Inhibition of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathway for the treatment of patients with metastatic metaplastic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal/metaplastic breast cancers (MpBCs) are often triple-negative (TNBC), and chemo-refractory, and can harbor phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3kinase) alterations; thus, therapy with mTor inhibitors may demonstrate activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mesenchymal/MpBC treated with temsirolimus-based regimens were evaluated. Mutational analyses [polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based DNA sequencing method, mass spectrometric detection (Sequenom MassARRAY), or next-generation sequencing] as well as loss of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) (immunohistochemistry) were performed (archived tissue when available). RESULTS: Twenty-three patients (one of whom was on two separate trials) were treated using temsirolimus-containing regimens: temsirolimus alone (n = 1 patient) or combined with the following: liposomal doxorubicin and bevacizumab (DAT, n = 18); liposomal doxorubicin (DT, n = 1); paclitaxel and bevacizumab (TAT, n = 2); paclitaxel (TT, n = 1); carboplatin and bevacizumab (CAT, n = 1). Response rate [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)] was 25% across all regimens; 32% in the anthracycline-based regimens [DAT and DT (CR = 2, PR = 4; N = 19)]. An additional two patients achieved stable disease (SD) ≥6 months [total SD ≥6 months/CR/PR = 8 (33%)]. Molecular aberrations in the PI3K pathway were common: PIK3CA mutation = 6/15 (40%), PTEN mutation = 3/11 (27%), and PTEN loss = 2/11 (18%). A point mutation in the NF2 gene (K159fs*16; NF2 alterations can activate mTor) was found in one patient who attained CR (3+ years). Of the eight patients who achieved SD ≥6 months/CR/PR, all 4 patients with available tissue had a molecular aberration that activate the PIK3CA/Akt/mTOR axis: PIK3CA mutation = 2; PTEN loss = 1; NF2 aberration = 1. CONCLUSIONS: DAT has activity in MpBCs including complete CRs. Molecular aberrations that can activate the PI3 K/Akt/mTOR axis are common in MpBC.

Imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) in advanced breast cancer-expressing C-Kit or PDGFR-beta: clinical activity and biological correlations.

BACKGROUND: Novel molecular therapies for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are necessary to improve the dismal prognosis of this condition. Imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) inhibits several protein tyrosine kinases, including platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) and c-kit, which are preferentially expressed in tumor cells. We tested the activity of imatinib mesylate in MBC with overexpression of PDGFR or c-kit. Additionally, we sought to determine the biological correlates and immunomodulatory effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirteen patients were treated with Imatinib administered orally at 400 mg p.o. b.i.d. (800 mg/day), until disease progression. All patients demonstrated PDGFR-beta overexpression and none showed c-kit expression. RESULTS: No objective responses were observed among the 13 patients treated in an intention-to-treat analysis. All patients experienced disease progression, with a median time to progression of 1.2 months. Twelve patients have died, and the median overall survival was 7.7 months. No patient had a serious adverse event. Imatinib therapy had no effect on the plasma levels of the angiogenesis-related cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor, PDGF, b-fibroblast growth factor, and E-selectin. Immune studies showed imatinib inhibits interferon-gamma production by TCR-activated CD4(+) T cells. CONCLUSION: Imatinib as a single agent has no clinical activity in PDGFR-overexpressing MBC and has potential immunosuppressive effects.

Randomized trial of high-dose chemotherapy and blood cell autografts for high-risk primary breast carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled studies have reported encouraging outcomes for patients with high-risk primary breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell support. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare standard-dose chemotherapy with the same therapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with 10 or more positive axillary lymph nodes after primary breast surgery or patients with four or more positive lymph nodes after four cycles of primary (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy were eligible. All patients were to receive eight cycles of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin (Adriamycin), and cyclophosphamide (FAC). Patients were stratified by stage and randomly assigned to receive two cycles of high-dose cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin with autologous hematopoietic stem cell support or no additional chemotherapy. Tamoxifen was planned for postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors and chest wall radiotherapy was planned for all. All P values are from two-sided tests. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients (48 after primary surgery and 30 after primary chemotherapy) were registered. Thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned to FAC and 39 to FAC followed by high-dose chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 6.5 years, there have been 41 relapses. In intention-to-treat analyses, estimated 3-year relapse-free survival rates were 62% and 48% for FAC and FAC/high-dose chemotherapy, respectively (P =.35), and 3-year survival rates were 77% and 58%, respectively (P =.23). Overall, there was greater and more frequent morbidity associated with high-dose chemotherapy than with FAC; there was one septic death associated with high-dose chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: No relapse-free or overall survival advantage was associated with the use of high-dose chemotherapy, and morbidity was increased with its use. Thus, high-dose chemotherapy is not indicated outside a clinical trial.

Management of breast cancer during pregnancy using a standardized protocol.

PURPOSE: No standardized therapeutic interventions have been reported for patients diagnosed with breast cancer during pregnancy. Of the potential interventions, none have been prospectively evaluated for treatment efficacy in the mother or safety for the fetus. We present our experience with the use of combination chemotherapy for breast cancer during pregnancy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During the past 8 years, 24 pregnant patients with primary or recurrent cancer of the breast were managed by outpatient chemotherapy, surgery, or surgery plus radiation therapy, as clinically indicated. The chemotherapy included fluorouracil (1,000 mg/m2), doxorubicin (50 mg/m2), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2), administered every 3 to 4 weeks after the first trimester of pregnancy. Care was provided by medical oncologists, breast surgeons, and perinatal obstetricians. RESULTS: Modified radical mastectomy was performed in 18 of the 22 patients, and two patients were treated with segmental mastectomy with postpartum radiation therapy. This group included patients in all trimesters of pregnancy. The patients received a median of four cycles of combination chemotherapy during pregnancy. No antepartum complications temporally attributable to systemic therapy were noted. The mean gestational age at delivery was 38 weeks. Apgar scores, birthweights, and immediate postpartum health were reported to be normal for all of the children. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer can be treated with chemotherapy during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy with minimal complications of labor and delivery.

Phase I study of a third-generation selective estrogen receptor modulator, LY353381.HCL, in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted this phase I trial to determine the safety and toxicity profile of LY353381.HCl-a novel, potent, third-generation selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM)-because this benzothiophene derivative demonstrated an SERM profile in preclinical studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 32 patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Patients were treated in four cohorts with oral daily doses of 10, 20, 50, and 100 mg. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed during the first 72 hours following the first dose on day 1 and during the 24 hours after the day 57 dose. Eligibility criteria included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2; no significant major organ dysfunction; and at least 3 weeks elapsed since most recent hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and estrogen replacement therapy. RESULTS: The median patient age was 56 years (range, 30 years to 76 years). The median number of prior chemotherapies for metastatic disease was one (range, zero to four), while the median number of prior hormone regimens for metastatic disease was two (range, zero to five). Receptor status was estrogen receptor (ER) positive and progesterone receptor (PR) positive, 19 patients; ER positive and PR negative, eight patients; ER positive and PR unknown, two patients; and ER and PR unknown, three patients. Dose-limiting toxicity was not observed. Treatment was well tolerated with mild to moderate hot flashes in 18 of 32 patients (56%) at all dose levels. Transvaginal ultrasound performed at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment showed no endometrial thickening. Of the 32 patients evaluable for response, six patients had stable disease for at least 6 months with a median duration of 7.7 months (range, 6.2 months to 33.8 months). The pharmacokinetics of LY353381.HCl were generally linear with respect to time and studied dose range. CONCLUSION: As predicted in preclinical testing, daily oral LY353381.HCl is safe, is well tolerated at all tested dose levels, and may be clinically beneficial in patients with extensively pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Further studies with LY353381 to evaluate the efficacy in patients with or without prior exposure to tamoxifen and fewer overall prior regimens are under way.

Bioequivalence of 20-mg once-daily tamoxifen relative to 10-mg twice-daily tamoxifen regimens for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We studied the bioequivalence of a new once-daily regimen of tamoxifen citrate relative to the standard twice-daily regimen of tamoxifen citrate, an established antiestrogenic treatment for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 30 women with breast cancer, 27 completed this open, two-period, crossover randomized trial. During one 3-month period, patients took one standard 10-mg tamoxifen tablet twice daily; during the preceding or following 3-month period, patients took one of the new 20-mg tablets once daily. Pharmacokinetic profiles and safety parameters were assessed at the end of each 3-month treatment period. RESULTS: Overall, measured concentrations of tamoxifen and its principal active metabolite, N-desmethyltamoxifen, remained relatively constant over the 24-hour sampling periods at the end of each treatment sequence. For both compounds, the percentage differences of the geometric means for all pharmacokinetic parameters indicated bioequivalence of the once-daily regimen of tamoxifen relative to the standard twice-daily regimen. Both treatment sequences were well tolerated; reported adverse events occurred at similar frequencies with the two treatment regimens. CONCLUSION: The 20-mg tamoxifen tablet taken once daily was bioequivalent to the 10-mg tamoxifen tablet taken twice daily, with no difference in relative risk. The once-daily treatment is a simpler regimen and may facilitate compliance, which may enhance therapeutic outcomes during long-term treatment of breast cancer.

Long-term results of combined-modality therapy for locally advanced breast cancer with ipsilateral supraclavicular metastases: The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience.

PURPOSE: To determine outcomes in local-regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival in patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) who present with ipsilateral supraclavicular metastases and who are treated with combined-modality therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy patients with regional stage IV LABC, which is defined by our institution as LABC with ipsilateral supraclavicular adenopathy without evidence of distant disease, received treatment on three prospective trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil, or cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone. Patients then received local therapy that consisted of either total mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) or segmental mastectomy and ALND before or after irradiation. Patients with no response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were treated with surgery and/or radiotherapy. After completion of local therapy, chemotherapy was continued for four to 15 cycles, followed by radiotherapy. Patients older than 50 years who had estrogen receptor-positive tumors received tamoxifen for 5 years. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 11.6 years (range, 4.8 to 22.6 years). Disease-free survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 34% and 32%, respectively. The median disease-free survival was 1.9 years. Overall survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 41% and 31%, respectively. The median overall survival was 3.5 years. The overall response rate (partial and complete responses) to induction chemotherapy was 89%. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: Patients with ipsilateral supraclavicular metastases but no other evidence of distant metastases warrant therapy administered with curative intent, ie, combined-modality therapy consisting of chemotherapy, surgery, and radiotherapy. Patients with ipsilateral supraclavicular metastases should be included in the stage IIIB category of the tumor-node-metastasis classification because their clinical course and prognosis are similar to those of patients with stage IIIB LABC.

Phase I study of stealth liposomal doxorubicin in combination with gemcitabine in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted a single-institution phase I clinical trial to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and define the toxic effects of stealth liposomal doxorubicin in combination with gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had disease progression with no limit on prior number of chemotherapy regimens. Prior treatment with liposomal doxorubicin and/or gemcitabine was not allowed. The starting dose of liposomal doxorubicin was 20 mg/m(2) on day 1 only with a 20% dose escalation of the previous mg/m(2) dose until MTD was reached. Gemcitabine was given as a fixed dose of 800 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. RESULTS: We treated 27 patients of whom six had never received chemotherapy for their disease. Most had had visceral involvement as their dominant site of disease. The dose-limiting toxicity was myelosuppression, which included neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. However, neither neutropenic fever nor episodes of bleeding were major occurrences. Significant antitumor activity was also observed with a total of two complete and seven partial responses. The recommended phase II dose is liposomal doxorubicin 24 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. CONCLUSION: The combination of liposomal doxorubicin and gemcitabine is an active and well tolerated regimen when administered on a 21-day schedule. Myelosuppression limited further dose escalation, however, it did not increase the incidence of neutropenic fever. Significant antitumor activity seen in heavily and minimally pretreated patients warrants further evaluation of this combination.

Sequence-dependent alteration of doxorubicin pharmacokinetics by paclitaxel in a phase I study of paclitaxel and doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a schedule-dependent interaction occurs when paclitaxel and doxorubicin are administered sequentially. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten patients with metastatic breast cancer received paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 over 24 hours either immediately before or after doxorubicin 48 mg/m2 over 48 hours as the initial chemotherapy treatment. Two such courses were given, and the sequence of administration was reversed after course 1. In cohort 1, paclitaxel preceded doxorubicin for course 1. In cohort 2, doxorubicin preceded paclitaxel for course 1. Doxorubicin levels were measured serially during the infusion and for 24 hours following it. Patients were assessed clinically for the occurrence of stomatitis and infection and granulocyte counts were measured twice weekly. RESULTS: Eight patients had complete pharmacokinetic sampling for both courses. The mean end-of-infusion plasma doxorubicin concentrations (Cmax) were 70% higher in the paclitaxel-doxorubicin sequence compared with the reverse sequence (45 +/- 8 ng/mL v 26 +/- 5 ng/ mL). The mean doxorubicin clearance was 32% lower in the paclitaxel-doxorubicin sequence (34.3 +/- 10.3 L/h v 51.6 +/- 16.1 L/h, P < .01). Clinically, hematologic and mucosal toxic effects were worse in the paclitaxel-doxorubicin sequence. The median absolute granulocyte count was 0.2/microL in the paclitaxel-doxorubicin sequence and 1.3/microL in the doxorubicin-paclitaxel sequence. Seven of 10 patients who received the paclitaxel-doxorubicin sequence had grade 2 (n = 4) or 3 (n = 3) stomatitis, while only one of 10 patients who received the doxorubicin-paclitaxel sequence had grade 2 stomatitis and none had grade 3. CONCLUSION: When paclitaxel by 24-hour infusion precedes doxorubicin by 48-hour infusion, doxorubicin clearance is reduced by nearly one third, which results in grade 2 and 3 stomatitis. To prevent this effect when paclitaxel (by 24-hour infusion) and doxorubicin are administered sequentially, doxorubicin should be given first. The mechanisms for this effect are under investigation.

Phase II trial of liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and fluorouracil as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and safety profile, including the risk for cardiac toxicity, of liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin (TLC D-99), fluorouracil (5-FU), and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-one women were registered in this phase II study. All patients had measurable disease and no previous chemotherapy for MBC. Treatment consisted of TLC D-99 60 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 on day 1 and 5-FU 500 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Serial cardiac monitoring, including endomyocardial biopsies, was performed. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 73% (95% confidence interval, 57% to 86%). The median duration of response was 11.2 months, the median time to treatment failure was 8.1 months, and the median overall survival duration was 19.4 months. The median number of cycles per patient was 10. The median cumulative dose of TLC D-99 was 528 mg/m2. Ten patients required hospitalization for febrile neutropenia. Nausea/vomiting, stomatitis, and fatigue higher than grade 2 occurred in 12%, 15%, and 41% of patients, respectively. Twenty-one patients reached a cumulative doxorubicin dose greater than 500 mg/m2. Three patients (7%) were withdrawn from the study due to protocol-defined cardiac toxicity, two because of a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction to < or = 40%, and one because her endomyocardial biopsy result was grade 1.5. One patient had congestive heart failure that was probably nonanthracycline related. CONCLUSION: This chemotherapy regimen, including TLC D-99, was highly active against MBC and associated with low cardiac toxicity despite high cumulative doses of doxorubicin.

Gene expression profiles predict complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to examine the feasibility of developing a multigene predictor of pathologic complete response (pCR) to sequential weekly paclitaxel and fluorouracil + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (T/FAC) neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients underwent one-time pretreatment fine-needle aspiration to obtain RNA from the cancer for transcriptional profiling using cDNA arrays containing 30721 human sequence clones. Analysis was performed after profiling, and 42 patients' clinical results were available, 24 of which were used for predictive marker discovery; 18 patients' results were used as an independent validation set. RESULTS: Thirty-one percent of patients had pCR (six discovery and seven validation), defined as disappearance of all invasive cancer in the breast after completion of chemotherapy. We could identify no single marker that was sufficiently associated with pCR to be used as an individual predictor. A multigene model with 74 markers (P

A phase II study of docetaxel in patients with paclitaxel-resistant metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of docetaxel in patients with paclitaxel-resistant metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Docetaxel (100 mg/m2) was administered every 3 weeks to 46 patients registered at four centers. Patients had previously received < or = two chemotherapy regimens for MBC. All patients had progressive disease while receiving paclitaxel therapy. Treatment was repeated until there was evidence of disease progression or for a maximum of three cycles after best response. RESULTS: Objective responses were seen in eight of 44 assessable patients (18.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7% to 29.5%). Seven patients had partial responses and one patient responded completely. Response rates were not significantly different by previously received paclitaxel dose or resistance. No responses were seen in 12 patients who had previously received paclitaxel by 24-hour infusion, but the response rate in 32 patients who had received paclitaxel by 1- to 3-hour infusion was 25%. The median response duration was 29 weeks and the median time to disease progression was 10 weeks. Median survival was 10.5 months. Clinically significant (severe) adverse events included neutropenic fever (24% of patients), asthenia (22%), infection (13%), stomatitis (9%), neurosensory changes (7%), myalgia (7%), and diarrhea (7%). CONCLUSION: Docetaxel is active in patients with paclitaxel-resistant breast cancer, particularly in those who failed to respond to brief infusions of paclitaxel. Response rates were comparable to or better than those seen with other therapies for patients with paclitaxel-resistant MBC. This confirms preclinical studies, which indicated only partial cross-resistance between paclitaxel and docetaxel.

Prospective evaluation of paclitaxel versus combination chemotherapy with fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare prospectively the antitumor activity of single-agent paclitaxel to the three-drug combination of fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with operable breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with T1-3N0-1M0 disease were randomized to receive either paclitaxel (250 mg/m(2)) as 24-hour infusion or FAC in standard doses at every-3-week intervals. Each patient was treated with four cycles of preoperative chemotherapy. Clinical response and extent of residual disease in the breast and lymph nodes was assessed after four cycles of induction chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were registered, and 87 were randomized to each arm of the study. Clinical response, ie, complete and partial responses, was similar in both arms of the study. Three patients in the FAC arm and one patient in the paclitaxel subgroup had progressive disease. The extent of residual disease by intent-to-treat analysis at the time of surgery was similar between the two arms of the study. CONCLUSION: The results of this prospective study demonstrated that single-agent paclitaxel as neoadjuvant therapy has significant antitumor activity, and this was clinically comparable to FAC. Similar fractions of patients had clinical complete and partial responses, and very few patients had no response to either therapy. The value of alternate non-cross-resistant therapies as used in this protocol on the clinical course of this disease would require longer follow-up.

The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience with Taxol in metastatic breast cancer.

