Regional hyperthermia with cisplatin added to gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: The HEAT randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Regional hyperthermia (RHT) with cisplatin added to gemcitabine showed efficacy in gemcitabine-pre-treated patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We conducted a randomised clinical trial to investigate RHT with cisplatin added to gemcitabine (GPH) compared with gemcitabine (G) in the adjuvant setting of resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This randomised, multicentre, open-label trial randomly assigned patients to either GPH (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on day 1, 15 and cisplatin 25 mg/m2 with RHT on day 2, 3 and 15,16) or to G (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on day 1,8,15), four-weekly over six cycles. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end-point. Secondary end-points included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: A total of 117 eligible patients (median age, 63 years) were randomly allocated to treatment (57 GPH; 60 G). With a follow-up time of 56.6 months, the median DFS was 12.7 compared to 11.2 months for GPH and G, respectively (p = 0.394). Median post-recurrence survival was significantly prolonged in the GPH-group (15.3 versus 9.8 months; p = 0.031). Median OS reached 33.2 versus 25.2 months (p = 0.099) with 5-year survival rates of 28.4% versus 18.7%. Excluding eight patients who received additional capecitabine in the G-arm (investigators choice), median OS favoured GPH (p = 0.052). Adverse events CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) grade ≥3 occurred in 61.5% (GPH) versus 63.6% (G) of patients. Two patients in the G-group died because of treatment-related toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: The randomised controlled Hyperthermia European Adjuvant Trial study failed to demonstrate a significant difference in DFS. However, it suggests a difference in post-recurrence survival and a trend for improved OS. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, number NCT01077427.

Systemic antitumor effect by regional hyperthermia combined with low-dose chemotherapy and immunologic correlates in an adolescent patient with rhabdomyosarcoma - a case report.

Introduction: An abscopal effect is a clinical observation whereby a local treatment is associated with regression of metastatic cancer at a site distant from the primary location of treatment. Here, we describe the clinical systemic effect induced by regional hyperthermia combined with low-dose chemotherapy and provide immunologic correlates.Case presentation: A 15-year-old patient had been diagnosed with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS). All previous treatment options failed in the patient including haploidentical stem cell transplantation and donor lymphocyte infusion. The patient presented with local and metastatic disease, and upon admission, underwent regional hyperthermia combined with low-dose chemotherapy. Immediately following therapy severe skin reactions were observed. Skin biopsies revealed an intraepithelial lymphocytic infiltration dominated by CD3+/CD8+ T cells with a regular network of dendritic cells. Clinical images compared before and during sequential treatment cycles showed complete metabolic response of the local tumor for more than 10 months of therapy. In addition, metastases completely regressed although they were not direct targets of regional hyperthermia. The systemic effect was associated with enhanced frequency of NK cells and T cells expressing the lectin-like natural-killer group 2 D activating receptor (NKG2D), an increase of the CD56bright subset of NK cells, as well as an increase of effector/memory and effector CD8+ and CD4+ T cells in the blood while the percentage of CD25+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells declined.Conclusions: Regional hyperthermia combined with low-dose chemotherapy had the potential to create a systemic effect which was associated with activation of NK cells and T cells.

Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Plus Regional Hyperthermia on Long-term Outcomes Among Patients With Localized High-Risk Soft Tissue Sarcoma: The EORTC 62961-ESHO 95 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with soft tissue sarcoma are at risk for local recurrence and distant metastases despite optimal local treatment. Preoperative anthracycline plus ifosfamide chemotherapy improves outcome in common histological subtypes. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether the previously reported improvement in local progression-free survival by adding regional hyperthermia to neoadjuvant chemotherapy translates into improved survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxic effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus regional hyperthermia. Adult patients (age ≥18 years) with localized soft tissue sarcoma (tumor ≥5 cm, French Federation Nationale des Centers de Lutte Contre le Cancer [FNCLCC] grade 2 or 3, deep) were accrued across 9 centers (6, Germany; 1, Norway; 1, Austria; 1, United States) from July 1997 to November 2006. Follow-up ended December 2014. INTERVENTIONS: After stratification for tumor presentation and site, patients were randomly assigned to either neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and etoposide alone, or combined with regional hyperthermia. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was local progression-free survival. Secondary end points included treatment safety and survival, with survival defined from date of randomization to death due to disease or treatment. Patients lost to follow-up were censored at the date of their last follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 341 patients were randomized, and 329 (median [range] age, 51 [18-70] years; 147 women, 182 men) were eligible for the intention-to-treat analysis. By December 2014, 220 patients (67%; 95% CI, 62%-72%) had experienced disease relapse, and 188 (57%; 95% CI, 52%-62%) had died. Median follow-up was 11.3 years. Compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, adding regional hyperthermia improved local progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.86; P = .002). Patients randomized to chemotherapy plus hyperthermia had prolonged survival rates compared with those randomized to neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.98; P = .04) with 5-year survival of 62.7% (95% CI, 55.2%-70.1%) vs 51.3% (95% CI, 43.7%-59.0%), respectively, and 10-year survival of 52.6% (95% CI, 44.7%-60.6%) vs 42.7% (95% CI, 35.0%-50.4%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with localized high-risk soft tissue sarcoma the addition of regional hyperthermia to neoadjuvant chemotherapy resulted in increased survival, as well as local progression-free survival. For patients who are candidates for neoadjuvant treatment, adding regional hyperthermia may be warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003052.

