Mark Jitlal

Cisplatin and gemcitabine for advanced biliary tract cancer: a meta-analysis of two randomised trials

BACKGROUND Two recent studies (ABC-02 [UK] and BT22 [Japan]) have demonstrated the superiority of cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) chemotherapy over gemcitabine (Gem) alone for patients with pathologically proven advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC: cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder and ampullary cancers). This pre-planned analysis evaluates the efficacy of CisGem with increased statistical power. PATIENTS AND METHODS We carried out a meta-analysis of individual patient-level data of these studies to establish the effect of CisGem versus Gem on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and carried out exploratory subgroup analyses. RESULTS CisGem demonstrates a significant improvement in PFS [hazard ratio (HR)=0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.76, P<0.001] and OS (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.78, P<0.001) over Gem. This effect is most marked among patients with good performance status (PS 0-1): HR for PFS is 0.61 (95% CI 0.51-0.74), P<0.001 and OS HR=0.64 (95% CI 0.53-0.77), P<0.001. CisGem resulted in improved PFS and OS for intra- and extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinomas and gallbladder cancer. The treatment effect between UK and Japanese patients was consistent with respect to OS (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.53-0.79 and 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-1.03, respectively); with similar OS in the combination arms (median 11.7 and 11.1 months, respectively). Subgroups least likely to benefit included patients with ampullary tumours and poor performance status (PS2). CONCLUSIONS CisGem is the standard of care for the first-line treatment of good-PS patients with advanced BTC regardless of ethnicity. Future studies should aim to enhance the effectiveness of this regimen in the first-line setting, establish the role of subsequent (second-line) therapy and assess the role of rationally developed molecular-targeted therapies.

Anti-angiogenic Therapy Using Thalidomide Combined With Chemotherapy in Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND Cancer cells rely on angiogenesis for growth and dissemination, and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly angiogenic tumor. We evaluated thalidomide, an anti-angiogenic agent, when combined with chemotherapy and as maintenance treatment. METHODS A total of 724 patients (51% with limited and 49% with extensive disease) were randomly assigned to receive placebo or thalidomide capsules, 100-200 mg daily for up to 2 years. All patients received etoposide and carboplatin every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Endpoints were overall survival, progression-free survival, tumor response rate, toxicity, and quality of life (QoL). Hazard ratios (HRs) for comparing thalidomide against placebo were estimated using Cox regression modeling. Statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS The median overall survival was 10.5 months (placebo) and 10.1 months (thalidomide) (HR for death = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.93 to 1.27; P = .28). Among patients with limited-stage disease, there was no evidence of a survival difference (HR for death = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.73 to 1.15), but among patients with extensive disease, survival was worse in the thalidomide group (HR for death = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.68). Progression-free survival rates were also similar in the two groups (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.24). Thalidomide was associated with an increased risk of having a thrombotic event, mainly pulmonary embolus and deep vein thrombosis (19% thalidomide vs 10% placebo; HR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.41 to 3.20; P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between treatments in hematological and nonhematological toxic effects, except more patients in the thalidomide group had rash, constipation, or neuropathy. Overall, QoL scores were similar in the two treatment groups, but thalidomide was associated with less insomnia and diarrhea and more constipation and peripheral neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS In this large randomized trial, thalidomide in combination with chemotherapy did not improve survival of patients with SCLC but was associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events.

Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Thalidomide in Combination With Gemcitabine and Carboplatin in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE Cancers rely on angiogenesis for their growth and dissemination. We hypothesized that thalidomide, an oral antiangiogenic agent, when combined with chemotherapy, and as maintenance treatment, would improve survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Seven hundred twenty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or thalidomide capsules 100 to 200 mg daily for up to 2 years. All patients received gemcitabine and carboplatin every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. End points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, grade 3/4 toxicity, and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS The median OS rates were 8.9 months (placebo) and 8.5 months (thalidomide). The hazard ratio (HR) was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.32; P = .12). The 2-year survival rate was 16% and 12% in the placebo and thalidomide arms, respectively. The PFS results were consistent with those for OS. The risk of having a thrombotic event was increased by 74% in the thalidomide group: HR of 1.74 (95% CI, 1.20 to 2.52; P = .003). There were no differences in hematologic toxicities, but a slight excess of rash and neuropathy in the thalidomide group. QoL scores were similar but thalidomide was associated with less insomnia, and more constipation and peripheral neuropathy. In a retrospective analysis, patients with nonsquamous histology in the thalidomide group had a poorer survival: 2-year risk difference of 10% (95% CI, 4% to 16%; P < .001). CONCLUSION In this large trial of patients with NSCLC, thalidomide in combination with chemotherapy did not improve survival overall, but increased the risk of thrombotic events. Unexpectedly, survival was significantly worse in patients with nonsquamous histology.

