Phase II study of pemetrexed and carboplatin plus bevacizumab as first-line therapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this open label phase II study (NCT00407459) was to assess the activity of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor bevacizumab combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin in patients with previously untreated, unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). METHODS: Eligible patients received pemetrexed 500 mg m(-2), carboplatin area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) 5 mg ml(-1) per minute and bevacizumab 15 mg kg(-1), administered intravenously every 21 days for six cycles, followed by maintenance bevacizumab. The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival (PFS). A 50% improvement in median PFS in comparison with standard pemetrexed/platinum combinations (from 6 to 9 months) was postulated. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were evaluable for analysis. A partial response was achieved in 26 cases (34.2%, 95% CI 23.7-46.0%). Forty-four (57.9%, 95% CI 46.0-69.1%) had stable disease. Median PFS and overall survival were 6.9 and 15.3 months, respectively. Haematological and non-haematological toxicities were generally mild; however, some severe adverse events were reported, including grade 3-4 fatigue in 8% and bowel perforation in 4% of patients. Three toxic deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: The primary end point of the trial was not reached. However, due to the limitation of a non-randomised phase II design, further data are needed before drawing any definite conclusion on the role of bevacizumab in MPM.

Phase II prospective study with sorafenib in advanced soft tissue sarcomas after anthracycline-based therapy.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the activity and safety of sorafenib, a multitargeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: An open-label nonrandomised multicentre phase II study was conducted in advanced STS patients pre-treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Patients received sorafenib 400 mg twice daily for 28 days. The primary end point was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Toxicity was assessed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated in all histologies and in leiomyosarcoma (L) and angiovascular sarcomas (A). RESULTS: Between November 2006 and January 2010, 101 patients (36 L, 19 A, and 46 others) were enrolled; 76 patients per-protocol (PP) and 100 per intention-to-treat (ITT) were assessable for the primary end point. In the PP analysis, 11 (14.5%) achieved partial response and 25 (32.9%) stable disease; 6-month PFS rates were all histologies, 34.5%; L, 38.4%; and A, 56.3%. In the ITT analysis, 6-month PFS results were 27.1, 35, and 35.5% in all histologies, L, and A, respectively. When stratified by histology, we observed a better PFS favouring leiomyosarcoma versus other histologies (P = 0.033). Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib appears to be a promising option in leiomyosarcoma patients. This finding warrants further evaluation in histology-driven trials.

Nutritional support in patients with cancer of the esophagus: impact on nutritional status, patient compliance to therapy, and survival.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: The multimodal approach to patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma often includes polychemotherapy combined with radiation therapy. Cancer dysphagia and drug-related anorexia, mucositis and vomiting can all lead to malnutrition. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the administration of enteral nutrition (EN) on the patient's nutritional status, tolerance of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and final oncological outcome. METHODS: Fifty esophageal cancer patients who were to be submitted to chemotherapy (days 1-4 5-fluorouracil (FU) 1 g/m2/day and cisplatin (CDDP) 100 mg/m2/day 1) for two cycles plus radiotherapy (31 Gy) were referred to the Nutrition Support Unit prior to any therapy due to their malnourished status. Twenty-nine dysphagic patients received nutrition via tube (37 kcal/kg/day + 2.0 g proteins/kg/day for 34 days), while 21 others who were not dysphagic were given a standard oral diet (SD). The patients who received EN had a more severe weight loss than the SD patients (16.8% vs 12.8%, P <0.02). RESULTS: The dose of administered EN represented 86% of the planned support, and 70% of the nutritional therapy was administered in the home setting. Administration of EN support resulted in stable body weight and unchanged levels of visceral proteins, while SD patients had a decrease in body weight, total proteins and serum albumin (P <0.01). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of tolerance and response to cancer therapy, suitability for radical resection and median survival (9.5 months). CONCLUSIONS: EN in patients with cancer of the esophagus undergoing chemotherapy and radiotherapy is well tolerated, feasible even in the home setting, prevents further nutritional deterioration and achieves the same oncological results in dysphagic patients as those achieved in non-dysphagic patients.

Extensive experience of disease control with gefitinib and the role of prognostic markers.

Traditionally, the efficacy of an anticancer agent has been measured by response rate. With the development of biological molecular-targeted agents, which have a different mechanism of action from conventional agents, it may be appropriate to consider alternative criteria that reflect the positive effect of these biological agents on disease control, palliation, symptom improvement and quality of life. One such targeted agent is the orally active epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib ("Iressa", ZD1839). This article reviews the clinical experience of patients with advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, who have received gefitinib as part of a clinical trial or through the "Iressa" Expanded Access Programme. Disease-control rates of approximately 50% were observed in some Expanded Access Programme series, comparable with results obtained from Phase II trials. Symptom improvement was also reported. Information that will help identify those patients most likely to respond to treatment will become increasingly important. Therefore, the possible role of prognostic markers and the relationship between epidermal growth factor receptor status and response to gefitinib has been investigated. No clear association between epidermal growth factor receptor expression and response was observed. Future studies of other biomarkers in the epidermal growth factor receptor pathway should help to identify which patients are likely to benefit most from gefitinib.

