Risk of thromboembolism in cisplatin versus carboplatin-treated patients with lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Carboplatin is widely used to treat lung cancer in the United States as an alternative to cisplatin. Several studies have demonstrated that cisplatin-based regimen is associated with a high frequency of thromboembolic complications. However, there has been limited investigation directly comparing the risk of thromboembolic events (TEEs) between cisplatin- and carboplatin-treated patients with lung cancer. METHODS: All lung cancer patients treated with cisplatin or carboplatin at Wilmot Cancer Center, University of Rochester between 2011 and 2014 were included. Patient characteristics including exposure (cisplatin vs. carboplatin) and outcome (TEEs between the time of the first dose of cisplatin or carboplatin and 4 weeks after the last dose) were collected by reviewing electronic medical records. A Fisher's exact test was used to compare the proportion of incident TEEs between cisplatin and carboplatin groups. The risk of TEE associated with carboplatin compared to cisplatin was assessed using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 415 subjects, 317 patients (76.4%) received carboplatin and 98 (23.6%) patients received cisplatin. In the carboplatin group, 10.9% (33/302) of evaluable patients developed treatment-related TEEs vs. 14.7% (14/95) in the cisplatin group. There was no significant difference in the risk of developing TEEs between the two groups (P = 0.32). However, 15.2% of carboplatin-related TEEs were arterial thromboses compared to none in the cisplatin group. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of carboplatin-related TEEs was high in lung cancer patients without significant difference in the risk of developing TEEs between cisplatin and carboplatin groups. Potential use of prophylactic anticoagulation in all platinum-treated patients should be further investigated.

Double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial of low-dose 13-cis retinoic acid in the prevention of second primaries in head and neck cancer: Long-term follow-up of a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (C0590).

BACKGROUND: 13-Cis retinoic acid (13-CRA) is a synthetic vitamin A derivative. High-dose 13-CRA in patients with squamous cell cancers of the head and neck (SCCHNs) reduces the incidence of second primary tumors (SPTs). The authors report long-term results from a phase 3 randomized trial that compared treatment with low-dose 13-CRA versus placebo for patients who had early stage SCCHN, with a focus on the development of SPTs and overall survival (OS). METHODS: In total, 176 patients who received treatment for stage I/II SCCHN were randomized to receive either low-dose 13-CRA (weight-based dose of 7.5 mg or 10 mg) or placebo for 2 years. A competing-risk approach and the log-rank test were used to compare the time to SPT and OS, respectively, between groups. RESULTS: 13-CRA neither significantly reduced the cumulative incidence of SPT (P = .61) nor improved the time to SPT (hazard ratio [HR] for 13-CRA/placebo; 0.86; P = .61). Despite limited power, there was a trend toward improved OS for the 13-CRA arm (HR, 0.75; P = .14), particularly among patients whose index tumor was surgically excised (N = 26; HR, 0.50; P = .057) and among women (N = 39; HR, 0.44; P = .065) and never/former smokers (N = 129; HR, 0.61; P = .055), with a median follow-up of 16 years. The main 13-CRA related toxicities were dry skin and cheilitis. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with low-dose 13-CRA for 2 years did not decrease the incidence of SPT; subset analysis indicates a potential survival advantage among patients who are women and never/former smokers. More targeted interventions based on clinical risk factors and molecular characterization of tumors may yield greater success in future prevention trials. Cancer 2017;123:4653-4662. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Phase 3 Randomized Low-Dose Paclitaxel Chemoradiotherapy Study for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is the standard treatment for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) but is associated with poor chest tumor control. Here, we report results of a randomized phase 3 study comparing two CCRT regimens in improving chest tumor control by low-dose paclitaxel chemoradiation for LA-NSCLC. METHODS: Due to the logistics of local referral pattern, the study was designed to enroll patients with stage III LA-NSCLC who had completed 2-4 cycles of full-dose chemotherapy. One hundred thirty four were randomized to either Arm 1 [paclitaxel at 15 mg/m2, three times per week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday) for 6 weeks, n = 74] or Arm 2 (weekly paclitaxel at 45 mg/m2 for 6 weeks, n = 60). Chest radiotherapy was 60-70 Gy in standard fractionation. Response rate was the primary endpoint, with recurrence-free survival (RFS) as the secondary endpoint. RESULTS: From March 2006 to February 2013, 71 patients completed Arm 1 treatment and 59 completed Arm 2 treatment. The response rate for Arm 1 was significantly higher (83.1%) than Arm 2 (54.2%) (p=0.001). RFS was superior in Arm 1: median 14.6 vs. 9.4 months, p = 0.005, Hazard ratio (HR) 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20, 2.90]. Overall survival was not significantly different: median 32.6 months in Arm 1 vs. 31.3 months in Arm 2, p = 0.91, HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.55, 1.70). Toxicity was significantly lower in Arm 1 for Grade 3 and 4 leukopenia/neutropenia (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Pulsed low-dose paclitaxel CCRT resulted in significantly better RFS and tumor response rate, and less hematologic toxicities than weekly CCRT for LA-NSCLC.

