Influence of chemotherapeutic drug-related gene polymorphisms on toxicity and survival of early breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether GSTT1 ("null" allele), GSTM1 ("null"allele), GSTP1 (A313G), RFC1 (G80A), MTHFR (C677T), TS (2R/3R) polymorphisms were associated with toxicity and survival in patients with early breast cancer (EBC) treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (CT). METHODS: This prospective trial included patients with stage I-III BC subjected to CT with CMF or FEC regimens. PCR-RFLP was performed for MTHFR, RFC1 and GSTP1, while PCR for TS, GSTT1 and GSTM1 genes. RESULTS: Among the 244 patients consecutively enrolled, 48.7% were treated with FEC and 51.3% with CMF. Patients with TS2R/3R genotype showed less frequently severe neutropenia (G3/G4) than those with TS2R/2R and 3R/3R genotype (p = 0.038). Patients with MTHFRCT genotype had a higher probability of developing severe neutropenia than those with MTHFR CC genotype (p = 0.043). Patients with RFC1GG or GSTT1-null genotype or their combination (GSTT1-null/RFC1GG) were significantly associated with a shorter disease free survival (DFS) (p = 0.009, p = 0.053, p = 0.003, respectively) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.036, p = 0.015, p = 0.005, respectively). Multivariate analysis confirmed the association of RFC1GG genotype with a shorter DFS (p = 0.018) and of GSTT1-null genotype of a worse OS (p = 0.003), as well as for the combined genotypes GSTT1-null/RFC1GG, (DFS: p = 0.004 and OS: p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that TS2R/2R and 3R/3R or MTHFR CT genotypes have a potential role in identifying patients with greater risk of toxicity to CMF/FEC and that RFC1 GG and GSTT1-null genotypes alone or in combination could be important markers in predicting clinical outcome in EBC patients.

Aprepitant versus dexamethasone for preventing chemotherapy-induced delayed emesis in patients with breast cancer: a randomized double-blind study.

PURPOSE: A combination of aprepitant, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone is recommended for the prophylaxis of acute or delayed emesis induced by chemotherapy containing anthracyclines plus cyclophosphamide in patients with breast cancer. The aim of this study was to verify whether dexamethasone is superior to aprepitant in preventing delayed emesis in patients receiving the same prophylaxis for acute emesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized double-blind study comparing aprepitant versus dexamethasone was completed in chemotherapy-naive patients with breast cancer treated with anthracyclines plus cyclophosphamide. Before chemotherapy, all patients were treated with intravenous palonosetron 0.25 mg, dexamethasone 8 mg, and oral aprepitant 125 mg. On days 2 and 3, patients randomly received oral dexamethasone 4 mg twice per day or aprepitant 80 mg once per day. Primary end point was rate of complete response (ie, no vomiting or rescue treatment) from days 2 to 5 after chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 580 enrolled patients, 551 were evaluable: 273 received dexamethasone, and 278 received aprepitant. Day 1 complete response rates were similar: 87.6% for dexamethasone and 84.9% for aprepitant (P < .39). From days 2 to 5, complete response rates were the same with both antiemetic prophylaxes (79.5%; P < 1.00), as were results of secondary end points (ie, complete protection, total control, no vomiting, no nausea, score of Functional Living Index-Emesis; P < .24). Incidences of insomnia (2.9% v 0.4%; P < .02) and heartburn (8.1% v 3.6%; P < .03) were significantly greater with dexamethasone on days 2 to 5. CONCLUSION: In patients with breast cancer treated with anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide chemotherapy and receiving the same antiemetic prophylaxis for acute emesis, dexamethasone was not superior to aprepitant but instead had similar efficacy and toxicity in preventing delayed emesis.

Association of cytidine deaminase and xeroderma pigmentosum group D polymorphisms with response, toxicity, and survival in cisplatin/gemcitabine-treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Selecting patients according to key genetic characteristics may help to tailor chemotherapy and optimize the treatment in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Genetic variations in drug metabolism may affect the clinical response, toxicity, and prognosis of NSCLC patients treated with cisplatin/gemcitabine-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated seven single-nucleotide polymorphisms of six genes CDA Lys27Gln (A/C); CDA C435T; ERCC1 C118T; XRCC3 Thr241Met (C/T); XPD Lys751Gln (A/C); P53 Arg72Pro (G/C), and RRM1 C524T in 192 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC treated with cisplatin/gemcitabine-based regimen by TaqMan probe-based assays with 7300 Real-Time PCR System, using genomic DNA extracted from blood samples. RESULTS: The CDA 435 T/T genotype was significantly associated with better response (p = 0.03). The CDA 435 C/T genotype was associated with a significantly increased risk of nonhematological toxicity of grade ≥3 (p = 0.02) after adjusting for performance status, age, and type of treatment regimen. In the multivariate Cox model, the XPD 751 C/C genotype was a significant prognostic factor of longer progression-free survival (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest polymorphic variations of drug metabolic gene were associated with response and toxicity of cisplatin/gemcitabine-based therapy and progression-free survival of patients with advanced NSCLC.

