Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: final results from the X-ACT trial with analysis by age and preliminary evidence of a pharmacodynamic marker of efficacy.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter randomized trial compared oral capecitabine with bolus i.v. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) as adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were assigned to 24 weeks of capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks or 5-FU/FA (Mayo Clinic regimen). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population received capecitabine (n = 1004) or 5-FU/FA (n = 983). With a median follow-up of 6.9 years, capecitabine was at least equivalent to 5-FU/FA in terms of DFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.01] and overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.74-1.01); the 95% CI upper limits were significantly less than the predefined noninferiority margins of 1.20 (P < 0.0001) and 1.14 (P < 0.001), respectively. This pattern was maintained in all subgroups, including patients aged ≥ 70 years. Preplanned multivariate analyses showed that capecitabine had statistically significant beneficial effects on DFS (P = 0.021) and OS (P = 0.020) versus 5-FU/FA. A post hoc analysis suggested that the occurrence of hand-foot syndrome may be associated with better outcomes in capecitabine recipients. CONCLUSION: Oral capecitabine is an effective alternative to bolus 5-FU/FA as adjuvant treatment of patients with stage III colon cancer with efficacy benefits maintained at 5 years and in older patients.

Recommendations and expert opinion on the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in Spain

Adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard in the management of patients with localised colon cancer (CC) following curative resection. The use of oxaliplatin plus 5 fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFOX) or oxaliplatin plus capecitabine-based (XELOX) regimens, both approved in Europe as adjuvant treatment for stage III CC, has improved prognosis in this stage, but questions on their usefulness in high-risk stage II or elderly CC patients and on the role of some prognostic biomarkers are still pending. In April 2010, a consensus meeting on adjuvant CC treatment based on a revision of the most recent literature was held in Spain. The panel considered the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk stage II CC patients to be justified. Additionally, the more convenient administration of oral fluoropyrimidines vs. IV continuous infusion 5-FU would make XELOX a more suitable alternative for the patient. A more cautious decision should be taken when prescribing oxaliplatin treatment in patients aged ≥70 (AU)

Recommendations and expert opinion on the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in Spain.

Adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard in the management of patients with localised colon cancer (CC) following curative resection. The use of oxaliplatin plus 5 fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFOX) or oxaliplatin plus capecitabine-based (XELOX) regimens, both approved in Europe as adjuvant treatment for stage III CC, has improved prognosis in this stage, but questions on their usefulness in high-risk stage II or elderly CC patients and on the role of some prognostic biomarkers are still pending. In April 2010, a consensus meeting on adjuvant CC treatment based on a revision of the most recent literature was held in Spain. The panel considered the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk stage II CC patients to be justified. Additionally, the more convenient administration of oral fluoropyrimidines vs. IV continuous infusion 5-FU would make XELOX a more suitable alternative for the patient. A more cautious decision should be taken when prescribing oxaliplatin treatment in patients aged ≥70.

Platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy on moderate- and high-risk stage I and II epithelian ovarian cancer patients. Long-term single institution experience and literature review

