Phase Ib with expansion study of olaparib plus weekly (Metronomic) carboplatin and paclitaxel in relapsed ovarian cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Our goals were to: establish the maximum-tolerated dose of olaparib tablets combined with metronomic carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with relapsed high-grade serous ovarian cancer; evaluate dose-limiting toxicities; and evaluate efficacy at the maximum tolerated dose. METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, investigator-initiated trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01650376), patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer who failed primary platinum and taxane therapy received oral olaparib tablets twice daily days 1-3 each week combined with fixed-dose metronomic carboplatin AUC2 and paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 weekly for 3 out of 4 weeks. A 3 × 3 design was used to determine the olaparib maximum tolerated dose. Combination therapy continued until disease progression, but patients with partial or complete response were transitioned to olaparib maintenance therapy. All patients were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose of olaparib tablets was 150 mg twice daily with metronomic carboplatin and paclitaxel. 54 women were enrolled, 14 in phase Ib and 40 in the expansion phase. The median number of prior therapeutic regimens was 3. Response included 13 complete remission (24%) and 16 partial remission (30%) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) for an overall response rate of 54% (95% CI 40% to 67%). Of 47 patients who underwent BRCA testing, 23 were BRCA mutation (BRCAm) and 24 B RCA wild type (BRCAwt). Progression-free survival for BRCAm was 12.1 months versus 4.8 for BRCAwt (p=0.0001). Median overall survival for BRCAm was 24.1 months versus 10.4 months for BRCAwt (p=0.02). 42 patients (78%) experienced grade 3-4 toxicities with combination therapy; the most common were hematologic. There were no treatment related deaths. Among 14 patients who received maintenance therapy, 7 experienced grade 1-2 non-hematologic toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib 150 mg tablet twice daily can be safely administered in combination with metronomic carboplatin and paclitaxel in pre-treated relapsed ovarian cancer with 24% complete remission. BRCAm patients had statistically significant longer progression-free survival and overall survival than BRCAwt. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01650376.

A phase I trial of intraperitoneal nab-paclitaxel in the treatment of advanced malignancies primarily confined to the peritoneal cavity.

PURPOSE: To evaluate intraperitoneal (IP) nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced malignancies that are primarily confined to the peritoneal cavity in a phase I trial. METHODS: Using a 3 + 3 dose escalation of IP nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, we evaluated six dose levels (35-175 mg/m2/dose). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) of IP nab-paclitaxel were determined. RESULTS: There were no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in cohorts 1-3. There was a DLT in one of six patients in cohort 4 (112.5 mg/m2) (grade 3 neutropenia causing treatment delay > 15 days) and a DLT in one of three patients in cohort 6 (175 mg/m2) (grade 4 neutropenia and grade 3 abdominal pain). A second patient in cohort 6 experienced a serious adverse event (cycle 1, grade 4 ANC ≤ 7 days, cycle 4, grade 2 left ventricular dysfunction). This dose level was determined to be above the MTD. No DLTs were seen in seven patients treated in cohort 5 (140 mg/m2). The MTD of IP nab-paclitaxel was established at 140 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. There was a PK advantage for IP nab-paclitaxel, with an IP plasma area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) ratio of 147-fold (range 50-403) and therapeutic range systemic drug levels. Eight of 27 enrolled patients had progression-free survival ≥ 6 months. One patient experienced complete response, and one patient experienced partial response. Six patients had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly IP nab-paclitaxel has a favorable toxicity profile, a significant pharmacologic advantage, and promising clinical activity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00825201.

Colorectal Chemoprevention Pilot Study (SWOG-9041), randomized and placebo controlled: the importance of multiple luminal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is common worldwide and chemoprevention has the potential of reducing the number of individuals who may suffer and perish from this disease. METHODS: A randomized placebo controlled pilot study in colorectal cancer patients was performed using calcium carbonate as the test agent in a multi-institutional oncology study group. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty volunteers were randomized in the study. The primary goals of compliance, accrual, and toxicity monitoring are presented. Presence of multiple adenomas at study entry and subsequent development of metachronous adenomas were recorded and found to be associated with synchronous adenomas. The secondary endpoint of recurrent adenomas indicated lower rates of new adenoma in the volunteers randomized to the calcium group. CONCLUSION: This pilot study indicates the feasibility of enrolling survivors of colorectal cancer as study volunteers in a colorectal neoplasm chemoprevention clinical trial and oral calcium continues to be a potentially effective drug in reducing colorectal adenomas.

