3 versus 6 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine combination therapy for colorectal cancer (SCOT): an international, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: 6 months of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy is usually given as adjuvant treatment for stage 3 colorectal cancer. We investigated whether 3 months of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy would be non-inferior to the usual 6 months of treatment. METHODS: The SCOT study was an international, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 244 centres. Patients aged 18 years or older with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer underwent central randomisation with minimisation for centre, choice of regimen, sex, disease site, N stage, T stage, and the starting dose of capecitabine. Patients were assigned (1:1) to receive 3 months or 6 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimens could consist of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX (bolus and infused fluorouracil with oxaliplatin). The regimen was selected before randomisation in accordance with choices of the patient and treating physician. The primary study endpoint was disease-free survival and the non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio of 1·13. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in patients who started study treatment. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN59757862, and follow-up is continuing. FINDINGS: 6088 patients underwent randomisation between March 27, 2008, and Nov 29, 2013. The intended treatment was FOLFOX in 1981 patients and CAPOX in 4107 patients. 3044 patients were assigned to 3 month group and 3044 were assigned to 6 month group. Nine patients in the 3 month group and 14 patients in the 6 month group did not consent for their data to be used, leaving 3035 patients in the 3 month group and 3030 patients in the 6 month group for the intention-to-treat analyses. At the cutoff date for analysis, there had been 1482 disease-free survival events, with 740 in the 3 month group and 742 in the 6 month group. 3 year disease-free survival was 76·7% (95% CI 75·1-78·2) for the 3 month group and 77·1% (75·6-78·6) for the 6 month group, giving a hazard ratio of 1·006 (0·909-1·114, test for non-inferiority p=0·012), significantly below the non-inferiority margin. Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or worse was more common in the 6 month group (237 [58%] of 409 patients for the subset with safety data) than in the 3 month group (103 [25%] of 420) and was long-lasting and associated with worse quality of life. 1098 serious adverse events were reported (492 reports in the 3 month group and 606 reports in the 6 month group) and 32 treatment-related deaths occurred (16 in each group). INTERPRETATION: In the whole study population, 3 months of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy was non-inferior to 6 months of the same therapy for patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer and was associated with reduced toxicity and improved quality of life. Despite the fact the study was underpowered, these data suggest that a shorter duration leads to similar survival outcomes with better quality of life and thus might represent a new standard of care. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, Swedish Cancer Society, NETSCC, and Cancer Research UK.

SCOT: a comparison of cost-effectiveness from a large randomised phase III trial of two durations of adjuvant Oxaliplatin combination chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study is an international, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial assessing the efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness of 3 months (3 M) versus the usually given 6 months (6 M) of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer. METHODS: In total, 6088 patients with fully resected high-risk stage II or stage III colorectal cancer were randomised and followed up for 3-8 years. The within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis from a UK health-care perspective is presented using the resource use data, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), time on treatment (ToT), disease-free survival after treatment (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data. Quality-adjusted partitioned survival analysis and Kaplan-Meier Sample Average Estimator estimated QALYs and costs. Probabilistic sensitivity and subgroup analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: The 3 M arm is less costly (-£4881; 95% CI: -£6269; -£3492) and entails (non-significant) QALY gains (0.08; 95% CI: -0.086; 0.230) due to a better significant quality of life. The net monetary benefit was significantly higher in 3 M under a wide range of monetary values of a QALY. The subgroup analysis found similar results for patients in the CAPOX regimen. However, for the FOLFOX regimen, 3 M had lower QALYs than 6 M (not statistically significant). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 3 M dominates 6 M with no significant detrimental impact on QALYs. The results provide the economic case that a 3 M treatment strategy should be considered a new standard of care.

