Non-pegylated liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin citrate plus cyclophosphamide or vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer not previously treated with chemotherapy:a multicenter phase III study.

We conducted a phase III multicenter randomized trial to compare the efficacy of the combination of liposome encapsulated doxorubicin (Myocet(©)) plus either cyclophosphamide (MC) or vinorelbine (MV). Since July 2006, 233 patients affected with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive the combination of Myocet (M) 60 mg/m(2) i.v. plus cyclophosphamide (C) 600 mg/m2 on Day 1 of a 21­day cycle (Arm A) or Myocet (M) at 50 mg/m2 plus vinorelbine (V) 25 mg/m2 i.v. on Day 1 and V 60 mg/m2 orally on Day 8 on a 21­day cycle (Arm B). The primary endpoints of the study was time to progression (TTP); secondary endpoints were RR, toxicity and OS. Response was observed in 53/116 (45.7%) evaluable patients of Arm A vs. 51/112 (45.5%) of Arm B, respectively (P=NS). Median TTP was 41 weeks (95% CI, 32­51) and 34 weeks (95% CI, 26­39), for M/C and M/V, respectively (P=0.0234). The difference in median OS was not statistically significant (131 vs. 122 weeks; P=0.107). With regard to toxicity, patients treated with MV showed a slight increase of neutropenia and constipation, as compared to those treated with MC. No clinical signs of cardiotoxicity were observed. The MC combination remains as an unbeaten 'standard' in first line treatment of MBC.

A multicenter phase III prospective randomized trial of high-dose epirubicin in combination with cyclophosphamide (EC) versus docetaxel followed by EC in node-positive breast cancer. GOIM (Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale) 9902 study.

BACKGROUND: The Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale 9902 trial compared four cycles of high-dose epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC) with four cycles of docetaxel (Taxotere, D) followed by four cycles of EC as adjuvant treatment of node-positive breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to EC (E 120 mg/m(2), C 600 mg/m(2), arm A) for four cycles or four cycles of D (100 mg/m(2)) followed by four cycles of EC (arm B), both regimens every 21 days. Hormone receptor-positive patients were given hormonal therapy for 5 years. Primary end point was 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary objectives were overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: There were 750 patients enrolled. With a median follow-up of 64 months, 5-year DFS was 73.4% in both arms, and 5-year OS was 89.5% versus 90.7% in arm A and B [hazard ratio was 0.99 (95% confidence interval for DFS 0.75-1.31; P = 0.95)], respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicity was more common in arm B. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not show advantages from the addition of docetaxel to high-dose EC as adjuvant chemotherapy in node-positive breast cancer. The small sample size and low number of DFS events may have limited the ability to observe statistically significant difference between the two arms.

Liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy in metastatic breast cancer: a phase II multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin (TLC D-99) plus cyclophosphamide (CTX) as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer in light of the potential cardioprotective effect of TLC D-99 as compared with conventional doxorubicin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-seven patients as defined according Simon's two-stage phase II design were enrolled. They received TLC D-99 at the dosage of 60 mg/m2 plus CTX 600 mg/m2, with cycles repeated every 3 weeks. Cardiac function was assessed by ultrasonography at baseline and every two cycles. RESULTS: The principal characteristics of the 67 enrolled patients were as follows: median age 60 years (range 33-75), median World Health Organization performance status of 1 (range 0-2) and dominant disease site (viscera/bone/soft tissue): 47/15/15 There were nine complete responses and 32 partial responses for an overall response rate of 64%; a further 14 patients had stable disease and the remaining nine patients progressed. Median number of administered cycles was six. Median duration of response was 10 and 9 months, respectively, for complete responders and partial responders. Median duration of survival was 17+ months (range 3 to 33+). Hematological toxicity consisted in leucopenia (G1-G2) in 21 patients and anemia (G1-G2) in 20 patients; G1 thrombocytopenia was observed only in 2 patients. Non-hematological toxicity was generally mild with G1-G2 nausea/vomiting in 23 patients and G1-G2 mucositis in 10. Hair loss was registered in 30 patients and it was G2 in 14 patients. As to concern cardiac toxicity, one patient developed an asymptomatic 20% decline of left ventricular ejection fraction from the baseline value. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study show that the combination of TLC D-99 plus CTX is active and well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicity.