Phase III study comparing gemcitabine plus cetuximab versus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Southwest Oncology Group-directed intergroup trial S0205.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced pancreas cancer present with disease that is poorly responsive to conventional therapies. Preclinical and early clinical evidence has supported targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling pathway in patients with pancreas cancer. This trial was conducted to evaluate the contribution of an EGFR-targeted agent to standard gemcitabine therapy. Cetuximab is a monoclonal antibody against the ligand-binding domain of the receptor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine alone or gemcitabine plus cetuximab. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, objective response, and toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 745 eligible patients were accrued. No significant difference was seen between the two arms of the study with respect to the median survival time (6.3 months for the gemcitabine plus cetuximab arm v 5.9 months for the gemcitabine alone arm; hazard ratio = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.23; P = .23, one-sided). Objective responses and progression-free survival were similar in both arms of the study. Although time to treatment failure was longer in patients on gemcitabine plus cetuximab (P = .006), the difference in length of treatment was only 2 weeks longer in the combination arm. Among patients who were studied for tumoral EGFR expression, 90% were positive, with no treatment benefit detected in this patient subset. CONCLUSION: In patients with advanced pancreas cancer, the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab did not improve the outcome compared with patients treated with gemcitabine alone. Alternate targets other than EGFR should be evaluated for new drug development.

Southwest Oncology Group Trial S9912: intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel plus intravenous paclitaxel and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin as primary chemotherapy of small-volume residual stage III ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: While primary cisplatin-based intraperitoneal chemotherapy has been shown to favorably impact survival in small-volume residual advanced ovarian cancer, there is a need to develop strategies that improve the effectiveness of this approach. METHODS: A multi-center phase 2 trial was conducted that added intravenous pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (day 8; 30-40 mg/m(2)) to a regimen of intraperitoneal cisplatin (day 2; 75 mg/m(2)) and intravenous (day 1; 135 mg/m(2)) plus intraperitoneal (day 8; 60 mg/m(2)) paclitaxel. Treatment was initially delivered on an every 3-week schedule, but was modified to an every 4-week program due to excessive toxicity. Patients were to receive 6 cycles of this regimen. RESULTS: Of 68 patients entering this trial, 63 patients were eligible and evaluable, of whom 39 (62%) completed 6 cycles. Overall, 32 (51%) experienced at least 1 grade 4 or worse toxicity (most commonly hematologic) including 5 treatment-related deaths. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 25 months (2-year PFS: 52%) and median overall survival 51 months, an outcome similar to previous reports of cisplatin-based intraperitoneal chemotherapy in comparable patient populations. Seventeen patients (27% of all eligible patients) were without evidence of disease recurrence >4 years following entry into the trial. CONCLUSION: Both the overall trial outcome, and specifically the excessively severe systemic toxicity of this regimen would prevent its future development in this exact form. The provocative PFS in a subset of individuals should encourage the development of alternative strategies designed to optimize the delivery of regional therapy in ovarian cancer management.

Long-term survival in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia: 10-year follow-up of Southwest Oncology Group-directed intergroup trial S9003.

The survival of patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) varies enormously. The development of prognostic models in WM has been fraught by limited follow-up in current studies. Here, we update the outcome of a prospective WM trial with a median follow-up of 10 years for live patients. Of the 59 previously untreated patients who initially were observed, only 12 patients (21%) required therapy at a median follow-up of 100 months. Multivariate analysis among the 183 patients requiring therapy reaffirmed age 70 years or greater, previous nonprotocol therapy, and beta-2 microglobulin (B2M) of 3 mg/dL or greater as prognostic factors. Importantly, increased serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was identified as an additional independent variable, which improved risk assessment beyond the recent WM international prognostic scoring system (ISSWM). By using age, previous therapy, B2M, and LDH, we identified 3 risk groups with 8-year survival estimates of 55%, 33%, and 5% (P < .001). These data provide novel insights into factors predicting long-term outcome in WM. This trial has been registered with www.cancer.gov under ID 4852904.

External beam irradiation and the combination of cisplatin and carmustine followed by carmustine alone for the treatment of high-grade glioma: a phase 2 Southwest Oncology Group trial.