The influence of sex and histology on outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of five randomized trials.

BACKGROUND Some non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgical series have indicated that the positive prognostic effect of female sex is limited to patients with adenocarcinoma. We carried out a retrospective analysis to investigate the role of sex and histology on efficacy, toxicity, and dose delivery after chemotherapy. PATIENT AND METHODS Individual patient data were pooled from five randomized, phase III, advanced NSCLC chemotherapy trials. Primary outcomes were response rate, overall survival (OS), toxicity, and dose delivery. A secondary analysis examined survival by sex in histological subgroups. RESULTS Of 2349 patients, 34% were women. Women had a higher response rate to chemotherapy (42% versus 40%, P = 0.01) and longer survival than men (median OS 9.6 versus 8.6 months, P = 0.002). The difference in OS remained after adjusting for age, stage, performance status, and histology (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.92, P = 0.0005). Upon further examination, longer survival in women was only seen in patients with adenocarcinoma (test for interaction P = 0.006). There were no differences in hematological toxicity or transfusions. Women experienced more grade 3-4 emesis than men (P < 0.0001) and more dose delays (P = 0.02) or dose reductions (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION The positive prognostic effect among women is confirmed in patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy but appears confined to those with adenocarcinoma histology.

Prognostic factors for recurrence and survival in anal cancer

Only 2 prospective studies have previously reported prognostic factors for anal cancer, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 22861 (EORTC 22861) and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 98‐11 (RTOG 98‐11). Both of those trials reported that clinically positive lymph nodes and male sex predicted poorer overall survival (OS). The EORTC 22861 trial indicated that the same factors were prognostic for locoregional control. In the current report, the authors investigated potential prognostic factors from the first United Kingdom Coordinating Committee on Cancer Research Anal Cancer Trial (ACT I), in which patients were randomized to receive either radiotherapy alone or chemoradiation (CRT) with concurrent 5‐fluorouracil/mitomycin C.

“Mind the Gap”—The Impact of Variations in the Duration of the Treatment Gap and Overall Treatment Time in the First UK Anal Cancer Trial (ACT I)

PURPOSE The United Kingdom Coordinating Committee on Cancer Research anal cancer trial demonstrated the benefit of combined modality treatment (CMT) using radiotherapy (RT), infusional 5-fluorouracil, and mitomycin C over RT alone. The present study retrospectively examines the impact of the recommended 6-week treatment gap and local RT boost on long-term outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 577 patients were randomly assigned RT alone or CMT. After a 6-week gap responders received a boost using either additional external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) (15 Gy) or iridium-192 implant (25 Gy). The effect of boost, the gap between initial treatment (RT alone or CMT) and boost (Tgap), and overall treatment time (OTT) were examined for their impact on outcome. RESULTS Among the 490 good responders, 436 (89%) patients received a boost after initial treatment. For boosted patients, the risk of anal cancer death decreased by 38% (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62, 99% CI 0.35-1.12; p=0.04), but there was no evidence this was mediated via a reduction in locoregional failure (LRF) (HR: 0.90, 99% CI 0.48-1.68; p=0.66). The difference in Tgap was only 1.4 days longer for EBRT boost, compared with implant (p=0.51). OTT was longer by 6.1 days for EBRT (p=0.006). Tgap and OTT were not associated with LRF. Radionecrosis was reported in 8% of boosted, compared with 0% in unboosted patients (p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS These results question the benefit of a radiotherapy boost after a 6-week gap. The higher doses of a boost may contribute more to an increased risk of late morbidity, rather than local control.

Inhibition of Carboplatin-Induced DNA Interstrand Cross-link Repair by Gemcitabine in Patients Receiving these Drugs for Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer

Background: The potential of gemcitabine to interact with carboplatin was explored in a phase II trial in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Peripheral blood lymphocytes were sampled after drug administration to measure DNA interstrand cross-link formation and repair. Patients and Methods: Forty patients received carboplatin target area under concentration-time curve (AUC 4) followed by gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 with a second dose of gemcitabine on day 8. Peripheral blood lymphocytes were obtained in 12 patients before and at intervals during the first cycle of chemotherapy. DNA cross-link formation and repair (unhooking) were measured by the single-cell gel electrophoresis (comet) assay following ex vivo incubation. Results: The global response rate was 47% (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors rate, 29%; CA125 rate, 63%). Delays in treatment were seen in 24% of cycles largely due to myelosuppression; 15% of day 8 administration was omitted. Peak carboplatin-induced DNA cross-linking was seen by 24 hours. Significant reduction was seen in the repair of in vivo carboplatin-induced DNA cross-links following administration of gemcitabine. Conclusion: An enhanced activity of carboplatin in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer may be due to synergy with gemcitabine through inhibition of repair of DNA cross-links. Future studies should explore coadministration of these drugs, as this may be a more effective schedule. Clin Cancer Res; 16(19); 4899–905. ©2010 AACR.