BACKGROUND: Although the optimal management of women with FIGO stages I and II epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is still controversial, platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is the mainstay of treatment. Suboptimal survival results have led to major efforts to identify prognostic factors, improve surgical staging and develop adjuvant therapies to improve patients' outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluate in a retrospective study clinical efficacy and the toxicity profile of a platinum-based adjuvant CT in FIGO stages I and II EOC treated at our institution from March 1984 to December 2006. Grade I FIGO stages IA-IB were excluded from the analysis. In the first period (1984-1997), patients received a platinum-based regimen without taxanes. In the second period from 1997 onwards, patients were treated with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Four to six cycles of adjuvant CT were administered. Potential predictive factors of efficacy and the role of paclitaxel addition were also analysed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-eight patients (60 treated with paclitaxel) met inclusion criteria and were evaluable. Median age at diagnosis was 53.7 years (range 19-81) and most patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score (ECOG) of 0-1 (91.8%); 82.9% patients had pathological stage I and 17.1% pathological stage II. With a median follow up of 8.34 years (range 4.4-11.6), 103 patients (74.1%) were free of disease and 110 of them were alive (79.1%). Median relapse-free survival (RFS) and median overall survival (OS) had not been reached at the time of the analysis. No survival difference was found between paclitaxel and carboplatin combination or non-paclitaxel-containing regimens. Statistically significant prognostic factors for better RFS in the multivariate analysis were: ECOG 0 (p=0.023; HR 0.32; 95% CI 0.17-0.57); FIGO I stage (p<0.001; HR 0.30; 95% CI 0.15-0.58); I-II histological grade (p=0.005; HR 0.38; 95% CI 0.19-0.75); mucinous histology (p=0.013; HR 0.28; 95% CI 0.13-0.53); non-surgical adherences (p<0.002, HR 0.32; 95% CI 0.15-0.54); paracolic gutters inspection (p=0.033; HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.26-0.95) and liver surface biopsies (p=0.048; HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.41-0.98).Toxicity was generally mild and non-haematologic events were the most commonly found (62.9% of the total). The most frequent haematologic toxicities were neutropenia (41.7% in all grades, 9.5% grade 3-4) and anaemia (29.1% in all grades, 3.2% grade 3-4). CONCLUSIONS: The long-term outcome of this series is comparable to the published evidence and reflects the limited activity of platinum-based CT in the adjuvant setting. The potential survival advantage of the addition of paclitaxel to carboplatin cannot be definitively answered due to the small number of patients, the limited follow-up and the retrospective nature of the study. More effective and specific treatments are clearly required, in particular for those patients with stage II and undifferentiated tumours. Quality of surgery entails prognostic value (AU)

APC Yin-Yang haplotype associated with colorectal cancer risk.

The Yin-Yang haplotype is defined as two mismatched haplotypes (Yin and Yang) representing the majority of the existing haplotypes in a particular genomic region. The human adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene shows a Yin-Yang haplotype pattern accounting for 84% of all of the haplotypes existing in the Spanish population. Several association studies have been published regarding APC gene variants (SNPs and haplotypes) and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. However, no studies concerning diplotype structure and CRC risk have been conducted. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the APC Yin-Yang homozygote diplotype is over-represented in patients with sporadic CRC when compared to its distribution in controls, and its association with CRC risk. TaqMan(®) assays were used to genotype three tagSNPs selected across the APC Yin-Yang region. Frequencies of the APC Yin-Yang tagSNP alleles, haplotype and diplotype of 378 CRC cases and 642 controls were compared. Two Spanish CRC group samples were included [Hospital Clínico San Carlos in Madrid (HCSC) and Instituto Catalán de Oncología in Barcelona (ICO)]. Analysis of 157 consecutive CRC patients and 405 control subjects from HCSC showed a significative effect for the risk of CRC (OR=1.93; 95% CI 1.32-2.81; P=0.001). However, this effect was not confirmed in 221 CRC patients and 237 control subjects from ICO (OR=0.89; 95% CI 0.61-1.28; P=0.521). We found a significant association between the APC homozygote Yin-Yang diplotype and the risk of colorectal cancer in the HCSC samples. However, we did not observe this association in the ICO samples. These observations suggest that a study with a larger Spanish cohort is necessary to confirm the effects of the APC Yin-Yang diplotype on the risk of CRC.

Randomized study of weekly irinotecan plus high-dose 5-fluorouracil (FUIRI) versus biweekly irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) as first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumors Study.

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan plus infusional 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) is accepted as a reference treatment for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). The aim of this study was to demonstrate that a regimen without leucovorin (LV) (FUIRI) is not inferior to the standard FOLFIRI (response rate). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with MCRC were randomized to receive either irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) on day 1) + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (400 mg/m(2) bolus and 600 mg/m(2) 22-h infusion) + LV (200 mg/m(2) on days 1-2) (FOLFIRI) every 2 weeks or irinotecan (80 mg/m(2)) + 5-FU (2.250 mg/m(2) 48-h infusion) (FUIRI) weekly. RESULTS: In all, 346 patients were included, 173 in each arm. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the response rates for FOLFIRI and FUIRI were 57% [95% confidence interval (CI) 49% to 64%] and 51% (95% CI 43% to 59%), respectively (P = 0.2809). No statistically significant differences were observed between FOLFIRI and FUIRI regarding median progression-free survival (8.3 versus 8.4 months; P = 0.4339) nor median overall survival (21.6 versus 19.2 months; log-rank test P = 0.2941). Grade 3/4 neutropenia was significantly more frequent on FOLFIRI arm (27% versus 9%), while the proportion of diarrhea was higher on FUIRI arm (21% versus 42%). CONCLUSION: FUIRI represents a valid alternative without LV to the FOLFIRI regimen as MCRC first-line treatment.