A Pilot Trial of Cisplatin/Etoposide/Radiotherapy Followed by Consolidation Docetaxel and the Combination of Bevacizumab (NSC-704865) in Patients With Inoperable Locally Advanced Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: SWOG S0533.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial was to determine feasibility of incorporating bevacizumab (B) into concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, performance status of 0 to 1, and adequate organ function were accrued in 2 strata, low- and high-risk (squamous histology, hemoptysis, tumor with cavitation and/or adjacent to a major vessel). Cohort 1 patients received cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) days (d) 1 and 8, etoposide 50 mg/m(2) (d 1-5) for 2 cycles concurrent with radiotherapy (64.8 Gy) followed by docetaxel (D) 75 mg/m(2) and B 15 mg/kg for 3 cycles. If safety was established, then accrual would continue to cohort 2 (B, d 15, 36, 57) and then subsequently to cohort 3 (B, d 1, 22, 43). RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (17 low- and 12 high-risk) registered to cohort 1. Twenty-six patients (including 4 squamous, 1 adenosquamous) were assessable. Twenty-five completed CRT. Grade 3/4 toxicities during CRT included acceptable rates of hematologic toxicity, esophagitis, and pneumonitis. Of 21 assessable for safety with D/B consolidation, major adverse events were pneumonitis (2 Grade 3) and 2 episodes of fatal hemoptysis in the high-risk group, resulting in closure of this stratum. The low-risk stratum subsequently closed because of slow accrual. Median overall survival was 46 months for low-risk and 17 months for high-risk strata. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab was not safely integrated into CRT for stage III NSCLC in patients considered at high risk for hemoptysis. In lower risk patients, data are insufficient to determine safety or efficacy.

A Pilot Study (SWOG S0429) of Weekly Cetuximab and Chest Radiotherapy for Poor-Risk Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with poor performance status (PS) or co-morbidities are often not candidates for standard chemoradiotherapy (chemoRT) due to poor tolerance to treatments. A pilot study for poor-risk stage III NSCLC patients was conducted combining cetuximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), with chest radiation (RT). METHODS: Stage III NSCLC patients with Zubrod PS 2, or Zubrod PS 0-1 with poor pulmonary function and co-morbidities prohibiting chemoRT were eligible. A loading dose of cetuximab (400 mg/m(2)) was delivered week 1, followed by weekly cetuximab (250 mg/m(2))/RT to 64.8 Gy in 1.8 Gy daily fractions, and maintenance weekly cetuximab (250 mg/m(2)) for 2 years or until disease progression. H-score for EGFR protein expression was conducted in available tumors. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled. Twenty-two were assessed for outcome and toxicity. Median survival was 14 months and median progression-free survival was 8 months. The response rate was 47% and disease control rate was 74%. Toxicity assessment revealed 22.7% overall ≥Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities. Grade 3 esophagitis was observed in one patient (5%). The skin reactions were mostly Grade 1 or 2 except two of 22 (9%) had Grade 3 acne and one of 22 (5%) had Grade 3 radiation skin burn. Grade 3-4 hypomagnesemia was seen in four (18%) patients. One patient (5%) had elevated cardiac troponin and pulmonary emboli. H-score did not reveal prognostic significance. An initially planned second cohort of the study did not commence due to slow accrual, which would have added weekly docetaxel to cetuximab/RT after completion of the first cohort of patients. CONCLUSION: Concurrent weekly cetuximab/chest RT followed by maintenance cetuximab for poor-risk stage III NSCLC was well tolerated. Further studies with larger sample sizes will be useful to establish the optimal therapeutic ratio of this regimen.

Advances in personalized therapy for lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Personalized medicine based on tumor characteristics is transforming the management of lung cancer. This review provides an overview of clinically approved strategies to personalize treatment for lung cancer as well as evolving strategies in various stages of clinical development. AREAS COVERED: Selecting therapy based on various tumor characteristics such as histology and presence of specific molecular alterations will be covered. This review will not only discuss the role of targeted agents in personalizing care for lung cancer but also the strategies to personalize traditional chemotherapeutic agents. EXPERT OPINION: Advances in genomic medicine to identify key genetic alterations with subsequent development of matching targeted agents are rapidly changing the management of lung cancer. Being able to target key driver molecular aberrations is certainly exciting and clinically meaningful, but only for a limited period of time. Intra- and intertumoral heterogeneity is a major contributor to therapy resistance, a substantial roadblock to durable response. Better understanding of resistance mechanism is at least as important as identifying new targetable genetic changes to effectively advance personalized therapy for lung cancer. Finally, optimization of biopsy specimens and rigorous validation steps to ensure reliability of diagnostic methods would be critical in moving forward.

Preclinical and pilot clinical studies of docetaxel chemoradiation for Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Local and distant failure rates remain high despite aggressive chemoradiation (CRT) treatment for Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. We conducted preclinical studies of docetaxel's cytotoxic and radiosensitizing effects on lung cancer cell lines and designed a pilot study to target distant micrometastasis upfront with one-cycle induction chemotherapy, followed by low-dose radiosensitizing docetaxel CRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A preclinical study was conducted in human lung cancer cell lines NCI 520 and A549. Cells were treated with two concentrations of docetaxel for 3 h and then irradiated immediately or after a 24-h delay. A clonogenic survival assay was conducted and analyzed for cytotoxic effects vs. radiosensitizing effects of docetaxel. A pilot clinical study was designed based on preclinical study findings. Twenty-two patients were enrolled with a median follow-up of 4 years. Induction chemotherapy consisted of 75 mg/m(2) of docetaxel and 75 mg/m(2) of cisplatin on Day 1 and 150 mg/m(2) of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on Days 2 through 10. Concurrent CRT was started 3 to 6 weeks later with twice-weekly docetaxel at 10 to 12 mg/m(2) and daily delayed radiation in 1.8-Gy fractions to 64.5 Gy for gross disease. RESULTS: The preclinical study showed potent cytotoxic effects of docetaxel and subadditive radiosensitizing effects. Delaying radiation resulted in more cancer cell death. The pilot clinical study resulted in a median survival of 32.6 months for the entire cohort, with 3- and 5-year survival rates of 50% and 19%, respectively, and a distant metastasis-free survival rate of 61% for both 3 and 5 years. A pattern-of-failure analysis showed 75% chest failures and 36% all-distant failures. Therapy was well tolerated with Grade 3 esophagitis observed in 23% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: One-cycle full-dose docetaxel/cisplatin induction chemotherapy with recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor followed by pulsed low-dose docetaxel CRT is promising with regard to its antitumor activity, low rates of distant failure, and low toxicity, suggesting that this regimen deserves further investigation.

