Combination Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: the Best Choice for Every Patient?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Therapeutic alternatives to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are increasing, and combination therapies, including antiangiogenic agents and tyrosine kinase/mTOR/immune checkpoint inhibitors, are identified as the gold standard driven by the results of recent clinical studies. Nevertheless, the real-world RCC population is very heterogeneous, with categories of patients not represented in the enrolled trial population who may not benefit more from these treatments. The purpose of this expert review is to assess the rationale on which tyrosine kinase alone may still be a viable first-line treatment option for some subgroups of patients with mRCC. RECENT FINDINGS: The first-line treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy can still be considered an effective tool for addressing selected mRCCs, as highlighted by the successful outcome in a range of subjects such as favorable-risk patients, the ones suffering from autoimmune diseases, those with pancreatic or lung metastases, or previously undergoing organ transplantation and elderly subjects. Some selected categories of patients may still benefit from monotherapy with TKI, and smart sequential therapies can also be considered instead of a combination strategy. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors can also act as immune modulator agents, boosting the immune response to facilitate and potentiate the therapeutic effectiveness of subsequent immunotherapy.

NEPA as antiemetic prophylaxis after failure of 5HT3-RA plus dexamethasone in patients receiving carboplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy: A monocentric real-life experience.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) may affect adherence to planned chemotherapy treatments and compromise patients' quality of life during the therapy. NEPA is an oral fixed combination of netupitant, a highly-selective NK1-RA and palonosetron, a 5HT3-RA, approved for the prevention of acute and delayed CINV. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NEPA with dexamethasone for CINV prophylaxis in the challenging setting of carboplatin and gemcitabine combination chemotherapy, after failure of prophylaxis with 5HT3 receptor antagonist. METHODS: Eligible patients were undergoing carboplatin and gemcitabine combination chemotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ovarian cancer or urothelial cancer and experienced nausea and/or vomiting after the first cycle of chemotherapy, despite an antiemetic prophylaxis with a 5HT3-RA and dexamethasone. Primary efficacy endpoint was complete response (CR: no emesis, no rescue medication) obtained with NEPA, during the overall phase (0-120 h), after the start of chemotherapy. RESULTS: During the first cycle of chemotherapy, 15 out of 30 (50%) patients did not properly control CINV with a 5HT3-RA plus dexamethasone used as primary antiemetic prophylaxis and then were switched to NEPA from the subsequent cycle. During NEPA administration, 13 out of 15 patients (86.7%) achieved an overall CR (no emesis, no rescue medication). Antiemetic treatment with NEPA was very well tolerated with only two patients (13.3%) that experienced a grade 1 TEAE. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience showed that NEPA has proven to be very effective and well tolerated in the prophylaxis of CINV induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Second line therapy with axitinib after only prior sunitinib in metastatic renal cell cancer: Italian multicenter real world SAX study final results.

BACKGROUND: This multi-institutional retrospective real life study was conducted in 22 Italian Oncology Centers and evaluated the role of Axitinib in second line treatment in not selected mRCC patients. METHODS: 148 mRCC patients were evaluated. According to Heng score 15.5%, 60.1% and 24.4% of patients were at poor risk, intermediate and favorable risk, respectively. RESULTS: PFS, OS, DCR and ORR were 7.14 months, 15.5 months, 70.6% and 16.6%, respectively. The duration of prior sunitinib treatment correlated with a longer significant mPFS, 8.8 vs 6.3 months, respectively. Axitinib therapy was safe, without grade 4 adverse events. The most frequent toxicities of all grades were: fatigue (50%), hypertension (26%), and hypothyroidism (18%). G3 blood pressure elevation significantly correlated with longer mPFS and mOS compared to G1-G2 or no toxicity. Dose titration (DT) to 7 mg and 10 mg bid was feasible in 24% with no statistically significant differences in mPFS and mOS. The sunitinib-axitinib sequence was safe and effective, the mOS was 41.15 months. At multivariate analysis, gender, DCR to axitinib and to previous sunitinib correlated significantly with PFS; whereas DCR to axitinib, nephrectomy and Heng score independently affected overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Axitinib was effective and safe in a not selected real life mRCC population. Trial registration INT - Napoli - 11/16 oss. Registered 20 April 2016. http://www.istitutotumori.na.it.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy in oligoprogressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer during abiraterone or enzalutamide.

