David G. Pfister

American Society of Clinical Oncology Treatment of Unresectable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline: Update 2003

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) previously published evidencebased guidelines for the treatment of unresectable non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1]. ASCO guidelines are updated periodically by the responsible Expert Panel (Appendix) [2]. For the 2003 update, a methodology similar to that applied in the original ASCO practice guidelines for treatment of unresectable NSCLC was used. Pertinent information published from 1996 through March 2003 was reviewed. The MEDLINE database (1996 through October 2002; National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD) was searched to identify relevant information from the published literature for this update. A series of searches was conducted using the medical subject headings, “carcinoma, non–small-cell lung,” “diagnostic imaging,” “neoplasm staging,” “mediastinoscopy,” “bone neoplasms,” “brain neoplasms,” “liver neoplasms,” “adrenal gland neoplasms,” “non–small-cell lung cancer,” “radionuclide imaging,” “bisphosphonates,” “radiotherapy,” “smoking,” “chemoprevention,” and the text words “chemotherapy,” “bone scan,” “PET,” and “zoledronic acid.” These terms were combined with the study design–related subject headings or text words “meta-analysis” and “randomized controlled trial.” Search results were limited to human studies and English-language articles. The Cochrane Library was searched in October 2002 using the phrase “lung cancer.” Directed searches based on the bibliographies of primary articles were also performed. Randomized trials published in the literature since October 2002, as well as data presented at ASCO Annual Meetings, were added to the evidence for these guidelines at the discretion of members of the Expert Panel. The entire update committee met once to discuss strategy and assign responsibilities for the update. A writing committee subsequently met to further review the literature searches, collate different sections of the update, and refine the manuscript. A draft update was circulated to the full Expert Panel for review and approval. The final document was also reviewed by ASCO’s Health Services Research Committee and the ASCO Board of Directors. Each recommendation from the 1997 guideline is listed below, and is followed by an updated (2003) recommendation, if applicable. “No change” is indicated if a particular recommendation has not been revised. A summary of the evidence follows thereafter. In order to preserve the framework of the 1997 guideline, information and recommendations regarding major topics, such as fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDGPET), have been divided and distributed to the appropriate section of the text. ASCO considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary. The ultimate determination regarding their application is to be made by the physician in light of each From the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA.

Phase I Studies of Anti–Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Chimeric Antibody C225 Alone and in Combination With Cisplatin

PURPOSE The epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor is frequently overexpressed in epithelial tumors. C225 is a human-to-murine chimeric monoclonal antibody that binds to the receptor and inhibits growth of cancer cells expressing the receptor. We evaluated the pharmacokinetics and toxicity of C225 in patients with advanced tumors overexpressing EGF receptors. PATIENTS AND METHODS We treated 52 patients in three successive phase I clinical trials of C225 as a single dose (n = 13), weekly multiple dose (n = 17), and weekly multiple dose with cisplatin (n = 22). C225 dose levels were 5, 20, 50, and 100 mg/m(2). In the study combining C225 with cisplatin, limited to patients with either head and neck or non-small-cell lung cancer, C225 was further escalated to 200 and 400 mg/m(2). Cisplatin was given at a dose of 60 mg/m(2) once every 4 weeks, and treatment was continued for up to 12 weeks if no disease progression occurred. RESULTS C225 displayed nonlinear pharmacokinetics, with antibody doses in the range of 200 to 400 mg/m(2) being associated with complete saturation of systemic clearance. C225 clearance did not change with repeated administration or with coadministration of cisplatin. Antibodies against C225 were detected in only one patient, and C225-associated toxicity was minimal. Patients experiencing disease stabilization were seen in all studies. In the study combining C225 and cisplatin, nine (69%) of 13 patients treated with antibody doses >/= 50 mg/m(2) completed 12 weeks of therapy, and two partial responses were observed. CONCLUSION C225 has dose-dependent pharmacokinetics, and doses that achieve saturation of systemic clearance are well tolerated. C225 given in combination with cisplatin has biologic activity at pharmacologically relevant doses.

