Kenneth S. Wilson

Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in node-positive premenopausal women with breast cancer

BACKGROUND Radiotherapy after mastectomy to treat early breast cancer has been known since the 1940s to reduce rates of local relapse. However, the routine use of postoperative radiotherapy began to decline in the 1980s because it failed to improve overall survival. We prospectively tested the efficacy of combining radiotherapy with chemotherapy. METHODS From 1978 through 1986, 318 premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned, after modified radical mastectomy, to receive chemotherapy plus radiotherapy or chemotherapy alone. Radiotherapy was given to the chest wall and locoregional lymph nodes between the fourth and fifth cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. RESULTS After 15 years of follow-up, the women assigned to chemotherapy plus radiotherapy had a 33 percent reduction in the rate of recurrence (relative risk, 0.67; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.50 to 0.90) and a 29 percent reduction in mortality from breast cancer (relative risk, 0.71; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.99), as compared with the women treated with chemotherapy alone. CONCLUSIONS Radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy after modified radical mastectomy decreases rates of locoregional and systemic relapse and reduces mortality from breast cancer.

Effect of daily etidronate on the osteolysis of multiple myeloma.

Progressive bone disease in multiple myeloma frequently leads to osteolysis, bone resorption, pathologic fractures, vertebral compression, and hypercalcemia. We conducted a double-blind study in 173 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients of etidronate disodium (EHDP), a diphosphonate compound that reduces bone resorption by inhibiting osteoclastic activity. The patients were randomly assigned to receive oral EHDP 5 mg/kg/d or placebo until death or discontinuation due to intolerance or refusal. The extent of vertebral deformity was measured by a vertebral index as well as height. The frequency of pathologic fractures, hypercalcemia, and bone pain was regularly assessed, as well as size and number of osteolytic lesions. All patients received melphalan and prednisone daily for 4 days every 4 weeks as the primary chemotherapy for their disease. Although the repeated measures analysis showed a significant height loss, there was no difference between treatment arms (P = .98). There was no significant difference in bone pain, episodes of hypercalcemia, or development of pathologic fractures. Patients on EHDP showed less deterioration in their vertebral index, but this difference only approached statistical significance (P = .07). We conclude that EHDP therapy used in this dosage schedule does not have a clinically significant impact in multiple myeloma.

Phase III double-blind comparison of dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron and an evaluation of the additive role of dexamethasone in the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting due to moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

PURPOSE To compare the efficacy of dolasetron and ondansetron in controlling nausea and vomiting in the first 24 hours; to evaluate the efficacy when dexamethasone is added to either drug in the first 24 hours; and to extend these comparisons over 7 days in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized study with six parallel arms that used a 2 x 2 factorial design in chemotherapy-naive patients. In arm 1, dolasetron (2.4 mg/kg) was given intravenously (I.V.) prechemotherapy, followed 24 hours later by oral dolasetron (200 mg once daily) for 6 days. Arms 2 and 3 consisted of dolasetron and dexamethasone 8 mg I.V., followed 24 hours later by oral dexamethasone (8 mg once daily) in one arm, and oral dexamethasone and dolasetron in the other, also for 6 days. In arms 4, 5, and 6, ondansetron (32 mg I.V. or 8 mg orally twice daily) was administered in a similar manner to arms 1, 2, and 3 before and 24 hours after chemotherapy. Mean nausea severity (MNS) was assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS) in a daily diary. RESULTS Of 703 patients enrolled, 696 were eligible. There were 343 dolasetron- and 353 ondansetron-treated patients; 57% of dolasetron-treated patients had complete protection in the first 24 hours versus 67% of patients who received ondansetron (P = .013). MNS was also more pronounced on the dolasetron arm (P = .051). Sixty-seven percent of patients who received added dexamethasone in the first 24 hours had complete protection, compared with 55% without dexamethasone (P < .001). MNS was significantly reduced with the addition of dexamethasone (P < .001). At 7 days, dolasetron and ondansetron had equivalent complete protection rates (36% and 39%, respectively). With the addition of dexamethasone, 48% of patients compared with 28% had complete protection (P < .001). MNS was significantly improved with added dexamethasone (P < .001). CONCLUSION At the doses used, dolasetron was significantly less effective than ondansetron at controlling nausea and vomiting in the first 24 hours in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, but there was no demonstrable difference between both drugs over 7 days. The addition of dexamethasone significantly improved the efficacy of both drugs in the first 24 hours and over 7 days.

