EORTC 24051: unexpected side effects in a phase I study of TPF induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation with lapatinib, a dual EGFR/ErbB2 inhibitor, in patients with locally advanced resectable larynx and hypopharynx squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In this phase I/II study, the addition of lapatinib (LAP) was investigated in combination with the sequential use of both approaches TPF induction chemotherapy (ICT) followed by chemoradiation (CRT) in locally advanced larynx or hypopharynx squamous cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Objectives were to assess maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and to recommend a safe dose of LAP when administered with 4 cycles of TPF followed by CRT. RESULTS: Seven male patients were included. Three patients were included in the first cohort, at dose level 1 (LAP 500 mg daily plus TPF). Renal toxicity was observed among these three patients (grade 3 [n=1], grade 2 [n=1] and grade 1 [n=1]), with 1 DLT, leading to treatment interruption in this group. Nephrotoxicity was reversible after stopping LAP and hydration of the patients. In a second cohort of four patients administering docetaxel from the second cycle, 3 more DLTs were observed (grade 2 renal toxicity and grade 3 diarrhea, grade 3 anorexia and grade 3 stomatitis, and grade 4 neutropenia). Based on the occurrence of 4 DLTs at the first dose level of LAP, patient recruitment was closed. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that LAP cannot be combined safely with full dose TPF.

A non-randomized comparison of gemcitabine-based chemoradiation with or without induction chemotherapy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (chemoradiation; CRT) is the standard treatment for locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN). CRT improves local control and overall survival (OS) when compared to radiotherapy (RT) alone. Induction chemotherapy (IC) reduces the risk of distant metastases (DM) and improves OS by 5% with the use of cisplatin/infusional 5 fluorouracil (PF) in meta-analysis. Adding a taxane to PF in the IC regimen confers a better outcome. Sequential treatment (ST) of IC followed by CRT is therefore under active investigation in multiple phase III trials. METHODS: We compared the outcome of two cohorts of patients (pts) with LA-SCCHN treated at our institution with CRT (n = 27) or ST (n = 31), respectively. CRT consisted of GEM 100 mg/m2 weekly + conventional RT (70 Gy); ST consisted of the same CRT preceded by platinum-based IC. RESULTS: Response to IC: complete 8 (26%), partial 20 (65%), stable 1, progressive 1, not evaluable 1. Median follow up of the surviving pts: for CRT 73 months, for ST 51 months. Median time to distant metastasis (TDM) was for CRT 23.6 months, for ST not reached. Median OS was for CRT 20.2 months, for ST 40.2 months. Cox regression analysis, taking into account age, T and N stage and tumor site, showed a hazard ratio with ST of 1.190 for time to locoregional failure (p = 0.712), 0.162 for TDM (p = 0.002), and 0.441 for overall survival (OS) (p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: TDM and OS were found significantly longer in the ST cohort without a reduced locoregional control. Notwithstanding the limitations of a non-randomized single-center comparison, the results are in line with very preliminary data of randomized comparisons suggesting an improved outcome with ST.

Docetaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin (DIP) in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel, ifosfamide and cisplatin have all shown activity in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). The optimal combination of the three drugs is, however, unknown. Considering the favorable results of taxane-containing triplets as induction chemotherapy in locally advanced (LA) SCCHN, DIP (docetaxel, ifosfamide, cisplatin) was studied in this setting as part of a phase I dose- and sequence-exploring study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: D (60 or 75 mg/m(2)) was given by 60-min infusion on day 1, I (1000 mg/m(2)/day), with mesna until 12 hours after I, by 24-h infusion days 1-5, and P (50 or 75 mg/m(2)) by 24-h infusion on days 1 or 5. The cycles were repeated every 21 days. Toxicities according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria version 2 (NCI-CTC2) were evaluated weekly and response was evaluated every 2 cycles according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Thereafter, radiotherapy (RT, cumulative dose 70 Gy) or chemoradiation (CRT), both with conventional fractionation, were planned. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (18 male, 4 female; age 41-66 years, performance status 0-1, 2 T4N0, 3 T3N2, 11 T4N2, 3 T unknown N3, 1 T1N3 and 2 T4N3) received a median of 4 DIP cycles (range 1-5). Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 18 patients, grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia in 5 and 1 patients, respectively, and grade 3 anemia in 5 patients. Gastrointestinal and mucosal toxicities were generally mild/moderate. Vascular complications (probably not DIP-related) precluded local treatment in two patients. Moreover, one patient died on day 13 of the first DIP (neutropenic sepsis and myocardial infarction). The remaining patients received RT (n=2) or CRT (n=17; 16 of these with gemcitabine). The response to 2 x DIP was 95% (1 complete response, 19 partial responses, 1 stable disease); the complete response rate increased to 42% after 4 x DIP. No dose or sequence effect was evident. The minimum follow-up of the surviving patients was 51 months, with median relapse-free survival of 13.8 months and median overall survival of 18.8 months. Only four patients relapsed at distant sites. CONCLUSION: DIP is highly active in previously untreated LA SCCHN, however, toxicity of DIP in this population is substantial.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation of platinum derived from cisplatin administered alone and with pemetrexed in head and neck cancer patients.

