Dose modification in enzalutamide and abiraterone plus prednisolone for castration-resistant prostate cancer: A subanalysis from the ENABLE study for PCa.

BACKGROUND: A head-to-head comparison between enzalutamide (ENZ) and abiraterone plus prednisolone (ABI) revealed similar survival benefits for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in the ENABLE study for PCa. Considering that a dose reduction of ENZ and ABI has demonstrated sufficient inhibitory ability of androgen receptor (AR) signaling, we analyzed the efficacy of modified doses of these agents in the ENABLE study for PCa. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized controlled trial that was conducted in Japan analyzed the prespecified survival endpoints, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate ( ≥50% decline from baseline), and safety profile in patients treated with modified doses (ENZ ≤ 120 mg/day, ABI ≤ 750 mg/day) compared with those treated with a standard dose (ENZ 160 mg/day, ABI 1000 mg/day) as a starting dose. RESULTS: In total, 92 patients in each arm were treated and analyzed; 16 patients were treated with a modified dose in both the ENZ and ABI arms, respectively. Moreover, 32 patients treated with modified doses showed a significantly better time to PSA progression (TTPP) and overall survival (OS) compared with the 152 patients treated with a standard dose (HR 0.47, 95%CI 0.27-0.83, p = 0.0379, and HR 0.35, 95%CI 0.19-0.63, p = 0.0162). Despite a significantly longer TTPP in the modified ABI group than in the standard ABI group (HR 0.29, 95%CI 0.14-0.62, p = 0.0248), no significant difference was observed in the TTPP between the modified and standard ENZ groups (p = 0.5366). Furthermore, similar adverse event rates and grades were observed in each treatment dose group. CONCLUSIONS: The modified doses of ABI showed better TTPP than the standard dose of ABI and may be a potential treatment option for CRPC patients; however, its mechanism is still unclear, although its ability to suppress AR signaling is equivalent to that of a standard dose.

Retrospective study on the efficacy and tolerability of dose modification of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in hospital-system community outpatient cancer clinics.

BACKGROUND: Anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1 and anti-PD-L1 medications inhibit the PD-1 and PD-L1 interaction and have been shown to be effective in treating several forms of advanced cancers. Since the approval of these agents, standard dosing protocols have been utilized. However, a small population of patients in the community setting has received dose-modified PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors secondary to a lack of tolerability. Data from this study suggests possible benefit with different dosing strategies. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this retrospective study is to assess the efficacy and tolerability in terms of time to progression and adverse effects in patients receiving dose-modified PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-labeled indications. METHODS: This single-institution retrospective chart review was conducted in an outpatient community setting on patients with cancer that received nivolumab, pembrolizumab, durvalumab, or atezolizumab for an FDA indication at one of the Houston Methodist Hospital infusion clinic site between September 1, 2017 and September 30, 2019. Data collection included demographics, adverse effects, dosing, treatment delay, and number of immunotherapy cycles administered per patient. RESULTS: This study included 221 patients, who received either nivolumab (n = 81), pembrolizumab (n = 93), atezolizumab (n = 21), or durvalumab (n = 26). There were 11 patients who experienced a dose reduction and 103 patients who experienced a treatment delay. Of the patients with a treatment delay, the median time to progression was 197 days, and for patients with a dose reduction, the median time to progression was 299 days. CONCLUSION: The results of this study found that the immunotherapy associated adverse effects led to dosing and frequency changes for tolerance with continued therapy. Our data suggests that there could be potential benefits of dose modifications to immunotherapy treatment, but further large studies are needed to assess the efficacy of specific immunotherapy dose modifications on both outcomes and adverse effects.

