D. Koeberle

Adding cetuximab to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK

BACKGROUNDnTo determine the activity and tolerability of adding cetuximab to the oxaliplatin and capecitabine (XELOX) combination in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC).nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnIn a multicenter two-arm phase II trial, patients were randomized to receive oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks alone or in combination with standard dose cetuximab. Treatment was limited to a maximum of six cycles.nnnRESULTSnSeventy-four patients with good performance status entered the trial. Objective partial response rates after external review and radiological confirmation were 14% and 41% in the XELOX and in the XELOX + Cetuximab arm, respectively. Stable disease has been observed in 62% and 35% of the patients, with 76% disease control in both arms. Cetuximab led to skin rash in 65% of the patients. The median overall survival was 16.5 months for arm A and 20.5 months for arm B. The median time to progression was 5.8 months for arm A and 7.2 months for arm B.nnnCONCLUSIONnDifferences in response rates between the treatment arms indicate that cetuximab may improve outcome with XELOX. The correct place of the cetuximab, oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combinations in first-line treatment of MCC has to be assessed in phase III trials.

Phase II study of capecitabine and oxaliplatin given prior to and concurrently with preoperative pelvic radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer

This multicentre phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of preoperative capecitabine plus oxaliplatin and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (T3/T4 rectal adenocarcinoma with or without nodal involvement). Treatment consisted of one cycle of XELOX (capecitabine 1000u2009mgu2009m−2 bid on days 1–14 and oxaliplatin 130u2009mgu2009m−2 on day 1), followed by RT (1.8u2009Gy fractions 5 days per week for 5 weeks) plus CAPOX (capecitabine 825u2009mgu2009m−2 bid on days 22–35 and 43–56, and oxaliplatin 50u2009mgu2009m−2 on days 22, 29, 43 and 50). Surgery was recommended 5 weeks after completion of chemoradiotherapy. The primary end point was pathological complete tumour response (pCR). Sixty patients were enrolled. In the intent-to-treat population, the pCR rate was 23% (95% CI: 13–36%). 58 patients underwent surgery; R0 resection was achieved in 57 (98%) patients, including all 5 patients with T4 tumours. Sphincter preservation was achieved in 49 (84%) patients. Tumour and/or nodal downstaging was observed in 39 (65%) patients. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20%) and lymphocytopaenia (43%). Preoperative capecitabine, oxaliplatin and RT achieved encouraging rates of pCR, R0 resection, sphincter preservation and tumour downstaging in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III non-inferiority trial (SAKK 41/06)

BACKGROUNDnChemotherapy plus bevacizumab is a standard option for first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. We assessed whether no continuation is non-inferior to continuation of bevacizumab after completing first-line chemotherapy.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnIn an open-label, phase III multicentre trial, patients with mCRC without disease progression after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were randomly assigned to continuing bevacizumab at a standard dose or no treatment. CT scans were done every 6 weeks until disease progression. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A non-inferiority limit for hazard ratio (HR) of 0.727 was chosen to detect a difference in TTP of 6 weeks or less, with a one-sided significance level of 10% and a statistical power of 85%.nnnRESULTSnThe intention-to-treat population comprised 262 patients: median follow-up was 36.7 months. The median TTP was 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1-5.4] months for bevacizumab continuation versus 2.9 (95% CI 2.8-3.8) months for no continuation; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.58-0.96). Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated. The median overall survival was 25.4 months for bevacizumab continuation versus 23.8 months (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.63-1.1; P = 0.2) for no continuation. Severe adverse events were uncommon in the bevacizumab continuation arm. Costs for bevacizumab continuation were estimated to be ∼30,000 USD per patient.nnnCONCLUSIONSnNon-inferiority could not be demonstrated for treatment holidays versus continuing bevacizumab monotheray, after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Based on no impact on overall survival and increased treatment costs, bevacizumab as a single agent is of no meaningful therapeutic value. More efficient treatment approaches are needed to maintain control of stabilized disease following induction therapy.nnnCLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONnClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00544700.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with or without panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS, locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): a randomized, multicenter, phase II trial SAKK 41/07

BACKGROUNDnWe conducted a randomized, phase II, multicenter study to evaluate the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mAb panitumumab (P) in combination with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with standard-dose capecitabine as neoadjuvant treatment for wild-type KRAS locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnPatients with wild-type KRAS, T3-4 and/or N+ LARC were randomly assigned to receive CRT with or without P (6 mg/kg). The primary end-point was pathological near-complete or complete tumor response (pNC/CR), defined as grade 3 (pNCR) or 4 (pCR) histological regression by Dworak classification (DC).nnnRESULTSnForty of 68 patients were randomly assigned to P + CRT and 28 to CRT. pNC/CR was achieved in 21 patients (53%) treated with P + CRT [95% confidence interval (CI) 36%-69%] versus 9 patients (32%) treated with CRT alone (95% CI: 16%-52%). pCR was achieved in 4 (10%) and 5 (18%) patients, and pNCR in 17 (43%) and 4 (14%) patients. In immunohistochemical analysis, most DC 3 cells were not apoptotic. The most common grade ≥3 toxic effects in the P + CRT/CRT arm were diarrhea (10%/6%) and anastomotic leakage (15%/4%).nnnCONCLUSIONSnThe addition of panitumumab to neoadjuvant CRT in patients with KRAS wild-type LARC resulted in a high pNC/CR rate, mostly grade 3 DC. The results of both treatment arms exceeded prespecified thresholds. The addition of panitumumab increased toxicity.