BACKGROUND: The poor prognosis reported for patients with high-grade glial neoplasms indicates a need for the development of multimodality therapeutic approaches. The addition of chemotherapy has contributed variably to increased survival. The objective of the current study (Southwest Oncology Group [SWOG] 9016) was to determine whether concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy with the combination of carmustine and cisplatin could be given safely in a cooperative group setting. Additional objectives included the estimation of response rate, the rate of disease stabilization, and the probability of 1-year survival. METHODS: SWOG 9016 study included 59 eligible patients with grade III or IV astrocytoma who received radiotherapy concurrently with carmustine/cisplatin chemotherapy. Patients were required to have either measurable or evaluable disease. The therapeutic endpoints were comprised of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or progressive disease (PD). RESULTS: Six patients achieved a CR (CR rate of 10%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4-21%), 4 achieved a PR (PR rate of 7%; 95% CI, 2-16%), and 2 patients (3%) experienced an unconfirmed response. Twenty-four patients (41%; 95% CI, 28-54%) had stable disease and 10 patients (17%) demonstrated PD. The overall disease stabilization rate (CR + PR + stable disease, excluding unconfirmed response) was 58% (95% CI, 44-70%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the presence of a cohort of long-term survivors, the results of the current study do not appear to support the additional study or routine use of concurrent cisplatin and carmustine.

Treatment options for muscle-invasive urothelial cancer for patients who were not eligible for cystectomy or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin: report of Southwest Oncology Group Trial 8733.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with invasive urothelial cell cancer are poor candidates for cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and many are high risk for cystectomy. Southwest Oncology Group Trial 8733 was designed to address treatment for such patients. METHODS: Eligible patients had primary or recurrent muscle-invasive disease with transitional cell or squamous cell histology, a performance status from 0 to 2, no extrapelvic disease, a life expectancy >3 months, and adequate hematologic function. The treating clinician assigned patients to operable or inoperable groups. All patients received 2 cycles of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) per day x 4 starting concurrently with radiation at a dose of 200 centigrays per day x 10 each cycle. After 2 cycles, operable patients with positive biopsies underwent cystectomy, and patients with negative biopsies received a third cycle of chemoradiotherapy. Patients in the inoperable group received 3 cycles without interim biopsy. RESULTS: Eighteen of 24 eligible patients in the operable group were evaluable for response. Five patients had a complete response (CR), 9 patients had stable disease, 1 patient had progressive disease, and 3 patients were not assessable. The median progression-free survival was 10 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4-14 months), and the median overall survival was 18 months (95% CI, 7-28 months). In the inoperable group, 35 of 37 eligible patients were evaluable for response with 17 CRs (49%; 95% CI, 31%-66%). The median progression-free survival was 13 months (95% CI, 10-17 months), and the median overall survival was 20 months (95% CI, 11-53 months). There were no episodes of grade 4 toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, the combination of 5-FU and radiation was found to be tolerated well by patients with numerous comorbidities who could not tolerate cisplatin-based therapy or cystectomy.

A phase II study of cisplatin preceded by a 12-h continuous infusion of concurrent hydroxyurea and cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C) for adult patients with malignant gliomas (Southwest Oncology Group S9149).

Inhibition of DNA excision repair can modulate resistance to cisplatin. Cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C) and hydroxyurea (HU), in combination, inhibit the excision-repair system and removal of platinum-DNA adducts. Marked cytotoxic synergy had been demonstrated in vitro at clinically achievable levels. The three-drug regimen was found to be feasible in clinical pilot studies. A Phase II study in patients with relapsed or progressive anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) or glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) was performed in the Southwest Oncology Group. The primary end point was 6 month survival, historically about 42%. A loading dose of HU 1,260 mg/m2 IV over 1 h was followed by Ara-C 1,200 mg/m2 plus HU 5,040 mg/m2 IV over 12 h, followed by cisplatin 100 mg/m2 IV over 1 h. A total of 76 patients were registered. The GBM stratum registered 56 patients in a two-stage accrual. Among 51 eligible GBM patients, the 6-month survival probability was 41% (95% CI 28-55%), and median overall survival was 5 months (95% CI 4-6 months). The 6-month progression-free survival probability was 25% (95% CI 14-37%), and median progression-free survival was 2 months (95% CI 2-4 months). One patient achieved a partial response (2%, 95% CI 0-10%), 13 patients had stable disease (25%, 95% CI 14-39%). Twenty-two patients progressed, and 14 were not assessable for response. The AA stratum was closed early after 20 patients due to slow accrual. Among 19 eligible patients, the 6-month survival probability was 58% (95% CI 36-80%), and median overall survival was 7 months (95% CI 7-14 months). The 6-month progression-free survival probability was 26% (95% CI 6-46%), and median progression-free survival was 3 months (95% CI 2-5 months). No responses were seen. Six patients (32%) had stable disease (95% CI 13-57%), 11 progressed, and 2 were not assessable for response. Of the 70 patients evaluable for toxicity, two died of infection. Twenty-three patients (33%) experienced Grade 4 toxicities, primarily hematological. Cisplatin combined with HU and Ara-C did not improve the 6 month survival rate in patients with relapsed or progressive AA or GBM. Significantly more hematological toxicity was seen than expected from cisplatin alone. Although benefit might be possible in a more platinum-sensitive tumor type, further clinical trials with this regimen for patients with glioblastoma multiforme or anaplastic astrocytoma are not justified.