INTRODUCTION: This monocentric, single-arm, retrospective study investigated the role of stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer who experienced oligoprogression during androgen receptor targeted agents. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer patients treated with androgen receptor targeted agents between December 2016 and January 2022. All patients experienced an oligoprogression (defined as the appearance and/or the progression of ⩽5 bone or nodal or soft tissue metastases) during treatment with androgen receptor targeted agents and received stereotactic body radiotherapy upon oligoprogressive sites, preserving the androgen receptor targeted agents. Further stereotactic body radiotherapy upon new metastatic sites was permitted. Patients showing visceral metastases or receiving palliative radiotherapy were excluded. Progressive disease at >5 metastatic sites or the appearance of visceral metastases led to a change of the systemic treatment. Primary endpoints were 36-month survival rate and 36-month rate of patients receiving treatment with androgen receptor targeted agents. Secondary endpoints were local disease control, biochemical response and safety. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 30 patients. The 36-month survival rate was 90% (27 patients); 36-month rate of patients who were still on treatment with androgen receptor targeted agents was 50%. 20 of 30 patients had performed imaging control after a single course of stereotactic body radiotherapy: overall response rate was 50%, while clinical benefit was 93%. No ⩾G2 adverse events related to stereotactic body radiotherapy were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic body radiotherapy in oligoprogressive metastatic sites during androgen receptor targeted agent treatment resulted in a feasible and effective treatment to delay the start of next-line systemic treatment and prolong overall survival in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer. Longer follow-up and further prospective studies are necessary to confirm our preliminary results.

Feasibility of cabazitaxel in octogenarian prostate cancer patients.

Background: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of cabazitaxel in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients aged ≥80 years, we performed a retrospective study on a sample of patients from 11 Italian cancer centers. Materials and methods: Fifty-seven patients aged ≥80 years were treated with cabazitaxel after previous failure with docetaxel; 39 completed a comprehensive geriatric assessment questionnaire (34 fit and 5 vulnerable) and 8 patients (14%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) ≥2, while most had a PS of 0-1 (86%). Cabazitaxel was administered at a dose of 25 mg/m2 in 30 (52%) patients and 20 mg/m2 or adapted schedules in 27 (48%) patients. These schedules were adopted mainly in patients ≥85 years (75%), with a PS ≥2 (87.5%), and those classified as vulnerable (100%). Results: The duration of treatment was 4.8 months and was comparable in all subgroups; disease control rate was reported in 36 patients (63%); prostate-specific antigen response was recorded in 18 patients (31.5%). Median overall survival was 13.1 months regardless of age (<85/≥85 years), but overall survival was reduced in vulnerable (7.2 months) and PS ≥ 2 patients (6.8 months). The most frequently documented grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (14%) and diarrhea (10.5%). Six patients (10.5%) dropped out due to severe toxicity. Conclusions: Octogenarian patients can be treated with cabazitaxel with reduced doses or alternative schedules that are associated with less toxicity and fewer treatment interruptions. Comprehensive geriatric assessment could facilitate more appropriate patient selection.