Efficacy of the combination of cisplatin with either gemcitabine and vinorelbine or gemcitabine and paclitaxel in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomised trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG 0101).

BACKGROUND: Triplet regimens were occasionally reported to produce a higher response rate (RR) than doublets in locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was conducted to assess (i) whether the addition of cisplatin (CDDP) to either gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) or GEM and paclitaxel (PTX) significantly prolongs overall survival (OS) and (ii) to compare the toxicity of PTX-containing and VNR-containing combinations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stage III or IV NSCLC patients were randomly assigned to (i) GEM 1000 mg/m(2) and VNR 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (GV arm); (ii) GEM 1000 mg/m(2) and PTX 125 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (GT arm); (iii) GV plus CDDP 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (PGV arm); and (iv) GT plus CDDP 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (PGT arm). Treatments were repeated every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: A total of 433 (stage III, 160; stage IV, 273) patients were randomly allocated to the study. RR was 48% [95% confidence interval (CI), 42% to 54%] for triplets and 35% (95% CI, 32% to 38%) for doublets (P = 0.004). Median progression-free survival (6.1 versus 5.5 months, P = 0.706) and median OS (10.7 versus 10.5 months, P = 0.379) were similar. CDDP significantly increased the occurrence of severe neutropenia (35% versus 13%), thrombocytopenia (14% versus 4%), anaemia (9% versus 3%), vomiting (6% versus 0.5%), and diarrhoea (6% versus 2%). Conversely, frequency of severe neutropenia (30% versus 17%) and thrombocytopenia (11% versus 6%) was significantly higher with VNR-containing regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Adding CDDP to GV or GT significantly increased RR, but did not prolong the OS of patients. Among doublets, the GT regimen should be preferred in view of its better safety profile.

Weekly docetaxel and gemcitabine as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: results of a multicenter phase II study.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a multicenter phase II study to evaluate the clinical efficacy, toxicity, and dose intensity of a new weekly schedule of docetaxel and gemcitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients. METHODS: We enrolled 58 patients, 52% of whom had received a previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. The treatment schedule was: docetaxel 35 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 8, 15 every 28 days. RESULTS: All patients were assessable for toxicity and 56 for efficacy. Overall response rate was 64.3% with 16.1% of complete responses and 48.2% of partial responses. Median survival was 22.10 months (95% CI: 15.53-28.67) and median time to tumor progression was 13.6 months (95% CI: 10.71-16.49). The most common hematological toxicity was neutropenia (no febrile neutropenia), which occurred in 28 patients (48.3%) but grade 3-4 in only 8 patients (14%). Alopecia, the most common nonhematological toxicity, occurred in 20 (34.5%) patients, but only 5 patients (8.6%) experienced grade 3 alopecia. CONCLUSION: The activity of docetaxel and gemcitabine in metastatic breast cancer is confirmed. The promising results of the employed schedule, in agreement with other published studies, need to be further confirmed within a phase III study.

Oxaliplatin plus high-dose folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil i.v. bolus (OXAFAFU) versus irinotecan plus high-dose folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil i.v. bolus (IRIFAFU) in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group phase III trial.