Guides for adjuvant treatment of colon cancer. TTD Group (Spanish Cooperative Group for Gastrointestinal Tumor Therapy).

The choice of the most suitable chemotherapy schedule for the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer has been reviewed by the TTD group, as well as the principles of risk assessment for patients with stage II disease. In the light of data now available, oxaliplatin- based schedules (FOLFOX4 or FLOX) are recommended. Alternatives in special situations are monotherapy with capecitabine, UFT/LV, or 5- FU/LV in infusion. In patients with stage II disease, the indication of chemotherapy must be individualized and based on the patient's risk of recurrence (perforation, obstruction, peritumoral lymphovascular involvement, poorly differentiated histology, number of lymph nodes examined < or = 11, pre-surgical CEA), and comorbidities that can compromise the safety of treatment or survival of the patient.

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of adjuvant oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-FU/LV in Dukes' C colon cancer: the X-ACT trial.

Oral capecitabine (Xeloda) is an effective drug with favourable safety in adjuvant and metastatic colorectal cancer. Oxaliplatin-based therapy is becoming standard for Dukes' C colon cancer in patients suitable for combination therapy, but is not yet approved by the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the adjuvant setting. Adjuvant capecitabine is at least as effective as 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV), with significant superiority in relapse-free survival and a trend towards improved disease-free and overall survival. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant capecitabine from payer (UK National Health Service (NHS)) and societal perspectives. We used clinical trial data and published sources to estimate incremental direct and societal costs and gains in quality-adjusted life months (QALMs). Acquisition costs were higher for capecitabine than 5-FU/LV, but higher 5-FU/LV administration costs resulted in 57% lower chemotherapy costs for capecitabine. Capecitabine vs 5-FU/LV-associated adverse events required fewer medications and hospitalisations (cost savings pound3653). Societal costs, including patient travel/time costs, were reduced by >75% with capecitabine vs 5-FU/LV (cost savings pound1318), with lifetime gain in QALMs of 9 months. Medical resource utilisation is significantly decreased with capecitabine vs 5-FU/LV, with cost savings to the NHS and society. Capecitabine is also projected to increase life expectancy vs 5-FU/LV. Cost savings and better outcomes make capecitabine a preferred adjuvant therapy for Dukes' C colon cancer. This pharmacoeconomic analysis strongly supports replacing 5-FU/LV with capecitabine in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer in the UK.

Phase I/II trial of irinotecan plus high-dose 5-fluorouracil (TTD regimen) as first-line chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a phase I/II study of weekly irinotecan [30 min intravenous (i.v.) infusion] combined with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU 3 g/m(2) weekly 48 h i.v. infusion, TTD regimen) as first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in the treatment of gastrointestinal solid tumors (in phase I), and the antitumor activity and toxicity of the recommended phase I dose (in phase II) were determined. RESULTS: Diarrhea was the DLT, and irinotecan 80 mg/m(2) plus 5-FU 3 g/m(2) was the recommended phase I dose. In phase II, the confirmed response rate was 44% [95% confidence interval (CI) 29% to 59%] and the median overall survival was 23.8 months. However, grade 3/4 diarrhea affected 59% of patients and led to withdrawal of three patients. A second cohort of patients studied using the same schedule but with a reduced 5-FU starting dose of 2.25 g/m(2) showed improved tolerance (the incidence of grade 4 diarrhea decreased from 28% to 11% and overall grade 3/4 diarrhea to 56%, with no patient withdrawals) but the confirmed response rate was 28% (95% CI 14% to 45%) and median overall survival was 17.2 months. CONCLUSIONS: We found weekly irinotecan 80 mg/m(2) plus TTD regimen (5-FU 2.25 g/m(2) given as 48-h i.v. infusion) to be a feasible and active combined chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.

Irinotecan (CPT-11) in metastatic colorectal cancer patients resistant to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU): a phase II study.

The efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan (CPT-11) 350 mg/m(2) i.v. once every 3 weeks was assessed in 60 patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) showing failure to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) treatment. The overall objective response rate was 13.6% (1 complete response and 4 partial responses) and 25 patients (42.4%) showed stable disease; the median time to disease progression was 4.4 months and the median survival was 10.5 months. The main non-hematological toxicities were alopecia (80.3% of patients), diarrhea (75.0%), and nausea/vomiting (71.7%); neutropenia was the main hematological toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea appeared in 21 of 131 cycles (16.1%), whereas grade 3 or 4 neutropenia appeared in 78 cycles (25.0%). In conclusion, the present phase II study confirms that CPT-11 350 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks is active and well tolerated as second-line chemotherapy for CRC in 5-FU resistant patients.

Doxorubicin in combination with fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide (i.v. FAC regimen, day 1, 21) versus methotrexate in combination with fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide (i.v. CMF regimen, day 1, 21) as adjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer: a study by the GEICAM group.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the relative efficacy of doxorubicin versus methotrexate in combination with intravenous cyclophosphamide and 5-fluorouracil (FAC versus CMF) as adjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Over a 4-year period, 985 women undergoing curative surgery for breast cancer (T1-3 N0-2 M0, stage I-IIIA, UICC) from nine hospitals were stratified with respect to axillary node involvement (node positive versus node negative) and randomized to receive either FAC (500/50/500/m(2)) every 3 weeks for six cycles or CMF (600/60/600/m(2)) every 3 weeks for six cycles. RESULTS: The relative dose intensities of FAC and CMF were 87% and 85% of planned doses, respectively. Unadjusted data indicated a non-significant trend towards better results with FAC. In the prospectively formed subset of node-negative patients, disease-free survival and overall survival were statistically superior in the FAC treatment arm (P = 0.041 and 0.034, respectively), but this advantage was not seen in the subset of node-positive patients, probably because of a difference in the percentage of patients with four or more positive nodes. Adjusting data for size of treatment effect and potential interactions (number of positive nodes, tumor size, treatment center), the overall relative risk (RR) of disease recurrence and death were significantly lower with FAC treatment (RR 1.2, P = 0.03, and RR 1.3, P = 0.05, respectively). This result was mainly due to the difference observed in the node-negative patient population. Toxicity was mild: FAC induced more alopecia, emesis, mucositis and cardiotoxicity; this last was of clinical concern, but was infrequent and manageable. CMF induced more conjunctivitis and weight gain. There were no toxic deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Doxorubicin in combination with day 1 i.v. cyclophosphamide and 5-fluorouracil is superior to methotrexate in combination with day 1 i.v. cyclophosphamide and 5-fluorouracil as adjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. A treatment effect is particularly evident in the node-negative patients. Although the clinical toxicity of FAC is greater than that of CMF, the levels were manageable and clinically acceptable.

Methotrexate, uracil and tegafur, and leucovorin chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer in progression after high-dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood progenitor cell transplant: a phase II study.

Thirty-four patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had progression of disease after high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) with peripheral blood progenitor cell support (PBPC) had methotrexate, uracil and tegafur (UFT), and leucovorin (MUL) therapy administered: methotrexate administered intramuscularly in combination with UFT given orally and leucovorin given orally. All patients had received extensive prior chemotherapy including a high-dose regimen with PBPC support. Two complete responses (CR) and 11 partial responses (PR) were observed (objective response rate: 13/34 or 38%, 95% confidence interval 22-56%). Seven additional patients had stable disease (SD), 4 of whom (12% of the total population) of 6 months or longer duration, with the clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD of at least 6-month duration) reaching 50%. Median follow-up was 38 months, and the median time to progression and the median overall survival time from the start of MUL were 5.5 and 11 months, respectively. Toxicity was mainly gastrointestinal. Eight patients (24%) had World Health Organization grade II or greater diarrhea and/or enteritis and, consequently, the UFT dose was reduced. Emesis was mild and easily manageable with thiethylperazine given orally. The regimen did not produce significant myelosuppression or alopecia. In conclusion, patients with MBC retain chemosensitivity even when they progress after HDCT/PBPC and can be treated again with chemotherapy. MUL is active and well tolerated in patients with MBC progressing after HDCT. Further studies with this regimen, as salvage chemotherapy or as maintenance chemotherapy after HDCT/PBPC, would appear to be warranted.