Gemcitabine and cisplatin combined with regional hyperthermia as second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: There is no standard second-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) after gemcitabine (G) failure. Cisplatin (Cis)-based chemotherapy has shown activity in APC. It is proven that cytotoxicity of G and Cis is enhanced by heat exposure at 40° to 42°C. Therefore G plus Cis with regional hyperthermia (RHT) might be beneficial for patients with G-refractory APC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 23 patients with advanced (n = 2) or metastatic (n = 21) pancreatic cancer with relapse after G mono first-line chemotherapy (n = 23). Patients had received G (day 1, 1000 mg/m(2)) and Cis (day 2 and 4, 25 mg/m(2)) in combination with RHT (day 2 and 4, 1 h) biweekly for 4 months. We analysed feasibility, toxicity, time to second progression (TTP2), overall survival (OS) and clinical response. RESULTS: Between October 1999 and August 2008 23 patients were treated. Haematological toxicity was low with no grade 4 event. Hyperthermia-associated toxicity consisted of discomfort because of bolus pressure (3%), power-related pain (7%) or position-related pain (17%). Median TTP1 was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.6-9.2), median TTP2 was 4.3 months (95%CI: 1.2-7.4) and OS 12.9 months (95%CI: 9.9-15.9). The disease control rate in 16 patients with available CT scans was 50%. CONCLUSION: We show first clinical data of G plus Cis with RHT being clinically active in G-pretreated APC with low toxicity. A prospective controlled phase II second-line clinical trial (EudraCT: 2005-003855-11) and a randomised phase III adjuvant clinical trial offering this treatment (HEAT; EudraCT: 2008-004802-14) are currently open for recruitment.

Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy alone or with regional hyperthermia for localised high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised phase 3 multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: The optimum treatment for high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) in adults is unclear. Regional hyperthermia concentrates the action of chemotherapy within the heated tumour region. Phase 2 studies have shown that chemotherapy with regional hyperthermia improves local control compared with chemotherapy alone. We designed a parallel-group randomised controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of regional hyperthermia with chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients were recruited to the trial between July 21, 1997, and November 30, 2006, at nine centres in Europe and North America. Patients with localised high-risk STS (> or = 5 cm, Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer [FNCLCC] grade 2 or 3, deep to the fascia) were randomly assigned to receive either neo-adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of etoposide, ifosfamide, and doxorubicin (EIA) alone, or combined with regional hyperthermia (EIA plus regional hyperthermia) in addition to local therapy. Local progression-free survival (LPFS) was the primary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT 00003052. FINDINGS: 341 patients were enrolled, with 169 randomly assigned to EIA plus regional hyperthermia and 172 to EIA alone. All patients were included in the analysis of the primary endpoint, and 332 patients who received at least one cycle of chemotherapy were included in the safety analysis. After a median follow-up of 34 months (IQR 20-67), 132 patients had local progression (56 EIA plus regional hyperthermia vs 76 EIA). Patients were more likely to experience local progression or death in the EIA-alone group compared with the EIA plus regional hyperthermia group (relative hazard [RH] 0.58, 95% CI 0.41-0.83; p=0.003), with an absolute difference in LPFS at 2 years of 15% (95% CI 6-26; 76% EIA plus regional hyperthermia vs 61% EIA). For disease-free survival the relative hazard was 0.70 (95% CI 0.54-0.92, p=0.011) for EIA plus regional hyperthermia compared with EIA alone. The treatment response rate in the group that received regional hyperthermia was 28.8%, compared with 12.7% in the group who received chemotherapy alone (p=0.002). In a pre-specified per-protocol analysis of patients who completed EIA plus regional hyperthermia induction therapy compared with those who completed EIA alone, overall survival was better in the combined therapy group (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, p=0.038). Leucopenia (grade 3 or 4) was more frequent in the EIA plus regional hyperthermia group compared with the EIA-alone group (128 of 165 vs 106 of 167, p=0.005). Hyperthermia-related adverse events were pain, bolus pressure, and skin burn, which were mild to moderate in 66 (40.5%), 43 (26.4%), and 29 patients (17.8%), and severe in seven (4.3%), eight (4.9%), and one patient (0.6%), respectively. Two deaths were attributable to treatment in the combined treatment group, and one death was attributable to treatment in the EIA-alone group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first randomised phase 3 trial to show that regional hyperthermia increases the benefit of chemotherapy. Adding regional hyperthermia to chemotherapy is a new effective treatment strategy for patients with high-risk STS, including STS with an abdominal or retroperitoneal location. FUNDING: Deutsche Krebshilfe, Helmholtz Association (HGF), European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology (ESHO), and US National Institute of Health (NIH).