PURPOSE: The primary end point of this phase III trial was to compare the response rate (RR) of oxaliplatin (OXA) plus levo-folinic acid (l-FA) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus with that of irinotecan (IRI) plus l-FA and 5-FU bolus in advanced colorectal carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable metastatic colorectal carcinoma were randomly allocated to receive: IRI 200 mg/m(2) on day 1, l-FA 250 mg/m(2) intravenously plus 5-FU 850 mg/m(2) on day 2 (IRIFAFU); or OXA 100 mg/m(2) on day 1, l-FA 250 mg/m(2) plus 5-FU 1050 mg/m(2) on day 2 [OXAFAFU high dose (hd)]. Cycles were given every 2 weeks. After a planned interim analysis, OXA was reduced to 85 mg/m(2) and 5-FU to 850 mg/m(2) [OXAFAFU low dose (ld)]. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-four patients (IRIFAFU, 135; OXAFAFUhd, 71; OXAFAFUld, 68) were treated. Forty-two confirmed responses were achieved with IRIFAFU, 29 with OXAFAFUhd and 32 with OXAFAFUld. The response rate with OXAFAFU [44%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 35% to 52%] was significantly higher (P=0.029) than that of IRIFAFU (31%; 95% CI 23% to 40%). Occurrence of grade > or =3 neutropenia with OXAFAFUld was similar to that for IRIFAFU (29% versus 31%), while severe diarrhoea was significantly lower (12% versus 24%). Median failure-free survival (7 versus 5.8 months; P=0.046) and overall survival of patients (18.9 versus 15.6 months; P=0.032) were significantly prolonged with OXAFAFU. CONCLUSIONS: OXAFAFU was more active and less toxic than IRIFAFU, and it should be preferred in the first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer patients.

Gemcitabine with either paclitaxel or vinorelbine vs paclitaxel or gemcitabine alone for elderly or unfit advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

The aim of this study was to assess whether a combination of gemcitabine (GEM) with either paclitaxel (PTX) or vinorelbine (VNR) could be more effective than GEM or PTX alone in elderly or unfit advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. A total of 264 NSCLC patients aged >70 years with ECOG performance status (PS)< or =2, or younger with PS=2, were randomly treated with: GEM 1200 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days; PTX 100 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days; GEM 1000 mg m(-2) plus PTX 80 mg m(-2) (GT) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days; GEM 1000 mg m(-2) plus VNR 25 mg m(-2) (GV) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. In all arms, an intra-patients dose escalation was applied over the first three courses, provided that no toxicity of WHO grade > or =2 had previously occurred. At present time, 217 (82%) patients had died. The median (months) and 1-year survival probability were 5.1 and 29% for GEM, 6.4 and 25% for PTX, 9.2 and 44% for GT, and 9.7 and 32% for GV. Multivariate analysis showed that PS< or =1 (hazard ratio (HR)=0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.90), and doublet treatments (HR=0.76; 95% CI 0.59-0.99) were significantly associated with longer survival. Doublets produced no more toxicity than single agents. GT should be considered a reference regimen for elderly NSCLC patients with PS< or =1.

Adsorptive partitioning of an organic compound onto polyelectrolyte-immobilized micelles on porous glass and sand.

Halting the spread of organic contaminants in subsurface aquifers is a critical environmental problem. We describe a novel "permeable reactive barrier" that results when organophile-solubilizing properties are conferred on siliceous materials by treating them with a cationic polymer and oppositely charged mixed surfactant micelles. Controlled pore glass, quartz sand, and sea sand were treated with poly(diallyldimethylammonium chloride) and with mixed micelles of Triton X-100 and sodium dodecyl sulfate, either sequentially or simultaneously, following different treatment procedures. A model organophilic compound, Orange OT, was adsorbed and retained under aqueous agitation on the siliceous treated surfaces but not on untreated surfaces or those treated with micelle only. The aspect of the treatment procedure producing the most significant effect on Orange OT solubilization was the ionic strength. The retention of Orange OT in a layer of polyelectrolyte-micelle-treated sand under flow, within a column of untreated sand, demonstrates the possibility of using similar processes as a permeable reactive barrier to trap organic pollutants.

Chemical fractionation of metals in wetland sediments: Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore.