Dose Modification of Etoposide plus Platinum in Elderly Patients with Extensive-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) have a high risk of chemotherapy toxicity due to multiple comorbidities and poor performance status. Although dose modification is often used to avoid toxicity in elderly patients with ED-SCLC, there is little data on the effect of initial dose-reduced chemotherapy on survival outcomes. METHODS AND PATIENTS: We retrospectively reviewed 100 elderly patients (≥70 years) with ED-SCLC who received first-line etoposide plus platinum chemotherapy between January 2006 and December 2020. RESULTS: The median age was 74 years. Eighty-nine patients (89%) had a history of smoking, and 38 (38%) had chronic lung disease. Thirty-four patients (34%) received dose-reduced etoposide plus platinum in the first cycle. The dose-reduced group had significantly higher age, lower body mass index, and poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Score. There were no significant differences in survival outcomes between the dose-reduced and full-dose chemotherapy (median overall survival [OS], 4.9 vs. 6.5 months, p = 0.440; median progression-free survival [PFS], 3.7 vs. 4.6 months, p = 0.272). In multivariate analyses, DR in the first cycle (hazard ratio 0.519, 95% CI: 0.269-1.000, p = 0.050) was significantly associated with OS. Following a subgroup analysis of 59 patients who received minimum four cycles, no significant differences in survival outcomes between the two groups (median OS, 10.9 vs. 9.4 months, p = 0.817; median PFS, 6.3 vs. 6.5 months, p = 0.902) were noted. CONCLUSIONS: The dose-reduced chemotherapy with first-line etoposide plus platinum had non-inferior survival outcomes compared to the full-dose chemotherapy in elderly patients with ED-SCLC.

Efficacy and safety of modified FOLFIRINOX as salvage therapy for patients with refractory advanced biliary tract cancer: a retrospective study.

Background Gemcitabine plus cisplatin is regarded as the standard first-line therapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC); however, no standard chemotherapy has yet been recommended after treatment failure. Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) appears to be a better-tolerated regimen, which leads to improved survival in metastatic pancreatic cancer that has histological and molecular similarities with BTC. We assessed the efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX as salvage therapy in advanced BTC patients who were refractory to previous chemotherapy. Methods A total of 15 consecutive patients with documented unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BCT who received the mFOLFIRINOX regimen were included in the study. Patients were intravenously administrated with oxaliplatin (65 mg/m2), leucovorin (400 mg/m2), irinotecan (150 mg/m2), and continuous infusion of fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2) over 46 h. The objective response rates (ORR), disease control rates (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Results At least three cycles of mFOLFIRINOX regimen were delivered to 15 patients with a median number of 6.0 cycles (IQR 5.5-11.0). The median duration of treatment was 3.8 months (IQR 2.9-8.5). Four patients (26.7%) achieved an ORR, and 12 patients (80.0%) had a DCR. The median PFS and OS were 6.7 months (95%CI 2.3-11.1) and 13.2 months (95%CI 7.3-19.1), respectively. Five patients (33.3%) had treatment-related grade 3/4 AEs. The most common grade 3/4 AE was neutropenia (n = 3, 20.0%), while there was no occurrence of febrile neutropenia. Conclusion Treatment with mFOLFIRINOX has promising efficacy and favorable tolerance as salvage therapy in patients with refractory advanced BCT.

Early dose reduction/delay and the efficacy of liposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and leucovorin in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): A post hoc analysis of NAPOLI-1.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy dose modification to manage adverse events is commonplace in clinical practice. This exploratory analysis evaluates the impact of liposomal irinotecan dose modification on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the NAPOLI-1 clinical trial (NCT01494506). METHODS: Analysis includes only patients enrolled under protocol version 2 who received at least the first 2 scheduled doses of study drug. Within the liposomal irinotecan +5 fluorouracil/leucovorin (5 FU/LV) arm, patients were grouped according to whether or not they had a dose modification within the first 6 weeks. Dose reduction was defined as any decrease from initial dose; dose delay was any dosing delay >3 days from target date. OS and PFS (Kaplan-Meier estimates) were compared within the liposomal irinotecan+5-FU/LV arm and between treatment arms. Unstratified hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 93 patients from the liposomal irinotecan+5 FU/LV arm included in the analysis, 53 experienced a dose modification (both delay and reduction, n = 30; delay only, n = 19; reduction only, n = 4). No apparent difference in median OS or PFS was observed between patients who did versus patients who did not have a dose modification (OS: 8.4 vs 6.7 months; HR, 0.89; PFS: 4.2 vs 3.1 months; HR, 0.74). CONCLUSION: An early dose reduction or delay of liposomal irinotecan+5-FU/LV in the first 6 weeks does not significantly impact OS or PFS compared to patients without dose modifications. This finding suggests that tolerability-guided dose modification of liposomal irinotecan does not adversely affect efficacy outcomes.

