A. Belau

German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-Positive Study: A Phase III Trial to Compare Oral Ibandronate Versus Observation in Patients With High-Risk Early Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Bisphosphonates prevent skeletal-related events in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Their effect in early breast cancer is controversial. Ibandronate is an orally and intravenously available amino-bisphosphonate with a favorable toxicity profile. It therefore qualifies as potential agent for adjuvant use. PATIENTS AND METHODS The GAIN (German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-Positive) study was an open-label, randomized, controlled phase III trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. Patients with node-positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to two different dose-dense chemotherapy regimens and 2:1 to ibandronate 50 mg per day orally for 2 years or observation. In all, 2,640 patients and 728 events were estimated to be required to demonstrate an increase in disease-free survival (DFS) by ibandronate from 75% to 79.5% by using a two-sided α = .05 and 1-β of 80%. We report here the efficacy analysis for ibandronate, which was released by the independent data monitoring committee because the futility boundary was not crossed after 50% of the required DFS events were observed. RESULTS Between June 2004 and August 2008, 2,015 patients were randomly assigned to ibandronate and 1,008 to observation. Patients randomly assigned to ibandronate showed no superior DFS or overall survival (OS) compared with patients randomly assigned to observation (DFS: hazard ratio, 0.945; 95% CI, 0.768 to 1.161; P = .589; OS: HR, 1.040; 95% CI, 0.763 to 1.419; P = .803). DFS was numerically longer if ibandronate was used in patients younger than 40 years or older than 60 years compared with patients age 40 to 59 years (test for interaction P = .093). CONCLUSION Adjuvant treatment with oral ibandronate did not improve outcome of patients with high-risk early breast cancer who received dose-dense chemotherapy.

Topotecan Weekly Versus Conventional 5-Day Schedule in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Multicenter Phase II Trial of the North-Eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology Ovarian Cancer Study Group

PURPOSE Weekly administration of topotecan (Tw) is less toxic and widely considered a better treatment option than conventional 5-day therapy (Tc) in women with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer. We conducted a randomized phase II trial (TOWER [Topotecan Weekly Versus Conventional 5-Day Schedule in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer]) to better define the ratio between benefits and risks with either treatment approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to two independent two-stage protocols of Tw (4 mg/m(2)/wk administered on days 1, 8, and 15) or Tc (1.25 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 5). We evaluated risk ratios (RRs) for the primary end point of clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, and stable disease), the duration of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), associated hazard ratios (HRs), and RRs of toxicity with 95% CIs. RESULTS In total, 194 patients were randomly assigned at 54 centers to Tw (n = 97) or Tc (n = 97). Clinical benefit was observed in 36 of 76 (47%; 95% CI, 36% to 59%) Tw and 46 of 80 (58%; 95% CI, 46% to 68%) Tc patients (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.64; P = .205). Patients in the Tw group had a slightly shorter PFS (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.76) but similar OS (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.45) compared with Tc. Tw was associated with significantly lower risks of anemia (RR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.79), neutropenia (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.65), and thrombocytopenia (RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.57). CONCLUSION With regard to effectiveness in terms of response and PFS, Tc remains the standard of care in patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer. However, comparable OS rates and a favorable toxicity profile make Tw another viable treatment option in this setting.

A randomized phase III adjuvant study in high-risk cervical cancer: simultaneous radiochemotherapy with cisplatin (S-RC) versus systemic paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by percutaneous radiation (PC-R): a NOGGO-AGO Intergroup Study

BACKGROUND Simultaneous adjuvant platinum-based radiochemotherapy in high-risk cervical cancer (CC) is an established treatment strategy. Sequential paclitaxel (Taxol) and platinum followed by radiotherapy may offer further advantages regarding toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS An open-labeled randomized phase III trial was conducted to compare paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) plus carboplatin (AUC5) followed by radiation (50.4 Gy) (experimental arm-A) versus simultaneous radiochemotherapy with cisplatin (40 mg/m(2)/week) (arm-B) in patients with stage IB-IIB CC after surgery. Primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Overall, 271 patients were randomized and 263 were eligible for evaluation; 132 in arm-A and 131 in arm-B appropriately balanced. The estimated 2-year PFS was 81.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 74.4-89.1] in arm-B versus 87.2% (95% CI 81.2-93.3) in arm-A (P = 0.235) and the corresponding 5-year survival rates were 85.8% in arm-A and 78.9% in arm-B (P = 0.25). Hematological grade 3/4 toxicity was higher in arm-B. Alopecia (87.9% versus 4.1%; P < 0.001) and neurotoxicity (65.9% versus 15.6%; P < 0.001) were significantly higher in arm-A. Early treatment termination was significantly more frequent in arm-B than in arm-A (32.1% versus 12.9%; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Sequential chemotherapy and radiation in high-risk CC could not show any significant survival benefit; however, a different toxicity profile appeared. This sequential regime may constitute an alternative option when contraindications for immediate postoperative radiation are present.BACKGROUND Simultaneous adjuvant platinum-based radiochemotherapy in high-risk cervical cancer (CC) is an established treatment strategy. Sequential paclitaxel (Taxol) and platinum followed by radiotherapy may offer further advantages regarding toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS An open-labeled randomized phase III trial was conducted to compare paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) plus carboplatin (AUC5) followed by radiation (50.4 Gy) (experimental arm-A) versus simultaneous radiochemotherapy with cisplatin (40 mg/m2/week) (arm-B) in patients with stage IB-IIB CC after surgery. Primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Overall, 271 patients were randomized and 263 were eligible for evaluation; 132 in arm-A and 131 in arm-B appropriately balanced. The estimated 2-year PFS was 81.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 74.4-89.1] in arm-B versus 87.2% (95% CI 81.2-93.3) in arm-A (P=0.235) and the corresponding 5-year survival rates were 85.8% in arm-A and 78.9% in arm-B (P=0.25). Hematological grade 3/4 toxicity was higher in arm-B. Alopecia (87.9% versus 4.1%; P<0.001) and neurotoxicity (65.9% versus 15.6%; P<0.001) were significantly higher in arm-A. Early treatment termination was significantly more frequent in arm-B than in arm-A (32.1% versus 12.9%; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS Sequential chemotherapy and radiation in high-risk CC could not show any significant survival benefit; however, a different toxicity profile appeared. This sequential regime may constitute an alternative option when contraindications for immediate postoperative radiation are present.

