Phase I/II trial of dose-reduced capecitabine in elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Combination chemotherapy is associated with improved outcomes in trials of selected fit patients with advanced colorectal cancer (acrc). For older or less-fit patients, combination chemotherapy is associated with greater toxicity and less benefit. Capecitabine monotherapy is a reasonable option for those patients, but the optimal dose remains controversial. METHODS: A multicentre phase i/ii trial of reduced-dose capecitabine (2000 mg/m2, days 1-14 every 21 days) was conducted in 221 patients representing one or more of the following subsets: age greater than 65 years (n = 167), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ecog) performance status of 1 or greater (n = 139), elevated lactate dehydrogenase (ldh) (n = 105), or prior pelvic radiation (n = 54). Based on phase i results, patients with prior pelvic radiation received capecitabine 750 mg/m2 twice daily. The goal was to ascertain efficacy in a design that was unlikely to cause high levels of toxicity. RESULTS: Median age in the patient cohort was 72 years. A median of 5 and a mean of 8 capecitabine cycles were given (range: 0-50 cycles). Grade 3 or 4 toxicity occurred in 25% of patients during the first 3 cycles (8.1% hand-foot syndrome, 7.7% diarrhea). The response rate was 13.6%, with a 69.7% disease control rate. Median progression-free survival (pfs) was 5.6 months. Post progression, 56 patients received further capecitabine monotherapy (median of 4 additional cycles). Median overall survival duration for the patients was 14.3 months. Median survival was significantly higher for those who, at baseline, had an ecog performance status of 0 (compared with 1 or more) and normal ldh (compared with elevated ldh). CONCLUSIONS: Toxicity is less with dose-reduced capecitabine than with historical full-dose capecitabine, with only a small trade-off in efficacy, seen as a lower objective response rate. The improved tolerability could lead to an increased number of cycles of therapy, and pfs appears to be consistently higher at the lower dose. Those observations should, in the absence of a head-to-head clinical trial, be viewed as compelling evidence that 1000 mg/m2, or even 750 mg/m2, twice daily is an appropriate dose in elderly or frail patients with acrc.

Improvements in Survival and Clinical Benefit With Gemcitabine as First-Line Therapy for Patients With Advanced Pancreas Cancer: A Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Most patients with advanced pancreas cancer experience pain and must limit their daily activities because of tumor-related symptoms. To date, no treatment has had a significant impact on the disease. In early studies with gemcitabine, patients with pancreas cancer experienced an improvement in disease-related symptoms. Based on those findings, a definitive trial was performed to assess the effectiveness of gemcitabine in patients with newly diagnosed advanced pancreas cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-six patients with advanced symptomatic pancreas cancer completed a lead-in period to characterize and stabilize pain and were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly x 7 followed by 1 week of rest, then weekly x 3 every 4 weeks thereafter (63 patients), or to fluorouracil (5-FU) 600 mg/m2 once weekly (63 patients). The primary efficacy measure was clinical benefit response, which was a composite of measurements of pain (analgesic consumption and pain intensity), Karnofsky performance status, and weight. Clinical benefit required a sustained (> or = 4 weeks) improvement in at least one parameter without worsening in any others. Other measures of efficacy included response rate, time to progressive disease, and survival. RESULTS: Clinical benefit response was experienced by 23.8% of gemcitabine-treated patients compared with 4.8% of 5-FU-treated patients (P = .0022). The median survival durations were 5.65 and 4.41 months for gemcitabine-treated and 5-FU-treated patients, respectively (P = .0025). The survival rate at 12 months was 18% for gemcitabine patients and 2% for 5-FU patients. Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that gemcitabine is more effective than 5-FU in alleviation of some disease-related symptoms in patients with advanced, symptomatic pancreas cancer. Gemcitabine also confers a modest survival advantage over treatment with 5-FU.

Improvements in survival and clinical benefit with gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreas cancer: a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Most patients with advanced pancreas cancer experience pain and must limit their daily activities because of tumor-related symptoms. To date, no treatment has had a significant impact on the disease. In early studies with gemcitabine, patients with pancreas cancer experienced an improvement in disease-related symptoms. Based on those findings, a definitive trial was performed to assess the effectiveness of gemcitabine in patients with newly diagnosed advanced pancreas cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-six patients with advanced symptomatic pancreas cancer completed a lead-in period to characterize and stabilize pain and were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly x 7 followed by 1 week of rest, then weekly x 3 every 4 weeks thereafter (63 patients), or to fluorouracil (5-FU) 600 mg/m2 once weekly (63 patients). The primary efficacy measure was clinical benefit response, which was a composite of measurements of pain (analgesic consumption and pain intensity), Karnofsky performance status, and weight. Clinical benefit required a sustained (> or = 4 weeks) improvement in at least one parameter without worsening in any others. Other measures of efficacy included response rate, time to progressive disease, and survival. RESULTS: Clinical benefit response was experienced by 23.8% of gemcitabine-treated patients compared with 4.8% of 5-FU-treated patients (P = .0022). The median survival durations were 5.65 and 4.41 months for gemcitabine-treated and 5-FU-treated patients, respectively (P = .0025). The survival rate at 12 months was 18% for gemcitabine patients and 2% for 5-FU patients. Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that gemcitabine is more effective than 5-FU in alleviation of some disease-related symptoms in patients with advanced, symptomatic pancreas cancer. Gemcitabine also confers a modest survival advantage over treatment with 5-FU.