Multicenter, randomized, phase 2 study of zoledronic acid in combination with docetaxel and carboplatin in patients with unresectable stage IIIB or stage IV non-small cell lung cancer.

This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined zoledronic acid and docetaxel/carboplatin in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as preclinical studies showed synergistic antitumoral activity with bisphosphonates and docetaxel. Patients with inoperable stage IIIB or stage IV NSCLC were randomized 2:1 to receive docetaxel 75mg/m(2) and carboplatin area under the concentration time curve 6 with (Arm A) or without (Arm B) zoledronic acid 4mg every 3 weeks for 6 cycles. Patients responding in Arm A were rerandomized to receive monthly zoledronic acid (maximum: 12 months [Arm A1] or no zoledronic acid [Arm A2]). Patients responding in Arm B entered Arm B1 for follow-up evaluation only. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients without disease progression; secondary endpoints were time to disease progression (TTP), TTP in bone, best overall response rate, 1-year overall survival (OS) time, and safety; study not powered to detect endpoint differences. Of 150 patients, 98 were randomized to Arm A and 52 to Arm B. In the treatment phase, results were similar between groups in the proportion of patients without disease progression (40.9% vs 38.8%; P=.8096) and median TTP (132d vs 132d; P=.9622). One-year OS times and best overall response rates were 266d vs 206d (P=.4855) and 64.1% vs 72% (P=.3423), respectively; the study was not powered to detect differences. In the follow-up phase, TTP and OS time were similar. Adding zoledronic acid to docetaxel/carboplatin in advanced stage NSCLC patients was well tolerated, but provided little to no effect on disease progression endpoints.

Assessing persistent cancer pain: a comparison of current pain ratings and pain recalled from the past week.

Recent guidelines developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the use of patient-reported outcomes discuss the rating of pain and other symptoms at their current level of severity versus rating these symptoms using a recall period, such as the past 24 hours or past week. To explore whether the overall experience of cancer patients is better represented by ratings of current pain or pain recalled from the past week, we conducted a secondary analysis of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group data from 1147 patients with cancer who had reported having persistent pain during the past week. Patients used the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) to rate their current pain along with their pain at its worst, least, and average during the past week. T-tests were used to compare ratings of current pain and pain recalled from the past week. Linear regressions described the extent to which the various pain ratings contributed to overall pain interference, also derived from the BPI. Overall, patients rated their current pain as less severe than their worst or average pain recalled from the past week. Worst pain recalled from the past week contributed most to ratings of pain interference. These findings indicate that ratings of recalled worst pain, rather than ratings of current pain, might better reflect the overall experience of pain and its impact on function in cancer patients with persistent pain. Our results provide information that might guide the choice of recall period for cancer clinical trials with pain as a self-reported outcome.

Tumor response kinetics after schedule-dependent paclitaxel chemoradiation treatment for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer: a model for low-dose chemotherapy radiosensitization.

PURPOSE: Poor local disease control remains a major obstacle for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after radiotherapy. We previously reported results of a phase I/II clinical study based on preclinical investigations of paclitaxel radiation interactions for inoperable locally advanced NSCLC, which yielded remarkable local tumor responses and durable in-field tumor control using schedule-dependent low-dose paclitaxel for radiosensitization. Given our unique results, we analyzed the tumor response kinetics and conducted a statistical modeling of tumor response to characterize this regimen. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 104 chest CT scans from 27 patients treated in the clinical trial were evaluated. Tumor volumes were calculated by three-dimensional measurements of pretreatment and serial post-therapy CT scans. A nonlinear mixed effects model was used to model response kinetics. RESULTS: The average tumor volume reduction at 1 month post-therapy was 69.9 +/- 22.6% (standard deviation), and was 80.6 +/- 17.9% at the last follow-up. The nonlinear mixed effects model predicts that tumor volume will ultimately shrink by at least 75% for more than 75% of patients treated by this regimen. The model also suggests that maximum shrinkage is reached within 2 months after treatment. CONCLUSION: Tumor volume response kinetics revealed a rapid shrinkage of gross tumors using schedule-dependent pulsed low-dose paclitaxel radiosensitization. This is contrary to the protracted tumor regression process observed in radiation alone or other chemoradiation combinations. Statistical modeling may prove useful in characterizing and comparing different therapeutic regimens.

Phase II study of palifermin and concurrent chemoradiation in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Acute mucositis is a dose-limiting toxicity of concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimens for locally advanced head and neck cancer. Palifermin (a recombinant human keratinocyte growth factor; DeltaN23-KGF) stimulates the proliferation and differentiation of mucosal epithelium to reduce mucositis in patients receiving intensive therapy for hematologic cancers. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of palifermin in patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy for advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase II trial, standard radiotherapy was delivered in daily 2-Gy fractions to 70 Gy, or hyperfractionated radiotherapy was delivered in 1.25-Gy fractions twice daily to 72 Gy, over 7 weeks. Chemotherapy included cisplatin 20 mg/m(2) for 4 days and continuous-infusion fluorouracil 1,000 mg/m(2)/d for 4 days on weeks 1 and 5 of irradiation. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to palifermin 60 microg/kg or placebo once weekly for 10 doses. A follow-up trial evaluated long-term survival. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients received palifermin and 32 received placebo. The median duration of grade >or= 2 mucositis was 6.5 and 8.1 weeks in the palifermin and placebo groups, respectively (P = .157). Palifermin appeared to reduce mucositis, dysphagia, and xerostomia during hyperfractionated radiotherapy (n = 40) but not standard radiation therapy (n = 59). Adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Palifermin did not alter tumor response or survival. CONCLUSION: Ten once-weekly doses of palifermin at 60 microg/kg were well tolerated. Most patients completed treatment, but palifermin did not reduce the morbidity of concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Future studies should evaluate higher palifermin doses with longer and more standardized assessment of acute mucositis.

Phase 1/2 dose escalating study of twice-monthly pemetrexed and gemcitabine in patients with advanced cancer and non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Pemetrexed is synergistic with gemcitabine in preclinical models of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The optimal dose and utility of gemcitabine and pemetrexed was evaluated in a dose-escalating study. METHODS: The phase 1 study included patients with advanced tumors, whereas the phase 2 study included patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Gemcitabine was infused over 30 minutes, followed by pemetrexed administered over 10 minutes on day 1 of a 14-day cycle. Treatment continued for 12 cycles or until disease progression. All patients received folic acid, Vitamin B12, and steroid prophylaxis. RESULTS: Maximum tolerated dose was gemcitabine 1500 mg/m, followed by pemetrexed 500 mg/m. Fifty-three patients (29 male, 24 female) were enrolled in the phase 2 study. Response rate was 20.8% (95% CI: 0.108-0.341), and the clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) was 64.2%. Median time to disease progression was 4.6 months (95% CI: 2.79-6.18), median survival was 10.1 month (95% CI: 5.95-14.09, censorship = 20.75%), and 1-year survival was 41.0%. Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events (% of patients) were neutropenia (28.3%), fatigue (22.6%), and febrile neutropenia (9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Twice-monthly gemcitabine and pemetrexed was well tolerated, with overall survival and clinical benefit indicating disease activity in NSCLC patients.

