[Multicenter phase II clinical trial of uroacitides injection in the treatment for advanced malignant tumors].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy, safety and the life quality improvement of uroacitides injection in the treatment for patients with advanced malignant tumors. METHODS: A total of 160 patients with advanced stage cancers were enrolled into this multicenter, open and non-randomized phase II clinical trial, including cancers of the lung (33 cases), liver (45 cases), breast (17 cases), esophagus (11 cases), stomach (18 cases), colon (19 cases), pancreas (3 cases) and kidney (4 cases), and glioma (10 cases). Uroacitides was administrated in a dose of 300 ml daily via the superior vena cava catheter for consecutive 4-8 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 160 patients, 21 dropped out and one patient died during the trial. Efficacy could be evaluated in 138 patients and safety in 160. The total objective response rate (ORR, CR + PR)) and tumor control rate (CR + PR + MR + SD) of the 138 evaluable patients were 5.8% and 65.2%, respectively. Clinical benefit response (CBR) rate was 57.2%. Major adverse effects were grade I - II and reversible nausea/vomiting (21.9%) and pain (6.3%). CONCLUSION: Uroacitides injection is effective in the control for various kinds of advanced cancers with mild, reversible and tolerable adverse effects, and can also improve the patient's quality of life. It is worth being studied further.

A phase IIa study of rhLTα-Da in combination with cisplatin and fluorouracil for patients with metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or gastric adenocarcinoma.

Recombinant human lymphotoxin-α derivative (rhLTα-Da) is a lymphotoxin-α derivative missing 27 N-terminal amino acid residues. This multicenter phase IIa trial was conducted to evaluate the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of rhLTα-Da with cisplatin (DDP) and 5-fluorouracil (5-Fu) for metastatic esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) and gastric adenocarcinoma (GC). Two different rhLTα-Da doses (10 µg/m2/d and 20 µg/m2/d) in combination with DDP and 5-Fu were evaluated in this study. The first 6 ESCC and 6 GC patients were given 10 µg/m2/d rhLTα-Da followed by DDP (15 mg/m2/d) and 5-Fu (750 mg/m2/d) on days 1-5. The next 6 ESCC and 6 GC patients were given 20 µg/m2/d rhLTα-Da after fewer than 2 of the 6 patients who received the 10 µg/m2/d dose exhibited dose-limiting rhLTα-Da-related toxicities. The treatment was 21 days a cycle until a maximum of 6. The rhLTα-Da pharmacokinetic analyses were performed. Twelve ESCC and 12 GC patients were enrolled. The toxicities were controllable and reversible. The most common adverse events related to rhLTα-Da were chills (37.5 %, 9/24) and fever (16.7 %, 4/24) (all grades 1-2). The overall response rates in the 10- and 20-µg/m2/d groups were 50 % (6/12) and 33.3 % (4/12), respectively, and the overall response rates of the ESCC and GC patients were 66.7 % (8/12) and 16.7 % (2/12), respectively. rhLTα-Da in combination with DDP and 5-Fu exhibited a tolerable toxicity profile. The addition of rhLTα-Da may enhance the anti-tumor efficacy of platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic ESCC.

[Clinical trial on exemestane in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the response rate and adverse reactions of exemestane (a new aromatase inactivator) in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. METHODS: One hundred and seventy-three patients with advanced breast cancer entered this study with two patients excluded because of postmenopausal time being less than one year. Therefore, 173 patients could be evaluated for adverse events and 171 patients could be evaluated for efficacy. Exemestane, 25 mg orally daily for 4 weeks as one cycle was given. RESULTS: In the 171 patients evaluated for efficacy, 4 (2.3%) experienced a complete response (CR) and 40 (23.4%) a partial response (PR), with the overall response rate of 25.7%. Ninety patients (52.6%) had stable disease (SD), with 25 having SD for at least 24 weeks. The clinical benefit (CR + PR + SD > or = 24 weeks) was shown in 69 (40.4%) patients. Progressive disease (PD) was shown in 37 (21.6%) patients. The untreated patients had a higher objective response rate (33.8%) than the retreated ones (18.1%) with significant difference (P = 0.019 7). The response rates for soft-tissue, bone involvement and visceral metastasis were 32.8%, 23.9%, and 12.4% (P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in different ages, time of menopause, disease-free interval or receptor status (P > 0.05). Drug-related adverse events were gastric discomfort (17.9%), malaise (17.9%), nausea (13.9%), hot flushes (11.0%) and dysphoria (5.8%). Other side reactions and abnormal laboratory parameters were observed occasionally which were irrelevant. CONCLUSION: Exemestane can be used to treat postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer giving only mild adverse reactions which are well tolerated.

Long-term results of a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled phase III trial: Endostar (rh-endostatin) versus placebo in combination with vinorelbine and cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: : Phase II-III trials in patients with untreated and previously treated locally advanced or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) suggested that Endostar was able to enhance the effect of platinum-based chemotherapy (NP regimen) with tolerable adverse effects. METHODS: Four hundred and eighty six patients were randomized into two arms: study arm A: NP plus Endostar (n = 322; vinorelbine, cisplatin, Endostar), and study arm B: NP plus placebo (n = 164; vinorelbine, cisplatin, 0.9% sodium chloride). Patients were treated every third week for two to six cycles. RESULTS: : Overall response rates were 35.4% in arm A and 19.5% in arm B (P = 0.0003). The median time to progression was 6.3 months for arm A and 3.6 months for B, respectively (P < 0.001). The clinical benefit rates were 73.3% in arm A and 64.0% in arm B (P = 0.035). Grade 3/4 neutropenia, anemia, and nausea/vomiting were 28.5%, 3.4%, and 8.0%, respectively, in Arm A compared with 28.2%, 3.0%, and 6.6%, respectively, in Arm B (P > 0.05). There were two treatment related deaths in arm A and one in arm B (P > 0.05). The median overall survival was longer in arm A than in arm B (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: : Long-term follow-up revealed that the addition of Endostar to an NP regimen can result in a significant clinical and survival benefit in advanced NSCLC patients, compared with NP alone.

[Tropisetron hydrochloride in preventing and treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a phase II, randomized, multicenter, double-blinded, comparative clinical trial].

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Tropisetron hydrochloride (Navoban), as a highly selective 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist, has been widely used in preventing and treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting for many years. This study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of homemade tropisetron hydrochloride in preventing and treating cisplatin-based chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. METHODS: A randomized, double-blinded, multicenter, comparative trial was conducted in cancer patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy. All patients were assigned to group A-B or B-A randomly, and took homemade tropisetron hydrochloride and Navoban (positive control agent) to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients were enrolled: 60 in group A-B and 58 in group B-A. There was no difference in the efficacy of relieving acute vomiting between homemade tropisetron hydrochloride and Navoban (P>0.05). The inhibition rates of nausea and vomiting were 28.59% and 52.61% respectively in group A-B, while 29.21% and 51.94% in group B-A (P>0.05). In addition, quality of life (QOL) showed no significant difference between the 2 groups at Days 3, 6, 10, and 21 (P>0.05). Besides, the occurrence rate of adverse events, such as constipation, abdominal distention, vertigo, headache and fatigue, was 27.97% in group A-B and 22.03% in group B-A (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Homemade tropisetron hydrochloride injection has both reliable efficacy and safety in preventing and treating cisplatin-induced acute or chronic nausea and vomiting; it is comparable with Navoban on many aspects, such as long action time, less adverse effects and improved QOL.