Ciro Gallo

c-erb B2 overexpression decreases the benefit of adjuvant tamoxifen in early-stage breast cancer without axillary lymph node metastases.

PURPOSE We studied retrospectively the interaction between c-erbB2 overexpression and adjuvant tomoxifen in node-negative breast cancer patients enrolled in the Gruppo Universitario Napoletano 1 (GUN-1) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS c-erbB2, evaluated by immunohistochemistry in 145 of 173 patients randomly assigned to 2-year adjuvant tamoxifen or no further therapy, was considered overexpressed if greater than 10% of the cells showed specific membrane staining. The role of each prognostic variable and their independent effect were studied using the Cox model. Disease-free (DFS) and overall (OAS) survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS As of November 30, 1994, the median follow-up period was 12 years. c-erbB2 was overexpressed in 43 of 145 patients (29.7%), which directly correlated with tumor size and inversely with estrogen receptor (ER) level. At univariate analysis, overexpression of c-erbB2 did not affect either DFS or OAS; tamoxifen had a greater effect on reducing the risk of recurrence than of death. Addition of c-erbB2 to a multivariate Cox model that contained menopausal status, tumor size, nuclear grade, and treatment as covariates did not affect the significance of the model for DSF or OAS, whereas addition of the first-order interaction between c-erbB2 and tamoxifen was statistically significant both for DFS and OAS. The same result was obtained when the model contained ER status and ER-tamoxifen interaction. Indeed, adjuvant tamoxifen significantly prolonged DFS and OAS in c-erbB2-negative cases, whereas it had no effect on DFS and OAS in c-erbB2-positive patients. CONCLUSION In early-stage breast cancer patients, overexpression of c-erbB2 is a marker of lack of efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen.

Pretreatment Quality of Life and Functional Status Assessment Significantly Predict Survival of Elderly Patients With Advanced Non—Small-Cell Lung Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy: A Prognostic Analysis of the Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study

PURPOSE To study the prognostic value for overall survival of baseline assessment of functional status, comorbidity, and quality of life (QoL) in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data from 566 patients enrolled onto the phase III randomized Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES) study were analyzed. Functional status was measured as activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL). The presence of comorbidity was assessed with a checklist of 33 items; items 29 and 30 of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) were used to estimate QoL. ADL was dichotomized as none versus one or more dependency. For IADL and QoL, three categories were defined using first and third quartiles as cut points. Comorbidity was summarized using the Charlson scale. Analysis was performed by Cox model, and stratified by treatment arm. RESULTS Better values of baseline QoL (P = .0003) and IADL (P = .04) were significantly associated with better prognosis, whereas ADL (P = .44) and Charlson score (P = .66) had no prognostic value. Performance status 2 (P = .006) and a higher number of metastatic sites (P = .02) also predicted shorter overall survival. CONCLUSIONS Pretreatment global QoL and IADL scores, but not ADL and comorbidity, have significant prognostic value for survival of elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who were treated with chemotherapy. Using these scores in clinical practice might improve prognostic prediction for treatment planning.

Gemcitabine Plus Vinorelbine Compared With Cisplatin Plus Vinorelbine or Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase III Trial of the Italian GEMVIN Investigators and the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group

PURPOSE Platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens are the standard treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although toxicity is common and may significantly affect the patients quality of life (QoL). This trial aimed to assess whether a combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine had benefits in terms of QoL, without influencing negatively on survival, compared with cisplatin-containing regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage IIIB (effusion and supraclavicular nodes) or IV documented NSCLC who were younger than 70 years of age were randomly assigned gemcitabine plus vinorelbine (GemVin) or either gemcitabine plus cisplatin or vinorelbine plus cisplatin (cisplatin-based). European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scales were used for QoL analysis. RESULTS Five hundred one patients were randomly assigned to treatment. The median age was 62 years. There were no significant differences in global QoL scores between the two arms after 2 months of treatment. However, worsening scores for appetite, vomiting, and alopecia were significantly more common in the cisplatin-based arm. Median survival was 38 v 32 weeks and median progression-free survival was 23 v 17 weeks in the cisplatin-based versus GemVin arms, respectively. For the GemVin arm the hazard ratio for death was 1.15 (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.37) and the hazard ratio for progression was 1.29 (90% CI, 1.10 to 1.52). Grade 3 or 4 myelosuppression, vomiting, alopecia, and ototoxicity were significantly more frequent with cisplatin-based treatment. CONCLUSION Global QoL is not improved with GemVin, although advantages in some components of QoL were apparent. GemVin is less toxic than standard cisplatin-based chemotherapy. There is a nonsignificant slight survival advantage with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. GemVin could be offered to advanced NSCLC patients who express concern about toxicity.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Single-Agent Gemcitabine As First-Line Treatment of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The GIP-1 Study

PURPOSE Single-agent gemcitabine became standard first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after demonstration of superiority compared with fluorouracil. The Gruppo Italiano Pancreas 1 randomized phase III trial aimed to compare gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT00813696). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or = 50, were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (arm A) or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (arm B). Arm A: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks, and, after a 1-week rest, on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Arm B: cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) added weekly to gemcitabine, except cycle 1 day 22. Primary end point was overall survival. To have 8% power of detecting a 0.74 hazard ratio (HR) of death, with bilateral alpha .05, 355 events were needed and 400 patients planned. RESULTS Four hundred patients were enrolled (arm A: 199; arm B: 201). Median age was 63, 59% were male, 84% had stage IV, and 83% had KPS > or = 80. Median overall survival was 8.3 months versus 7.2 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.35; P = .38). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months versus 3.8 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.19; P = .80). The objective response rate was 10.1% in A and 12.9% in B (P = .37). Clinical benefit was experienced by 23.0% in A and 15.1% in B (P = .057). Combination therapy produced more hematologic toxicity, without relevant differences in nonhematologic toxicity. CONCLUSION The addition of weekly cisplatin to gemcitabine failed to demonstrate any improvement as first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Comparison of predictive accuracy of four prognostic models for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy: a multicenter European study.

The objective of the current study was to compare, in a large multicenter study, the discriminating accuracy of four prognostic models developed to predict the survival of patients undergoing nephrectomy for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

Colistin and Rifampicin Compared With Colistin Alone for the Treatment of Serious Infections Due to Extensively Drug-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii: A Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND Extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Acinetobacter baumannii may cause serious infections in critically ill patients. Colistin often remains the only therapeutic option. Addition of rifampicin to colistin may be synergistic in vitro. In this study, we assessed whether the combination of colistin and rifampicin reduced the mortality of XDR A. baumannii infections compared to colistin alone. METHODS This multicenter, parallel, randomized, open-label clinical trial enrolled 210 patients with life-threatening infections due to XDR A. baumannii from intensive care units of 5 tertiary care hospitals. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to either colistin alone, 2 MU every 8 hours intravenously, or colistin (as above), plus rifampicin 600 mg every 12 hours intravenously. The primary end point was overall 30-day mortality. Secondary end points were infection-related death, microbiologic eradication, and hospitalization length. RESULTS Death within 30 days from randomization occurred in 90 (43%) subjects, without difference between treatment arms (P = .95). This was confirmed by multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 0.88 [95% confidence interval, .46-1.69], P = .71). A significant increase of microbiologic eradication rate was observed in the colistin plus rifampicin arm (P = .034). No difference was observed for infection-related death and length of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS In serious XDR A. baumannii infections, 30-day mortality is not reduced by addition of rifampicin to colistin. These results indicate that, at present, rifampicin should not be routinely combined with colistin in clinical practice. The increased rate of A. baumannii eradication with combination treatment could still imply a clinical benefit. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NCT01577862.

Tamoxifen in treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Results from small randomised trials on tamoxifen in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are conflicting. We studied whether the addition of tamoxifen to best supportive care prolongs survival of patients with HCC. METHODS Patients with any stage of HCC were eligible, irrespective of locoregional treatment. Randomisation was centralised, with a minimisation procedure accounting for centre, evidence of disease, and time from diagnosis. Patients were randomly allocated best supportive care alone or in addition to tamoxifen. Tamoxifen was given orally, 40 mg per day, from randomisation until death. RESULTS 496 patients from 30 institutions were randomly allocated treatment from January, 1995, to January, 1997. Information was available for 477 patients. By Sept 15, 1997, 119 (50%) of 240 and 130 (55%) of 237 patients had died in the control and tamoxifen arms, respectively. Median survival was 16 months and 15 months (p=0.54), respectively. No differences were found within subgroups defined by prognostic variables. Relative hazard of death for patients receiving tamoxifen was 1.07 (95% CI 0.83-1.39). INTERPRETATION Our findings show that tamoxifen is not effective in prolonging survival of patients with HCC.

