Long-term outcomes with intensive induction chemotherapy (carboplatin, bleomycin, vincristine and cisplatin/bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin) and standard bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin in poor prognosis germ cell tumours: A randomised phase II trial (ISRCTN53643604).

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of men with poor prognosis, non-seminoma germ cell tumours (GCTs) die with standard BEP (bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin) chemotherapy. An intensive regimen, CBOP/BEP (carboplatin, bleomycin, vincristine and cisplatin/BEP), met response targets in a randomised, phase II trial (74% complete response or partial response marker negative, 90% confidence interval (CI) 61%-85%). AIM: To assess long-term outcomes and late toxicity associated with CBOP/BEP. METHODS: Patients with poor prognosis extracranial GCT were randomised to 4xBEP or CBOP/BEP (2xCBOP, 2xBO, 3xBEP with 15,000iu of bleomycin). Low-dose, stabilising chemotherapy before entry was permitted. Response rates (primary outcome) were reported previously. Here, we report secondary outcomes: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and late toxicity. Prognostic factors and the impact of marker decline are assessed in exploratory analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients (43 CBOP/BEP) were randomised. After median 63 months follow-up, 3-year PFS is 55.7% (95% CI: 39.7%, 69.0%) for CBOP/BEP and 38.7% (95% CI: 24.7%, 52.4%) for BEP (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59 (0.33, 1.06), p = 0.079). Three-year OS is 65.0% (48.8%, 77.2%) and 58.5% (43.0%, 71.2%), respectively (HR: 0.79 (0.41, 1.52), p = 0.49). Twelve-month toxicity was affected by subsequent treatments, with no clear differences between arms. Stabilising chemotherapy was associated with poorer PFS (HR: 2.09 (1.14, 3.81), p = 0.017), whereas unfavourable marker decline, in 60 (70%) patients, was not. CONCLUSION: Although not powered for PFS, results for CBOP/BEP are promising. Impact on OS was less clear (and will be affected by subsequent therapy). Further study in an international phase III trial is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 53643604.

Salvage Chemotherapy With Gemcitabine, Paclitaxel, Ifosfamide, and Cisplatin for Relapsed Germ Cell Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic germ cell tumors remain potentially curable when treated with salvage chemotherapy at first relapse. In the present phase I/II study, we sought to improve on the response rate and duration of the TIP (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, cisplatin) regimen by adding gemcitabine (Gem-TIP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients were recruited after failure of first-line cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine when combined with TIP and to establish the dose intensity of the TIP drugs in this combination. The secondary objectives were the response rates, failure-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine was 1200 mg/m2. The mean relative dose intensity was 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.2%-99.2%) for gemcitabine, 96% (95% CI, 92.9%-98.7%) for paclitaxel, 92% (95% CI, 84.5%-98.8%) for ifosfamide, and 94% (95% CI, 89.3%-99.0%) for cisplatin. The overall complete response rate was 50%; another 30% of the patients achieved a partial response. The 1-year failure-free survival and overall survival rates were 68% (95% CI, 43%-84%) and 89.5% (95% CI, 64%-97%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine can be added to TIP chemotherapy at the full dose, with manageable toxicity and no detrimental effect on the dose intensity of the TIP drugs. The response rate and duration were improved compared with those reported from the Medical Research Council TIP trial; further evaluation is warranted.

A randomised phase 2 trial of intensive induction chemotherapy (CBOP/BEP) and standard BEP in poor-prognosis germ cell tumours (MRC TE23, CRUK 05/014, ISRCTN 53643604).

BACKGROUND: Standard chemotherapy for poor-prognosis metastatic nonseminoma has remained bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) for many years; more effective regimens are required. OBJECTIVE: To explore whether response rates with a new intensive chemotherapy regimen, CBOP/BEP (carboplatin, bleomycin, vincristine, cisplatin/BEP), versus those in concurrent patients treated with standard BEP justify a phase 3 trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a phase 2 open-label randomised trial in patients with germ cell tumours of any extracranial primary site and one or more International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group poor-prognosis features. Patients were randomised between 2005 and 2009 at 16 UK centres. INTERVENTION: BEP (bleomycin 30,000 IU) was composed of four cycles over 12 wk. CBOP/BEP was composed of 2×CBOP, 2×BO, and 3×BEP (bleomycin 15,000 IU). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary end point was favourable response rate (FRR) comprising complete response or partial response and normal markers. Success required the lower two-sided 90% confidence limit to exclude FRRs <60%; 44 patients on CBOP/BEP gives 90% power to achieve this if the true FRR is ≥80%. Equal numbers were randomised to BEP to benchmark contemporary response rates. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 89 patients were randomised (43 CBOP/BEP, 46 BEP); 40 and 41, respectively, completed treatment. CBOP/BEP toxicity, largely haematologic, was high (96% vs 63% on BEP had Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.3 grade ≥3). FRRs were 74% (90% confidence interval [CI], 61-85) with CBOP/BEP, 61% with BEP (90% CI, 48-73). After a median of 58-mo follow-up, 1-yr progression-free survival (PFS) was 65% and 43%, respectively (hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% CI, 0.33-1.06); 2-yr overall survival (OS) was 67% and 61%. Overall, 3 of 14 CBOP/BEP and 2 of 18 BEP deaths were attributed to toxicity, one after an overdose of bleomycin during CBOP/BEP. The trial was not powered to compare PFS. CONCLUSIONS: The primary outcome was met, the CI for CBOP/BEP excluding FRRs <61%, but CBOP/BEP was more toxic. PFS and OS data are promising but require confirmation in an international phase 3 trial. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study we tested a new, more intensive way to deliver a combination of drugs often used to treat men with testicular cancer. We found that response rates were higher but that the CBOP/BEP regimen caused more short-term toxicity. Because most patients are diagnosed when their cancer is less advanced, it took twice as long to complete the trial as expected. Although we plan to carry out a larger trial, we will need international collaboration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN53643604; http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN53643604.