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.

Adjuvant systemic therapy and survival after breast cancer

BACKGROUND AND METHODS We examined the effect of adjuvant systemic therapy on survival after breast cancer among the residents of the Canadian province of British Columbia. Data on survival were collected for all women in whom breast cancer was diagnosed in British Columbia during each of three calendar years chosen to represent different province-wide treatment recommendations: 1974, when no adjuvant systemic therapy was recommended; 1980, when adjuvant chemotherapy was recommended only for premenopausal women with node-positive disease; and 1984, when adjuvant chemotherapy was also recommended for premenopausal women with node-negative disease and lymphatic, vascular, or neural invasion and tamoxifen was recommended for postmenopausal women with involved lymph nodes or lymphatic, vascular, or neural invasion unless their tumors were negative for estrogen receptors. RESULTS For women less than 50 years of age, disease-specific survival at seven years (i.e., with censoring of data on women who died from causes other than breast cancer) improved from 65.2 to 76.3 percent between 1974 and 1984 (P = 0.008), and overall survival improved from 64.8 to 74.6 percent (P = 0.02). For women from 50 through 89 years of age, disease-specific survival at seven years improved from 62.5 to 70.4 percent between 1980 and 1984 (P = 0.001), and overall survival improved from 53.9 to 58.3 percent (P = 0.05). The timing of the improvements in survival correlated with the introduction of adjuvant systemic therapy in each group. CONCLUSIONS Survival among women with breast cancer improved significantly in a geographically defined population during the period when adjuvant systemic therapy became widely used.

Metastatic Leydig cell tumor of the testis: report of three cases and review of the literature

Metastatic Leydig cell carcinomas account for less than 0.2% of all testicular cancers, and may be associated with sex hormone production. Leydig cell carcinoma is relatively refractory to radiotherapy and chemotherapy, and median survival of patients with metastatic disease is less than 2 years. Presented are three cases of metastatic Leydig cell cancer, and a review of the literature pertaining to this rare tumor.

A randomised comparison of melphalan with prednisone or dexamethasone as induction therapy and dexamethasone or observation as maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma: NCIC CTG MY.7

The effectiveness of melphalan plus dexamethasone (M‐Dex) with melphalan plus prednisone (MP) as induction therapy and dexamethasone with observation as maintenance therapy was compared in 585 older patients with multiple myeloma. Randomization to the M‐Dex arm was stopped as a result of an analysis performed which met a predetermined event‐related criterion. Of 466 patients randomised to MP or M‐Dex, no differences were detected in the respective median progression‐free survivals (PFS) [1·8 vs. 1·9 years; Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0·88, 95% CI 0·72–1·07; P = 0·2] or overall survivals (OS) (2·5 vs. 2·7 years; HR = 0·91, 95% CI 0·74–1·11; P = 0·3). Of the initial 585 patients, 292 remained evaluable for maintenance therapy. Patients randomised to maintenance dexamethasone had a superior median PFS (2·8 years vs. 2·1 years; HR = 0·61, 95% CI 0·47–0·79; P = 0·0002). No difference in median OS was detected (4·1 years vs. 3·8 years; HR = 0·88, 95% CI 0·65–1·18; P = 0·4). The maintenance therapy results were robust when analysed by using two additional methodologies. Dexamethasone did not improve clinical outcome when combined with melphalan during induction; maintenance dexamethasone improved PFS, but this did not translate into a detectable survival advantage.