Hematologic adverse events following palbociclib dose reduction in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: pooled analysis from randomized phase 2 and 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib improves outcomes for women with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (HR+/HER2- ABC). Dose reductions are recommended for the management of hematologic toxicities. A previous pooled analysis from the PALOMA clinical trials showed that 36.9% of patients required dose reduction, predominantly during the first 6 months of treatment and with decreasing frequency during subsequent 28-day treatment cycles (C). Previous data have shown that palbociclib dose reductions do not affect efficacy. This pooled, post hoc analysis evaluated the frequency of hematologic adverse events (AEs) before and after palbociclib dose reduction in PALOMA-1, PALOMA-2, and PALOMA-3. METHODS: This analysis evaluated the frequency of hematologic AEs 30 days before dose reduction and during each subsequent treatment from C1 to C6 among patients who required palbociclib dose reduction. Data were pooled from 3 randomized studies. PALOMA-1 was a phase 2, open-label study of postmenopausal patients untreated for ABC receiving palbociclib plus letrozole or letrozole alone. PALOMA-2 was a phase 3, double-blind study of postmenopausal patients untreated for ABC receiving palbociclib plus letrozole or placebo plus letrozole. PALOMA-3 was a phase 3, double-blind study of pre/perimenopausal or postmenopausal patients, whose disease progressed on prior endocrine therapy, receiving palbociclib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. RESULTS: A total of 311 (35.5%) patients with HR+/HER2- ABC required a palbociclib dose reduction (93.6% due to AEs) from 125 to 100 mg. Mean patient age was 59.9 years, and 46.9% of patients had visceral disease. Median time to dose reduction was 70 days. The majority of dose reductions occurred within 3 months of starting palbociclib treatment. Incidences of all-grade and grades 3/4 hematologic AEs were lower following dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS: A decrease in frequency and severity of hematologic AEs, including febrile neutropenia, following palbociclib dose reduction was observed, supporting the recommended use of dose reduction in AE management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: These studies were sponsored by Pfizer. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00721409; registration date July 24, 2008. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01740427; registration date December 4, 2012. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01942135; registration date September 13, 2013.

Effectiveness of sorafenib dose modifications on treatment outcome of hepatocellular carcinoma: Analysis in real-life settings.

Controlling adverse events (AEs) through dose reduction can enhance drug adherence and treatment response. Currently, there is no guide for sorafenib dosing. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether sorafenib dosing could affect treatment outcomes. A total of 782 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with sorafenib were evaluated for sorafenib dosing and its modifications via medical records at baseline and regular follow-up. Study outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), sorafenib duration, cumulative dose, AEs and drug discontinuation. The median patient survival was 7.7 months. Overall, 242 (30.9%) patients underwent dose reduction and 121 (17.5%) discontinued sorafenib due to AEs. In multivariate analysis, dose reduction was identified to be independently predictive of PFS and OS. The 800-to-400 mg/day group provided significantly better PFS than the 800 mg/day-maintained group or the 800-to-600 mg/day group. Likewise, the 800-to-400 mg/day group resulted in a significantly better OS than other dosing. However, dose reduction to 200 mg/day led to significantly worse PFS and OS. Hand-foot skin reaction and drug discontinuation due to AEs were higher in the 800-to-600 mg/day group than the 800-to-400 mg/day group. The 800-to-400 mg/day group had significantly longer treatment duration and higher cumulative dose than the 800 mg/day-maintained group. Sorafenib dose reduction can improve HCC survival and increase patient tolerance and adherence coupled with longer duration and higher cumulative dose. Dose reduction from 800 to 400 mg/day than to 600 mg/day is recommended when clinically warranted. However, dose reduction to 200 mg/day is not recommendable.