Toxicity profile and pharmacokinetic study of a phase I low-dose schedule-dependent radiosensitizing paclitaxel chemoradiation regimen for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: We report the toxicity profile and pharmacokinetic data of a schedule-dependent chemoradiation regimen using pulsed low-dose paclitaxel for radiosensitization in a Phase I study for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Paclitaxel at escalating doses of 15 mg/m(2), 20 mg/m(2), and 25 mg/m(2) were infused on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday with daily chest radiation in cohorts of 6 patients. Daily radiation was delayed for maximal G2/M arrest and apoptotic effect, an observation from preclinical investigations. Plasma paclitaxel concentration was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. RESULTS: Dose-limiting toxicities included 3 of 18 patients with Grade 3 pneumonitis and 3 of 18 patients with Grade 3 esophagitis. There was no Grade 4 or 5 pneumonitis or esophagitis. There was also no Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia or neuropathy. For Dose Levels I (15 mg/m(2)), II (20 mg/m(2)), and III (25 mg/m(2)), the mean peak plasma level was 0.23 +/- 0.06 micromol/l, 0.32 +/- 0.05 micromol/l, and 0.52 +/- 0.14 micromol/l, respectively; AUC was 0.44 +/- 0.09 micromol/l, 0.61 +/- 0.1 micromol/l, and 0.96 +/- 0.23 micromol/l, respectively; and duration of drug concentration >0.05 micromol/l (t > 0.05 micromol/l) was 1.6 +/- 0.3 h, 1.9 +/- 0.2 h, and 3.0 +/- 0.9 h, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pulsed low-dose paclitaxel chemoradiation is associated with low toxicity. Pharmacokinetic data showed that plasma paclitaxel concentration >0.05 micromol/l for a minimum of 1.6 h was sufficient for effective radiosensitization.

A randomized, phase II trial of two dose levels of temsirolimus (CCI-779) in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer who have responding or stable disease after induction chemotherapy: a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (E1500).

HYPOTHESIS: To study the progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity with 25- or 250-mg doses of temsirolimus (CCI-779) after induction chemotherapy in patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: Patients with either stable or responding disease to four to six cycles of cisplatin or carboplatin plus etoposide or irinotecan were randomized between 4 and 8 weeks after completion of induction therapy to receive either 25 or 250 mg of temsirolimus intravenously every week until disease progression. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients entered between January 2002 and December 2003, of whom 85 were eligible: 44 received 25 mg (arm A), and 41 received 250 mg (arm B). The overall median follow-up time for all eligible patients was 34.6 months. Median age was 59 years (range, 39-80); 42 (49.4%) were male and 43 (50.6%) female; 12.9% had brain metastases. The overall median and 1-year PFS were 2.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8, 2.9) and 4.7% (95% CI: 0.2%, 9.2%), respectively. The median PFS (95% CI) for arm A was 1.9 months (1.6, 2.3); for arm B, it was 2.5 months (1.9, 3.4; p = 0.24). The median overall survival from randomization was 8 months (95% CI: 6.5, 9.5). Among the 86 patients with reported toxicities, 36 (42%) had grade 3 toxicities, the most common of which were thrombocytopenia, hypophosphatemia, and fatigue, and an additional 12 (14%) had grade 4 toxicities, the most common of which was neutropenia. No patients experienced lethal toxicities. CONCLUSION: Temsirolimus (CCI 779), given at 25 or 250 mg weekly, seemed not to increase the PFS in this patient population.

Phase III study of standard combination versus rotating regimen of induction chemotherapy in patients with hormone insensitive metastatic breast cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Intergroup Study (E3185).

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this multicenter phase III trial was to study the impact on time to treatment failure (TTF) and survival of cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) versus CAF/thiotepa, Adriamycin, vinblastine, and Halotestin (TsAVbH), a partially noncross-resistant regimen used in a rotating schedule in the treatment of hormone insensitive metastatic breast cancer in accordance with the Goldie and Coldman hypothesis. METHODS: Three hundred forty-three patients received 6 cycles of induction treatment with one of 2 regimens. Patients with estrogen receptor-negative tumors or those with estrogen receptor-positive or estrogen receptor-unknown tumors with demonstrated unresponsiveness to hormone treatment were eligible. Complete responders were randomized to either observation or maintenance therapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone, tamoxifen, and Halotestin (CMF[P]TH). Patients with partial response or stable disease on completion of induction therapy were maintained on CMF plus Halotestin. RESULTS: There were no differences in the primary end point of TTF (median 7.3 and 7.4 months, respectively). There was a significant difference in TTF and survival by duration of disease-free interval: a median of 8.8 and 21.2 months for those with a disease-free interval of > or =2 years versus 6 to 8 and 13.3 months for those with a disease-free interval <2 years (P = 0.016 and <0.001), respectively. Toxicity of the 2 treatment regimens was similar. CONCLUSION: There were no differences observed in TTF, survival, and toxicities between the 2 treatment arms, both of which contained doxorubicin (Adriamycin) as the most active agent. The results of observation versus maintenance in complete responders were reported separately.

