Jean Latreille

Compliance With Consensus Recommendations for Systemic Therapy Is Associated With Improved Survival of Women With Node-Negative Breast Cancer

PURPOSE The impact of consensus recommendations for systemic therapy on outcome of disease is unclear. We evaluated if compliance with guidelines for systemic adjuvant treatment is associated with improved survival of women with node-negative breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS The study population included women diagnosed with invasive node-negative breast cancer in Québec, Canada, in 1988 to 1989, 1991 to 1992, and 1993 to 1994. Information was collected by chart review, linkage with administrative databases, and queries to attending physicians. Guidelines from the 1992 St Gallen conference were used as standard of care. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses. RESULTS Among 1,541 women, 358 died before December 1999. Median follow-up was 6.8 years. Seven-year event-free and overall survivals were 66% and 81%, respectively. Survival was 88%, 84%, and 74% in women at minimal, moderate, or high risk of recurrence. Virtually all women at minimal risk were treated according to the consensus (98.4% of 370). In comparison, adjusted hazard ratios of death were 1.0 (95% CI, 0.6 to 1.7) and 2.3 (95% CI, 1.3 to 4.0) among women at moderate risk treated according to the consensus or not, respectively. Among women at high risk, adjusted hazard ratios of death were 2.0 (95% CI, 1.4 to 2.8) and 2.7 (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.9), respectively. Both risk category (P <.0005) and compliance with guidelines (P <.0005) were independent significant predictors of survival. CONCLUSION Treatment according to consensus recommendations is associated with improved survival of women with breast cancer in the community. Promoting the adoption of guidelines for treatment is an effective strategy for disease control.

Ondansetron compared with dexamethasone and metoclopramide as antiemetics in the chemotherapy of breast cancer with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil.

BACKGROUND Although ondansetron was found to be effective as an antiemetic in numerous clinical trials of highly emetogenic combination-chemotherapy regimens that included cisplatin, its role in milder emetogenic regimens has not been fully defined. To address its use with a widely used but less emetogenic regimen, we performed a double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing ondansetron with dexamethasone and metoclopramide in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. METHODS A total of 165 women with breast cancer from 14 Canadian centers who were about to receive this chemotherapy for the first time were randomly assigned to receive either ondansetron (n = 85) or dexamethasone plus metoclopramide (n = 80), a widely used, standard antiemetic regimen. The patients recorded the incidence of nausea, emesis, and other side effects in diaries, and these data were compared in the two groups. RESULTS The patients who received dexamethasone and metoclopramide had significantly less nausea during the first 24 hours after chemotherapy was begun. Otherwise, there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy between the regimens. The incidence of drowsiness and increased appetite was higher in the group given dexamethasone and metoclopramide. CONCLUSIONS For women with breast cancer who are being treated with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil, the efficacy of dexamethasone and metoclopramide in controlling nausea and vomiting equaled or exceeded that of ondansetron.

Motesanib, or open-label bevacizumab, in combination with paclitaxel, as first-line treatment for HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has a crucial role in angiogenesis, and is a valid target in metastatic breast cancer. Motesanib is an investigational oral inhibitor of VEGF receptors. We aimed to determine whether treatment with motesanib plus paclitaxel is better than placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. METHODS Between Dec 1, 2006, and July 4, 2008, patients with untreated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned (using a randomisation list created by personnel not associated with the study) in a 1:1:1 ratio to paclitaxel (90 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 3 weeks) plus either masked motesanib 125 mg orally once per day (n=91), masked placebo orally once per day (n=94), or open-label bevacizumab 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle (n=97), after stratification according to adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (taxane-containing regimens vs other regimens vs none), number of metastatic sites (<3 vs ≥3), and hormone receptor status (positive vs negative). Placebo was provided as a replica of motesanib 25 mg tablets. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) based on the population as assigned to treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00356681. FINDINGS ORRs for the motesanib group and the placebo group did not differ significantly (49%vs 41%; absolute difference 8% [95% CI -6 to 22]; p=0.31). The ORR in the bevacizumab group (52%) was similar to that in the motesanib group. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events included diarrhoea (18 of 92 patients in the motesanib group, none of 89 patients in the placebo group, and four of 96 patients in the bevacizumab group), fatigue (11, eight, and six), hypertension (11, one, and seven), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (ten, seven, and 19). More patients in the motesanib group had serious adverse events than did those in the placebo or bevacizumab groups (34, 26, and 21 patients, respectively); the most common of these in the motesanib group were gastrointestinal in nature. INTERPRETATION Data from this trial do not support the further investigation of motesanib at this dose and schedule in this population. FUNDING Amgen.

