Efficacy and tolerability of biweekly bevacizumab, irinotecan, folinic acid and fluorouracil intravenous bolus (BIFF Regimen) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the southern Italy cooperative oncology group experience.

BACKGROUND: We have extensively assessed a biweekly regimen of irinotecan plus folinic acid and fluorouracil bolus (IRIFAFU) in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). Here, we report on the safety and activity of BIFF (bevacizumab plus IRIFAFU) regimen in 94 mCRC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Bevacizumab 5 mg/kg (1 hour), and irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) (1 hour) were given intravenously on day 1, 6S-folinic acid 250 mg/m(2) (2 hours), and fluorouracil 850 mg/m(2) (bolus) were given intravenously on day 2 every 2 weeks for a median of 9 cycles per patient (range, 1-12), and maintenance bevacizumab alone was delivered in 16 cases. RESULTS: Grade ≥ 3 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (50%) and febrile neutropenia (5%). Most common grade 3 nonhematologic side effects were diarrhea (20%), vomiting (7%), nausea (4%), and stomatitis (4%). Severe hypertension (1%) and epistaxis (1%) rarely occurred. Six complete responses and 44 partial responses were registered, giving a response rate of 53% (95% CI, 43%-64%). Median progression-free survival was 11.5 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.0 months). Forty-three (46%) patients eventually died, and the median overall survival was 24.0 months (95% CI, 20.2-27.8 months). CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab appeared to increase the activity of the IRIFAFU regimen without worsening its tolerability. Efficacy of BIFF was comparable with that reported with other bevacizumab plus irinotecan-based combinations.

Italian Survey on adjuvant treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (ISA).

BACKGROUND: A recent pooled analysis of randomized trials indicated significant improvement in overall survival from cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), depending on disease stage (only in stages II and III) and PS (≤ 1). Post-operative radiotherapy (RT) is optional for pN2 tumours. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To evaluate opinions and daily clinical practice of Italian Oncologists about adjuvant treatment of NSCLC, a 46-item questionnaire was delivered via e-mail. RESULTS: Seventy-eight physicians from 68 Centers (out of 98 contacted) returned their questionnaire. Seventy-four, 86, 94, and 78% of them give the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIA, IIB, IIIA, and IIIB disease, respectively and 14% in stage IB disease. Stage, PS, and age are taken into consideration evaluating adjuvant approach by 97, 95 and 73%, respectively. Cisplatin-vinorelbine (64%) and cisplatin-gemcitabine (33%), for 4 cycles (81%), are the preferred regimens, while 32% use different regimens. Ninety-two percent indicate RT in pN2 disease and/or positive resection margins. Real Number of patients Needed to Treat (NNT) is probably not completely known/understood and/or used by physicians. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial adherence between clinical daily practice in Italy and scientific progresses is described in this paper, even with some discordances regarding the most appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.

Peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin.

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is, after liver metastases, the second most frequent cause of death in colorectal cancer patients and at the present time, is commonly inserted and treated as a stage IV tumour. Because there is no published data that outlines the impact of new therapeutic regimens on survival of patients with peritoneal surface diffusion, the story of carcinomatosis can be rewritten in light of a new aggressive approach based on the combination of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Also if these treatment perhaps allow to obtain better results than standard therapies, we suggest, that a large prospective randomised control trial is needed to compare long-term and progression-free survival under the best available systemic therapy with or without cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Randomised trial comparing biweekly oxaliplatin plus oral capecitabine versus oxaliplatin plus i.v. bolus fluorouracil/leucovorin in metastatic colorectal cancer patients: results of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology study 0401.

PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin combined with either fluorouracil/leucovorin (OXAFAFU) or capecitabine (OXXEL) has a demonstrated activity in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. We aimed at comparing these two regimens in terms of response rate (RR), safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and quality of life (QoL) of patients. METHODS: A total of 322 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were randomized to receive biweekly: oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 1, capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) orally twice daily from day 1 to day 11 (OXXEL); or oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 1; 6S-leucovorin 250 mg/m(2) i.v. and fluorouracil 850 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 2 (OXAFAFU). RESULTS: Eleven complete and 42 partial responses were registered with OXXEL (RR = 34%); six complete and 48 partial responses were obtained with OXAFAFU (RR = 33%) (P = 0.999). Severe adverse events were less frequent (32 vs. 43%) with OXXEL, which also reduced the occurrence of severe neutropenia (10 vs. 27%) and febrile neutropenia (6 vs. 13%), but produced more gastric side effects (8 vs. 3%) and diarrhea (13 vs. 8%). QoL did not differ across the two arms. Median PFS was 6.6 months in the OXXEL, and 6.5 months in the OXAFAFU arm (HR = 1.12, P = 0.354). Median overall survival was 16.0 and 17.1 months (HR = 1.01, P = 0.883). CONCLUSIONS: OXXEL and OXAFAFU regimens were equally active in metastatic colorectal cancer. The choice should be based on patient preference and on pharmacoeconomic evaluations.

Preferences of patients with advanced colorectal cancer for treatment with oral or intravenous chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, patient-reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life have become important areas of clinician focus in general cancer management. Patients' preferences for, and/or satisfaction with, oral versus intravenous (IV) chemotherapy schedules may have a major impact on such outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate preferences for oral or IV chemotherapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, crossover trial was conducted in 12 hospitals in Southern Italy, in which 22 patients with advanced colorectal cancer received one cycle of oral capecitabine ± irinotecan or oxaliplatin, followed by one cycle of an IV de Gramont or similar regimen (arm A), or the same regimens in reverse order (arm B). Patients were aged 50-70 years and 21% had a higher level of education (graduate or similar). Patients received oral capecitabine 3500 mg/m/day for 7 days (± irinotecan 180 mg/m or oxaliplatin 85 mg/m on day 1 only), followed by an IV de Gramont regimen ± irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin (FOLFOX); or the two schedules administered in reverse order.The main outcome measure was patients' preferences for oral versus IV chemotherapy, as determined by a pre- and post-treatment therapy preference questionnaire (TPQ). RESULTS: Before treatment, 75% of patients preferred oral therapy. Characteristics that patients considered to be important were that treatment should not interfere with daily activities (100% of patients) and should not cause fatigue (95%), diarrhea (76%), or painful mouth ulcers (76%); other factors considered important were the risk of infection and nausea (90%), and that treatment could be administered at home (65%). After receiving both chemotherapy schedules, only 45% of patients preferred oral therapy, while 55% preferred IV therapy. Among the latter, the most important characteristics influencing treatment choice were less nausea (66%), fewer mood effects (65%), the safety of hospital IV treatment (62%), less interference with family relationships (55%), less vomiting (55%), less interference with daily activities (50%), and less diarrhea (50%). Although the order in which patients received therapy did not influence treatment preference, significantly fewer patients with a lower rather than higher educational level preferred oral therapy (47% vs 80%; chi-square test = 9.9; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that there may be a correlation between educational level and the preference of patients with advanced colorectal cancer for oral or IV chemotherapy.

Intra-patient alternated dose escalation of paclitaxel and gemcitabine versus paclitaxel followed by fixed dose rate infusion of gemcitabine in fit elderly non-small cell lung cancer patients. A Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group randomised phase II trial.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to select the best schedule of administration for the paclitaxel plus gemcitabine combination in fit elderly patients affected by locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-eight patients in stage III or IV NSCLC, aged 70 years or more and in ECOG performance status (PS)