Non insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (type 2) secondary failure. Metformin-glibenclamide treatment.

The goal of sulphonylurea (S) treatment in Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (NIDDM - type 2 diabetes) subjects should be to obtain a satisfactory glycemic control (fasting glycemic levels < 140 mg%). The loss of an adequate blood glucose control after an initial variable period of S is known as secondary failure (SF). The number of SF are extremely variable among different trials for many reasons, some of which are patient-related: increased food intake, weight gain, non-compliance, poor physical activity, stress, diseases and÷or impaired pancreatic beta cell function, desensitization after S chronic therapy, reduced absorption, concomitant therapies. Many therapeutic strategies have been proposed to achieve an adequate metabolic control in type 2 diabetes patients: switch to intensive insulin therapy and subsequent return to S therapy; association with insulin; association with sulphonylureas plus biguanides. The association biguanides and S, in particular glibenclamide plus metformin, is now widely used by diabetologists in SF since glibenclamide improves insulin secretion while metformin exerts its antidiabetic.

Ifosfamide and vinorelbine: an active regimen for patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin's disease.

Twenty-six patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin's disease (HD) were treated with an intensive salvage regimen combining ifosfamide (3000 mg/m2/d, days 1-4 through continuous intravenous infusion) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2, i.v. days 1 and 5) with mesna uroprotection and G-CSF support. Courses were given at 3-week intervals. Ten patients achieved a complete and 10 patients a partial response, yielding an overall response rate of 77%. The main toxic effect was neutropenia and the combination was well tolerated.

Three-week versus four-week schedule of cisplatin and gemcitabine: results of a randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: The cisplatin and gemcitabine (GC) regimen is usually administered as a 4- or 3-week schedule; however, the best schedule to use is still unclear. We therefore started a randomized phase II trial to compare toxicity and dose intensity (DI) between these two GC schedules. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-six patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and an additional 11 patients with an advanced epithelial neoplasm [bladder (n = 5), head and neck (n = 3), cervix (n = 1), esophageal (n = 1) or unknown primary carcinoma (n = 1)] were randomized to receive cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 2 plus either gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle or gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Planned DI (PDI) for the 4-week schedule was 750 mg/m(2)/week for gemcitabine and 17.5 mg/m(2)/week for cisplatin; for the 3-week regimen PDI was 666 mg/m(2)/week and 23 mg/m(2)/week for gemcitabine and cisplatin, respectively. RESULTS: From July 1998 to March 2000, 107 patients were randomized. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in 27.8% of patients in the 3-week versus 22.5% in the 4-week arm (P = 0.69), while grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was higher in the 4-week arm (29.5% versus 5.5% of patients; P = 0.14). A total of 398 cycles of therapy were delivered. Overall, 51% of cycles were modified in dose, timing or both in the 4-week arm, and 19% in the 3-week arm. The 21-day schedule of GC leads to a similar received DI of gemcitabine and higher cisplatin DI. Both regimens had activity in NSCLC, with a response rate of 39% (38% for the 4-week arm, and 42% for the 3-week arm). CONCLUSIONS: The 3-week schedule has similar DI to the 4-week schedule. However the 3-week regimen has a better compliance profile and a comparable response rate in NSCLC, supporting the use of such a schedule.

Activity of a specific inhibitor, gefitinib (Iressa, ZD1839), of epidermal growth factor receptor in refractory non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gefitinib (Iressa(TM), ZD1839) is an orally active, selective epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Phase I studies showed that it is well tolerated, with evidence of tumor regression in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, we aimed to assess the antitumor activity and tolerability of gefitinib in a series of patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC, as a part of a compassionate use program. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To be eligible, all patients were required to have histologically or cytologically proven advanced or metastatic NSCLC, prior chemotherapy with at least one cisplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen or contraindication to cytotoxic drugs, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < or =2, and adequate hematological, renal and hepatic parameters. All patients provided signed informed consent. Patient re-evaluation was performed every 4-6 weeks. RESULTS: Seventy-three consecutive patients were enrolled. Response rate, including complete and partial response, was 9.6%; an additional 43.8% of patients achieved stable disease, for an overall disease control of 53.4%. EGFR1 status was evaluated by immunocytochemistry in 25 patients. According to EGFR1 immunoreactivity all responses were observed with medium/strong imunoreactivity while three out of four responses were observed in high expressive patients. Median survival for all patients was 4 months while it reached 6 months for patients with disease control. The 1-year survival rate was 13.1% for the entire series and 23.2% for patients with disease control. Non-hematological toxicity was generally mild. CONCLUSION: Gefitinib has promising activity with a good toxicity profile in patients with progressive NSCLC who have received one or two prior chemotherapy regimens. A possible relationship within response and EGFR1 expression is suggested.