Retrospective evaluation of toxicity in three different schedules of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resected colorectal cancer. TTD Spanish Cooperative Group.

Adjuvant chemotherapy has been established since 1990 as standard treatment for patients with colon cancer stage III (Dukes' C). Chemotherapeutic schemes combining 5-fluorouracil with levamisole or leucovorin have shown significant advantage over surgery alone. Adjuvant trials are being currently implemented to investigate some relevant questions, such as which is the optimal duration of chemotherapy, as well as the possible advantage of levamisol versus leucovorin schedules, and of high-dose versus low-dose leucovorin. While these trials are ongoing, a retrospective evaluation of the toxicity associated with the different chemotherapeutic schemes might be of help when choosing the most appropriate regimen for individual patients not involved in clinical trials. A total of 519 patients subjected to three different schedules of adjuvant chemotherapy between 1993 and 1996, were evaluated for toxicity according to the NCI-CTC criteria. Chemotherapeutic regimens were: 5-fluorouracil plus levamisole (5-Fu+Lev; Moertel schedule), 5-fluorouracil plus low-dose leucovorin (5-Fu+LVLD; NCCTG schedule) and 5-fluorouracil plus high-dose leucovorin (5-Fu+LVHD; IMPACT-modified schedule). 5-Fu+LVLD is significantly more toxic than the other two regimens in terms of neutropenia, mucositis and diarrhea. delay in chemotherapy and dose reduction of 5-fluorouracil were also more frequent in the 5-Fu+LVLD group. However, the percentage of prematurely discontinued treatments was significantly higher in the 5-Fu+Lev group. Information on toxicity of adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer may help medical oncologists to choose the most appropriate regimen for individual patients not involved in clinical trials.

Weekly continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil with oral leucovorin in metastatic breast cancer patients with primary resistance to doxorubicin.

Doxorubicin-resistant metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a very poor prognosis scenario, where only taxanes have shown activity, often at the expense of severe toxicity that compromises palliation. This study was undertaken to test the antitumor activity and tolerability of infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) modulated with low-dose oral leucovorin (LV), in heavily pretreated patients with stringent criteria of primary resistance to doxorubicin, visceral involvement, and suboptimal performance status. Twenty-six patients with measurable MBC and primary resistance to anthracyclines received a weekly outpatient 48-hour infusion of high-dose 5-FU with low dose oral leucovorin. All patients were assessable for response and toxicity. Eight partial responses were seen (30% response rate) in soft tissue and visceral sites, with a median response duration of eight months (5 + to 12). 98% of the cycles were minimally toxic or non-toxic. Toxicities included mucositis, diarrhea, and plantar-palmar-syndrome. Our results suggest that this schedule of LV-modulated infusional 5-FU can produce a substantial number of long-lasting responses and meaningful palliation to this very poor prognosis population.

Randomized trial comparing monthly low-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus with weekly high-dose 48-hour continuous-infusion fluorouracil for advanced colorectal cancer: a Spanish Cooperative Group for Gastrointestinal Tumor Therapy (TTD) study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this multicenter study was to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles of a combination of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) given by bolus injection together with intravenous leucovorin (LV) versus high-dose 5-FU in continuous infusion (CI) in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 306 patients were randomized to receive either 5-FU 425 mg/m2 given by bolus injection on days 1-5 plus intravenous (i.v.) LV 20 mg/m2 every four to five weeks or 5-FU 3.5 g/m2/week in a 48-hour CI. Therapy was continued until disease progression. Second-line chemotherapy was allowed in both arms. RESULTS: The response rates in 306 patients with measurable lesions were 19.2% (modulated arm) and 30.3% (CI arm, P < 0.05). The median progression-free survival times were 23.5 weeks (modulated arm) and 25 weeks (CI arm, P = NS). Median survival times were 42.5 weeks (modulated arm) and 48 weeks (CI arm, P = NS). There were no significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicity profiles but if we consider all grades we observed more mucositis in the modulated arm and more hand-foot syndrome in the CI arm. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of response rate, the continuous infusion regimen was more effective than the modulated regimen. There was no significant difference in survival and time to progression, and none in grade 3-4 toxicity.

Preliminary results. UFT/methotrexate/leucovorin for breast Ca patients in progression after HDCT/PBPC support.

Twenty-four patients with metastatic breast cancer that had progressed after high-dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) support were given intramuscular methotrexate in combination with oral UFT (tegafur and uracil) and oral leucovorin (the MUL regimen). Of the total treated, 21 patients are currently evaluable for response and toxicity. All patients had received extensive prior chemotherapy, including a high-dose regimen with PBPC support. Of the 21 assessable patients, 8 obtained either a complete response (1) or partial response (7), for an overall objective response rate of 38%. Another 7 patients had stable disease for 3 or more months. Therefore, the MUL regimen was able to stop disease progression for 3 or more months in nearly 75% of patients. The median time to progression and median overall survival from the start of MUL were 6 and 9 months, respectively. The toxicity was mainly gastrointestinal; 6 patients (29%) had World Health Organization grade 2/3 diarrhea, leading to a UFT dose reduction. Emesis was mild and easily manageable with thiethylperazine. In conclusion, MUL chemotherapy is active and well tolerated in patients with metastatic breast cancer in progression after high-dose chemotherapy. Further studies with this regimen, either as salvage chemotherapy or as maintenance chemotherapy after high-dose chemotherapy with PBPC, are warranted.

Neoadjuvant therapy with cisplatin/fluorouracil vs cisplatin/UFT in locally advanced squamous cell head and neck cancer.

This study compared the activity and toxicity of fluorouracil (5-FU)/ cisplatin with the combination tegafur and uracil (UFT)/cisplatin in the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced-stage III or IV (MO)-head and neck cancer. A total of 67 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by either a continuous infusion of 5-FU 1,000 mg/m2/day on days 2 through 6 (group 1) or oral administration of UFT 300 mg/m2/day on days 2 through 20 (group 2). Both treatments were repeated every 21 days for four cycles. Responding patients received locoregional standard radiotherapy (50 to 70 Gy) after chemotherapy. Group 1 was comprised of 34 patients, 30 of whom were men, with a median age of 57.5 years; 79% of this group had a Karnofsky performance status of 90% to 100%; 70% had a squamous and 29% an undifferentiated histology. The majority (85%) had stage IV disease. Of the 33 patients in group 2, 29 were men. The median age was 56 years. Most (88%) had a performance status of 90% to 100%. More patients had a squamous than an undifferentiated histology (82% vs 18%) and most (88%) had stage IV disease. Overall response in group 1 was 73% (21% complete) compared with 79% (18% complete) in group 2. At a median follow-up of 84 months, no significant differences have emerged in overall survival, 15 vs 37 months, or time to progression, 8.5 vs 14.5 months, for groups 1 and 2, respectively. Toxicity was also similar, except for phlebitis, which occurred significantly more often in group 1 (71% vs 9%). Cisplatin/UFT was as effective as the classic cisplatin/5-FU regimen and has the advantages of outpatient oral administration and a lower incidence of phlebitis.

Outpatient weekly high-dose continuous-infusion 5-fluorouracil plus oral leucovorin in advanced colorectal cancer. A phase II trial. Spanish Cooperative Group for Gastrointestinal Tumor Therapy (TTD).

BACKGROUND: In a previous phase I-II trial we showed that the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in a weekly 48-hour continuous infusion (CI) was 3.5 g/m2. In a subsequent confirmative phase II trial with 85 evaluable patients, a 38.5% response rate was obtained, and a median survival of 12 months. These data were comparable to those achieved by biochemical modulation of 5-FU with leucovorin. On this basis we attempted to modulate high-dose 5-FU (3 g/m2) with oral leucovorin (LV) but the regimen was too toxic and the dose had to be reduced. A new phase II trial with 2 g/m2/week plus oral leucovorin was planned. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From July 1992 to June 1994, 110 previously untreated patients with advanced, measurable colorectal cancer were included in a multicenter study. The patients received, on an outpatient basis, 5-FU 2 g/m2 by continuous infusion for 48 hours once a week until progression or the appearance of toxic effects. Oral leucovorin (60 mg every six hours) was also given during the 5-FU infusion. RESULTS: Patients received a median dose intensity of 5-FU of 1.6 g/m2/week (range 0.9-2). Three complete responses and 36 partial responses were observed. The overall response rate was 37.5% (95% CI, 28% to 46.8%), the median time to progression 7.4 months and median survival 14.5 months. W.H.O. grade 3 diarrhea occurred in 27 patients (24.5%); grade 3 mucositis was observed in 9 (8.1%) patients and grade 4 in one. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting was reported in 13 (11.7%) patients, while grade 3 hand-foot syndrome was detected in only 5 (4.5%). Grade 4 leukopenia occurred in one patient and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in two. CONCLUSIONS: Oral leucovorin modulation of weekly 48-hour continuous infusion of 5-FU at 2 g/m2 is an active regimen, with diarrhea and mucositis as the main limiting toxic effects. Its antitumor activity does not seem superior to that obtained with a weekly 48-hour continuous infusion of 5-FU alone at a dose of 3.5 g/m2.

