Modified-BEP Chemotherapy in Patients With Germ-Cell Tumors Treated at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

OBJECTIVES: Bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) is the most common and successful chemotherapy regimen for germ-cell tumor (GCT) patients, accompanied by a bleomycin-induced dose-dependent lung toxicity in certain patients. In an attempt to reduce bleomycin-toxicity, we developed a modified-BEP (mBEP) regimen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2008 and February 2018, 182 unselected mainly testicular GCT patients (39 with adjuvant purpose and 143 with curative purpose) received a tri-weekly 5-day hospitalization schedule with bleomycin 15 U intravenous (IV) push on day 1 and 10 U IV continuous infusion over 12 hours on days 1 to 3, cisplatin 20 mg/m IV, and etoposide 100 mg/m IV on days 1 to 5. Pulmonary toxicity was assessed through chest computed tomography scan and clinical monitoring. RESULTS: Median number of mBEP cycles was 3 (range: 1 to 4). In the curative setting, according to the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) prognostic system, 112, 21, and 9 patients had good-risk, intermediate-risk, and poor-risk class, respectively; 66 (46%) patients had complete response (CR), 67 (47%) had partial response (52 of whom became CR afterwards), 6 (4%) had stable disease (that in 3 became CR afterwards), 3 (2%) progressed, and 1 (1%) died of brain stroke. At a median follow-up of 2.67 years (interquartile range: 1.23-5.00 y), 1 and 5-year overall survival and progression-free survival were 99% and 95%, and 90% and 88%, respectively. In the entire patient population, there was grade 3/4 neutropenia in 92 patients (51%), febrile neutropenia in 11 patients (6%), grade 1/2 nausea in 74 patients (41%), and no death due to pulmonary toxicity. CONCLUSION: In GCT patients, our mBEP-schedule would suggest an effective treatment modality without suffering meaningful pulmonary toxicity.

Is there still a role for sorafenib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of sorafenib over other targeted agents.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has largely improved over the last decade, due to the availability of several targeted agents (TAs). Sorafenib was the first TA to report a benefit in terms of PFS in this disease, and it has largely been used as a comparator in randomized trials. We tested its activity compared to other TAs by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the ASCO university websites were searched for randomized phase II or III trials that compared other TAs to sorafenib in mRCC. Data extraction was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The measured outcomes were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the overall response rate (ORR). Sub-analyses were performed for MSKCC prognostic groups and lines of therapy. RESULTS: A total of 3094 patients were evaluable for PFS. Other TAs significantly reduce the risk of progression compared to sorafenib (HR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.85; p<0.001). This difference remains significant in patients in a good prognostic group with respect to both first- (HR=0.61; 95%CI, 0.44-0.85; p=0.003) and second-line therapy (HR=0.58; 95% CI, 0.42-0.79; p<0.001). No significant differences were, however, found in patients with an intermediate prognosis in terms of both first- (HR=0.80; 95% CI, 0.60-1.00; p=0.05) and second-line treatment (HR=0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.07; p=0.21). In 2922 patients evaluable for OS, no significant difference was found between other TAs and sorafenib (HR=1.07; 95% CI, 0.97-1.18; p=0.18). A benefit was also not identified when the analysis was limited to patients treated with first or subsequent lines of therapy or in patients previously treated with sunitinib. Significant differences were found in terms of the ORR in the 2963 evaluable patients favoring other TAs (RR=1.48; 95% CI, 1.24-1.76; p<0.001). This difference remain significant when a sub-analysis was performed per line of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Other TAs improve PFS but not OS when compared to sorafenib. The use of sorafenib in patients with an intermediate prognosis, especially in second-line therapy, does not have a detrimental effect on PFS and might be an option for certain patients.

Successful treatment with GEMOX in patient with metastatic pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenosquamous carcinoma (PASC) is a rare subtype of pancreatic cancer characterized by a dual histological component and aggressive behavior. This form is not well known, its histogenesis is uncertain, and there are different opinions on the diagnostic histopathological criteria. The differential diagnosis with more common ductal adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, squamous or adenosquamous metastases is complex. The available therapies do not improve the poor prognosis and it is difficult to find long-term survivors (more than 1 year), even after demolitive surgery with complementary therapies. CASE REPORT: We report a case of advanced PASC with excellent progression-free survival and overall survival, 20 months and 29 months, respectively. Furthermore, an almost complete response was obtained to first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine/oxaliplatin (GEMOX) followed by maintenance gemcitabine. CONCLUSION: GEMOX followed by gemcitabine as maintenance could be an effective treatment for this pancreatic entity. Further reports are needed to confirm this outcome.