Evaluation of Mucin-1 protein and mRNA expression as prognostic and predictive markers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND Mucin-1 (MUC1) is a promising antigen for the development of tumor vaccines. We evaluated the frequency of MUC1 expression and its impact on therapy response and survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Pre-treatment core biopsies of patients from the GeparTrio neoadjuvant trial (NCT 00544765) were evaluated for MUC1 by immunohistochemistry (IHC; N = 691) and quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR; N = 286) from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. RESULTS MUC1 protein and mRNA was detectable in the majority of cases and was associated with hormone-receptor-positive status (P < 0.001). High MUC1 protein and mRNA expression were associated with lower probability of pathologic complete response (P = 0.017 and P < 0.001) and with longer patient survival (P = 0.03 and P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, MUC1 protein and mRNA expression were independently predictive (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001). MUC1 protein and mRNA expression were independently prognostic for overall survival (P = 0.029 and P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS MUC1 is frequently expressed in breast cancer and detectable on mRNA and protein level from FFPE tissue. It provides independent predictive information for therapy response and survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In clinical immunotherapy trials, MUC1 expression may serve as a predictive marker.

Randomized phase II trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without lonafarnib in first-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer stage IIB-IV

OBJECTIVES This study evaluates whether a molecular targeted therapy with the farnesyltransferase inhibitor lonafarnib added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (OC) could improve progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS We performed a prospective randomized phase II study to compare standard therapy carboplatin (C; AUC 5) and paclitaxel (T; 175 mg/m(2)) in primary advanced OC with or without lonafarnib (L). Lonafarnib was given in a dose of 100mg orally twice a day during chemotherapy and was increased afterwards to 200mg up to six months as a maintenance therapy. RESULTS 105 patients were recruited (53 patients were randomized to receive LTC, 52 to TC). Hematologic toxicity was similar in both arms. Grade 3 and 4 non-hematological toxicity, occurred significantly more often with LTC (23% versus 4%, p=0.005) and was associated with a higher dropout rate. PFS and OS were not significantly different among both arms. The LTC arm showed inferiority in the stratum with residual tumor of more than 1cm: median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI: 7.4-14.2) compared with 16.4 (95% CI: 10.3-40.4) for TC (p=0.0141; HR=0.36 (95% CI: 0.15-0.84)) with median OS 20.6 months (95% CI: 13.1-31.0) and 43.4 months (95% CI: 15.7-) for the TC arm (p=0.012; HR=0.32 (95% CI: 0.13-0.8)). CONCLUSION The addition of lonafarnib did not improve PFS or OS. Patients with a residual tumor of more than 1cm had significantly shorter PFS and OS. Incorporation of lonafarnib into future studies for primary therapy of OC is not recommended.

Topotecan plus carboplatin versus standard therapy with paclitaxel plus carboplatin (PC) or gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus carboplatin (PLDC): a randomized phase III trial of the NOGGO-AGO-Study Group-AGO Austria and GEICO-ENGOT-GCIG intergroup study (HECTOR)