Recommendations for the Use of Antiemetics: Evidence-Based, Clinical Practice Guidelines

THE GOAL OF ANTIEMETIC therapy is to prevent nausea and vomiting completely. This goal is achieved for many patients receiving chemotherapy or radiation therapy, and is based on clinical and basic research that has steadily improved the control of emesis over the last 20 years. As therapy has become more effective, it has also become safer, with few side effects associated with the most commonly used regimens. These regimens are convenient for patients to receive and for health care professionals to administer. However, despite improvements, a significant number of patients still experience emesis, and efforts to reduce this side effect of treatment must continue. As antiemetic usage has grown, the classes of agents available for antiemetic treatment, the number of agents, and the indications for antiemetics have all increased as well. The prevention of delayed emesis and anticipatory emesis is equal in importance to the need to prevent acute chemotherapyand radiation-induced emesis. Additionally, managing special and difficult emetic problems and selecting the proper antiemetic approach necessitate identification of the patient’s emetic risk. Although the neuropharmacologic basis of emesis is still incompletely understood, the selection of an appropriate antiemetic regimen is possible and can have an impact on several aspects of clinical care. Goals related to the complete control of emesis, ie, no vomiting, include providing care that is convenient for the patient, treatment that reduces hospitalization and time in the ambulatory setting, and therapy that enhances the patient’s quality of life. Additionally, practitioners need to be mindful of reducing costs of treatment while achieving these goals. 1-3

Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: 2005 Update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology Practice Guideline

PURPOSE To update the 2000 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on colorectal cancer surveillance. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on results from three independently reported meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that compared low-intensity and high-intensity programs of colorectal cancer surveillance, and on recent analyses of data from major clinical trials in colon and rectal cancer, the Panel recommends annual computed tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen for 3 years after primary therapy for patients who are at higher risk of recurrence and who could be candidates for curative-intent surgery; pelvic CT scan for rectal cancer surveillance, especially for patients with several poor prognostic factors, including those who have not been treated with radiation; colonoscopy at 3 years after operative treatment, and, if results are normal, every 5 years thereafter; flexible proctosigmoidoscopy [corrected] every 6 months for 5 years for rectal cancer patients who have not been treated with pelvic radiation; history and physical examination every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years, every 6 months during years 4 and 5, and subsequently at the discretion of the physician; and carcinoembryonic antigen every 3 months postoperatively for at least 3 years after diagnosis, if the patient is a candidate for surgery or systemic therapy. Chest x-rays, CBCs, and liver function tests are not recommended, and molecular or cellular markers should not influence the surveillance strategy based on available evidence.

Activity of XL184 (Cabozantinib), an Oral Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients With Medullary Thyroid Cancer

PURPOSE XL184 (cabozantinib) is a potent inhibitor of MET, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2), and RET, with robust antiangiogenic, antitumor, and anti-invasive effects in preclinical models. Early observations of clinical benefit in a phase I study of cabozantinib, which included patients with medullary thyroid cancer (MTC), led to expansion of an MTC-enriched cohort, which is the focus of this article. PATIENTS AND METHODS A phase I dose-escalation study of oral cabozantinib was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors. Primary end points included evaluation of safety, pharmacokinetics, and maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) determination. Additional end points included RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) response, pharmacodynamics, RET mutational status, and biomarker analyses. RESULTS Eighty-five patients were enrolled, including 37 with MTC. The MTD was 175 mg daily. Dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3 palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE), mucositis, and AST, ALT, and lipase elevations and grade 2 mucositis that resulted in dose interruption and reduction. Ten (29%) of 35 patients with MTC with measurable disease had a confirmed partial response. Overall, 18 patients experienced tumor shrinkage of 30% or more, including 17 (49%) of 35 patients with MTC with measurable disease. Additionally, 15 (41%) of 37 patients with MTC had stable disease (SD) for at least 6 months, resulting in SD for 6 months or longer or confirmed partial response in 68% of patients with MTC. CONCLUSION Cabozantinib has an acceptable safety profile and is active in MTC. Cabozantinib may provide clinical benefit by simultaneously targeting multiple pathways of importance in MTC, including MET, VEGFR2, and RET. A global phase III pivotal study in MTC is ongoing (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00215605).

