A phase II/III randomized clinical trial of CisPlatin plUs Gemcitabine and Nabpaclitaxel (GAP) as pReoperative chemotherapy versus immediate resection in patIents with resecTable BiliarY Tract Cancers (BTC) at high risk for recurrence: PURITY study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are rare and lethal cancers, with a 5-year survival inferior to 20%(1-3). The only potential curative treatment is surgical resection. However, despite complex surgical procedures that have a remarkable risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality, the 5-year survival rate after radical surgery (R0) is 20-40% and recurrence rates are up to ~ 75%(4-6). Up to ~ 40% of patients relapse within 12 months after resection, and half of these patient will recur systemically(4-6). There is no standard of care for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in resectable BTC, but retrospective reports suggest its potential benefit (7, 8). METHODS: PURITY is a no-profit, multicentre, randomized phase II/III trial aimed at evaluating the efficacy of the combination of gemcitabine, cisplatin and nabpaclitaxel (GAP) as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable BTC at high risk for recurrence. Primary objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of neoadjuvant GAP followed by surgery as compared to upfront surgery, in terms of 12-month progression-free survival for the phase II part and of progression free survival (PFS) for the phase III study. Key Secondary objectives are event free survival (EFS), relapse-free survival, (RFS), overall survival (OS), R0/R1/R2 resection rate, quality of life (QoL), overall response rate (ORR), resectability. Safety analyses will include toxicity rate and perioperative morbidity and mortality rate. Exploratory studies including Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) in archival tumor tissues and longitudinal ctDNA analysis are planned to identify potential biomarkers of primary resistance and prognosis. DISCUSSION: Considering the poor prognosis of resected BTC experiencing early tumor recurrence and the negative prognostic impact of R1/R2 resections, PURITY study is based on the rationale that NAC may improve R0 resection rates and ultimately patients' outcomes. Furthermore, NAC should allow early eradication of microscopic distant metastases, undetectable by imaging but already present at the time of diagnosis and avoid mortality and morbidity associated with resection for patients with rapid progression or worsening general condition during neoadjuvant therapy. The randomized PURITY study will evaluate whether patients affected by BTC at high risk from recurrence benefit from a neoadjuvant therapy with GAP regimen as compared to immediate surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PURITY is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06037980) and EuCT(2023-503295-25-00).

Safety and efficacy of sunitinib in patients from Italy with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: final results from an expanded-access trial.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) received sunitinib in a global expanded-access program (EAP). Here, we report the efficacy and safety results for the EAP subpopulation in Italy. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years old with previously treated or treatment-naïve mRCC received oral sunitinib 50 mg/day on a 4-weeks-on/2-weeks-off schedule. Tumor measurements were scheduled per local practice (using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors). Safety was regularly assessed. RESULTS: A total of 521 patients participated, including 40% aged ≥65 years, 11% with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, 14% with non-clear cell RCC, and 11% with brain metastases. The median treatment duration and posttreatment follow-up were 7.4 and 12.3 months, respectively. The objective response rate was 12%, and the median progression-free and overall survival was 9.1 and 27.2 months, respectively. 514 patients (99%) discontinued treatment; reasons included death (17%), nonresponse (46%), or adverse events (AEs; 13%). The most common any-grade treatment-related AEs were asthenia (44%, plus 15% reporting fatigue), thrombocytopenia and stomatitis (both 37%), diarrhea (36%), mucosal inflammation (29%), hypertension (26%), and dysgeusia (25%). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (10%), asthenia (9%, plus 3% reporting fatigue), neutropenia, stomatitis (both 6%), and hypertension (5%). CONCLUSION: In a large population of Italian mRCC patients, sunitinib had a manageable safety profile and encouraging efficacy.