PURPOSE: This phase I study characterized the pharmacokinetics of free and total platinum derived from cisplatin administered alone and in combination with pemetrexed. Secondary objectives were to assess the pharmacokinetics of pemetrexed when it is combined with cisplatin as well as to evaluate the safety profile and document antitumor activity associated with this combination. METHODS: An open-label, two-arm, cross-over phase 1 study was performed in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, age > or =18 years, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and adequate organ function. Blood samples were taken and pharmacokinetics evaluated for the first two cycles using noncompartmental analysis. Patients received either pemetrexed (500 mg m(-2)) plus cisplatin (75 mg m(-2)) administered in cycle 1 followed by cisplatin alone in cycle 2; or in the reverse order (i.e., cisplatin alone in cycle 1 followed by pemetrexed plus cisplatin in cycle 2). Each treatment cycle was 21 days and patients received folic acid, vitamin B(12) supplementation, and dexamethasone prophylaxis. After the first two cycles, patients continued study treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin every 3 weeks up to a maximum of six total treatment cycles. Toxicities were graded by the investigators according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 3.0. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients were treated; one patient was discontinued from the study after cycle 1 for failure to meet baseline eligibility criteria for renal function. The ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CI) comparing the pharmacokinetics for cisplatin administered with pemetrexed to those for cisplatin administered alone for free platinum were: C(max) = 1.08 (CI: 0.92, 1.27) and AUC = 0.93 (CI: 0.82, 1.06); and, total platinum were: C(max) = 0.97 (CI: 0.88, 1.06) and AUC = 0.87 (CI: 0.81, 0.93). These results indicate that platinum pharmacokinetics (free and total) are similar, whether cisplatin is administered alone or combined with pemetrexed. The pemetrexed pharmacokinetic results were consistent with those from previous single-agent pemetrexed studies and a previous study of pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin. The combination of pemetrexed and cisplatin did not show any unexpected toxicities. Consistent with the platinum pharmacokinetic results, co-administration with pemetrexed did not appear to enhance cisplatin-related toxicities. Of the 13 treated patients, 11 had stable disease as the best overall response and 2 had progressive disease. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics of free platinum derived from cisplatin were not altered by co-administration with pemetrexed, and in agreement with this, no unexpected cisplatin-induced toxicities were observed when these drugs were combined.

Current concepts for the management of head and neck cancer: chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy can be administered in patients with locoregionally advanced (LA) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) either concurrently with irradiation or as induction chemotherapy prior to local treatment or as palliative therapy in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic disease. Cisplatin-based chemoradiation is still the standard for LA-SCCHN. TPF has emerged as the new standard regimen when induction chemotherapy is indicated. Areas of active investigation in LA-SCCHN are the sequential administration of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and the integration of targeted therapies. None of the combination chemotherapy regimens demonstrated an overall survival benefit when compared to single agent methotrexate, cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil in recurrent/metastatic disease. Combination chemotherapy in this setting is preferably used in younger patients with a good performance status and with symptomatic disease who require prompt symptom relief. However, a survival benefit was observed when cetuximab was combined with platinum-5-fluorouracil.

Recurrent head and neck cancer: current treatment and future prospects.

Recurrent and metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck still carries a poor prognosis. Response rates with combination chemotherapy regimens are generally higher than those observed with single-agent chemotherapy. However, this did not translate into an overall survival benefit, not in even a single randomized trial. As none of the combination chemotherapy regimens demonstrated an overall survival benefit when compared with single-agent methotrexate, cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil, the use of combination chemotherapy outside clinical trials is usually restricted to younger patients with a good performance status and with symptomatic disease who require prompt symptom relief. After decades without real progress, a recent randomized trial showed that adding cetuximab, the first clinically available EGF receptor-directed monoclonal antibody, to a standard chemotherapy regimen (platinum/5-fluorouracil), led to an important survival benefit. In addition, the response rate nearly doubled with this approach, which has great promise for the treatment of symptomatic disease. There is now a plethora of targeted therapies in various stages of preclinical and clinical development. The next challenge will be to sort out which of them have a clinically meaningful activity and find out how to incorporate them into existing treatment regimens.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in head and neck cancer: should it be revisited?

Locally advanced SCCHN (LA-SCCHN) is generally treated by a combination of chemotherapy, irradiation and/or surgery. Timing of the chemotherapy has for long been a matter of debate but concurrent chemoradiation was widely adopted as standard of care for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck after the publication of a large meta-analysis which demonstrated that concurrent chemoradiation confers an absolute survival benefit of 8% at 2 and 5 years. Induction chemotherapy has some appealing advantages including the opportunity of assessing tumor response and selecting the patients who are candidates for organ preservation. The cisplatin-fluorouracil combination has been the induction regimen of choice for two decades but has recently been superseded by a combination of cisplatin, fluorouracil and a taxane which can be considered the standard regimen when induction chemotherapy is appropriate. Multiple large randomized trials designed to compare sequential induction, i.e., chemotherapy followed by CRT to CRT alone are currently underway. New challenges are the integration of targeted therapies into the current treatment strategies and the identification of prognostic biomarkers and of factors predicting the response to treatment which would help to select patients who are likely to benefit most from induction chemotherapy.