"Waiting and the waiting room: how do you experience them?" emotional implications and suggestions from patients with cancer.

Waiting can increase discomfort. The goal of this study was to identify moods and fears of cancer patients while in a waiting room and to capture their concrete suggestions for an anthropocentric transformation of waiting itself. A 15-item questionnaire was given to 355 patients who came to our Out-patient Oncology Clinic. Eighty-three percent of patients felt that waiting has an emotional cost, 35% were upset by talking about their condition with others while waiting, and 26% suffered a major emotional impact seeing other sick people and witnessing their clinical decline. Eighty-nine percent of patients suggested that alternative activities, such as meetings with professionals, doctors, and psychologists, be organized during the waiting period; 65% suggested fun activities (music therapy, drawing courses, library, TV). Most patients asked to have the freedom to leave the waiting room. This option, feasibly by means of IMs/"beepers," would limit their sense of having a lack of freedom or being robbed of their time. This study highlighted the complexity and heterogeneity of emotional implications that waiting causes in patients with cancer and collected many patients' suggestions about how to create a constructive, free, and personalized waiting period, overcoming the boredom, distress, and psychological suffering it causes.

Phase II study of an all-oral combination of vinorelbine with capecitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Combination of intravenous (i.v.) vinorelbine and capecitabine was shown to be feasible and effective in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In an effort to improve patient convenience and to prolong infusion-free survival, we investigated in first-line treatment a regimen combining oral vinorelbine and capecitabine in a phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients (median age, 60 years) with MBC received the combination consisting of oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 plus capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) bid given from day 1 to day 14 in an open-label, multicentre phase II study [the recommended doses were established in a phase I study (Nolé et al. in Ann Oncol 17:332-339, 2006)]. Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of the patients had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy and 81% presented with visceral involvement. The median number of administered cycles per patient was 7 (range 1-18). Twenty-three responses were documented and validated by an independent panel review, yielding response rates of 44.2% (95% CI, 30.5-58.7) in the 52 enrolled patients and 54.8% (95% CI, 38.7-70.2) in the 42 evaluable patients. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 8.4 and 25.8 months, respectively. Neutropenia was the main dose-limiting toxicity but complications were uncommon, only one patient having experienced febrile neutropenia. Other frequently reported adverse events included, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and constipation, stomatitis and hand-foot syndrome, which were rarely severe. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen combining oral vinorelbine with capecitabine is effective and manageable in the first-line treatment of MBC. Oral vinorelbine on days 1, 8 and 15 with capecitabine from days 1 to 14 every 3 weeks represents a convenient option which offers an all-oral treatment to the patients and prolongs their infusion-free survival.

Capecitabine initially concomitant to radiotherapy then perioperatively administered in locally advanced rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant capecitabine, concomitant to radiotherapy, followed by capecitabine monotherapy, in operable locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) by measuring pathologic response and conservative surgery rate, toxicity profile, and disease-free survival (DFS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: From October 2002 to July 2006, a total of 51 patients affected by LARC (T3-T4 or any node positive tumor), received capecitabine (825 mg/m(2), orally, twice daily continuously) concomitant to radiotherapy on the pelvis (50.4 Gy/ 28 fractions), followed by two cycles of capecitabine (1,250 mg/m(2), orally, twice daily, 14 days on 7 days off) up until 2 weeks before surgery. Tailored adjuvant systemic treatment was discussed according to pathologic stage. RESULTS: Of 51 patients, (median age 61 years, range 38-82 years; 19 women and 32 men; ECOG performance status 0/1/2: 46/4/1), 50 were evaluable for response: 18% complete pathologic remission; 12% T-downstaging, and 30% N-downstaging. One patient died before surgery from mesenteric stroke. Grade 3 acute toxicities were 2% diarrhea, 8% dermatitis, 2% liver function test elevation, and 2% hand-foot syndrome. Sphincter preservation rates for tumors < or =6 cm from the anal verge were 62% and 80% for the whole population. Median follow up was 43.0 months (range 0.8-68.6 months). Five-years DFS was 85.4% (95% CI = 75.3-95.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our study results, we conclude that this regimen is well tolerated and active and compares favorably with existing capecitabine-based approaches.