Prognostic significance of smoking in addition to established risk factors in patients with Dukes B and C colorectal cancer: a retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: To investigate the prognostic significance of smoking in addition to established risk factors in patients with Dukes stage B and C colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: 291 consecutive non-selected CRC patients were studied retrospectively. Twenty-three variables were examined using a regression statistical model to identify relevant prognostic factors related to disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: On multivariate analysis DFS was found to be negatively affected in patients with a smoking history of ≤10 pack-years vs. non-smokers (p<0.016). Additionally, performance status (PS)<90 (p<0.001), Dukes stage C (p<0.001) and elevated tumor markers (p<0.001) at the time of diagnosis were found to adversely affect DFS. Smoking also had a significant association with relapse. Patients with a smoking history of ≤10 pack-years had 2.45 (p<0.018) higher risk of recurrence compared to patients with no smoking history. OS was influenced by Karnofsky performance status (PS), Dukes stage, and elevated tumor markers. In particular patients with PS< 90 had a 4.69-fold higher risk of death (p<0.001) than patients with better PS. Stage C disease was associated with 2.27-fold higher risk of death (p<0.001) than stage B disease, and patients with elevated tumor markers at the time of diagnosis had 2.74-fold higher risk of death (p<0.014) when compared to those whose tumor markers were normal at presentation. CONCLUSION: Our study associates smoking and relapse incidence in non-clinical- trial CRC patients and reiterates the prognostic significance of PS, stage and tumor markers at the time of diagnosis.

CEA and CA-19.9 serum tumor markers as prognostic factors in patients with locally advanced (unresectable) or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a retrospective analysis.

Most pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease at diagnosis. in this retrospective study the authors evaluated the prognostic significance of the CEA and CA-19.9 serum tumor markers in advanced (unresectable) pancreatic cancer in correlation to other prognostic factors (demographic data, clinical parameters, treatment modality) and survival time using univariate and multivariate methods, in 215 patients with locally advanced (unresectable) or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. median survival was 29.0 weeks, with 21.9% of patients surviving 36 weeks. Among 24 potential prognostic variables, 19 were associated with shorter survival. Multivariate analysis indicated that ten factors had a significant independent effect on survival: chemotherapy, surgery, tumor localization, elevated C-reactive protein, elevated CeA, CA 19-9 (>30 x nl), jaundice at diagnosis, weight loss >10%, distant metastases, and Karnofsky performance status. Patients who had only palliative therapy had a hazard ratio of 8.94 versus those who underwent palliative surgery and chemotherapy. Although certain clinical, biochemical and biological factors remain important predictors of survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, CA-19.9 serum tumor marker levels retain independent prognostic value for poor survival.

Efficacy of tropisetron in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin and taxanes.

Even though significant progress has been made, chemotherapy-induced emesis remains a challenging problem. Few studies focus on emesis in patients treated with carboplatin and the observation period is limited to the initial 24 h following chemotherapy. Thus, we investigated if tropisetron (T) monotherapy can adequately prevent acute and delayed emesis in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving a moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) (carboplatin-containing) regimen. Furthermore, we explored the merits of adding dexamethasone (D) or alprazolam (A) to T, especially in the setting of a pre-existing high level of stress. We studied 60 patients with advanced NSCLC receiving carboplatin and taxanes in three consecutive cycles. During the first cycle, patients received 5 mg of T intravenously before chemotherapy and the same dose per os on each of the following 3 days. In the second cycle, T was co-administered with 8 mg of D once a day, while, during the third cycle, T was combined with per os A 0.25 mg every 12 h and continued over the following 3 days. Finally, we evaluated the impact of stress on the anti-emetic response achieved with the previously described regimens. The combination of T + A was superior to T monotherapy and the combination of T + D, regarding the prevention of acute and delayed emesis. Both T + A and T + D combinations led to appetite improvement, while patients receiving T + A experienced sedation more frequently. Interestingly, subgroup analysis revealed that patients without underlying stress obtained no further benefit by the addition of A or D, while both T + A and T + D combinations led to a better anti-emetic response in patients with stress. In conclusion, T monotherapy provides a satisfactory result in controlling nausea and emesis caused by a MEC regimen in patients without stress. However, the addition of D and, mainly, A improves its anti-emetic effect in patients with obvious stress.

Docetaxel-ifosfamide combination in patients with advanced breast cancer failing prior anthracycline-based regimens: results of a phase I-II study.

