Palliative second-line treatment with weekly high-dose 5-fluorouracil as 24-hour infusion and folinic acid (AIO) plus oxaliplatin after pre-treatment with the AIO-regimen in colorectal cancer (CRC).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this work was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of second-line treatment with weekly high-dose 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) as a 24-hour infusion (24-h inf.) and folinic acid (FA) (AIO-regimen) plus Oxaliplatin (L-OHP) after pre-treatment with the AIO regimen, focusing in particular on the efficacy of palliative first- and second-line treatment in colorectal carcinoma (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with non-resectable distant CRC metastases were enrolled in a prospective phase II study for palliative second-line treatment after previous palliative first-line treatment in accordance with the AIO regimen. On an outpatient basis, the patients received a treatment regimen comprising biweekly 85 mg/m2 L-OHP in the form of a 2-hour intravenous (i.v.) infusion and 500 mg/m2 FA as a 1 to 2-hour i.v. infusion, followed by 2,600 mg/m2 5-FU administered as a 24-h inf. i.v. once weekly. A single treatment cycle comprised 6 weekly infusions followed by 2 weeks of rest. RESULTS: During second-line treatment, a total of 26 patients received 340 chemotherapy applications. As the main symptom of toxicity, diarrhoea (NCI-CTC toxicity grade 3+4) presented in 5 patients (19%; 95% CI: 4-34), followed by nausea (CTC grade 3) in one patient (4%; 95% CI: 0-11). Twenty-three patients were evaluable for treatment response. The remission data can be summarised as follows: Complete remission (CR): n=1 (4%; 95% CI: 0-13); partial remission (PR): n=3 (13%; 95% CI: 0-27); stable disease (SD): n=11 (48%; 95% CI: 27-68) and progressive disease (PD): n=8 (35%; 95% CI: 15-54). The median progression-free survival (PFS) rate (n=26) was 3.3 months (range 0-11.5), the median survival time counted from the start of second-line treatment (n=26) 11.6 months (range 2.1-33.0) and the median survival time counted from the start of first-line treatment (n=26) 19.9 months (range 7.7-49.8). CONCLUSION: Palliative second-line treatment according to the AIO regimen plus L-OHP is feasible in an outpatient setting and well tolerated by the patients. Tumour control (CR + PR + SD) was achieved in 65% of the patients, the median survival time being 11.6 months. The AIO regimen followed by the 'AIO regimen plus L-OHP' therapy sequence led to a promising median survival time of 19.9 months (range 7.7-49.8).

[Palliative second-line treatment with oxaliplatin, gemcitabine and weekly high-dose 5-fluorouracil as 24-h infusion in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma]. / Palliative Zweitbehandlung mit Oxaliplatin, Gemcitabin und wochentlich hochdosiert 5-Fluorouracil als 24-h-Infusion beim metastasierten Adenokarzinom des Pankreas.

The most commonly used treatment in the palliative first-line therapy of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the Gemcitabine (Gem) monotherapy, while several combination therapies are currently being tested in clinical trials. With regard to pancreatic cancer, a palliative second-line therapy has not been established, yet. The four patients presented in this paper received a palliative second-line therapy with Oxaliplatin (L-OHP), Gem and high-dose 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) as a 24-h infusion after a first-line therapy with Gem and weekly high-dose 5-FU as a 24-h infusion. During second-line therapy, four patients received 67 chemotherapy applications, which were well tolerated. As severe symptom of toxicity, thrombocytopenia (CTC toxicity grade 4) was observed in one patient. As a result of second-line therapy, stable disease (SD) with a significant decrease of CA 19 - 9 was achieved in three patients and partial remission (PR) in one patient. After palliative first- and second-line treatment the survival time of the patients was 9, 9, 15 and 20 months. Currently, a multicentre phase I study has been started aiming at an optimisation of the three-drug combination dosage.

CEA and CA 19-9 measurement as a monitoring parameter in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) under palliative first-line chemotherapy with weekly 24-hour infusion of high-dose 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA).

BACKGROUND: There have been contradictory reports on the benefit of CEA and CA 19-9 measurements in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer using palliative chemotherapy. The object of this study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of monitoring of palliative chemotherapy by means of CEA and CA 19-9. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The tumour markers CEA and CA 19-9 were subjected to serial measurement in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (n = 90) using palliative first-line chemotherapy with weekly 24-hour infusion of high-dose 5-FU with FA and were compared with objective response according to WHO criteria. 85 patients could be evaluated. 43 patients (51%) initially had elevated CEA (> or = 10 ng/ml) and 33 patients (39%) elevated CA19-9 (> or = 50 IE/ml). In 24 patients (28%), both markers were initially increased. With CEA positive patients, 143 cycles of chemotherapy were carried out, which showed the following response in the various cycles: 21 episodes with progressions (ePD), 69 episodes with no change (eNC), 53 episodes with partial/complete remission (ePR/eCR). With CA 19-9 positive patients, 100 cycles of chemotherapy were carried out with the following results: 21 episodes with progressions (ePD), 48 episodes with eNC, and 31 episodes with ePR/eCR. RESULTS: A CEA rise by at least 50% differentiated between ePD versus eNC/ePR/eCR with a sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 90%. With CEA decreases of at least 30% in 99% of these patient episodes (78 of 79), a tumour progression could be excluded. Patients with an initial drop in CEA after the first cycle of chemotherapy of at least 50% of the initial level had a significantly higher probability of achieving an ePR/eCR in further therapy (relative risk 2.9; P = 0.002). With an CA 19-9 increase of at least 30%, a sensitivity progression of 62% and a specifity of 90% could be calculated. A CA 19-9 decrease of at least 60% excludes a progression in 95% of the patient episodes. CONCLUSIONS: A CEA or CA 19-9 rise is only conditionally appropriate for recording progressions. A progression however, can be excluded with falling levels with high diagnostic accuracy, in which CEA offers a greater degree of certainty than CA 19-9. With a drop in CEA 79 of 143 (= 55%) of the CT scans could be saved, in which case 78 of 79 patient episodes (99%) were correctly assessed as 'no progression'. In patients with an increased CEA and CA 19-9 the CEA determination is sufficient for the further monitoring. A confirmation of these results by multicenter trials can result in a considerable decrease of monitoring costs for palliative treatment.