Pilot study of multiple chemotherapy resistance modulators plus epirubicin in the treatment of resistant malignancies.

We studied the toxicity and efficacy of adding to epirubicin five resistance modulators in the treatment of resistant solid tumors. Additional drugs were added in successive cohorts of patients, such that cohort 1 patients received two drugs along with their epirubicin, while cohort 4 patients received five modulators along with their epirubicin. Metronidazole, tamoxifen (cohort 1), dipyridamole (cohort 2), ketoconazole (cohort 3) and cyclosporin (cohort 4) were administered with epirubicin. A total of 22 patients were treated. Nausea and vomiting was usually mild to moderate. There was an unexpectedly high incidence of possible cardiac toxicity associated with treatment, although in some patients it was uncertain whether or not observed cardiac events were related to treatment. Granulocytopenia was significant in all four cohorts, but it was unclear whether it was increased by the modulators. There were two febrile neutropenic events in cohorts 1 and 2 successfully treated with antibiotics, and three septic deaths (one in each of cohorts 1, 2 and 4). It was elected to discontinue enrollment on the study prematurely in light of cardiac and other toxicity seen in the first two patients accrued in cohort 4. A single response was observed. While this approach is feasible, the observed toxicity and the difficulty patients experienced in ingesting the large number of prescribed pills will make further exploration of this approach difficult.

Effects of PALA on the pharmacokinetics of 5-fluorouracil.

N-(phosphonacetyl)-L-aspartate (PALA) modulates the activity of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) by inhibiting pyrimidine biosynthesis. A cross-over study was conducted to determine whether PALA affects the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5-FU in patients given 5-FU/folinic acid (FA). Six patients (3 males, 3 females) aged 63 4.3 (mean SD) years (body surface area of 1.84 18 m2) with metastatic colorectal carcinoma were given two courses of treatment. The treatment consisted of 250 mg/m2 of PALA on day 1 followed by 20 mg/m2 FA and 400 mg/m2 5-FU (5 min i.v. bolus injection) on days 2-5 in one cycle of treatment (PALA+). In another treatment cycle, these doses of 5-FU and FA were given for all 5 days without PALA (PALA-). The two courses were given four weeks apart. It was determined by random selection whether the course with PALA was given before or after the course without PALA. Blood samples were collected over a period of three hours, starting from the beginning of 5-FU infusion on days 2 and 5 of both courses. Plasma concentrations of 5-FU were determined by an HPLC technique. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using a non-compartmental model. While there were no significant differences between pharmacokinetic parameters in the PALA+ vs PALA- courses, there was a trend towards a decreasing area under the curve (AUC) and increasing clearance (Cl) in PALA+ courses of treatment.

Doxorubicin plus metronidazole in the treatment of recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Twenty-five patients were treated on a Phase II study of doxorubicin, 60-75 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks, accompanied by metronidazole, 1500 mg/m2 orally 12 hours and immediately before the doxorubicin and 6 hours and 24 hours after the doxorubicin. Of 23 patients evaluable for response, 2 (9%) achieved complete remissions, 2 (9%) achieved partial remissions, and 4 (18%) were stable (one of whom achieved a minor response). One patient with an inoperable biopsy-proven 4 x 3 x 3 cm recurrence following radiation and surgery has had a complete remission that persists at 8 years. The second patient who achieved a complete remission subsequently underwent surgical resection of the involved area. No residual tumor was found, and he remains disease free after 8.5 years. Doxorubicin toxicity did not appear to be augmented significantly by metronidazole. Although the response rate seen in this study was low, the occurrence of two long-term complete remissions suggests that this combination should be studied further in other tumor types.

