Maurizio Tonato

Guideline update for MASCC and ESMO in the prevention of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: results of the Perugia consensus conference

Despite the relevant progress achieved in the last 20 years,vomiting and, especially, nausea, continue to be two of themost distressing side-effects of cancer chemotherapy. In the late1990s several professional organizations publishedrecommendations on the optimal antiemetic prophylaxis inpatients submitted to chemotherapy and radiotherapy.Subsequently, due to the emergence of new findings and newantiemetic agents since the first recommendations from 1997,representatives from several oncology societies met in Perugia,Italy, in 2004 and updated the antiemetic guidelines. On 20–21June 2009 the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO)and the Multinational Association of Supportive Care inCancer (MASCC) organized the third Consensus Conferenceon antiemetics in Perugia. The results of this Conference arereported in this paper.The methodology for the guideline process was based ona literature review through 1 June 2009 using MEDLINE(National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA) and otherdatabases, with evaluation of the evidence by an expert panelcomposed of 23 oncology professionals in clinical medicine,medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology,oncology nursing, statistics, pharmacy, pharmacology, medicalpolicy and decision making. With the participating expertscoming from 10 different countries, on five continents, webelieve that this is the most representative and evidence-basedguideline process that has yet been performed.The panel comprised 10 committees dealing with majortopics in this field (e.g. acute or delayed nausea and vomitinginduced by highly emetogenic chemotherapy). Althoughprevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting inducedby highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC andMEC) had specific committees, these worked finally together, as

Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized phase III study of the Italian Lung Cancer Project.

PURPOSE To compare gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) with mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (MIC) chemotherapy in patients with stage IIIB (limited to T4 for pleural effusion and N3 for supraclavicular lymph nodes) or stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The end points were the evaluation of quality of life (QoL), response rates, survival, and toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three hundred seven patients were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 2, every 28 days, or mitomycin 6 mg/m(2), ifosfamide 3,000 mg/m(2), and mesna on day 1 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 2, every 28 days. The whole-blood cell count was repeated on day 1 in both arms and weekly in the GC arm before each gemcitabine administration. RESULTS No major differences in changes in QoL were observed between the two treatment arms. The objective response rate was 38% in the GC arm compared with 26% in the MIC arm (P =.029). The median survival time was 8.6 months in the GC arm and 9.6 months in the MIC arm (P =.877, log-rank test). Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was significantly worse in the GC arm (64% v 28%, P <.001), whereas grade 3 and 4 alopecia was reported more commonly in the MIC arm (39% v 12%, P <. 001). CONCLUSION We report an increased response rate without changes in QoL and a similar overall survival, time to progression, and time to treatment failure for the GC when compared with the MIC regimen in the treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study.

PURPOSE The nucleoside analog, gemcitabine, has shown activity as a single agent in the treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Its combination with cisplatin in preclinical models suggested synergy between the two drugs. The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and toxicity of the cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-eight consecutive previously untreated NSCLC patients entered the trial from January to June 1994. The median age was 60 years (range, 37 to 70) and performance status (PS) was 0 or 1; 22 patients had unresectable stage III disease (21 stage IIIB and one stage IIIA) and 26 had stage IV disease. Gemcitabine 1 g/m2 was administered weekly (days 1, 8, and 15) followed by a 1-week rest and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 2 of each 28-day cycle. Survival and response were determined in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle in all enrolled patients. RESULTS Of 48 assessable patients, one (stage IV) had a complete response (CR) and 25 achieved a partial response (PR). The overall response rate was 54% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40% to 68%). Thrombocytopenia was the main side effect, with 52% of patients experiencing grade III to IV toxicity, which was usually short-lived and responsible for the omission of gemcitabine administration on day 15 in 50% of chemotherapy courses. The median survival time was 61.5 weeks (95% CI, 40 to 71). CONCLUSION The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin induced a high response rate in both stage IIIB and IV NSCLC, with modest side effects. The regimen deserves further careful evaluation in a phase III prospective randomized trial.

Prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis: a double-blind multicenter randomized crossover study comparing ondansetron and ondansetron plus dexamethasone.