Palbociclib use with grade 3 neutropenia in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Neutropenia is the most common toxicity of CDK4/6 inhibitors, causing frequent dose interruptions. However, CDK4/6 inhibitor-induced neutropenia shows a benign clinical course in contrast to that caused by chemotherapy. Here, we investigated the safety of a new dose scheme for palbociclib, which avoids dose delays or reductions due to afebrile grade 3 neutropenia. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of ER( +)/HER2( -) advanced breast cancer patients who received palbociclib between 2017 and 2018 was analyzed. The patients were classified into Group 1 (patients who maintained palbociclib dose with afebrile grade 3 neutropenia), Group 2 (patients who experienced any dose modification with afebrile grade 3 neutropenia), and Group 3 (patients without afebrile grade 3 neutropenia). The primary endpoint was febrile neutropenia incidence; other toxicities were compared with those of the PALOMA-2 trial. RESULTS: Among the 107 patients, 54.2%, 22.4%, and 23.4% were classified into Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. There was no febrile neutropenia in Groups 1 and 2 during palbociclib treatment. Group 1 showed higher incidence of thrombocytopenia (all-grade, 32.8%; grade 3-4, 8.6%) than Group 2 and the PALOMA-2 data, but there was no bleeding related to thrombocytopenia. Group 1 showed higher incidence of all-grade non-hematologic adverse events than Group 2; only one grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity was observed in Group 1. There were no treatment-related hospitalizations or deaths in Group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, omitting palbociclib dose modification with afebrile grade 3 neutropenia is safe and tolerable without febrile neutropenia events. This scheme could be useful to avoid unnecessary reductions in palbociclib doses in future practice.

Modified-FOLFIRINOX combined with deep regional hyperthermia in pancreatic cancer: a retrospective study in Chinese patients.

BACKGROUND: FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy displays significant survival improvements in patients with pancreatic cancer. However, toxicities have hampered enthusiasm for the use of FOLFIRINOX in full dose. In order to increase the tolerability, many researchers focused on the modification of FOLFIRINOX. On the other hand, hyperthermia (HT) has been considered as an effective ancillary treatment for cancer therapy. Up to now, there is no report evaluating combining deep regional hyperthermia (DRHT) with modified-FOLFIRINOX for pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS: In this study, we conducted a retrospective review of pancreatic cancer patients treated with the combination of new form modified-FOLFIRINOX and DRHT (BSD2000). Patients underwent chemotherapy that included low-dose irinotecan (70-130 mg/m2), oxaliplatin (65-70 mg/m2) on day 1 and 5-FU (2400 mg/m2 as a 46 h continuous infusion, no bolus) or capecitabine (CAP) (1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-10) or tegafur, gimeracil and oteracil potassium (TS-1) (80-120 mg/d twice daily on days 1-10), 2-week schedule. Generally, DRHT treatment was performed weekly, 45 min for each time during chemotherapy. RESULTS: The patients receiving mFOLFIRINOX as the first line chemotherapy combining with DRHT, obtained an improvement in OS and PFS, 17 months (95% CI 1.97-32.03 months) and 4 months (95% CI 0-8.29 months) respectively. Overall, this combination regimen was safe; 17.6% patients suffered from grade 3/4 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we conducted a retrospective study combining mFOLFIRINOX and DRHT, which was well tolerated. The efficacy in the treatment of pancreatic cancer was encouraging, but further studies would be required to prove its merit, compared with conventional treatment.

Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of aerobic training in pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The investigation of exercise training in metastatic breast cancer has received minimal attention. This study determined the feasibility and safety of aerobic training in metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Sixty-five women (age, 21-80 years) with metastatic (stage IV) breast cancer (57% were receiving chemotherapy, and >40% had ≥ 2 lines of prior therapy) were allocated to an aerobic training group (n = 33) or a stretching group (n = 32). Aerobic training consisted of 36 supervised treadmill walking sessions delivered thrice weekly between 55% and 80% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak ) for 12 consecutive weeks. Stretching was matched to aerobic training with respect to location, frequency, duration, and intervention length. The primary endpoint was aerobic training feasibility, which was a priori defined as the lost to follow-up (LTF) rate (<20%) and attendance (≥70%). Secondary endpoints were safety, objective outcomes (VO2peak and functional capacity), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs; quality of life). RESULTS: One of the 33 patients (3%) receiving aerobic training was LTF, whereas the mean attendance rate was 63% ± 30%. The rates of permanent discontinuation and dose modification were 27% and 49%, respectively. Intention-to-treat analyses indicated improvements in PROs, which favored the attention control group (P values > .05). Per protocol analyses indicated that 14 of 33 patients (42%) receiving aerobic training had acceptable tolerability (relative dose intensity ≥ 70%), and this led to improvements in VO2peak and functional capacity (P values < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Aerobic training at the dose and schedule tested is safe but not feasible for a significant proportion of patients with metastatic breast cancer. The acceptable feasibility and promising benefit for select patients warrant further evaluation in a dose-finding phase 1/2 study. Cancer 2018;124:2552-60. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

A single institution experience with palbociclib toxicity requiring dose modifications.

PURPOSE: Since the widespread implementation of adding palbociclib to endocrine therapy in clinical practice, myelosuppression is becoming increasingly recognized as a toxicity that may lead to dose modification. We aimed to characterize toxicities observed with palbociclib resulting in dose modifications and prescriber preferences in modifying palbociclib dosage in response to treatment-related toxicities outside the context of a clinical trial. METHODS: We conducted a single institution, retrospective study of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) resulting in modifications in dose and schedule and the methods by which dose modifications occurred in patients with advanced hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy. RESULTS: From 2/2015 to 10/2016, 100 patients were identified for inclusion in this study. Treatment with palbociclib and endocrine therapy resulted in dose modifications in 38.0% of patients due to AEs with 18.4% requiring subsequent dose changes. Most palbociclib dose modifications occurred during the first 2 cycles. Grade 3-4 neutropenia accounted for 54.8% events of palbociclib dose modification. Most providers (65.8%) dose reduced palbociclib from 125 mg to 100 mg as their preferred method of dose modification, while others dose reduced from 125 mg to 75 mg (10.5%) and altered the schedule to 125 mg every other day (7.9%). A comparable rate of palbociclib dose modifications and subsequent dose changes were identified in an age ≥ 65 subgroup. In this group, dose adjustments were most commonly from grade 3-4 neutropenia, occurred mainly during cycle 1, and were most frequently addressed by dose reduction from 125 to 100 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Neutropenia remains the predominant cause for palbociclib dose modification and most modifications occur within the first two cycles. Older age (≥ 65) does not affect palbociclib tolerance. Our findings provide context outside of a clinical trial that inform ongoing studies evaluating the safety and feasibility of palbociclib-based therapies.

Does adjuvant chemotherapy dose modification have an impact on the outcome of patients diagnosed with advanced stage ovarian cancer? An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

PURPOSE: To determine the relationship between chemotherapy dose modification (dose adjustment or treatment delay), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for women with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) and primary peritoneal carcinoma (PPC) who receive carboplatin and paclitaxel. METHODS: Women with stages III and IV EOC and PPC treated on the Gynecologic Oncology Group phase III trial, protocol 182, who completed eight cycles of carboplatin with paclitaxel were evaluated in this study. The patients were grouped per dose modification and use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). The primary end point was OS; Hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS were calculated for patients who completed eight cycles of chemotherapy. Patients without dose modification were the referent group. All statistical analyses were performed using the R programming language and environment. RESULTS: A total of 738 patients were included in this study; 229 (31%) required dose modification, 509 did not. The two groups were well-balanced for demographic and prognostic factors. The adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for disease progression and death among dose-modified patients were: 1.43 (95% CI, 1.19-1.72, P < 0.001) and 1.26 (95% CI, 1.04-1.54, P = 0.021), respectively. Use of G-CSF was more frequent in dose-modified patients with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.63 (95% CI: 2.51-5.26, P < 0.001) compared to dose-unmodified patients. CONCLUSION: Dose-modified patients were at a higher risk of disease progression and death. The need for chemotherapy dose modification may identify patients at greater risk for adverse outcomes in advanced stage EOC and PPC.