Phase I Dose-Finding Study of a New Taxane, RPR 109881A, Administered as a One-Hour Intravenous Infusion Days 1 and 8 to Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors

PURPOSE To define the maximum-tolerated dose, recommended phase II dose (RD), dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and pharmacokinetics of a novel taxane, RPR 109881A, administered on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. PATIENTS AND METHODS Twenty-nine patients were enrolled and treated according to a modified continual reassessment method from a starting dose of 7.5 mg/m(2) to 52.5 mg/m(2). Detailed pharmacokinetic analyses of blood and urine were performed on days 1 and 8 of the first cycle. Toxicity was monitored weekly. RESULTS DLT consisting of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea was seen in three of six patients at 52.5 mg/m(2). Grade 3 or 4 granulocytopenia was also seen in five of six patients treated at this dose (four of six in the first cycle). At the next lower dose level, 45 mg/m(2) toxicity was moderate, with only one of 12 patients experiencing severe diarrhea and grade 4 granulocytopenia with associated infection. Drug concentrations were consistent with a three-compartment open model. The total-body clearance suggests a linear dose-concentration relationship. RPR 109881A has a high clearance (mean, 42.6 L/h/m(2)), a large volume of distribution (mean, 952 L/m(2)), and a long terminal half-life (mean, 24 hours). There was no drug accumulation between days 1 and 8. One partial response was seen in a patient with renal cell carcinoma. CONCLUSION The RD of RPR 109881A given as a 1-hour infusion on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle is 45 mg/m(2). At this dose the drug is well tolerated and should be further studied.

Investigating the correlation between hospital of primary treatment and the survival of women with breast cancer.

To understand the relation between hospital of initial treatment and the survival of women with breast cancer, the authors investigated the characteristics of the treatment center that were related most to outcome.

Bevacizumab with or without erlotinib as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (GERCOR DREAM; OPTIMOX3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND The combination of an anti-VEGF or an anti-EGFR-targeted monoclonal antibody with chemotherapy has shown clinical activity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. However, combining both anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR antibodies with chemotherapy in first-line treatment resulted in adverse outcomes. We assessed whether the combination of erlotinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with bevacizumab could increase the efficacy of maintenance therapy in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was undertaken in 49 centres in France, Austria, and Canada. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with histologically confirmed, unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, WHO performance status 0-2, had received no previous therapy for metastatic disease, and had adequate organ function. Patients without disease progression after bevacizumab-based induction therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) by a minimisation technique to bevacizumab (7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks) or bevacizumab plus erlotinib (150 mg once daily) as maintenance therapy until progression. All patients were stratified by centre, baseline performance status, age, and number of metastatic sites. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival on maintenance therapy analysed by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00265824. FINDINGS Between Jan 1, 2007, and Oct 13, 2011, 700 eligible patients were enrolled; following induction treatment, patients without disease progression were randomly assigned to bevacizumab (n=228) or bevacizumab plus erlotinib (n=224). At the final analysis, median follow-up was 51·0 months (IQR 36·0-60·0) in the bevacizumab group and 48·3 months (31·5-61·0) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group. In the primary analysis (after 231 progression-free survival events), median progression-free survival from randomisation was 5·1 months (95% CI 4·1-5·9) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group compared with 6·0 months (4·6-7·9) in the bevacizumab group (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·79 [95% CI 0·60-1·06]; p=0·11; unstratified HR 0·76 [0·59-0·99]; p=0·043). In the final analysis, median progression-free survival from randomisation was 5·4 months (95% CI 4·3-6·2) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group compared with 4·9 months (4·1-5·7) in the bevacizumab group (stratified HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·66-1·01], p=0·059; unstratified HR 0·78 [0·68-0·96], p=0·019). At the final analysis, median overall survival from maintenance was 24·9 months (95% CI 21·4-28·9) in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group and 22·1 months (19·6-26·7) in the bevacizumab group (stratified HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·63-0·99], p=0·036; unstratified HR 0·79 [0·64-0·98], p=0·035). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were skin rash (47 [21%] of 220 patients in the bevacizumab plus erlotinib group vs none of 224 patients in the bevacizumab alone group), diarrhoea (21 [10%] vs two [<1%]), and asthenia (12 [5%] vs two [<1%]). INTERPRETATION Maintenance bevacizumab plus erlotinib might be a new non-chemotherapy-based maintenance option for the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer after bevacizumab-based induction therapy. FUNDING GERCOR and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Dexamethasone improves the efficacy of granisetron in the first 24 h following high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy

The object of the study was to determine whether dexamethasone improved the efficacy of the serotonin receptor (5-HT3) antagonist granisetron in controlling acute (within 24 h) emesis in cancer patients receiving high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy and to ascertain whether continuation of granisetron after 24 h reduces the occurrence of delayed emesis. This randomised, double-blind, multicentre, three-arm study was conducted at 21 medical centres. A group of 292 nausea- and emcsis-free patients with cancer, who had never had chemotherapy and were scheduled to receive at least 50 mg/m2 cisplatin, were given 3 mg granisetron i.v. in a 15-min infusion with or without 10 mg dexamethasone i.v. completed 5 min prior to high-dose cisplatin and 1 mg granisetron p.o. at +6 h and +12 h. Primary study end-points were control of emesis and nausea. Patients completed a self-report diary every 6 h for the first 24 h. At the end of the 24-h period, the patients who received dexamethasone had a significantly higher complete protection rate from emesis (64% compared to 39%) than those who received no steroid. Similarly, the dexamethasone-treated group had a significantly higher complete plus partial (0–2 emetic episodes) protection rate (84% compared to 64%). This study shows that dexamethasone markedly enhances the antiemetic efficacy of granisetron for acute-onset emesis in high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.

Bevacizumab (Bev) with or without erlotinib as maintenance therapy, following induction first-line chemotherapy plus Bev, in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Efficacy and safety results of the International GERCOR DREAM phase III trial.

LBA3500^ Background: Therapy targeting VEGF or EGFR demonstrated clinical activity in combination with chemotherapy (CT) in mCRC but monoclonal antibodies cannot be associated. The DREAM trial compares a maintenance therapy (MT) with bev +/- EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib (E) after a first-line Bev-based induction therapy (IT) in pts with mCRC. METHODS Pts with previously untreated and unresectable mCRC were eligible. After a Bev-based IT with FOLFOX or XELOX or FOLFIRI, pts without disease progression were randomized to MT between Bev alone (Bev 7.5 mg/kg q3w; arm A) or Bev+E (B 7.5 mg/kg q3w, E 150 mg/day continuously; arm B). Pts were treated until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS on MT. RESULTS The study enrolled 700 pts from 01/2007 to 11/2011 in 3 countries (France, Canada, Austria). 446 (63.7%) pts were randomized for MT (arm A, N=224; arm B, N=222). Among the 446 randomized pts, IT regimen was FOLFOX-Bev in 265 pts (59.4%), XELOX-Bev in 135 pts (30.3%), and FOLFIRI-Bev in 46 pts (10.3%). Baseline characteristics of randomized pts were (arm A/B): ECOG PS 0, 60% in both arms; normal LDH level 47%/49%; normal alkaline phosphatase level 48%/50%; synchronous metastasis 83%/82%. The median no of MT cycles was 6 in both arms. With a median follow-up of 31.0 months, 327 PFS events were observed. Median MT-PFS were 4.6 m in arm A vs 5.8 m in arm B (HR 0.73 [95%CI: 0.59-0.91], P=.005). Median PFS from inclusion were 9.2 m vs 10.2 m. During MT, in arm A vs arm B, grade 3-4 diarrhea (<1% vs 9%) and grade 3 skin toxicity (0% vs 19%) were the main differences in toxicity. Severe adverse events from randomization related to B or E were 6 in arm A and 7 in arm B. Overall survival is not mature. CONCLUSIONS The addition of erlotinib to bevacizumab after induction therapy significantly improves the duration of maintenance PFS, following induction with first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer.

