Randomised trial comparing three different schedules of infusional 5FU and raltitrexed alone as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Final results of the Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD) 9601 trial.

LV5FU2 with high-dose leucovorin (LV), weekly infusional 5-fluorouracil (5FU) (AIO schedule) and raltitrexed have been demonstrated to be active agents in first-line treatment of colorectal cancer. We performed a 4-arm randomised trial to compare (1) a low-dose intravenous bolus of LV (20 mg/m2), followed by an intravenous bolus of 5FU (400 mg/m2), followed by a 22-hour continuous infusion of 5FU (600 mg/m2) on day 1 and day 2/2 weeks (ldLV5FU2 arm), (2) a weekly continuous infusion of high-dose 5FU (2.6 g/m2/week) for 6 weeks followed by a rest week (HD-FU arm) and (3) raltitrexed (Tomudex arm; 3 mg/m2/3 weeks) to standard LV5FU2. From 1997 to 2001, 294 patients were included. The 4 arms were well balanced for sex ratio, age, WHO performance status, the primary tumour site and prior adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment was stopped due to low accrual. Two toxicity-related deaths were observed in the Tomudex arm. The treatments gave rise to different rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (3, 4, 11 and 14% of the patients in the LV5FU2, ldLV5FU2, HD-FU and Tomudex arms, respectively, p = 0.028), leucopenia and vomiting. At least one episode of grade 3-4 toxicity was observed in 27, 25, 38 and 47% of the patients in the LV5FU2, ldLV5FU2, HD-FU and Tomudex arms, respectively (p = 0.016). An objective response was observed in 28, 21, 22 and 10% of the patients in the LV5FU2, ldLV5FU2, HD-FU and Tomudex arms, respectively (p = 0.04). Progression-free survival (PFS) of the patients in the Tomudex arm was statistically lower compared to that of patients treated with LV5FU2 or ldLV5FU2 (combined group; p = 0.013, log rank test). In conclusion, Tomudex is more toxic and yields shorter PFS than infusional 5FU. Despite the early closure of the study and the lack of power of the comparison, it seems that ldLV5FU2 could be considered as an active, easier and less expensive option for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer compared to classic LV5FU2 or weekly HD-FU.

Heated intra-operative intraperitoneal oxaliplatin after complete resection of peritoneal carcinomatosis: pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution.

PURPOSE: This article reports the pharmacokinetics (PK) of heated intra-operative intraperitoneal oxaliplatin and its tolerance profile. Oxaliplatin has demonstrated significant activity in advanced colorectal cancer, and this is the first publication concerning its intraperitoneal administration. METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of either gastrointestinal or uniquely peritoneal origin underwent complete cytoreductive surgery followed by intra-operative intraperitoneal chemo-hyperthermia (IPCH) with increasing doses of oxaliplatin. We performed IPCH using an open procedure (skin pulled upwards), at an intraperitoneal temperature of 42-44 degrees C, with 2 l/m2 of 5% dextrose instillate in a closed circuit. The flow-rate was 2 l/min for 30 min. Patients received intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2) just before the IPCH to maximize the effect of oxaliplatin. We treated at least three patients at each of the six intraperitoneal oxaliplatin dose levels (from 260 to 460 mg/m2) before progressing to the next. We analysed intraperitoneal, plasma and tissue samples with atomic absorption spectrophotometry. RESULTS: The mean duration of the entire procedure was 8.4 +/- 2.7 h. Half the oxaliplatin dose was absorbed in 30 min at all dose levels. Area under the curve (AUC) and maximal plasma concentration (Cmax) increased with dose. At the highest dose level (460 mg/m2), peritoneal oxaliplatin concentration was 25-fold that in plasma. AUCs following intraperitoneal administration were consistently inferior to historical control AUCs after intravenous oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2). Intratumoral oxaliplatin penetration was high, similar to absorption at the peritoneal surface and 17.8-fold higher than that in non-bathed tissues. Increasing instillate volume to 2.5 l/m2 instead of 2 l/m2 dramatically decreased oxaliplatin concentration and absorption. There were no deaths, nor severe haematological, renal or neurological toxicity, but we observed two fistulas and three deep abscesses. CONCLUSIONS: Heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy gives high peritoneal and tumour oxaliplatin concentrations with limited systemic absorption. We recommend an oxaliplatin dose of 460 mg/m2 in 2 l/m2 of 5% dextrose for intraperitoneal chemo-hyperthermia, at a temperature of 42-44 degrees C over 30 min. We may be able to improve these results by increasing the intraperitoneal perfusion duration or by modifying the instillate composition.