Patient training in cancer pain management using integrated print and video materials: a multisite randomized controlled trial.

Standard guidelines for cancer pain treatment routinely recommend training patients to reduce barriers to pain relief, use medications appropriately, and communicate their pain-related needs. Methods are needed to reduce professional time required while achieving sustained intervention effectiveness. In a multisite, randomized controlled trial, this study tested a pain training method versus a nutrition control. At six oncology clinics, physicians (N=22) and nurses (N=23) enrolled patients (N=93) who were over 18 years of age, with cancer diagnoses, pain, and a life expectancy of at least 6 months. Pain training and control interventions were matched for materials and method. Patients watched a video followed by about 20 min of manual-standardized training with an oncology nurse focused on reviewing the printed material and adapted to individual concerns of patients. A follow-up phone call after 72 h addressed individualized treatment content and pain communication. Assessments at baseline, one, three, and 6 months included barriers, the Brief Pain Inventory, opioid use, and physician and nurse ratings of their patients' pain. Trained versus control patients reported reduced barriers to pain relief (P<.001), lower usual pain (P=.03), and greater opioid use (P<.001). No pain training patients reported severe pain (>6 on a 0-10 scale) at 1-month outcomes (P=.03). Physician and nurse ratings were closer to patients' ratings of pain for trained versus nutrition groups (P=.04 and <.001, respectively). Training efficacy was not modified by patient characteristics. Using video and print materials, with brief individualized training, effectively improved pain management over time for cancer patients of varying diagnostic and demographic groups.

Phase II study of erlotinib in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: a Southwest Oncology Group Study.

PURPOSE: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) expresses high levels of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and preclinical studies have identified antitumor activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in MPM. We conducted a phase II trial of the EGFR TKI erlotinib in previously untreated patients with MPM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable and nonmeasurable disease were treated with erlotinib 150 mg/d on days 1 through 28 of each 28-day dosing cycle. Archived patient tumors were analyzed for immunohistochemical expression of EGFR, phospho-EGFR, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), phospho-extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), and phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) and phosphorylation of members of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt signaling pathway. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were treated on the study. EGFR was highly expressed in 75% of patient tumors, as was phospho-ERK (82%), phospho-Akt (84%), phospho-mammalian target of rapamycin (74%), and phospho-forkhead (74%). HER2 was rarely expressed, and loss of PTEN was rare. For 33 patients with measurable disease, there were no objective responses; 14 patients (42%) had stable disease, 15 patients (45%) had disease progression, and four patients had inadequate assessments to determine response. Toxicities were mainly constitutional (51%), dermatologic (82%), and GI (52%); there was one death on trial, which was related to dyspnea. Median overall survival time was 10 months; 1-year survival rate was 43%; and median progression-free survival time was 2 months. CONCLUSION: Single-agent erlotinib was not effective in MPM, despite high expression of EGFR. Activation of the ERK and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt downstream pathways are possible resistance mechanisms to EGFR TKI. The activated phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt pathway is a potential therapeutic target for MPM.

Long-term safety of intravenous ibandronic acid for up to 4 years in metastatic breast cancer: an open-label trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Despite their widespread use in metastatic bone disease, some bisphosphonate drugs are associated with adverse events (AEs), particularly renal toxicity, adding to treatment burdens and increasing healthcare costs. Ibandronic acid is a single-nitrogen bisphosphonate with high efficacy against bone events and metastatic bone pain, and a renal safety profile compar- able to that of placebo. In this study, the safety of ibandronic acid was examined over a period of 4 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During an initial 96-week period, breast cancer patients with bone metastases were randomised in double-blind fashion to placebo or ibandronic acid 6mg administered by intravenous infusion over 1-2 hours every 3-4 weeks as part of a previously reported phase III trial (MF 4265 study). All patients completing the phase III trial were offered open-label active treatment for a further 96 weeks (extension phase). A total of 62 patients received ibandronic acid 6mg in this extension phase and were classified according to their initial treatment (placebo/ibandronic acid 6mg [placebo/6mg] and ibandronic acid 6mg/ibandronic acid 6mg [6mg/6mg] groups). Safety was assessed by AE reports and clinical laboratory evaluations. RESULTS: During the 4-year study, most patients experienced at least one AE, with malignancy progression being most commonly reported. However, fewer treatment-related AEs were reported in the extension phase (placebo/6mg: 6.3% [1/16]; 6mg/6mg: 13.0% [6/46]) than in the initial phase of the study (placebo: 56.3% [9/16]; 6mg: 67.4% [31/46]). Serious AEs were mainly due to malignancy progression. There were no clinically relevant renal AEs, and in both groups, serum creatinine levels were similar for up to 4 years. CONCLUSION: This 96-week open-label safety extension of a phase III, placebo-controlled trial demonstrates that long-term use of intravenous ibandronic acid is well tolerated.

Phase II trial of R115777 (NSC #70818) in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this Phase II multi-institutional trial was to determine the efficacy and toxicity of R115777 in previously untreated patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were required to have histologically confirmed colorectal cancer with distant metastatic disease that was not surgically curable. They could not have received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. R115777 was given at a dose of 300 mg p.o. twice a day for 21 days every 28 days until tumor progression or toxicity or other reason for discontinuation occurred. The primary endpoint was to determine the confirmed response probability with this treatment. RESULTS: There were 55 eligible patients accrued to the study. There were no complete responses, but one confirmed partial response for a confirmed response probability of 2% (95%CI 0-10%). Three additional patients had an unconfirmed partial response for an overall response probability of 7%. The time to treatment failure was 1.7 months and the estimated median survival was 8.1 months. One patient died of treatment related infection and there were 7 other patients with grade 4 toxicities consisting of neutropenia, leukopenia, febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, depression, increased bilirubin, anemia, and pneumonitis/infiltrates. CONCLUSION: R115777 given as a single agent by this dose and schedule is ineffective in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

A Phase II trial of epothilone B analogue BMS-247550 (NSC #710428) ixabepilone, in patients with advanced pancreas cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this Phase II multi-institutional study was to define the efficacy and toxicity of ixabepilone in patients with advance pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were required to have pancreatic adenocarcinoma and metastatic or recurrent disease that was not amenable to curative resection. Performance status was 0-1, and patients could not have had prior chemotherapy, or chemoradiation therapy for their advanced disease although prior local palliative radiation was allowed. Ixabepilone was administered iv as a 3 hour infusion every 21 days. Initially, the dose was 50 mg/m(2) but this was lowered to 40 mg/m(2) shortly after the trial opened because of concerns about neurotoxicity. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were registered however 2 were ineligible because they did not have recurrent or metastatic disease. For the 60 eligible patients, 22 had performance status of 0 and 38 performance status of 1. The estimated 6-month survival was 60% (95% CI 48%-72%) with a median survival of 7.2 months and an estimated time to treatment failure of 2.3 months. Out of 56 patients with measurable disease there were 5 confirmed partial responses for a confirmed response probability of 9% (95% CI 3%-20%) and 7 unconfirmed partial responses for an overall response probability of 21% (95% CI 12%-34%). Common toxicities were neutropenia/granulocytopenia, nausea and vomiting and neuropathy. There was one death, cause not determined but judged "possibly" related to treatment. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone shows encouraging activity in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and should be investigated further in this disease.