A Prospective Observational Study on the Structuring Process and Implementation of a Large Regional, Inter-hospital, Virtual Multidisciplinary Tumor Board on Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: At present, multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTB) are considered best practice in oncology. However, web-based virtualization of MDTB may increase participation in meetings, the number of cases discussed, and adherence to guidelines, deliver better treatment, and eventually improve outcomes for patients with prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is an observational study focused on exploring the structuring process and implementing a multi-institutional virtual MDTB in Sicily, Italy. Other endpoints included the analysis of cooperation between participants, adherence to guidelines, patient outcomes, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Overall, 126 patients were referred to the virtual MDTB for a total of 302 cases discussed in an 18-month period. Nearly 45% of cases were referred from general hospitals or tertiary centers, 38% from comprehensive cancer centers, and only 17% from academic ones. Most health professional participants (95%) reported eliminating geographical barriers and consequently reducing costs and saving time as key advantages of virtual meetings over face-to-face ones. Using a specifically designed platform for virtual MDTBs was another excellent point, especially to geolocate clinical trials and time-lapse data storage. The majority of referred patients had stage T 3-4 prostate cancer (79%). Overall, 71% of proposals discussed were approved unchanged, while 19% changed after the virtual MDTB discussion. Debated points were mostly radiologic, surgical, medical, or radiation treatment-related issues. In particular, the prescriptive appropriateness of positron emission tomography with 68Ga-prostatic specific membrane antigen, newer drugs, radiation versus surgical approach, stage T3-4 cases, and adjuvant therapy represented the most debated issues. The proposed diagnostic and/or therapeutic options were controlled for adherence to the guidelines and/or updated scientific evidence. Overall, 98% of approved proposals and changes were in line with the guidelines. Overall, most participants felt virtual MDTB was very useful and case discussions led to a major change of strategy in 19% of cases. CONCLUSION: Virtual MDTBs are a very useful way to achieve best management of prostate cancer while saving time and fostering cooperation.

Megestrol Acetate for Heavily Pretreated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: An Old Answer for a New Problem.

Prostate cancer is the most frequent malignant tumor in male. Despite its incidence increased in the last few years, the mortality is gradually decreasing, even in patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC). Unfortunately, prolongation of survival leads to the exhaustion of therapeutic chances. Therefore, patients with good performance status (PS) may remain out of further active treatments. We report the clinical case of a 71-year-old patient with symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and good PS who progressed after multiple treatments and started a hormonal therapy with megestrol acetate (MA). MA is a synthetic progestin used for treatment of mPC in 1990s since it was shown to have an antiandrogen activity. In our case, MA managed to overcome resistance to androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs), getting a dramatic biochemical and radiological response and a rapid improvement of symptoms. Our clinical case shows that MA is an interesting therapeutic option especially in long-survivor patients with mCRPC and a long progression-free survival during ARTAs therapies.

Current treatment options for HER2-positive breast cancer patients with brain metastases.

Brain metastases (BMs) are frequently associated with HER2+ breast cancer (BC). Their management is based on a multi-modal strategy including both local treatment and systemic therapy. Despite therapeutic advance, BMs still have an adverse impact on survival and quality of life and the development of effective systemic therapy to prevent and treat BMs from HER2 + BC represents an unmet clinical need. Trastuzumab-based therapy has long been the mainstay of systemic therapy and over the last two decades other HER2-targeted agents including lapatinib, pertuzumab and trastuzumab emtansine, have been introduced in the clinical practice. More recently, novel agents such as neratinib, tucatinib and trastuzumab deruxtecan have been developed, with interesting activity against BMs. Further research is needed to better elucidate the best sequence of these agents and their combination with local treatment.

Oral vinorelbine and capecitabine as first-line therapy in metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective analysis.

A retrospective analysis of 70 patients with triple-negative or hormone-resistant advanced breast carcinoma who had not previously received chemotherapy was carried out. Patients received oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m2 on day 1 and 8, plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 bid for 14 consecutive days every 3 weeks. Overall response rate was 53% with a 9% complete response rate. Stable disease was recorded in 27% of the cases. Median progression-free survival was 7.9 months and median overall survival was 29.2 months. Toxicity was generally mild and easily manageable. These data demonstrate that this combination is feasible, safe and active as first-line treatment of triple-negative fully hormone-resistant advanced breast carcinoma patients.

Eribulin Mesylate for the Treatment of Metastatic Hormone-refractory and Triple-negative Breast Cancer: A Multi-institutional Real-world Report on Efficacy and Safety.