Time trends in systemic adjuvant treatment for node-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE We conducted a population-based study in Quebec, Canada, to assess longitudinal changes in systemic adjuvant therapy for node-negative breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A stratified random sample was selected among women with newly diagnosed node-negative breast cancer in 1988, 1991, and 1993. Information on the patient, her tumor, source of care, and treatment was abstracted from medical charts. Patients were classified as being at minimal, moderate, or high risk of recurrence on the basis of criteria proposed at the 4th International Conference on Adjuvant Therapy of Primary Breast Cancer (St. Gallen, Switzerland, 1992), and systemic adjuvant treatment received was dichotomized as being consistent or not consistent with consensus recommendations. RESULTS Overall, 1,578 cases of invasive breast carcinoma were reviewed. The proportion of patients who were given hormonal or cytotoxic treatment increased from 51.7% to 73.1% from 1988 to 1993. Virtually all women at minimal risk were treated in 1991 and 1993 according to the consensus statement. The proportions of women so treated were 75.0% and 65.4% in the moderate- and high-risk categories, respectively, in 1991. In 1993, these proportions were 71.4% and 67.0%, respectively. Omission of chemotherapy, especially in high-risk women with estrogen receptor-negative tumors who were 50 to 69 years of age, was the most frequent inconsistency with guidelines. CONCLUSION Systemic adjuvant therapy for node-negative breast cancer has gained acceptance. Better understanding of the decision-making process, of the perception of the risks and benefits involved, and of the impact of alternative strategies for the dissemination of consensus recommendations are needed to promote the use of chemotherapy in specific categories of women who are at high risk of recurrence.

Activity and Safety of the Antiestrogen EM-800, the Orally Active Precursor of Acolbifene, in Tamoxifen-Resistant Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To determine the efficacy and safety of EM-800 (SCH-57050), the precursor of acolbifene, a new, highly potent, orally active, pure antiestrogen in the mammary gland and endometrium, for the treatment of tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-three post menopausal/ovariectomized women with breast cancer who had received tamoxifen, either for metastatic disease or as adjuvant to surgery for > or = 1 year, and had relapsed were treated in a prospective, multicenter, phase II study with EM-800 (20 mg/d [n = 21] or 40 mg/d [n = 22] orally). Results Thirty-seven patients had estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors (>10 fmol/mg; mean, 146 fmol/mg cytosolic protein), three patients had ER-negative/progesterone receptor-positive tumors, and three patients had undetermined ER status. The objective response rate to EM-800 was 12%, with one complete response and four partial responses. Ten patients (23%) had stable disease for > or = 3 months, and 7 patients (16%) had stable disease for > or = 6 months. With a median follow-up of 29 months, median duration of response was 8 months (range, 7 to 71+ months). Treatment with EM-800 was well tolerated. No significant adverse events related to the study drug were observed clinically or biochemically. CONCLUSION EM-800 produced responses in a significant proportion of patients with tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer, thus showing that this highly potent, selective estrogen receptor modulator, which lacks estrogenic activity in the mammary gland and endometrium, has incomplete cross-resistance with tamoxifen, thus suggesting additional benefits in the treatment of breast cancer.