The Spanish experience with high-dose infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in colorectal cancer. The Spanish Cooperative Group For Gastrointestinal Tumor Therapy (TTD).

Background In a previous phase I to II trial, we have shown that the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) in 48-hour continuous infusion (CI) weekly was 3.5 gr/m2. In a subsequent confirmative phase II trial with 85 evaluable patients, a 38.5% response rate was obtained and the median survival reached was 12 months. These data were comparable to those achieved by biochemical modulation of 5-FU with Leucovorin. On this basis we tried to modulate high-dose 5-FU (3 gr/m2) with oral leucovorin (LV) but the regimen was too toxic and the dose had to be reduced. A new phase II trial with 2 g/m2/week plus oral leucovorin was planned. Patients received a median dose intensity of 5-FU of 1.6 g/m2/week (range 0.9-2). Three complete responses and 36 partial responses were observed. Overall response rate was 37.5% (95% CI, 28% to 46.8%). Median time to progression has been 7.4 months, and median survival 14.4 months. WHO grade 3 diarrhea was seen in 27 patients (24.5%). Grade 3 mucositis was also seen in 9 (8.1%) patients, and grade 4 was observed in one. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting was reported in 13 (11.7%) patients. Grade 3 hand-foot syndrome was detected in only 5 (4.5%) patients. Grade 4 leukopenia was observed in 1 case and grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia was observed in two cases, respectively. Oral leucovorin modulation of weekly 48-hour continuous infusion of 5-FU at 2 g/m2 is an active regimen, with diarrhea and mucositis as main limiting toxicities. Its antitumor activity does not seem superior to that obtained with a weekly 48 hour continuous infusion of 5-FU alone at a dose of 3.5 g/m2.

A phase II trial of weekly high dose continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil plus oral leucovorin in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. The Spanish Cooperative Group for Gastrointestinal Tumor Therapy (TTD).

BACKGROUND: In a previous Phase II trial, the authors showed that a weekly continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) at a dose of 3.5 g/m2 for 48 hours is an active treatment for advanced colorectal cancer. The overall response rate was 38.5%, and the median survival was 12 months. These data were comparable to those achieved by biochemical modulation of 5-FU with leucovorin. To study the modulation of this weekly, high dose, continuous infusion 5-FU with oral leucovorin, a new Phase II trial was planned. METHODS: From December 1991 to July 1992, 43 previously untreated patients with measurable advanced colorectal cancer were included in a multicenter study. They received on an outpatient basis 5-FU at a weekly dose of 3 g/m2 by continuous infusion for 48 hours until progression or toxicity. Oral leucovorin (60 mg every 6 hours) also was given during the infusion of 5-FU. RESULTS: Patients received a median dose intensity of 5-FU of 2.2 g/m2/week (range, 0.76-3 g/m2/week). One complete response and 11 partial responses were observed. The overall response rate was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16-45%). Median time to progression was 7 months, and the median survival was 15 months. World Health Organization Grades 3 and 4 diarrhea were observed in 19 (45%) and 6 (14%) patients, respectively. Grade 3 mucositis also was observed in 10 (24%) patients, and Grade 4 mucositis was observed in 1. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting were reported in seven (17%) patients. Grade 3 hand-foot syndrome was detected in only two (2.5%) patients. No leukopenia or thrombocytopenia was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Oral leucovorin modulation of a weekly 48-hour infusion of 5-FU at a dose of 3 g/m2 of leucovorin is a toxic regimen, always requiring dose reduction, with diarrhea and mucositis as the main limiting toxicities. Its antitumor activity does not seem superior to that observed with a weekly 48-hour infusion of 5-FU alone at a dose of 3.5 g/m2.