Azacitidine favorably modulates PSA kinetics correlating with plasma DNA LINE-1 hypomethylation in men with chemonaïve castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Azacitidine is a hypomethylating agent that activates genes repressed by promoter methylation. Preclinically, demethylating agents reverse resistance of prostate cancer to androgen ablation. A phase II trial evaluated azacitidine for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) progressing on combined androgen blockade (CAB). METHODS: Chemonaïve patients with CRPC on CAB and PSA-doubling time (DT) < 3 months were eligible. The primary endpoint was prolongation of PSA-DT to ≥ 3 months. Correlation of biologic activity (fetal hemoglobin, plasma DNA LINE-1 methylation) with prolongation of PSA-DT was tested. CAB was continued and azacitidine 75 mg/m(2) was administered subcutaneously on days 1-5 of each 28-day cycle up to 12 cycles or until clinical progression/intolerable toxicities. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled, 80.6% had metastatic disease, and 34 were evaluable. A PSA-DT ≥ 3 months was attained in 19 patients (55.8%). Overall median PSA-DT was significantly prolonged compared to baseline (2.8 vs. 1.5 months, P < 0.01). Fourteen patients had some PSA decline during therapy and 1 patient had a ≥ 30% decline compared with baseline. The median clinical progression-free survival was 12.4 weeks. Grade 3 toxicities included fatigue (12%), and neutropenia (6%), with 4 patients discontinuing due to toxicities. A trend in decreasing plasma DNA LINE-1 methylation was seen with longer treatment duration (P = 0.06), which significantly correlated with prolongation of PSA-DT (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Azacitidine favorably modulates PSA kinetics in chemonaïve CRPC that correlates with decreasing plasma DNA LINE-1 methylation. Given the excellent tolerability, further development of azacitidine for CRPC may be warranted, with exploration of combination regimens.

Placebo-controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of a urea/lactic acid-based topical keratolytic agent for prevention of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study N05C5.

PURPOSE: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting toxicity of capecitabine for which no effective preventative treatment has been definitively demonstrated. This trial was conducted on the basis of preliminary data that a urea/lactic acid-based topical keratolytic agent (ULABTKA) may prevent HFS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blind phase III trial evaluated 137 patients receiving their first ever cycle of capecitabine at a dose of either 2,000 or 2,500 mg/m(2) per day for 14 days. Patients were randomly assigned to a ULABTKA versus a placebo cream, which was applied to the hands and feet twice per day for 21 days after the start of capecitabine. Patients completed an HFS diary (HFSD) daily. HFS toxicity grade (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] v3.0) was also collected at baseline and at the end of each cycle. The primary end point was the incidence of moderate/severe HFS symptoms in the first treatment cycle, based on the patient-reported HFSD. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with moderate/severe HFS symptoms was not different between groups, being 13.6% in the ULABTKA arm and 10.2% in the placebo arm (P = .768 by Fisher's exact test). The odds ratio was 1.37 (95% CI, 0.37 to 5.76). Cycle 1 CTCAE skin toxicity was higher in the ULABTKA arm but not significantly so (33% v 27%; P = .82). No significant differences were observed in other toxicities between groups. CONCLUSION: These data do not support the efficacy of a ULABTKA cream for preventing HFS symptoms in patients receiving capecitabine.

Phase I study of a 3-drug regimen of gemcitabine/cisplatin/pemetrexed in patients with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium.

OBJECTIVES: Gemcitabine (G) plus cisplatin (C) is standard care for metastatic transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urothelium. Pemetrexed (P), alone or in combination with G, is active in metastatic TCC. However, the safety and efficacy of P combined with GC therapy is unknown. This phase I trial was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of GC followed by P+G in patients with metastatic TCC. METHODS: Cohorts of 3 to 6 patients received escalating doses 28-day cycles (maximum 6 cycles): G 800-1,000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15; P 400-500 mg/m2 on day 15; and C 50-70 mg/m2 on day 1. All patients received folic acid, vitamin B12, and full supportive care. The 3+3 standard phase I escalation rule was used to determine MTD. RESULTS: Fifteen patients registered: 13/15 white males; median age 70 years (range, 53-82); 11/15 had KPS>or=90. At dose level 0, 2/4 patients experienced unrelated DLTs, and 1 patient was replaced (completed<1 cycle). Dose escalation proceeded to dose level 1. At level 1, 4/6 patients experienced DLTs; dosing decreased to level 0 and 4/5 patients experienced DLTs. The MTD was not determined. The 2 patients that completed 6 cycles both had partial responses. Grades 3-4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (60%), leukopenia (20%), and febrile neutropenia (13%). CONCLUSION: Adding P to the standard GC regimen as first-line therapy for metastatic TCC produced no benefit. The MTD exceeded therapeutic gemcitabine and cisplatin doses for urothelial cancer and thus the study was aborted.

A phase 2 study of gemcitabine and epirubicin for the treatment of pleural mesothelioma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Study, N0021.

BACKGROUND: The North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) conducted a phase 2 study to evaluate the antitumor activity of the combination of gemcitabine and epirubicin in patients with pleural mesothelioma who received no more than 1 prior chemotherapy regimen. METHODS: A total of 23 patients were accrued between August 2001 and April 2002 and received gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously over 30 minutes weekly every 2 weeks and epirubicin at a dose of 90 mg/m(2) intravenously on Day 1 on an every-21-days cycle (high-dose patient group). Between August 2002 and April 2004, an additional 45 patients were treated at a reduced dose of gemcitabine of 750 mg/m(2) and epirubicin at a dose of 70 mg/m(2) with the same schedule (low-dose patient group). RESULTS: In the high-dose patient group, the confirmed response rate was 13% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3-34%). The median survival was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.4-10.7 months) and the median time to disease progression was 6.3 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.6 months). In the low-dose patient group, the confirmed response rate was 7% (95% CI, 0-28%). The median survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.7-8.7 months) and the median time to disease progression was 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.7-5.6 months). Toxicity was moderate to severe. In the high-dose and low-dose groups, 87% and 60% of patients, respectively, experienced at least 1 adverse event of grade 4 or higher (according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]). The quality of life remained similar from baseline to the end of the 2 cycles of treatment in the high-dose group but worsened in the low-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, the combination regimen of gemcitabine and epirubicin was found to demonstrate minimal antitumor activity against pleural mesothelioma.