Time From Colorectal Cancer Surgery to Adjuvant Chemotherapy: Post Hoc Analysis of the SCOT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for colorectal cancer and its association with long-term outcomes have been investigated in national cohort studies, with no consensus on the optimal time from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy. Objective: To analyze the association between the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for colorectal cancer and disease-free survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 SCOT randomized clinical trial, from 244 centers in 6 countries, investigating the noninferiority of 3 vs 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with high-risk stage II or stage III nonmetastatic colorectal cancer who underwent curative-intended surgery were randomized to either 3 or 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin regimens. Those with complete information on the date of surgery, treatment type, and long-term follow-up were investigated for the primary and secondary end points. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to February 2024. Intervention: In the post hoc analysis, patients were grouped according to the start of adjuvant chemotherapy being less than 6 weeks vs greater than 6 weeks after surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease-free survival. The secondary end points were adverse events in the total treatment period or the first cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: A total of 5719 patients (2251 [39.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 63.4 [9.3] years) were included in the primary analysis after data curation; among them, 914 were in the early-start group and 4805 were in the late-start group. Median (IQR) follow-up was 72.0 (47.3-88.1) months, with a median (IQR) of 56 (41-66) days from surgery to chemotherapy. Five-year disease-free survival was 78.0% (95% CI, 75.3%-80.8%) in the early-start group and 73.2% (95% CI, 72.0%-74.5%) in the late-start group. In an adjusted Cox regression analysis, the start of adjuvant chemotherapy greater than 6 weeks after surgery was associated with worse disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.46; P = .01). In adjusted logistic regression models, there was no association with adverse events in the total treatment period (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.04; P = .09) or adverse events in the first cycle of treatment (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.09; P = .13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this international population of patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer, starting adjuvant chemotherapy more than 6 weeks after surgery was associated with worse disease-free survival, with no difference in adverse events between the groups. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN59757862.

Bevacizumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy As First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab when added to first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (either capecitabine plus oxaliplatin [XELOX] or fluorouracil/folinic acid plus oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with MCRC were randomly assigned, in a 2 × 2 factorial design, to XELOX versus FOLFOX-4, and then to bevacizumab versus placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 1,401 patients were randomly assigned in this 2 × 2 analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.4 months in the bevacizumab group and 8.0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 97.5% CI, 0.72 to 0.95; P = .0023). Median overall survival was 21.3 months in the bevacizumab group and 19.9 months in the placebo group (HR, 0.89; 97.5% CI, 0.76 to 1.03; P = .077). Response rates were similar in both arms. Analysis of treatment withdrawals showed that, despite protocol allowance of treatment continuation until disease progression, only 29% and 47% of bevacizumab and placebo recipients, respectively, were treated until progression. The toxicity profile of bevacizumab was consistent with that documented in previous trials. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in this first-line trial in patients with MCRC. Overall survival differences did not reach statistical significance, and response rate was not improved by the addition of bevacizumab. Treatment continuation until disease progression may be necessary in order to optimize the contribution of bevacizumab to therapy.

Current status of cediranib: the rapid development of a novel anti-angiogenic therapy.

Angiogenesis, the process whereby tumors develop new blood vessels to facilitate growth and metastasis, is a pivotal event in tumorigenesis. It is tightly regulated by the VEGF system. Cediranib (AZD2171, Recentin; AstraZeneca, London, UK) is a novel and potent small-molecule inhibitor of VEGF signaling, with activity against the three VEGF receptors, as well as other targets. This article provides a comprehensive and up-to-date synopsis of all pertinent preclinical and clinical studies detailing this promising new therapy.