TEAM Study: Upfront Docetaxel Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Real-World, Multicenter, Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) dramatically changed. PEACE-1 and ARASENS trials established triplet therapy efficacy. Identifying prognostic factors supporting treatment choice is pivotal. METHODS: TEAM is an observational, retrospective study to evaluate prognostic role of variables in mHSPC patients receiving upfront docetaxel in 11 Italian centers. Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS). RESULTS: From September 2014 to December 2020, 147 patients were included. Median PFS and OS were 11.6 and 37.4 months. At univariate analysis, PFS-related variables were Gleason Score (GS) (P = .001), opioid use (P = .004), bone metastases number (P < .001), baseline PSA (P = .006), Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .002), time between ADT and docetaxel start (P = .018), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001), and number of docetaxel cycles (P < .001). OS-related variables were PSA at diagnosis (P = .024), primary tumor treatment (P = .022), baseline pain (P = .015), opioid use (P < .001), bone metastases number (P < . 001), baseline Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .001), NLR ratio (P = .039), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001) and docetaxel cycles number (P < .001). At multivariate analysis, independent prognostic variables were GS, opioid use, baseline LDH and time between ADT and docetaxel initiation for PFS, and baseline Hb and LDH for OS. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving upfront docetaxel with high GS, high disease burden, pain or opioid use, baseline unfavorable laboratory values had worse outcomes. Patients had greater docetaxel benefit when initiated early after ADT start. These parameters could be taken into account when selecting candidates for triplet therapy.

Patients with cancer and hospital admissions: disease trajectory and strategic choices.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital admission (HA) in cancer history is a common, repeated and frequently unplanned event. The emergency departments (EDs) and the oncological outpatient service (OOS) are the ordinary way of entry. We studied the reasons of admission, pathways of access and discharge and prognostic factors in a population of admitted patients with cancer. METHODS: The health records of the admitted patients in the oncological ward of a referral hospital in a 6-month period were retrieved and analysed. The characteristics of those admitted in the last 3 months of life were compared with the other group. RESULTS: Among the 147 HA, 79.5% were unplanned, 48.9% passing through the ED and 30.6% through the OOS; 56.5% were due to cancer-related symptoms; 50.3% occurred in the last 3 months of life. Median overall survival was 90 days (95% IC 53.1-126.9). Independent prognostic factors for survival were: being admitted for symptoms, referral through the ED and not being discharged at home. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital is a turning point in the cancer care pathway. Patients needing HA have a dismal prognosis, half of them being in the last 3 months of life. This group can be identified using universally available variables.

Survival prediction and frequency of anticancer treatment in cancer patients hospitalized due to acute conditions. Role of clinical parameters and PaP score.

PURPOSE: Survival prediction is useful in selecting patients for palliative care or active anticancer therapy. The palliative and prognostic (PaP) score was shown to predict 1-month survival in terminally ill patients. Its application to patients with less advanced disease is a subject of debate. We assessed the value of the PaP score and of other clinical parameters in predicting survival in patients admitted in an oncological ward due to acute conditions. We also evaluated the frequency of active anticancer treatment in the last weeks of life. METHODS: All the 208 patients, consecutively admitted in a department of medical oncology and radiotherapy in a 9-month period, were included. Patients and disease features together with the PaP score were assessed and included in a multivariable model for survival prediction. RESULTS: Overall, median survival was 19 weeks and 12-week survival was 59.6%. The PaP score accurately predicted 4-week survival. Among the 39 patients who died within 4 weeks, 36% were on active treatment. The reason of admission, disease control, treatment, and PaP score were independently related to 12-week survival in the multivariate analysis; however patients with a 12-week survival lower than 30% were a minority. CONCLUSIONS: Although the PaP score accurately predicts life expectancy, its use in the setting of acute conditions seems not straightforward, due to the overall good prognosis of these patients. Active treatment in the last period of life is common. The potential reversibility of acute conditions makes prognostic measures inadequate for the purpose of treatment choices.

Unusual Fatal Outcome Following Administration of a Combination of anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Liver Toxicity Case Report and a Literature Review.

Hepatic dysfunction, in the absence of liver metastases, occurs in 10-15% of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients, while immune hepatitis due to anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 administration affects about 3-9% and 0.7-1.8% of treated patients, respectively. Liver toxicity following combination therapy (anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1) is seen in 29% of patients overall and grade 3-4 toxicity in 14% of patients. Stauffer's syndrome is a rare para-neoplastic phenomenon associated with RCC and characterized by abnormal liver function tests, hepato-splenomegaly and histological changes consistent with non-specific hepatitis. We describe a case of RCC treated with anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 therapy resulting in immediate liver toxicity and death after 2 months of progressive hepatic impairment. We hypothesize that high IL-6 levels due to Stauffer's syndrome might have contributed to immune-related hepatic failure. LEARNING POINTS: Consider Stauffer's syndrome in patients who develop liver toxicity unresponsive to immunotherapy.Evaluate IL-6 as high levels are seen in Stauffer's syndrome patients undergoing immunotherapy.Consider taking a liver biopsy to assess the severity of liver injury.

