% of patients showed a DLT after the first cycle. Starting from OXA 85 mg/m(2) (over 2 h) and IRI 150 mg/m(2) (over 1 h), an alternated escalation was planned up to 110 mg/m(2) and 200 mg/m(2), respectively. Thereafter, a fixed dose of LFA, 250 mg/m(2) (as 2-h infusion), plus an escalating dose of 5-FU (from 650 to 800 mg/m(2) as an intravenous bolus) was added on day 2 to the previous dose level of OXA and IRI. RESULTS: Forty-six patients, all but four affected by advanced colorectal primaries, entered this study. The MTDs for OXA and IRI given on the same day were 110 and 200 mg/m(2): these doses caused a DLT in three of six patients. The previous dose level (110 and 175 mg/m(2), respectively) on day 1 was safely followed on day 2 by LFA plus 5-FU up to 800 mg/m(2). Indeed, only one of three patients treated at this last level had a DLT. This cohort was then expanded including a total of 14 patients, and on the whole series five cases of DLT occurred: WHO grade 4 neutropenia (two patients), grade 3 or 4 diarrhoea (three patients). Cumulative toxicity was analysed in 43 patients for a total of 347 cycles: grade 4 neutropenia was detected in 13 patients (30%); it was not dose-related, nor was it exacerbated by the addition of modulated 5-FU. Febrile neutropenia occurred in four patients. Grade 3 or 4 diarrhoea was suffered by nine (21%) and five (12%) patients, respectively. Two complete and nine partial responses were reported on 40 evaluable patients (six patients were disease-free at study entry), giving a response rate of 27.5% (95% confidence interval 15% to 44%); nine of 18 (50%) assessable patients of the two last cohorts treated with the triplet regimen achieved a complete response (two patients) or a partial response (seven patients). CONCLUSIONS: The RDs for this biweekly regimen were: OXA 110 mg/m(2) plus IRI 175 mg/m(2) on day 1, and LFA 250 mg/m(2) plus 5-FU 800 mg/m(2) on day 2. This regimen appeared active in pretreated gastrointestinal malignancies, and it is worthy of being evaluated in advanced colorectal carcinoma after failure of 5-FU-based adjuvant or palliative treatment.

Prevalence and prognostic role of microsatellite instability in patients with rectal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Association between microsatellite instability (MSI) and favorable postoperative survival in patients with colorectal cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy has been indicated. To evaluate whether an analogous positive prognostic role of MSI could be present in rectal carcinoma (RC; most RC patients receive adjuvant radiotherapy), PCR-based microsatellite analysis of archival RCs and statistical correlation with clinico-pathological parameters were performed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DNA from paraffin-embedded paired samples of tumors and corresponding normal tissue from 91 RC patients was analyzed for MSI using five microsatellite markers (tumors were classified as MSI(+) when two or more markers were unstable). RESULTS: Seventeen (19%) RC patients exhibited a MSI(+) phenotype. Prevalence of instability was found in patients with earlier RC onset (28% in cases with diagnosis age < or =55 years versus 15% in cases >55 years), whereas similar MSI frequencies were observed in patients with different disease stage or receiving different adjuvant therapies. While MSI was detected in seven (64%) of 11 familial patients, a remarkably lower MSI incidence was observed in sporadic cases (10/80; 12.5%). A significant association with better disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was found for MSI(+) patients (median DFS/OS, 30/32 months) in comparison to MSI(-) ones (median DFS/OS, 18/21 months) (P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MSI was demonstrated to be a strong molecular prognostic marker in rectal carcinoma, independent of the administered treatment (radiotherapy, chemotherapy or both).

Oxaliplatin plus raltitrexed and leucovorin-modulated 5-fluorouracil i.v. bolus: a salvage regimen for colorectal cancer patients.

The aim of the present study was to define the activity and tolerability of a triplet regimen including oxaliplatin 130 mg x m(-2) (2 h i.v. infusion) and raltitrexed 3.0 mg x m(-2) (15 min i.v. infusion) given on day 1, followed by levo-folinic acid 250 mg x m(-2) (2 h i.v. infusion) and 5-fluorouracil 1050 mg x m(-2) i.v. bolus on day 2, every 2 weeks, in pretreated colorectal cancer patients. From April 1999 to December 2000, 50 patients were enrolled: 26 were males and 24 females, their median age was 63 (range, 43-79) years; ECOG performance status was 0 in 26 patients, > or =1 in 24 patients; 26 patients had received previous adjuvant chemotherapy, 40 patients had been exposed to one or two lines of palliative chemotherapy (including irinotecan in 31 cases); 18 patients were considered chemo-refractory. A total of 288 cycles were administered, with a median number of 6 (range 1-12) courses per patient. A complete response was obtained in three patients, and a partial response in nine patients, giving a major response rate of 24% (95% confidence interval, 13-38%), while 15 further patients showed a stable disease, for an overall control of tumour growth in 60% of patients. Three complete responses and three partial responses were obtained in patients pretreated with irinotecan (response rate, 19%); among refractory patients, three achieved partial responses (response rate, 13%). After a median follow-up of 18 (range, 10-30) months, 40 patients showed a progression of disease: the growth modulation index ranged between 0.2 and 2.5: it was > or =1.33 (showing a significant delay of tumour growth) in 16 (40%) patients. Actuarial median progression-free survival time was 7.6 months, and median survival time was 13.6 months: estimated probability of survival was 55% at 1 year. Main severe toxicity was neutropenia: World Health Organisation grade 4 affected 32% of patients; non-haematological toxicity was mild: World Health Organisation grade 3 diarrhoea was complained of by 8%, and grade 3 stomatitis by 4% of patients; neurotoxicity (according to Lévi scale) was scored as grade 3 in 8% of patients. In conclusion, this regimen was manageable and active as salvage treatment of advanced colorectal cancer patients; it showed incomplete cross-resistance with irinotecan-based treatments, and proved to delay the progression of disease in a relevant proportion of treated patients.

