Predictors of long-term response to abiraterone in patients with metastastic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

We aimed to identify clinical predictors of long-term response to abiraterone (defined as >12 months drug exposure) in a retrospective cohort of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated in post-docetaxel setting at 24 Italian centers. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the association between clinical features and the duration of drug exposure. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 143 patients met the inclusion criteria. Their median age was 73 years, median Gleason score 8 and median abiraterone exposure 20 months. At the univariate analysis, a significant correlation with the duration of abiraterone exposure was found for Gleason score (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.96; p=0.012), PSA (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.18; p=0.08) and lactic dehydrogenase levels (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.46; p=0.027), while the association between lower alkaline phosphatase levels and treatment duration was marginally significant (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99-1.16; p=0.074). Only PSA and Gleason score were predictive of long-term treatment duration in the multivariate analysis. No other clinical factors resulted to be predictive of sustained response to abiraterone, including metastatic disease at diagnosis and visceral disease, suggesting that all subgroups of patients may derive a substantial clinical benefit from abiraterone treatment. These findings need to be validated in prospective, larger studies.

Impact of use of oral anticancer drugs on activity of Italian oncology practices: results of a survey conducted by the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM).

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: In recent years, the number of oral anticancer drugs used in clinical practice has rapidly increased. The Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM) conducted a survey to describe the impact of the use of oral anticancer drugs on the daily activity of Italian oncology practices. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: A survey questionnaire was distributed to the coordinators of the regional sections of AIOM. A 6-month period was considered, from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010. The survey addressed (1) quantitative aspects of the use of oral anticancer drugs; (2) practical aspects in the management of patients treated with these drugs; (3) issues related to treatment costs and reimbursement procedures. RESULTS: Thirty-six questionnaires were received from institutions distributed throughout the Italian territory. Oral anticancer drugs (both chemotherapy and molecularly targeted agents) accounted for a significant proportion (17%) of prescribed treatments. Among the responding institutions, there were different dispensation procedures of oral drugs to patients: drugs were dispensed by the pharmacist (57%) or directly by the medical oncologist (23%) or nurse (20%). The medical oncologist played a major role in the communication with patients (73% alone and a further 24% in cooperation with other professional figures) and was the point of reference in the event of side effects in 97% of cases. In most cases, the reimbursement of drug costs was separated ("File F" procedure) from the flat fare received by the hospital for outpatient visits or day-hospital access. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal organization of oral anticancer treatment warrants the cooperation and integration of multiple professional figures. At least three figures are involved in patient management in the hospital: the medical oncologist, the nurse, and the hospital pharmacist. Oral anticancer treatments are associated with specific reimbursement issues: in the majority of cases, the cost of the drug is reimbursed separately from the cost of patient access.

Disparity in the "time to patient access" to new anti-cancer drugs in Italian regions. Results of a survey conducted by the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM).

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: In 2009, the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM) conducted a survey to describe the impact of regional pharmaceutical formularies on the disparity of access to eight new drugs among cancer patients treated in Italian regions. The survey documented some regional restrictions for some anti-cancer drugs. In the study, we analyzed the "time to patient access" to new anti-cancer drugs in Italian regions. METHODS: In March 2010, we analyzed the availability of 17 new anti-cancer drugs at a regional level, specifically the coherence of regional authorizations compared with national authorizations approved by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA). In the regions with pharmaceutical formularies, we analyzed the characteristics of technical-scientific committees for the evaluation of inclusion of hospital drugs in these formularies. We also analyzed the time from EMA (CMPH) authorization to AIFA marketing authorization, the time from AIFA marketing authorization to patient availability, and the total time from EMA (CMPH) authorization to patient availability of the drugs in all Italian regions, for 11 of these drugs. RESULTS: Some drugs were included in all the regional pharmaceutical formularies, without restrictions, whereas other drugs were not included in one and others were not included in more than one formulary. Median time from EMA to AIFA was 11.2 months (range, 2.9-17.1). Median time from AIFA to patient availability was 1.4 months (range, 0.0-50.5) in regions with drug formularies versus 0.0 months in regions without drugs formularies. Median total time from EMA to patient availability was longer in regions with formularies (13.3 months; range, 2.9-65.3) than in regions without formularies (11.2 months; range, 2.9-24.0), where drugs are immediately available after AIFA marketing authorization. Moreover, the interval was very long (range, 2.9-65.3) for some drugs in regions with formularies. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis confirmed that the presence of multiple hierarchical levels of drug evaluation can create disparity in drug availability for Italian citizens.

Differences in the availability of new anti-cancer drugs for Italian patients treated in different regions. Results of analysis conducted by the Italian Society Of Medical Oncology (AIOM).