Tessier-type (1979) sequential extractions for heavy metals (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Pb, and Zn) were conducted on sediments from two wetland sites, one inundated and the other drained, within the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (IDNL), NW Indiana, with the objective of (i) evaluating extraction techniques on organic-rich sediments, (ii) determining the geochemistry and mobility of potentially biotoxic trace metals in a contaminated environment, and (iii) considering the implications of different restoration strategies on the potential for heavy metal remobilization. Long and repeated extractions were needed to effectively degrade the organic-rich sediments (up to 75% of the sediment by mass). Analysis of sulfur fractionation revealed that it was predominantly sequestered along with the organically bound fraction (renamed oxidizable). Metal recovery was good with the sum of the extractant steps typically within 20% of the total metal concentration determined after total microwave digestion. Results showed metal fractionation to be both metal- and site-specific, The oxidizable fraction is dominant for Cu, Cr, and Fe (>65% of the nonresidual fraction for almost all samples) and overall is most important also for Cd and Pb. The iron/manganese oxide fraction is important for Pb, Mn, and Zn, particularly at the drained site. The carbonate bound fraction is relatively insignificant at both sites, except for Cd and Mn, although it is more important at the drained site. The exchangeable fraction is significant in the uppermost sediments at the drained site, particularly for Cd (3-24%), Pb (3-14%), and Zn (36-45%); whereas, for the inundated site, it ranged only from 0 to 1% Zn, with no detectable Cd or Pb. Chromium, Cu, and Fe exist in forms not likely to be remobilized, whereas Cd, Mn, Pb, and Zn are potentially mobile if drained wetland sites are reflooded (and pH and redox potential altered). Simple mass balance calculations illustrate the potential for the removal of approximately 84,375 kg of exchangeable Zn if currently drained sites across the IDNL are reflooded, with concentrations in water draining into Lake Michigan as high as 5 ppm.

Randomized trial comparing cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine with either cisplatin and gemcitabine or cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: interim analysis of a phase III trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: In our previous phase II study, the cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine (PGV) regimen produced a median survival time (MST) of approximately 1 year in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present study was aimed at comparing the MST of patients treated with this triplet regimen with the MSTs of patients receiving cisplatin and vinorelbine (PV) or cisplatin and gemcitabine (PG). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 1997, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, an age of < or = 70 years, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < or = 1 were randomized to receive one of the following regimens: cisplatin 50 mg/m(2), gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm A); cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (arm B); or cisplatin 120 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2)/wk (arm C). According to the two-stage design for phase III trials, an interim analysis was planned when the first 60 patients per arm were assessable for survival. RESULTS: The survival data of 180 NSCLC patients (stage IIIB, 76 patients; stage IV, 104 patients) were analyzed in April 1999. Overall, 128 patients had died (PGV, n = 33; PG, n = 42; and PV, n = 53). The MST of patients in the PGV, PG, and PV arms was 51, 42, and 35 weeks, respectively, and the corresponding 1-year projected survival rates were 45%, 40%, and 34%, respectively. When only patients with stage IV disease were considered, an even stronger difference was seen between PGV (MST = 47 weeks) and both PG (34 weeks) and PV (27 weeks). At multivariate Cox analysis, the estimate hazard of death for patients receiving PGV compared with those receiving PV was 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.77; P <.01). The response rates were 47% in the PGV arm, 30% in the PG arm, 25% in the PV arm. Both hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were not substantially worse in patients who received the PGV regimen. CONCLUSION: The PGV regimen is associated with a substantial survival gain (MST > 3 months longer) when compared with the PV combination. Because this difference in survival met one of the early stopping rules, the accrual in the PV arm has been stopped (null hypothesis rejected). Enrollment still continues in the PGV and PG arm to ascertain whether the PGV regimen can also produce a significantly longer survival than that obtained with the PG regimen.

A review of osseous resective surgery.

The treatment of periodontal diseases associated with attachment loss has involved a variety of approaches. While the goal of periodontal surgical treatments is to access the root surfaces for proper debridement, the decision to remove or reshape the supporting bone has been controversial. This paper will address the controversy as well as discuss surgical pocket therapy directed toward pocket reduction through recontouring the underlying bone.