Pamidronate treatment in patients with malignant osteolytic bone disease and pain

Abstract The aim of this double-blind, randomized study was to compare the effects of two pamidronate dosages, given as repeated infusions in patients with advanced malignant osteolytic bone disease and bone pain. Seventy patients were randomly assigned to receive pamidronate 60 mg or 90 mg i.v. every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. Pain parameters, analgesic consumption and performance status were assessed at baseline and throughout the study. Furthermore, total-body bone mineral density was measured using dual- energy X-ray absorptiometry at baseline, after three and after six infusions. Sixty percent (95% CI 41–77%) of the patients in the 60 mg group and 63% (95% CI 44–79%) of the patients in the 90-mg group had a sustained reduction of pain intensity and were classified as pain responders. Median duration of pain response was 15 versus 12 weeks in the 60-mg and 90-mg groups, respectively (P=0.32). After two infusions, significant changes in pain intensity, pain frequency, general well-being and WHO pain score were observed (P<0.01). A trend toward improved performance status and reduced consumption of analgesics was also observed. Patients in the 90-mg group had more pronounced bone remineralization as measured by total-body bone mineral density. No significant difference was detectable between the two pamidronate treatments in any of the parameters evaluated. In conclusion, bone pain can be effectively reduced by repeated pami-dronate infusions in patients with advanced osteolytic bone disease. Pamidronate 90 mg every 3 weeks results in higher bone remineralization, but this difference did not translate into a further increase of palliative effects.

Economic analysis of terminal care for patients with malignant osteolytic bone disease and pain treated with pamidronate

Abstractu2002The goals of this study were the assessment (1) of all costs of terminal care of patients with osteolytic bone disease and pain and (2) of the economic consequences of the pamidronate treatment as observed in a prospective clinical trial on the effectiveness of pamidronate. A total of 70 patients were recruited, who were all suffering from advanced tumour diseases (60% breast cancer, 21% multiple myeloma, and 19% other tumours). In a single-institution study the patients were randomly assigned to receive, in a double-blinded setting, pamidronate 60u2009mg i.v. or 90u2009mg i.v. every 3u2009weeks for a maximum of six cycles. Perception of pain intensity was recorded by self-assessment, using a linear analogue scale. Follow-up lasted 6u2009months after treatment. All elements of direct costs of in-patient and out-patient care were recorded in cooperation with the hospital administration and the health insurance companies [Krankenkassen]. Average monthly direct costs amounted to ECUu20091,290 (±410) and 1,050 (±430) during the treatment phase and follow-up, respectively. Average in-patient costs were about three times the out-patient costs. Significantly higher costs (by a factor of 2) were observed for terminal care in hospital (last 3u2009months before death) than for continued care (of patients surviving the study period). The treatment with pamidronate reduced pain significantly but did not add noticeably to the costs. The study showed that it is practicable and quite efficient to combine a pharmaco-economic evaluation with a clinical trial, although it may be difficult (depending on the setting and availability of information) to assess true costs, i.e. total resource usage.

Von Hippel-Lindau disease: a rare disease important to recognize

Introduction: Von Hippel-Lindau disease (VHL) is an autosomal dominant multisystemic cancer syndrome due to a mutation of the VHL tumor suppressor gene on chromosome 3, region p25-26, with an incidence of 1/36,000 in newborns. Patients are at risk of developing cerebellar, spinal and retinal hemangioblastoma, renal cell carcinoma, pheochromocytoma, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, pancreatic and renal cysts, and epididymal cystadenoma. The most common causes of death from VHL are metastases from renal cell carcinoma and neurological complications from cerebellar hemangioblastomas. Molecular analysis of the VHL gene is clinically available and indicated in patients with known or suspected VHL. Case Report: A 19-year-old woman was surgically treated for cerebellar hemangioblastoma in 1998 and for renal cell carcinoma of the right side in 2002. Familial VHL was subsequently diagnosed as the patient’s mother was found to be affected with bilateral polycystic kidney disease with chronic renal failure as well as hemangioblastoma of the retina and medulla oblongata. The mother underwent surgery for bilateral renal cell carcinoma in 2003. Conclusion: The multitude of VHL-associated tumors and intra-familial variability in clinical expressivity render early diagnosis of VHL difficult. We therefore shortly illustrate the spectrum of clinical phenotypes and the VHL screening and surveillance guidelines.

Sorafenib with or without everolimus in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): a randomized multicenter, multinational phase II trial (SAKK 77/08 and SASL 29)

BACKGROUNDnSorafenib (S), a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is the standard of care for first-line systemic treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Everolimus (E) is a potent inhibitor of mTOR, a pathway frequently activated in HCC. Preclinical data suggest that the combination S + E has additive effects compared with single-agent S.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnPatients with unresectable or metastatic HCC and Child-Pugh ≤7 liver dysfunction were randomized to receive daily S 800 mg alone or with E 5 mg until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12). The secondary end points included response rate, PFS, time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), duration of disease stabilization (DDS), safety, and quality-of-life (QoL) assessments.nnnRESULTSnA total of 106 patients were randomized: 46 patients received S and 60 patients received S + E. Ninety-three patients were assessable for the primary end point and 105 patients for the safety analysis. The PFS12 rate was 70% [95% confidence interval (CI) 54-83] and 68% (95% CI 53-81) in patients randomized to S and S + E, respectively. The RECIST (mRECIST) response rate was 0% (23%) in the S arm and 10% (35%) in the S + E arm. Median PFS (6.6 versus 5.7 months), TTP (7.6 versus 6.3 months), DDS (6.7 versus 6.7 months), and OS (10 versus 12 months) were similar in the S and S + E arms, respectively. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 72% and 86% of patients in arm S and arm S + E, respectively. Patients had similar QoL scores over time, except for a greater worsening in physical well-being and mood in the arm S + E.nnnCONCLUSIONSnNo evidence was found that S + E improves the efficacy compared with S alone. Combining 5 mg E with full-dose S is feasible, but more toxic than S alone. Further testing of this drug combination in molecularly unselected HCCs appears unwarranted.nnnCLINICALTRIALSGOVnNCT01005199.

Combination of trastuzumab and letrozole after resistance to sequential trastuzumab and aromatase inhibitor monotherapies in patients with estrogen receptor-positive, HER-2-positive advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial (SAKK 23/03)

A sequential treatment design was chosen in this trial to ensure complete resistance to single-agent non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) and trastuzumab both given as monotherapy before receiving the combination of a non-steroidal AI and trastuzumab. Key eligibility criteria included postmenopausal patients with advanced, measurable, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2)-positive disease (assessed by FISH, ratio (≥2)), hormone receptor (HR)-positive disease, and progression on prior treatment with a non-steroidal AI, e.g. letrozole or anastrozole, either in the adjuvant or in the advanced setting. Patients received standard dose trastuzumab monotherapy in step 1 and upon disease progression continued trastuzumab in combination with letrozole in step 2. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR) in step 2. Totally, 13 patients were enrolled. In step 1, six patients (46%) achieved CBR. Median time to progression (TTP) was 161 days (95% confidence interval (CI): 82-281). In step 2, CBR was observed in eight out of the 11 evaluable patients (73%), including one patient with partial response. Median TTP for all the 11 patients was 188 days (95% CI: 77-not reached). Results of this proof-of-concept trial suggest that complete resistance to both AI and trastuzumab can be overcome in a proportion of patients by combined treatment of AI and trastuzumab, as all patients served as their own control. Our results appear promising for a new treatment strategy that offers a chemotherapy-free option for at least a subset of patients with HR-positive, HER-2-positive breast cancer over a clinically relevant time period.

Off-label use of anticancer drugs in eastern Switzerland: a population-based prospective cohort study

PurposePrevalence data on the off-label use (OLU) of anticancer drugs are limited despite OLU being controversial for medical, pharmaco-economic, and ethical reasons. We therefore quantified and characterized the OLU of anticancer drugs and compared OLU based on the national drug label with international treatment recommendations.MethodsWe prospectively collected data on patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy between October and December 2012 at hospitals affiliated with the Eastern Switzerland Oncology Network. Individual data on patient characteristics, tumor disease, and systemic treatment were collected, and each individual treatment was compared with the national drug label and international treatment guidelines.ResultsA total of 985 consecutive patients receiving 1,737 anticancer drug treatments were included in the study. Overall, 32.4xa0% of all patients received at least one off-label drug, corresponding to 27.2xa0% of all anticancer drugs administered. Major reasons for OLU were the lack of approval for the specific disease entity (15.7xa0%) and modified application of the anticancer drug (10xa0%). OLU that was unsupported by the current European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) treatment recommendations was rare (6.6xa0%) but higher for bevacizumab (29.6xa0%) due to its use in treating advanced ovarian cancer beyond the second-line setting and advanced breast cancer beyond the first-line setting and for lenalidomide (22.6xa0%) due to its use in treating Non-Hodgkin lymphoma.ConclusionsBased on data collected on our patient cohort, OLU of anticancer drugs in a European clinical setting applies to one-third of all cancer patients. ESMO-unsupported use of chemotherapies or molecularly-targeted drugs is rare, opposing concerns that the off-label use of newer anticancer drugs is a substantial clinical problem.