The established clinical activity of docetaxel and ifosfamide as single agents in anthracycline pre-treated breast cancer, led us to conduct a phase I-II study to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and clinical activity of the docetaxel+ifosfamide combination in this setting. Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic breast cancer, after failure on prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy, were treated at successive dose levels (DLs) in cohorts of 3-6 with escalated doses of docetaxel 70-100 mg/m(2) over 1 h on day 1 followed by ifosfamide 5-6 g/m(2) divided over days 1+2 (2.5-3.0 g/m(2)/day over 1 h), every 21 days. G-CSF was added once dose-limiting neutropenia was encountered at a certain DL and planned to be incorporated prophylactically in subsequent higher DLs. Between March 1997 and December 2002, 65 patients with a median age of 57 years (range, 32-72) and performance status (WHO) of 1 (range, 0-2) were treated at 5 DLs as follows; 21 in phase I DLs (DL1: 3, DL2: 6, DL3: 3, DL4: 6, and DL5: 3) and the remaining 44 were treated at DL4 (total of 50 patients at DL4), which was defined as the level for phase II testing. All patients were assessable for toxicity and 62 for response. DLT (with the addition of G-CSF after DL2) was reached at DL5 with 2/3 initial patients developing febrile neutropenia. Clinical response rates (RRs), on an intention-to-treat basis, in phase II were: 56%; (95% CI, 42.2-69.7%); 4 CRs, 24 PRs, 10 SD and 12 PD. The median response duration was 7 mo (3-24 mo), median TTP 6.5 mo (0.1-26 mo), and median OS 13 mo (0.1-33 mo). Grade 3/4 toxicities included: neutropenia in 72% of patients, with 60% developing grade 4 neutropenia (

Methotrexate-paclitaxel-epirubicin-carboplatin (M-TEC) combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced bladder cancer: an open label phase II study.

The present phase II study aimed to define the application of a novel regimen incorporating methotrexate, paclitaxel, epirubicin, and carboplatin (M-TEC) in advanced bladder cancer, essentially as an M-VAC-like regimen, by substitution of cisplatin by carboplatin, doxorubicin by epirubicin and vinblastine by paclitaxel. Forty patients with advanced bladder cancer entered the study; 34 males/6 females, median age: 68 (range, 59-76), median PS (Karnovsky): 80, without receiving prior chemotherapy. Disease extention was as follows; 11/40 had local recurrence, 6/40 liver metastases, 14/40 lung metastases, bone and lymph node 8/40, bones-lymph node-lung metastases 4, lymph node and liver 4/40, lymph node-liver and lung metastases 2/40. Drug schedule and doses were as follows: paclitaxel 180 mg/m2, carboplatin AUC = 5 (according to creatinine clearance, based on Calvert's formula), and epirubicin 40 mg/m2 were administered during day 1, whereas methotrexate 30 mg/m2 and epirubicin 40 mg/m2 were administered on day 14. All patients were evaluable for response with 24/40 responding [response rate (RR) 60%]; 10/40 (25%) CR, 14/40 (35%) PR, 9/40 (22.5%) SD, and 7/40 (17.5%) PD. Symptomatic improvement was observed in 50% of patients. The median duration of response was 22 (14-32) weeks, median time-to-progression (TTP) 33 (12-44) weeks, and median survival was 56 (20-84) weeks. Toxicity was well accepted and was mainly neutropenia > grade 3: 17%, anemia >grade 3: 16%, thrombocytopenia > grade 2: 6%, nausea & vomiting mainly > grade 2: 31%, according to the administered chemotherapy cycles, whereas fatigue grade 2-3: 19%, neurotoxicity grade 1-2 13% of patients, and alopecia grade 2 was observed in all patients. The present pilot study indicates the feasibility of the M-TEC combination for bladder cancer with acceptable toxicity.

Dose escalation of docetaxel and ifosfamide in patients with advanced breast cancer failing prior anthracyclines: mature results of a phase I-II study.

PURPOSE: Single-agent docetaxel and ifosfamide are clinically active in anthracycline-pretreated advanced breast cancer. We conducted a phase I-II study aiming to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and the activity of the docetaxel-ifosfamide combination in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cohorts of 3-6 patients with histologically confirmed metastatic breast cancer after prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy were treated at successive dose levels (DLs) with escalated doses of docetaxel (70-100 mg/m(2) over 1 h on day 1), followed by ifosfamide 5-6 g/m(2) divided over days 1 and 2 (2.5-3.0 g/m(2)/day over 1 h), and recycled every 21 days. G-CSF was added once dose-limiting neutropenia was encountered at a certain DL and planned to be incorporated prophylactically in subsequent higher DLs. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients (median age 57 years, range 32-72) and performance status (PS) (World Health Organization-WHO) of 1 (range 0-2) were treated at 5 DLs as follows: 21 in phase I DLs (DL1: 3, DL2: 6, DL3: 3, DL4: 6, and DL5: 3) and the remaining 44 were treated at DL4 (total of 50 patients at DL4), which was defined as the level for phase II testing. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 62 for response. DLT (with the addition of G-CSF after DL2) was reached at DL5 with 2/3 initial patients developing febrile neutropenia. Clinical response rates (RRs), on an intention-to-treat basis, in phase II were 56% (95% CI 42.2-69.7): complete remission (CR) 4, partial remission (PR) 24, stable disease (SD) 10 and progressive disease (PD) 12. The median response duration was 7 months (range 3-24), the median time to progression (TTP) 6.5 months (range 0.1-26), and the median overall survival (OS) 13 months (range 0.1-33). Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia in 72% of patients-with 60% developing grade 4 neutropenia (

Leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil versus levamisole and 5-fluorouracil as adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of 6-month therapy with leucovorin (LV)+5-fluorouracil (5-FU) versus 12-month therapy with levamisole (LVS)+5-FU, as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with completely resected Aster-Coller stage B(2) or C(1)/C(2) rectal cancer (RC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients with surgically resected RC were enrolled. Seventy patients with stage B(2) and 80 with stage C were randomly assigned to adjuvant chemotherapy with 5-FU+LXx6 months or 5-FU+LVSx12 months. Patient characteristics were equally balanced between the examined groups. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of LV 20 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) plus 5-FU 450 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus every week plus LVS tablets 50 mg t.i.dx3 days every 2 weeks for 1 year. RESULTS: After a median follow up for survivors of 8.7 years (range 1.8-10.5), all of the patients were evaluable. There were no significant differences between the two treatment groups with respect to the recurrence rates (p=0.821). Moreover, there were no significant differences between the two tratment groups in disease-free survival (DFS) (p=0.84) [B(2)(p=0.805) and C (p=0.978)] and overall survival (OS) rates for patients of either stage B(2) or C (p=0.78). Toxicities were more frequent in the 5-FU+LVS versus 5-FU+LV group: myelosuppression (grade 3 leucopenia, 12 versus 4%, p<0.04), diarrhea (grade 0, 60 versus 76%, p<0.02), and liver toxicity (increase of transaminases >3-fold, 12 patients versus 2, p<0.03.). No patient stopped chemotherapy because of toxicity, and there were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy in RC with LV+5-FU for 6 months is equally effective and less toxic than LVS+5-FU for 12 months.

Leucovorin and fluorouracil vs levamisole and fluorouracil as adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 6-month therapy with leucovorin (LV) + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) vs 12 months of therapy with levamisole (LVZ) + 5-FU, as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with completely resected Dukes' stage B2 or C rectal cancer. One hundred and fifty patients with surgically resected rectal carcinoma, were enrolled in the present study; Dukes' stage B2 (n=70) or C (n=80), were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with 5-FU + LV x 6 months or 5-FU + LVZ x 12 months. Patient characteristics were equally balanced between the examined groups. Adjuvant CT consisted of LV 20 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) plus 5-FU 450 mg/m(2) i.v., on days 1-5 every 4 weeks for 6 cycles or 5-FU 450 mg/m(2) i.v. every week plus LVZ 50 mg t.i.d x 3 days for 1 year. All patients received radiotherapy with a three-field technique to a total dose of 45 Gy, over 5 weeks. After a median follow-up of 7.4 years there were no significant differences between the two treatment groups with respect to the recurrence rates (P=0.821). Moreover, there was no difference in disease-free survival for patients stage Dukes' B2 (log-rank p=0.73); median for LV group 90 (8-131) months, and for LVZ group 86.5 (3-129) months. No difference was noted in disease-free survival for patients stage Dukes' C (log-rank p=0.73); median for LV group 60 (17-128) months, and for LVZ group 64 (2-123) months. There was no difference in overall survival for patients stage Dukes' B2 (log-rank p=0.75); median for LV group 90 (22-131) months, and for LVZ group 86 (10-129) months. For stage Dukes' C (log-rank p=0.73); median for LV group 67 (17-128) months, and for LVZ group 64 (5-123) months. Toxicities were as follows in the 5-FU + LVZ vs 5-FU + LV group; myelosuppression (leucopenia grade 3, 12% vs 4%, p<0.04), diarrhea (grade 0, 60% vs 76%, p<0.02), and liver toxicity (increase of transaminases >3-fold, 12 patients vs 2, p<0.03), were more frequent in LVZ group. None of the patients stopped chemotherapy because of the toxicity, and there were no toxicity-related deaths. In conclusion, adjuvant chemotherapy in RC with LV + 5-FU for 6 months is equally effective and less toxic than LVZ + 5-FU for 12 months.