Delayed emesis: moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (single-day chemotherapy regimens only).

PURPOSE: An update of the recommendations for the prophylaxis of delayed emesis induced by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy discussed during the third Perugia Consensus Conference (June 2009) sponsored by MASCC-ESMO was presented. The review considered new studies published since the second consensus conference (April 2004). METHODS: An online search was used conducting PubMed and the search terms moderately, chemotherapy, and emesis with a restriction to papers in English. RESULTS: Overall, nine randomized controlled studies were included: four evaluating NK1 receptor antagonists, one palonosetron, and four dopamine receptor antagonists. CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving a combination of anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide treated with a combination of aprepitant, a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist and dexamethasone to prevent acute nausea and vomiting, aprepitant is suggested to prevent delayed emesis. In patients who do not receive aprepitant for the prophylaxis for acute emesis and in which palonosetron is recommended, a multiday oral dexamethasone is the preferred treatment for the prevention of delayed emesis. Levels of evidence and of consensus for both recommendations are moderate.

Consensus recommendations for the prevention of vomiting and nausea following high-emetic-risk chemotherapy.

In this update of our 2005 document, we used an evidence-based approach whenever possible to formulate recommendations, emphasizing the results of controlled trials concerning the best use of antiemetic agents for the prevention of emesis and nausea following anticancer chemotherapies of high emetic risk. A three-drug combination of a 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor (5-HT(3)) receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant beginning before chemotherapy and continuing for up to 4 days remains the standard of care. We address issues of dose, schedule, and route of administration of five selective 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists. We conclude that, for each of these five drugs, there is a plateau in therapeutic efficacy above which further dose escalation does not improve outcome. In trials designed to prove the equivalence of palonosetron to ondansetron and granisetron, palonosetron proved superior in emesis prevention, while adverse effects were comparable. Furthermore, for all classes of antiemetic agents, a single dose is as effective as multiple doses or a continuous infusion. The oral route is as efficacious as the intravenous route of administration.

The role of histology with common first-line regimens for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a brief report of the retrospective analysis of a three-arm randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: Although histology has not consistently been associated with treatment outcome in advanced non-small cell lung cancer, a recent phase III trial comparing pemetrexed plus cisplatin and gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) demonstrated better efficacy for pemetrexed plus cisplatin in nonsquamous (adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma) carcinoma than in squamous cell carcinoma. Herein, retrospective analysis is used to explore the potential predictive and prognostic role of non-small cell lung cancer histology in patients treated with three first-line, platinum-based regimens. METHODS: Survival and time to progression (TTP) data from a phase III trial comparing paclitaxel plus carboplatin (PCb), GC, and vinorelbine plus cisplatin (VC) were analyzed. Using Cox multiple regression, factors for one model included treatment (PCb, GC, and VC), histology (squamous, adenocarcinoma, large cell, and other), gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1 and 2), stage (IIIB and IV), number of metastatic sites (< or = 1 and >1), and smoking history (yes or no). In another model, histology was simply considered as squamous versus nonsquamous. An interaction value of p < 0.10 was considered significant. RESULTS: Baseline patient and disease characteristics for the 607 treated patients were balanced among the arms. No significant treatment-by-histology interaction was seen in either model for either end point. Nevertheless, histology was a significant prognostic factor for survival in the first model (p = 0.0183) and marginally significant for TTP (p = 0.0783). Subsequent pairwise comparisons of histology groups demonstrated a survival advantage for squamous cell carcinoma over adenocarcinoma (p = 0.0021). CONCLUSIONS: Histology was not predictive of PCb, GC, or VC treatment effect for either survival or TTP. Histology was prognostic for survival, with better outcomes associated with squamous cell carcinoma.