OBJECTIVE: Eribulin mesylate (EM) is a fully synthetic macrocyclic ketone analogue of the marine natural product halichondrin. EM has been reported to be active in metastatic breast cancer. In this paper, we report efficacy and safety of data of EM in a retrospective, real-world series of patients with poor prognosis, hormone-refractory, or triple-negative metastatic breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis was carried out at 4 interrelated oncology centers. EM was delivered at the dose of 1.4 mg/m2 in 100 mL of normal saline over 2 to 5 minutes on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. EM was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Side effects were reported every cycle as per standard clinical practice and graded according to NCI-CTCAE, version 4.0. Time-to-progression and overall survival were reported. RESULTS: In this series of 90 patients the overall response rate was 22%, and 21% and 23% in the hormonal-resistant group and the triple-negative one, respectively. Stable disease was recorded in 24%, 21%, and 27%, respectively, in the whole series, the hormonal-resistant group, and the triple-negative one, respectively. Time-to-progression was 3.5 months (range, 1 to 22 mo) in the whole series and 3.0 months (range, 1 to 14.7 mo) and 3.4 months (range, 2.2 to 16.2 mo) in the hormonal-resistant group and the triple-negative one, respectively. Overall survival reached a median of 11.4 months. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study, albeit retrospective, demonstrates the activity of this combination as third-line chemotherapy option in a challenging clinical setting such as triple-negative or hormone-resistant patients with breast cancer progressing after several lines of hormonal manipulations.

Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: A WhatsApp Messenger-Based Survey of Patients' Queries, Needs, Fears, and Actions Taken.

PURPOSE: This descriptive investigation was undertaken at three oncology units to report queries, needs, and fears related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) of patients with cancer and to avoid uncontrolled treatment delays or withdrawal, behavioral mistakes, and panic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All queries spontaneously delivered through the WhatsApp instant messaging system commonly used by patients to communicate with oncology units were collected and grouped by homology in five categories. Responses to the queries were given according to recommendations by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology through WhatsApp and by subsequent phone calls. Patients were also classified according to the site of the primary tumor, stage of disease, and current treatments. Analysis of the association between these data and queries was carried out. RESULTS: The social scenario in Italy is a nationwide lockdown except for hospitals, pharmacies, and food supplies. Overall, 446 different patients' WhatsApp conversations were analyzed between March 1 and March 13 and comprised the following: requirement of visit delay by patients undergoing oral therapies or in follow-up, delays in chemotherapy or immunotherapy administration, queries about possible immunosuppression, and changes in lifestyle or daily activities. Delay requirements were statistically more frequent among patients with prostate or breast cancer compared with those with lung or pancreatic cancer. Actions taken by oncologists are also reported. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, the WhatsApp instant messaging system has been occasionally used in other medical settings with controversial results. In our experience, WhatsApp turned out to be adequate to give a rapid answer to most queries from patients with cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic scenario.

High-dose Radiotherapy for Oligo-progressive NSCLC Receiving EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Real World Data.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Local ablative treatments for oligo-progressive, EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer (mut-NCSLC) may improve long-term disease control and survival. We analyzed the efficacy of hypo-fractionated, high-dose radiation therapy (HDRT), in association with prolonged EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in oligo-progressive, EGFR mutant-NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Progression-free survival-1 (PFS-1, date from initiation of TKI therapy until oligo-progression or death), and progression-free survival-2 (PFS-2, date of focal progression until further progression or death) were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were analyzed. The median PFS 1 was 12.5 months. HDHRT consisted of intensity-modulated RT and stereotactic RT in 23 (64%) and 13 (36%) patients respectively. The median PFS 2 was 6.3 months. Overall survival was 38.7 months. CONCLUSION: Hypo-fractionated HDRT plus TKI therapy, is associated with a significant prolongation of disease control (overall PFS: 18.8 months), with manageable side effects. These real-world data support the use of local ablative approaches in oligo-progressive EGFR mut-NSCLC.

Stereotactic Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Patients With Oligo-progressive Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor: Data From the Real World.

