Phase III Study of Pemetrexed in Combination With Cisplatin Versus Cisplatin Alone in Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, a rapidly progressing malignancy with a median survival time of 6 to 9 months, have previously responded poorly to chemotherapy. We conducted a phase III trial to determine whether treatment with pemetrexed and cisplatin results in survival time superior to that achieved with cisplatin alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients who were not eligible for curative surgery were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1. Both regimens were given intravenously every 21 days. RESULTS: A total of 456 patients were assigned: 226 received pemetrexed and cisplatin, 222 received cisplatin alone, and eight never received therapy. Median survival time in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm was 12.1 months versus 9.3 months in the control arm (P = .020, two-sided log-rank test). The hazard ratio for death of patients in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm versus those in the control arm was 0.77. Median time to progression was significantly longer in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm: 5.7 months versus 3.9 months (P = .001). Response rates were 41.3% in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm versus 16.7% in the control arm (P < .0001). After 117 patients had enrolled, folic acid and vitamin B12 were added to reduce toxicity, resulting in a significant reduction in toxicities in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm. CONCLUSION: Treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin and vitamin supplementation resulted in superior survival time, time to progression, and response rates compared with treatment with cisplatin alone in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Addition of folic acid and vitamin B12 significantly reduced toxicity without adversely affecting survival time.

Emerging biological therapies for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Introduction: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has limited treatment options with minimal new therapy approvals for unresectable disease in the past 15 years. However, considerable work has occurred to develop immunotherapies and biomarker driven therapy to improve patient outcomes over this period.Areas covered: This review examines current standard of care systemic therapy in the first- and second line setting. The last 12 months has seen 2 significant trials (Checkmate 743 and CONFIRM) which provide evidence supporting the role of immunotherapy in the management of MPM. Further trials are underway to assess the role of combination chemoimmunotherapy and personalized therapy. Additionally, a large number of clinical trials are ongoing to assess the efficacy of oncoviral, dendritic cell, anti-mesothelin and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy in the treatment of MPM.Expert opinion: Recent Phase III trial results have established a role for immunotherapy in the management of MPM. The optimal sequencing and combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy remains to be determined. Novel therapies for MPM are promising however efficacy remains to be determined and issues remain regarding access to and delivery of these therapies.

Best Evidence to Best Practice: Implementing an Innovative Model of Nutrition Care for Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Improves Outcomes.

Malnutrition is prevalent in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), impacting outcomes. Despite publication of nutrition care evidence-based guidelines (EBGs), evidence-practice gaps exist. This study aimed to implement and evaluate the integration of a patient-centred, best-practice dietetic model of care into an HNC multidisciplinary team (MDT) to minimise the detrimental sequelae of malnutrition. A mixed-methods, pre-post study design was used to deliver key interventions underpinned by evidence-based implementation strategies to address identified barriers and facilitators to change at individual, team and system levels. A data audit of medical records established baseline adherence to EBGs and clinical parameters prior to implementation in a prospective cohort. Key interventions included a weekly Supportive Care-Led Pre-Treatment Clinic and a Nutrition Care Dashboard highlighting nutrition outcome data integrated into MDT meetings. Focus groups provided team-level evaluation of the new model of care. Economic analysis determined system-level impact. The baseline clinical audit (n = 98) revealed barriers including reactive nutrition care, lack of familiarity with EBGs or awareness of intensive nutrition care needs as well as infrastructure and dietetic resource limitations. Post-implementation data (n = 34) demonstrated improved process and clinical outcomes: pre-treatment dietitian assessment; use of a validated nutrition assessment tool before, during and after treatment. Patients receiving the new model of care were significantly more likely to complete prescribed radiotherapy and systemic therapy. Differences in mean percentage weight change were clinically relevant. At the system level, the new model of care avoided 3.92 unplanned admissions and related costs of $AUD121K per annum. Focus groups confirmed clear support at the multidisciplinary team level for continuing the new model of care. Implementing an evidence-based nutrition model of care in patients with HNC is feasible and can improve outcomes. Benefits of this model of care may be transferrable to other patient groups within cancer settings.

Efficacy of sorafenib in advanced renal cell carcinoma independent of prior treatment, histology or prognostic group.