[Assessment of the cost of first line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Preliminary results in the FFCD 9601 trial]. / Coûts de la première ligne de traitement des métastases du cancer colo-rectal.

AIM: The objective of the study was to estimate the cost of first line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer treated in the Gustave-Roussy Institute. Patients were randomized in the study FFCD 9601 with four schedules of treatment: Tomudex(R), 5FU weekly, LV5FU2 with low dose of folinic acid and LV5FU2 with high dose of folinic acid. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty three patients were included prospectively from March 1997 to April 1999. Healthcare costs took into account drug-regimen related costs (cost of the drugs and its preparation, drug administration, laboratory tests, transport from and to hospital), non-drug-regimen related hospitalization costs (treatment of chemotherapy related side effects, radiologic tests, hospital outpatient visits, transport from and to hospital) and surgery costs. Costs were derived from the accounting system in the Gustave-Roussy Institute. Non medical costs were not taken into account in this study. RESULTS: The median overall cost per 4 weeks was 6,343 FF with LV5FU2 low dose, 9,968 FF with LV5FU2 high dose, 15,340 FF with 5FU weekly and 28,810 FF with Tomudex(R). This overcost is explained by a more expensive price and greater toxicity: 12 grade 3-4 toxicity and 9 hospitalizations (including one in intensive care unit for the 8 treated patients) for Tomudex(R) despite a lower cost for the administration of the drug. Weekly 5FU was the most expensive among the 5FU schedules because of its dose and frequency of administration. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of first line chemotherapy in metastatic cancer colorectal is high (6,000 FF minimum per 4 weeks of treatment). Tomudex, a recent and expensive drug, seems to be more toxic. In this study, toxicity was probably overestimated due to the small number of patients. More patients are necessary in order to better estimate the cost of toxicity of these chemotherapies.

Treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma with lipiodol chemoembolization: a multicenter randomized trial. Groupe CHC.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Lipiodol chemoembolization is a widely used method of treatment in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, but its efficacy is still debated. The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy of lipiodol chemoembolization in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Seventy-three patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, but without severe liver disease or portal vein occlusion, were randomly assigned to receive either repeated lipiodol chemoembolization (lipiodol, cisplatin (2 mg/kg), lecithin, and gelatin sponge injected into the hepatic artery) plus tamoxifen (40 mg) or tamoxifen alone. The main end-point was survival. RESULTS: The 37 patients in the lipiodol chemoembolization group received 104 courses (median 3 per patient). By 1 September 1996, 58 patients had died: 30 in the lipiodol chemoembolization group and 28 in the tamoxifen group. There was no difference in survival between the two groups (p=0.77). The relative risk of death in the lipiodol chemoembolization plus tamoxifen group as compared to the tamoxifen group was 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.56). At 1 year, survival was 51% and 55%, respectively. An objective tumoral response was more frequently observed in the lipiodol chemoembolization group than in the tamoxifen group (24 versus 5.5%, respectively, p=0.046). Lipiodol chemoembolization caused two deaths and induced signs of liver failure in 51% of the patients assigned to this treatment. CONCLUSION: In our randomized study, lipiodol chemoembolization did not improve the survival of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma treated with tamoxifen.