The magnitude of neurotoxicity in patients with multiple myeloma and the impact of dose modifications: results from the population-based PROFILES registry.

The aim of this analysis is to assess (1) self-reported chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) symptoms; (2) its association with sociodemographic and clinical characteristics; and (3) treatment dose modifications and its influence on the magnitude of neurotoxicity in a population-based cohort of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). MM patients (n = 156), diagnosed between 2000 and 2014, filled out the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 (65% response). Data on treatment, outcomes, and dose modifications were extracted from the medical files. Fifty-three percent of patients reported at least one and on average three neuropathy symptoms that bothered them the most during the past week, with tingling toes/feet as most reported. In multivariate analysis, thalidomide, especially higher cumulative dose, was associated with neuropathy (ß = 0.26, CI 95% 0.27-15.34, p = 0.04) and CIPN was not associated with age, sex, time since last course of therapy, number of prior therapies, osteoarthritis, or diabetes. Dose modifications were often applied (65%). Although not statistically significant, a trend towards higher sensory (22 vs. 15 vs. 12, p = 0.22) and motor neuropathy scores (21 vs. 15 vs. 11, p = 0.36) was observed among patients receiving dose modification because of CIPN (31%) compared to those receiving a dose modification for another reason or no dose modification, without altering treatment response. CIPN is a common dose limiting side effect in patients with MM. Severity of CIPN was mainly affected by treatment with thalidomide. In spite of dose modifications, patients still reported somewhat higher neuropathy scores without altered response rates. Early dose modification based on a more reliable tool for CIPN measurements may prove value.

Adaptive dose modification for phase I clinical trials.

Most phase I dose-finding methods in oncology aim to find the maximum-tolerated dose from a set of prespecified doses. However, in practice, because of a lack of understanding of the true dose-toxicity relationship, it is likely that none of these prespecified doses are equal or reasonably close to the true maximum-tolerated dose. To handle this issue, we propose an adaptive dose modification (ADM) method that can be coupled with any existing dose-finding method to adaptively modify the dose, when it is needed, during the course of dose finding. To reflect clinical practice, we divide the toxicity probability into three regions: underdosing, acceptable, and overdosing regions. We adaptively add a new dose whenever the observed data suggest that none of the investigational doses are likely to be located in the acceptable region. The new dose is estimated via a nonparametric dose-toxicity model based on local polynomial regression. The simulation study shows that ADM substantially outperforms the similar existing method. We applied ADM to a phase I cancer trial. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Optimizing initial chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

The two combination chemotherapy regimens FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel represent major breakthroughs in the management of metastatic pancreatic cancer. Both regimens showed unprecedented survival advantage in the setting of front-line therapy. However, their application for treatment of patients in the community is challenging because of significant toxicities, thus limiting potential benefits to a narrow population of patients. Modifications to the dose intensity or schedule of those regimens improve their tolerability, while likely retaining survival advantage over single-agent chemotherapy. Newer strategies to optimize these two active regimens in advanced pancreatic cancer are being explored that can help personalize treatment to individual patients.

Randomized trial of low-dose peginterferon α-2b plus low and escalating doses of ribavirin in older patients with chronic hepatitis C with high viral load genotype 1.

Elderly patients with chronic hepatitis C cannot tolerate standard combination therapy of peginterferon and ribavirin, which remains the backbone of therapy in many countries, including Japan. The efficacy and safety of low-dose peginterferon α-2b in combination with low and escalating doses of ribavirin in older patients with high viral load genotype 1 were investigated in this randomized controlled trial. Thirty-two patients (age ≥ 60 years) were randomized into standard (group 1) or low (group 2) doses of peginterferon α-2b in combination with low and escalating doses of ribavirin. Patients were evaluated for safety and efficacy of treatment. There was a higher virological response rate in group 1 than in group 2. However, the response in men was higher than in women in the early treatment phase and 24 weeks after treatment (P = 0.008). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the virological response rate in men and women. Completion of therapy was higher in group 2 than in group 1 (31% vs. 13%, P = 0.200). Dose modification of ribavirin was less frequent in group 2 than in group 1 (69% vs. 88%, P = 0.200). These data suggest that combination therapy with low-dose peginterferon plus low and escalating doses of ribavirin may be safer in older patients than that with standard dose peginterferon, without impairing the treatment response.

