Sequential administration of 5-fluorouracil (5FU)/leucovorin (LV) followed by irinotecan (CPT-11) at relapse versus CPT-11 followed by 5-FU/LV in advanced colorectal carcinoma. A phase III randomized study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the differences in the sequence of administration of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) followed by irinotecan (CPT-11), or CPT-11 followed by 5-FU/LV in advanced colorectal cancer (ACC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with ACC were allocated to the following treatment groups: group A, a bolus of 20 mg/m(2) LV and 425 mg/m(2) 5-FU for 5 days until progression/relapse, and upon progression treatment with weekly CPT-11 (100 mg/m(2)), and group B, CPT-11 followed at progression/relapse by 5-FU/LV at the same doses and schedules as in group A. RESULTS: 120 patients were randomized to receive one of the two treatment sequences and their pretreatment characteristics were equally balanced between treatment arms. No statistically significant difference was found in the objective response rate to CPT-11 (p = 0.45); partial response (PR) was 23.3% for group A patients and 33.3% for group B. Following documented progression and second line treatment there was a significant difference between the response rate in group A (23.3%) and group B where no patients were found to respond to second-line treatment with 5-FU/LV (p = 0.024). The median overall survival was 42.0 weeks (range, 36.6-47.4 weeks) for group A and 32.0 weeks (range, 28.2-35.8 weeks) for group B. The median time to progression for patients in group A following first-line 5-FU/LV was 18 weeks (range, 10-36 weeks) and 12 weeks (range, 10-16 weeks) for group B following first-line CPT-11 (p = 0.0005). Toxicity, according to WHO, was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treating patients with CPT-11 upon progression to 5-FU/LV treatment seems to be superior to the opposite sequence. We used these treatments as sequential monotherapies (at progression/relapse), and the best results are gained when 5-FU/LV is followed by CPT-11 at disease progression or relapse.

Cardiotoxicity of fluoropyrimidines in different schedules of administration: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiotoxicity associated with 5-Fluorouracil (5FU) administration has been infrequently reported in literature, albeit various series of acute coronary syndromes have recorded a low but definite incidence of the above toxicity. In the present study, patients undergoing 5FU-based and oral capecitabine (Xeloda-based chemotherapy were tested for the potential development of cardiac-related symptoms during their administration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six hundred and forty-four patients entered the study. Those experiencing any cardiac-related symptoms during 5FU infusion or oral capecitabine were subjected to ECG and serum cardiac enzymes determination. If cardiotoxicity was confirmed, 5FU infusion or oral capecitabine were interrupted, sublingual nitrates administered and cardiac monitoring initiated, while patients with >two-fold enzyme elevation were followed in a coronary care unit for at least 72 h. Cases with acute myocardial infarction were excluded from further 5FU or oral capecitabine treatment. RESULTS: Overall 26 patients (4.03%) developed symptoms and/or ECG abnormalities due to 5FU and capecitabine. Patients with continuous 5FU infusion presented a higher incidence of cardiotoxicity [14/209; 6.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.3-10.1%] than the remaining (7/317; 2.3%, 95% CI = 0.8-3.3%) (P < 0.012). Specifically, an increased incidence of cardiac-related events was encountered in patients with continuous 24-h 5FU + LV infusion for 5 days (12.5%, 95% CI = 2.3-22.7%) rather than in patients with the same schedule without LV (5.3%, 95% CI = 1.95-8.67%) (P < 0.027), as well as in patients with short 5FU + LV administration (2.4%, 95% CI = 0.9-3.9%) (P < 0.019). Overall, 3/54 patients (5.5%, 95% CI = -0.6-11.1%) on oral capecitabine developed cardiac-related events. Seven out of the 20 patients suffered an acute myocardial infarction, 6 developed ischemia only, while 4 more patients had ECG consistent with coronary vasospasm and 3 with conduction disturbances, of which one subsequently died. Patients administered oral capecitabine had a similar incidence of cardiac-related events; 1/22 (4.5%) patients with advanced breast cancer and 2/32 (6.2%) with colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The present study supports the toxic effect of 5-FU on the myocardium, which is largely schedule-dependent, whereas a low but finite risk of such toxicity has been observed with oral capecitabine. A high level of alertness is required when using fluoropyrimidines (i.v. 5FU or oral capecitabine), while their toxic effect on the coronary endothelium and myocardium merits further investigation.

Second-line treatment with oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil in gemcitabine-pretreated advanced pancreatic cancer: A phase II study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of Oxaliplatin, Leucovorin and 5-FU as second line therapy, following relapse to Gemcitabine, in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with Gemcitabine were included in the study. All patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the pancreas that was unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic. Treatment consisted of Oxaliplatin 50 mg/m(2) (2-hour iv infusion), followed by Leucovorin 50 mg/m(2) (i.v. bolus) and 500 mg/m(2) 5-FU (1-hour iv infusion), administered weekly, until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. Objective tumour response and toxicity were evaluated according to World Health Organisation (WHO) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients, 20 men and 10 women, median age 63 years (range 52-71 years) and Karnofsky Performance Status (PS) of > or =50 entered the study. The majority of patients (96%) had locally advanced disease. A total of 380 doses of chemotherapy were delivered, a median of 12 doses per patient. Partial responses were observed in 7 patients (PR 23.3%), stable disease in 9 (SD 30.0%), while 14 patients progressed (PD 46.7%). Improved PS was observed in 18 (42.8%) patients. Patients that had responded to first-line Gemcitabine treatment were found more likely to respond or stabilize their disease with second-line treatment. The median duration of response was 22 weeks, and median overall survival was 25 weeks, Grade 3/4 toxicity expressed per chemotherapy dose included leukopenia 16%, anemia 3.2%, thrombocytopenia 3.2%, diarrhea 14.2%, fatigue 16.1% and neurotoxicity 4.2%. Eight patients (27%) suffered a febrile neutropenic event managed successfully with oral antibiotic home therapy, while 17 patients required G-CSF support. There were no treatment related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of Oxaliplatin, Leucovorin and 5-FU was tolerated with manageable toxicity, offering encouraging activity as second-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, previously treated with Gemcitabine. Additional studies are warranted with this regimen in Gemcitabine relapsed pancreatic cancer patients.