BACKGROUND Randomized, phase III trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of topotecan and carboplatin (TC) compared with standard platinum-based combinations in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the experimental TC arm (topotecan 0.75 mg/m2/ days 1-3 and carboplatin AUC 5 on day 3 every 3 weeks) or to one of the standard regimes [(PC) paclitaxel plus carboplatin; (GC) gemcitabine plus carboplatin; (PLDC) pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and carboplatin] which could be chosen by individual preference but before randomization. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) after 12 months. Overall survival (OS), response rate, toxicity, quality of life and treatment preference regarding standard treatment were defined as secondary end points. RESULTS A total of 550 patients were recruited. The PFS rate after 12 months was 37.0% for TC compared with 40.2% in the standard combinations (P = 0.470). The overall response rate was 73.1% for TC versus 75.1% for standard combinations (P = 0.149). After a median follow-up of 20 months, the median PFS was 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.4-10.6] and did not differ between both arms (P = 0.414). The median OS was 25 months in the TC arm versus 31 months in the standard arm (95% CI: 22.4-27.6 resp. 26.0-36.0; P = 0.163). Severe hematologic toxicities (grade 3/4) were rare in the experimental arm (P < 0.001), with 17.4% leucopenia, 27.8% neutropenia and 15.9% thrombopenia. CONCLUSION The combination of carboplatin and topotecan was well tolerated with significant lower rates of severe hematological toxicities but did not improve PFS or OS in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer compared with established standard regimens.

Clinical Outcome of Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Results of an Open Prospective, Multicenter Phase 2 Study of the North-eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology

Objective The aim of this study was to determine the response rate, toxicity, operability, and surgical complication rate of neoadjuvant concomitant radiochemotherapy (cRCH) (ifosfamide + carboplatin) followed by radical hysterectomy plus external-beam radiotherapy with curative intention in locally advanced primary inoperable stages IIB and IIIB squamous cell cervical cancer. Methods Patients with cervical cancer from 8 departments were enrolled. Patients received 3 cycles of ifosfamide 1.2 mg/m2 (+mesna 20%) plus carboplatin (area under the curve = 4), every 21 days, and concomitant external-beam radiotherapy (50.4 Gy [1.8 Gy/d]). Operability and remission were evaluated by clinical gynecological examination in general anesthesia (magnetic resonance imaging was optional), 4 weeks after the third cycle of cRCH. In case of achieved operability, a radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy was performed within 6 weeks after cRCH. If surgery was not performed because of incomplete remission or patient preferences, vaginal brachytherapy (15 Gy [5 Gy/d]) was given additionally. Results Forty-four patients were enrolled. Distribution of FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) tumor stage was as follows: IIB (19 patients) and IIIB (25 patients). All patients completed cRCH. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities (% of all cycles) were moderate: leukopenia, 7.3; thrombocytopenia, 2.4; and anemia, 3.2. In 13.8%, treatment cycles were delayed because of hematologic toxicity. Blood transfusions were given in 17.7% and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in 39.5%. Overall, grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were seldom (6.5%). Clinical overall response rate was 95.2%. Operability was achieved in 85.7%. Surgery was performed in 83.3%. Pathological response rates were as follows: pathological complete remission, 33.3%; partial remission, 63.3%; stable disease, 3.3%. Conclusions Our study demonstrates that cRCH is an effective and tolerable regimen in locally advanced cervical cancer treatment.

AGO-OVAR 14: A retrospective study evaluating the reasons for non-participating in trials in patients with ovarian cancer (OC) treated in coordinating centers of the AGO Ovarian Cancer Study Group.

5081 Background: Retrospective analysis suggested that participation in clinical trials is associated with better outcome. However, it is not clear to what extent selection bias contributes to this observation. METHODS This study evaluated the reasons leading to the decision of not participating in clinical trials for OC in 2001. In a retrospective study the 16 AGO study coordination centers documented those pts who were not enrolled in current OC study protocols. Both cohorts, the OVAR-14 pts and pts recruited in prospective trials in the same period were compared. RESULTS Overall, 273 pts with OC FIGO-stage IIB-IV were enrolled of whom 138 (51%) and 135 (49%) pts were included in OVAR-14 and in prospective clinical trials, respectively. 93/138 pts. (67%) did not meet the inclusion criteria for clinical trials. The most common reasons were a history of 2nd malignancy (24 pts, 17%) and impaired renal function (GFR < 60 ml/min, 39 pts, 28%, of whom 51% had a GFR > 50 ml/min). Further 28 pts (20%) refused participation in a prospective study. 17 pts. (12%) were not recruited although they met the inclusion criteria (investigators decision). The OVAR-14 pts were older than pts treated in prospective studies (median age 65.8 vs 57.2 yrs.). There were no significant differences with respect to FIGO stage. OVAR-14 pts underwent less radical surgery and more frequent had residual disease of 2 cm or above: 48 pts (34,8%) vs 35 pts (25,9 %) in clinical studies. However, 85/138 pts (62%) were treated with carboplatin-paclitaxel, the standard arm in all AGO studies. CONCLUSIONS Future analysis should reveal if any change in inclusion criteria might increase study participation without compromising safety. Therefore, required GFR was reduced to 50 ml/min in the ongoing AGO trial (OVAR-9). Long-term follow-up should determine whether a history with prior malignancies without relapse should maintain an exclusion criteria in trials for advanced OC. Improving education for both pts and investigators might improve recruitment in clinical trials as well. No significant financial relationships to disclose.