Lessons from the past: Long-term safety and survival outcomes of a prematurely terminated randomized controlled trial on prophylactic vs. hemoglobin-based administration of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia.

Prophylactic erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) administration for chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) is not supported by current guidelines. Long-term follow-up of patients WHO had been treated with ESA for CIA in the past may provide useful information. In 2002, we undertook a prospective, randomized phase III trial of prophylactic vs. hemoglobin (Hb)-based (threshold: 11 mg/dl) ESA administration in patients with solid tumors and CIA. ESA administration FOR CIA was permanently suspended in 2007 in view of published data at that time, while patient surveillance continued. Among 630 evaluable patients, 38.6% were male, 50.9% had advanced cancer at diagnosis, 40.6% had Hb levels <12 mg/dl at baseline and 47.9% received ESA prophylactically (1:1 randomization). The major tumor types included colorectal (36.0%), breast (20.6%), non-prostate genitourinary (11.0%) and lung CANCER (8.4%). After a median follow-up of 85.4 months, 358 patients had relapsed and 380 had succumbed to the disease. Patients in the prophylactic ESA group (GROUP A; experimental arm), as compared with those in the Hb-based group (GROUP B; iron supplementation alone), exhibited A significantly more prominent increase in median Hb levels, particularly in the subset of patients with non-metastatic disease (two-sided P<0.01) among patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced cancer, those who received ESAs prophylactically exhibited a lower incidence of CIA (all grades: P=0.014, grades 3-4: P=0.034) and fatigue (all grades: P<0.001, grades 3-4: P=0.055), but a higher rate of a composite outcome encompassing all thrombosis-related events (all grades: P=0.043, grades 3-4: P=0.099). These differences were less prominent in the group of patients who received adjuvant treatment. There were no significant differences in overall mortality and relapse/progression rates between the two groups. therefore, prophylactic, compared with Hb-based, administration of ESAs for CIA in patients with solid tumors, was found to be associated with a significantly lower incidence of anemia and fatigue, but with a marginally higher rate of thrombosis-related adverse events, particularly in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for advanced cancer.

A randomized phase III trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with irinotecan, leucovorin and fluorouracil versus leucovorin and fluorouracil for stage II and III colon cancer: a Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group study.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer is a public health problem worldwide. Adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection for stage III colon cancer has been shown to improve both progression-free and overall survival, and is currently recommended as standard therapy. However, its value for patients with stage II disease remains controversial. When this study was designed 5-fluorouracil (5FU) plus leucovorin (LV) was standard adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. Irinotecan (CPT-11) is a topoisomerase I inhibitor with activity in metastatic disease. In this multicenter adjuvant phase III trial, we evaluated the addition of irinotecan to weekly 5FU plus LV in patients with stage II or III colon cancer. METHODS: The study included 873 eligible patients. The treatment consisted of weekly administration of irinotecan 80 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.), LV 200 mg/m2 and 5FU 450 mg/m2 bolus (Arm A) versus LV 200 mg/m2 and 5FU 500 mg/m2 i.v. bolus (Arm B). In Arm A, treatments were administered weekly for four consecutive weeks, followed by a two-week rest, for a total of six cycles, while in Arm B treatments were administered weekly for six consecutive weeks, followed by a two-week rest, for a total of four cycles. The primary end-point was disease-free survival (DFS) at three years. RESULTS: The probability of overall survival (OS) at three years was 0.88 for patients in Arm A and 0.86 for those in Arm B, while the five-year OS probability was 0.78 and 0.76 for patients in Arm A and Arm B, respectively (P = 0.436). Furthermore, the probability of DFS at three years was 0.78 and 0.76 for patients in Arm A and Arm B, respectively (P = 0.334). With the exception of leucopenia and neutropenia, which were higher in patients in Arm A, there were no significant differences in Grades 3 and 4 toxicities between the two regimens. The most frequently recorded Grade 3/4 toxicity was diarrhea in both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Irinotecan added to weekly bolus 5FU plus LV did not result in improvement in disease-free or overall survival in stage II or III colon cancer, but did increase toxicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000148077.