Cisplatin, cytosine arabinoside, and pentoxifylline in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Nine patients were entered on a Phase I-II study of cisplatin, cytosine arabinoside, and pentoxifylline in the treatment of advanced head and neck cancer. The treatment regimen consisted of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 only, cytosine arabinoside 2,000 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 2, and pentoxifylline 400 mg orally three times daily beginning 7 to 14 days before the chemotherapy. The pentoxifylline was continued between chemotherapy cycles. Chemotherapy courses were repeated at 3- to 4-week intervals. Partial remission were seen in two patients, two patients were stable, and five patients failed on treatment. Dose-limiting toxicity was granulocytopenia. Pentoxifylline itself caused some nausea and anorexia. Although the patient numbers were small, there was no indication that pentoxifylline increased the efficacy of this chemotherapy in head and neck cancer. It is possible that another dose schedule might have been more effective.

Multiple resistance modulators combined with carboplatin for resistant malignancies: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy resistance is probably multifactorial; hence, we assessed the feasibility of adding to carboplatin 6 concurrent resistance modulators in 53 patients with resistant cancers. METHODS: Pentoxifylline and dipyridamole were added to carboplatin 400 mg/m2 in cohort 1, and metronidazole was also given in cohort 2. Mannitol and saline were administered in each cohort with the theoretical objective of improving carboplatin delivery to tumors by reducing blood viscosity. Because of excessive toxicity in cohort 2, cohort 3 received the same modulators as in cohort 2 but with a reduced dose of carboplatin (200 mg/m2). Subsequent patients had the following drugs added to those in the previous cohort: novobiocin (cohort 4), tamoxifen (cohort 5), ketoconazole (cohort 6). Cohort 7 patients received the 6 cohort 6 modulators along with carboplatin 300 mg/m2. RESULTS: Thrombocytopenia was excessive in early cohorts with a carboplatin dose of 400 mg/m2, but was minimal at lower doses. Other toxicity was generally tolerable and reversible, particularly at carboplatin doses < or = 300 mg/m2, although gastrointestinal and neurological toxicity tended to worsen as additional modulators were added. No major responses (but 4 minor responses) were seen in this patient population with heavily pretreated or primarily resistant cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptable doses for phase II studies are carboplatin 300 mg/m2, 20% mannitol 250 ml plus normal saline 500 ml over 1 hr prior to carboplatin, pentoxifylline 700 mg/m2/day p.o. from 3 days before carboplatin to cessation of therapy, dipyridamole 100 mg/m2 p.o. q6h x 6 days starting 24 hr before carboplatin, metronidazole (750 mg/m2 p.o. 12 hr and immediately before, and 24 hr after carboplatin; 250 mg/m2 suppository p.r. 12 hr and immediately before, and 6 and 24 hr after carboplatin; and 500 mg/m2 i.v. right after carboplatin), novobiocin 600 mg/m2 p.o. q12h x 6 days starting 24 hr before carboplatin, and tamoxifen 100 mg/m2/day plus ketoconazole 700 mg/m2/day x 3 days starting the day before carboplatin, with oral dexamethasone and ondansetron as antimetics.

Cancer physicians' attitudes toward colorectal cancer follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The optimal follow-up strategy for colorectal cancer is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We surveyed all Canadian radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and surgeons specializing in colorectal cancer to assess their recommendations for follow-up after potentially curative treatment, the beliefs and attitudes underlying these practices, and the cost implications of different follow-up strategies. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty practitioners (58%) returned completed surveys. Most recommended clinical assessments every 3-4 months in the first 2 years including carcino-embryonic antigen testing, gradually decreasing in frequency over 5 years. Ninety per cent recommend a surveillance colonoscopy in the first year. The majority felt that specialist involvement in follow-up was important because of the increased opportunities for patients to contribute to research (76%) and teaching (73%). About half felt that specialists were more efficient at providing follow-up than primary care physicians, but these same physicians recommended significantly longer and more expensive follow-up routines on average than others. Primary care physicians were felt to be important allies, especially in managing the psychosocial concerns of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Surveillance practices are generally in keeping with published recommendations. Most specialists feel that they should remain involved in follow-up, but this may result in increased resource utilization.

The estrogen receptor test: a prognostic tool in primary breast cancer.

To evaluate the usefulness of the estrogen receptor test as a prognostic indicator, a retrospective study of 134 patients with primary breast cancer was carried out at the Ottawa Civic Hospital. The estrogen receptor values, measured in a single laboratory, were correlated with the recurrence rate and the survival time after recurrence. Other well-established prognostic data, such as stage of cancer, lymph-node involvement and menopausal state, have been similarly examined to ensure that information obtained from the estrogen receptor test offers more than a duplication of information from these traditional methods. It was found that this test is a useful prognostic tool when used on premenopausal women. The results of the study show that (a) breast cancer patients having positive estrogen receptor values have recurrences less frequently, (b) among estrogen receptor-negative patients there is more than a 50% chance of early recurrence in premenopausal women compared with less than a 20% chance in postmenopausal women, (c) conventional adjuvant chemotherapy in estrogen receptor-negative premenopausal patients does not prevent early recurrence, hence, this group requires more aggressive adjuvant treatment and (d) the method described by Heuson and colleagues for estrogen receptor determination follows the trends of better-established tests.