AIM: This retrospective observational study evaluated the role of hypo-fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with oligo-progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Data on local control, delay of further progression, and safety are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2016, 28 patients with mRCC who showed oligo-progressive disease while receiving first-line pazopanib were treated with hypofractionated SRT to progressive metastatic sites to delay the change of systemic therapy. First and second progression-free survival (PFS-1 and PFS-2) were recorded, as well as objective response and toxicity. RESULTS: After pazopanib therapy, nine partial remissions (32%), 12 stable disease (43%) and seven progressions (25%) were recorded. The median time to progression from first-line pazopanib until oligo-progression was 9.45 months (PFS-1 range=2-30 months). Seventeen patients (61%) showed progression at pre-existing tumor sites, and 11 patients (39%) showed the appearance of new metastases. Progression-free survival after radiation therapy was 4.55 months (PFS-2 range=1-11 months). PFS-1 plus PFS-2 was 14.0 months (range=3-41 months). Severe grade 3-4 toxicities were seen only occasionally. CONCLUSION: Patients with oligo-progressive mRCC treated with first-line pazopanib may benefit from hypo-fractionated high-dose SRT at progressing sites achieving a further increase in median progression-free survival. Further studies and prospective validation are required to establish if this minimally invasive approach may have a positive impact on overall survival and reported outcomes.

Metronomic oral vinorelbine in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer progressing after nivolumab immunotherapy: a retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: The availability of immune checkpoint inhibitors has deeply changed the therapeutic scenario of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Up until now, chemotherapy still represents the first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC not harbouring genetic mutations or lacking high expression of programmed death ligand even if the addition of immunotherapy to first-line chemotherapy has recently been shown to improve clinical outcome. We carried out a multi-institutional retrospective analysis on third-line chemotherapy with metronomic oral vinorelbine (VNR) in a series of patients with metastatic NSCLC pre-treated with first-line chemotherapy and second-line immunotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with metastatic NSCLC with progressive disease after first-line chemotherapy and subsequent immunotherapy were treated with metronomic oral VNR continuously at the fixed dose of 30 mg three times per week. RESULTS: A partial response was achieved in 4 patients (13.3%), while 10 patients (33.3%) displayed disease stabilisation for an overall disease control rate of 46.7%. Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months (range 1-13 months) and median OS reached 8.1 months (range 4.0-24.0+ months) with a 12-month survival rate of 22%. CONCLUSION: Oral metronomic VNR appears to be active and safe in patients with metastatic NSCLC in progression after first-line chemotherapy and second-line immunotherapy. The results reported, although from a limited sample, may suggest its use for long-term stabilisation of the disease with good patient compliance.

Reactions and countermeasures of medical oncologists towards the incoming COVID-19 pandemic: a WhatsApp messenger-based report from the Italian College of Chief Medical Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: This descriptive, unplanned investigation has been undertaken to report reactions, attitudes and countermeasures which have been put in place and implemented by medical oncology units facing the COVID-19 outbreak in Southern Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data have been retrospectively obtained from the time-related analysis of conversations via a WhatsApp messenger-based group chat between the medical directors belonging to the Italian College of Medical Oncology Directors. Overall number, intensity and time trend of conversations related to reactions during the 4 weeks of observation related to the crucial events which occurred between 24 February and 28 March, 2020 2020 are included. A sentiment analysis of conversations was also carried out. RESULTS: We report 956 conversations among 19 medical oncology units related to reactions to the crucial events, such as epidemic spread, Government ordinances and guidelines during the 4 weeks of observation. Data show significant awareness of problems linked to the COVID-19 spread among oncologists and rapid diffusion of countermeasures. Actions taken were correlated time wise to crucial events. A correlation between conversations and the volume of activity of oncology units was found. By analysing the sentiment analysis of raw data, positive emotions were reduced in percentage over the weeks. A significant increase in negative emotions was observed as the outbreak impacted on the healthcare system. CONCLUSION: In our experience, the WhatsApp instant-messaging system seems to be a useful tool to share news and reactions between medical oncologists to rapidly implement necessary health measures and answers to most cancer patients' needs and queries in the COVID-19 pandemic scenario.

Radium-223 treatment in castration resistant bone metastatic prostate cancer. Should be the primary tumor always treated?

