Phase III Study of Cabozantinib in Previously Treated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: COMET-1.

PURPOSE: Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of kinases, including MET and vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, and has shown activity in men with previously treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This blinded phase III trial compared cabozantinib with prednisone in patients with mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men with progressive mCRPC after docetaxel and abiraterone and/or enzalutamide were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to cabozantinib 60 mg once per day or prednisone 5 mg twice per day. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Bone scan response (BSR) at week 12 as assessed by independent review committee was the secondary end point; radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and effects on circulating tumor cells (CTCs), bone biomarkers, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) were exploratory assessments. RESULTS: A total of 1,028 patients were randomly assigned to cabozantinib (n = 682) or prednisone (n = 346). Median OS was 11.0 months with cabozantinib and 9.8 months with prednisone (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.06; stratified log-rank P = .213). BSR at week 12 favored cabozantinib (42% v 3%; stratified Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel P < .001). rPFS was improved in the cabozantinib group (median, 5.6 v 2.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.57; stratified log-rank P < .001). Cabozantinib was associated with improvements in CTC conversion, bone biomarkers, and post-random assignment incidence of SSEs but not PSA outcomes. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events and discontinuations because of adverse events were higher with cabozantinib than with prednisone (71% v 56% and 33% v 12%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Cabozantinib did not significantly improve OS compared with prednisone in heavily treated patients with mCRPC and progressive disease after docetaxel and abiraterone and/or enzalutamide. Cabozantinib had some activity in improving BSR, rPFS, SSEs, CTC conversions, and bone biomarkers but not PSA outcomes.

One stage curative resection of double intestinal neuroendocrine tumors with thirty-two bilobar liver metastases. A case report.

Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) of the midgut are often multifocal and have a noticeable attitude to metastasize to locoregional lymph nodes and liver. Surgery is the only curative treatment for metastatic NETs of the midgut, even though only a minority of patients are candidates to radical surgical resection. The optimal timing for surgical resection in case of synchronous presentation of primary intestinal neoplasms and resectable LM is still controversial, especially when LM are multiple and/or involve multiple liver segments. Even though a staged approach with initial intestinal resection followed by liver resection is still preferred, recent studies have shown favourable results for simultaneous procedures, which have the striking advantage of avoiding a second laparotomy, with morbidity and mortality rates comparable to staged resections. We report here the case of a patient with double midgut well-differentiated NET and thirty-two synchronous bilobar LM who received successful simultaneous curative right hemicolectomy and radical but conservative liver resection and radiofrequency thermal ablation with the guidance of intraoperative ultrasonography. He is alive without evidence of recurrence 48 months after surgery.

Phase II randomized study of vandetanib plus gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus placebo as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in elderly patients.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vandetanib plus gemcitabine (V/G) compared with gemcitabine alone in elderly patients with untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: This was a phase II, randomized, double-blind study. A total of 124 elderly patients (mean age, 75 yr; age range, 70-84 yr; 73% men) received V/G (n = 61) or placebo plus gemcitabine (n = 63). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate, time to deterioration of performance status, and safety outcomes. RESULTS: PFS was significantly prolonged with V/G (median, 183 days; 95% confidence interval, 116-214) compared with placebo plus gemcitabine (median, 169 days; 95% confidence interval, 95-194; p = 0.047). No statistically significant differences between arms were observed in all secondary endpoints, including overall survival. The addition of vandetanib to gemcitabine was well tolerated. The rate of patients with ≥1 treatment-related adverse event was comparable in the two arms, pyrexia, dyspnea, and neutropenia being the most common adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: V/G combination was associated with a statistically significant prolongation of PFS compared with gemcitabine alone in untreated elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, with an acceptable safety profile.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Italian cancer centers: results of CINVDAY, a prospective, multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Guideline consistency in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains low (29% in the Pan European Emesis Registry study) and very low (11%) in regimens with a high emetogenic risk. The aim of this study was to evaluate the guideline consistency of CINV prophylaxis for acute emesis in daily clinical practice in Italy. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Patients scheduled to receive antitumor treatment on a single prespecified day were included. Data on patient characteristics (demographic and clinical), type of anticancer therapy, and type of antiemetic therapy prescribed for acute emesis were collected on electronic data capture forms. Chemotherapy regimens and antiemetic prophylaxis were categorized according to the MASCC 2011 guidelines. The study was approved by the local ethics committees. RESULTS: From July 2013 to February 2014, a total of 502 patients were enrolled at 26 study sites. Median age was 62 years (range 27-87 years). Colorectal cancer and breast cancer were the most common malignancies. The emetogenic potential of the chemotherapy regimens used was high (HEC) (23.7%), moderate (MEC) (40.6%), low (31.3%) or minimal (4.4%). Overall, guideline consistency was 19.3%. Consistency reached 45% when the various 5HT3 receptor antagonists were considered equivalent and interchangeable in MEC regimens. Adherence to guidelines was lowest for MEC and Minimal risk groups. Ten percent of patients in HEC and MEC regimens did not receive any 5HT3 receptor antagonists. NK1 receptor antagonists were used in 8% of all regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that antiemetic guideline inconsistency remains an issue in daily clinical oncology practice in Italy.

