A pilot study of adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel and sorafenib in women with node-positive or high-risk early-stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To examine the safety of sorafenib combined with standard adjuvant treatment in patients with node-positive or otherwise high-risk breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility: mastectomy/breast-conserving surgery; axillary node assessment for stage I/II/IIIA/IIIC (T1-3, N3a only) breast cancer; node-positive/high-risk node-negative (tumor size >2 cm; hormone-receptor negative; grade 2/3; or age <35 years); Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) 0-1; and adequate organ function. TREATMENT: doxorubicin (60 mg/m(2) intravenous) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m(2) intravenous; AC) on day 1, every 3 weeks (x 4 cycles), followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) intravenous on day 1, (every 3 weeks x 4 cycles) or 80 mg/m(2) intravenous (every week/x 12 cycles), combined with sorafenib (400 mg oral twice a week; TS) for 12 months or less. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled from 5/07-1/08. Baseline characteristics included: median age of 54 years (range, 35-74 years); 93% of patients with ECOG-PS 0; 84% node-positive; 33% hormone-receptor negative. All patients completed AC treatment and were eligible to receive TS; of these, 8 (13%) patients came off study due to physician/patient decision; 21 (47%) patients came off study due to toxicity; 2 (4%) patients completed TS but did not proceed with maintenance sorafenib; and 14 (31%) patients completed TS and entered the maintenance phase of sorafenib treatment. Sorafenib was taken for 6.1 weeks during the paclitaxel phase and 15 weeks during maintenance. Severe toxicities during sorafenib therapy were limited, including neutropenia, anorexia, arthralgia, diarrhea, and dyspnea. After a median follow-up of 21.0 months (range, 18.9-25.9), all patients were alive and without recurrence. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib was generally associated with limited severe toxicity when combined with paclitaxel following AC. However, many patients discontinued sorafenib early due to grade 1/2 toxicity, physician/patient decision, and treatment compliance. Additional studies of sorafenib in breast cancer in the neoadjuvant and triple-negative settings are warranted.

Phase II trial of S-1 as second-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Currently available agents for the treatment of advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have limited efficacy. S-1 is a novel formulation of oral fluoropyrimidine shown to be tolerable and active in patients with NSCLC in Japan. We conducted a multicenter phase II study in previously treated patients with NSCLC to evaluate the efficacy of single-agent S-1 in a predominantly non-Asian population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced NSCLC and previously treated with only one line of chemotherapy received oral S-1 at 30 mg/m every 12 hours for 14 consecutive days followed by a 7-day rest until meeting discontinuation criteria. The primary end point was to evaluate the overall response rate. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were accrued from 21 centers across the United States. Overall response rates and stable disease according to independent review were 7.1% and 48.2%, respectively, with a disease control rate of 55.3%. Progression-free survival was 2.9 months, median overall survival 7.3 months, and 1-year survival 31.6%. There were no significant differences in survival according to histologic subtype. The treatment was well tolerated, with the most common treatment-related side effects being nausea (54%) and diarrhea (49%). CONCLUSION: Single-agent S-1 is well tolerated and has activity comparable with the other agents approved for use in recurrent/relapsed NSCLC.

Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and irinotecan in patients with previously treated carcinoma of an unknown primary site: a Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network Phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to evaluate the activity of combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and irinotecan in patients with previously treated carcinoma of an unknown primary site. METHODS: Patients with carcinoma of an unknown primary site who had received one previous chemotherapy regimen were eligible for this study. All patients received gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) and irinotecan at a dose of 100 mg/m2 i.v. on Days 1 and 8; treatment courses were repeated every 21 days. Patients were evaluated for response after completing two courses of treatment; responders/stable patients continued treatment for a recommended six courses. RESULTS: Forty patients entered this multicenter, community-based Phase II trial between September 2000 and July 2003. Four of these 40 patients (10%) achieved objective responses (a partial response in 3 patients and a complete response in 1 patient). An additional 17 patients (43%) had stable disease/minor response at first reevaluation; 7 of these patients (18%) remained stable for longer than 6 months. The median survival for the entire group was 4.5 months, with 1-year and 2-year survival rates of 25% and 13%, respectively. The treatment was well tolerated by most patients. Neutropenia was the most common Grade 3/4 toxicity (according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 3.0) (occurring in 36% of patients). Myelosuppression-related complications were uncommon, as were severe nonhematologic toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and irinotecan has modest activity and is well tolerated in patients with recurrent/refractory carcinoma of an unknown primary site. Treatment-related toxicity, particularly myelosuppression, appears to be less severe than toxicity produced by the taxane and platinum regimens frequently used in the first-line therapy of these patients. Evaluation of the gemcitabine and irinotecan combination as first-line therapy is indicated.