Phase I clinical trial of bendamustine and bevacizumab for patients with advanced cancer.

Bendamustine, a cytotoxic alkylating agent, has shown promising results in solid tumors. An investigator-initiated phase I clinical trial of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent bevacizumab and bendamustine was conducted in patients with advanced cancer, because the 2 drugs have different mechanisms of antitumor activity and nonoverlapping toxicity. Patients were treated with escalating doses of intravenous bendamustine (70, 80, 90, and 100 mg/m(2); days 1 and 2) and intravenous bevacizumab (10 mg/kg; days 1 and 15). A conventional "3 + 3" study design was used. Forty-two patients were treated: 23 women and 19 men. The median age was 60 years. Patients had received a median of 4 prior therapies (range, 1-10). The most common cancer types were colorectal (n=9), head and neck (n= 8), non-small cell lung (n=6), and breast (n=5). Overall, 117 cycles were administered (median per patient, 2; range, 1-8). No dose-limiting toxicities were noted during the escalation phase. Therefore, the highest dose (level 4) of bendamustine (100 mg/m(2)) was used in the expansion phase. The most common toxicities were fatigue (n=22), nausea (n=14), anorexia (n=9), and thrombocytopenia (n=7). Of 38 patients who were evaluable for response, 23 (61%) had stable disease, including 2 (5.2%) who had stable disease for 6 months or more (1 with adenoid cystic carcinoma and 1 with non-small cell lung cancer). This regimen of bendamustine (100 mg/m(2)) and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) was well tolerated and yielded disease stabilization in selected heavily pretreated patients with advanced cancer.

Randomized, controlled trial of yoga in women with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Previous research incorporating yoga (YG) into radiotherapy (XRT) for women with breast cancer finds improved quality of life (QOL). However, shortcomings in this research limit the findings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stages 0 to III breast cancer were recruited before starting XRT and were randomly assigned to YG (n = 53) or stretching (ST; n = 56) three times a week for 6 weeks during XRT or waitlist (WL; n = 54) control. Self-report measures of QOL (Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short-form survey; primary outcomes), fatigue, depression, and sleep quality, and five saliva samples per day for 3 consecutive days were collected at baseline, end of treatment, and 1, 3, and 6 months later. RESULTS: The YG group had significantly greater increases in physical component scale scores compared with the WL group at 1 and 3 months after XRT (P = .01 and P = .01). At 1, 3, and 6 months, the YG group had greater increases in physical functioning compared with both ST and WL groups (P < .05), with ST and WL differences at only 3 months (P < .02). The group differences were similar for general health reports. By the end of XRT, the YG and ST groups also had a reduction in fatigue (P < .05). There were no group differences for mental health and sleep quality. Cortisol slope was steepest for the YG group compared with the ST and WL groups at the end (P = .023 and P = .008) and 1 month after XRT (P = .05 and P = .04). CONCLUSION: YG improved QOL and physiological changes associated with XRT beyond the benefits of simple ST exercises, and these benefits appear to have long-term durability.

Dose-finding study of hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin-based treatment in patients with advanced solid tumors metastatic to the liver.

BACKGROUND: Liver metastases in patients with cancer are associated with poor survival. We hypothesized that hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of oxaliplatin combination therapy would have antitumor activity in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer and predominant liver metastases were treated on a phase I study of HAI oxaliplatin in combination with systemic bevacizumab, with or without HAI or systemic fluorouracil and/or leucovorin and/or cetuximab. Patients were divided into two treatment arms according to KRAS mutational status and physician choice. A "3 + 3" design was used. RESULTS: Among 76 patients (median age 61 years; 34 women; median number of prior therapies 4), the most common cancer was colorectal (CRC) (n = 58). Overall, the only dose-limiting toxicity was Grade 3 diarrhea (n = 2). The most common treatment-related toxicities were hypertension (n = 40), nausea (n = 29), fatigue (n = 28), and transaminitis (n = 26). Of 76 patients, one (1 %) had a complete response (CR), 12 (16 %) had a partial response (PR), and 12 (16 %) had SD for ≥ 6 months (total CR/PR/SD ≥ 6 months 25/76 = 33 %). In CRC (n = 58), total CR/PR/SD ≥ 6 months was 31 % (n = 18). Both patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors achieved a PR (24+ months) and a CR (6+ months). Time to treatment failure (TTF) on the current regimen was 3.5 versus 2.8 months on patients' prior systemic treatment (p = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: HAI oxaliplatin combination therapy with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, bevacizumab, and/or cetuximab was well tolerated and had antitumor activity in selected heavily pretreated patients with predominant liver disease.

Intraperitoneal and intravenous chemotherapy in peritoneal carcinomatosis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We conducted a phase I trial of IP oxaliplatin and paclitaxel with IV paclitaxel and bevacizumab in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. METHODOLOGY: Patients received IV bevacizumab (2.5mg/kg) over 1 hour (day 1), then IV paclitaxel (110 mg/m2) 24-hr-infusion (day 1) and IP oxaliplatin (25-40 mg/m2) (day 2), and IP paclitaxel (30-60 mg/m2) (day 8 from cycle 2 onwards). A '3+3' design was used. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated (median age 60 years; 10 women, 9 men; median number of prior therapies 3). Primary tumors were colorectal (n=9), signet ring carcinoma (n=2), gastric (n=2), ovarian (n=2) and others (n=4). The maximum tolerated doses (MTD) of IP oxaliplatin and IP paclitaxel were 25mg/m2 and 60 mg/ m2, respectively. Nine (47%) patients reported no toxicities >grade 2. Two patients receiving IP oxaliplatin 40 mg/m2 and IP paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 had dose limiting toxicities (DLT) of grade 3 diarrhea/dehydration and febrile neutropenia. Toxicities included abdominal pain (n=14), nausea (n=10) and constipation (n=7). Of 12 patients restaged at 2 months, 7 (58%) had stable disease (SD) including 2 (17%) who had SD for >4 months. CONCLUSIONS: IP paclitaxel and IP oxaliplatin can be given safely at 60 mg/m2 and 25mg/m2, respectively.

The effects of a presurgical stress management intervention for men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE This study assessed the short-term and long-term efficacy of a presurgical stress management intervention at reducing mood disturbance and improving quality of life (QOL) in men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred fifty-nine men were randomly assigned to a two-session (plus two boosters) presurgical stress management intervention (SM), a two-session (plus two boosters) supportive attention group (SA), or a standard care group (SC). Assessments occurred 1 month before surgery; 1 week before surgery; the morning of surgery; 6 weeks after surgery, and 6 and 12 months after surgery. Results Results indicated significant group differences in mood disturbance before surgery (P = .02), such that men in the SM group had significantly less mood disturbance than men in the SC group (P = .006), with no significant differences between the SM and SA or SA and SC groups. In the year after surgery, there were significant group differences on Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short form survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores (P = .004); men in the SM group had significantly higher PCS scores than men in the SC group (P = .0009), and there were no significant differences between the SM and SA or SA and SC groups. There were no group effects on prostate-specific QOL or SF-36 mental health scores. CONCLUSION These findings demonstrate the efficacy of a brief presurgical stress management intervention in improving some short-term and long-term outcomes. If these results are replicated, it may be a useful adjunct to standard care for men with prostate cancer undergoing surgery.