American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline on the Role of Bisphosphonates in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: To determine clinical practice guidelines for the use of bisphosphonates in the prevention and treatment of bone metastases in breast cancer and their role relative to other therapies for this condition. METHODS: An expert multidisciplinary panel reviewed pertinent information from the published literature and meeting abstracts through May 1999. Additional data collected as part of randomized trials and submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration were also reviewed, and investigators were contacted for more recent information. Values for levels of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned by expert reviewers and approved by the panel. Expert consensus was used if there were insufficient published data. The panel addressed which patients to treat and when in their course of disease, specific drug delivery issues, duration of therapy, management of bony metastases with other therapies, and the public policy implications. The guideline underwent external review by selected p...

American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline for the Use of Larynx-Preservation Strategies in the Treatment of Laryngeal Cancer

PURPOSE To develop a clinical practice guideline for treatment of laryngeal cancer with the intent of preserving the larynx (either the organ itself or its function). This guideline is intended for use by oncologists in the care of patients outside of clinical trials. METHODS A multidisciplinary Expert Panel determined the clinical management questions to be addressed and reviewed the literature available through November 2005, with emphasis given to randomized controlled trials of site-specific disease. Survival, rate of larynx preservation, and toxicities were the principal outcomes assessed. The guideline underwent internal review and approval by the Panel, as well as external review by additional experts, members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Health Services Committee, and the ASCO Board of Directors. RESULTS Evidence supports the use of larynx-preservation approaches for appropriately selected patients without a compromise in survival; however, no larynx-preservation approach offers a survival advantage compared with total laryngectomy and adjuvant therapy with rehabilitation as indicated. RECOMMENDATIONS All patients with T1 or T2 laryngeal cancer, with rare exception, should be treated initially with intent to preserve the larynx. For most patients with T3 or T4 disease without tumor invasion through cartilage into soft tissues, a larynx-preservation approach is an appropriate, standard treatment option, and concurrent chemoradiotherapy therapy is the most widely applicable approach. To ensure an optimum outcome, special expertise and a multidisciplinary team are necessary, and the team should fully discuss with the patient the advantages and disadvantages of larynx-preservation options compared with treatments that include total laryngectomy.

Selumetinib-enhanced radioiodine uptake in advanced thyroid cancer

BACKGROUND Metastatic thyroid cancers that are refractory to radioiodine (iodine-131) are associated with a poor prognosis. In mouse models of thyroid cancer, selective mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway antagonists increase the expression of the sodium-iodide symporter and uptake of iodine. Their effects in humans are not known. METHODS We conducted a study to determine whether the MAPK kinase (MEK) 1 and MEK2 inhibitor selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) could reverse refractoriness to radioiodine in patients with metastatic thyroid cancer. After stimulation with thyrotropin alfa, dosimetry with iodine-124 positron-emission tomography (PET) was performed before and 4 weeks after treatment with selumetinib (75 mg twice daily). If the second iodine-124 PET study indicated that a dose of iodine-131 of 2000 cGy or more could be delivered to the metastatic lesion or lesions, therapeutic radioiodine was administered while the patient was receiving selumetinib. RESULTS Of 24 patients screened for the study, 20 could be evaluated. The median age was 61 years (range, 44 to 77), and 11 patients were men. Nine patients had tumors with BRAF mutations, and 5 patients had tumors with mutations of NRAS. Selumetinib increased the uptake of iodine-124 in 12 of the 20 patients (4 of 9 patients with BRAF mutations and 5 of 5 patients with NRAS mutations). Eight of these 12 patients reached the dosimetry threshold for radioiodine therapy, including all 5 patients with NRAS mutations. Of the 8 patients treated with radioiodine, 5 had confirmed partial responses and 3 had stable disease; all patients had decreases in serum thyroglobulin levels (mean reduction, 89%). No toxic effects of grade 3 or higher attributable by the investigators to selumetinib were observed. One patient received a diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome more than 51 weeks after radioiodine treatment, with progression to acute leukemia. CONCLUSIONS Selumetinib produces clinically meaningful increases in iodine uptake and retention in a subgroup of patients with thyroid cancer that is refractory to radioiodine; the effectiveness may be greater in patients with RAS-mutant disease. (Funded by the American Thyroid Association and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00970359.).

