Karin Haider

Irinotecan plus raltitrexed vs raltitrexed alone in patients with gemcitabine-pretreated advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

There is no established second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine failure. In view of the urgent need for such therapy, and since preclinical and phase I clinical data suggest an encouraging, potentially synergistic activity between raltitrexed and irinotecan, the present randomised phase II study was initiated. A total of 38 patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, who progressed while receiving or within 6 months after discontinuation of palliative first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine, were enrolled in this study. They were randomised to 3-weekly courses of raltitrexed 3 mg m−2 on day 1 (arm A) or irinotecan 200 mg m−2 on day 1 plus raltitrexed 3 mg m−2 on day 2 (arm B). The primary study end point was objective response, secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), as well as clinical benefit response in symptomatic patients (n=28). In the combination arm, the IRC-confirmed objective response rate was 16% (three out of 19 patients had a partial remission; 95% CI, 3–40%), which was clearly superior to that in the comparator/control arm with raltitrexed alone, in which no response was obtained. Therefore, the trial was already stopped at the first stage of accrual. Also, the secondary study end points, median PFS (2.5 vs 4.0 months), OS (4.3 vs 6.5 months), and clinical benefit response (8 vs 29%) were superior in the combination arm. The objective and subjective benefits of raltitrexed+irinotecan were not negated by severe, clinically relevant treatment-related toxicities: gastrointestinal symptoms (42 vs 68%), partial alopecia (0 vs 42%), and cholinergic syndrome (0 vs 21%) were more commonly noted in arm B; however, grade 3 adverse events occurred in only three patients in both treatment groups. Our data indicate that combined raltitrexed+irinotecan seems to be an effective salvage regimen in patients with gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic cancer. The superior response activity, PFS and OS (when compared to raltitrexed), as well as its tolerability and ease of administration suggest that future trials with this combination are warranted.

Combined Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin Plus Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor in Patients With Advanced Fluoropyrimidine/Leucovorin-Pretreated Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of combined irinotecan and oxaliplatin in patients with advanced colorectal cancer pretreated with leucovorin-modulated fluoropyrimidines. PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty-six patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, who progressed while receiving or within 6 months after discontinuing palliative chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidines/leucovorin, were enrolled onto this study. Treatment consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on days 1 + 15 and irinotecan 80 mg/m2 on days 1 + 8 + 15 every 4 weeks. Depending on the absolute neutrophil counts (ANC) on the day of scheduled chemotherapeutic drug administration, a 5-day course of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 microg/kg/d was given. RESULTS The overall response rate was 42% for all 36 assessable patients (95% confidence interval, 26% to 59%), including two complete remissions (6%). Thirteen additional patients (36%) had stable disease, and only eight (22%) progressed. The median time to treatment failure was 7.5 months (range, 1 to 13.5+ months). After a median follow-up time of 14 months, 19 patients (53%) are still alive. Hematologic toxicity was commonly observed, although according to the ANC-adapted use of G-CSF (in 31 patients during 81 of 174 courses), it was generally mild: grade 3 and 4 granulocytopenia occurred in only five and two cases, respectively. The most frequent nonhematologic adverse reactions were nausea/emesis and diarrhea, which were rated severe in 17% and 19%, respectively. CONCLUSION Our data suggest that the combination of irinotecan and oxaliplatin with or without G-CSF has substantial antitumor activity in patients with progressive fluoropyrimidine/leucovorin-pretreated colorectal cancer. Overall toxicity was modest, with gastrointestinal symptoms constituting the dose-limiting side effects. Further evaluation of this regimen seems warranted.

Treatment of advanced breast cancer with gemcitabine and vinorelbine plus human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor.

AbstractPurpose. A phase II trial was performed to investigate the efficacy and tolerance of gemcitabine, vinorelbine, and recombinant human granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor (G‐CSF) in advanced breast cancer. Patients and methods. Between April 96 and August 97, 60 patients entered this trial. Forty‐five patients were previously untreated and 15 patients had failed previous palliative chemotherapy with (n = 10) or without anthracyclines (n = 5). Therapy consisted of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 + 15 + 21 and vinorelbine 40 mg/m2 on days 1 + 21, both diluted in 250 ml saline and infused over 30 min. G‐CSF was administered at 5 μg/kg/day subcutaneously from days 2–6 and 22–26. Courses were repeated every 5 weeks. Treatment was continued in case of response or stable disease until a total of six courses. Results. The overall response rate was 55.5% for patients who had not received prior palliative chemotherapy (95% confidence interval, 40%–70.3%), including 5 CR (11.1%) and 20 PR (44.4%) 12 patients (27%) had stable disease (SD), and 8 (18%) progressed. Second‐line treatment with this regimen resulted in 6/15 (40%) objective remissions, 5 had SD, and 4 PD. The median time to progression was 9.5 months (range, 1.5–28) in previously untreated patients, and 7.0 months (range, 2–23) in those who had failed prior chemotherapy. After a median follow‐up time of 15 months, 44 patients (73%) are still alive with metastatic disease. Myelosuppression was commonly observed, though WHO 3 and 4 neutropenia occured in only 9 (l5%) and 2 patients (3%), and was never complicated by septicaemia; grade 3 anemia was noted in 2 patients. Severe (WHO grade 3) nonhematologic toxicity was rarely observed, and included nausea/emesis in 3 and constipation in 2 patients. Conclusions. Our data suggest that gemcitabine and vinorelbine plus G‐CSF is an effective and tolerable first‐ as well as second‐line combination regimen for treatment of advanced breast cancer.

Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer with Vinorelbine and Docetaxel With or Without Human Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor

PURPOSE A multicenter phase II trial was performed to investigate the efficacy and tolerance of docetaxel, vinorelbine with or without recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between February 1998 and March 1999, 57 patients participated in this trial. Forty-two patients received this combination as first-line and 15 patients as second-line chemotherapy, including 10 patients who had failed anthracyclines. Therapy consisted of vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 and docetaxel 30 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Depending on the absolute neutrophil counts on the day of scheduled chemotherapeutic drug administration, a 5-day course of G-CSF 5 microg/kg/d was given. RESULTS The overall response rate was 64.3% (95% confidence interval, 48.1% to 78.4%) in patients receiving docetaxel plus vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy, including eight complete (19%) and 19 partial remissions (45.3%); 11 patients (26.2%) had disease stabilization, and only four (9.5%) progressed. Second-line treatment with this regimen resulted in eight (53.3%) of 15 objective responses, four had stable disease, and three had progressive disease. The median time to progression was 12 months in the first-line and 9.8 months in the second-line setting, respectively. After a median follow-up time of 18 months, 38 patients (65%) were still alive with metastatic disease. Myelosuppression was commonly observed; World Health Organization grade 3 or 4 neutropenia both occurred in 18 patients (32%) and was complicated by septicemia in four cases; grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia was seen in two patients (4%), and grade 3 anemia was seen in only one patient (2%). Severe (grade 3) nonhematologic toxicity, except for alopecia, was rarely observed and included nausea/vomiting in two patients (4%), and stomatitis, peripheral neuropathy, and skin toxicity each in one patient. CONCLUSION Our data suggest that docetaxel and vinorelbine with or without G-CSF is an effective and fairly well tolerated regimen for the treatment of advanced breast cancer. It might be particularly useful in patients previously exposed to adjuvant or palliative anthracyclines and/or alkylating agents.

MDR1 gene expression and prognostic factors in primary breast carcinomas

To prospectively assess the role of the MDR1 gene in breast carcinomas, MDR1 RNA levels of breast carcinoma specimens were determined by slot blot analysis. In 59 evaluable patients with primary breast carcinomas, MDR1 RNA levels of the carcinomas were negative in 54%, low in 29% and high in 17% of the patients. No differences in age, menopause status, oestrogen and progesterone receptor levels, tumour size, lymph node involvement and c-erbB-2/neu gene expression were observed between MDR1 RNA negative patients and MDR1 RNA positive patients.

MDR1 gene expression and its clinical relevance in primary gastric carcinomas

Background. Drug resistance remains a major problem in gastric carcinomas. To evaluate the mechanisms involved in this resistance, the authors determined the expression of the MDR1 gene, a multidrug resistance gene, in primary gastric carcinomas.