Ondansetron (OND) is a new 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that give complete protection from emesis/nausea in approximately 50% of cisplatin (CDDP)-treated patients. To evaluate if dexamethasone (DEX) added to OND increases antiemetic efficacy, we carried out a double-blind randomized crossover study to compare the antiemetic activity of OND with OND plus DEX. One hundred two chemotherapy-naive patients (44 women and 58 men) scheduled to receive CDDP chemotherapy at doses greater than or equal to 50 mg/m2 entered the study. Eighty-nine patients completed both cycles with the following results: complete protection from emesis/nausea was obtained in 57/59 patients (64.0%/66.3%) with OND and in 81/79 (91.0%/88.8%) with OND plus DEX (P = .0005/P = .0021). At the end of the study, 53% of the patients expressed a treatment preference, and of these, 74% chose OND plus DEX compared with 26% who preferred OND alone, a statistically significant difference (P less than .003). Side effects were very mild and not significantly different between the two treatments. We conclude that OND plus DEX is more efficacious than OND in protecting patients from CDDP-induced emesis and nausea.

Treatment of Metastatic Malignant Melanoma with Dacarbazine plus Tamoxifen

BACKGROUND Endocrine factors may affect the clinical course of malignant melanoma and the response to the treatment of this disease. The presence of estrogen receptors in melanomas has been suggested, and occasional responses to antiestrogen therapy have been reported. METHODS AND RESULTS We randomly assigned 117 patients with metastatic malignant melanoma to treatment with dacarbazine alone or dacarbazine in combination with tamoxifen. The overall rate of response, measured objectively, was higher (28 percent vs. 12 percent, P = 0.03) and survival was longer (median, 48 vs. 29 weeks, P = 0.02) among the patients who received dacarbazine plus tamoxifen than among those who received dacarbazine alone. Among women, both the response rate (38 percent vs. 10 percent, P = 0.04) and the median survival (69 vs. 30 weeks, P = 0.008) were better with dacarbazine plus tamoxifen than with dacarbazine alone, whereas among men the differences were smaller and not statistically significant. Among the patients given dacarbazine alone, there were no significant differences between women and men in response rate (10 percent vs. 13 percent) or survival (30 vs. 27 weeks), whereas among those given dacarbazine plus tamoxifen, women had better outcomes, as indicated by both response rate (38 percent vs. 19 percent, P = 0.15) and survival (69 vs. 31 weeks, P = 0.02). When we analyzed the Quetelet body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) as an indirect indicator of the levels of endogenous estrogens in postmenopausal women and in men, survival was not affected by the body-mass index in the group given dacarbazine alone, whereas in the group given dacarbazine plus tamoxifen, survival was longer among patients whose Quetelet index was above the median value than among those with a Quetelet index lower than the median value (60 vs. 26 weeks, P less than 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma, dacarbazine plus tamoxifen is more effective than dacarbazine alone, as indicated by both the response rate and the median survival; the difference in efficacy is among women.

Transcripts in pretreatment biopsies from a three-arm randomized trial in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

Non-small-cell lung cancer patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis show marginal response to chemotherapy in terms of tumor shrinkage, time to progression and median survival. The identification and implementation of predictive genetic markers of response-specific cytotoxic drugs is a priority of current research and future trials. In this study, we have used quantitative PCR to analyse expression of β-tubulin III, stathmin, RRM1, COX-2 and GSTP1 in mRNA isolated from paraffin-embedded tumor biopsies of 75 nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients treated as part of a large randomized trial. In total, 22 patients were treated with gemcitabine/cisplatin, 25 with vinorelbine/cisplatin and 28 with paclitaxel/carboplatin. There were no differences in clinical characteristics and transcript levels in the pretreatment biopsies according to treatment arm. Patients with low β-tubulin III levels had better response in the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm (P=0.05), and those with low RRM1 levels showed a tendency to better response in the gemcitabine/cisplatin arm. Time to progression was influenced by β-tubulin III (P=0.03) and stathmin (P=0.05) levels in the vinorelbine/cisplatin arm, and there was a tendency toward correlation between β-tubulin III levels and time to progression in the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm. RRM1 levels influenced time to progression (P=0.05) and even more so, survival (P=0.0028) in the gemcitabine/cisplatin arm. The predictive value of β-tubulin III, stathmin and RRM1 should be tested in prospective customized chemotherapy trials, the results of which will help tailor chemotherapy to improve patient survival.

Evaluation of new antiemetic agents and definition of antineoplastic agent emetogenicity--an update.