Nadroparin for the prevention of thromboembolic events in ambulatory patients with metastatic or locally advanced solid cancer receiving chemotherapy: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are needed to assess the clinical benefit of antithrombotic prophylaxis in patients with cancer who are receiving chemotherapy, since these patients are at an increased risk of developing a thromboembolism. We did a trial to assess the clinical benefit of the low-molecular-weight heparin nadroparin for the prophylaxis of thromboembolic events in ambulatory patients receiving chemotherapy for metastatic or locally advanced solid cancer. METHODS: Between October, 2003, and May, 2007, ambulatory patients with lung, gastrointestinal, pancreatic, breast, ovarian, or head and neck cancer were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to receive subcutaneous injections of nadroparin (3800 IU anti-Xa once a day, n=779) or placebo (n=387), in a 2:1 ratio. Study treatment was given for the duration of chemotherapy up to a maximum of 4 months. The primary study outcome was the composite of symptomatic venous or arterial thromboembolic events, as assessed by an independent adjudication committee. All randomised patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the efficacy and safety analyses (modified intention-to-treat population). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT 00951574. FINDINGS: 1150 patients were included in the primary efficacy and safety analyses: 769 patients in the nadroparin group and 381 patients in the placebo group. 15 (2.0%) of 769 patients treated with nadroparin and 15 (3.9%) of 381 patients treated with placebo had a thromboembolic event (single-sided p=0.02). Five (0.7%) of 769 patients in the nadroparin group and no patients in the placebo group had a major bleeding event (two-sided p=0.18). The incidences of minor bleeding were 7.4% (57 of 769) with nadroparin and 7.9% (30 of 381) with placebo. There were 121 (15.7%) serious adverse events in the nadroparin goup and 67 (17.6%) serious adverse events in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Nadroparin reduces the incidence of thromboembolic events in ambulatory patients with metastatic or locally advanced cancer who are receiving chemotherapy. Future studies should focus on patients who are at a high risk for thromboembolic events. FUNDING: Italfarmaco SpA, Milan, Italy.

Randomised multicenter phase II study of two schedules of docetaxel and gemcitabine or cisplatin/gemcitabine followed by docetaxel as first line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the attempt to optimize the efficacy of chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) several strategies need to be investigated including the use of non-platinum combinations and the sequential use of different agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase II randomised study 165 patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were assigned to receive docetaxel 40 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 plus gemcitabine 1200 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 every 21 days (arm A, N=54) or docetaxel 50 mg/m(2) days 1 and 15 plus gemcitabine 1600 mg/m(2) days 1 and 15 every 28 days (arm B, N=57) or gemcitabine 1200 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 100mg/m(2) day 2 every 21 days for 3 cycles followed by docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) day 1 every 21 days for 3 cycles (arm C, N=54). The primary endpoint of the trial was overall response rate. Secondary end points included safety, progression-free and overall survival. RESULTS: Response rate was 22.2%, 23.2% and 33.3% after 3 cycles, whereas at the end of treatment was 24.1%, 12.5% and 27.8% in arm A-C, respectively. Median time to progression was similar in all the 3 arms: 6.7 months in arm A (95% CI: 4.8-9.7), 5.6 in arm B (5.0-7.9) and 6.6 in arm C (5.7-9.1). The median survival time was 10.7 months in arm A (95% CI: 6.8-15.6), 8.9 in arm B (7.4-12.5) and 14.6 in arm C (8.0-22.4) and 1-year survival rate was 46.3%, 37.9% and 53.9%, respectively. Grade 3-4 haematological toxicities were more frequent in arm C while non-haematological were more common in the gemcitabine and docetaxel arms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this phase II randomised clinical trial do not indicate a clear superior efficacy of one of the tested combinations according to the planned statistical design and none of these regimens is sufficiently active or less toxic to warrant further investigation in a phase III study.