Gabapentin for hot flashes in 420 women with breast cancer: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most women receiving systemic therapy for breast cancer experience hot flashes. We undertook a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-institutional trial to assess the efficacy of gabapentin in controlling hot flashes in women with breast cancer. METHODS: 420 women with breast cancer who were having two or more hot flashes per day were randomly assigned placebo, gabapentin 300 mg/day, or gabapentin 900 mg/day by mouth in three divided doses for 8 weeks. Each patient kept a 1-week, self-report diary on the frequency, severity, and duration of hot flashes before the start of the study and during weeks 4 and 8 of treatment. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Evaluable data were available on 371 participants at 4 weeks (119 placebo, 123 gabapentin 300 mg, and 129 gabapentin 900 mg) and 347 at 8 weeks (113 placebo, 114 gabapentin 300 mg, and 120 gabapentin 900 mg). The percentage decreases in hot-flash severity score between baseline and weeks 4 and 8, respectively were: 21% (95% CI 12 to 30) and 15% (1 to 29) in the placebo group; 33% (23 to 43) and 31% (16 to 46) in the group assigned gabapentin 300 mg; and 49% (42 to 56) and 46% (34 to 58) in the group assigned gabapentin 900 mg. The differences between the groups were significant (p=0.0001 at 4 weeks and p=0.007 at 8 weeks by ANCOVA for overall treatment effect, adjusted for baseline values); only the higher dose of gabapentin was associated with significant decreases in hot-flash frequency and severity. INTERPRETATION: Gabapentin is effective in the control of hot flashes at a dose of 900 mg/day, but not at a dose of 300 mg/day. This drug should be considered for treatment of hot flashes in women with breast cancer.

Phase II study of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) and mitomycin C, vincristine, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (MVPF) in patients with metastatic large bowel cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study (EST 1285).

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and the toxicity of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) and mitomycin C, vincristine, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (MVPF) in patients with metastatic large bowel cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 94 patients with no prior chemotherapy and measurable metastatic large bowel cancer were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment regimens. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) criteria were used to evaluate response and toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty patients were randomized to PF and 44 to MVPF. Toxicity was evaluable in all patients except one; response was evaluable in 40 and 31, with response rate of 13 and 42%, respectively. Intent-to-treat analysis showed a response rate of 12 and 32%, respectively (p = 0.076), where it was assumed that none of the ineligible or unevaluable patients responded. Median survival for all patients was 9 months, with no difference between PF and MVPF. ECOG Performance Status (0 vs. 1), weight loss (< or =10 vs. >10%) and site of metastatic lesion had statistically significant impact on survival. MVPF was definitely more toxic than PF (p < 0.000005). CONCLUSION: Both treatment regimens showed clinical activity. The MVPF regimen resulted in more responses than PF, no improvement in survival, and more toxicity.

Pilot study using gabapentin for tamoxifen-induced hot flashes in women with breast cancer.

In this pilot study, 22 women with breast cancer on tamoxifen therapy with at least two hot flashes a day took oral gabapentin at 300 mg three times a day for 4 weeks. The 16 women who completed the study had a mean decrease in hot flash duration of 73.6% (P = 0.027), frequency of 44.2% (P < 0.001), and severity of 52.6% (P < 0.001), with a complete response in 8/16 women. Side effects reported by four women who did not complete 4 weeks of the study were nausea (1/4), rash (1/4) and excessive sleepiness (3/4). Two additional patients did not provide complete data. Gabapentin is a promising new agent in the treatment of tamoxifen induced hot flashes, and should be studied further.