Performance of formulae based estimates of glomerular filtration rate for carboplatin dosing in stage 1 seminoma.

BACKGROUND: Single cycle carboplatin, dosed by glomerular filtration rate (GFR), is standard adjuvant therapy for stage 1 seminoma. Accurate measurement of GFR is essential for correct dosing. Isotopic methods remain the gold standard for the determination of GFR. Formulae to estimate GFR have improved the assessment of renal function in non-oncological settings. We assessed the utility of these formulae for carboplatin dosing. METHODS: We studied consecutive subjects receiving adjuvant carboplatin for stage 1 seminoma at our institution between 2007 and 2012. Subjects underwent 51Cr-ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) measurement of GFR with carboplatin dose calculated using the Calvert formula. Theoretical carboplatin doses were calculated from estimated GFR using Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology (CKD-EPI), Management of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) and Cockcroft-Gault (CG) formulae with additional correction for actual body surface area (BSA). Carboplatin doses calculated by formulae were compared with dose calculated by isotopic GFR; a difference <10% was considered acceptable. RESULTS: 115 patients were identified. Mean isotopic GFR was 96.9 ml/min/1.73 m(2). CG and CKD-EPI tended to overestimate GFR whereas MDRD tended to underestimate GFR. The CKD-EPI formula had greatest accuracy. The CKD-EPI formula, corrected for actual BSA, performed best; 45.9% of patients received within 10% of correct carboplatin dose. Patients predicted as underdosed (13.5%) by CKD-EPI were more likely to be obese (p=0.013); there were no predictors of the 40.5% receiving an excess dose. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support further evaluation of the CKD-EPI formula in this patient population but clinically significant variances in carboplatin dosing occur using non-isotopic methods of GFR estimation. Isotopic determination of GFR should remain the recommended standard for carboplatin dosing when accuracy is essential.

Imatinib in the management of multiple gastrointestinal stromal tumors associated with a germline KIT K642E mutation.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gut and are distinguished by expression of CD117 (c-Kit). Oncogenic mutations in the KIT or PDGFRA gene are detected in approximately 85% of sporadic GISTs. In recent years, examples of familial GIST have been reported in which germline mutations of KIT or PDGFRA result in multiple GISTs, skin disorders, and other abnormalities. The most common germline mutations are in KIT exon 11, mutations in exons 8 and 17 have also been described, and there are 2 families with germline PDGFRA mutations. We present a case in which a germline KIT exon 13 mutation (K642E) was discovered in a patient with multiple GISTs of rectum, small intestine, and esophagus, as well as diffuse hyperplasia of the interstitial cells of Cajal. To our knowledge, this is only the second germline example of this particular mutation. The patient's esophageal tumors were stabilized with imatinib.

Management of Skin Toxicity Related to the Use of Imatinib Mesylate (STI571, Glivectrade mark) for Advanced Stage Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours.

Skin toxicity is a common side-effect of treatment with imatinib mesylate (STI571, Glivectrade mark) in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) and chronic myeloid leukaemia. The optimal duration of treatment with imatinib mesylate in GIST has not yet been established, as durable remissions have been observed in patients. It is, therefore, important to develop strategies to deal with common side-effects of what may be a long-term treatment. Here we report the case of a patient with advanced GIST who developed a cutaneous drug reaction secondary to imatinib mesylate and the various management options that may be employed depending upon the severity of the toxicity. The case and literature are discussed.

Vascular endothelial growth factor-D expression is an independent prognostic marker for survival in colorectal carcinoma.

The angiogenic factor vascular endothelial growth factor-D (VEGF-D) isa ligand for VEGF receptor-3 (VEGFR-3/Flt-4) and receptor-2 (VEGFR-2/KDR)and is implicated in the development of lymphatic vessels and promotion of lymphatic metastases. We assessed the expression of VEGF-D and VEGFR-3 in relation to microvessel density (MVD) in colorectal carcinomas (CRC), adenomas, and adjacent normal tissue by immunohistochemistry on consecutive archival sections. VEGF-D was detected in malignant and benign epithelium and in some smooth muscle of the colorectum. High-grade VEGF-D expression was observed frequently (74%) in CRC compared with adenomas (0%) and adjacent normal mucosa (22%). High-grade VEGF-D expression was not correlated with MVD, Dukes' stage (A to C), or tumor differentiation, but was associated with lymphatic involvement and patient survival. By multivariate analysis, VEGF-D expression was found to be an independent prognostic factor for both disease-free and overall survival. VEGFR-3 expression was detected in a subset of vessels, typically thin-walled and devoid of RBCs, in 89% of CRC cases examined. VEGFR-3-positive vessel densities increased progressively from normal mucosa to adenomas and carcinomas and were correlated with MVD, but not with Dukes' stage (A to C), tumor differentiation, or VEGF-D expression. VEGFR-3 expression was spatially associated with macrophage-rich inflammatory infiltrates, which were significantly more frequent among VEGFR-3-positive cases. We conclude that VEGF-D expression, but not that of its receptor VEGFR-3, is an independent prognostic indicator in CRC. VEGF-D expression may be associated with disease outcome through the promotion of lymphatic involvement/metastases.