[Preoperative chemotherapy in the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases]. / Preoperatív kemoterápia a colorectalis májáttétes betegek sebészi kezelésében.

INTRODUCTION: The only curative treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is surgical resection. Preoperative/neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be used for resectable, for borderline resectable or even for irresectable CRLM patients. PATIENTS: Data of CRLM patients treated with surgical resection at the Uzsoki Hospital were analysed. Patients were classified into two groups, (A) who received preoperative chemotherapy before hepatic resection, and (B) who received no chemotherapy before resection. RESULTS: Between 01.01.2007. and 31.12.2010. 128 CRLM patients were treated with hepatic resection. 68 patients (53%) received chemotherapy before hepatic resection, 60 patients (47%) were resected without neoadjuvant chemotherapy. There was no significant difference in the complications between the groups (p = 0.39). Median overall survival was 41 months. The progression free survival (PFS) at 3 and 5 years were 25%, the 3 and 5 year overall survival (OS) were 55% and 31%. Both PFS and OS were significantly worse in the chemotherapy group (p = 0.014, p = 0.015). The subgroup of patients receiving bevacizumab containing preoperative chemotherapy has significanly better PFS than patients receiving only cytotoxic chemotherapy (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Surgical resection of CRLM patients results good survival data even in non-selected patients, although the very long survival results reported in the literature couldn't have been reproduced in this patient population. When preoperative chemotherapy was combined with bevacizumab, survival was similar to the upfront resected patients.

Expert opinion 2011 on the use of new anti-resorptive agents in the prevention of skeletal-related events in metastatic bone disease.

Bisphosphonates have been a mainstay in the treatment of cancer-related bone disease and have greatly reduced the risk of skeletal complications. More recently, clinical studies suggested additional benefits of denosumab over zoledronic acid in the prevention of skeletal related events. Similar adverse event profiles have been reported for bisphosphonates and denosumab, with infrequent occurrences of osteonecrosis of the jaw with both agents, higher incidence of renal deterioration with zoledronic acid, and higher incidence of hypocalcaemia with denosumab. Based on current evidence, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines do not recommend one drug class over the other in patients with metastatic bone disease. Denosumab, however, may present advantages over bisphosphonates in patients suffering from chronic renal insufficiency. Further research and growing clinical experience will refine the evidence based on which decisions in daily clinical practice can be taken.

Successful treatment of solitary bone metastasis of non-small cell lung cancer with bevacizumab and hyperthermia.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents 85 % of all malignant lung cancers. In metastatic disease the principle goal of palliative therapy is to prolong survival with least toxicity and best patients' quality of life. Bevacizumab (BEV) has been approved as first line treatment in combination with platinum based chemotherapy and maintenance therapy in NSCLC. BEV can be added safely to several chemotherapeutic agents, however there is no data on coadministration with thermotherapy. Even in localized disease no robust evidence exists about the beneficial effect of loco-regional thermotherapy on overall survival, but it might be used successfully in symptom palliation. In this article a successful co-administration of BEV and hyperthermia is reported in a patient with monolocalized bone metastasis from previously operated NSCLC. This case suggests that electrohyperthermia can probably be incorporated in palliative therapy added not only to radiotherapy or chemotherapy but also to anti-angiogenic BEV treatment.

The association of polymorphisms in 5-fluorouracil metabolism genes with outcome in adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer.

AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether specific combinations of polymorphisms in 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) metabolism-related genes were associated with outcome in 5-FU-based adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer. METHODS: We analyzed two cohorts of 302 and 290 patients, respectively, one cohort for exploratory analyses and another cohort for validating the exploratory analyses. A total of ten polymorphisms in genes involved in 5-FU pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics were studied. End points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival. Multifactor dimensionality reduction was used to identify genetic interaction profiles associated with outcome. RESULTS: Low-expression alleles in thymidylate synthase (TYMS) were associated with decreased DFS and overall survival (DFS:hazard ratio [HR] exploration 2.65 [1.40-4.65]; p = 0.004, HR validation 1.69 [1.03-2.66]; p = 0.03). A specific multifactor dimensionality reduction derived combination of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and TYMS polymorphisms was associated with increased DFS (HR exploration 0.69 [0.49-0.98]; p = 0.04, HR validation 0.66 [0.45-0.95]; p = 0.03). Specific combinations of functional polymorphisms in DPYD and TYMS were demonstrated to be associated with DFS and overall survival in patients receiving adjuvant 5-FU-based treatment. Specifically high TYMS expression alleles seem to be associated with decreased DFS.

Motesanib, or open-label bevacizumab, in combination with paclitaxel, as first-line treatment for HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has a crucial role in angiogenesis, and is a valid target in metastatic breast cancer. Motesanib is an investigational oral inhibitor of VEGF receptors. We aimed to determine whether treatment with motesanib plus paclitaxel is better than placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Between Dec 1, 2006, and July 4, 2008, patients with untreated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned (using a randomisation list created by personnel not associated with the study) in a 1:1:1 ratio to paclitaxel (90 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 3 weeks) plus either masked motesanib 125 mg orally once per day (n=91), masked placebo orally once per day (n=94), or open-label bevacizumab 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle (n=97), after stratification according to adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (taxane-containing regimens vs other regimens vs none), number of metastatic sites (<3 vs ≥3), and hormone receptor status (positive vs negative). Placebo was provided as a replica of motesanib 25 mg tablets. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) based on the population as assigned to treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00356681. FINDINGS: ORRs for the motesanib group and the placebo group did not differ significantly (49%vs 41%; absolute difference 8% [95% CI -6 to 22]; p=0.31). The ORR in the bevacizumab group (52%) was similar to that in the motesanib group. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events included diarrhoea (18 of 92 patients in the motesanib group, none of 89 patients in the placebo group, and four of 96 patients in the bevacizumab group), fatigue (11, eight, and six), hypertension (11, one, and seven), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (ten, seven, and 19). More patients in the motesanib group had serious adverse events than did those in the placebo or bevacizumab groups (34, 26, and 21 patients, respectively); the most common of these in the motesanib group were gastrointestinal in nature. INTERPRETATION: Data from this trial do not support the further investigation of motesanib at this dose and schedule in this population. FUNDING: Amgen.

Multicenter phase III comparison of cisplatin/S-1 with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma study: the FLAGS trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma need more efficacious and safer treatments than established today. S-1, a contemporary oral fluoropyrimidine, can provide that advantage. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted in 24 countries and 146 centers. One thousand fifty-three patients were stratified (center, number of metastatic sites, prior adjuvant therapy, and measurable cancer) and randomly assigned. Patients received either S-1 at 50 mg/m(2) divided in two daily doses for 21 days and cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, repeated every 28 days (527 patients) or infusional fluorouracil at 1,000 mg/m(2)/24 hours for 120 hours and cisplatin at 100 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, repeated every 28 days (526 patients). The primary end point was superiority in overall survival (OS) from cisplatin/S-1 compared with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil in patients with advanced, untreated gastric, or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. The secondary end points were response rate, progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, and safety. RESULTS: The median OS was 8.6 months in the cisplatin/S-1 arm and 7.9 months in the cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil arm (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.05; P = .20). Significant safety advantages were observed in the cisplatin/S-1 arm compared with the cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil arm for the rates of grade 3/4 neutropenia (32.3% v 63.6%), complicated neutropenia (5.0% v 14.4%), stomatitis (1.3% v 13.6%), hypokalemia (3.6% v 10.8%), and treatment-related deaths (2.5% v 4.9%; P < .05). CONCLUSION: Cisplatin/S-1 did not prolong OS of patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma compared with cisplatin/infusional fluorouracil, but it did result in a significantly improved safety profile.

Adjuvant chemotherapy with sequential or concurrent anthracycline and docetaxel: Breast International Group 02-98 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel is more effective than doxorubicin for patients with advanced breast cancer. The Breast International Group 02-98 randomized trial tested the effect of incorporating docetaxel into anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy and compared sequential vs concurrent administration of doxorubicin and docetaxel. METHODS: Patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer (n = 2887) were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: 1) sequential control (four cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil [CMF]); 2) concurrent control (four cycles of doxorubicin at 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide at 600 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF); 3) sequential docetaxel (three cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of docetaxel at 100 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF); 4) concurrent docetaxel (four cycles of doxorubicin at 50 mg/m2 plus docetaxel at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF). The primary comparison evaluated the efficacy of including docetaxel regardless of schedule and was planned after 1215 disease-free survival (DFS) events (ie, relapse, second primary cancer, or death from any cause). Docetaxel and control treatment groups were compared by log-rank tests, and hazard ratios (HR) of DFS events were calculated by Cox modeling. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Due to a lower-than-anticipated rate of relapse, this analysis was performed after 5 years with 732 events. Patients in control arms had a 5-year DFS of 73% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 70% to 75%). Docetaxel treatment resulted in an improvement in DFS of borderline statistical significance compared with control treatment (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.00; P = .05). However, DFS in the sequential docetaxel arm was better than that in the concurrent docetaxel arm (HR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.00) and in the sequential control arm (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating docetaxel into anthracycline-based therapy resulted in an improvement in DFS that was of borderline statistical significance. However, important differences may be related to doxorubicin and docetaxel scheduling, with sequential but not concurrent administration, appearing to produce better DFS than anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

Influence of thymidylate synthase gene polymorphisms on the survival of colorectal cancer patients receiving adjuvant 5-fluorouracil.

The present study aimed to prospectively investigate the influence of thymidylate synthase (TS) polymorphisms (5'-TSER, 3'-TSUTR) on the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who were treated with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) therapy. Patients were followed up for 19+/-14 months (median+/-SD). TS genotypes were determined from the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of 166 patients by polymerase chain reaction-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and restriction fragment length polymorphism methods. 5'-TSER 3R homozygotes showed significantly longer DFS (P = 0.048) and OS (P = 0.009). The 5'-TSER and 3'-TSUTR genotype combination groups showed a significant difference for DFS (P = 0.039) and OS (P = 0.029). Significantly better DFS (P = 0.049) and OS (P = 0.043) were observed for 6 bp/6 bp genotypes in 5'-TSER heterozygotes (n = 80). Based on this, and on hazard ratios obtained by Cox regression analysis of the DFS of genotype-combinations, the patients were classified as belonging to prognostic groups A and B. The DFS and OS of these two groups showed a highly significant difference (P = 0.002 and 0.001). In the multivariate Cox regression model, beside tumour location, the prognostic classification (groups A and B) proved to be an independent prognostic factor. Our data suggest that those TS genotypes and their combinations (group A: 3R/3R with any 3'-TSUTR genotype and 2R/3R with 6 bp/6 bp), which have been reported earlier as having high TS expression, predict significantly longer DFS and OS. We found that a combination of germline TS polymorphisms is an independent prognostic marker in selecting CRC patients with worse prognosis, and it may be worthwhile to examine whether these patients would benefit from an alternative therapy.

[Recent results of irinotecan therapy in colorectal cancer]. / A colorectalis carcinoma irinotecan kezelésének legújabb eredményei.

New results presented at ASCO Conference in 2003 added further important data to our knowledge on successful use of irinotecan in colorectal cancer (CRC). Irinotecan - just like oxaliplatin - given as neoadjuvant therapy with 5-FU - folinic acid (FUFA) can render originally unresectable liver or lung metastases of CRC resectable, giving the hope of long-term survival for a proportion of patients. Irinotecan combined with 5-FU is an essential part of the most successful palliative sequential chemotherapy of stage IV CRC. Sequential FOLFIRI before or after FOLFOX combination ensures the longest possible progression-free and overall survival for metastatic CRC patients in the palliative setting. In order to achieve the longest survival time, sequential use of both 5-FU, irinotecan and oxaliplatin is necessary. The French GERCOR Group achieved 26 months median overall survival with the sequential use of continuous infusional FUFA, oxaliplatin and irinotecan combinations in stage IV CRC. The analysis of large phase III trials using 5-FU, irinotecan and oxaliplatin revealed that the higher proportion of patients was treated with all three drugs, the longer overall survival was achieved. If applied with caution, toxicity and efficacy of irinotecan in elderly patients is not significantly different from that seen in younger population. The anti-VEGF bevacizumab increases the efficacy of first-line irinotecan therapy, while the addition of cetuximab restores irinotecan sensitivity in second line treatment of stage IV CRC. The combination of irinotecan with oral capecitabine is safe and effective in advanced CRC.

Adjuvant therapy of breast cancer with docetaxel-containing combination (TAC).

The adjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer changed in the past two decades. Docetaxel containing regimens are highly active in metastatic breast cancer. A logical approach was their incorporation into trials of early breast cancer adjuvant therapy. The authors present the Hungarian interim analysis and experience with the BCIRG 001 randomized, multicentric, phase III clinical trial comparing TAC (docetaxel, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide) and FAC (5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide) in the adjuvant treatment of node positive breast cancer patients. The results are presented compared to the international data. Three Hungarian centers - Szt. Margit Hospital, Budapest, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Petz Aladár Hospital, Gyôr - participated in the international trial. Between June 1997 and June 1999, 61 patients with node positive breast cancer were enrolled in the study after the surgery. Thirty-four patients were randomized to TAC (75/50/500 mg/m2 6xq3wk) and 27 patients were randomized to FAC (500/50/500 mg/m2 6x q3wk) chemotherapy, with prospective stratification by node (1-3, 4+). Patients with hormone receptor positive tumors received tamoxifen for 5 years after the chemotherapy. Radiotherapy was performed after the 6th cycle of chemotherapy. 33 months of follow up was performed. In both arms the hematological toxicity was more frequent. The TAC group showed a higher incidence of neutropenia (76%) compared to the FAC (22%), as well as a higher incidence of febrile neutropenia (26 % versus none), without grade 3-4 infection and there was no cases of septic death. More grade 3-4 nausea and vomiting was observed in the FAC group. At three years follow up, results indicated improvement in disease-free survival (88% vs. 76%) in favour of TAC, and similar tendency was observed in the case of overall survival (97% vs. 88%). Based on the international data analysis TAC was superior to FAC chemotherapy, the results show statistically significant differences between the two arms. This benefit with TAC was seen regardless of hormone receptor status. Additional follow up data will evaluate the role of TAC in the adjuvant setting of early breast cancer treatment.

[Hungarian experience with docetaxel combination (TAC) in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Results of BCIRG 001 randomized, multicentric, phase III trial]. / Docetaxel kombinációs kezeléssel (TAC) szerzett tapasztalataink az emlôrák adjuváns kemoterápiájában. BCIRG 001 randomizált, multicentrikus fázis III vizsgálat hazai eredményei.

AIM: The authors present the Hungarian interim analysis and experience with the BCIRG 001 randomized, multicentric, phase III clinical trial comparing TAC (docetaxel, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide) and FAC (5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide) in the adjuvant treatment of node positive breast cancer patients. The results are presented according to international data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three Hungarian centers - St. Margit Hospital, Budapest, National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Petz Aladár Hospital, Gyôr - participated in the international trial. Between June 1997 and June 1999, 61 patients with node positive breast cancer were enrolled in the study after the surgery. Thirty-four patients were randomized to TAC (75/50/500 mg/m2 6x q3wk) and 27 patients were randomized to FAC (500/50/500 mg/m2 6x q3wk) chemotherapy, with prospective stratification by node (1-3, 4+). In the case of patients with ER and/or PR positive tumours 5 years tamoxifen treatment was started. Radiotherapy was performed after the 6th cycle of chemotherapy. RESULTS: 36 months of follow up was performed. In both arms the hematological toxicity was more frequent. The TAC group showed a higher incidence of neutropenia (76%) compared to the FAC (22%), as well as a higher incidence of febrile neutropenia (26%), without grade 3-4 infection and there were no cases of septic death. Regarding non-hematological toxicity more grade 3-4 nausea and vomiting was observed in the FAC group. At three years follow up, the international results show statistically significant improvement in disease-free survival (82% vs. 74%, p=0.0011) in favour of TAC, and similar tendency was observed in the case of overall survival (92% vs. 87%, p=0.11). This benefit with TAC was seen regardless of hormone receptor status. Due to the low number of Hungarian patients we cannot declare the same results. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the international analysis TAC was superior to FAC chemotherapy. Additional follow up data will evaluate the role of TAC in the adjuvant setting of early breast cancer treatment. The results indicate that TAC has the potential to be incorporated in the new strategies of adjuvant breast cancer treatments.