Impact of use of oral anticancer drugs on activity of Italian oncology practices: results of a survey conducted by the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM).

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: In recent years, the number of oral anticancer drugs used in clinical practice has rapidly increased. The Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM) conducted a survey to describe the impact of the use of oral anticancer drugs on the daily activity of Italian oncology practices. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: A survey questionnaire was distributed to the coordinators of the regional sections of AIOM. A 6-month period was considered, from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010. The survey addressed (1) quantitative aspects of the use of oral anticancer drugs; (2) practical aspects in the management of patients treated with these drugs; (3) issues related to treatment costs and reimbursement procedures. RESULTS: Thirty-six questionnaires were received from institutions distributed throughout the Italian territory. Oral anticancer drugs (both chemotherapy and molecularly targeted agents) accounted for a significant proportion (17%) of prescribed treatments. Among the responding institutions, there were different dispensation procedures of oral drugs to patients: drugs were dispensed by the pharmacist (57%) or directly by the medical oncologist (23%) or nurse (20%). The medical oncologist played a major role in the communication with patients (73% alone and a further 24% in cooperation with other professional figures) and was the point of reference in the event of side effects in 97% of cases. In most cases, the reimbursement of drug costs was separated ("File F" procedure) from the flat fare received by the hospital for outpatient visits or day-hospital access. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal organization of oral anticancer treatment warrants the cooperation and integration of multiple professional figures. At least three figures are involved in patient management in the hospital: the medical oncologist, the nurse, and the hospital pharmacist. Oral anticancer treatments are associated with specific reimbursement issues: in the majority of cases, the cost of the drug is reimbursed separately from the cost of patient access.

Gemcitabine and paclitaxel combination as second-line chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Although small-cell lung cancer is a chemosensitive malignancy, most patients rapidly relapse. Results of second-line treatment are generally poor. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the activity and toxicity of a combination of gemcitabine and paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were refractory or relapsed small-cell lung cancer, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and measurable disease. Paclitaxel was administered at 135 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 immediately followed by gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks up to 6 courses. Restaging of disease was scheduled every 3 courses. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were enrolled. The median age was 65 years. Nineteen patients were considered refractory (progressive disease during or within 90 days from completion of first-line treatment), whereas 22 patients were chemotherapy sensitive. A total of 135 courses was administered (range, 1-6; median, 3). Nine patients achieved a partial remission (partial response, 22%), and 10 patients had stable disease (24%), with a disease control rate (partial response + stable disease) of 46%: in 12 (55%) of 22 patients who were sensitive and in 7 (37%) of 19 patients with refractory disease, respectively. All partial responses but one were observed in the sensitive group. The median duration of response was 5 months. The most-frequent severe toxicities were neutropenia grade 3-4 and neurologic grade 3 in 24% and 7% of delivered courses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and paclitaxel investigated in our study achieved a high disease control rate, but the schedule we adopted appeared to be quite toxic.

Phase II trial of non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and low-dose prednisone in second-line chemotherapy for hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) (Myocet) has shown marked in vitro activity in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and also in docetaxel-resistant cells, higher than that shown by pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. Its activity would seem to be due to a high intracellular drug concentration and induction of Golgi-dependent apoptosis. On the basis of these results, a clinical study was designed to assess the activity of NPLD and low-dose prednisone in second-line therapy. METHODS: Fifty-four patients were enrolled and evaluated. Eligibility criteria were histologically confirmed CRPC, PSA >20 ng/mL or measurable lesions according to the RECIST criteria, previous docetaxel-based chemotherapy, and adequate cardiac function. Patients were treated with weekly intravenous NPLD 25 mg/m2 and daily prednisone 10 mg until progression. RESULTS: Median patient age was 69 years (range, 52-83) and median baseline PSA concentration was 120 ng/mL (range, 5.35-4350). Sixteen (29.6%) patients had measurable lesions. Objective or PSA responses (>50% reduction) were observed in 8 (14.8%) patients. The median time to progression was 2.8 months and the median overall survival was 11.3 months. Toxicity was generally mild (grade 1-2) and infrequent, with grade 3-4 neutropenia in 12.9% of cases. Grade 3 nonhematological toxicities included nausea in 2 patients (3.7%) and fatigue and stomatitis in 1 case (1.9%). No drug-related serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly administration of NPLD is a well tolerated treatment with proven albeit limited activity.

Use of metronomic chemotherapy in oncology: results from a national Italian survey.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Metronomic chemotherapy refers to the administration of low doses of cytotoxic agents over a prolonged period of time with no or only short drug-free intervals. It is designed to overcome acquired tumor resistance to chemotherapy and reduce neo-angiogenesis despite a lower toxicity than with standard chemotherapy. The role of metronomic chemotherapy remains controversial, and its optimal therapeutic use has not yet been defined. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: The present survey was designed as a short questionnaire and was sent to the medical oncologists registered with Medikey, a national database listing all the Italian oncology specialists linked with the Italian Council of Medical Oncology Hospital Consultants (Collegio Italiano Primari Oncologi Medici Ospedalieri, CIPOMO) and the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica, AIOM). The questionnaire was completed on a voluntary basis and it was totally anonymous. RESULTS: The questionnaire was sent to 3,289 oncologists, and 191 (5.8%) actively participated in the survey. Seventy-two percent of responders declared that they had administered a regimen of metronomic chemotherapy at least once. Metronomic chemotherapy is commonly used in advanced breast cancer patients, and in most cases it was prescribed after failure of at least two lines of treatment. Oral agents such as cyclophosphamide, capecitabine, methotrexate and vinorelbine were the most commonly prescribed drugs. Nearly 60% of responders was believed to have significantly less toxicity with metronomic chemotherapy than with standard chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The sample of oncologists who participated in the survey is small but it appears to be representative of the Italian medical oncology community. The answers to the questionnaire indicate a significant interest in metronomic chemotherapy, which is apparently widely prescribed. This is the first large national survey on the use of metronomic chemotherapy. Considering the results, larger research on metronomic chemotherapy is strongly warranted.

Disparity in the "time to patient access" to new anti-cancer drugs in Italian regions. Results of a survey conducted by the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM).

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: In 2009, the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM) conducted a survey to describe the impact of regional pharmaceutical formularies on the disparity of access to eight new drugs among cancer patients treated in Italian regions. The survey documented some regional restrictions for some anti-cancer drugs. In the study, we analyzed the "time to patient access" to new anti-cancer drugs in Italian regions. METHODS: In March 2010, we analyzed the availability of 17 new anti-cancer drugs at a regional level, specifically the coherence of regional authorizations compared with national authorizations approved by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA). In the regions with pharmaceutical formularies, we analyzed the characteristics of technical-scientific committees for the evaluation of inclusion of hospital drugs in these formularies. We also analyzed the time from EMA (CMPH) authorization to AIFA marketing authorization, the time from AIFA marketing authorization to patient availability, and the total time from EMA (CMPH) authorization to patient availability of the drugs in all Italian regions, for 11 of these drugs. RESULTS: Some drugs were included in all the regional pharmaceutical formularies, without restrictions, whereas other drugs were not included in one and others were not included in more than one formulary. Median time from EMA to AIFA was 11.2 months (range, 2.9-17.1). Median time from AIFA to patient availability was 1.4 months (range, 0.0-50.5) in regions with drug formularies versus 0.0 months in regions without drugs formularies. Median total time from EMA to patient availability was longer in regions with formularies (13.3 months; range, 2.9-65.3) than in regions without formularies (11.2 months; range, 2.9-24.0), where drugs are immediately available after AIFA marketing authorization. Moreover, the interval was very long (range, 2.9-65.3) for some drugs in regions with formularies. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis confirmed that the presence of multiple hierarchical levels of drug evaluation can create disparity in drug availability for Italian citizens.

