Randomized phase II trial of irinotecan and bevacizumab as neo-adjuvant and adjuvant to temozolomide-based chemoradiation compared with temozolomide-chemoradiation for unresectable glioblastoma: final results of the TEMAVIR study from ANOCEF†.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis of unresectable glioblastoma (GB) remains poor, despite temozolomide (TMZ)-based chemoradiation. Activity of bevacizumab (BEV) and irinotecan (IRI) has been reported in recurrent disease. We evaluated BEV and IRI as neo-adjuvant and adjuvant treatment combined with TMZ-based chemoradiation for unresectable GB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable GB, age 18-70, IK ≥50 were eligible. The experimental arm (BEV/IRI) consisted of neo-adjuvant intravenous BEV, 10 mg/kg, and IRI, 125 mg/m(2), every 2 weeks for four cycles before radiotherapy (RT) (60 Gy), concomitant oral TMZ, 75 mg/m(2)/day, and BEV, 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Adjuvant BEV and IRI were given every 2 weeks for 6 months. The control arm consisted of concomitant oral TMZ, 75 mg/m(2)/day during RT, and 150-200 mg/m(2) for 5 days every 28 days for 6 months. The use of BEV was allowed at progression in the control arm. RESULTS: Patients (120) were included from April 2009 to January 2011. The working hypothesis was that treatment would increase the progression-free survival at 6 month (PFS-6) from 50% to 66%. The primary objective was not achieved, and only 30 out of 60 patients were alive without progression at 6 months (50.0% [IC95% (36.8; 63.1)] in the BEV/IRI arm when 37 out of 60 patients were required according to the Fleming decision rules. PFS-6 was 7.1 months in BEV/IRI versus 5.2 months in the control arm. The median overall survival was not different between the two arms (11.1 months). Main toxicities were three fatal intracranial bleedings, three bile duct or digestive perforations/infections (1 fatal), and six thrombotic episodes in the BEV/IRI arm, whereas there was one intracranial bleeding, two bile duct or digestive perforations/infections (1 fatal), and one thrombotic episode in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS: Neo-adjuvant and adjuvant BEV/IRI, combined with TMZ-radiation, is not recommended for further evaluation in the first-line treatment of unresectable GB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registered under EUDRACT number 2008-002775-28 (NCT01022918).

[Hyperfractionated irradiation with cobalt 60 in ORL cancers]. / Irradiation hyperfractionnée au cobalt 60 dans les cancers de la sphère O.R.L.

So-called "hyperfractionated" radiotherapy is aimed at obtaining synchronisation of tumour cells and to kill the cells synchronised in this way. The technique has been used now for approximately a year and a half in the treatment of 45 advanced or inoperable squamous carcinomas of the upper respiratory and digestive tract. The initial results are encouraging. Oncological sterilisation of the lesions is obtained at the price of actinic reactions which rapidly disappear, but also tumour necrosis, which indicates the need for review of the protocol.

Intensified dose of cyclophosphamide with G-CSF support versus standard dose combined with platinum in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer a randomised study from the GINECO group.

ICON3 trial results have suggested that CAP and carboplatin-taxol regimens as first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) yield similar survival. We explored the impact of increased dose of cyclophosphamide in a modified CAP regimen on the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of AOC patients. From February 1994 to June 1997, 164 patients were randomised to receive six cycles every 3 weeks of either standard CEP (S) combining cyclophosphamide (C), 500 mg m(-2), epirubicin (E) 50 mg m(-2), and cisplatin (P) 75 mg m(-2) or intensive CEP (I) with E and P at the same doses, but with (C) 1800 mg m(-2) and filgrastim 5 mug kg(-1) per day x 10 days. Response was evaluated at second-look surgery. Patient characteristics were well balanced. Except for grade 3-4 neutropaenia (S: 54%, I: 38% of cycles), Arm1 presented a significantly more important toxicity: infection requiring antibiotics, grade 3-4 thrombocytopaenia, anaemia, nausea-vomiting, diarrhoea, mucositis. Median follow-up was 84 months. DFS (15.9 vs 14.8 months) and OS (33 vs 30 months) were not significantly different between S and I (P>0.05). Increasing cyclophosphamide dose by more than 3 times with filgrastim support in the modified CAP regimen CEP induces more toxicity but not better efficacy in AOC.