Head and Neck Cancers

Recent evidence suggests that dysregulated translation and its control significantly contribute to the etiology and pathogenesis of the head and neck cancers, specifically to that of squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). eIF4E is one of the most studied components of the translation machinery implicated in the development and progression of HNSCC. It appears that dysregulation of eIF4E levels and activity, namely by the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, plays an important role in the etiology and pathogenesis of HNSCC and correlates with clinical outcomes. In this chapter, we will discuss the role of eIF4E and some other translation factors as they relate to the biology and treatment of HNSCC.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy Protectants

PURPOSE Because toxicities associated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy can adversely affect short- and long-term patient quality of life, can limit the dose and duration of treatment, and may be life-threatening, specific agents designed to ameliorate or eliminate certain chemotherapy and radiotherapy toxicities have been developed. Variability in interpretation of the available data pertaining to the efficacy of the three United States Food and Drug Administration-approved agents that have potential chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-protectant activity-dexrazoxane, mesna, and amifostine-and questions about the role of these protectant agents in cancer care led to concern about the appropriate use of these agents. The American Society of Clinical Oncology sought to establish evidence-based, clinical practice guidelines for the use of dexrazoxane, mesna, and amifostine in patients who are not enrolled on clinical treatment trials. METHODS A multidisciplinary Expert Panel reviewed the clinical data regarding the activity of dexrazoxane, mesna, and amifostine. A computerized literature search was performed using MEDLINE. In addition to reports collected by individual Panel members, all articles published in the English-speaking literature from June 1997 through December 1998 were collected for review by the Panel chairpersons, and appropriate articles were distributed to the entire Panel for review. Guidelines for use, levels of evidence, and grades of recommendation were reviewed and approved by the Panel. Outcomes considered in evaluating the benefit of a chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-protectant agent included amelioration of short- and long-term chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-related toxicities, risk of tumor protection by the agent, toxicity of the protectant agent itself, quality of life, and economic impact. To the extent that these data were available, the Panel placed the greatest value on lesser toxicity that did not carry a concomitant risk of tumor protection. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION Mesna: (1) Mesna, dosed as detailed in these guidelines, is recommended to decrease the incidence of standard-dose ifosfamide-associated urothelial toxicity. (2) There is insufficient evidence on which to base a guideline for the use of mesna to prevent urothelial toxicity with ifosfamide doses that exceed 2.5 g/m(2)/d. (3) Either mesna or forced saline diuresis is recommended to decrease the incidence of urothelial toxicity associated with high-dose cyclophosphamide use in the stem-cell transplantation setting. Dexrazoxane: (1) The use of dexrazoxane is not routinely recommended for patients with metastatic breast cancer who receive initial doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. (2) The use of dexrazoxane may be considered for patients with metastatic breast cancer who have received a cumulative dosage of 300 mg/m(2) or greater of doxorubicin in the metastatic setting and who may benefit from continued doxorubicin-containing therapy. (3) The use of dexrazoxane in the adjuvant setting is not recommended outside of a clinical trial. (4) The use of dexrazoxane can be considered in adult patients who have received more than 300 mg/m(2) of doxorubicin-based therapy for tumors other than breast cancer, although caution should be used in settings in which doxorubicin-based therapy has been shown to improve survival because of concerns of tumor protection by dexrazoxane. (5) There is insufficient evidence to make a guideline for the use of dexrazoxane in the treatment of pediatric malignancies, with epirubicin-based regimens, or with high-dose anthracycline-containing regimens. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence on which to base a guideline for the use of dexrazoxane in patients with cardiac risk factors or underlying cardiac disease. (6) Patients receiving dexrazoxane should continue to be monitored for cardiac toxicity. Amifostine: (1) Amifostine may be considered for the reduction of nephrotoxicity in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemoth