Economic burden of chemotherapy-treated recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in France: real-world data from the permanent sample of national health insurance beneficiaries.

Aims: Overall survival (OS) of patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) is extremely poor. New therapeutic options emerge but need to establish their economic value. The objective was to describe the direct and related costs of R/M SCCHN in France. Materials and methods: We selected all adult patients treated with chemotherapy for R/M SCCHN between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2014 from the permanent sample of the French national health insurance database (EGB). Data were analyzed from the index date (first chemotherapy) until patients' death or 31 December 2015. "Treatment period" and "end-of-life" (EoL) (from last chemotherapy until death) were distinguished. Costs included all hospitalizations for SCCHN and ambulatory care. Costs of hospitalized and non-hospitalized adverse events (AEs) were estimated. Results: Among 267 patients identified, 85% were men, 44% had metastases at the index date and the mean age was 62.0 years (±9.9). The most common tumor location was oropharynx (29%) but 39% of patients had multiple locations. Median OS was 9.3 (95% CI: 7.9-11.8) months for the overall population. The average total direct cost per patient was €49,954, broken down into €32,908 (95% CI: 29,525-36,290) for hospitalizations and €17,047 (14,941-19,152) for ambulatory care. Main cost drivers were drug acquisition and administration (€14,538) during the treatment period (209 days on average) and palliative care (€3,750) during the EoL period (125 days). Regarding related costs, around 12% of patients received disability pensions (€1,397 per patient [624-2,171]) and sick leave payments (€1,592 [888-2,297]). "Metabolism and nutrition disorders" and "Infections and infestations" were the most expensive hospitalized AEs (€1,513 and €1,180 per patient, respectively). Febrile neutropenia was the most expensive non-hospitalized AE (€766 per patient). Conclusions: This analysis of real-world data confirms the poor prognosis of patients with R/M SCCHN and provides cost data for future economic evaluations.

Pathologic response to short intensified taxane-free neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with highly proliferative operable breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Breast cancer treatment relies on 3 major phenotypical subtypes, including the triple-negative (TN), HER2-positive, and hormone receptor-positive (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor) ones. We retrospectively determined the clinical and pathologic response rates to intensified taxane-free neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to these phenotypical classes in a series of patients with highly proliferative operable breast cancer, and examined the patterns of recurrence. METHODS: Patients with early breast cancer with highly proliferative (S-phase fraction >4%) operable tumors of >3 cm received 4 cycles of intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with high-dose cyclophosphamide (doxorubicin 70 mg/m d1, cyclophosphamide 700 mg/m d1/d8, and 5 FU 700 mg/m d1-d5) every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were included in the analysis. Patients with TN phenotype experienced a high pathologic complete response (pCR) rate to intensified chemotherapy in comparison with patients with HER2-positive and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor tumors (47%, 0%, and 12%, respectively). Forty percent of patients with TN breast cancer recurred after a median follow-up of nearly 11 years, but only 22% of those achieving a pCR. CONCLUSIONS: A high pCR rate to short intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with high-dose cyclophosphamide was achieved in patients with operable highly proliferative TN breast cancer, and pCR was associated with a low rate of recurrence.

Development of anti-cancer drugs.

Every new anti-cancer drug or drug combination is evaluated for safety and efficacy before being approved. Clinical development of cytotoxic anticancer drugs classically follows three main phases. Phase I trials represent the first administration of a new drug or combination to human beings. Their primary goal is to determine the recommended phase two dose and also to collect toxicity, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data. Phase II trials are screening studies aimed at identifying signals of anti-tumor activity in a specific tumor type and setting. Phase III trials aim to compare the efficacy of a new treatment with standard of care and can lead to regulatory approval when positive. The recent emergence of molecularly targeted agents has challenged the traditional developmental pathway for anti-cancer drugs. Using biomarker enriched patient populations has been successful for a few agents. Otherwise, new types of trials have been proposed for these agents in an attempt to elucidate their mechanism of action, such as phase 0 trials and "window of opportunity" trials. These two types of trials and the classical three phase trials are discussed in detail.

Phase I combination of sorafenib and erlotinib therapy in solid tumors: safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic evaluation from an expansion cohort.

The aims of this study were to further define the safety of sorafenib and erlotinib, given at their full approved monotherapy doses, and to correlate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic markers with clinical outcome. In addition, a novel pharmacodynamic marker based on the real-time measurement of RAF signal transduction capacity (STC) is described. Sorafenib was administered alone for a 1-week run-in period, and then both drugs were given together continuously. RAF STC was assessed in peripheral blood monocytes prior to erlotinib initiation. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression and K-RAS mutations were measured in archival tumor samples. Changes in pERK and CD31 were determined in fresh tumor biopsies obtained pretreatment, prior to erlotinib dosing, and during the administration of both drugs. In addition, positron emission tomography-computed tomography scans and pharmacokinetic assessments were done. Eleven patients received a total of 57 cycles (median, 5; range, 1-10). Only four patients received full doses of both drugs for the entire study course, with elevation of liver enzymes being the main reason for dose reductions and delays. Among 10 patients evaluable for response, 8 experienced tumor stabilization of >or=4 cycles. Pharmacokinetic analysis revealed no significant interaction of erlotinib with sorafenib. Sorafenib-induced decrease in RAF-STC showed statistically significant correlation with time-to-progression in seven patients. Other pharmacodynamic markers did not correlate with clinical outcome. This drug combination resulted in promising clinical activity in solid tumor patients although significant toxicity warrants close monitoring. RAF-STC deserves further study as a predictive marker for sorafenib.

Sunitinib: a novel tyrosine kinase inhibitor. A brief review of its therapeutic potential in the treatment of renal carcinoma and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST).

Sunitinib malate is a novel oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumor and antiangiogenic activities. Sunitinib was recently approved in first-line treatment for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and for the treatment of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) after disease progression or intolerance to imatinib mesylate therapy. We report the very interesting results of the phase II trials after cytokin failure and of the randomized recent trial of sunitinib versus cytokin-based therapy in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic RCC, as well as the promising results of the recent trials on patients with GIST after disease progression or intolerance to imatinib mesylate therapy. Oral sunitinib demonstrates a high level of efficacy with acceptable tolerability with the 50 mg daily for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks off schedule; a continuous schedule could be of interest. Hypertension and asthenia are the most common side effects with sunitinib. Regardless of these encouraging results, studies investigating sunitinib in first-line treatment (for patients with GIST), adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings are awaited, as well as trials using sunitinb in combination with chemotherapy or other targeted therapies. Clinical trials investigating sunitinib in other tumor types are ongoing.