Richard L. Schilsky

Randomized Trial of Dose-Dense Versus Conventionally Scheduled and Sequential Versus Concurrent Combination Chemotherapy as Postoperative Adjuvant Treatment of Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer: First Report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741

PURPOSE Using a 2 x 2 factorial design, we studied the adjuvant chemotherapy of women with axillary node-positive breast cancer to compare sequential doxorubicin (A), paclitaxel (T), and cyclophosphamide (C) with concurrent doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by paclitaxel (T) for disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS); to determine whether the dose density of the agents improves DFS and OS; and to compare toxicities. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 2,005 female patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following regimens: (I) sequential A x 4 (doses) --> T x 4 --> C x 4 with doses every 3 weeks, (II) sequential A x 4 --> T x 4 --> C x 4 every 2 weeks with filgrastim, (III) concurrent AC x 4 --> T x 4 every 3 weeks, or (IV) concurrent AC x 4 --> T x 4 every 2 weeks with filgrastim. RESULTS A protocol-specified analysis was performed at a median follow-up of 36 months: 315 patients had experienced relapse or died, compared with 515 expected treatment failures. Dose-dense treatment improved the primary end point, DFS (risk ratio [RR] = 0.74; P =.010), and OS (RR = 0.69; P =.013). Four-year DFS was 82% for the dose-dense regimens and 75% for the others. There was no difference in either DFS or OS between the concurrent and sequential schedules. There was no interaction between density and sequence. Severe neutropenia was less frequent in patients who received the dose-dense regimens. CONCLUSION Dose density improves clinical outcomes significantly, despite the lower than expected number of events at this time. Sequential chemotherapy is as effective as concurrent chemotherapy.

Improved Outcomes From Adding Sequential Paclitaxel but Not From Escalating Doxorubicin Dose in an Adjuvant Chemotherapy Regimen for Patients With Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer

PURPOSE This study was designed to determine whether increasing the dose of doxorubicin in or adding paclitaxel to a standard adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for breast cancer patients would prolong time to recurrence and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS After surgical treatment, 3,121 women with operable breast cancer and involved lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive a combination of cyclophosphamide (C), 600 mg/m(2), with one of three doses of doxorubicin (A), 60, 75, or 90 mg/m(2), for four cycles followed by either no further therapy or four cycles of paclitaxel at 175 mg/m(2). Tamoxifen was given to 94% of patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors. RESULTS There was no evidence of a doxorubicin dose effect. At 5 years, disease-free survival was 69%, 66%, and 67% for patients randomly assigned to 60, 75, and 90 mg/m(2), respectively. The hazard reductions from adding paclitaxel to CA were 17% for recurrence (adjusted Wald chi(2) P =.0023; unadjusted Wilcoxon P =.0011) and 18% for death (adjusted P =.0064; unadjusted P =.0098). At 5 years, the disease-free survival (+/- SE) was 65% (+/- 1) and 70% (+/- 1), and overall survival was 77% (+/- 1) and 80% (+/- 1) after CA alone or CA plus paclitaxel, respectively. The effects of adding paclitaxel were not significantly different in subsets defined by the protocol, but in an unplanned subset analysis, the hazard ratio of CA plus paclitaxel versus CA alone was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.86) for those with estrogen receptor-negative tumors and only 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.07) for patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors, almost all of whom received adjuvant tamoxifen. The additional toxicity from adding four cycles of paclitaxel was generally modest. CONCLUSION The addition of four cycles of paclitaxel after the completion of a standard course of CA improves the disease-free and overall survival of patients with early breast cancer.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Provisional Clinical Opinion: Testing for KRAS Gene Mutations in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma to Predict Response to Anti–Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibody Therapy

