A randomised phase II study of oxaliplatin alone versus oxaliplatin combined with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid (Mayo Clinic regimen) in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of both oxaliplatin as a single agent and oxaliplatin in combination with dailyx5 bolus 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid (5-FU/FA, Mayo clinic regimen) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. 73 advanced CRC patients were randomised to receive either oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks (35 patients), or the same treatment combined with 5-FU 425 mg/m(2)/day and FA 20 mg/m(2)/dayx5 days every 4 weeks (38 patients). Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. All patients had documented inoperable disease and no previous chemotherapy for advanced disease. Based on the investigators' assessment of best response, objective response rate was 9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2-24%) in the oxaliplatin arm, and 45% (95% CI 27-64%) in the oxaliplatin+5-FU/FA arm. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2 months (95% CI 1.7-2.4 months) in the oxaliplatin arm and 3.9 months (95% CI 2.9-5 months) in the oxaliplatin+5-FU/FA arm. Severe neutropenia was seen in 23% of patients in the oxaliplatin+5-FU/FA arm, and none in the oxaliplatin arm. There were two treatment-related deaths, both in the oxaliplatin+5-FU/FA arm. In the oxaliplatin+5-FU/FA arm, severe diarrhoea, vomiting and stomatitis were seen in 34, 14 and 14% of the patients, respectively. In conclusion, oxaliplatin at a dose of 85 mg/m(2) given every 2 weeks was well tolerated and has limited activity in metastatic CRC, while the combination of this treatment with the full-dose Mayo clinic regimen (5-FU bolus 425 mg/m(2)/day+FA 20 mg/m(2)/dayx5 days every 4 weeks), although active, was unfeasible due to a high level of myelosuppression and gastrointestinal toxicity. Alternative lower dosing or other regimens are to be explored to ascertain the value of bolus 5-FU/FA combined with oxaliplatin.

Randomized trial of CVPP for three versus six cycles in favorable-prognosis and CVPP versus AOPE plus radiotherapy in intermediate-prognosis untreated Hodgkin's disease.

PURPOSE: To evaluate in a randomized trial the impact of three versus six cycles of cyclophosphamide, vinblastine, procarbazine, and prednisone (CVPP) chemotherapy in favorable-prognosis and CVPP versus doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, and etoposide (AOPE) plus involved-field radiotherapy (RT) in intermediate-prognosis previously untreated Hodgkin's disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 256 patients evaluated, 80 with a favorable prognosis according to a prognostic index designed by the Grupo Argentina de Tratamiento de Leucemia Aguda (GATLA) were randomized to three versus six cycles of CVPP without RT and 176 with intermediate risk to CVPP versus AOPE, both for six cycles with RT between the third and fourth cycles of 30 Gy to the involved areas at diagnosis. CVPP consisted of intravenous (I.V.) cyclophosphamide and vinblastine on days 1 and 8, and oral procarbazine and prednisone on days 1 to 14, every 28 days. AOPE consisted of I.V. doxorubicin and vincristine on day 1, oral prednisone on days 1 to 5, and I.V. etoposide on days 1 and 3, every 28 days. RESULTS: Complete remission was obtained in 39 of 41 (95%) patients treated with three cycles of CVPP and 36 of 39 (92%) treated with six cycles in the favorable-risk group (difference not significant [NS]). In the intermediate-risk group, 89 of 92 (97%) treated with CVPP plus RT versus 75 of 84 (89%) treated with AOPE plus RT achieved a complete remission (P = .05). At 60 months, the event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival rates in the favorable-risk group were 80% and 91% for CVPP x 3 and 84% and 97% for CVPP x 6, respectively (P = NS). In the intermediate-risk group, 60-month EFS rate for CVPP plus RT was 85%, compared with 66% for AOPE plus RT (P = .009). The overall survival rate was 95% versus 87% respectively (P = .157). CONCLUSION: Three cycles of CVPP without RT are equally effective as six cycles in the favorable-risk group. However, in the intermediate-group, CVPP plus RT is superior to AOPE plus RT, with significantly fewer events before and after induction (P = .009), without a difference in overall survival.

Multivariate analyses of prognostic factors associated with hematopoietic recovery in autograft patients with different sources of progenitor cells. A GATMO experience. Argintine Group of Bone Marrow Transplant.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate in a multivariate analysis the prognostic factors associated with hematopoietic recovery and the supportive care requirements after autotransplant of progenitor cells (PC) from various sources: bone marrow (BMPC), BMPC & peripheral blood (PBPC), and PBPC alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 570 patients with hematological malignancies and solid tumors underwent high-dose therapy followed by autotransplant. PBPC were obtained after mobilization with chemotherapy and/or cytokines. One-hundred five patients received BMPC, 217 received BMPC & PBPC and 248 PBPC alone; all of the patients received G-CSF or GM-CSF after infusion. RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis the recovery of neutrophils was adversely associated with low numbers of nucleated cells infused (P < 0.13), bone marrow progenitor cell source, and diagnosis of multiple myeloma and acute leukemia (P < 0.001). The factors that adversely affected platelet recovery were low number of nucleated cells and diagnosis of multiple myeloma and acute leukemia (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that BMPC adversely affect neutrophil recovery while low numbers of nucleated cells and diagnosis of multiple myeloma and acute leukemia adversely affect both neutrophil and platelet recovery.