Prednisone plus gefitinib versus prednisone plus placebo in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer: a randomized phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal epidermal growth factor receptor expression and pre-clinical data prompted us to investigate the activity of gefitinib, a selective epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in hormone-refractory prostate cancer. METHODS: Eighty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive prednisone plus gefitinib (pG; n = 44) or prednisone plus placebo (ppl; n = 38). On progression, patients initially assigned to placebo were offered the possibility to receive gefitinib. Best prostate-specific antigen response was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 29.0 months (26.0-32.0), 77 patients progressed and 51 died. Prostate-specific antigen response was recorded in 6/38 (15.8%; 95% CI 4.2-27.4) and in 5/44 (11.4%; 95% CI 2.0-20.8) patients in pG and ppl groups, respectively. There was no difference between groups in time to progression (median pG 4.0 months, range 3.5-4.5; median ppl 4.5 months, range 3.5-5.0) and survival (median pG 26.5 months, range 16.0-37.0; median ppl 20.5 months, range 14.0-27.0). Adverse events occurred in 19 patients in each arm and were generally mild. CONCLUSIONS: pG showed a good tolerability profile but only a limited therapeutic activity in hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Switching to an aromatase inhibitor provides mortality benefit in early breast carcinoma: pooled analysis of 2 consecutive trials.

BACKGROUND: The superiority of new generation aromatase inhibitors over tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of early breast carcinoma has emerged from several randomized trials. However, until now not all previous studies have shown a mortality benefit. METHODS: A pooled analysis of 2 prospective multicentric trials, sharing the same study design and nearly identical inclusion criteria, was performed. In both trials, women treated previously with tamoxifen for 2 or 3 years were randomly assigned to either continuing tamoxifen for an additional 2 or 3 years or to having their treatment switched to aminoglutethimide or anastrozole for a comparable time period. Mortality was analyzed according to allocated treatment and other patient and tumor variables. RESULTS: In all, 828 postmenopausal women, mostly with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and node-positive tumors who had been monitored for a median time of 78 months (range, 6-141 months) were analyzed. Of these women, 415 were randomly selected to continue tamoxifen and 413 switched to aminoglutethimide or anastrozole. All-cause mortality and breast cancer-specific mortality were significantly improved by the switch: all-cause mortality: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61 (0.42-0.88) P = .007; breast cancer-specific mortality: HR = 0.61 (0.39-0.94) P = .025. No increase was recorded in breast cancer-unrelated mortality in women after switching. Multivariate analysis showed that patient age, tumor size, allocated treatment, and nodal status, in that order, were independent mortality predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to an aromatase inhibitor after 2 or 3 years of tamoxifen therapy significantly improves survival compared with continuing 2 or 3 years of additional tamoxifen treatment.

The impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on health-related quality of life.

GOAL OF WORK: The objectives of this prospective observational study were to estimate the frequency of patients who reported an impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) on their daily life and to evaluate the determinants of such an impact. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult cancer patients at seven Italian oncology centers who were receiving cisplatin-containing regimens reported incidence and intensity of CINV for eight consecutive days in a diary and completed a Functional Living Index for Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 34% of patients reported vomiting and 62% reported nausea after chemotherapy. On days 1 to 5 after receiving chemotherapy, 67% of patients who had at least one emetic episode and 77% of those who suffered from at least mild nausea experienced an impact on their daily activities as measured on the FLIE questionnaire. More than 90% of all patients with both acute and delayed nausea or vomiting reported an impact on their daily life. Both acute and delayed vomiting contributed in similar measure to impact daily life; however, the importance of delayed nausea was greater than that of acute nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Despite antiemetic prophylaxis, CINV is still prevalent and often impacts the daily life of patients in Italy, especially in the delayed phase. The duration more than the severity seems to be responsible for the impact of CINV on the patients' daily lives.

