Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Testing prior to Treatment with 5-Fluorouracil, Capecitabine, and Tegafur: A Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: 5-Fluorouracil (FU) is one of the most commonly used cytostatic drugs in the systemic treatment of cancer. Treatment with FU may cause severe or life-threatening side effects and the treatment-related mortality rate is 0.2-1.0%. SUMMARY: Among other risk factors associated with increased toxicity, a genetic deficiency in dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), an enzyme responsible for the metabolism of FU, is well known. This is due to variants in the DPD gene (DPYD). Up to 9% of European patients carry a DPD gene variant that decreases enzyme activity, and DPD is completely lacking in approximately 0.5% of patients. Here we describe the clinical and genetic background and summarize recommendations for the genetic testing and tailoring of treatment with 5-FU derivatives. The statement was developed as a consensus statement organized by the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology in cooperation with 13 medical associations from Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Key Messages: (i) Patients should be tested for the 4 most common genetic DPYD variants before treatment with drugs containing FU. (ii) Testing forms the basis for a differentiated, risk-adapted algorithm with recommendations for treatment with FU-containing drugs. (iii) Testing may optionally be supplemented by therapeutic drug monitoring.

A randomized phase II study of paclitaxel alone versus paclitaxel plus sorafenib in second- and third-line treatment of patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (PASO).

BACKGROUND: We conducted an open-label, randomized, two-arm multi-center study to assess the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel versus paclitaxel + sorafenib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either paclitaxel monotherapy (80 mg/m2) weekly (3 weeks on, 1 week off) plus sorafenib 400 mg orally, twice a day taken continuously throughout 28 day cycles. Sorafenib dose was gradually escalated from a starting dose of 200 mg twice a day. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A pre-planned efficacy interim analysis was performed on the data of 60 patients, 30 patients in each treatment arm. Median PFS was estimated at 6.6 months (95% CI: 5.1 to 9.0) in patients randomized to single-agent paclitaxel (Arm A) and 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.8 to 6.5) in patients randomized to paclitaxel-sorafenib combination (Arm B) therapy. Contrary to the hypothesis, the treatment effect was statistically significant in favor of paclitaxel monotherapy (hazard ratio 1.80, 95% CI: 1.02 to 3.20; log-rank test P = 0.0409). It was decided to stop the trial early for futility. Median OS was also in favor of Arm A (20.7 months (95% CI: 16.4 to 26.7) versus 12.1 months (95% CI: 5.8 to 20.4) in Arm B. Clinical control was achieved in 28 patients (93.3%) in Arm A and in 21 patients 70.0% in Arm B. Overall response rate was met in 43.3% of patients in Arm A and in 40.0% in Arm B. Toxicities were increased in Arm B with higher rates of diarrhea, nausea, neutropenia, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) and anorexia, Grad 3 and 4 toxicities were rare. CONCLUSIONS: In this pre-planned interim analysis, paclitaxel-sorafenib combination therapy was not found to be superior to paclitaxel monotherapy with regard to the primary end point, progression-free survival. The trial was therefore discontinued early. There was no indication of more favorable outcomes for combination therapy in secondary efficacy end points. As expected, the safety and toxicity profile of the combination therapy was less favorable compared to monotherapy. Overall, this trial did not demonstrate that adding sorafenib to second- or third-line paclitaxel provides any clinical benefit to patients with HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Cautious dosing using a sorafenib ramp up schedule might have contributed to negative results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at EudraCT (No 2009-018025-73) and retrospectively registered at Clinical trials.gov on March 17, 2011 ( NCT01320111 ).

Prevalence of Circulating Tumor Cells After Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Anthracyclines in Patients With HER2-negative, Hormone Receptor-positive Early Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Use of anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with early breast cancer (EBC) has been well-established but is often associated with cardiotoxicity. Based on data suggesting a limited benefit of anthracyclines in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative patients, the Simultaneous Study of Docetaxel Based Anthracycline Free Adjuvant Treatment Evaluation, as well as Life Style Intervention Strategies (SUCCESS) C study randomized patients to either anthracycline-containing or anthracycline-free chemotherapy. Given the proven prognostic value of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in EBC, we compared the prevalence of CTCs after chemotherapy between both treatment arms for a preliminary efficacy assessment. METHODS: The SUCCESS C trial (NCT00847444) is an open-label, phase III study randomizing 3547 patients with HER2-negative EBC to either 3 cycles of epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, and cyclophosphamide followed by 3 cycles of docetaxel (FEC-DOC) or 6 cycles of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (DOC-C). CTC status was prospectively evaluated in hormone receptor-positive patients at the time of last chemotherapy cycle using the US Food and Drug Administration-approved CellSearch System (Janssen Diagnostics). RESULTS: Data on CTC status were available for 1766 patients. Overall, CTCs were found in 221 (12.5%) patients. Univariate analyses revealed that presence of CTCs at time of last chemotherapy cycle was not significantly associated with tumor or patient characteristics (all P > .1). There was no significant difference with respect to presence of CTCs between patients randomized to FEC-DOC or DOC-C (11.5% vs. 13.6%; P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: The comparable prevalence of CTCs at the time of last chemotherapy cycle may indicate that anthracycline-free chemotherapy is equally effective to anthracycline-containing chemotherapy in HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive EBC. However, efficacy data from the final survival analysis of SUCCESS C have to be awaited to confirm these preliminary findings.