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Italy is divided into 20 regions. As a consequence of local autonomy, following marketing authorization by the Italian Medicines Agency, each drug for hospital use is not immediately available, because its approval needs to undergo further steps that can be different among regions. The Italian Society of Medical Oncology conducted the present study to describe the impact of the existence of sub-national pharmaceutical formularies on the disparity of access to new anti-cancer drugs among patients treated in different Italian regions. METHODS: The availability of 8 new anti-cancer drugs at a regional level and the coherence of regional authorizations compared with national authorizations approved by the Italian Medicines Agency were analyzed as of April 2009. RESULTS: Fourteen regions and autonomous province of Trento have a regional pharmaceutical formulary. In most cases, the regional pharmaceutical formularies include the eight analyzed drugs, with therapeutic indications coherent with national marketing authorization indications. Five drugs (bevacizumab, trastuzumab, rituximab, erlotinib, sunitinib) were included in all the existing regional pharmaceutical formularies, without restrictions, whereas three drugs (cetuximab, sorafenib, pemetrexed) were found to have restrictions in some regions. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of multiple hierarchical levels of drug evaluation creates a potential element of disparity in the access to pharmacological therapies for Italian citizens.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer: a randomized phase III trial conducted by GOIRC.

BACKGROUND: Complete surgical resection of gastric cancer is potentially curative, but long-term survival is poor. METHODS: Patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the stomach of stages IB, II, IIIA and B, or IV (T4N2M0) and treated with potentially curative surgery were randomly assigned to follow-up alone or to intravenous treatment with four cycles (repeated every 21 days) of PELF (cisplatin [40 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 5], epirubicin [30 mg/m(2), days 1 and 5], L-leucovorin [100 mg/m(2), days 1-4], and 5-fluorouracil [300 mg/m(2), days 1-4] in a hospital setting. Frequencies and severity of adverse events were determined. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between the treatment arms using Kaplan-Meier analysis and a Cox proportional hazards regression model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: From January 1995 through September 2000, 258 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy (n = 130) or surgery alone (n = 128). Patient characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Among those who received chemotherapy, grade 3 or 4 toxic effects including vomiting, mucositis, and diarrhea were experienced by 21.1%, 8.4%, and 11.8% of patients, respectively. Leucopenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia of grade 3 or 4 were experienced by 20.3%, 3.3%, and 4.2% of patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 72.8 months, 128 patients (49.6%) experienced recurrence and 139 (53.9%) deaths were observed, one toxicity-related. Relative to treatment with surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy did not increase disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] of recurrence = 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.27) or overall survival (HR of death = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.26). CONCLUSIONS: Our results failed to provide proof of an effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with PELF on overall survival or disease-free survival. The estimated effect of chemotherapy (10% reduction in the hazard of death or relapse) is modest and consistent with the results of meta-analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy without platinum agents.

Paclitaxel and epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil for patients with stage IIIC breast cancer with ten or more involved axillary lymph nodes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a combination of epirubicin and paclitaxel followed by intravenous (iv) cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracile (CMF) as adjuvant treatment of breast cancer patients with 10 or more metastatic axillary lymph nodes. METHODS: Forty-four patients entered this multicenter study and received 4 cycles of epirubicin (E 120 mg/m2 day 1, q3 weeks) and paclitaxel (T 135 mg/m2 day 1, q3 weeks), followed by 4 cycles of iv CMF (days 1 and 8, q4 weeks). Patients with positive hormonal receptors received sequentially tamoxifen associated with LH-RH analogue if premenopausal. The endpoints were the evaluation of the feasibility of this schedule and disease free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Median age of patients was 55; median number of positive axillary nodes was 14 (range, 10-47). Hormonal receptor status was positive in 57% of patients. The combination of epirubicin and paclitaxel was well tolerated; NCI grade 3/4 events were: leucopenia in 27% of patients, neutropenic fever in 5 patients, anemia in 7%, thrombocytopenia in 7%, nausea in 18%, vomiting in 14%, and neurotoxicity in 4%. CMF regimen caused a few cases of grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity. No cardiac toxicity was recorded. With a median follow-up of 59 months, 18 (41%) patients relapsed. Sites of relapse were mainly bone, skin/soft tissues, liver, and lung. Median DFS was 78 months, with a 5-year rate of 60%. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of paclitaxel at low dose and epirubicin followed by CMF is a feasible regimen, which seems to be effective in high-risk node positive breast cancer patients and requires further investigations.

Biweekly administration of gemcitabine and vinorelbine as first line therapy in elderly advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine both as a single agent or associated are active in advanced breast cancer patients as second line therapy, with low toxicity. In the elderly patients polichemotherapy is difficult for co-morbidity, but results with monotherapy are fewer. The use of this association as first line could be of help. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-four patients over 65 were treated with 1000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine and 25 mg/m2 of vinorelbine on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. An analysis of toxicities, TTP and OS were performed. RESULTS: The ORR was 53%: a CR was obtained in five patients (15%) and a PR in 13 patients (38%). Moreover, seven patients (21%) had a stable disease maintained for 6 months. The mean duration of CR and PR were, respectively, of 10 (range 7-19) and 7 (range: 4-14), months. Toxicity was low, mainly haematological: grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred only in 7 (20%) cases without febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: The gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination shows significant activity in elderly metastatic breast cancer patients. The treatment is well tolerated and has an acceptable toxicity profile.