Biological markers and DNA flow cytometric analysis in radically resected patients with non-small cell lung cancer. A study of the Perugia Multidisciplinary Team for Thoracic Tumors.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between a panel of biological markers (p53, Bcl-2, HER-2, Ki67, DNA ploidy and S-phase fraction) and clinical-pathological parameters and its impact on outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: Tumor tissue specimens obtained after surgical resection were collected from consecutive patients with NSCLC. We used an immunocytochemical technique for p53, Bcl-2, HER-2 and Ki67 analysis in fine-needle aspirates obtained from surgical samples that were also evaluated by flow cytometric DNA analysis using a FACScan flow cytometer. RESULTS: From April 2000 to December 2005, 136 patients with radically resected NSCLC were recruited. Median age was 66 years (range, 31-84 years), male/female ratio 117/19, ECOG performance status 0/1 127/4, stage I/II/III 76/25/35, squamous/adenocarcinoma/large-cell/mixed histology 62/49/17/8, smokers yes/no 121/11. Positivity of p53, Bcl-2, HER-2 and Ki67 was detected in 51.4%, 27.9%, 25.0% and 55.8% of the samples, respectively; 82.9% of the cases revealed aneuploid DNA histograms and 56.7% presented an S-phase fraction of more than 12%. Statistically significant associations between high Ki67 and poorly differentiated tumors (P = 0.016) and a smoking history (P = 0.053); p53 positivity and high Ki67 (P = 0.002); HER-2 positivity and adenocarcinoma subtype (P = 0.015) and presence of lymph node involvement (P = 0.006); and Bcl-2 positivity and squamous cell carcinoma subtype (P = 0.058) were observed. At univariate analysis, high Ki67 proved to be the only marker associated with disease-free survival (P = 0.047). After adjusting for stage, none of the examined immunocytochemical markers emerged as an independent factor for disease-free and overall survival; only pathological stage was identified as an independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival (P = 0.0001) and overall survival (P = 0.0001). In the group of 76 patients classified as TNM stage I, high Ki67 was the only marker associated with recurrence of disease (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support a relevant prognostic role of immunocytochemical markers in NSCLC, even if the Ki67 index might have particular relevance to identify patients with more aggressive tumors who are at high risk for disease relapse.

Plasma DNA, microsatellite alterations, and p53 tumor mutations are associated with disease-free survival in radically resected non-small cell lung cancer patients: a study of the perugia multidisciplinary team for thoracic oncology.

INTRODUCTION: This prospective study examined association between circulating plasma DNA, microsatellite alterations (MA), p53 mutations with time to relapse and survival in surgically treated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (pts). METHODS: Plasma samples, adjacent lung tissue, and lung tumor tissue specimens were collected from consecutive patients with stage I-III NSCLC. Blood samples of 66 matched healthy donors with positive smoking history were collected as controls. The plasma DNA amount was determined by real-time PCR. The analysis of MA at loci D3S1300, D3S1289, D3S1266, and D3S2338 on chromosome 3p was performed by radiolabeled PCR. p53 Mutations (exons 5, 6, 7, and 8) were detected by PCR-single-strand conformational polymorphism assay. RESULTS: There were 76 patients, 65 men; median age was 68 years (range, 42-86), 20 had stage I, 40 stage II, and 16 stage III, the majority of pts (48.7%) had squamous-cell histology. Sixty-nine (91%) were smokers and most had good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1:72/4). Mean circulating DNA of all pts was 60 ng/ml versus 5 ng/ml in smoker-matched controls (p < 0.0001). In pts without recurrence, mean circulating DNA was 48.5 ng/ml at baseline, 32.8 ng/ml at 3 month, and 20.6 ng/ml at 12 month after surgery. In pts with recurrence, mean circulating DNA at baseline was 97.1 ng/ml. At 3 month after surgery, mean DNA concentration was significantly lower in disease-free pts than in patients with recurrent disease (32.8 versus 292.7 ng/ml; p = 0.0016). MA in at least one locus was found in 39.5% of NSCLC tumors. p53 Genomic mutations were observed in 54.0% of tumor samples. Statistically significant associations were observed between MA and squamous-cell histotype (p = 0.007) and between p53 mutations and lymph node involvement (p = 0.012). MA and p53 mutations were found to be significantly associated with recurrence of disease (p = 0.033 and 0.026, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that MA and p53 mutations in tumor DNA have a potential prognostic role for disease recurrence in NSCLC patients, and elevated levels of plasma circulating DNA identify patients with possible systemic disease at diagnosis. This might be proposed as an early detection test of disease recurrence.

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.

HER2 overexpression as a predictive marker in a randomized trial comparing adjuvant cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil with epirubicin in patients with stage I/II breast cancer: long-term results.