Preliminary results of a phase II study of high-dose radiation therapy and neoadjuvant plus concomitant 5-fluorouracil with CDDP chemotherapy for patients with anal canal cancer: a French cooperative study.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil-mitomycin C) concomitant with radiotherapy (RT) increases local control and colostomy-free survival in advanced anal canal carcinomas (ACC). The purpose of this prospective trial was to analyse the toxicity of and response to an induction chemotherapy combining 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and CDDP administered concomitantly with irradiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients (24 F/6 M, mean age 60, range 38-74) with an advanced ACC > 40 mm and/or with node involvement were prospectively treated (1 T1, 16 T2, 8 T3, 5 T4, 10 N1, 1 N2, 8 N3) from November 1994 to January 1996. Two induction and two concomitant cycles of 5-FU (800 mg/ m2 D1-4 infusion) and CDDP (80 mg/i.v./m2 at D1) were delivered. RT consisted of 45 Gy (1.8 Gy/fr, 5 fr/w) on pelvis +/- inguinal nodes or 30 Gy (3 Gy/fr, 4 fr/w) by direct perineal field. A boost (15-20 Gy) was delivered six weeks later. TOXICITY: one patient died of a pulmonary embolism on D4. The remaining 29 received the entire treatment, with reduced 5-FU doses in 11 patients because of acute toxicity. The RT boost was delayed for one patient (aplasia). In 109 cycles, 3 grade 4 and 17 grade 3 toxicities were observed; there were no toxic deaths. Tumor response: the complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) rates were, respectively, 11% and 61% after induction chemotherapy, 59% and 31% after concomitant radiochemotherapy and 96% and 0% two months after completion of the treatment. No tumor progression was observed. CONCLUSION: the treatment was well tolerated and there was good compliance. After induction chemotherapy, most of the patients were in PR, with some even in CR. After completion of the treatment all but one were in CR. The tumor response and the long term results of 50 patients will be analysed before initiation of a randomised trial is considered.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric carcinoma--a phase II trial with combined continuous intravenous 5-fluorouracil and bolus cisplatinum.

Locally advanced gastric adenocarcinomas (LAGC) have a poor prognosis, particularly when tumours are bulky, located in the cardia or in the event of locoregional lymph node involvement. Patients bearing these tumours were entered in a phase II trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, combining continuous intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5FU) (1000 mg/m2 for 5 days) and cisplatinum (CDDP) (100 mg/m2 on day 2) repeated every 4 weeks, for one to six cycles according to response and tolerance. 30 patients have been entered, 26 after clinical evaluation (CAT scan and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy) and 4 with unresectable tumours at prior laparotomy. Median age was 60 years, 15/30 patients had a tumour of the cardia, 15/30 had enlarged lymph nodes and 7/30 had linitis plastica (diffuse type). A mean number of three cycles was administered (range 1-6). 27 of the 30 patients were evaluable for response. One patient achieved a complete response (CR) and 14 a partial response (56%; 95% confidence interval 38-74%). No patient had tumour progression, and only 1/6 with linitis plastica responded. 28 patients underwent surgery, and 23 had a macroscopically complete resection (77% of the 30 entered patients); RO resections were performed in 60% of the cases, mainly after an objective response (13/15 versus 4/12 in nonresponders). No pathological CR were seen. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in eight cycles (5 patients), with five septic complications and one death due to toxicity. Four postoperative complications were observed: 2 cases of severe pneumonia and 2 subphrenic abscesses. One postoperative death, due to intravascular disseminated coagulation, was observed at day 30. Median survival was 16 months and the 1-, 2- and 3-year survival was 67, 42 and 38%, respectively. Patients with linitis plastica had a significantly shorter survival (P < 0.002). We conclude that neodjuvant chemotherapy is feasible in LAGC, although randomised trials are warranted to demonstrate its efficacy on survival and resection rates.

Efficacy of chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinomas: experience from the Gustave Roussy Institute and the Bicêtre Hospital.

Chemoembolization (CE) has been used for more than 10 years to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in our departments, and three studies have been done. The first was a retrospective study on 232 patients in which CE was performed with doxorubicin and Gelfoam with or without Lipiodol; the response rate was 41% (34.7-47.3%) and survival was better for Okuda stage I disease than for stages II and III (2-year survival 82, 29, and 0% respectively); for patients with Lipiodol retention the response rate was over 50%. The second study compared CE with doxorubicin and Gelfoam to symptomatic treatment in a randomized manner; it included 42 patients and failed to demonstrate a survival advantage (1-year survival: CE 24% vs. control 31%; NS). The third study is ongoing and tests CE with cis-platinum, Lipiodol, and Gelfoam. According to our experience prospective randomized studies are warranted to define clearly the best indications for CE in HCC.