Taxol was evaluated in metastatic breast cancer in three trials. In the first, a phase II study, 25 patients who had received only one prior regimen of chemotherapy received Taxol (starting dose of 250 mg/m2). The response rates were 12% complete, 44% partial, and 32% minor. The median duration of response was 9 months (range, 3 to 19 months). The median survival was 20 months (range, 5 to 29+ months). Toxic effects were granulocytopenia less than 500/mm3 in 85% of all courses but serious infection in only 6% of courses, myalgias, and cumulative neuropathy. The second trial was a phase I study of Taxol by 24-hour infusion sequenced with doxorubicin by 48-hour infusion as initial chemotherapy for metastatic disease. In arm 1, Taxol preceded doxorubicin. The starting doses were 125 mg/m2 Taxol, 60 mg/m2 doxorubicin. Neupogen (5 micrograms/kg) was given subcutaneously on days 5 through 19. Ten patients received 96 courses. The maximum tolerated dose was defined by mucositis and infection at the starting dose. Cumulative thrombocytopenia occurred in subsequent courses. The unexpectedly severe toxic effects at doses that were low by comparison to other studies suggested schedule-related toxicity. Therefore, in arm 2 the sequence has been reversed: doxorubicin precedes Taxol. Doses have been escalated to 180 mg/m2 Taxol with 60 mg/m2 doxorubicin without dose-limiting toxic effects occurring. The third trial, a phase II study in patients who have received three or more prior chemotherapy regimens, is ongoing. Twenty-one of a planned 35 patients have been entered. Taxol has shown significant antitumor activity in minimally pretreated patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Treatment of locally advanced breast cancer.

It is possible to convert most patients with stage III breast cancer to the state of "no evidence of disease." The challenges now are to increase the cure rate by eradicating local and distant micrometastatic disease, and to minimize the mutilation of locoregional treatment.

Combined chemoradiotherapy in limited-disease, inoperable non-small cell lung cancer.

Forty-three patients with limited-disease, inoperable non-small cell lung cancer received two intravenous courses of cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, and cisplatin (CAP) chemotherapy over a 6-week period. This was followed by 5 weeks of combined chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) consisting of low weekly doses of CAP for 5 weeks plus 50 Gy continuous X ray therapy (XRT) to the primary tumor site. Chemotherapy was continued until disease progression occurred or until the total dose of Adriamycin reached 450 mg/m2, whichever came first. CCRT improved the response rate [complete response (CR) plus partial responses (PR)] from 25% after two courses of CAP alone to 65% after CCRT. Previous response to two courses of CAP influences response subsequent to CAP plus XRT. A pretherapy weight loss of 6% or greater had a significant adverse effect on both response and survival time. The median survival time for all patients was 50 weeks; patients whose disease responded to treatment survived significantly longer than patients with nonresponding disease. The median time until disease progression was 37 weeks. Twenty-seven patients relapsed. The first sites of relapse were local in 30% of the patients, distant in 56% of them, and both local and distant in 15%. Severe esophagitis occurred in 30% of the patients and was dose-limiting. The administration of CCRT resulted in an improved response rate compared with the rates reported in previous studies of chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone. Further improvement of the CCRT program is needed to increase long-term survival time and to decrease esophageal toxicity.

Esophageal complications from combined chemoradiotherapy (cyclophosphamide + Adriamycin + cisplatin + XRT) in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

Esophageal complications from combined chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) were analyzed in 55 patients with limited non-small cell lung cancer. CCRT consisted of chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin (Adriamycin), and cisplatin: CAP) and chest irradiation (5000 rad in 25 fractions/5 weeks). Forty-five patients received two courses of CAP, followed by five weekly courses of low dose CAP and irradiation followed by maintenance courses of CAP (Group 1). Ten patients received concomitant CCRT from the onset of treatment (Group 2). Esophagitis occurred in 80% of all patients. Severe esophagitis occurred in 27% of patients of Group 1 and 40% of patients of Group 2. Esophageal stricture or fistula developed in 1 of 45 (2%) patients in Group 1, and 3 of 10 (30%) patients in Group 2 (p less than 0.025). Weekly low-dose chemotherapy administered concomitantly with chest irradiation (R) at the onset of treatment significantly increases esophageal complications. A review of the literature suggests that CCRT may be used safely with split courses of R. The duration between onset of chemotherapy either before or after R should be greater than one week.

Anthracycline antibiotics in cancer therapy. Focus on drug resistance.

