Predictive Role of ERCC1 Expression in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Surgery and Adjuvant Cisplatin-Based Chemoradiation.

OBJECTIVE: ERCC1 (excision repair cross-complementation group 1) expression predicts survival in patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) treated with chemoradiation. In order to evaluate the predictive role in the adjuvant setting, we investigated ERCC1 expression in radically resected HNSCC patients who underwent surgery and cisplatin chemoradiation. METHODS: ERCC1 expression levels were determined by immunohistochemistry in primary tumor tissues from 48 patients with stage III-IV cancers. The median follow-up was 38.5 months (range: 5-121). RESULTS: High ERCC1 expression was observed in 36 (75%) patients. Univariate analysis showed that patients with high levels of ERCC1 had significantly worse disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) than patients with low levels (HR = 7.15; 95% CI, 1.68-30.35; p = 0.008 and HR = 9.90; 95% CI, 1.33-73.96; p = 0.025, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, high ERCC1 expression (HR = 7.36; 95% CI, 1.72-31.4; p = 0.007) together with high-risk category (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.01-7.18; p = 0.048) were the best predictors for relapse. High ERCC1 expression was the only unfavorable independent determinant for OS (HR = 9.53; 95% CI, 1.27-71.35; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: This investigation suggests that ERCC1 expression might be useful to predict prognosis in radically resected HNSCC patients treated with surgery and chemoradiation.

Radiotherapy and sequential temozolomide compared with radiotherapy with concomitant and sequential temozolomide in the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme.

Our objective was to determine and compare effects of sequential temozolomide vs. concomitant plus sequential temozolomide with conventional radiotherapy, in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme, comparing two independent trials. Sixty-four patients were treated on two consecutive separate phase II studies that used identical eligibility criteria and the same radiotherapy (60 Gy, 2 Gy/day, after surgery) and adjuvant temozolomide (200 mg/m/day for 5 days/28 days until progression), but differed in the absence or presence of a concomitant treatment with temozolomide (75 mg/m/day) during radiotherapy. In the first protocol (1999-2002), 21 patients (median age of 64 years) received radiotherapy alone and sequential temozolomide; in the succeeding protocol (2002-2004), 43 patients (median age of 61 years) with similar characteristics received radiotherapy with concomitant and sequential temozolomide. Median number of adjuvant cycles was five in both trials. Median survival was similar in both studies (18 vs. 17.4 months); overall survival rates at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months of all the population were 89, 69, 45 and 24%. No statistically significant differences were found among prognostic factors considered. Hematologic toxicities were mild and similar, with grade 3-4 neutropenia in 5-7% and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in 7-10% of patients in the sequential phases, and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in 7% in the concomitant phase of temozolomide. We confirmed that temozolomide combined with radiotherapy is well tolerated and provides a survival advantage compared with historical data using radiotherapy alone. Nevertheless, a concomitant use of temozolomide during radiotherapy does not seem to improve survival, although it does not increase toxicity.

Combination of trabectedin and irinotecan is highly effective in a human rhabdomyosarcoma xenograft.

Our objective was to evaluate in vitro and in vivo the effect of the combination of trabectedin (Yondelis, ET-743) and irinotecan (CPT-11) or its major metabolite SN-38 in a human rhabdomyosarcoma cell line. The schedule trabectedin (1 h) followed by irinotecan or SN-38 (24 h) and the opposite sequence (irinotecan or SN-38 24 h followed by trabectedin 1 h) were analyzed in a rhabdomyosarcoma cell line. In vivo studies were conducted with trabectedin and irinotecan at the doses of 0.2 and 20 mg/kg, respectively, simultaneously administered with a q4d x 3 schedule. In vitro studies indicated an overall additive effect [combination index (CI) relatively close to 1.0], with the former schedule slightly superior to the latter (at the IC50 effect levels: CI=0.89 versus 1.07). Neither transcription nor expression of DNA topoisomerase I was affected by trabectedin treatment. In vivo the therapeutic results of the combination were certainly more impressive: trabectedin and irinotecan combination caused a strong and long-lasting effect on tumor growth (tumor volume inhibition=89%, log10 cell kill=1.6), whereas each drug given as a single agent was only marginally active. The discrepancy between the in vitro and in vivo results suggests possible mechanisms involving host cells, other than tumor cells. The striking effects of the combination observed in vivo could be related to a combination of a direct cytotoxic and an anti-inflammatory indirect effect. The very marked and long-lasting effect of the trabectedin and irinotecan combination in vivo suggests a basis for a clinical evaluation in pediatric patients with rhabdomyosarcoma.

Pharmacokinetics of temozolomide given three times a day in pediatric and adult patients.

PURPOSE: To characterize and compare pharmacokinetic parameters in children and adults treated with temozolomide (TMZ) administered for 5 days in three doses daily, and to evaluate the possible relationship between AUC values and hematologic toxicity. METHODS: TMZ pharmacokinetic parameters were characterized in pediatric and adult patients with primary central nervous system tumors treated with doses ranging from 120 to 200 mg/m2 per day, divided into three doses daily for 5 days. Plasma levels were measured over 8 h following oral administration in a fasting state. A total of 40 courses were studied in 22 children (mean age 10 years, range 3-16 years) and in 8 adults (mean age 30 years, range 19-54 years). RESULTS: In all patients, a linear relationship was found between systemic exposure (AUC) and increasing doses of TMZ. Time to peak concentration, elimination half-life, apparent clearance and volume of distribution were not related to TMZ dose. No differences were seen among TMZ C(max), t(1/2), V(d) or CL/F in children compared with adults. Intra- and interpatient variability of systemic exposure were limited in both children and adults. No statistically significant differences were found between the AUCs of children who experienced grade 4 hematologic toxicity and children who did not. CONCLUSIONS: No difference appears to exist between pharmacokinetic parameters in adults and children when TMZ is administered in three doses daily. Hematologic toxicity was not related to TMZ AUC. AUC measurement does not appear to be of any use in optimizing TMZ treatment.