Stopping clinical trials early for futility: retrospective analysis of several randomised clinical studies

Background:Many clinical trials show no overall benefit. We examined futility analyses applied to trials with different effect sizes.Methods:Ten randomised cancer trials were retrospectively analysed; target sample size reached in all. The hazard ratio indicated no overall benefit (n=5), or moderate (n=4) or large (n=1) treatment effects. Futility analyses were applied after 25, 50 and 75% of events were observed, or patients were recruited. Outcomes were conditional power (CP), and time and cost savings.Results:Futility analyses could stop some trials with no benefit, but not all. After observing 50% of the target number of events, 3 out of 5 trials with no benefit could be stopped early (low CP⩽15%). Trial duration for two studies could be reduced by 4–24 months, saving £44 000–231 000, but the third had already stopped recruiting, hence no savings were made. However, of concern was that 2 of the 4 trials with moderate treatment effects could be stopped early at some point, although they eventually showed worthwhile benefits.Conclusions:Careful application of futility can lead to future patients in a trial not being given an ineffective treatment, and should therefore be used more often. A secondary consideration is that it could shorten trial duration and reduce costs. However, studies with modest treatment effects could be inappropriately stopped early. Unless there is very good evidence for futility, it is often best to continue to the planned end.

Analysis of circulating angiogenic biomarkers from patients in two phase III trials in lung cancer of chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy and thalidomide.

Background:Thalidomide has potent anti-inflammatory and anti-angiogenic properties. It was evaluated in combination with chemotherapy in two randomised placebo-controlled trials in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC, n=724) and advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, n=722). Neither study demonstrated an improvement in overall survival with the addition of thalidomide to chemotherapy. This study investigated circulating angiogenic biomarkers in a subset of these patients.Methods:Serial plasma samples were collected in a cohort of patients enrolled in these two trials (n=95). Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), soluble truncated form of VEGF receptor-2 (sVEGFR-2), interleukin-8 (IL-8), tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1) levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Results were correlated with patient clinical data including stage, response rate and progression-free survival (PFS).Results:Baseline biomarker levels were not significantly different between SCLC and NSCLC. For pooled treatment groups, limited stage SCLC was associated with lower baseline VEGF (P=0.046), sICAM-1 (P=0.008) and IL-8 (P=0.070) than extensive stage disease. Low baseline IL-8 was associated with a significantly improved PFS in both SCLC and NSCLC (P=0.028), and a greater reduction in IL-8 was associated with a significantly improved tumour response (P=0.035). Baseline angiogenic factor levels, however, did not predict response to thalidomide.Conclusion:Circulating angiogenic biomarkers did not identify patients who benefited from thalidomide treatment.

A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Ibandronate Compared With Single-Dose Radiotherapy for Localized Metastatic Bone Pain in Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND The radiotherapy or ibandronate (RIB) trial was a randomized multicenter nonblind two-arm trial to compare intravenous ibandronate given as a single infusion with single-dose radiotherapy for metastatic bone pain. METHODS Four hundred seventy prostate cancer patients with metastatic bone pain who were suitable for local radiotherapy were randomly assigned to radiotherapy (single dose, 8 Gy) or intravenous infusion of ibandronate (6mg) in a noninferiority trial. Pain was measured using the Brief Pain Inventory at baseline and four, eight, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. Pain response was assessed using World Health Organization (WHO) criteria and the Effective Analgesic Score (EAS); the maximum allowable difference was ±15%. Patients failing to respond at four weeks were offered retreatment with the alternative treatment. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed at baseline and four and 12 weeks. Because the trial was designed with a 5% one-sided test, we provide 90% confidence intervals (two-sided) for differences in pain response. RESULTS Overall, pain response was not statistically different at four or 12 weeks (WHO: -3.7%, 90% confidence interval [CI] = -12.4% to 5.0%; and 6.7%, 90% CI = -2.6 to 16.0%, respectively). Corresponding differences using the EAS were -7.5% and -3.5%. However, a more rapid initial response with radiotherapy was observed. There was no overall difference in toxicity, although each treatment had different side effects. QoL was similar at four and 12 weeks. Overall survival was similar between the two groups but was better among patients having retreatment than those who did not. CONCLUSIONS A single infusion of ibandronate had outcomes similar to a single dose of radiotherapy for metastatic prostate bone pain. Ibandronate could be considered when radiotherapy is not available.