RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery improves survival compared with surgery alone for patients with oesophageal cancer. The OE05 trial assessed whether increasing the duration and intensity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy further improved survival compared with the current standard regimen. METHODS: OE05 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised clinical trial. Patients with surgically resectable oesophageal adenocarcinoma classified as stage cT1N1, cT2N1, cT3N0/N1, or cT4N0/N1 were recruited from 72 UK hospitals. Eligibility criteria included WHO performance status 0 or 1, adequate respiratory, cardiac, and liver function, white blood cell count at least 3â×â109 cells per L, platelet count at least 100â×â109 platelets per L, and a glomerular filtration rate at least 60 mL/min. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) using a computerised minimisation program with a random element and stratified by centre and tumour stage, to receive two cycles of cisplatin and fluorouracil (CF; two 3-weekly cycles of cisplatin [80 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1] and fluorouracil [1 g/m2 per day intravenously on days 1-4]) or four cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX; four 3-weekly cycles of epirubicin [50 mg/m2] and cisplatin [60 mg/m2] intravenously on day 1, and capecitabine [1250 mg/m2] daily throughout the four cycles) before surgery, stratified according to centre and clinical disease stage. Neither patients nor study staff were masked to treatment allocation. Two-phase oesophagectomy with two-field (abdomen and thorax) lymphadenectomy was done within 4-6 weeks of completion of chemotherapy. The primary outcome measure was overall survival, and primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (number 01852072) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00041262), and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2005, and Oct 31, 2011, 897 patients were recruited and 451 were assigned to the CF group and 446 to the ECX group. By Nov 14, 2016, 327 (73%) of 451 patients in the CF group and 302 (68%) of 446 in the ECX group had died. Median survival was 23·4 months (95% CI 20·6-26·3) with CF and 26·1 months (22·5-29·7) with ECX (hazard ratio 0·90 (95% CI 0·77-1·05, p=0·19). No unexpected chemotherapy toxicity was seen, and neutropenia was the most commonly reported event (grade 3 or 4 neutropenia: 74 [17%] of 446 patients in the CF group vs 101 [23%] of 441 people in the ECX group). The proportions of patients with postoperative complications (224 [56%] of 398 people for whom data were available in the CF group and 233 [62%] of 374 in the ECX group; p=0·089) were similar between the two groups. One patient in the ECX group died of suspected treatment-related neutropenic sepsis. INTERPRETATION: Four cycles of neoadjuvant ECX compared with two cycles of CF did not increase survival, and cannot be considered standard of care. Our study involved a large number of centres and detailed protocol with comprehensive prospective assessment of health-related quality of life in a patient population confined to people with adenocarcinomas of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction (Siewert types 1 and 2). Alternative chemotherapy regimens and neoadjuvant chemoradiation are being investigated to improve outcomes for patients with oesophageal carcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/terapia , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Capecitabina/uso terapéutico , Cisplatino/uso terapéutico , Epirrubicina/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/terapia , Esofagectomía , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Quimioterapia Combinada , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Calidad de Vida , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Erlotinib is an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has shown a significant but only marginally improved median overall survival when combined with gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. Vandetanib is a novel tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR2, RET, and EGFR, all of which are in involved in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer. We investigated the clinical efficacy of vandetanib when used in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The Vandetanib in Pancreatic Cancer (ViP) trial was a phase 2 double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial in previously untreated adult patients (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas confirmed by cytology or histology. Patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0-2 and a documented life expectancy of at least 3 months. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive vandetanib plus gemcitabine (vandetanib group) or placebo plus gemcitabine (placebo group) according to pre-generated sequences produced on the principle of randomly permuted blocks with variable block sizes of two and four. Patients were stratified at randomisation by disease stage and ECOG performance status. All patients received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 as a 30-min intravenous infusion, weekly, for 7 weeks followed by a 1-week break, followed by a cycle of 3 weeks of treatment with a 1-week break, until disease progression, and either oral vandetanib 300 mg per day once daily or matching placebo. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome measure was overall survival (defined as the difference in time between randomisation and death from any cause or the censor date) in the intention-to-treat population. This trial has been completed and the final results are reported. The study is registered at EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Patients were screened and enrolled between Oct 24, 2011, and Oct 7, 2013. Of 381 patients screened, 142 eligible patients were randomly assigned to treatment (72 to the vandetanib group and 70 to the placebo group). At database lock on July 15, 2015, at a median follow-up of 24·9 months (IQR 24·3 to not attainable), 131 patients had died: 70 (97%) of 72 in the vandetanib group and 61 (87%) of 70 in the placebo group. The median overall survival was 8·83 months (95% CI 7·11-11·58) in the vandetanib group and 8·95 months (6·55-11·74) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·21, 80·8% CI 0·95-1·53; log rank χ21df 1·1, p=0·303). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (35 [49%] of 72 patients in the vandetanib group vs 22 [31%] of 70 in the placebo group), thrombocytopenia (20 [28%] vs 16 [23%]), hypertension (nine [13%] vs 11 [16%]), leucopenia (12 [17%] vs 13 [19%]), and fatigue (17 [24%] vs 15 [21%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred during the study. INTERPRETATION: The addition of vandetanib to gemcitabine monotherapy did not improve overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors might still have potential in the treatment of pancreatic cancer but further development requires the identification of biomarkers to specifically identify responsive cancer subtypes. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/secundario , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Metástasis Linfática , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Piperidinas/administración & dosificación , Pronóstico , Quinazolinas/administración & dosificación , Tasa de Supervivencia , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Peri-operative chemotherapy and surgery is a standard of care for patients with resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against VEGF, improves the proportion of patients responding to treatment in advanced gastric cancer. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with resectable gastric, oesophagogastric junction, or lower oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 2-3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with histologically proven, resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma from 87 UK hospitals and cancer centres. We randomly assigned patients 1:1 to receive peri-operative epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, in addition to surgery. Patients in the control group (chemotherapy alone) received three pre-operative and three post-operative cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy: 50 mg/m2 epirubicin and 60 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1250 mg/m2 oral capecitabine on days 1-21. Patients in the investigational group received the same treatment as the control group plus 7·5 mg/kg intravenous bevacizumab on day 1 of every cycle of chemotherapy and for six further doses once every 21 days following chemotherapy, as maintenance treatment. Randomisation was done by means of a telephone call to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, where staff used a computer programme that implemented a minimisation algorithm with a random element to establish the allocation for the patient at the point of randomisation. Patients were stratified by chemotherapy centre, site of tumour, and tumour stage. The primary outcome for the phase 3 stage of the trial was overall survival (defined as the time from randomisation until death from any cause), analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Here, we report the primary analysis results of the trial; all patients have completed treatment and the required number of primary outcome events has been reached. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN 46020948, and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00450203. FINDINGS: Between Oct 31, 2007, and March 25, 2014, 1063 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone (n=533) or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (n=530). At the time of analysis, 508 deaths were recorded (248 in the chemotherapy alone group and 260 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group). 3-year overall survival was 50·3% (95% CI 45·5-54·9) in the chemotherapy alone group and 48·1% (43·2-52·7) in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·08, 95% CI 0·91-1·29; p=0·36). Apart from neutropenia no other toxic effects were reported at grade 3 or worse severity in more than 10% of patients in either group. Wound healing complications were more prevalent in the bevacizumab group, occurring in 53 (12%) patients in this group compared with 33 (7%) patients in the chemotherapy alone group. In patients who underwent oesophagogastrectomy, post-operative anastomotic leak rates were higher in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (23 [10%] of 233 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 52 [24%] of 220 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group); therefore, recruitment of patients with lower oesophageal or junctional tumours planned for an oesophagogastric resection was stopped towards the end of the trial. Serious adverse events for all patients included anastomotic leaks (30 events in chemotherapy alone group vs 69 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group), and infections with normal neutrophil count (42 events vs 53). INTERPRETATION: The results of this trial do not provide any evidence for the use of bevacizumab in combination with peri-operative epiribicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy for patients with resectable gastric, oesophagogastric junction, or lower oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Bevacizumab might also be associated with impaired wound healing. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, and F Hoffmann-La Roche Limited.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Unión Esofagogástrica/patología , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Adenocarcinoma/cirugía , Anciano , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Capecitabina/administración & dosificación , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Epirrubicina/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Atención Perioperativa , Pronóstico , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirugía , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the fifth most common cause of cancer death in the UK. Its poor prognosis is attributed to late detection and limited therapeutic options. Expression of SULF2, an endosulfatase that modulates heparan sulfate proteoglycan 6-O-sulfation and is reportedly tumourigenic in different types of cancer, was investigated. METHODS: SULF2 expression was determined immunohistochemically in archival surgical resection tissue sections from 93 patients with a confirmed histological diagnosis of PDAC between 2002 and 2008 followed for a median of 9 years. Relationships with clinico-pathological parameters and patient survival were explored. RESULTS: The majority of PDACs showed positive SULF2 staining in tumour cells and intratumoural or tumour-adjacent stroma. Greater than 25% SULF2-positive tumour cells was present in 60% of cancers and correlated with tumour stage (P=0.002) and perineural invasion (P=0.024). SULF2 intensity was scored moderate or strong in 81% of cancers and positively correlated with vascular invasion (P=0.015). High SULF2 expression, defined as >50% SULF2-positive tumour cells and strong SULF2 staining, was associated with shorter time to radiological progression (P=0.018, HR 1.98, CI 1.13-3.47). Similarly, by multivariate analysis, high SULF2 expression was independently associated with poorer survival (P=0.004, HR 2.10, CI 1.26-3.54), with a median survival of 11 months vs 21 months for lower PDAC SULF2. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated SULF2 in PDAC was associated with advanced tumour stage, vascular invasion, shorter interval to radiological progression and shorter overall survival. SULF2 may have roles as a prognostic biomarker and as a therapeutic target for patients with PDAC.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/química , Proteínas de Neoplasias/análisis , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/química , Sulfotransferasas/análisis , Anciano , Biomarcadores de Tumor/análisis , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidad , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Terapia Combinada , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Molecular Dirigida , Invasividad Neoplásica , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Proyectos Piloto , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sulfatasas , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Second-line chemotherapy for patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma refractory to platinum and fluoropyrimidines has not shown benefits in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We assessed whether the addition of docetaxel to active symptom control alone can improve survival and HRQoL for patients. METHODS: For this open-labelled, multicentre trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older from 30 UK centres. Patients were eligible if they had an advanced, histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus, oesophagogastric junction, or stomach that had progressed on or within 6 months of treatment with a platinum-fluoropyrimidine combination. Patients could have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. We randomly assigned patients using a central, computerised minimisation procedure to receive docetaxel plus active symptom control, or active symptom control alone (1:1; stratified by disease status, disease site, duration of response to previous chemotherapy, and performance status). Docetaxel was given at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. This is the report of the planned final analysis. This study is an International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN13366390. FINDINGS: Between April 21, 2008, and April 26, 2012, we recruited 168 patients, allocating 84 to each treatment group. After a median follow-up of 12 months [IQR 10-21]) and 161 (96%) deaths (80 in the docetaxel group, 81 in the active symptom control group), median overall survival in the docetaxel group was 5.2 months (95% CI 4.1-5.9) versus 3.6 months (3.3-4.4) in the active symptom control group (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92; p=0.01). Docetaxel was associated with higher incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia (12 [15%] patients vs no patients), infection (15 [19%] patients vs two [3%] patients), and febrile neutropenia (six [7%] patients vs no patients). Patients receiving docetaxel reported less pain (p=0.0008) and less nausea and vomiting (p=0.02) and constipation (p=0.02). Global HRQoL was similar between the groups (p=0.53). Disease specific HRQoL measures also showed benefits for docetaxel in reducing dysphagia (p=0.02) and abdominal pain (p=0.01). INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that docetaxel can be recommended as an appropriate second-line treatment for patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma that is refractory to treatment with platinum and fluoropyrimidine. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Unión Esofagogástrica , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Taxoides/uso terapéutico , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Adenocarcinoma/psicología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Docetaxel , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Gástricas/psicologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of sequential or simultaneous telomerase vaccination (GV1001) in combination with chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: TeloVac was a three-group, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. We recruited patients from 51 UK hospitals. Eligible patients were treatment naive, aged older than 18 years, with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy with sequential GV1001 (sequential chemoimmunotherapy), or chemotherapy with concurrent GV1001 (concurrent chemoimmunotherapy). Treatments were allocated with equal probability by means of computer-generated random permuted blocks of sizes 3 and 6 in equal proportion. Chemotherapy included six cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2), 30 min intravenous infusion, at days 1, 8, and 15) and capecitabine (830 mg/m(2) orally twice daily for 21 days, repeated every 28 days). Sequential chemoimmunotherapy included two cycles of combination chemotherapy, then an intradermal lower abdominal injection of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF; 75 µg) and GV1001 (0·56 mg; days 1, 3, and 5, once on weeks 2-4, and six monthly thereafter). Concurrent chemoimmunotherapy included giving GV1001 from the start of chemotherapy with GM-CSF as an adjuvant. The primary endpoint was overall survival; analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN4382138. FINDINGS: The first patient was randomly assigned to treatment on March 29, 2007, and the trial was terminated on March 27, 2011. Of 1572 patients screened, 1062 were randomly assigned to treatment (358 patients were allocated to the chemotherapy group, 350 to the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 354 to the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group). We recorded 772 deaths; the 290 patients still alive were followed up for a median of 6·0 months (IQR 2·4-12·2). Median overall survival was not significantly different in the chemotherapy group than in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group (7·9 months [95% CI 7·1-8·8] vs 6·9 months [6·4-7·6]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·19, 98·25% CI 0·97-1·48, p=0·05), or in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group (8·4 months [95% CI 7·3-9·7], HR 1·05, 98·25% CI 0·85-1·29, p=0·64; overall log-rank of χ(2)2df=4·3; p=0·11). The commonest grade 3-4 toxic effects were neutropenia (68 [19%] patients in the chemotherapy group, 58 [17%] patients in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 79 [22%] patients in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group; fatigue (27 [8%] in the chemotherapy group, 35 [10%] in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 44 [12%] in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group); and pain (34 [9%] patients in the chemotherapy group, 39 [11%] in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 41 [12%] in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group). INTERPRETATION: Adding GV1001 vaccination to chemotherapy did not improve overall survival. New strategies to enhance the immune response effect of telomerase vaccination during chemotherapy are required for clinical efficacy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and KAEL-GemVax.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Vacunas contra el Cáncer/administración & dosificación , Conductos Pancreáticos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Fragmentos de Péptidos/administración & dosificación , Telomerasa/administración & dosificación , Adenocarcinoma/secundario , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Vacunas contra el Cáncer/efectos adversos , Capecitabina , Proliferación Celular , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Fatiga/inducido químicamente , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/análogos & derivados , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos y Macrófagos/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos/administración & dosificación , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neutropenia/inducido químicamente , Dolor/inducido químicamente , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Fragmentos de Péptidos/efectos adversos , Linfocitos T/inmunología , Telomerasa/efectos adversos , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: EGFR overexpression occurs in 27-55% of oesophagogastric adenocarcinomas, and correlates with poor prognosis. We aimed to assess addition of the anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab to epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (EOC) in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label phase 3 trial (REAL3), we enrolled patients with untreated, metastatic, or locally advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma at 63 centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals) in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive up to eight 21-day cycles of open-label EOC (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21) or modified-dose EOC plus panitumumab (mEOC+P; epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-21, and panitumumab 9 mg/kg on day 1). Randomisation was blocked and stratified for centre region, extent of disease, and performance status. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. After a preplanned independent data monitoring committee review in October, 2011, trial recruitment was halted and panitumumab withdrawn. Data for patients on treatment were censored at this timepoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00824785. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2008, and Oct 17, 2011, we enrolled 553 eligible patients. Median overall survival in 275 patients allocated EOC was 11.3 months (95% CI 9.6-13.0) compared with 8.8 months (7.7-9.8) in 278 patients allocated mEOC+P (hazard ratio [HR] 1.37, 95% CI 1.07-1.76; p=0.013). mEOC+P was associated with increased incidence of grade 3-4 diarrhoea (48 [17%] of 276 patients allocated mEOC+P vs 29 [11%] of 266 patients allocated EOC), rash (29 [11%] vs two [1%]), mucositis (14 [5%] vs none), and hypomagnesaemia (13 [5%] vs none) but reduced incidence of haematological toxicity (grade ≥ 3 neutropenia 35 [13%] vs 74 [28%]). INTERPRETATION: Addition of panitumumab to EOC chemotherapy does not increase overall survival and cannot be recommended for use in an unselected population with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Amgen, UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/enzimología , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Biomarcadores de Tumor/antagonistas & inhibidores , Biomarcadores de Tumor/metabolismo , Capecitabina , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Terminación Anticipada de los Ensayos Clínicos , Epirrubicina/administración & dosificación , Receptores ErbB/antagonistas & inhibidores , Receptores ErbB/metabolismo , Neoplasias Esofágicas/enzimología , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/análogos & derivados , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Molecular Dirigida , Análisis Multivariante , Oportunidad Relativa , Compuestos Organoplatinos/administración & dosificación , Oxaliplatino , Panitumumab , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Gástricas/enzimología , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We evaluated capecitabine (an oral fluoropyrimidine) and oxaliplatin (a platinum compound) as alternatives to infused fluorouracil and cisplatin, respectively, for untreated advanced esophagogastric cancer. METHODS: In a two-by-two design, we randomly assigned 1002 patients to receive triplet therapy with epirubicin and cisplatin plus either fluorouracil (ECF) or capecitabine (ECX) or triplet therapy with epirubicin and oxaliplatin plus either fluorouracil (EOF) or capecitabine (EOX). The primary end point was noninferiority in overall survival for the triplet therapies containing capecitabine as compared with fluorouracil and for those containing oxaliplatin as compared with cisplatin. RESULTS: For the capecitabine-fluorouracil comparison, the hazard ratio for death in the capecitabine group was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.99); for the oxaliplatin-cisplatin comparison, the hazard ratio for the oxaliplatin group was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.80 to 1.10). The upper limit of the confidence intervals for both hazard ratios excluded the predefined noninferiority margin of 1.23. Median survival times in the ECF, ECX, EOF, and EOX groups were 9.9 months, 9.9 months, 9.3 months, and 11.2 months, respectively; survival rates at 1 year were 37.7%, 40.8%, 40.4%, and 46.8%, respectively. In the secondary analysis, overall survival was longer with EOX than with ECF, with a hazard ratio for death of 0.80 in the EOX group (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.97; P=0.02). Progression-free survival and response rates did not differ significantly among the regimens. Toxic effects of capecitabine and fluorouracil were similar. As compared with cisplatin, oxaliplatin was associated with lower incidences of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, alopecia, renal toxicity, and thromboembolism but with slightly higher incidences of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea and neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Capecitabine and oxaliplatin are as effective as fluorouracil and cisplatin, respectively, in patients with previously untreated esophagogastric cancer. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN51678883 [controlled-trials.com].).
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Fluorouracilo/análogos & derivados , Compuestos Organoplatinos/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Capecitabina , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Epirrubicina/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oxaliplatino , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidad , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has been controversial. We have previously reported the cases of patients managed with a policy of observation only. We now present the salvage rate for the patients in that study who experienced relapse. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred ninety-four patients with stage I EOC presenting between 1980 and 1994 received no adjuvant chemotherapy, but were treated with platinum-based chemotherapy at relapse. We calculated the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the whole cohort and the salvage rate for those who experienced relapse. We defined salvage as freedom from relapse for 5 years after platinum treatment. RESULTS: Sixty-one (31%) of 194 patients experienced relapse, and 55 received platinum-based chemotherapy. Twenty-four percent were progression-free at 5 years after this treatment. Clear-cell histology and cyst rupture before the patients' original surgery were independent prognostic factors for PFS after salvage chemotherapy. The OS for all 194 patients is 72% at 10 years (median follow-up, 8.7 years), with an 80% disease-specific survival (DSS). CONCLUSION: We have shown that some patients with stage I EOC can be successfully treated with a salvage chemotherapy regimen after a policy of observation only. Interestingly, approximately 30% of stage I patients who die within 10 years do so from causes other than EOC (OS, 72%; DSS, 80%). Our findings need to be taken into consideration when the results from recent randomized trials of adjuvant chemotherapy in this patient population (International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm Trial 1/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Ovarian Neoplasm Trial) are being discussed with patients.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Ováricas/terapia , Adulto , Anciano , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/terapia , Compuestos Organoplatinos/uso terapéutico , Pronóstico , Terapia Recuperativa , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To ascertain the challenges associated with implementation of the 2-week wait referral criteria and waiting time targets for colorectal cancer and to identify recommendations for improvements to the pathway. DESIGN: Qualitative research using semistructured interviews and applying thematic analysis using the method of constant comparison. SETTING: 10 primary care surgeries and 6 secondary care centres from 3 geographical areas in the England. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of 24 clinicians (10 general practitioners (GPs), 7 oncologists and 7 colorectal surgeons). RESULTS: GPs and specialists highlighted delays in patient help-seeking, difficulties applying the colorectal cancer referral criteria due to their low predictive value, and concerns about the stringent application of targets because of potential impact on individual care and associated penalties for breaching. Promoting patient awareness and early presentation, clarifying predictive symptoms, allowing flexibility, optimising resources and maximising care coordination were suggested as improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Challenges during diagnosis and treatment persist, with guidelines and waiting time targets producing the perception of unintended harms at individual and organisational levels. This has led to variations in how guidelines are implemented. These require urgent evaluation, so that effective practices can be adopted more widely.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Vías Clínicas , Médicos Generales , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Derivación y Consulta , Especialización , Inglaterra , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Percepción , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Investigación Cualitativa , Atención Secundaria de Salud/normasRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Data concerning the prevalence of and outcomes related to thromboembolic events (TEs) in patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer who are undergoing chemotherapy are limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, exploratory analysis of TEs in a randomized, controlled trial of 964 patients recruited between 2000 and 2005 and treated with epirubicin/platinum/fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for advanced/locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Regimens were epirubicin (E), cisplatin (C), fluorouracil (F; ECF); E, C, capecitabine (X; ECX); E, F, oxaliplatin (O; EOF); and EOX. Continuously infused F was administered via a central venous access device (CVAD) with 1 mg of warfarin for thromboprophylaxis. The principal outcome was the incidence of TEs (venous and arterial) in the whole treated patient cohort, according to chemotherapy, associated with CVADs and TE-related prognoses. RESULTS: The incidences of any, of venous, and of arterial TEs among 964 treated patients were 12.1% (95% CI, 10.7 to 14.3), 10.1% (95% CI, 8.3 to 12.3), and 2.2% (95% CI, 1.4 to 3.4) respectively. There were fewer TEs in the O compared with the cisplatin groups (EOF/EOX v ECF/ECX: 7.6% v 15.1%; P = .0003). C was identified as a risk factor for TE in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.76; P = .001). There was no difference in the incidence of TEs for the F group compared with the capecitabine groups. The incidence of CVAD-related thrombosis was 7.0% (ECF/EOF arms). Overall survival was worse for patients who experienced TEs versus no TEs (median survival, 7.4 v 10.5 months; HR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.99; P = .043). CONCLUSION: This analysis has prospectively quantified the incidence/pattern of TEs among patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer who were treated with four triplet regimens, has demonstrated a differential thrombogenic effect according to platinum use, and has noted a poorer outcome associated with TE during treatment. Chemotherapy-related TE should contribute to the risk/benefit assessment of treatment.