Development of effective antiemetic therapy depends upon an understanding of both the antiemetic agents and the emetogenic challenges these agents are designed to address. New potential antiemetic agents should be studied in an orderly manner, proceeding from phase I to phase II open-label trials and then to randomized double-blind phase III trials comparing new agents and regimens to best standard therapy. Use of placebos in place of antiemetic therapy against highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy is unacceptable. Nausea and vomiting should be evaluated separately and for both the acute and delayed periods. Defining the emetogenicity of new antineoplastic agents is a challenge, since such data are often not reliably recorded during early drug development. A four-level classification system is proposed for emetogenicity of intravenous antineoplastic agents. A separate four-level classification system for emetogenicity of oral antineoplastic agents, which are often given over an extended period of time, is also proposed.

Radiation therapy in metastatic spinal cord compression. A prospective analysis of 105 consecutive patients

One hundred thirty consecutive patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) were entered in a therapeutic protocol in which radiation therapy (RT) played the main role. When MSCC is diagnosed by clinical‐radiologic methods such as myelography with or without computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), steroids are given and RT treatment started within 24 hours. When diagnostic doubts exist or stabilization is necessary, surgery precedes RT. Chemohormonal potentially responsive tumors are also treated with chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Twelve patients (9.2%) underwent surgery plus RT, and 118 (90.8%) received RT alone. Thirteen (11%) early death patients were not evaluable. The 105 evaluable cases that received RT alone were analyzed. Median follow‐up was 15 months (range, 4 to 38 months). Response among patients with back pain was 80%. In cases with motor dysfunction, 48.6% improved, and in 33 of 105 patients (31.4%) without motor disability there was no deterioration. Forty percent of patients with autonomic dysfunction responded to RT. Median survival time was 7 months with a 36% probability of survival for 1 year. The median duration of improvement was 8 months. The most important prognostic factor was early diagnosis. Radiosensitivity of tumor was only important in paraparetic patients in predicting response to RT. Complete myelographic block significantly diminished response to RT. Vertebral collapse did not influence response or survival.

Antiemetic activity of high doses of metoclopramide combined with methylprednisolone versus metoclopramide alone in cisplatin-treated cancer patients: a randomized double-blind trial of the Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research.

We designed a multicenter, double-blind randomized study to determine the safety and antiemetic effectiveness of intravenous (IV) methylprednisolone (P) combined with high-dose IV metoclopramide (MTC) v MTC alone in 200 untreated cancer patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy. One hundred eighty-five patients were evaluable for treatment efficacy. MTC plus P was significantly superior to MTC alone in reducing the number and length of vomiting episodes (P = .001 and P = .0008, respectively) and the maximal intensity of nausea (P = .0124 with a score system; P = .0155 with a linear analogue scale) and length of nausea (P = .0056). The subgroup with a major incidence of nausea and vomiting was women, especially young women, outpatients, and those treated with higher doses of cisplatin. Side effects were low and equally distributed between the two treatment groups. We conclude that MTC plus P has greater antiemetic activity than MTC alone in patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy.

High coexpression of both insulin-like growth factor receptor-1 (IGFR-1) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is associated with shorter disease-free survival in resected non-small-cell lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND Insulin-like growth factor receptor-1 (IGFR-1) represents a novel molecular target in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). IGFR-1 and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) activation is essential to mediate tumor cell survival, proliferation and invasion. We explored the correlation between IGFR-1 and EGFR, their relationship with clinicopathological parameters and their impact on outcome in resected stage I-III NSCLC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Tumors from 125 surgical NSCLC patients were evaluated for IGFR-1 and EGFR expression by immunohistochemistry. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival and time to recurrence were calculated for clinical variables and biologic markers using the Cox model for multivariate analysis. RESULTS IGFR-1 protein overexpression was detected in 36.0% of NSCLC patients and was associated with larger tumor size (P = 0.04) but not with other clinical or biological characteristics. EGFR protein overexpression was observed in 55.2% of NSCLC, more frequently in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) than non-SCC (63.7% versus 36.3%, chi(2) = 9.8, P = 0.001). IGFR-1 protein expression was associated with EGFR protein expression (P = 0.03). At the multivariate analysis, high coexpression of both IGFR-1 and EGFR was a significant prognostic factor of worse disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio 2.51, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION A statistically significant association was observed between high coexpression of both IGFR-1 and EGFR and worse DFS in early NSCLC patients.