PURPOSE An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO), offers timely clinical direction to ASCOs oncologists following publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the utility of KRAS gene mutation testing in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy with cetuximab or panitumumab (see Note). CLINICAL CONTEXT Recent results from phase II and III clinical trials demonstrate that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer benefit from therapy with monoclonal antibodies directed against the EGFR, when used either as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy. Retrospective subset analyses of the data from these trials strongly suggest that patients who have KRAS mutations detected in codon 12 or 13 do not benefit from this therapy. RECENT DATA Five randomized controlled trials of cetuximab or panitumumab have evaluated outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma in relation to KRAS mutational status as no mutation detected (wild type) or abnormal (mutated). Another five single-arm studies have retrospectively evaluated tumor response according to KRAS status. PROVISIONAL CLINICAL OPINION Based on systematic reviews of the relevant literature, all patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma who are candidates for anti-EGFR antibody therapy should have their tumor tested for KRAS mutations in a CLIA-accredited laboratory. If KRAS mutation in codon 12 or 13 is detected, then patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma should not receive anti-EGFR antibody therapy as part of their treatment. NOTE ASCOs provisional clinical opinions (PCOs) reflect expert consensus based on clinical evidence and literature available at the time they are written, and are intended to assist physicians in clinical decision-making and identify questions and settings for further research. Due to the rapid flow of scientific information in oncology, new evidence may have emerged since the time a PCO was submitted for publication. PCOs are not continually updated and may not reflect the most recent evidence. PCOs cannot account for individual variation among patients, and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments. It is the responsibility of the treating physician or other health care provider, relying on independent experience and knowledge of the patient, to determine the best course of treatment for the patient. Accordingly, adherence to any PCO is voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patients individual circumstances. ASCO PCOs describe the use of procedures and therapies in clinical practice and cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions in the context of clinical trials. ASCO assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of ASCOs PCOs, or for any errors or omissions.

Impact of Physical Activity on Cancer Recurrence and Survival in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: Findings From CALGB 89803

PURPOSE Regular physical activity reduces the risk of developing colon cancer, however, its influence on patients with established disease is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a prospective observational study of 832 patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in a randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial. Patients reported on various recreational physical activities approximately 6 months after completion of therapy and were observed for recurrence or death. To minimize bias by occult recurrence, we excluded patients who experienced recurrence or died within 90 days of their physical activity assessment. RESULTS Compared with patients engaged in less than three metabolic equivalent task (MET) -hours per week of physical activity, the adjusted hazard ratio for disease-free survival was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.26 to 0.97) for 18 to 26.9 MET-hours per week and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.33 to 0.91) for 27 or more MET-hours per week. The adjusted P for trend was .01. Postdiagnosis activity was associated with similar improvements in recurrence-free survival (P for trend = .03) and overall survival (P for trend = .01). The benefit associated with physical activity was not significantly modified by sex, body mass index, number of positive lymph nodes, age, baseline performance status, or chemotherapy received. Moreover, the benefit remained unchanged even after excluding participants who developed cancer recurrence or died within 6 months of activity assessment. CONCLUSION Beyond surgical resection and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer, for patients who survive and are recurrence free approximately 6 months after adjuvant chemotherapy, physical activity appears to reduce the risk of cancer recurrence and mortality.

UGT1A1*28 polymorphism as a determinant of irinotecan disposition and toxicity

The metabolism of irinotecan (CPT-11) involves sequential activation to SN-38 and detoxification to the pharmacologically inactive SN-38 glucuronide (SN-38G). We have previously demonstrated the role of UGT1A1 enzyme in the glucuronidation of SN-38 and a significant correlation between in vitro glucuronidation of SN-38 and UGT1A1 gene promoter polymorphism. This polymorphism (UGT1A1*28) is characterized by the presence of an additional TA repeat in the TATA sequence of the UGT1A1 promoter, ((TA)7TAA, instead of (TA)6TAA). Here we report the results from a prospective clinical pharmacogenetic study to determine the significance of UGT1A1*28 polymorphism on irinotecan disposition and toxicity in patients with cancer. Twenty patients with solid tumors were treated with a 90 min i.v. infusion of irinotecan (300 mg m−2) once every 3 weeks. The frequency of UGT1A1 genotypes was as follows: 6/6—45%, 6/7—35% and 7/7—20%, with allele frequencies of 0.375 and 0.625 for (TA)7TAA and (TA)6TAA, respectively. Patients with the (TA)7TAA polymorphism had significantly lower SN-38 glucuronidation rates than those with the normal allele (6/6>6/7>7/7, P = 0.001). More severe grades of diarrhea and neutropenia were observed only in patients heterozygous (grade 4 diarrhea, n = 1) or homozygous (grade 3 diarrhea/grade 4 neutropenia, n = 1 and grade 3 neutropenia, n = 1) for the (TA)7TAA sequence. The results suggest that screening for UGT1A1*28 polymorphism may identify patients with lower SN-38 glucuronidation rates and greater susceptibility to irinotecan induced gastrointestinal and bone marrow toxicity.