Patient preference and pharmacokinetics of oral modulated UFT versus intravenous fluorouracil and leucovorin: a randomised crossover trial in advanced colorectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to determine the patient's preference for oral UFT/leucovorin (LV) or intravenous (i.v.) 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/LV chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer and to compare 5-FU exposure with these two treatment options. A total of 37 previously untreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer were randomised to start treatment with either oral UFT 300 mg/m2/day plus oral LV 90 mg/day for 28 days every 5 weeks or i.v. 5-FU 425 mg/m2/day plus LV 20 mg/m2/day for 5 days every 4 weeks. For the second treatment cycle, patients were crossed-over to the alternative treatment regimen. Prior to the first and after the second therapy cycle, patients were required to complete a therapy preference questionnaire (TPQ). The pharmacokinetics of 5-FU were determined by taking blood samples on days 8, 15 or 22 and 28 for UFT and on days 1 and 5 for i.v. 5-FU. 36 patients were eligible. 84% of the patients preferred oral UFT over i.v. 5-FU. After having experienced both treatment modalities, patients indicated taking the medication at home, less stomatitis and diarrhoea, and pill over injection as the most important reasons for their preference. The area under the plasma concentration curve (AUC) for 5-FU after UFT administration was 113 microM x min on day 8, 114 on day 15 and 98 on day 28; the peak levels (Cmax) were 1.2, 1.3 and 1.0 microM, respectively. The AUC for the 5-FU/LV courses was 3083 microM x min for day 1 and 3809 for day 5 (P=0.002). The Cmax was 170.1 and 196.2 microM (P=0.06) and the clearance 2.6 and 1.9 l/min, respectively (P=0.002). Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer clearly preferred oral over i.v. chemotherapy treatment. This choice was most importantly influenced by convenience and toxicity considerations. Although i.v. bolus 5-FU leads to higher peak 5-FU concentrations and AUC values compared with oral UFT, this pharmacokinetic advantage of i.v. 5-FU seems to translate mainly into higher toxicity as seen in large randomised studies comparing oral UFT/LV with i.v. 5-FU/LV. Oral UFT/LV compares favourably with i.v. 5-FU/LV in terms of toxicity and patient's preference and leads to prolonged 5-FU exposure, which is comparable to continuous i.v. 5-FU treatment.

Gemcitabine plus vinorelbine yields better survival outcome than vinorelbine alone in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. A Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG) phase III trial.

OBJECTIVE: This phase III study was aimed at evaluating whether the addition of gemcitabine (G) to vinorelbine (V) could improve the survival and quality of life (QoL) of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC, aged >or=70 years, were randomly allocated to receive V 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks or G 1200 mg/m(2) plus V 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Survival was the main end point of the study. The estimated sample size was 120 patients per arm, but an interim analysis of survival was planned on the first 60 patients per arm. RESULTS: In May 1999, an interim analysis was performed with the survival data of the first 120 eligible patients (V(arm)=60, G+V(arm)=60). Forty-nine patients had stage IIIB disease and 71 patients stage IV disease, median potential follow-up of 14 months (range; 3-22), 93 patients had died (G+V(arm)=41, V(arm)=52). Median survival time (MST) was 29 weeks and projected 1-year survival was 30% in the G+V(arm); these values were 18 weeks and 13% in the V(arm). At multivariate Cox analysis, the risk of death in the G+V(arm) compared with V(arm) was 0.48 (95% C1=0.29-0.79; P<0.01). Combination therapy was also associated with a clear delay in symptom and QoL deterioration. The ORR was 22 and 15% in the G+V and V(arms), respectively. Toxicity was not irrelevant in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: G+V treatment is associated with a significantly better survival than V alone in elderly NSCLC patients. The magnitude of the difference justifies the early closure of the study. The G+V regimen is now the SICOG reference regimen in this type of patients.

[Prevalence of anemia in oncologic patients treated with chemotherapy. Italian survey at the national level]. / La prevalenza dell'anemia nei pazienti oncologici sottoposti a chemioterapia. Indagine italiana a livello nazionale.

UNLABELLED: In Italy the prevalence of anemia in cancer patients has only been indirectly drawn from clinical studies, and a direct estimation has never been made. METHODS: This is the first nation-wide survey on the prevalence of anemia in cancer patients in Italy. In 193 Centres, clinical data were collected on consecutive patients with non-myeloid malignancies entering a new cycle of chemotherapy during a reference week in 1997. RESULTS: A total of 1763 patients has been recruited. At the time of enrollment grade I-II anemia was observed in 56% of patients, although only 1% showed severe anemia. Most of the patients (73%) experienced a decrease of haemoglobin level following treatment completion. Drop of haemoglobin correlated with a more advanced stage of the disease and with a lower performance status at baseline. CONCLUSION: Anemia is an increasingly common complication in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Improving our knowledge on occurrence of anemia and the type of neoplasms and chemotherapies which are more likely to be associated with this complication may allow the adoption of specific measures to prevent the development of anemia and to avoid the need of blood transfusion in these patients.