5-fluorouracil and levofolinic acid with or without recombinant interferon-2b in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma: a randomized multicenter study with stratification for tumor burden and liver involvement by the Southern Italy Oncology Group.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of the current study were: 1) to verify whether the addition of modulating low doses of interferon-2b (IFN) to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and levofolinic acid (1-FA) could improve clinical results in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma; and 2) to evaluate the role of tumor burden and liver involvement as prognostic factors. METHODS: A total of 204 untreated patients were randomized to receive 1-FA at 100 mg/m2 and 5-FU at 375 mg/m2 for 5 consecutive days with or without IFN every 3 weeks. IFN was given subcutaneously at 3 MU/day for 7 days starting 2 days before chemotherapy administration. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of hepatic disease (H+ or H-) and to total tumor burden defined as "low" or "high" using an area of 10 cm2 as the cutoff value. Thus, four patient categories were obtained: Group 1: H+ > or = 10 cm2; Group 2: H+ < 10 cm2; Group 3: H- > or = 10 cm2; and Group 4: H- < 10 cm2. RESULTS: No differences were observed in the objective response rate (23% for the combination of 1-FA and 5-FU vs. 24% for the 1-FA, 5-FU, and IFN regimen), median duration of response (11 months vs. 10 months), time to progression (5 months in both arms), and median survival (11 months vs. 12 months). A statistically significant improvement in response rate was observed in patients with limited liver involvement versus those with massive involvement independent of the chemotherapy arm (44% vs. 22%; P = 0.02). Overall survival also was improved in patients with limited liver disease (P = 0.0001) and in those without liver involvement (P = 0.004). Multivariate analysis confirmed these data and identified response and female gender as positive prognostic factors. Toxic side effects (mainly diarrhea, mucositis, and fever) were statistically more frequent in the IFN arm. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of low modulating doses of IFN to the regimen of 5-FU and I-FA failed to increase the response rate and survival of patients with advanced colorectal adenocarcinoma and significantly worsened toxicity. High tumor burden and the presence of liver involvement were confirmed prospectively as poor prognostic factors and should be taken in account in designing future Phase II or comparative trials.

5-Fluorouracil plus interferon alpha-2a compared to 5-fluorouracil alone in the treatment of advanced colon carcinoma: a multicentric randomized study.

Biochemical modulation is one of the most interesting fields in cancer chemotherapy. Interferon-alpha (IFNalpha) is a cytokine that is able to influence the pharmacodynamics of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) through a number of mechanisms. With the aim of confirming some data emerging from the literature, we initiated a multicentric randomized study comparing the combination of 5FU and IFNalpha-2a with 5FU alone in the treatment of advanced or metastatic colon cancer. A group of 205 colon cancer patients (104 in the 5FU arm and 101 in the 5FU + IFNapha-2a arm) were included in the final intention-to-treat analysis. Rectal cancers were not considered eligible. All patients had measurable disease, were aged 75 years or less, had a Karnofsky index of at least 60 and had good bone marrow, renal, liver and cardiac functions. No previous chemo-immunotherapy was allowed. The treatment was 750 mg/m2 5FU (4 h i.v. infusion) on days 1 5 and then i.v. bolus weekly, starting from day 12, with or without IFNalpha-2a given s.c. three times weekly (starting dose 3 x 10(6) IU rising to 9 x 10(6) IU, if tolerated). Patients were treated until progression or, if responsive, for a maximum of 48 weeks and then observed for a period of 2 years. The primary end-point of the study was objective clinical response (OR); secondary parameters were time to progression, overall survival, and time to death after progression. WHO criteria were used for both clinical response and toxicity measurements. Dose reduction was planned a priori in the event of significant toxicity due to 5FU, IFNalpha-2a or both. Association between primary and secondary end-points and treatment was studied by univariate and multivariate analysis. Altogether, 47 patients achieved a documented response. A 25% OR was observed in the combination arm while a 21% OR was seen in the 5FU arm; this difference is not statistically significant (P = 0.6). Patients with a small tumour burden (below 5 cm2) showed a higher probability of response in both arms. Patients in the experimental arm had a higher but not statistically significant cumulative progression-free probability. Median survival was 47.1 weeks overall, while it was 43.7 and 48.5 weeks in the control and experimental arms, respectively. The combination was clearly more toxic than 5FU alone, leukopenia being the most frequent side-effect in the experimental arm and nausea and vomiting in the control arm. In conclusion these results are quite disappointing and 5FU + IFNalpha-2a can not be considered a standard treatment for advanced colon cancer.