Weekly Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and Cetuximab in Palliative Treatment of Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck.

LESSONS LEARNED: Chemotherapy for recurrent, metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck need not be known for extreme toxicity.The weekly regimen studied here has been demonstrated to be tolerable and effective. BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to establish the response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and safety profile of weekly docetaxel, platinum, and cetuximab (TPC) in patients with relapsed or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with metastatic or recurrent SCCHN with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status <3 were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved phase II trial. This study permitted prior chemoradiation, radiation, and/or surgery, provided that 3 months had elapsed since the end of the potentially curative treatment. Patients received cisplatin 30 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 2, docetaxel 30 mg/m2, and cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly for 3 weeks, followed by a break during the fourth week, for a 28-day cycle. Planned intrapatient dose modifications were based on individual toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients received TPC and were evaluable for response and toxicity. Rates of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and confirmed PR were 3%, 52%, and 30%, respectively. The overall objective response rate was 56%. Estimated median PFS and OS were 4.8 and 14.7 months, respectively. The rates of grade 3 and 4 worst-grade adverse events (AEs) per patient were 85% and 7%, respectively. Dose density through cycle 4 was preserved for all patients; however, treatment beyond cycle 6 with the TPC regimen proved unfeasible. CONCLUSION: Weekly docetaxel, cisplatin, and cetuximab is an effective regimen for patients with metastatic or recurrent SCCHN. Response rates, PFS, and OS compare favorably with other combination chemotherapy treatments. Grade 4 toxicity rates observed in this study were substantially lower than those described with regimens using less frequent, higher-dose chemotherapy schedules.

In search for optimal induction chemotherapy for advanced nasopharyngeal cancer: Standard dosing of Docetaxel, Platinum, and 5-Fluorouracil (TPF) followed by chemoradiation.

OBJECTIVES: A phase II = design is used to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of full dose docetaxel, platinum, and 5-fluorouracil (TPF) in a sequential chemoradiation treatment locally advanced (LA) or oligometastatic (OM) NPC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with LANPC (M0 cohort) and six patients with OMNPC (M1 cohort) received induction standard dose T (75 mg/m2) P (75 mg/m2) F (750 mg/m2 IVCI x 5days) x 3 followed by weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m2) or carboplatin (AUC 1.5) x 6 concurrent with radiation therapy of 70 Gy over 6.5-7 weeks. The first five patients received bevacizumab as part of an exploratory objective of hypoxia modification using correlative fluoromisonidasole (18F-MISO) PET CT scanning. RESULTS: The 18F-MISO imaging failed to reveal adequate levels of baseline hypoxia necessary to evaluate for changes with chemotherapy and bevacizumab. Ninety percent of M0 patients and 83% of M1 patients received the full-intended TPF and radiation dose. Eighty-five percent of M0 patients and all M1 patients received at least 60% of the full-intended concurrent platinum dose. The 2-year progression free survival (PFS) rate for the M0 cohort was 90% (95% CI: 77.8%- 100%), and was sustained at 5 years. The 2-year PFS rate for the M1 cohort was 66.7% (95% CI: 37.9%- 100%). The 2-year overall survival (OS) rates for the M0 and M1 cohorts were 100% and 83.3% (95% CI: 58.3%- 100%), respectively. At five years, OS was 94.4% for the M0 cohort. CONCLUSION: Administration of standard-dose TPF as induction chemotherapy in this NPC patient population is both feasible and effective when coupled with definitive concurrent chemoradiation. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00896181.

The spatial extent of contaminants and the landscape scale: an analysis of the wildlife, conservation biology, and population modeling literature.

Many contaminant releases to the terrestrial environment are of small areal extent. Thus, rather than evaluating the ecological impact on species in the immediate vicinity of the release, it may be more ecologically meaningful to determine if population impacts occur at the landscape level. In order to do this, the cumulative impact of all releases in the landscape under consideration must be evaluated. If the release sites are viewed as localized areas that are no longer available for use by ecological receptors (i.e., no longer part of the habitat), this can be thought of as a form of habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation is typically viewed as the loss of large areas of habitat within a landscape, leaving small isolated patches of intact habitat within a hostile matrix. Small-scale contaminant releases, on the other hand, result in small uninhabitable areas within a primarily intact habitat. With this consideration in mind, we analyzed the wildlife and conservation biology literature to determine if information on habitat size requirements such as home-range or critical patch size could inform us about the potential for impact at the landscape level from release sites based on the size of the release alone. We determined that evaluating the impact of release size had to be conducted within a contextual basis (considering the existing state of the landscape). Therefore, we also reviewed the population modeling literature to determine if models could be developed to further evaluate the impact of the spatial extent of chemical releases on the landscape. We identified individual-based models linked to geographic information systems to have the greatest potential in investigating the role of release size with respect to population impacts at the landscape level.