First-line chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin in metastatic breast cancer.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of combined treatment with docetaxel-cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Consecutive eligible chemonaive patients received docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 2 every 3 weeks for 6 cycles, with prophylactic recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHuG-CSF) on days 4-11. Thirty-two patients (64%) had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy; these included 16 (32%) who had received anthracyclines. In 50 evaluable patients with a median age (range) of 56 (31-72) years, the overall response rate was 68% (95% CI, 55-81%), with 7 (14%) complete and 27 (54%) partial responses. Stable and progressive disease was observed in 10 (20%), and 6 (12%) patients, respectively. The median duration of response was 10 months, and the median time to progression was 39 weeks. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity included--neutropenia in 9 patients (18%), anemia in 2 (4%) and thrombocytopenia in 1 (2%). One patient (2%) with febrile neutropenia required hospitalization. Grade 3/4 nonhematological toxicities included nausea/vomiting in 18%, nephrotoxicity in 14%, asthenia (4%), and neurotoxicity (2%). Toxicity was common in older patients (>56 years). There were no treatment-related deaths. A combination of docetaxel-cisplatin with rHuG-CSF support is well tolerated and effective as first-line chemotherapy in MBC.

Vinorelbine and cisplatin for metastatic breast cancer: a salvage regimen in patients progressing after docetaxel and anthracycline treatment.

PURPOSE: To assess the antitumor efficacy and safety of a combination of vinorelbine (VNR) and cisplatin in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with assessable metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and docetaxel (adjuvant n = 1, palliative n = 20, both n = 15) were studied. Cisplatin was given at 75 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by 25 mg/m2 VNR on days 1 + 8 in a 5-minute i.v. infusion. Courses were repeated every 3 weeks. Treatment was continued until disease progression, excess toxicity, or patient refusal. Patients were classified according to their response to anthracyclines according to criteria published previously: 1) Anthracycline and/or docetaxel resistant were patients who progressed during treatment with anthracyclines and docetaxel or within 4 months after cessation of treatment (metastatic). In addition, adjuvant patients who progressed within 6 months after completion of chemotherapy belong to this group. 2) Anthracycline and/or docetaxel relapsed were either metastatic patients who responded initially and then progressed after 4 months of completing an anthracycline- and docetaxel-based chemotherapy or patients who progressed after 6 months from completion of anthracycline/docetaxel-based adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Two patients (5.6%) achieved a complete response (CR) and 15 patients (41.6%) achieved a partial response (PR), for an overall response rate (OR) of 47.2% (95% confidence interval, 31-63). Of 18 patients relapsed to anthracycline/docetaxel, 2 had a CR (11%) and 8 a PR (44.4%), giving an objective response of 55.5%. Stable disease (SD) was observed in one patient (5.5%); seven patients had progressive disease (PD) (39%). Among the 18 resistant patients, 7 PRs (39%) were observed (p = 0.5), one patient (5.5%) had stable disease, 10 patients (55.5%) progressed. The median time to progression (TTP) was 16 weeks and median overall survival 36 weeks. Relapsed patients had a longer TTP than resistant patients (24 vs. 8 weeks, p = 0.05) but similar survival (48 vs. 24 weeks, p = 0.173). All patients were assessed for toxicity. The main toxicity was neutropenia grade 3 and 4 in 47% of patients. Febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization was absent. There were no treatment-related deaths. Thrombocytopenia grade 3 and 4 occurred in four patients (11%). Phlebitis, orthostatic hypotension, and asthenia, all reversible, were observed in 3% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: This cisplatin/VNR regimen is well tolerated and active in patients who failed anthracyclines and docetaxel treatment. The response rate, TTP, and survival data are high and indicate that cisplatin/VNR may have a place as salvage treatment in this group of patients. If these results can be verified in multi-institutional trials, this combination of drugs would merit investigation as part of a first-line therapy in breast cancer.

Vinorelbine and docetaxel as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a combination of vinorelbine (VNR) and docetaxel (DOC) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study group comprised 40 women with untreated metastatic breast cancer with visceral (85%) and bone (70%) metastases. Of the 40 patients, 24 (60%) had previously received adjuvant chemotherapy, which had included anthracyclines in 12 patients (30%). Treatment consisted of VNR 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 5, and DOC 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 3 weeks. Depending on the neutrophil nadir (grade 3 or 4 neutropenia by WHO criteria) recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 micro g/kg on days 2-4 and 6-13 was given for all subsequent treatment cycles. RESULTS: The overall response rate (ORR) was 40% (95% confidence interval, CI 15-65). Six patients (15%) achieved a complete response (CR) and ten patients (25%) achieved a partial response (PR). Stable disease (SD) was observed in six patients (15%), and 18 patients (45%) had progressive disease (PD). The median duration of response was 8 months and the median predictive time to progression (TTP) was 6 months. The main toxicity was neutropenia grade 3 and 4 in 28 patients (70%). Febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization occurred in 12 patients (30%). Grade 3 or 4 anemia was seen in two patients (5%) and grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia was seen in one patient (2.5%). Severe nonhematologic toxicity, except alopecia, was uncommon and included stomatitis in two patients (5%), vomiting in two (5%) and diarrhea in one (2.5%). There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of VNR and DOC at the doses used in this study showed moderate activity as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Neutropenia was considerable despite G-CSF administration.

Control of irinotecan-induced diarrhea by octreotide after loperamide failure.

Diarrhea is a well-recognized side effect of chemotherapy, which affects the quality of life and when refractory is potentially life threatening. Irinotecan (CPT-11) is associated with an elevated incidence of chemotherapy-induced diarrhea and subsequent morbidity. Standard antidiarrheal treatment is based on high-dose loperamide, but this agent is associated with a significant failure rate. Octreotide is active against chemotherapy-induced diarrhea caused by fluoropyrimidines and irinotecan, with a distinct mechanism of action. We administered octreotide in a phase I trial in 37 patients who received irinotecan and experienced loperamide-refractory diarrhea, 23 of whom experienced grade III-IV diarrhea and were treated with loperamide. The 13 patients in whom to loperamide failed to control diarrhea received octreotide, with a high response rate (92%). We conclude that octreotide is effective against loperamide-refractory diarrhea resulting from irinotecan-based chemotherapy.

Prevention of vinorelbine phlebitis with cimetidine. A two-step design study.

One hundred eighteen patients with various malignancies received a total of 847 vinorelbine (VNR) infusions, during 25 of which episodes of vinorelbine phlebitis occurred (1 in each of the 25 patients concerned). Venous irritation was graded with reference to the scale devised by Rittenberg et al. To prevent these 25 patients against further venous toxicity, we pretreated them with cimetidine 200 mg i.v. prior to VNR administration in subsequent cycles of chemotherapy. In most (19, or 76%) complete prevention of recurrent phlebitis was observed, while partial prevention was observed in 5 patients (20%). Treatment was unsuccessful in 1 patient. In 127 VNR infusions given after cimetidine prophylaxis only 7 (6%) episodes of phlebitis occurred. These data show that i.v. administration of cimetidine prior to vinorelbine infusion can successfully prevent recurrence of phlebitis in patients who have shown venous irritation upon prior VNR treatment, at a rate of 94%.

Vinorelbine and cisplatin in metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with anthracyclines.

PURPOSE: To assess the antitumor efficacy and safety of a vinorelbine and cisplatin combination in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-three patients with assessable metastatic breast cancer with previous exposure to anthracyclines (adjuvant n = 6, palliative n = 47) were studied. Cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 was given followed by 25 mg/m2 vinorelbine (VNR) on days 1 + 8, in a five-min i.v. infusion. Courses were repeated every three weeks on an outpatient basis. Treatment continued until disease progression, excess toxicity or patient refusal. Patients were classified according to their response to anthracyclines: anthracycline refractory patients were patients who had never responded under an anthracycline regimen. Anthracycline resistant patients were either metastatic patients who progressed within four months of completing anthracycline-based chemotherapy or patients who progressed within six months of completion of an anthracycline adjuvant treatment. Patients who progressed four months after the end of an anthracycline regimen in metastatic setting or six months after the end of an anthracycline regimen in adjuvant setting were considered as patients previously treated with anthracyclines and were called 'relapsed'. RESULTS: Four patients (8%) achieved a complete response (CR) and twenty-two patients (41%) achieved a partial response (PR) with an overall response rate (OR) of 49% (95% confidence interval (CI): 35-63). Stable disease (SD) was observed in five patients (9%), twenty-two patients had progressive disease (PD). Responses according to previous sensitivity to anthracycline were as follow: 5 refractory patients achieved a PR from 14 patients (36%). Seven of sixteen resistant patients responded (44%), six with PR and one with CR. Among 23 'relapsed' patients, 14 responses were observed (61%), with 3 CR and 11 PR. There was no statistical difference in RR among the three groups. The median duration of response for all patients was 7 months, the median time to progression (TTP) 5 months and median overall survival 12 months. All patients were assessed for toxicity. The main toxicity was neutropenia grade 3 and 4 in 49% of patients. Febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization was uncommon (2 patients). There were no treatment related deaths. Despite potential overlapping neurologic toxicities of the two drugs, only eight patients (15%) developed neuropathy, which was, however, mild (grades 1 and 2). CONCLUSIONS: This cisplatin VNR regimen is well tolerated and active in patients who failed anthracyclines. The response rate, TTP and survival data are encouraging and indicate that cisplatin VNR may have a place as second-line treatment alternative to taxanes or other less active regimens. If these results can be verified in multi-institution trials, this combination of drugs would merit investigation as first-line therapy in this patient population.

A phase II study of the effectiveness of docetaxel (Taxotere) in women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with polychemotherapy. Hellenic Cooperative Interhospital Group in Oncology.

PURPOSE: The aim was to study the effectiveness of docetaxel (Taxotere) in patients with advanced breast cancer treated previously with polychemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-nine patients received docetaxel (100 mg/m2; 1-h i.v. infusion) and corticosteroid premedication. Forty-one patients who had received previous anthracycline treatment were divided into anthracycline-refractory and anthracycline-resistant (early and late) groups. RESULTS: Of 45 evaluable patients, 66.7% had a partial response (PR) and 2.2% a complete response (CR), giving an overall response rate (ORR) of 68.9%. The ORR in anthracycline-refractory patients was 60% versus 82.6% in anthracycline-resistant patients; the difference was not significant. The ORR in early-resistance patients was 62.5% versus 93.4% in late-resistance patients (0.05 < P < 0.1). The median response duration and overall survival was 8 months (range, 4-23 + months) and 11.5 months (range, 4-31 + months), respectively, in 39 patients treated previously for metastatic disease. For 295 courses, grade 3/4 neutropenia developed in 28.6% of patients (12.5% of courses) and was febrile in 26.5% of patients (6.1% of courses), including one septic death. Hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) developed in 16.3% of patients, and fluid retention developed in 34.7% of patients (11.9% of courses). CONCLUSIONS: Docetaxel is an active second-line drug in advanced breast cancer. The time of relapse after cessation of anthracycline treatment may be a significant prognostic factor.

The anti-emetic efficacy of tropisetron plus dexamethasone in patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation.

Among the most distressing symptoms experienced by patients who have undergone high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation are nausea and vomiting. The chemotherapy regimens used in high-dose conditioning protocols are highly emetogenic. The 5HT3 receptor antagonists are very effective in the prevention and abolition of nausea and vomiting resulting from chemotherapeutic drugs. One of them, tropisetron, is a selective antagonist of serotonin 5HT3 receptors with proven efficacy against emesis. Dexamethasone is also known as an effective agent against nausea and vomiting. The addition of dexamethasone to a 5HT3 receptor antagonist is synergistic, as has been shown in many trials with highly emetogenic drugs. The aim of the present trial was to study the efficacy and safety profile of the combination of tropisetron and dexamethasone in controlling nausea and vomiting in patients receiving megatherapy prior to stem cell transplantation. We studied 31 patients. All of them were evaluable for response and toxicity. The majority of patients achieved complete or major protection against acute vomiting (71-83%), and 67-84% of the patients had no or mild nausea. The combination was tolerated well, and only a minority of patients reported side effects. Among them the most common were headache (in three patients) and constipation. No patient withdrew from the study because of toxicity. It has become evident from our data that the administration of 5 mg tropisetron daily in combination with 20 mg dexamethasone for 8 days can prevent the acute emesis otherwise experienced by patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy as conditioning in stem cell transplantation programmes.

Optimal timing (Preemptive versus supportive) of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration following high-dose cyclophosphamide.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare various time schedules of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) treatment in a clinical model of patients who received high-dose cyclophosphamide (HDCY 45 g/m2) for the treatment of an underlying malignancy in order to investigate the optimal time (preemptive vs. supportive) of G-CSF initiation upon the incidence and duration of cytopenias and related parameters, such as incidence of febrile episodes, antibiotic use, duration and cost of G-CSF administration and overall clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of various schedules used. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-two courses were given in a sequential cohort study. G-CSF was administered either 24, 48, 72, 96 h after chemotherapy (preemptive treatment) or upon the onset of leukopenia (WBC 96 h), supportive and control groups (p < 0.05). The cost of antibiotics was also in favor of the early treatment group. The median duration of febrile days of the delayed (>72 h) treatment groups and antibiotic cost was similar to those in patients who did not receive G-CSF at all. (3) When G-CSF was given preemptively a shorter time was required to reach normal WBC (5,000/ microl) in comparison to the sup- portive and control group. This was due to a prolonged WBC recovery rather than to an early onset of leukopenia (tail effect). A delayed leukopenia recovery occurs as administration of G-CSF is delayed. (4) As a result the required length of G-CSF treatment to reach normal WBC (5,000/ microl) was shorter in the early treatment group and the cost from G-CSF use was less in that group in comparison to the late (>72 h) and supportive groups which indicated an increased cost without clinical benefit over controls. CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF administration after HDCY has a similar effect upon the incidence and duration of severe leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. However, severe leukopenia is shorter when G-CSF starts up to 72 h after HDCY. The length of G-CSF administration and its cost is also in favor of early initiation of treatment as well as the number of febrile days and antibiotic use. Delayed (>72 h) or supportive treatment indicate more febrile episodes, antibiotic use and higher cost when compared to the early groups. Late (>72 h) or supportive G-CSF administration in this study indicates no benefit versus no treatment in relation to length of leukopenia, febrile days, antibiotic use and overall treatment cost.

A phase II study of flutamide in ovarian cancer.

A phase II study of flutamide was conducted in 24 patients with stage III and IV ovarian cancer who failed chemotherapy and who had measurable disease. Flutamide was administered at a dose of 100 mg three times daily continuously until evidence of progression. Partial response observed in 1 of the 23 evaluable patients (4.3%) lasted 3 months. Two patients had stable disease (8.7%) for 7 and 8 months. The remaining 20 patients had progression of disease within 3 months. Toxicity was mild.

Predictive factors affecting mobilization and peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection using single apheresis (SA) for rescuing patients after high-dose chemotherapy (HD.CHE) in various malignancies.

We have investigated factors that affect the efficiency of single apheresis (SA) before transplant and define groups of patients that may require more than one collection for hematologic support. A consecutive series of 56 patients with hematologic malignancies and solid tumours had peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) collected following mobilization with colony-stimulating factors (CSF) alone or after conventional chemotherapy (CHE) or high-dose cytoxan (HD.CY) followed by CSF. The efficiency of SA was assessed by total mononuclear cell number (MNC) in the harvest, CD34+ cells and colony-forming units (CFU). Linear regression analysis was performed to determine factors that affect SA yield as assessed by the above parameters. Thirty-five patients were mobilized once, 13 patients twice, six patients required three, one required four and one required five aphereses. Suboptimal mobilization and collection by SA occurred in patients with extended previous radiotherapy (RT) and patients older than 50 years. The number of CHE cycles given in the past also had an adverse effect on SA efficiency. In contrast, disease status, bone marrow infiltration by malignant cells, type of CHE, time since last CHE and mobilization regimen used were not significantly related to the collection efficiency by SA. Age, extent of previous RT and amount of CHE given prior to mobilization define the patients who require more than one SA course for support regardless of the underlying disease, BM status or mobilization regimen used. In such patients a plan for multiple aphereses should be scheduled in advance.

Peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) transplantation with a single apheresis in patients with lymphoma, myeloma and solid tumors.

The aim of this study was to investigate if a single apheresis after peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) mobilization can be used to rescue patients receiving high dose chemotherapy (HD.CHE) as treatment for an underlying malignancy. Eighteen consecutive patients who were admitted to the transplant unit for treatment were leukapheresed following mobilization with one of the following protocols: group I: rHuG-CSF alone, group II: conventional chemotherapy (C.CHE) + rHuG-CSF or rHuGM-CSF and group III: high dose cytoxan (HD.CTX) + rHuG-CSF. The optimal day for leukapheresis was determined by following white blood cell counts (WBC), mononuclear cell counts (MNC) and CD34+ cell counts daily. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-forming cells (GM-CFC) assay was performed at the leukapheresis product and prior to reinfusion. All patients proceeded directly to ablative therapy according to their underlying malignancy. PBPC from single apheresis were reinfused to all patients and cytokines started 24 h after infusion. Hematologic recovery after HD.CHE was the parameter used to ensure successful engraftment. We have been able to recover adequate number of PBPC for transplantation with a single apheresis in all patients. The number of infused cells were for groups I, II and III: (1) median number of MNC 4.7, 3.58 and 2.79 x 10(8)/kg, respectively (2); median number of CD34+ cells 4.4, 2.8, 2.7 x 10(6)/kg, respectively. The median apheresis day was 6, 16 and 16, respectively. Recovery times to granulocyte count > 0.5 x 10(9)/ L was 9 d (range 9-12) and to platelets > 20 x 10(9)/L was 12 d (range 1-135); 17/18 patients have engrafted successfully independent of the mobilization method used. These data suggest that sufficient PBPC can be harvested at a single leukapheresis for hemopoietic rescue after myeloablative therapy. Rapid hematologic recovery occurs when cytokines alone after conventional or HD.CHE are used for mobilization. Results of collection products and hematopoietic recovery are independent of the mobilization technique used.

A phase II study of ondansetron as antiemetic prophylaxis in patients receiving high-dose polychemotherapy and stem cell transplantation.

The field of high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplantation has been expanded recently as a treatment for solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Severe emesis remains one of the main extramedullary side-effects of high-dose regimens during the first week of treatment. Traditional antiemetics such as chlorpromazine, diazepam, and phenothiazines are extensively used but are unable to control emesis. The new antiemetic ondansetron, a serotonin receptor (5HT3) antagonist appears to be superior to these drugs for cisplatin-induced emesis. The study we present here is an attempt to control emesis following high-dose regimens, during bone marrow or peripheral stem cell transplantation, with ondansetron. To our knowledge no other paper has reported the efficacy of this antiemetic in such group of patients. A total of 29 patients who received highly emetogenic polychemotherapy as conditioning regimens for bone marrow transplantation were treated with ondansetron, which was given as an 8-mg i.v. short infusion prior the initiation of treatment and every 6 h thereafter for 3 days, and an 8-mg dose every 8 h for 5 additional days. All the patients had previously been treated with chemotherapy and were evaluable for response and toxicity. Complete and major protection of vomiting on day 1 was achieved by 76% of the patients, 58% on day 2 and 52% on day 3. Nausea was absent or mild in 79% of patients on day 1, 45% on day 2 and 41% on day 3.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Central venous catheter-related infections after bone marrow transplantation in patients with malignancies: a prospective study with short-course vancomycin prophylaxis.

Infections associated with double-lumen central venous catheters (CVCs) in patients undergoing BMT are presented. We prospectively studied infections occurring with 46 CVCs in 40 patients with malignancies during and up to 30 days after BMT. We randomised patients with insertions of CVCs to receive either a short course of vancomycin 500 mg x 3 peri-operatively (16 CVCs) or no VCM (11 CVCs). Six per cent of CVCs in the group with vancomycin prophylaxis became infected with Gram positive microorganisms compared with 55% in the control group (P < 0.05). Next, 19 patients with CVCs were all given prophylaxis, so finally 35 patients were given vancomycin compared with 11 patients with no vancomycin. In a total of 11 CVC-related infections, 79% of the microbiological isolates were staphylococci, all of which were sensitive to vancomycin. Vancomycin prophylaxis reduced the number of infected CVCs to 11% compared with 45% (P < 0.05) and bacteraemias to 6% compared with 45% (P < 0.01). All infections responded to antibiotic treatment. Prophylactic short-duration vancomycin during insertion of CVCs may reduce the incidence of line-associated infections and Gram positive bacteraemias in patients undergoing BMT.

Relation between hematological recovery and number of transplanted mononuclear cells in patients after high dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell rescue.

The aim of the study is to investigate the relation between the hematological recovery in patients after high dose chemotherapy and peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) rescue and the number of reinfused previously collected stem cells assessed by the number of mononuclear cells (MNCs), CFU-GMs and CD34(+) cells in th harvest. Forty nine patients mobilized with different techniques were transplanted. Our data indicate that the number of reinfused MNCs and CFU-GMS has a statistical significant relationship with the duration of leukopenia and thrombocytopenia following high dose chemotherapy and PBSC rescue in patients with various malignancies.

Diagnostic significance of the tumour markers CEA, CA 15-3 and CA 125 in malignant effusions in breast cancer.

Concentrations of the tumour-associated antigens CEA, CA 15-3 and CA 125 were determined in serous effusions (EF) from patients (pts) with breast cancer. As controls, serous effusions from patients with benign and other malignant diseases were used. The EF levels were also compared with those of serum. CA 15-3 was elevated (greater than 35 U/ml) in 65.7% of breast cancer EF, in 39.3% of EF in various other malignant diseases and in 0% of benign EF. CEA was elevated (greater than 9 ng/ml) in 37.5% of breast cancer EF, in 17.9% of EF of various other malignant diseases and in 27% of benign EF. CA 125 was elevated (greater than 35 U/ml) in 93.8% of breast cancer EF, in 78.6% of EF of various other malignant diseases and in 58.8% of benign EF. There was a statistically significant correlation between EF and serum values for the markers studied. Sensitivity and specificity for CA 15-3 were 65.7% and 76.6%, for CEA 37.5% and 77.7% and for CA 125 93.8% and 28.7%, respectively. CA 15-3 is a marker with definite diagnostic accuracy compared to CEA and CA 125 in breast cancer EF. CA 125 appears to derive from proliferating mesothelia rather than cancer cells alone and occurs in a broad spectrum of malignant as well as benign EF. The above markers should not be used alone for diagnosis of breast cancer in patients with serous effusions.

Ifosfamide cardiotoxicity in humans.

Ifosfamide (IFS) is a new alkylating oxazaphosphorine related to cyclophosphamide. Various side effects have been reported; however, cardiotoxicity is not known to occur in humans. We report for first time acute cardiac side effects upon IFS treatment in the form of supraventricular arrhythmias and ST-T wave changes. IFS dose ranged from 6.5 g/m2 to 10 g/m2 fractionated in 3 or 5 days and infused i.v. over 4 h daily together with 2-mercaptoethane sulphonate sodium (Mesna). Arrhythmias appeared to be reversible upon discontinuation of the drug. In one patient, readministration of IFS led to arrhythmia that was refractory to treatment. Factors predisposing to the development of cardiac side effects could not be determined in this study. We suggest that patients who receive IFS treatment should be monitored for the occurrence of cardiac abnormalities. Readministration of the drug may be contraindicated in such patients.