Duration of intravenous antibiotics for patients with neutropenic fever.

BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy has consisted of intravenous antibiotic until resolution of both fever and neutropenia. We attempted to shorten the hospital stay by discontinuing intravenous antibiotics in blood culture negative patients who remained clinically stable and afebrile for 48 hours. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Febrile neutropenic admissions of non-leukemic patients were reviewed. They were divided by three consecutive six month intervals into Group 1 (prior to initiation of the policy), Group 2 (after the policy was instituted), and Group 3 (to monitor the implementation of the policy after the initial six months). RESULTS: There were 134 admissions for neutropenic fever. Median duration of intravenous antibiotic for Group 1 was 7 days (95% Confidence Interval 6-9). It was significantly decreased to 5 days (4-6) and 4 days (3-5) for Groups 2 and 3 respectively (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001). Median duration of hospital stay for Group 1 was 10 days (7-13). It was also significantly decreased to 7 (5-8) and 6 days (5-7) for Groups 2 and 3 respectively (p = 0.04 and p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Early discontinuation of intravenous antibiotics in patients with negative blood culture who remain afebrile and clinically stable for 48 hours results in shorter duration of hospital stay with potential for reduction in hospital costs.

Escalated as compared with standard doses of doxorubicin in BACOP therapy for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: In 1981 the Clinical Trials Group of the National Cancer Institute of Canada completed a pilot study in patients with advanced-stage non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with aggressive tumor histology. That study demonstrated the potential efficacy of escalating the dose of doxorubicin used in a regimen of bleomycin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (BACOP). In the present study, we compared standard BACOP (s-BACOP) with BACOP that included escalated doses of doxorubicin (esc-BACOP) in 238 patients 16 to 70 years old with previously untreated, advanced-stage intermediate- or high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. During the first 28-day cycle all patients received doxorubicin in a dose of 25 mg per square meter of body-surface area on days 1 and 8. Patients randomly assigned to receive s-BACOP subsequently received five identical cycles, whereas those assigned to receive esc-BACOP received 40 mg of doxorubicin per square meter on days 1 and 8 of five subsequent cycles if granulocytopenia (< 1000 cells per cubic millimeter) had not developed during the first cycle. RESULTS: The 119 patients assigned to the esc-BACOP regimen received doxorubicin at a significantly higher mean weekly dose intensity (13.5 vs. 10.4 mg per square meter per week, P < 0.001) and mean total dose (296 vs. 231 mg per square meter, P < 0.001). Because of granulocytopenia during the first cycle of therapy, only 56 of these patients (47 percent) received the escalated doses of doxorubicin. During a median follow-up of 65 months, there were no differences between the s-BACOP and esc-BACOP groups in response rate, overall survival, or survival without disease progression. When the patients who actually received the escalated doses of doxorubicin were compared with the patients in the s-BACOP group in whom neutropenia did not develop during the first treatment cycle, no difference between their outcomes was observed. Toxicity was greater in the esc-BACOP group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced-stage intermediate- or high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, escalating the dose of doxorubicin in the BACOP regimen increases toxicity but does not improve the rate of response or survival.

A phase II trial of gemcitabine in patients with 5-FU-refractory pancreas cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreas cancer that had progressed despite prior treatment with 5-FU. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-four patients were enrolled in this multicenter trial. Alleviation of cancer-related symptoms was the primary endpoint. Sixty-three patients completed a pain stabilization period and were treated with gemcitabine. Clinical Benefit Response was defined as a > or = 50% reduction in pain intensity, > or = 50% reduction in daily analgesic consumption, or > or = 20 point improvement in KPS that was sustained for > or = 4 consecutive weeks. RESULTS: Seventeen of 63 pts (27.0%) attained a Clinical Benefit Response (95% CI: 16.0%-38.0%). The median duration of Clinical Benefit Response was 14 weeks (range: 4-69 weeks). Median survival for patients treated with gemcitabine was 3.85 months (range: 0.3-18.0+ months). Therapy was generally well-tolerated with a low incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxicities. CONCLUSION: Systematic assessment of subjective outcomes can be used to evaluate the clinical impact of new therapies for pancreas cancer, a highly symptomatic disease. Our findings suggest that gemcitabine is a useful palliative agent in patients with 5-FU-refractory pancreas cancer.