The cost of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Italy.

GOALS OF WORK: The aim of this paper is to analyze the costs of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective observational study at seven public oncology centers, incidence and intensity of CINV daily for 8 days after chemotherapy in consecutive patients receiving cisplatin-containing chemotherapy were recorded. All costs related to CINV (direct medical, direct nonmedical, and indirect) were recorded (in 2003 euros). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 172 patients were enrolled; cost data were available for 168 patients. Thirty-seven percent of patients experienced acute CINV, and 57% experienced delayed CINV; 39% achieved total control, defined as no nausea, vomiting, or rescue therapy. Mean per-patient costs of acute and delayed CINV were 30.03 euro from the hospital perspective, 4.9 euro from the patient perspective, and 26.85 euro from the National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Costs of CINV were highly variable among oncology centers, largely because of differences in procedures for preventing delayed CINV. These costs were four times higher when antiemetic drugs were prescribed and paid for by the NHS than when antiemetic prophylaxis was provided directly from hospital pharmacies. Moreover, in the delayed phase, the NHS incurred a 94% increase in costs for patients without total control. Overall costs for patients who did not experience total control of CINV were 35.57 euro higher than for those who did (85% increase). CONCLUSIONS: Costs of CINV for the Italian NHS could be reduced if hospitals furnished antiemetic prophylaxis directly to patients. Better control of both acute and delayed CINV would improve patient well-being as well as reduce the budgetary impact of CINV in Italy.

Pemetrexed in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had received previous anthracycline and taxane treatment: phase II study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed in pretreated patients with advanced-stage breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced-stage or metastatic breast cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and progressive or relapsed disease after treatment with regimens containing anthracyclines and taxanes were eligible. Pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 was administered as a 10-minute intravenous infusion on day 1 every 21 days. RESULTS: Seventy-nine women were enrolled. After protocol amendment, 43 patients received folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation to control pemetrexed-related toxicity. A median of 4 cycles (range, 1-23 cycles) was administered. Overall response rate was 9% (95% confidence interval, 3.7%-17.6%), median duration of response was 5.5 months, median progression-free survival was 3.1 months, and median survival was 10.5 months. Major grade 3/4 toxicities were lymphopenia (53.3%), neutropenia (36.4%), leukopenia (26.9%), and anemia (7.7%). In general, the toxicities were less frequent in patients who received vitamin supplementation than in those who did not receive vitamin supplementation. CONCLUSION: The response to pemetrexed salvage treatment was low in this study of heavily pretreated patients with breast cancer. Pemetrexed was generally well tolerated in patients with previously treated breast cancer. Vitamin supplementation appeared to ameliorate toxicity.

Diagnostic criteria for psychosomatic research and psychosocial variables in breast cancer patients.

The aim of the study was to examine the relationship of the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) with psychosocial variables and quality of life among cancer patients. Of 105 women with breast cancer who participated in the study, 40 (38.1%) had symptoms meeting the criteria for at least one DCPR syndrome, and 30 (28.6%) had more than one DCPR syndrome. Health anxiety, demoralization, and alexithymia were the most frequent DCPR syndromes. Patients who were diagnosed with DCPR syndromes reported higher levels of cancer-related worries and poorer quality of life than those without a DCPR diagnosis. Analysis of the single DCPR clusters and coping with cancer indicated that health anxiety was related to higher scores on the Mini-Mental Adjustment to Cancer (Mini-MAC) anxious preoccupation subscale, DCPR demoralization was related to higher scores on the Mini-MAC hopelessness subscale, and DCPR alexithymia was related to higher scores on the Mini-MAC avoidance subscale. The study indicates the usefulness of the application of the DCPR in breast cancer, although further research is needed to improve the feasibility and internal validity of DCPR constructs.

Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis after modern antiemetics.

BACKGROUND: The authors determined the incidence of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis (vomiting) (CINV) among patients receiving highly (HEC) or moderately (MEC) emetogenic chemotherapy. They also assessed whether physicians and nurses accurately recognized the incidence of acute and delayed CINV in their own practices. METHODS: A prospective, observational study of adult patients receiving HEC or MEC for the first time was performed. Before patient enrollment, medical oncologists and oncology nurses estimated the incidence of acute (Day 1) and delayed (Days 2-5) CINV after first administration of HEC and MEC in their own practices. Eligible patients from their practices then completed a 6-day diary including emetic episodes, nausea assessment, and antiemetic medication use. Observed incidence rates of acute and delayed CINV were compared with physician/nurse predictions. RESULTS: Twenty-four physicians and nurses and 298 eligible patients (67 receiving HEC and 231 receiving MEC) were recruited from 14 oncology practices in 6 countries. Greater than 35% of patients overall experienced acute nausea, whereas 13% experienced acute emesis. Delayed nausea and emesis were observed in 60% and 50% of HEC patients, respectively, and in 52% and 28% of MEC patients, respectively. Delayed symptoms appeared without acute symptoms after HEC (emesis, 38%; nausea, 33%) and MEC (emesis, 19%; nausea, 21%). Physicians and nurses accurately predicted the incidence of acute CINV but underestimated the incidence of delayed nausea and emesis after HEC by 21 and 28 percentage points, respectively, and delayed nausea after MEC by 28 percentage points. Greater than 75% of physicians and nurses underestimated the incidence of delayed CINV after both HEC and MEC. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians and nurses markedly underestimated the incidence of delayed nausea and emesis after both HEC and MEC. Delayed nausea and emesis, which may appear even in the absence of acute nausea and emesis, remain important targets for improved therapeutic intervention.

Bolus fluorouracil and leucovorin with oxaliplatin as first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: A phase II trial investigated the activity and toxicity of a bolus administration schedule of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin (LV) therapy in patients with untreated advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-five patients in this multicenter, open, nonrandomized study received oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on the first day of each course and 5-FU and LV 350 mg/m(2) and 20 mg/m(2), respectively, as a daily bolus for 5 days, every 21 days, for a maximum of six courses. RESULTS: Partial responses occurred in 18 patients, giving an intent-to-treat response rate of 40.0%. Median time to response was 12.7 weeks; median duration of response was 18.4 weeks. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 months; median survival was 14 months. The independent prognostic factors for improved overall survival were good performance status and negative carcino-embryonic antigen blood level. Incidences of adverse effects were reduced after the 5-FU dose was reduced to 300 mg/m(2). Reversible neurologic toxicity occurred in 44.4% of patients. CONCLUSION: Bolus administration of oxaliplatin, 5-FU, and LV as first-line therapy for untreated advanced colorectal cancer is efficacious and safe. In addition to a more favorable safety profile, the 300 mg/m(2) dosage offered improved dose-intensity compared with the initial dosage.

Radiosensitization by oxaliplatin in a mouse adenocarcinoma: influence of treatment schedule.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to investigate if oxaliplatin (1-OHP) could be used as a radiosensitizer in vivo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Experiments were performed in mice (C3D2F1) bearing a transplanted mammary carcinoma in a foot. Drugs, 1-OHP and cis-diammine-dichloro-platinum (CDDP), were administered i.p. Results were analyzed in terms of tumor growth delay (TGD). RESULTS: 1-OHP and CDDP were tested in single doses of 6 and 10 mg/kg body weight. Administration of either 1-OHP or CDDP produced a significant TGD but only with the dose of 10 mg/kg. Single dose combined X-ray (10 Gy) and 1-OHP (6 and 10 mg/kg) treatments were performed with different sequences and time intervals (1 h, 4 h, and 24 h). All TGDs of these combined treatments were uniform among themselves (indicating that sequence and time interval did not influence the results), and did not depend on the drug dose. In X-ray (10 and 20 Gy) and 1-OHP (6 and 10 mg/kg) combined treatment, the TGDs increased only with X-ray dose. Different 1-OHP administration schedules were performed for fractionated experiments: two treatments every 4 days. The least toxic protocol (1-OHP total dose from 6 to 14 mg/kg) was selected for combined treatments with 10 daily X-ray treatments of 2 Gy. A clear drug dose-effect relationship was observed in those treatments with 1-OHP doses from 10 to 14 mg/kg. CONCLUSION: Although low-dose 1-OHP did not induce a TGD when administered alone, in combined protocols it increased X-ray efficacy.