Gemcitabine-docetaxel versus cisplatin-vinorelbine in advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III study addressing the case for cisplatin.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, randomized, phase III study compared the efficacy, including progression-free survival (PFS), and safety of gemcitabine-docetaxel (GD) combination versus cisplatin-vinorelbine (CV) in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were treated with GD (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 plus docetaxel 85 mg/m(2) day 8, every 3 weeks for eight cycles) or CV (cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) day 1 plus vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, 15 and 22, every 4 weeks for six cycles). RESULTS: A total of 311 patients were enrolled (155 GD and 156 CV). Neither PFS nor overall survival differed significantly between the two arms (median PFS 4.2 and 4 months; median survival 11.1 and 9.6 months; 1-year survival 46% and 42%, for GD and CV, respectively). For the GD arm compared with the CV arm, the hazard ratio for PFS was 1.04 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-1.32], and for overall survival, it was 0.90 (95% CI 0.70-1.16). Objective response rates did not differ significantly (31% for GD, 35.9% for CV). Myelosupression, emesis and frequency of febrile neutropenia were less pronounced on the GD arm, whereas fluid retention and pulmonary events were more pronounced. The CV arm experienced a higher number of serious adverse events and a lower compliance with the protocol. There was no quality of life (QoL) difference between arms. Median time to definite impairment of health-related QoL was 153 and 168 days in GD and CV arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There was no advantage in PFS with GD compared with CV; however, the CV regimen had higher rate of toxic events, mainly myelosuppression. The herein, non-platinum-containing regimen could be considered as a rational alternative to the cisplatin-based doublet.

[Hyperfractionated radiotherapy in 56 patients with tumors of the head and neck (author's transl)]. / Etude de la radiothérapie hyperfractionnée chez 56 patients atteints de tumeurs de la tête et du cou.

A new method of irradiation known as hyperfractionated radiotherapy was studied in 56 patients with cancers in the region of the ear, nose, and throat. The dose was 72 grays given during 80 sessions over a period of 28 days, with a rest period of two weeks at the half-way point. Each session lasted 2 hours. The results (complications and survival rate) were compared with those obtained in a control group treated with 70 grays in 35 sessions over a period of 7 weeks. The complication rate was 21% in the series treated with hyperfractionated radiotherapy, against 19% in those given classical treatment (results not significant). The survival rate was better, however, (63% against 33% after 18 months), for the patients treated with this new method of irradiation.

Efficacy of prophylactic anti-diarrhoeal treatment in patients receiving Campto for advanced colorectal cancer.

This study assessed the efficacy of combined prophylactic and curative anti-diarrhoeal medication in advanced colorectal patients treated by irinotecan. Thirty-four pre-treated eligible patients were evaluated. There were 44% women, the median age was 65 and 38% of the patients had a 0 performance status. The patients received sucralfate(4g/d) and nifuroxazide(600 mg/d) prophylactic treatment on days 0-7. In the case of severe diarrhoea, preventive treatment was replaced by loperamide(12 mg/d) and diosmectite (9 g/d). Grade 3 delayed diarrhoea occurred in 18% of patients (90% CI: [9.5-28.9]) and 4.6% of cycles. No grade 4 delayed diarrhoea was observed. Twenty-nine patients (85%) received the preventive treatment at cycle 1, while 14% (90% CI: [6.2-25.7]) experienced grade 3 delayed diarrhoea in 3.7% of cycles for a median 4.5 days. The objective response rate was 8% (90% CI [1.4-23.1]) among the 25 assessable patients. Preventive combined treatment is effective in reducing the incidence of severe delayed diarrhoea, and it should be proposed to patients treated with mono-therapy Campto(r) and evaluated in poly-chemotherapy protocols.

Multicenter phase II-III study of oxaliplatin plus cyclophosphamide vs. cisplatin plus cyclophosphamide in chemonaive advanced ovarian cancer patients.

PURPOSE: A phase II-III randomised study to compare safety and efficacy of an oxaliplatin/cyclophosphamide (OXAC) combination, vs. the reference combination of cisplatin/cyclophosphamide (CPC), in untreated advanced ovarian cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 182 patients were enrolled, of whom 177 were treated: 86 with OXAC (130 mg/m2 oxaliplatin two-hour intravenous (i.v.) infusion, 1,000 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide two-hour i.v. infusion), and 91 with CPC (100 mg/m2 cisplatin one-hour i.v. infusion. 1,000 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide two-hour i.v. infusion). Treatment cycles were repeated every three weeks (maximum of six cycles). RESULTS: The main toxicities, which were significantly less severe in the OXAC arm, were myelosuppression and vomiting, including (OXAC vs CPC, % patients): grade 3-4 leukopenia (37% vs. 56%), and anaemia (7% vs. 32%), with blood transfusions in 8% vs. 21%. In the OXAC arm, 64% of surgically assessable patients and 33% of clinically assessable patients achieved an objective response. In the CPC arm, 67% patients achieved a surgical response and 42% achieved an objective clinical response. In the OXAC and CPC arms, median progression free-survival was 13.0 and 13.3 months, and overall survival was 36.0 and 25.1 months respectively, without statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: The activity and time-related parameters of the OXAC and CPC combinations in advanced ovarian cancer patients, are comparable. Combined with the better safety profile of the oxaliplatin-containing regimen, this confirms the interest of oxaliplatin combined with active new agents in this indication.