Immediate versus deferred hormonal treatment for patients with prostate cancer who are not suitable for curative local treatment: results of the randomized trial SAKK 08/88.

PURPOSE: To determine if immediate hormonal therapy is advantageous compared with deferred treatment in newly diagnosed asymptomatic prostate cancer patients who, for any reason, were not candidates for curative local treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 1988 and February 1992, 197 patients with a median age of 76 years (range, 56 to 86 years) were randomly assigned to receive either immediate or deferred orchiectomy on symptomatic progression. The two groups did not differ significantly in clinical or laboratory parameters; 67% had T3-4 tumors and 20% had lymph node metastases. Patient accrual was stopped prematurely because of a similar competing trial. Therefore, observation time was prolonged to achieve the desired number of events and statistical power. RESULTS: Deferred orchiectomy was necessary in 58% of the patients. Median time to disease progression was 2.8 years less than for patients with immediate orchiectomy. However, overall pain-free time from random assignment to symptomatic progression after immediate or deferred orchiectomy, and performance status, were identical in both groups. Cancer-specific survival tended to be longer in the immediate group (P = .09) but there was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (P = .96). The median hemoglobin value decreased significantly after immediate orchiectomy (P < .001). CONCLUSION: For elderly, asymptomatic patients not undergoing curative local treatment, we were unable to show any major advantage of immediate compared with deferred hormonal treatment regarding quality of life or overall survival in our limited number of patients. Disabling complications were prevented in the deferred-treatment arm by careful follow-up; 42% of these patients never required any tumor-specific treatment.

Phase II study of capecitabine and oxaliplatin in first- and second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and tolerability of combining oxaliplatin with capecitabine in the treatment of advanced nonpretreated and pretreated colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-three nonpretreated patients and 26 patients who had experienced one fluoropyrimidine-containing regimen for advanced colorectal cancer were treated with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) bid on days 1 to 14 every 3 weeks. Patients with good performance status (World Health Organization grade 0 to 1) were accrued onto two nonrandomized parallel arms of a phase II study. RESULTS: The objective response rate was 49% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33% to 65%) for nonpretreated and 15% (95% CI, 4% to 35%) for pretreated patients. The main toxicity of this combination was diarrhea, which occurred at grade 3 or 4 in 35% of the nonpretreated and 50% of the pretreated patients. Grade 3 or 4 sensory neuropathy, including laryngopharyngeal dysesthesia, occurred in 16% of patients on both cohorts. Capecitabine dose reductions were necessary in 26% of the nonpretreated and 45% of the pretreated patients in the second treatment cycle. The median overall survival was 17.1 months and 11.5 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Combining capecitabine and oxaliplatin yields promising activity in advanced colorectal cancer. The main toxicity is diarrhea, which is manageable with appropriate dose reductions. On the basis of our toxicity experience, we recommend use of capecitabine in combination with oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) at an initial dose of 1,250 mg/m(2) bid in nonpretreated patients and at a dose of 1,000 mg/m(2) bid in pretreated patients.

Efficacy of rituximab and cladribine in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and feasibility of stem cell mobilization: a prospective multicenter phase II trial (protocol SAKK 34/02).

This phase II trial investigated rituximab and cladribine in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Four induction cycles, comprising cladribine (0.1 mg/kg/day days 1-5, cycles 1-4) and rituximab (375 mg/m(2) day 1, cycles 2-4), were given every 28 days. Stem cell mobilization (rituximab 375 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8; cyclophosphamide 4 g/m(2) day 2; and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor 10 microg/kg/day, from day 4) was performed in responders. Of 42 patients, nine achieved complete remission (CR), 15 very good partial remission, and two nodular partial remission (overall response rate 62%). Stem cell mobilization and harvesting (> or = 2 x 10(6) stem cells/kg body weight) were successful in 12 of 20 patients. Rituximab infusion-related adverse events were moderate. The main grade 3/4 adverse events during induction were neutropenia and lymphocytopenia. Rituximab plus cladribine was effective; however, the CR rate was modest and stem cell harvest was impaired in a large number of responding patients.