30 years ago an anthracycline antibiotic was shown to have antineoplastic activity. This led to the development of well over 1000 analogues with a vast spectrum of biochemical characteristics. Many biological actions have been described. The original anthracyclines are active against many types of cancer and are an integral part of several curative combinations. They are ineffective against other tumours. Although some analogues show an altered spectrum of activity or an improved therapeutic index relative to the older agents, it is not clear that cardiotoxicity can be totally avoided with these agents. Primary and secondary resistance to anthracyclines remain major clinical problems. Pharmacokinetic studies have been of limited help in explaining this. Overexpression of a surface-membrane permeability glycoprotein (Pgp) was identified in ovarian cancer of patients who had clinical multidrug resistance in 1985. This led the way for the discovery of a number of resistance mechanisms in vitro. Some of these have been found in more than 1 type of cell line, and more than 1 mechanism may exist in a single cell. Additional resistance proteins have been identified, qualitative and quantitative alterations of topoisomerase II have been described, and some mechanisms in other systems have not yet been identified. Some of these may prove to be important in clinical drug resistance. Drugs such as calcium antagonists and cyclosporin, studied initially for their ability to block the Pgp pump, appear to be heterogeneous in this capacity and may have additional sites of action. It will be critical for clinical studies to define the precise resistance mechanism(s) that must be reversed. To date this has been difficult, even in trials ostensibly dealing with the original Pgp. Liposomes can potentially alter toxicity and target drug delivery to specific sites. In addition, they may permit the use of lipophilic drugs that would otherwise be difficult to administer systemically. Resistant tumours may be sensitive to anthracyclines delivered by liposomes. To reduce cardiac toxicity, administering doxorubicin (adriamycin) by slow infusion through a central-venous line should be considered whenever feasible. Monitoring of cardiac ejection fraction and the use of endomyocardial biopsy will permit patients to be treated safely after they reach the dose threshold at which heart failure begins to be a potential risk. A number of structurally modified anthracyclines with the potential advantages of decreased cardiotoxicity and avoidance of multidrug resistance mechanisms are entering clinical trials. Meanwhile, the vast weight of clinical experience leaves doxorubicin as a well tolerated and effective choice for most potentially anthracycline-sensitive tumours.

Phase I study of liposomal annamycin.

Annamycin is a highly lipophilic anthracycline with the ability to bypass the MDR-1 mechanism of cellular drug resistance. In this phase I study, annamycin entrapped in liposomes was administered by a 1- to 2-h intravenous infusion at 3-week intervals. Thirty-six patients with relapsed solid tumors were treated and 109 courses were administered at doses ranging from 3 to 240 mg/m2. The dose-limiting toxicity was thrombocytopenia. Five patients had a probable allergic reaction, requiring discontinuation of treatment in one. Treatment was well tolerated otherwise. No cardiac toxicity was seen on endomyocardial biopsy of four patients studied. There was limited gastrointestinal toxicity and no alopecia. No objective tumor responses were observed. Pharmacokinetic studies at 24, 120 and 240 mg/m2 showed a biexponential plasma concentration-versus-time profile. There was a linear relationship between the dose and the maximal plasma concentration with relatively constant plasma clearance values. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for liposomal annamycin defined in this study is 210 mg/m2. Because of a subsequent change in the formulation of the drug, future studies will use 190 mg/m2 as the MTD.

Phase I trial of droloxifene in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Droloxifene (3-hydroxytamoxifen) is a new, nonsteroidal antiestrogen. In comparison with tamoxifen, it has a 10- to 64-fold higher affinity for the estrogen receptor and has shown a lower estrogenic and higher antiestrogenic effect in experimental studies. The objective of this study was to determine the toxicity (and its reversibility) of droloxifene given at different doses to patients with advanced metastatic breast cancer refractory to conventional endocrine therapy and chemotherapy. In this study, 30 patients were treated in groups of 6 at 5 different doses (20, 40, 100, 200, and 300 mg) by mouth once a day. Toxic effects included hot flashes, nausea, and fatigue and were not dose-related. Toxicity did not require any dose reduction or discontinuation of therapy. There was one episode of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. There was no complete or partial response in this study, but four patients showed a minor response (13%). These data illustrate that this drug is well tolerated and needs to be further evaluated in phase II and III studies.