INTRODUCTION: Radium-223 (223Ra) improves symptoms and survival in patients with bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). STUDY AIM: To evaluate the impact of a previous radical prostatectomy (RP) on the outcome of 223Ra therapy in mCRPC patients. The primary prostate tumor left untreated could progress during 223Ra treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: mCRPC symptomatic patients treated with 223Ra were enrolled. Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone analogue was maintained. No other anticancer therapy was given. 223Ra was administered i.v. at the dose of 55 kBq/kg every 4 weeks for 6 cycles. Patients were stratified according to previous RP or not. Hematological toxicity was monitored. Statistical analysis of 223Ra discontinuations, progressions, and deaths were performed. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled, 16 (36.4%) previously received RP, 5 (11.3%) prostate radiotherapy and 23 (52.3%) maintained the primary prostate tumor after local treatment. All patients presented only bone metastases, 24 patients (54.5%) had more than 20. Twenty-six (59.1%) patients were treated after first or second line systemic chemotherapy. Treatment interruptions occurred in 14 patients (50%) with prostate and in 4 (25%) without (P = 0.04). After a median follow-up of 18 months (6-30 months), 15 (53.6%), and 7 (43.7%) progressions (P = 0.34) and 13 and 1 (6.2%) deaths (P = 0.04) occurred in patients with and without prostate respectively. CONCLUSION: The presence of the primary prostate tumor seems to play a detrimental role in mCRPC patients undergoing 223Ra treatment in absence of other concomitant anticancer therapy. On the other hand a previous RP might play a protective role.

Cisplatin plus weekly vinorelbine versus cisplatin plus vinorelbine on days 1 and 8 in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective randomized phase III trial of the G.O.I.M. (Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale).

PURPOSE: A phase III randomized trial was carried out to compare two schedules of the vinorelbine (VNR)-cisplatin (CDDP) regimen in patients with locally advanced unresectable poor prognosis stage IIIB or metastatic stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and analysis of toxicity, while secondary endpoints included response rates, time-to-progression (TTP) and quality of life (QoL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized to receive: (a) VNR 25mg/m(2) on day 1, 8 and 15 plus CDDP 100mg/m(2) on day 1 every 4 weeks or (b) VNR 30 mg/m(2) on day 1 and 8 plus CDDP 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 3 weeks. All patients were chemotherapy-naïve and had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1. RESULTS: Overall 278 patients were enrolled into the trial. Overall response rate was 34% (95% CL 26-42%) in the weekly VNR/CDDP arm, and 32% (95% CL 24-40%) in patients treated with day 1-8 VNR/CDDP without any statistically significant difference. Median TTP was 4.5 and 4.6 months respectively for weekly VNR/CDDP arm and the day 1-8 VNR/CDDP one. This difference was not statistically significant (log-rank test, p=0.818). Median OS was 9.45 and 10 months respectively for weekly VNR/CDDP arm and the day 1-8 VNR/CDDP one without statistically a significant difference (log-rank test, p=0.259). The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 31 and 36%, and 10 and 11% respectively. The incidence of severe neutropenia (34% versus 68%; p=0.0001) and of febrile neutropenia (5% versus 12%; p=0.026), as well as the rate of therapy omissions (10% versus 24%; p=0.0037) were higher in the weekly VNR/CDDP arm than in the day 1-8 VNR/CDDP one. The weekly VNR/CDDP regimen was associated with a lower received dose intensity in a statistically significant fashion (9% versus 22%; p=0.0001) and with a lower non-statistically significant quality of life score as compared to the day 1-8 VNR/CDDP schedule. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of day 1-8 VNR plus CDDP every 3 weeks is less toxic and better tolerated than the regimen of weekly VNR plus CDDP every 4 weeks. The two schedules are equivalent in terms of overall response rate, median time-to-progression and overall survival. The combination of VNR on day 1-8 plus CDDP every 3 weeks may be considered as a reference regimen for the treatment of patients with advanced disease and those who deserve a postoperative therapy, and for future studies.