First-line pazopanib in patients with advanced non-clear cell renal carcinoma: An Italian case series.

BACKGROUND: Non-clear cell (ncc) metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) has dismal results with standard systemic therapies and a generally worse prognosis when compared to its clear-cell counterpart. New systemic combination therapies have emerged for metastatic RCC (mRCC), but the pivotal phase III trials excluded patients with nccRCC, which constitute about 30% of metastatic RCC cases. AIM: To provide a piece of real-life evidence on the use of pazopanib in this patient subgroup. METHODS: The present study is a multicenter retrospective observational analysis aiming to assess the activity, efficacy, and safety of pazopanib as first-line therapy for advanced nccRCC patients treated in a real-life setting. RESULTS: Overall, 48 patients were included. At the median follow-up of 40.6 mo, the objective response rate was 27.1%, the disease control rate was 83.3%, and the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 12.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6-20.9) and 27.7 (95%CI: 18.2-37.1) mo, respectively. Grade 3 adverse events occurred in 20% of patients, and no grade 4 or 5 toxicities were found. CONCLUSION: Pazopanib should be considered as a good first-line option for metastatic RCC with variant histology.

Cytokine Profiling of End Stage Cancer Patients Treated with Immunotherapy.

Published data suggest that immunotherapy plays a role even in patients with very advanced tumours. We investigated the immune profile of end-stage cancer patients treated with immunotherapy to identify changes induced by treatment. Breast, colon, renal and prostate cancer patients were eligible. Treatment consisted of metronomic cyclophosphamide, low-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) and a single radiation shot. A panel of 16 cytokines was assessed using automated ELISA before treatment (T0), after radiation (RT; T1), at cycle 2 (T2) and at disease progression (TPD). Receiving operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to identify cytokine cut-off related to overall survival (OS). Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to identify the immune profile correlating better with OS and progression-free survival. Twenty-three patients were enrolled. High IL-2, low IL-8 and CCL-2 correlated with OS. The PCA identified a cluster of patients, with high IL-2, IL-12 and IFN-γ levels at T0 having longer PFS and OS. In all cohorts, IL-2 and IL-5 increased from T0 to T2; a higher CCL-4 level compared to T2 and a higher IL-8 level compared to T0 were found at TPD. The progressive increase of the IL-10 level during treatment negatively correlated with OS. Our data suggested that baseline cytokine levels may predict patients' outcome and that the treatment may affect their kinetic even in end-stage patients. Cytokine profiling of end-stage patients might offer a tool for medical decisions (EUDRACT: 2016-000578-39).

Maintenance versus discontinuation of androgen deprivation therapy during continuous or intermittent docetaxel administration in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients: A multicentre, randomised Phase III study by the Piemonte Oncology Network.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to demonstrate the non-inferiority (NI) in overall survival (OS) of suspension of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus maintenance and intermittent versus continuous docetaxel administration in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: mCRPC patients were randomised to first-line docetaxel with maintenance or suspension of ADT. Patients attaining a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response after four chemotherapy cycles underwent second randomisation to receive continuous or intermittent docetaxel therapy. Six hundred patients were to be randomised to achieve 80% statistical power to demonstrate an NI hazard ratio (HR) of 1.25 of interruption versus maintenance of ADT. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely closed when 198 participants were randomised. OS was similar in patients who continued (N = 96) versus those who interrupted (n = 102) ADT during docetaxel therapy (HR 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.33] and those on a continuous (N = 35) versus an intermittent (N = 42) docetaxel schedule (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.55-1.43). No difference in radiological progression-free survival, PSA response, or toxicity was observed between the study arms. The actual NI hazard margins of OS in Arms A and B patients were 1.33 and 1.43, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This trial enrolled one-third of the planned patients; this main weakness dramatically limits the interpretation of the results. ADT discontinuation and switching to an intermittent schedule did not seem to affect docetaxel efficacy. The absence of testosterone recovery in the majority of patients could have been a contributory factor. In men with mCRPC, ADT discontinuation should only be done with regular biochemical and clinical monitoring, with the option of quickly restarting ADT at disease progression.

