A study of the effect of salicylic acetic acid on a lymphocyte cell model of cellular activation and proliferation.

Salicylic acetic acid (SAA) is a drug that has formed part of the treatment of many diseases for many years. Its anti-inflammatory activity is well known, but recently its possible role in the interference in the oncogenesis mechanisms has become apparent. With the aim of supporting these yet preliminary observations, we studied the effect of salicylic acetic acid on a cellular activation and proliferation model. We used lymphocytes obtained from peripheral blood, which were later exposed to cellular activation and proliferation stimulus by the SEB antigen. Lymphocyte activation was determined by direct immunoflourescence through expression of the receptor IL-2 (CD25) alpha chain and proliferation through the incorporation of tritiated thymidine to the DNA in synthesis together with the determination of the cellular cycle by flow cytometry. We found that both processes, activation and proliferation, are inhibited by increasing doses of SAA.

A phase II trial of gemcitabine and weekly high-dose 5-fluorouracil in a 48-hour continuous-infusion schedule in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma. A study of the Spanish Cooperative Group for Gastrointestinal Tumour Therapy (TTD).

AIM: A multi-centred, open-labelled, phase 11 study containing 46 patients was conducted to evaluate the clinical benefit of gemcitabine (1,400 mg/m(2)) combined with 5-FU (3 g/m(2)) in a 48 h continuous infusion (CI). METHODS: Both drugs were administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of every 4 week cycle in chemotherapy-naïve patients with locally advanced unresectable metastatic pancreatic carcinoma. The minimum follow-up was 6 months. RESULTS: Clinical benefit response was the primary endpoint and this was achieved by 24.4% of the patients. Quality of life (QoL) improved in 16.6% of patients. Objective response was observed in 7% of the patients. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.4 weeks and the median overall survival (OS) time was 22.7 weeks. One-year survival was 25%. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (45%), mucositis (7.5%) and hyperbilirubinaemia (10.5%). CONCLUSIONS: This schedule was not superior in terms of clinical benefit, response rate, PFS and OS than standard gemcitabine treatment

Exemestane and chemotherapy as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results of a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic breast cancer remains largely incurable. Strategies involving the combination of the selective estrogen receptor modulator tamoxifen and chemotherapy have been abandoned in view of unacceptable toxicity because of thromboembolic events. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of the third-generation steroidal aromatase inhibitor exemestane plus chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer received 6 cycles of intravenous chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil [5-FU], epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide) and exemestane 25 mg/day that was continued after chemotherapy was completed. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to progression (TTP), and response rates were also assessed. Safety was assessed from adverse events. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients (median age, 62 years) were included in this study. Twenty patients completed 6 chemotherapy cycles. Median TTP was 13.7 months. Overall response was achieved by 20 patients (73.9%), and the clinical benefit rate was 87%. During the chemotherapy plus exemestane treatments, 50 adverse events were reported in 14 of the 23 patients (60.9%). As expected, the incidence of adverse events decreased during the phase of exemestane treatment alone (19 adverse events in 10 of 20 patients [50%]). There were 2 grade 4 events reported, pulmonary embolism and pneumonia, although pneumonia was not considered to be related. CONCLUSION: Although a small number of patients were included, the combination of exemestane and chemotherapy was well tolerated and only 1 thromboembolic event was reported. Response rates were similar to other comparable series and may encourage further studies to confirm the efficacy of chemotherapy in combination with an aromatase inhibitor.

Reduced incidence of infusion-related reactions in metastatic colorectal cancer during treatment with cetuximab plus irinotecan with combined corticosteroid and antihistamine premedication.

BACKGROUND: : The multinational MABEL study of 1147 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had recently failed an irinotecan-containing regimen confirmed in a community practice setting the efficacy and safety of cetuximab combined with irinotecan. METHODS: : This report describes a post hoc analysis of the influence of prophylactic premedication on the incidence of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) in the MABEL study. The analysis was focused on the subpopulation of patients premedicated with antihistamines either with (n = 700) or without (n = 422) corticosteroids. Stepwise Cox regression modeling was used to examine the explanatory value of the type of premedication on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times. RESULTS: : The incidence of IRRs was lower in the group of patients who received antihistamine plus corticosteroid (9.6%) compared with those who received antihistamine alone (25.6%). A similar trend was seen for grade 3 or 4 IRRs (1.0% vs 4.7%, respectively). The 12-week PFS rates (61% vs 60%), median PFS (16.1 vs 13.1 weeks) and OS (9.2 vs 9.0 months) times for patients who received, respectively, antihistamines with and without corticosteroids were similar. Cox regression modeling did not identify any impact of type of premedication used (antihistamine with or without corticosteroids) on the efficacy of treatment in relation to PFS or OS. CONCLUSIONS: : Prophylactically premedicating mCRC patients with both antihistamine and a corticosteroid appeared to reduce the frequency of cetuximab-associated IRRs. Given that this was a post hoc analysis, caution must be exercised in the interpretation of these data, which require formal confirmation in a randomized study. Cancer 2010. (c) 2010 American Cancer Society.

Cetuximab plus irinotecan in heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer progressing on irinotecan: MABEL Study.

PURPOSE: This large, multinational study aimed to confirm in a community practice setting the efficacy and safety of cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with epidermal growth factor-expressing metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had recently failed an irinotecan-containing regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The primary objective was to determine the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 weeks. The initial cetuximab dose was 400 mg/m(2) and was followed weekly by 250 mg/m(2); irinotecan (according to prestudy regimen) was given weekly (125 mg/m(2) weekly for 4 of 6 weeks), every 2 weeks (180 mg/m(2) each), or every 3 weeks (350 mg/m(2) each). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat/safety population comprised 1,147 treated patients who received irinotecan weekly (n = 93); every 2 weeks (n = 670); every 3 weeks (n = 356); or another dose (n = 28). The PFS rate at 12 weeks was 61%, and the median survival was 9.2 months. Treatment was generally well tolerated. The most common treatment-related grades 3 to 4 adverse events were diarrhea (19%), neutropenia (10%), rash (7%), and asthenia (6%). The rate of grades 3 to 4 infusion-related reactions (IRRs; composite adverse event category) was 1% for patients who received both antihistamine and corticosteroid premedication. CONCLUSION Tolerability (except IRR incidence), PFS rate, and overall survival rate were in line with previous results. At 1%, the rate of IRRs in patients who received prophylactic premedication with both antihistamine and corticosteroid is lower than previously reported. MABEL clearly confirms in a community practice setting the efficacy and safety of cetuximab plus irinotecan in the treatment of mCRC.