First-Line Erlotinib Followed by Second-Line Cisplatin-Gemcitabine Chemotherapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The TORCH Randomized Trial

PURPOSE Erlotinib prolonged survival of unselected patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were not eligible for further chemotherapy, and two phase II studies suggested it might be an alternative to first-line chemotherapy. A randomized phase III trial was designed to test whether first-line erlotinib followed at progression by cisplatin-gemcitabine was not inferior in terms of survival to the standard inverse sequence. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage IIIB (with pleural effusion or supraclavicular nodes) to IV NSCLC and performance status of 0 to 1 were eligible. With a 95% CI upper limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio (HR) for death, 80% power, a one-sided α = .025, and two interim analyses, a sample size of 900 patients was planned. RESULTS At the first planned interim analysis with half the events, the inferiority boundary was crossed, and the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended early termination of the study. Seven hundred sixty patients (median age, 62 years; range, 27 to 81 years) had been randomly assigned. Baseline characteristics were balanced between study arms. As of June 1, 2011, median follow-up was 24.3 months, and 536 deaths were recorded (263 in the standard treatment arm and 273 in the experimental arm). Median survival was 11.6 months (95% CI, 10.2 to 13.3 months) in the standard arm and 8.7 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 10.5 months) in the experimental arm. Adjusted HR of death in the experimental arm was 1.24 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.47). There was no heterogeneity across sex, smoking habit, histotype, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. CONCLUSION In unselected patients with advanced NSCLC, first-line erlotinib followed at progression by cisplatin-gemcitabine was significantly inferior in terms of overall survival compared with the standard sequence of first-line chemotherapy followed by erlotinib.

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and treatment efficacy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of three randomised trials

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, and myelosuppression is a common side-effect. We aimed to assess whether haematological toxic effects could be a biological measure of drug activity and a marker of efficacy. METHODS We analysed data for 1265 patients who received chemotherapy (vinorelbine, gemcitabine, gemcitabine and vinorelbine, cisplatin and vinorelbine, or cisplatin and gemcitabine) within three randomised trials. Primary landmark analyses were restricted to 436 patients who received all six planned chemotherapy cycles and who were alive 180 days after randomisation. Neutropenia was categorised on the basis of worst WHO grade during chemotherapy: absent (grade 0), mild (grade 1-2), or severe (grade 3-4). All statistical analyses were stratified by treatment allocation. Analyses were repeated in the out-of-landmark group (829 patients), stratifying by treatment allocation and number of chemotherapy cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival. FINDINGS In the landmark group, hazard ratios of death were 0.65 (0.46-0.93) for patients with severe neutropenia and 0.74 (0.56-0.98) for those with mild neutropenia. Median survival after the landmark time of 180 days was 31.4 weeks (95% CI 25.7-39.6) for patients without neutropenia compared with 42.0 weeks (32.7-59.7) for patients with severe neutropenia, and with 43.7 weeks (36.6-66.0) for those with mild neutropenia (severe vs mild vs no neutropenia p=0.0118). Findings were much the same for the out-of-landmark group. INTERPRETATION Neutropenia during chemotherapy is associated with increased survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, and its absence might be a result of underdosing. Prospective trials are needed to assess whether drug dosing guided by the occurrence of toxic effects could improve efficacy of standard regimens.

Carboplatin- or Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy in First-Line Treatment of Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The COCIS Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data

PURPOSE Since treatment efficacy of cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains contentious, a meta-analysis of individual patient data was performed to compare the two treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS A systematic review identified randomized trials comparing cisplatin with carboplatin in the first-line treatment of SCLC. Individual patient data were obtained from coordinating centers of all eligible trials. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). All statistical analyses were stratified by trial. Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment toxicity. OS and PFS curves were compared by using the log-rank test. ORR was compared by using the Mantel-Haenszel test. RESULTS Four eligible trials with 663 patients (328 assigned to cisplatin and 335 to carboplatin) were included in the analysis. Median OS was 9.6 months for cisplatin and 9.4 months for carboplatin (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.27; P = .37). There was no evidence of treatment difference between the cisplatin and carboplatin arms according to sex, stage, performance status, or age. Median PFS was 5.5 and 5.3 months for cisplatin and carboplatin, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.29; P = .25). ORR was 67.1% and 66.0%, respectively (relative risk, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.16; P = .83). Toxicity profile was significantly different for each of the arms: hematologic toxicity was higher with carboplatin, and nonhematologic toxicity was higher with cisplatin. CONCLUSION Our meta-analysis of individual patient data suggests no differences in efficacy between cisplatin and carboplatin in the first-line treatment of SCLC, but there are differences in the toxicity profile.