AIM: To assess the response rate and safety of sorafenib in different subpopulations of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: Single-arm open access trial. Key eligibility: advanced RCC with either clear-cell or non-clear-cell histopathology; progression on prior systemic chemotherapy or treatment naïve. Sorafenib was commenced at 400 mg twice daily continuously. RESULTS: A total 47 participants with metastatic RCC were treated with sorafenib. Overall, 1 participant experienced complete response, 6 (13%) had documented partial response (PR) and 29 (62%) had stable disease (SD) as the best response. Eight (17%) had non-clear-cell histopathology and five (10%) had sarcomatoid features. In the non-clear-cell histopathology cohort, five participants (62.5%) had SD. Twenty-three (49%) participants were treatment naïve; of these, 1/23 showed CR, 5/23 experienced PR and 13/23 had SD (clinical benefit: 83%). Overall, 14 (30%) and 22 (47%) participants had high-risk status according to MSKCC (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center) and Heng prognostic scores, respectively. In the MSKCC poor prognostic group (14 participants), one participant had CR, two participants showed PR and eight participants had SD (clinical benefit: 79%). In Heng poor prognostic group (22 participants), 1 participant experienced CR, 2 participants showed PR and 13 had SD (clinical benefit: 73%). Hand-foot syndrome (53%), rash (47%), fatigue (42%), nausea (40%), anorexia (34%) and diarrhea (32%) were the most common adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the efficacy and tolerability of sorafenib in a different spectrum of advanced RCC patients including non-clear-cell histology, poor prognostic status and as first-line treatment.

Patient-doctor communication: use of complementary and alternative medicine by adult patients with cancer.

The purpose of this survey was to examine patient-doctor communication about the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by adult patients with cancer and compare patients' satisfaction with the consultation between patients who had and those who had not discussed the use of CAM with their doctors. Oncologists from three hospitals screened patients for eligibility. Eligible patients were mailed a letter of invitation with a questionnaire (N = 1,323). Three hundred eighty-one questionnaires were returned. Sixty-five percent of cancer patients used at least one form of CAM. Use of CAM was not discussed with the oncologist by 55% of respondents using biologically based CAM and by 80% of those using non-biologically based CAM since the diagnosis of cancer. Patients who discussed the use of biologic CAM with their oncologists were more satisfied with the consultation than those who had not (p = .027), whereas there were no significant differences between patients who discussed or did not discuss use of non-biologically based CAM (p = .102). A substantial proportion of cancer patients do not discuss the use of CAM with their oncologists. It is important to improve patient-doctor communication about the use of CAM to increase patients' satisfaction with the oncology consultation.

Boric Acid Disturbs Cell Wall Synthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Boric acid (BA) has broad antimicrobial activity that makes it a popular treatment for yeast vaginitis in complementary and alternative medicine. In the model yeast S. cerevisiae, BA disturbs the cytoskeleton at the bud neck and impairs the assembly of the septation apparatus. BA treatment causes cells to form irregular septa and leads to the synthesis of irregular cell wall protuberances that extend far into the cytoplasm. The thick, chitin-rich septa that are formed during BA exposure prevent separation of cells after abscission and cause the formation of cell chains and clumps. As a response to the BA insult, cells signal cell wall stress through the Slt2p pathway and increase chitin synthesis, presumably to repair cell wall damage.

Duration of chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

PURPOSE: To determine if it is preferable to extend chemotherapy beyond a standard number of cycles in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: We searched biomedical literature databases and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a defined number of cycles with continuation of the same chemotherapy until disease progression, a larger defined number of cycles of identical chemotherapy, and a defined number of cycles of identical initial chemotherapy followed by additional cycles of an alternative chemotherapy. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed effect model. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AE), and health-related quality of life (HRQL). RESULTS: We found 13 RCTs including 3,027 patients. Extending chemotherapy improved PFS substantially (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.81; P < .00001) and OS modestly (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99; P = .03). Subgroup analysis revealed that effects on PFS were greater for trials extending chemotherapy with third-generation regimens rather than older regimens (HR, 0.70 interaction v 0.92 interaction; P = .003). Extending chemotherapy was associated with more frequent AE in all trials where it was reported and impaired HRQL in two of seven trials. CONCLUSION: Extending chemotherapy, particularly with a third-generation regimen, improved PFS substantially, but OS less so. Future trials should test extending treatment with more effective and/or better-tolerated agents.

Prospective evaluation of quality of life and nutrition before and after treatment for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess quality of life in patients undergoing chemoradiation therapy for nasopharyngeal cancer. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is standard for advanced nasopharyngeal cancer; however, the toxic effects of this treatment are substantial. DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of quality of life and nutritional status before and after treatment for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: A cohort of 14 patients, treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for 7 weeks, completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire and Head and Neck Module before and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after treatment. Changes in score were analyzed and correlated with the toxic effect grade. RESULTS: Quality of life issues during the 24 months of follow-up included poorer global health (P = .01), fatigue (P = .01), appetite loss (P<.001), swallowing difficulties (P = .002), sense problems (P = .03), difficulty with social eating (P = .005), dental problems (P = .045), trismus (P = .001), xerostomia (P<.001), sticky saliva (P = .001), cough (P = .02), and feeling ill (P = .03). Pain (P = .004) and emotional functioning (P<.001) significantly improved from the pretreatment rating. The median weight loss was 7 kg, with most weight loss occurring during treatment, despite nutritional support with gastrostomy feeding tubes. One patient still required percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding at 2 years after treatment. Physician-scored toxic effects correlated poorly with quality-of-life scores. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life and functional assessment should be important end points in the follow-up of patients with nasopharyngeal cancer who receive chemoradiotherapy. This study supports the need for ongoing support and rehabilitation in a multidisciplinary setting.

A pilot study of preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable gastric cancer: Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group Study 9601.

BACKGROUND: With poor cure rates in gastric cancer using surgery alone, the safety, efficacy and feasibility of preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy was investigated. METHODS: Patients with advanced but operable gastric or cardio-oesophageal adenocarcinoma were staged using endoscopy, computed tomography scan and laparoscopy. If considered potentially resectable, they received chemotherapy (epirubicin, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) for 9 weeks before and after surgery. RESULTS: Of 59 participants entered, two were found to have metastatic disease and were excluded from the analysis. Of the participants, 10 were women and 47 men; their median age was 58 years (range 27-83 years) and median performance status 0 (range 0-1). Two of the 57 participants commencing chemotherapy did not undergo surgery (one sudden death, one new liver metastases). Grade 3 and 4 preoperative and postoperative toxicity rates were, respectively, neutropenia 22 and 18%, emesis 12 and 14% and other non-haematological toxicity <10 and <10%. Of the 55 who underwent surgery, 40 had apparently curative resections (clear or positive microscopic margins), 2 died after surgery (anastomotic leak, sepsis) and 16 had postoperative complications. Of these, 27 participants commenced postoperative chemotherapy and 21 completed it. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 19.6 and 22 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Epirubicin, cisplatin and protracted venous infusion of 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy was well-tolerated in the preoperative setting and did not appear to increase complication rates of surgery for advanced and operable stomach cancer. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of this strategy in the Australasian clinical setting and are in keeping with the results of a recently reported randomized trial, which demonstrated a significant survival advantage using this chemotherapy regimen.

A phase I/II study of pemetrexed and vinorelbine in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed and vinorelbine are active antineoplastic agents in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Phase I objectives include maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose determination, and pharmacokinetics of the pemetrexed-vinorelbine doublet in locally advanced or metastatic solid tumor patients (pts). Phase II objectives include tumor response evaluation, efficacy, and toxicity for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Phase I pts received pemetrexed (day 1, 300-700 mg/m2) and vinorelbine (days 1 and 8, 15-30 mg/m2) every 21 days. Pharmacokinetics determined at cycle 1. Beginning with dose-level 3, folic acid and Vitamin B12 supplementation were given. RESULTS: Thirty-one phase I pts were enrolled. MTD was pemetrexed 700 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2; and recommended phase II dose was pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2. When administered in combination, pemetrexed and vinorelbine pharmacokinetics were consistent with single-agent administration. Thirty-seven (36 chemonaive) phase II NSCLC pts received pemetrexed-vinorelbine. Evaluable tumor response was 40%, with intent-to-treat 38%. One drug-related death occurred from febrile neutropenia with Staphylococcal infection. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (65%) and febrile neutropenia (11%), while prevalent grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicity was fatigue (27%). CONCLUSION: The pemetrexed-vinorelbine combination is well tolerated and shows activity as first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC patients.

Phase III study of pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin versus cisplatin alone in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, a rapidly progressing malignancy with a median survival time of 6 to 9 months, have previously responded poorly to chemotherapy. We conducted a phase III trial to determine whether treatment with pemetrexed and cisplatin results in survival time superior to that achieved with cisplatin alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients who were not eligible for curative surgery were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1. Both regimens were given intravenously every 21 days. RESULTS: A total of 456 patients were assigned: 226 received pemetrexed and cisplatin, 222 received cisplatin alone, and eight never received therapy. Median survival time in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm was 12.1 months versus 9.3 months in the control arm (P =.020, two-sided log-rank test). The hazard ratio for death of patients in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm versus those in the control arm was 0.77. Median time to progression was significantly longer in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm: 5.7 months versus 3.9 months (P =.001). Response rates were 41.3% in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm versus 16.7% in the control arm (P <.0001). After 117 patients had enrolled, folic acid and vitamin B12 were added to reduce toxicity, resulting in a significant reduction in toxicities in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm. CONCLUSION: Treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin and vitamin supplementation resulted in superior survival time, time to progression, and response rates compared with treatment with cisplatin alone in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Addition of folic acid and vitamin B12 significantly reduced toxicity without adversely affecting survival time.