Effective second line chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer with navelbine and mitomycin C

SummaryThe efficacy and toxicity of navelbine 30 mg/m2 administered intravenously (IV) over 30 minutes every 3 weeks, and mitomycin C 15 mg/m2 administered IV every 6 weeks was assessed in 34 patients with metastatic breast cancer refractory to first-line chemotherapy. An overall objective response rate of 35% was achieved (95% confidence interval, 20% to 53%), with an additional 47% of patients maintaining stable disease (SD). Four of 12 patients who responded had received previous anthracycline therapy. Median time to progression for responders and patients with SD was 6.3 months. The median survival of all patients was 8.8 months. Tolerance of this regimen was remarkable. WHO grade 3/4 side effects consisted of granulocytopenia in 12% and thrombocytopenia in 15%, and included only 1 patient each with grade 3 neurotoxicity and local toxicity due to extravasation. Delay of treatment was required for hematologic toxicity in 7 patients, and 5 required dose reductions. In conclusion, navelbine/mitomycin C is an active and well-tolerated regimen that may be considered for second-line treatment. If our results are confirmed by larger analyses of other patient studies, this combination might also warrant further exploration in combination with other active agents for front line chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer.

Phase II trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Caelyx™) plus Gemcitabine in chemotherapeutically pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer

A phase II trial was performed to investigate the efficacy and tolerance of combined gemcitabine and liposomal doxorubicin±recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with chemotherapeutically pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Thirty-four patients were entered in this trial. Chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine and liposomal doxorubicin±G-CSF. Twenty seven patients received this regimen as 2nd line therapy, five patients as 3rd line and two patients as 4th line therapy after having failed taxane- and/or anthracycline-based chemotherapy or other drug combinations. After a median of six courses, an overall response rate of 26% (9 PR in 34 enrolled patients) was observed; 14 patients had disease stabilization (41%), and eight (24%) progressed. Three patients were not evaluable for response due to anaphylaxis after the first course and protracted thrombocytopenia. The median TTP was 7.5 months, and median overall survival was 15 months. Myelosuppression was the most frequently observed toxicity. Non-haematological side effects were generally mild to moderate. Our data suggest that gemcitabine and liposomal doxorubicin±G-CSF is an effective and fairly well tolerated regimen for chemotherapeutically pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer.

Amonafide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer

In a phase II study, 32 patients with advanced breast cancer previously unexposed to palliative cytotoxic chemotherapy were treated with amonafide, 800-900 mg intravenously over 3 h repeated every 4 weeks. Objective response was seen in 8 patients including 1 complete response, 10 patients had stable disease and 14 patients progressed so the overall response was 25% (95% confidence interval, 11-43%). The most frequently encountered side-effects were haematological (granulocytopenia > or = WHO grade 3 was encountered in 7/24 patients at 800 mg/m2 and in 3/8 patients at 900 mg/m2 amonafide) and nausea/vomiting (62%), despite prophylactic use of ondansetron. Non-haematological severe adverse reactions included neurotoxicity WHO grade 3 in 1 patient and orthostatic hypotension WHO grade 4 in another. In summary, the results of this trial suggest a limited therapeutic index of amonafide if used at this dose with this administration schedule.

MDR1 RNA transcripts do not indicate long-term prognosis in colorectal carcinomas

Because P-glycoprotein expression might be associated with a more aggressive behaviour of colorectal carcinomas (Weinstein et al., Cancer Res, 1991, 51, 2720-2726), we determined the relationship between MDR1 RNA expression of the carcinomas and the survival of the patients. At a median duration of follow-up of 86 months, event-free survival of patients with MDR1 RNA-negative tumours (n = 35) was not significantly different to that of patients with MDR1 RNA positive tumours (n = 67). Among the different tumour stages, event-free survival of the patients was also independent of MDR1 gene expression of the tumours. Thus, these findings do not support the hypothesis that local aggressiveness of P-glycoprotein positive tumour cells translates into worse clinical outcome.