Circulating cytokines and outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib is an oral small-molecule multikinase inhibitor approved in third or later line of treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Regorafenib has shown significant benefits in overall survival and progression free survival in two phase III trials compared to placebo in patients with mCRC who had progressed on previous therapy. AIM: To identify an immune profile that might specifically correlate with the outcome in patients treated with regorafenib. METHODS: Blood samples were collected from 17 patients before treatment with regorafenib and from 6 healthy volunteers. The proteins evaluated (TNF-α, TGF-ß, VEGF, CCL-2, CCL-4, and CCL-5) were selected on the basis of their roles in angiogenesis and colorectal cancer pathogenesis. RESULTS: We found that TNF-α basal level was significantly higher in mCRC patients compared to healthy individuals. Non Responder (NR) patients showing progression of disease (n = 12) had higher basal level of TGF-ß, TNF-α, VEGF, CCL-2 and CCL-5 compared to Responder (R) patients (complete response CR, n = 1; partial response PR, n = 1; Stable Disease SD, n = 3). On the contrary, plasma basal level of CCL-4 was higher in R compared to NR patients. High values of TGF-ß and TNF-α negatively correlated with progression free survival. CONCLUSION: These results suggest a cytokine signature potentially able to discriminate between R and NR patients to treatment with regorafenib.

Treating patients with cancer amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: experience of a regional hospital in the Piedmont region in northern Italy.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is posing an unprecedented dilemma to oncologists worldwide, forcing them to decide whether to continue or suspend treatments in order to protect their most vulnerable patients from infection. After the first report from China, the outbreak spread rapidly worldwide. To, date no clear indications on how to treat patients with cancer with COVID-19 infection are available. METHODS: We report data on 21 patients with cancer referred to a single medical oncology unit of a general hospital from mid-March to April 23, 2020. RESULTS: Nine patients were on active cancer therapy during the infection and all stopped medical treatments. Overall 8 patients developed pneumonia and 6 patients died of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The management of patients with cancer during the pandemic should be carefully balanced and discussed among oncologists and other key professionals involved in the treatment of this vulnerable group of patients, in order to balance the risk of treatment and the risk of infection.

Oligometastatic colorectal cancer: prognosis, role of locoregional treatments and impact of first-line chemotherapy-a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies by Gruppo Oncologico del Nord Ovest.

BACKGROUND: Oligometastatic disease (OMD) identifies tumours with limited metastatic spread. OMD definition is not univocal and no data from clinical trials are available about the prognostic effect of OMD in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the impact of locoregional treatments (LRTs) and the effect of chemotherapy intensification in these patients. The role of tumour burden (TB) in driving therapeutic choices is also debated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of phase III TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies comparing FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab (bev) to doublets (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI)/bev. Patients were grouped in OMD versus non-OMD based on the European Society for Medical Oncology definition. Among patients with OMD, those with OMD/low TB were compared with all the others. RESULTS: Of 1187 patients enrolled, 1096 were classified as OMD (N = 312 [28%]) or non-OMD (N = 784 [72%]). Among patients with OMD, 126 (40%) were OMD/low TB. OMD was associated with longer progression-free survival (14.0 versus 10.1 months; p < 0.01) and overall survival (38.2 versus 22.0 months; p < 0.01). These results were confirmed in multivariable models. The benefit provided by FOLFOXIRI/bev compared with doublets/bev did not differ in accordance with OMD and TB (p for interaction >0.05). Patients with OMD underwent LRTs more frequently (p < 0.01) and those with OMD/low TB had higher chance to undergo LRTs after the first progression (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: OMD is a positive prognostic factor in mCRC. The benefit from the upfront treatment intensification is independent of the metastatic spread extent and TB. LRTs should be highly considered in these patients, mainly during the first-line therapy but also at later stages of treatment history in selected cases.

Activation of immune responses in patients with relapsed-metastatic head and neck cancer (CONFRONT phase I-II trial): Multimodality immunotherapy with avelumab, short-course radiotherapy, and cyclophosphamide.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: Second-line treatment of platinum-resistant relapsed/metastatic (R/M) head and neck cancer (HNC) is a currently unmet clinical need. Clinical trials showed improvement in overall survival and quality of life of R/M-HNC patients treated with anti-PD-1 regardless of the number of prior chemotherapy lines; however, the percentage of long-term survivors remains limited.This study aims to test the hypothesis that attacking the tumor microenvironment at multiple levels can increase immunogenicity of R/M-HNC without worsening the safety profile of immune checkpoint inhibitors. METHODS/DESIGN: In this open label, multi-center, single-arm, Phase Ib/II, R/M-HNC patients pretreated with at least one line of therapy containing platinum, fluorouracil, and cetuximab will receive a daily metronomic dose of 50 mg cyclophosphamide without a drug-free break, 10 mg/kg avelumab on day 1 and every other week until progression, and a single fraction of 8 Gy radiotherapy on day 8. DISCUSSION: The treatment protocol aims to reverse immune evasion of the tumor through a radiotherapy-induced self-vaccination effect, suppression of CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+ regulatory T-cell function by metronomic cyclophosphamide, and effector T-cell reactivation owing to the inhibition of the PD-1-PD-L1 axis by avelumab.The immunologic interplay induced by the proposed combined treatment may theoretically improve the activity of avelumab without increasing its toxicity profile.Finally, an ancillary translational study will be extended to all the patients' population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT n. 2017-000353-39.