3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk stage II and III colorectal cancer: 3-year follow-up of the SCOT non-inferiority RCT.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy administered over 6 months is the standard adjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colorectal cancer. However, the regimen is associated with cumulative toxicity, characterised by chronic and often irreversible neuropathy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of 3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and to compare the toxicity, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the durations. DESIGN: An international, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, Phase III, parallel-group trial. SETTING: A total of 244 oncology clinics from six countries: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years who had undergone curative resection for high-risk stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum. INTERVENTIONS: The adjuvant treatment regimen was either oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin and capecitabine, randomised to be administered over 3 or 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Overall survival, adverse events, neuropathy and health-related quality of life were also assessed. The main cost categories were chemotherapy treatment and hospitalisation. Cost-effectiveness was assessed through incremental cost comparisons and quality-adjusted life-year gains between the options and was reported as net monetary benefit using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year per patient. RESULTS: Recruitment is closed. In total, 6088 patients were randomised (3044 per group) between 27 March 2008 and 29 November 2013, with 6065 included in the intention-to-treat analyses (3-month analysis, n = 3035; 6-month analysis, n = 3030). Follow-up for the primary analysis is complete. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in the 3-month treatment group was 76.7% (standard error 0.8%) and in the 6-month treatment group was 77.1% (standard error 0.8%), equating to a hazard ratio of 1.006 (95% confidence interval 0.909 to 1.114; p-value for non-inferiority = 0.012), confirming non-inferiority for 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy. Frequent adverse events (alopecia, anaemia, anorexia, diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, sensory neuropathy, neutropenia, pain, rash, altered taste, thrombocytopenia and watery eye) showed a significant increase in grade with 6-month duration; the greatest difference was for sensory neuropathy (grade ≥ 3 was 4% for 3-month vs.16% for 6-month duration), for which a higher rate of neuropathy was seen for the 6-month treatment group from month 4 to ≥ 5 years (p < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores were better in the 3-month treatment group over months 4-6. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed 3-month treatment to cost £4881 less over the 8-year analysis period, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £7246 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The study achieved its primary end point, showing that 3-month oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is non-inferior to 6 months of the same regimen; 3-month treatment showed a better safety profile and cost less. For future work, further follow-up will refine long-term estimates of the duration effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. The health economic analysis will be updated to include long-term extrapolation for subgroups. We expect these analyses to be available in 2019-20. The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study translational samples may allow the identification of patients who would benefit from longer treatment based on the molecular characteristics of their disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59757862 and EudraCT 2007-003957-10. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (transferred to NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre - Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; grant reference G0601705), the Swedish Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK Core Clinical Trials Unit Funding (funding reference C6716/A9894).

Patients diagnosed with bowel cancer are likely to have surgery to remove the tumour. Patients diagnosed with a more advanced stage of the disease are then likely to be offered what is known as adjuvant chemotherapy ­ chemotherapy to kill any cancer cells that have already spread but cannot be seen. Adjuvant chemotherapy is usually given over 6 months using two medicines known as oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine. This chemotherapy has side effects of diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, and it reduces the numbers of cells in the blood. It can also damage nerves, which causes discomfort, numbness and tingling; in some cases, this can go on for years. These side effects are more likely to develop with longer treatment. This study looked at whether or not shortening the time over which patients were given oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy reduced its effectiveness. In this large study of over 6000 patients, half of the patients were allocated by chance to be treated for 3 months and the other half to be treated for 6 months. Reducing the time that patients had chemotherapy from 6 months to 3 months did not make the treatment less effective. When patients treated with chemotherapy over 3 months were compared with those treated over 6 months, 77% of patients in both groups were well with no detectable disease 3 years after surgery. Patients were less likely to get side effects with 3-month chemotherapy. In particular, the chance of persistent long-term nerve damage was lower, resulting in patients with 3-month chemotherapy having better health-related quality of life. Overall, the study showed that 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with bowel cancer is as effective as 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy and causes fewer side effects.

Capecitabine as adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin is the standard adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. The oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine is an established alternative to bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated capecitabine in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 1987 patients with resected stage III colon cancer to receive either oral capecitabine (1004 patients) or bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen; 983 patients) over a period of 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was at least equivalence in disease-free survival; the primary safety end point was the incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxic effects due to fluoropyrimidines. RESULTS: Disease-free survival in the capecitabine group was at least equivalent to that in the fluorouracil-plus-leucovorin group (in the intention-to-treat analysis, P<0.001 for the comparison of the upper limit of the hazard ratio with the noninferiority margin of 1.20). Capecitabine improved relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04) and was associated with significantly fewer adverse events than fluorouracil plus leucovorin (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oral capecitabine is an effective alternative to intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer.

Phase 1b dose escalation study of erlotinib in combination with infusional 5-Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Erlotinib (Tarceva) is a potent epidermal growth factor receptor (HER1) inhibitor. Infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is a standard therapy for colorectal cancer. This trial assessed the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of erlotinib combined with FOLFOX. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced solid tumors were sequentially enrolled into three cohorts (cohort 1: 100 mg/d erlotinib, 65 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m(2) leucovorin, 400 mg/m(2) bolus 5-FU, and 400 mg/m(2) continuous infusion 5-FU; cohort 2: oxaliplatin increased to 85 mg/m(2) and 5-FU infusion increased to 600 mg/m(2); and cohort 3: erlotinib increased to 150 mg/d). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled (23 with colorectal cancer): no dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed in cohort 1. In cohort 2, two of nine patients experienced a DLT (both diarrhea). In cohort 3, two of nine patients had a DLT (diarrhea and staphylococcal septicemia). Cohort 3 determined the MTD cohort and expanded to 17 patients in total. The most common adverse events were diarrhea, nausea, stomatitis, and rash (primarily mild/moderate). No pharmacokinetics interactions were observed. One patient (colorectal cancer) had a complete response, seven patients had a partial response, and nine had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD was defined as follows: 150 mg/d erlotinib, 85 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin; 200 mg/m(2) leucovorin, 400 mg/m(2) bolus 5-FU, and 600 mg/m(2) infusion 5-FU. At the MTD, the combination was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity, warranting further investigation in patients with advanced colorectal cancer and other solid tumors.

Corporate crisis management managing a major crisis in a chemical facility.

Chemical sites should have well trained and organized emergency response plans to manage an incident within the plant or during transport. The implementation of an incident command system utilizing either internal resources or external response through mutual aid agreements is generally sufficient to address the direct impact of an event on the site. When the site resources become overwhelmed in addressing resulting issues such as press releases, medical advice/support, employees and family support, Agency notifications, etc, Corporate should be ready and able to respond. This paper, taken from an in-depth CCPS workshop led by the author, describes an outline for corporate assistance in the event of a major incident at a site or during transportation.

The Fast Real-time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-ONcology (FRACTION) program: innovative, high-throughput clinical screening of immunotherapies.

BACKGROUND: The unprecedented success of immuno-oncology (I-O) agents targeting the cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 and programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 pathways has stimulated the rapid development of other I-O agents against novel immune targets. Bristol-Myers Squibb has designed a novel phase II platform trial, the Fast Real-time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-ONcology (FRACTION) Program, to efficiently identify promising combinations for patients with specific malignancies. The concept and study design of the FRACTION Program-currently ongoing in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (FRACTION-Lung), gastric cancer (FRACTION-Gastric Cancer) and renal cell carcinoma (FRACTION-RCC)-are described. METHODS: The FRACTION Program comprises open-label, phase II studies that use adaptive randomisation designs with rolling combination regimens. Master Protocols provide the overall study design framework, whereas Sub-Protocols introduced over time provide details on specific I-O combination therapies to which patients may be randomised. In a Master Protocol, patients are enrolled into different Study Tracks based on characteristics such as prior I-O therapy experience. Patients who progress may be rerandomised to other combination regimens from any ongoing Sub-Protocol. Primary objectives are to assess objective response rate, median duration of response and progression-free survival rate at 24 weeks; the secondary objective is to investigate safety and tolerability. Biomarker collection before and on treatment will facilitate identification of patient subsets who benefit most from each therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The FRACTION Program allows for the evaluation of multiple I-O combinations through individual studies for specific tumours using an adaptive trial design and continuous enrolment.

Chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

This article aims to provide the reader with a broad overview of the current chemotherapeutic options available for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The review includes discussion of both well established and experimental therapies.

Significant effect of capecitabine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: Clinical cases of capecitabine and other fluorouracil-based chemotherapies potentiating the effects of coumarin derivatives have been reported. This study assessed the influence of capecitabine on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of warfarin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four patients with advanced/metastatic cancer completed the study, receiving a single oral dose of 20 mg warfarin before the start of standard capecitabine treatment (day 1), and again during the third cycle of capecitabine (day 61). PK parameters of warfarin and capecitabine and PD parameters of warfarin were assessed on days 1 and 61. RESULTS: During capecitabine treatment, the area under the plasma concentration time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) of S-warfarin increased by 57% (90% CI, 32% to 88%) with a 51% prolongation of the elimination half-life (t(1/2); 90% CI, 32% to 74%). Exposure to R-warfarin was not significantly affected. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites were not influenced by warfarin. During capecitabine treatment, the effect of warfarin on the baseline corrected AUC of the International Normalized Ratio (INR) increased by 2.8 times (90% CI, 1.33 to 5.70), with the maximum observed INR value almost doubling. Because of the administration of vitamin K to some patients with elevated INRs, these figures are likely to underestimate the true PD effect. Mean baseline factor VII levels dropped while on capecitabine therapy, potentially contributing to the observed PD interaction, though this effect did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: There is a significant pharmacokinetic interaction between capecitabine and S-warfarin, resulting in exaggerated anticoagulant activity. Patients receiving warfarin anticoagulant therapy concomitantly with capecitabine should have their INR closely monitored and warfarin doses adjusted accordingly.

Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha is required for the tumourigenic and aggressive phenotype associated with Rab25 expression in ovarian cancer.

The small GTPase Rab25 has been functionally linked to tumour progression and aggressiveness in ovarian cancer and promotes invasion in three-dimensional environments. This type of migration has been shown to require the expression of the hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF-1α). In this report we demonstrate that Rab25 regulates HIF-1α protein expression in an oxygen independent manner in a panel of cancer cell lines. Regulation of HIF-1α protein expression by Rab25 did not require transcriptional upregulation, but was dependent on de novo protein synthesis through the Erbb2/ERK1/2 and p70S6K/mTOR pathways. Rab25 expression induced HIF-1 transcriptional activity, increased cisplatin resistance, and conferred intraperitoneal growth to the A2780 cell line in immunocompromised mice. Targeting HIF1 activity by silencing HIF-1ß re-sensitised cells to cisplatin in vitro and reduced tumour formation of A2780-Rab25 expressing cells in vivo in a mouse ovarian peritoneal carcinomatosis model. Similar effects on cisplatin resistance in vitro and intraperitoneal tumourigenesis in vivo were obtained after HIF1b knockdown in the ovarian cancer cell line SKOV3, which expresses endogenous Rab25 and HIF-1α at atmospheric oxygen concentrations. Our results suggest that Rab25 tumourigenic potential and chemoresistance relies on HIF1 activity in aggressive and metastatic ovarian cancer. Targeting HIF-1 activity may potentially be effective either alone or in combination with standard chemotherapy for aggressive metastatic ovarian cancer.

XELOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin): active first-line therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Capecitabine has demonstrated high efficacy as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). Oxaliplatin shows synergy with fluorouracil (FU), with little toxicity overlap. The XELOX regimen (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin), established in a previous dose-finding study, should improve on infused oxaliplatin with FU and leucovorin (FOLFOX) regimens. The present studies further characterize efficacy and safety of the XELOX regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The antitumor activity of XELOX was investigated in a colon cancer xenograft model. Patients with MCRC received first-line XELOX in 3-week treatment cycles: intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) (day 1) followed by oral capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily (day 1, evening, to day 15, morning). RESULTS: A preclinical study confirmed that capecitabine has supra-additive activity with oxaliplatin. In the clinical study, 53 of 96 patients (55%) achieved an objective response, and 30 (31%) experienced disease stabilization for >/= 3 months following treatment. After 24 months' minimum follow-up, median time to disease progression (TTP) and median overall survival were 7.7 and 19.5 months, respectively. XELOX safety was predictable and similar to the FOLFOX4 regimen, except that myelosuppression was uncommon with XELOX (grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, 7%). Most adverse events were mild to moderate, the most common being acute sensory neuropathy (85%). Sixty-day, all-cause mortality was 2%. CONCLUSION: XELOX is a highly effective first-line treatment for MCRC. Response rates, TTP, and overall survival are similar to those observed with FU/leucovorin/oxaliplatin combinations. XELOX provides a more convenient regimen, likely to be preferred by both patients and healthcare providers. Capecitabine has the potential to replace FU/LV in combination with oxaliplatin for MCRC.

Liver metastases from breast cancer: management of patients with significant liver dysfunction.

The liver is a common site of metastases in breast cancer. Although the development of liver metastases has long been associated with a poor prognosis in this disease, this dogma has been challenged by more recent data, perhaps reflecting some treatment and other technological advances achieved in the last decade. Nevertheless, the specific population of breast cancer patients presenting with liver disease and associated liver dysfunction remain poorly studied. These women still seem to have a poor prognosis as compared to other patients with liver metastases. This is further complicated by the fact that the most active cytotoxic agents in breast cancer have significant hepatic metabolism and/or biliary excretion. Unfortunately, since these patients have been most of the time excluded from clinical trials, there are currently no clear recommendations for the management of such dramatic presentations. With some exceptions, recommendations for dose adjustments have also been largely empirical. In this paper, we review the optimal doses of cytotoxics used in this clinical situation and provide some tips on the management of these patients, based on the limited data currently available in the literature.

Adjuvant treatment strategies for early colon cancer.

Colon cancer remains a major cause of death; however, in the last 3 years a number of trials have been published that have led to changes in the treatment of patients with this disease. Initially, the adjuvant treatment of patients following curative resection was based on their Dukes staging; this is now being refined by consideration of other pathological factors, as well as the investigation of newer prognostic markers such as p53, Ki67 and a number of genes on chromosome 18. Tumours generally develop from the progressive accumulation of genetic events, although some develop through mutation or inactivation of DNA mismatch repair proteins leading to microsatellite instability; this is particularly important in Lynch's syndrome. The loss of gene expression can occur by deletion or mutation of genes or by aberrant methylation of CpG islands. In patients with Dukes C colon cancer the standard of care for adjuvant chemotherapy was previously based on bolus fluorouracil (5-fluorouracil) and folinic acid (leucovorin) administered 5 days per month or weekly for 6 months. Recent studies with a combination of infusional fluorouracil, folinic acid and oxaliplatin have been found to be superior. A further study replacing fluorouracil with oral capecitabine has also demonstrated equivalent disease-free survival. Although some debate remains regarding the benefit of adjuvant treatment for patients with Dukes B colon cancer, the emerging consensus is that, for those patients who are younger and have high-risk features, chemotherapy should be discussed. A number of large vaccine trials have also been conducted in the adjuvant setting and, overall, these have been disappointing. This is a rapidly advancing area of therapy and the results of new trials are awaited to determine whether additional benefits can be achieved with biological therapies such as anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-epithelial growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies, which have already been shown to be effective in setting of metastatic colon cancer.

Benefits and drawbacks of the use of oral fluoropyrimidines as single-agent therapy in advanced colorectal cancer.

One of the most widely used cytotoxic agents is 5-fluorouracil. The use of infusional regimens has become commonplace and with this has come a realization of the limitations of this mode of administration. A number of oral fluoropyrimidines have been developed. Of these, capecitabine is the most established, with registrations in most countries for breast and colorectal cancer. The trials with this agent have mainly attempted to show equivalence with a "standard" intravenous comparator. In most cases, this endpoint has been met or exceeded. In addition, the trials have demonstrated reduced toxicity (except for hand-foot syndrome), and aspects of patient acceptability and cost-effectiveness have been integrated into these studies. Patients seem to prefer oral therapy but not at the expense of anticancer activity. However, the absence of intravenous access devices and complications associated with their use is a major bonus for oral therapy. The drawbacks are somewhat less obvious. Some patients are concerned that oral therapy is in some way inferior (ie, soft option) to intravenous chemotherapy. Compliance with oral therapy is always questionable. Although very few trials in which compliance has been formally assessed have been performed, the issue of overcompliance has not been addressed; in other words, there may be a problem of patients continuing to take the medication even in the face of toxicity and advice to stop treatment. Oral chemotherapy requires just as much care as intravenous chemotherapy and probably requires more attention to patient education and involvement in care decisions.

Capecitabine/oxaliplatin, a safe and active first-line regimen for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: post hoc analysis of a large phase II study.