Randomized, controlled trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil with and without tamoxifen for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer: treatment results of Intergroup Protocol INT-0102.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) in node-negative breast cancer patients with and without tamoxifen (TAM), overall and by hormone receptor (HR) status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Node-negative patients identified by tumor size (> 2 cm), negative HR, or high S-phase fraction (n = 2,690) were randomly assigned to CMF, CAF, CMF + TAM (CMFT), or CAF + TAM (CAFT). Cox regression evaluated overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for CAF versus CMF and TAM versus no TAM separately. Two-sided CIs and one-sided P values for planned comparisons were calculated. RESULTS: Ten-year estimates indicated that CAF was not significantly better than CMF (P = .13) for the primary outcome of DFS (77% v 75%; HR = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.27). CAF had slightly better OS than CMF (85% v 82%, HR = 1.19 for CMF v CAF; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.43); values were statistically significant in the planned one-sided test (P = .03). Toxicity was greater with CAF and did not increase with TAM. Overall, TAM had no benefit (DFS, P = .16; OS, P = .37), but the TAM effect differed by HR groups. For HR-positive patients, TAM was beneficial (DFS, HR = 1.32 for no TAM v TAM; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.61; P = .003; OS, HR = 1.26; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.61; P = .03), but not for HR-negative patients (DFS, HR = 0.81 for no TAM v TAM; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.03; OS, HR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.05). CONCLUSION: CAF did not improve DFS compared with CMF; there was a slight effect on OS. Given greater toxicity, we cannot conclude CAF to be superior to CMF. TAM is effective in HR-positive disease, but not in HR-negative disease.

Phase II trial of oral rubitecan in previously treated pancreatic cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Additional systemic treatments for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer are needed, as current treatment options produce only modest survival benefits. Rubitecan (Orathecin; Supergen Inc., Dublin, CA, http://www.supergen.com) is an orally active camptothecin derivative with demonstrated responses in patients with pancreatic cancer in early clinical trials. This phase II, open-label trial was developed to assess the safety and efficacy of rubitecan in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer refractory to conventional chemotherapy. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with failed or relapsed advanced pancreatic cancer after receiving at least one prior chemotherapy regimen were enrolled to receive eight consecutive weeks of treatment with rubitecan at a dose of 1.5 mg/m2 orally on five consecutive days per week, followed by 2 days off therapy, repeatedly. The primary end point was response rate. Time to progression, overall survival, changes in CA19-9 levels, and the composite measure of clinical benefit response were evaluated as secondary end points. RESULTS: Among 43 patients with measurable disease, 7% (3/43) achieved partial responses and 16% (7/43) had disease stabilization for an overall response and disease stabilization rate of 23%. All responses were confirmed by independent radiology review. Median survival was longer in responding patients than in the overall study cohort (10 months versus 3 months). Gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities were the most commonly reported adverse events. CONCLUSION: Oral rubitecan produced responses and was well tolerated by heavily pretreated patients with refractory pancreatic cancer. The overall risk-benefit profile of oral rubitecan appears promising, supporting further evaluation in phase III trials in patients with refractory and chemotherapy-naive pancreatic cancer.

Phase III Southwest Oncology Group 9415/Intergroup 0153 randomized trial of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and levamisole versus fluorouracil continuous infusion and levamisole for adjuvant treatment of stage III and high-risk stage II colon cancer.

PURPOSE: Modest toxicity and possibly enhanced activity makes continuous-infusion fluorouracil (FU) an attractive alternative to FU plus leucovorin (FU/LV) for the adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer. Intergroup trial 0153 (Southwest Oncology Group trial 9415) was developed to compare the efficacy of continuous-infusion FU (CIFU) plus levamisole to FU/LV plus levamisole in the adjuvant treatment of high-risk Dukes' B2 and C1 or C2 colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After surgery, patients were randomly assigned to CIFU 250 mg/m(2)/d for 56 days every 9 weeks for three cycles or FU 425 mg/m(2) and LV 20 mg/m(2) daily for 5 days every 28 to 35 days for six cycles. All patients received levamisole 50 mg tid for 3 days every other week. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The study closed in December 1999 after an interim analysis demonstrated little likelihood of CIFU showing superiority to FU/LV within the stipulated hazard ratio. A total of 1,135 patients were registered. At least one grade 4 toxicity occurred in 39% of patients receiving FU/LV and 5% of patients receiving CIFU. However, almost twice as many patients receiving CIFU discontinued therapy early compared with those receiving FU/LV. The 5-year OS is 70% (95% CI, 66% to 74%) for FU/LV and 69% (95% CI, 64% to 73%) for CIFU. The corresponding 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) is 61% (95% CI, 56% to 65%) and 63% (95% CI, 59% to 68%), respectively. For all patients, 5-year OS is 83%, 74%, and 55%; 5-year DFS is 78%, 67%, and 47% for N0, N1, and N2-3, respectively. CONCLUSION: CIFU had less severe toxicity but did not improve DFS or OS in comparison with bolus FU/LV.