Adjuvant Paclitaxel Plus Carboplatin Compared With Observation in Stage IB Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: CALGB 9633 With the Cancer and Leukemia Group B, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, and North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study Groups

PURPOSE Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is now accepted on the basis of several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that demonstrated improved survival. Although there is strong evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy is effective in stages II and IIIA NSCLC, its utility in stage IB disease is unclear. This report provides a mature analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9633, the only RCT designed specifically for stage IB NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Within 4 to 8 weeks of resection, patients were randomly assigned to adjuvant chemotherapy or observation. Eligible patients had pathologically confirmed T2N0 NSCLC and had undergone lobectomy or pneumonectomy. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) intravenously over 3 hours and carboplatin at an area under the curve dose of 6 mg/mL per minute intravenously over 45 to 60 minutes every 3 weeks for four cycles. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS Three hundred-forty-four patients were randomly assigned. Median follow-up was 74 months. Groups were well-balanced with regard to demographics, histology, and extent of surgery. Grades 3 to 4 neutropenia were the predominant toxicity; there were no treatment-related deaths. Survival was not significantly different (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; CI, 0.64 to 1.08; P = .12). However, exploratory analysis demonstrated a significant survival difference in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients who had tumors > or = 4 cm in diameter (HR, 0.69; CI, 0.48 to 0.99; P = .043). CONCLUSION Because a significant survival advantage was not observed across the entire cohort, adjuvant chemotherapy should not be considered standard care in stage IB NSCLC. Given the magnitude of observed survival differences, CALGB 9633 was underpowered to detect small but clinically meaningful improvements. A statistically significant survival advantage for patients who had tumors > or = 4 cm supports consideration of adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin for stage IB patients who have large tumors.

Gemcitabine Plus Bevacizumab Compared With Gemcitabine Plus Placebo in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Phase III Trial of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB 80303)

PURPOSE The combination of gemcitabine plus bevacizumab produced a 21% response rate and a median survival of 8.8 months in a multicenter phase II trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. These encouraging data led Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) to conduct a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine/bevacizumab versus gemcitabine/placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had no prior therapy for advanced disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 to 2, no tumor invasion of adjacent organs, and no increased bleeding risk. The primary end point was overall survival. Patients were stratified by performance status, extent of disease, and prior radiotherapy. Patients received gemcitabine at 1,000 mg/m(2) over 30 minutes on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days and bevacizumab at 10 mg/kg or placebo on days 1 and 15 every 28 days. RESULTS Between June 2004 and April 2006, 602 patients were enrolled onto the study and 535 were treated. Median overall survival was 5.8 months for gemcitabine/bevacizumab and 5.9 months for gemcitabine/placebo (P = .95). Median progression-free survival was 3.8 and 2.9 months, respectively (P = .07). Overall response rates were 13% and 10%, respectively. Patients with a performance status of 0, 1, and 2 survived a median of 7.9, 4.8, and 2.4 months, respectively. The only statistically significant differences in grades 3 and 4 toxicity occurred for hypertension (10% v 3%; P < .001) and proteinuria (5% v 1%; P = .002); venous thrombosis grade > or = 3 was equivalent in both arms (14% and 15%, respectively). CONCLUSION The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine does not improve survival in advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development

2-[18F]Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) assesses a fundamental property of neoplasia, the Warburg effect. This molecular imaging technique offers a complementary approach to anatomic imaging that is more sensitive and specific in certain cancers. FDG-PET has been widely applied in oncology primarily as a staging and restaging tool that can guide patient care. However, because it accurately detects recurrent or residual disease, FDG-PET also has significant potential for assessing therapy response. In this regard, it can improve patient management by identifying responders early, before tumor size is reduced; nonresponders could discontinue futile therapy. Moreover, a reduction in the FDG-PET signal within days or weeks of initiating therapy (e.g., in lymphoma, non–small cell lung, and esophageal cancer) significantly correlates with prolonged survival and other clinical end points now used in drug approvals. These findings suggest that FDG-PET could facilitate drug development as an early surrogate of clinical benefit. This article reviews the scientific basis of FDG-PET and its development and application as a valuable oncology imaging tool. Its potential to facilitate drug development in seven oncologic settings (lung, lymphoma, breast, prostate, sarcoma, colorectal, and ovary) is addressed. Recommendations include initial validation against approved therapies, retrospective analyses to define the magnitude of change indicative of response, further prospective validation as a surrogate of clinical benefit, and application as a phase II/III trial end point to accelerate evaluation and approval of novel regimens and therapies.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Statement: A Conceptual Framework to Assess the Value of Cancer Treatment Options

Health care costs in the United States present a major challenge to the national economic well being. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has projected that US health care spending will reach

Oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin: integrated efficacy data and novel analyses from two large, randomised, phase III trials.

4.3 trillion and account for 19.3% of the national gross domestic product by 2019.1 This growth in spending—both in absolute terms and as a proportion of our gross domestic product—has not been accompanied by commensurate improvements in health outcomes, despite expenditures far exceeding those of other countries.2–4 One of the fastest growing components of US health care costs is cancer care, the cost of which is now estimated to increase from