BACKGROUND: HER2 overexpression/amplification has been reported to be a predictor of prognosis in breast cancer and a potential marker for selecting the optimal adjuvant chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HER2 expression and its interaction with treatment were retrospectively evaluated in 266 of 348 patients in a trial comparing adjuvant CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil) with weekly epirubicin in stage I/II breast cancer. HER2 expression was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the monoclonal antibody CB11. Initially, any cell showing definite membrane staining was counted, and HER2 overexpression was analyzed as a continuous variable and as a dichotomous variable, with a cutoff of > 50% of positively stained cells. Subsequently, the same slides were reanalyzed with the HercepTest. RESULTS: Of the 266 tumors immunostained for HER2, 34% exhibited nearly homogeneous staining with > 50% positive cells. When the HercepTest was applied, 8% of tumors were IHC 3+ and 8% were IHC 2+. At 8 years, no statistically significant difference in relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) was observed between the treatment arms in patients with low versus high HER2 overexpression, although the number of events is low. The OS was statistically shorter in patients with high HER2 overexpression in the CMF arm, whereas no difference was observed in the epirubicin arm, suggesting that patients whose cancer overexpresses HER2 could benefit more from anthracycline-based therapy. CONCLUSION: HER2 overexpression was associated with a poorer OS but not a poorer RFS. However, a Cox regression model did not confirm the prognostic role of HER2 for OS.

The multidisciplinary rectal cancer treatment: main convergences, controversial aspects and investigational areas which support the need for an European Consensus.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During the past decades staging and treatment of rectal cancer are used different in Europe and in North America. To promote a process to integrate the daily practice with the best evidence of the literature an International Conference was organized in Italy. Agreement between Experts, Centres, and specialists who participated in the Conference are reported. METHODS: Five aspects were analyzed and a questionnaire was tailored for this purpose. The questionnaire had 159 questions. During the Conference, at the beginning of each Session, the moderators showed the answers from the Experts and the Centres, and, at the end of the session, the audience voted in all controversial issues. Agreements were scored at three levels: minimum, if it was between 51 and 74% of votes for each group; moderate, between 75 and 94%; large, more than 94%. RESULTS: The main results are: staging: endoanal ultrasound was considered as mandatory in T staging, in the evaluation of sphincter infiltration, and in the restaging of T after chemoradiotherapy (chRT). Magnetic Resonance Imaging is mandatory in the evaluation of mesorectal fascia infiltration. Endoscopy had a moderate agreement for the definition of tumour location, and the barium enema as optional. Digital rectal examination is complementary for staging and PET-CT investigational for T, N and yT staging. Preoperative radiotherapy: for T4 stage chRT was always the preferred treatment, often with moderate agreement, for any tumour location and N status. For T3, chRT received the same agreement except for high location and N0-N1. For T2 stage, N2 and positive nodes outside the mesorectum, chRT received minimum agreement for low and middle tumours; for high tumours only positive nodes outside the mesorectum was agreed upon. Preoperative radiotherapy, negative specimen and sphincter preservation: chRT was agreed by many for all T stages and N presentations of lower third tumours, except for T1-2 N0-N1. Postoperative treatments: the selection for these treatments often received moderate agreement according to the infiltration of surrounding organs, positive nodal status and circumferential radial margins. Therapy of metastatic disease: an agreement was found for FOLFOX as first-line therapy and for FOLFIRI as second-line, although comparative studies show similar activity of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI regimens. CONCLUSIONS: This process represents an expertise opinion process that may contribute to increased scientific debate and to promote the development of 'guidelines', 'clinical recommendations' and ultimately a Consensus on the evolving approach to rectal cancer treatment.

Epidermal growth factor receptor gene and protein and gefitinib sensitivity in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gefitinib is a selective inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase, which is overexpressed in many cancers, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We carried out a clinical study to compare the relationship between EGFR gene copy number, EGFR protein expression, EGFR mutations, and Akt activation status as predictive markers for gefitinib therapy in advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Tumors from 102 NSCLC patients treated daily with 250 mg of gefitinib were evaluated for EGFR status by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), DNA sequencing, and immunohistochemistry and for Akt activation status (phospho-Akt [P-Akt]) by immunohistochemistry. Time to progression, overall survival, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method; groups were compared using the log-rank test. Risk factors associated with survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression modeling and multivariable analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Amplification or high polysomy of the EGFR gene (seen in 33 of 102 patients) and high protein expression (seen in 58 of 98 patients) were statistically significantly associated with better response (36% versus 3%, mean difference = 34%, 95% CI = 16.6 to 50.3; P<.001), disease control rate (67% versus 26%, mean difference = 40.6%, 95% CI = 21.5 to 59.7; P<.001), time to progression (9.0 versus 2.5 months, mean difference = 6.5 months, 95% CI = 2.8 to 10.3; P<.001), and survival (18.7 versus 7.0 months, mean difference = 11.7 months, 95% CI = 2.1 to 21.4; P = .03). EGFR mutations (seen in 15 of 89 patients) were also statistically significantly related to response and time to progression, but the association with survival was not statistically significant, and 40% of the patients with mutation had progressive disease. In multivariable analysis, only high EGFR gene copy number remained statistically significantly associated with better survival (hazard ratio = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.82). Independent of EGFR assessment method, EGFR+/P-Akt+ patients had a statistically significantly better outcome than EGFR-, P-Akt-, or EGFR+/P-Akt- patients. CONCLUSIONS: High EGFR gene copy number identified by FISH may be an effective molecular predictor for gefitinib efficacy in advanced NSCLC.