PURPOSE: The tumor-activated fluoropyrimidine capecitabine achieves response rates superior to those of bolus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), with favorable safety and fewer hospitalizations. Capecitabine is also at least as effective as bolus 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant setting, again with a favorable safety profile. Improved outcomes with capecitabine versus bolus 5-FU/LV in the adjuvant setting have been shown in overall trial populations and in patients aged >or= 70 years. Capecitabine/oxaliplatin (XelOx) is a safe and active combination for the first-line treatment of metastatic CRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This post hoc analysis of a large phase II trial compared data from older and younger patients treated with first-line XelOx: oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 followed by oral capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily for 14 days every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The median age of the overall population (N = 96) was 64 years (range, 34-79 years), including 52 younger patients (< 65 years of age) and 44 older patients (>or= 65 years of age). Both age groups received a median of 8 cycles (range, 1-26 cycles) of XelOx. The XelOx regimen had similar high activity in both groups, with response rates of 58% (95% CI, 43%-71%) and 52% (95% CI, 37%-68%) in younger and older patients, respectively. In addition, time to disease progression and overall survival were similar in both groups (P > 0.5 for both outcomes). The XelOx regimen also had a favorable safety profile, with no clinically relevant differences between older and younger patients. The overall incidence of adverse events (including grade 3/4), dose reductions, and withdrawals because of adverse events were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: In the context of an aging population, XelOx provides a highly effective and tolerable first-line treatment for patients with metastatic CRC.

A phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of Ro 31-7453 given as a 7- or 14-day oral twice daily schedule every 4 weeks in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: This is a dose-finding Phase I study of oral Ro 31-7453, a new class of antimitotic drug with promising preclinical activity in several chemoresistant models. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Two schedules of oral Ro 31-7453 (every 12 h) given for either 7 or 14 consecutive days repeated every 4 weeks were explored consecutively. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with refractory cancer entered the study (14 on the 7-day schedule and 23 on the 14-day schedule). Median age was 63 years (range, 40-77 years), and median Karnofsky performance status was 80 (range, 60-100); the most frequent diagnosis was colorectal carcinoma (16 patients). Dose levels of 100, 200, 240, and 280 mg/m(2) twice daily (bid) for 7 days and 70, 100, 125, and 150 mg/m(2) bid for 14 days were explored. A total of 110 cycles were administered, the median number of cycles received was 3 (range, 1-7); six patients completed 6 or more cycles. Myelosuppression and mucositis were dose-limiting with both schedules. Fatigue and gastrointestinal toxicities other than mucositis were frequent but generally mild. The maximum tolerated doses were 200 mg/m(2) bid and 125 mg/m(2) bid for the 7- and 14-day schedules, respectively. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed rapid absorption and metabolism. The area under the concentration-time curve and trough concentrations of Ro 31-7453 and two active metabolites appeared dose proportional with a t(1/2) of approximately 9 h and a t(max) of approximately 4 h. One patient with pretreated lung cancer had a partial response. CONCLUSIONS: Both Ro 31-7453 regimens were feasible, but the 14-day schedule at the recommended dose of 125 mg/m(2) bid was selected for further monotherapy Phase II evaluation because of its higher preclinical activity. This regimen is convenient, well tolerated, and has a favorable pharmacokinetic profile.

Tumour-targeted drug and gene delivery: principles and concepts.

Delivery systems for tumour targeting fall into two basic categories: drug conjugate systems, in which individual drug molecules are chemically modified to target them directly to the tumour; and carrier-based systems, in which the drug or gene is first packaged non-covalently into a synthetic carrier that is then targeted to the tumour. In both cases, the objective is to maximise exposure of the target cells to the drug yet minimise side effects that result from nonspecific toxicity in normal tissues. The creation of such dose differentials is based on phenotypic differences between the tumour and the rest of the body. However, although a wide range of such changes have been linked to the transformation of normal cells to cancer cells, no single common feature exists to allow unambiguous targeting to the tumour. In addition, the tumour microenvironment creates physical barriers that significantly impair transport within the tumour. It is therefore important to match the delivery requirements of the drug to the capabilities of the delivery system. In this review, a brief overview is given of the underlying concepts and principles that help guide the development of such tumour-targeting strategies.