Phase II study of CT-2103 in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of CT-2103, a novel conjugate of paclitaxel and poly-L-glutamic acid, in heavily pretreated patients with recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-nine patients with measurable disease received intravenous CT-2103 at 175 mg/m2 of conjugated paclitaxel over 10 minutes every 3 weeks without routine premedications. Platinum-sensitive (n = 42) and platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant patients (n = 57) were enrolled. Thirty-nine patients (39%) had received one or two prior regimens, and 60 patients (61%) had received between three and 12 regimens. RESULTS: In 99 patients, the median number of cycles was three (range, one to 14 cycles). The response rate (RR) for all patients was 10% (10 of 99 patients), with median time to disease progression (TTP) of 2 months. The RR (partial response) in platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant patients was 14% (six of 42 patients) and 7% (four of 57 patients), respectively. In patients with only one or two prior regimens, the RR in platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant patients was 28% (five of 18 patients) and 10% (two of 21 patients), with a median TTP of 4 and 2 months, respectively. Grade 2 (15 patients) or 3 (15 patients) neuropathy was reported in 30 patients (30%). Grade 2 hypersensitivity occurred in eight patients (8%) who were subsequently treated with premedications; one patient had grade 3 hypersensitivity and was removed. Grade 2 alopecia was absent. CONCLUSION: CT-2103 is active in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Neurotoxicity in these heavily pretreated patients was more frequent than predicted from phase I trials. Further study to define toxicity and efficacy in patients with less prior therapy is ongoing.

Randomized, placebo-controlled study of oregovomab for consolidation of clinical remission in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess oregovomab as consolidation treatment of advanced ovarian cancer and refine the immunotherapeutic strategy for subsequent study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage III/IV ovarian cancer who had a complete clinical response to primary treatment were randomly assigned to oregovomab or placebo administered at weeks 0, 4, and 8, and every 12 weeks up to 2 years or until recurrence. The primary end-point was time to relapse (TTR). RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients were treated with oregovomab (n = 73) or placebo (n = 72). For the population overall, median TTR was not different between treatments at 13.3 months for oregovomab and 10.3 months for placebo (P =.71). Immune responses were induced in most actively treated patients. This was associated with prolonged TTR. Quality of life was not adversely impacted by treatment. Adverse events were reported with similar frequency in oregovomab and placebo groups, indicating a benign safety profile. A long-term survival follow-up is ongoing. Cox analysis of relapse data identified significant factors: performance status, CA-125 before third cycle, and baseline CA-125. Further evaluation identified a subpopulation with favorable prognostic indicators designated as the successful front-line therapy (SFLT) population. For the SFLT population, TTR was 24.0 months in the oregovomab group compared with 10.8 months for placebo (unadjusted hazard ratio of 0.543 [95% CI, 0.287 to 1.025]), a hypothesis-generating observation. CONCLUSION: Consolidation therapy with oregovomab did not significantly improve TTR overall. A set of confirmatory phase III studies has been initiated to determine whether the SFLT population derives benefit from oregovomab treatment.

Adenoma recurrences after resection of colorectal carcinoma: results from the Southwest Oncology Group 9041 calcium chemoprevention pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal adenomas are the usual precursors to carcinoma in sporadic and hereditary colorectal cancers (CRC). METHODS: A total of 220 CRC patients (stages 0, I, and II) were randomized prospectively in a double-blind pilot study of calcium chemoprevention by using recurrent colorectal adenomas as a surrogate end point. This trial is still in progress, and we report the preliminary findings on adenoma recurrence rates. RESULTS: Synchronous adenomas were present in 60% of patients, and cancer confined in a polyp was present in 23% of patients. The overall cumulative adenoma recurrence rate was 31% (19% in the first year, 29% for 2 years, and 35% for 3 years). The recurrence rates were greater for patients with synchronous adenomas: 38% at 3 years (P =.01). Lower stage was associated with higher adenoma recurrence rates (P =.04). Factors including age, sex, site of primary cancer, and whether the cancer was confined to a polyp were not significantly associated with differences in adenoma recurrence rates. CONCLUSIONS: The substantial adenoma recurrence rate in patients resected of CRC justifies colonoscopic surveillance on a periodic basis. Patients with higher rates of adenoma recurrences, such as CRC with synchronous adenomas, are ideal subjects for chemoprevention trials.