A randomized phase 2 study comparing EC or CMF versus nab-paclitaxel plus capecitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for nonfrail elderly patients with moderate to high-risk early breast cancer (ICE II-GBG 52).

BACKGROUND: Although greater than 40% of breast cancers occur in patients aged ≥65 years, these individuals are frequently undertreated. Taxane-based adjuvant chemotherapy is considered the treatment of choice but to the authors' knowledge has only limited evidence in elderly patients. METHODS: Patients aged ≥65 years with a Charlson comorbidity index ≤2 and pT1/2 pN0/1 disease and either human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive, hormone receptor-negative, grade 3 (according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 3.0]), high uPA/PAI-1 or any stage pT3/4 pN2/3 breast cancer were randomized to receive 4 cycles of adjuvant epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) (epirubicin at a dose of 90 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide at a dose of 600 mg/m(2) intravenously [iv] on day 1 every 3 22 days) or 6 cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) (cyclophosphamide at a dose of 500 mg/m(2), methotrexate at a dose of 40 mg/m(2), and 5-fluorouracil at a dose of 600 mg/m(2) iv on days 1 plus 8 every 29 days) versus 6 cycles of nab-paclitaxel and capecitabine (nPX) (nab-paclitaxel at a dose of 100 mg/m(2) iv on days 1, 8, and 15 every 21 days with 1 week of rest every 6 weeks plus capecitabine at a dose of 2000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1-14 every 21 days). Primary endpoints were treatment discontinuations and overall frequency of adverse events. RESULTS: Thirteen of 198 patients (6.6%) discontinued EC/CMF and 69 of 193 patients (35.8%) discontinued nPX (P<.001) with 1 and 5 deaths observed during treatment, respectively. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were more frequent among patients treated with EC/CMF (90.9%) than among those treated with nPX (64.8%) (P<.001), with hematological toxicities being more frequent with EC/CMF (88.4% vs 22.3%; P<.001), but nonhematological toxicities (hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, mucositis, fatigue, sensory neuropathy, thromboembolisms, and metabolic disorders) being more frequent with nPX (58.5% vs 18.7%; P<.001). None of the geriatric scores (Charlson comorbidity index, Vulnerable Elders Survey [VES-13], Instrumental Activities of Daily Living [IADL], and G8) independently predicted grade 3 to 5 toxic events or treatment discontinuations. No differences in survival between the treatment groups were observed after 22.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EC/CMF, treatment with nPX led to more treatment discontinuations and nonhematological toxicities in elderly patients with moderate or high-risk breast cancer.

Contrasting regulation of macrophage iron homeostasis in response to infection with Listeria monocytogenes depending on localization of bacteria.

Due to its multiple roles for the proliferation and pathogenicity of many microbes on the one hand and via modulation of immune effector functions on the other hand the control over iron homeostasis is thought to play a decisive role in the course of infections. Diversion of cellular iron traffic is considered as an important defense mechanism of macrophages to reduce metal availability for intracellular bacteria residing in the phagosome. However, evidence is lacking whether such alterations of iron homeostasis also become evident upon infection with bacteria gaining access to the cytosol like Listeria monocytogenes. Here we show that infection of macrophages with L. monocytogenes triggers the expression of the major cellular iron exporter ferroportin1 and induces cellular iron egress. As the growth of Listeria within macrophages is promoted by iron, stimulation of ferroportin1 functionality limits the availability of the metal for Listeria residing in the cytoplasm, whereas ferroportin1 degradation upon hepcidin treatment increases intracellular bacterial growth. In parallel to an increase of ferroportin1 expression, infected macrophages induce anti-microbial immune effector mechanisms such as TNFα formation or NO expression which are aggravated upon iron deficiency. These adaptive changes of iron homeostasis and immune response pathways are only found in macrophages infected with Listeria which express listeriolysin O and are therefore able to escape from the phagosome to the cytoplasm. Listeriolysin O deficient Listeria which are restricted to the phagosome are even killed by excess iron which may be based on "iron intoxification" via macrophage radical formation, because iron supplementation in that setting is paralleled by increased ROS formation. Our results indicate that ferroportin1 mediated iron export is a nutritional immune effector pathway to control infection with Listeria residing in the cytoplasm, whereas a different strategy is observed in mutant Listeria restricted to the phagosome, where iron remains in the macrophages likewise contributing to ROS mediated intoxification of bacteria.

The yin and yang of type I interferon activity in bacterial infection.

Interferons (IFNs) are cytokines that are important for immune responses, particularly to intracellular pathogens. They are divided into two structurally and functionally distinct types that interact with different cell-surface receptors. Classically, type I IFNs are potent antiviral immunoregulators, whereas the type II IFN enhances antibacterial immunity. However, as outlined here, type I IFNs are also produced in response to infection with other pathogens, and an increasing body of work shows that type I IFNs have an important role in the host response to bacterial infection. Strikingly, their activity can be either favourable or detrimental, and can influence various immune effector mechanisms.