Randomized trial of peginterferon alpha-2b plus low and escalating dose of ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C with high viral load genotype 1.

It has been reported that elderly patients with chronic hepatitis C infection cannot tolerate standard combination therapy. In this randomized, controlled trial, the efficacy and safety of peginterferon alpha-2b plus a low and escalating dose of ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C patients with high viral load genotype 1 were investigated. Sixty-two patients were randomized into combination therapy with standard ribavirin dosing (group 1) or low and escalating ribavirin dosing (group 2). Patients were evaluated for safety and efficacy of treatment. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of virological response between the groups throughout the treatment as well as 24 weeks after treatment. However, the response in patients ≥60 years of age was higher in group 1 than in group 2 at early treatment phase (P = 0.015). The prevalence of completion of therapy in patients ≥60 years of age tended to be higher in group 2 than in group 1 (50% vs. 0%, P = 0.055). There was no significant difference in dose modification of peginterferon alpha-2b between the groups. However, dose modification of ribavirin was significantly more frequent in group 1 than in group 2 (60% vs. 24%, P = 0.005). These data suggest that combination therapy with low and escalating dosing of ribavirin may be safer in elderly patients than that with standard dosing of ribavirin without impairing the treatment response.

Refining sorafenib therapy: lessons from clinical practice.

Understanding the best use of sorafenib is essential in order to maximize clinical benefit in hepatocellular carcinoma. Based on Phase III and noninterventional study data, as well as our extensive experience, we discuss dose modification in order to manage adverse events, disease response evaluation and how to maximize treatment benefit. Sorafenib should be initiated at the approved dose (400 mg twice daily) and reduced/interrupted as appropriate in order to manage adverse events. Dose modification should be considered before discontinuation. Appropriate tumor response assessment is critical. Focusing on radiologic response may result in premature sorafenib discontinuation; symptomatic progression should also be considered. If second-line therapies or trials are unavailable, continuing sorafenib beyond radiologic progression may provide a clinical benefit. Our recommendations enable the maximization of treatment duration, and hence clinical benefit, for patients.

Age Is a Risk Factor for Olaparib Dose Modification and Discontinuation in Patients With Ovarian Cancer.

Background/Aim: Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, is widely used as maintenance therapy for ovarian cancer. Dose modification, such as dose reduction and treatment interruption, are frequently performed to manage adverse events (AEs) of olaparib. By identifying patients at high risk for dose modification before administration, interventions related to appropriate control of AEs can be implemented. This study aimed to evaluate risk factors of olaparib dose modification and its clinical usefulness. Patients and Methods: Sixty patients with ovarian cancer who received olaparib were included in this retrospective cohort study. Associations between patients' characteristics and dose modification were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression analysis. We also examined whether risk factors of dose modification were associated with treatment discontinuation due to AEs. Results: Twenty-five (41.7%) patients required dose modification. Patients who required dose modification were significantly older (p=0.018) and tended to be more underweight (p=0.078) than those who did not require dose modification. In multivariate analysis, increasing age was significantly associated with dose modification (odds ratio=1.056; 95% confidence interval=1.002-1.112; p=0.034). The optimal cutoff of age as a risk factor for dose modification, calculated from receiver operating characteristic curves, was 65.0 years. Patients aged 65.0 years and older were significantly more likely to discontinue olaparib owing to AEs (p=0.0437). Conclusion: Age is a risk factor of olaparib dose modification due to AEs. Older patients, who frequently require dose modification, are more likely to discontinue olaparib, suggesting that strict management of AEs is particularly necessary in this patient group.