Efficacy and safety of cetuximab/irinotecan in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal adenocarcinomas: a clinical practice setting, multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan/cetuximab administered as third- or fourth-line therapy in a retrospective series of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to oxaliplatin and irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Most patients (90%) had been previously treated with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, and all had received oxaliplatin-based regimens before receiving irinotecan-based second-line treatment. Sixty patients with irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer received a regimen comprising weekly irinotecan 120 mg/m2 as a 1-hour intravenous infusion and cetuximab 400 mg/m2 infused over 2 hours as the initial dose and 250 mg/m2 infused over 1 hour for the subsequent administrations. A single treatment cycle comprised 4 weekly infusions followed by 2 weeks of rest. RESULTS: According to an intent-to-treat analysis, a partial response was exhibited in 12 of 60 enrolled patients (20%; 95% confidence interval, 11%-32%) with a median duration of 5.1 months (range, 3-7.4 months). The tumor growth control rate was 50% (95% confidence interval, 37%-63%). Objective responses did not correlate with performance status, number of sites of disease, and pretreatments or epidermal growth factor receptor status. The median progression-free survival was 3.1 months (range, 1.2-9 months), whereas median overall survival was 6 months (range, 2-13 months). Both survival parameters correlated with performance status at the beginning of treatment. The main grade 3/4 toxicities were nausea (33%), diarrhea (27%), leukopenia (18%), asthenia (13%), and acne-like reaction (13%). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the weekly irinotecan/cetuximab regimen is feasible in an outpatient setting and tolerated by most patients. At present, combinations of chemotherapy with cetuximab are being evaluated in patients with earlier-stage disease in a number of ongoing studies.

Vinorelbine and 5-fluorouracil bolus and/or continuous venous infusion plus levofolinic acid as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: an analysis of results in clinical practice of the Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale (GOIM).

BACKGROUND: This retrospective study evaluated the activity and toxicity profile of a regimen of vinorelbine and 5-fluorouracil with levofolinic acid, given to a large series of patients with recurrent or refractory metastatic breast cancer after first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 286 evaluable patients were included in the analysis. Two chemotherapy schedules were reviewed: a) the bolus regimen consisted of levofolinic acid 100 mg/m2 and 5-fluorouracil 375 mg/m2, both administered i.v. on days 1,2 and 3, plus vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 i.v. bolus on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; b) the infusional regimen of levofolinic acid 100 mg/m2 given as a 2-hour infusion, followed by 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 i.v. bolus and by 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 administered as 22-hour continuous venous infusion (c.v.i) for 2 days, plus vinorelbine i.v. bolus on days 1 and 8. RESULTS: Overall, twelve patients achieved a complete response (4%; 95%CL 2%-7%) and 115 patients showed a partial response (40%, 95%CL 34%-46%), for an overall response rate of 44% (95CL 39%-50%). Sixty-one patients had stable disease (21%) and 98 patients progressive disease (34%). The tumor growth control rate was 63% (95%CL 60%-71%). Patients with soft tissue metastases as the dominant disease showed the highest response rate (56%), followed by viscera (48%) and bone (33%). The difference in response rate between patients with dominant visceral disease versus those with dominant bone disease was statistically significant (p=0.038). Patients treated with the bolus schedule achieved a 40% overall response rate with a 5% complete response rate, while those who received the infusional regimen had a 48% overall response rate with a 5% complete response rate. This difference was not statistically significant (p=0.164). The overall median duration of objective responses was 8.3 months (range 4-14 months), median time to progression of the all series was 6.1 months (range 2-24 months) and the median overall survival was 14.6 months (range 3-32). There was a statistically significant difference in survival among responder and non-responder patients (p=0.0009). CONCLUSION: The results of this large off-trial analysis confirmed the clinical activity and adverse-event profile reported in controlled clinical trials of the vinorelbine/ 5-fluorouracil with levofolinic acid regimen in clinical practice. This combination regimen was active with a low toxicity burden and, therefore, represents a good therapeutic choice for patients who require second-line chemotherapy.