Emesis induced by low or minimal emetic risk chemotherapy.

For patients treated with low or minimally emetogenic chemotherapy there is little evidence from clinical trials supporting the choice of a given antiemetic therapy or of any treatment at all. The panel recognized the necessity of considering the introduction into clinical practice of new agents in these categories, particularly oral cytotoxic agents and targeted biological agents and also the possibility of over-treatment with antiemetics. There was consensus among panel members regarding the recommended treatment for patients receiving chemotherapy agents with low and minimal emetic risk. Patients without a history of nausea and vomiting for whom minimally emetic risk chemotherapy is prescribed should not routinely receive antiemetic prophylaxis. A single agent such as a low-dose corticosteroid is suggested for patients receiving agents of low emetic risk. If nausea and vomiting occurs during subsequent cycles of chemotherapy, prophylaxis with a single agent such as a substituted benzamide, a corticosteroid, or a phenothiazine should be administered. Only patients with persistent nausea and vomiting despite treatment with these recommended agents should receive a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist in the following cycles.

Evaluation of new antiemetic agents and definition of antineoplastic agent emetogenicity--an update.

Development of effective antiemetic therapy depends upon an understanding of both the antiemetic agents and the emetogenic challenges these agents are designed to address. New potential antiemetic agents should be studied in an orderly manner, proceeding from phase I to phase II open-label trials and then to randomized double-blind phase III trials comparing new agents and regimens to best standard therapy. Use of placebos in place of antiemetic therapy against highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy is unacceptable. Nausea and vomiting should be evaluated separately and for both the acute and delayed periods. Defining the emetogenicity of new antineoplastic agents is a challenge, since such data are often not reliably recorded during early drug development. A four-level classification system is proposed for emetogenicity of intravenous antineoplastic agents. A separate four-level classification system for emetogenicity of oral antineoplastic agents, which are often given over an extended period of time, is also proposed.

Delayed emesis: moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Data on the incidence and efficacy of antiemetic prophylaxis against delayed emesis induced by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy are scanty. An overview of the literature has been done that showed the efficacy of dexamethasone in two of three randomized trials. Its optimal dose and duration of administration has not been defined. Only one of four randomized studies showed a statistically significant efficacy of 5-HT(3) antagonists. Finally, only weak evidence has been published on the efficacy of dopamine receptor antagonists.

Randomized phase II feasibility study of combining the matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor BMS-275291 with paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to assess whether the addition of the matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) inhibitor BMS-275291 to combined paclitaxel and carboplatin chemotherapy had an adverse impact on expected tumor response or had significant toxicity, especially arthrotoxicity, in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB-IV NSCLC were randomly assigned to BMS-275291 or placebo. All patients received paclitaxel 200mg/m(2) as a continuous 3-hour infusion followed by carboplatin calculated using the Calvert formula for a target AUC of 6 mg / (ml min), every 21 days for a maximum of eight cycles. BMS-275291 or placebo was administered on an outpatient basis at a daily oral dosage of 1200 mg. RESULTS: All 75 patients were evaluable for toxicity and 65 (86.7%) for response. Drug-related arthrotoxicity > or =grade 2 occurred in 12 patients (31.6%) in the BMS-275291 group (lower limit of one-sided 95% CI: 19.3) and in 11 patients (29.7%) in the placebo treatment arm. The incidence of rash was higher in patients receiving BMS-275291 (28.9% versus 18.9%). An objective response rate of 21.9% was observed in the BMS-275291 treatment arm and 36.4% in the placebo arm. CONCLUSION: BMS-275291 plus paclitaxel/carboplatin was well tolerated and active in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Treatment with BMS-275291 was not limited by drug-related arthrotoxicity and tumor response was as expected. As planned, patient accrual continued to further investigate the effect of BMS-275291 on overall and progression-free survival in a phase III setting.