CHOP-R therapy overcomes the adverse prognostic influence of BCL-2 expression in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

BCL-2 protein expression correlates with shorter survival in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are treated with CHOP chemotherapy. We report a retrospective analysis of the prognostic significance of BCL-2 status in patients who received CHOP with the addition of rituximab (CHOP-R) for DLBCL. Patients over 15 years of age with de novo, HIV negative DLBCL, without CNS involvement, and known BCL-2 protein status were identified from the BCCA Lymphoid Cancer Database. BCL-2 tumour positivity was defined as over 50% of tumour cells with BCL-2 protein expression. 140 patients who received CHOP-R were analysed. The majority (59%) of patients were over 60 years of age. Disease stage distribution was limited (22%) and advanced (78%). BCL-2 protein expression was observed in 90 (64%) cases. IPI score was similar in both BCL-2 positive and negative cases. Median follow-up time for living patients is 40 months. BCL-2 status did not predict for either progression-free or overall survival. IPI score was predictive for progression-free survival but not overall survival. The addition of rituximab to CHOP chemotherapy negates the adverse prognostic influence of BCL-2 protein expression on progression free and overall survival in DLBCL.

The role of the 5-HT3 antagonists ondansetron and dolasetron in the control of delayed onset nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND 5-HT3 antagonists are effective in reducing the acute nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. However, it is not clear whether continuing these agents beyond twenty four hours is useful in controlling emesis on days two to seven after chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Four hundred seven patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy who had been given dexamethasone 8 mg i.v. and either ondansetron 32 mg i.v. or dolasetron 2.4 mg/kg i.v. were randomized to continue either an oral form of their 5-HT3 antagonist (ondansetron 8 mg b.i.d. or dolasetron 200 mg daily) plus dexamethasone 8 mg p.o. daily or dexamethasone alone for days two to seven. Endpoints assessed by self-report were: 1) complete control (no vomiting, no rescue medications, no missing data) of emesis; 2) nausea severity; and 3) quality-of-life as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. RESULTS Continuation of 5-HT3 antagonists improved slightly, but not significantly, the complete control rate (47% vs. 41%: P = 0.24 one-sided) after chemotherapy. However, mean nausea severity was significantly (P = 0.015 one sided) reduced (by 3 mm on a 10 cm scale) on the combined arm. Minimal differences in quality of life were observed. CONCLUSION The benefit of continuing 5-HT3 antagonists beyond 24 hours is modest and the merits of routine use in these circumstances debatable.

Cyclophosphamide and fluorouracil combined with mitoxantrone versus doxorubicin for breast cancer: superiority of doxorubicin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a randomized, multicenter study of intravenous cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 plus fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 combined with either mitoxantrone (Novantrone, Lederle Cyanamid Canada Ltd, Willowdale, Ontario) 10 mg/m2 (CNF) or doxorubicin (Adriamycin, Adria Laboratories of Canada Ltd, Mississauga, Ontario) 50 mg/m2 (CAF) every 3 weeks in advanced breast cancer. RESULTS The response rate in 249 randomized patients was 36% with CNF (44 of 121) and 48% with CAF (62 of 128) (P = .054), with complete remissions in 10 patients (8.3%) on CNF and in 13 (10.2%) on CAF. If only fully assessable patients are considered, the response rate was 48% (44 of 91) with CNF and 60% (62 of 103) with CAF (P = .098). At time of analysis, all except 10 patients (one CNF and nine CAF) had died. The median survival time with CAF was longer than with CNF (15.2 v 10.9 months; P = .003), and time to progression was also longer with CAF (5.3 v 3.2 months; P < .03). Survival differences remained significant (P = .006) if patients who failed to meet all eligibility criteria were excluded. Favorable prognostic factors for survival in a Cox regression model included good performance status (P < .0001); less than two organ systems involved by tumor (P < .0001); no involvement of lung, liver, or brain (P < .003); involvement of bone or bone marrow (P < .009), prior surgery for breast cancer (P < .006); being premenopausal (P < .03); > or = 3 years from diagnosis until randomization on this study (P < .03); and treatment with CAF (P < .03). Alopecia > or = grade 3 was reported in 55% of patients with CAF and 12% of patients with CNF (P < .001), while other > or = grade 3 toxicities did not differ significantly. Priestman-Baum quality-of-life assessment was comparable on the two study arms. CONCLUSION In patients with advanced breast cancer, CAF was associated with longer survival than was CNF, with an increase in alopecia, but not in other toxicities.