Heterogeneity of colon cancer: from bench to bedside.

The large bowel shows biomolecular, anatomical and bacterial changes that proceed from the proximal to the distal tract. These changes account for the different behaviour of colon cancers arising from the diverse sides of the colon-rectum as well as for the sensitivity to the therapy, including immunotherapy. The gut microbiota plays an important role in the modulation of the immune response and differs between the right colon cancer and the left colorectal cancer. The qualitative and quantitative difference of the commensal bacteria between the right side and the left side induces epigenetic changes in the intestinal epithelial cells as well as in the resident immune population. The second player in the pathological homeostasis of colorectal cancer is the differences of the genetic features of cancer cells and the different effects that microsatellite instability, chromosomal instability and the CpG island methylator phenotype induce on the immunological organisation of the tumour microenvironment. The third player is the immunological composition of the tumour microenvironment, which changes under the influence of both genetic structures and gut microbiota. All these three players influence each other. This review describes these three aspects, highlights their interactions and discusses data from reported clinical trials.

Gemcitabine and cisplatin in a concomitant alternating chemoradiotherapy program for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer: a pharmacology-guided schedule.

PURPOSE: Administration of gemcitabine together with cisplatin at cytotoxic doses in a chemoradiotherapy regimen is hampered by a high degree of local toxicity. Using the pharmacologic properties of the drug we designed a modified schedule aimed at reducing toxicity while preserving activity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with squamous cell carcinomas of the oral cavity, pharynx and larynx, bulky T4, and/or N2 to N3 were eligible. Gemcitabine was administered at a dose of 800 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 12 and cisplatin at a dose of 20 mg/m2 on Days 2 to 5, every 21 days for 3 courses. Radiotherapy, delivered with standard fractionation, was given on Days 8 to 12 and 15 to 19 and was repeated 3 times up to a total dose of > or = 60 Gy. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients were selected. Grade 3 to 4 stomatitis was recorded in 25 patients (89%). Thirteen patients (46%) experienced Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 8 patients (29%) and in 2 was complicated by infection and death. The overall complete response rate was 79%. At a median follow up of 71 months, 11 patients had a locoregional relapse (3-year locoregional control, 64%); 6 patients had distant metastases, among whom only 2 were without locoregional recurrence. The 3-year progression-free survival is 39% and 3-year overall survival has been 43%. CONCLUSION: The schedule modification did not attenuate local toxicity. Moreover, infections and especially pneumonia, were a major problem. The high activity of gemcitabine when combined with radiotherapy would most likely be better exploited in the context of modified radiation schemes.

Weekly docetaxel and zoledronic acid every 4 weeks in hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the safety and efficacy of docetaxel and zoledronic acid in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC), based on preclinical evidence of synergism between taxanes and bisphosphonates. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with advanced HRPC received weekly docetaxel 30 mg/m2: in 18 patients with symptomatic bone metastases and normal renal function, docetaxel was combined with zoledronic acid, 4 mg i.v. every 4 weeks. Premedication consisted of intravenous dexamethasone before docetaxel. No oral steroids were given. RESULTS: Overall, 12 patients (48%) had a PSA response (reduction of 50% or more compared to baseline). A PSA response was achieved in 8/18 patients (44%) receiving concomitant docetaxel and zoledronic acid, and in 7/12 patients (58%) receiving docetaxel and zoledronic acid as first-line therapy. The weekly schedule of docetaxel resulted in a mean received dose intensity of 26 mg/m2/week, or 87% of the planned dose intensity. Toxicity was mild and as expected for docetaxel. The median time to progression was 7 months, and the median overall survival was 16 months. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant treatment with docetaxel and zoledronic acid is safe and has encouraging activity in HRPC. The combination should be evaluated in randomised clinical trials.

Prolonged Drainage and Intrapericardial Bleomycin Administration for Cardiac Tamponade Secondary to Cancer-Related Pericardial Effusion.

Malignant pericardial effusion (MPE) is a serious complication of several cancers. The most commonly involved solid tumors are lung and breast cancer. MPE can give rise to the clinical picture of cardiac tamponade, a life threatening condition that needs immediate drainage. While simple pericardiocentesis allows resolution of the symptoms, MPE frequently relapses unless further procedures are performed. Prolonged drainage, talcage with antineoplastic agents, or surgical creation of a pleuro-pericardial window are the most commonly suggested ones. They all result in MPE resolution and high rates of long-term control. Patients suitable for further systemic treatments can have a good prognosis irrespective of the pericardial site of disease. We prospectively enrolled patients with cardiac tamponade treated with prolonged drainage associated with Bleomycin administration. Twenty-two consecutive patients with MPE and associated signs of hemodynamical compromise underwent prolonged drainage and subsequent Bleomycin administration. After injection of 100 mg lidocaine hydrochloride, 10 mg Bleomycin was injected into the pericardial space. The catheter was clumped for 48 h and then reopened. Removal was performed when the drainage volume was <25 mL daily. Twelve patients (54%) achieved complete response and 9 (41%) a partial response. Only 1 (5%) had a treatment failure and underwent a successful surgical procedure. Acute toxicity was of a low degree and occurred in 7 patients (32%). It consisted mainly in thoracic pain and supraventricular arrhythmia. The 1-year pericardial effusion progression-free survival rate was 74.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.0-97.3). At a median follow-up of 75 months, a pericardial progression was detected in 4 patients (18%). One- and two-year overall survival rates were 33.9% (95% CI: 13.6-54.2) and 14.5% (95% CI: 0.0-29.5), respectively, with lung cancer patients having a shorter survival than breast cancer patients. The worst prognosis, however, was shown in patients not suitable for systemic treatments, irrespective of the site of the primary tumor.Prolonged drainage and intrapericardial Bleomycin is a safe and effective treatment, which should be considered as first choice at least in patients suitable for active systemic treatment.

Carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel in non-small cell lung cancer patients unfit for or pretreated with chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Carboplatin-Paclitaxel is one of the most active regimens in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We assessed the administration of weekly Paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy, or as first-line chemotherapy in unfit patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients received Carboplatin at the dose of 6 x area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) on day 1 and Paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 every 28. Thirty-two had received a prior platinum-based treatment, while 16 were chemotherapy-naive, unfit patients. RESULTS: Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 16 patients (33%); grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in 7 (15%); grade 1-3 peripheral sensory neuropathy in 35 (73%). Nineteen patients (39.6%; 95% C.I.: 25.8% - 53.4%) achieved an objective response without any difference between the first-line and second-line group. One-year survival was 39.5% (95% CI: 25.4% - 53.6%). CONCLUSION: The impressive activity of this regimen makes it suitable for further investigation in the second-line setting. Toxicity seen in the unfit population mandates some modification of the regimen.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the feasibility and activity of gemcitabine and vinorelbine as a second/third-line approach in patients with advanced breast cancer. METHODS: Entered into the study were 51 consecutive patients. All had been previously treated with anthracyclines. Of these 51 patients, 36 had experienced failure or relapse after one chemotherapy line for advanced disease, and 15 after two chemotherapy lines. The dominant sites of involvement were brain in 4 patients (7.8%), liver in 22 (43.2%), lung in 10 (19.6%), bone in 10 (19.6), and soft-tissue in 5 (9.8%). Treatment consisted of vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) administered on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. RESULTS: The scheme was well tolerated. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in 11% of patients. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting occurred in 6%, and grade 2 neurotoxicity in 6%. No patients experienced grade 3/4 alopecia. The median relative dose intensity was 94.6% (49.7-100%) and 90.0% (23.1-100%) for vinorelbine and gemcitabine, respectively. Two patients (3.9%) were not evaluable for disease response, 4 (7.8%) attained a clinical complete response, 13 (25.5%) a partial response (for an overall response rate of 33.3%, 95% coefficient interval 20.0-46.0%), 23 (45.2%) showed stable disease, and 9 (17.6%) progressed. The median time to progression of responding patients was 10.8 months, and the median overall survival of the entire population was 17.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Vinorelbine and gemcitabine is a manageable scheme with moderate activity in pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer.