Phase 3 RCT comparing docetaxel-platinum with docetaxel-platinum-5FU as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in borderline resectable oral cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5FU) is one of the treatment options in very locally advanced oral cancer with a survival advantage over PF (cisplatin and 5FU). TP (docetaxel and cisplatin) has shown promising results with a lower rate of adverse events but has never been compared to TPF. METHODS: In this phase 3 randomized superiority study, adult patients with borderline resectable locally advanced oral cancers were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either TP or TPF. After the administration of 2 cycles, patients were evaluated in a multidisciplinary clinic and further treatment was planned. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. RESULTS: 495 patients were randomized in this study, 248 patients in TP arm and 247 in TPF arm. The 5-year OS was 18.5% (95% CI 13.8-23.7) and 23.9% (95% CI 18.1-30.1) in TP and TPF arms, respectively (Hazard ratio 0.778; 95% CI 0.637-0.952; P = 0.015). Following NACT, 43.8% were deemed resectable, but 34.5% underwent surgery. The 5-year OS was 50.7% (95% CI 41.5-59.1) and 5% (95%CI 2.9-8.1), respectively, in the surgically resected versus unresected cohort post NACT (P < 0.0001). Grade 3 or above adverse events were seen in 97 (39.1%) and 179 (72.5%) patients in the TP and TPF arms, respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: NACT with TPF has a survival benefit over TP in borderline resectable oral cancers, with an increase in toxicity which is manageable. Patients who undergo surgery achieve a relatively good, sustained survival.

Long term outcomes of phase I/II study of palliative triple metronomic chemotherapy in platinum-refractory/early failure oral cancer.

Background: Triple metronomic chemotherapy is one of the options of treatment in platinum-refractory/early failure oral cancer. However, long term outcomes with this regimen are unknown. Methods: Adult patients with platinum-refractory/early-failure oral cancer were enrolled in the study. Patients were administered triple metronomic chemotherapy ie erlotinib 150 mg once daily celecoxib 200 mg twice daily and methotrexate weekly (phase 1 in variable dose 15-6 mg/m2 & 9 mg/m2 in phase 2), all taken orally till progression of disease or development of intolerable adverse events. The primary objective was to estimate the long-term overall survival and factors impacting it. The Kaplan Meier method was used for time-to-event analysis. Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify factors impacting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The factors included in the model were age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group - performance status (ECOG PS), tobacco exposure and a subsite of primary and circulating endothelial cell levels at baseline. A p-value of 0.05 was considered significant. Clinical trials information: CTRI/2016/04/006834. Results: A total of 91 patients were recruited (15 in phase 1 & 76 in phase 2), the median follow-up was 41 months and 84 events of death had occurred. The median OS was 6.7 months (95% CI 5.4-7.4). The 1-year, 2-years and 3-year OS' were 14.1% (95% CI 7.8-22.2), 5.9% (95% CI 2.2-12.2) and 5.9% (95% CI 2.2-12.2) respectively. The only factor favorably impacting OS was the detection of circulating endothelial cells at baseline (HR = 0.46; 95% CI 0.28-0.75, P = 0.0020). The median PFS was 4.3 months (95% CI 4.1-5.1) and the 1-year PFS was 13.0% (95% CI 6.8-21.2). The factors with statistically significant impact on PFS were detection of circulating endothelial cells at baseline (HR = 0.48; 95% CI 0.30-0.78, P = 0.0020) and no tobacco exposure at baseline (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.27-0.94, P = 0.030). Interpretation: The long-term outcomes with triple oral metronomic chemotherapy ie erlotinib, methotrexate and celecoxib are unsatisfactory. Detection of circulating endothelial cells at baseline is a biomarker predicting efficacy of this therapy. Funding: The study was funded by an intramural grant from Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council (TRAC) and Terry Fox foundation.

Safety, immunogenecity and effectiveness of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine during the second wave of pandemic in India: a real-world study.

OBJECTIVES: This real-world study was conducted to assess the adverse effects following immunization (AEFI) and immunogenicity of ChAdO×1 nCoV-19 vaccine in terms of neutralising antibody titers and to study the effects of covariates such as age, sex, comorbidities and prior COVID status on these outcomes. Also, the effectiveness of the vaccine based on interval between the two doses was also investigated. METHODS: A total of 512 participants (M/F=274/238) aged 35(18-87) years comprising a mixed population of healthcare workers, other frontline workers and general public were enrolled between March and May 2021. Records for adverse events if any were collected telephonically by following up with participants up to 6 months post first dose and graded as per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5. Blood samples for measuring antibody titers against the receptor binding domain (RBD) were collected serially using a convenient sampling strategy up to 6 months after the first dose. Data on breakthrough COVID infection was collected telephonically till December 2021. RESULTS: Incidence of local reactions was higher after first dose at 33.4 % (171/512) compared to those after second dose at 12.9 % (66/512). Commonest side effect observed was injection site pain after the first (87.1 %; 149/171) and second (87.9 %; 56/66) dose respectively. Among systemic reactions, fever was the most common manifestation followed by myalgia and headache. Female sex (p<0⸱001) and age less than 60 years (p<0⸱001) had significantly higher predilection for systemic toxicities. Age ≤60 years (p=0.024) and prior-COVID (p<0.001) were found to be significantly associated with higher antibody titers, however, no association was found between these variables and breakthrough COVID infection. Longer spacing between the doses (≥6 weeks) was found to offer better protection against breakthrough infection compared to a spacing of 4 weeks. All breakthroughs were mild-moderate in severity, not requiring hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine is apparently safe and effective against SARS-CoV-2 virus infection. Prior COVID infection and younger age group achieve higher antibody titers, but no additional protection. Delaying the second dose up to at least 6 weeks is more effective compared to shorter spacing between doses.

Low-Dose Immunotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: The regimens approved for the treatment of advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma are accessible to only 1%-3% of patients in low- and middle-income countries because of their cost. In our previous study, metronomic chemotherapy improved survival in this setting. Retrospective data suggest that a low dose of nivolumab may be efficacious. Hence, we aimed to assess whether the addition of low-dose nivolumab to triple metronomic chemotherapy (TMC) improved overall survival (OS). METHODS: This was a randomized phase III superiority study. Adult patients with recurrent or newly diagnosed advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma being treated with palliative intent with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to TMC consisting of oral methotrexate 9 mg/m2 once a week, celecoxib 200 mg twice daily, and erlotinib 150 mg once daily, or TMC with intravenous nivolumab (TMC-I) 20 mg flat dose once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was 1-year OS. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were randomly assigned, 75 in TMC and 76 in the TMC-I arm. The addition of low-dose nivolumab led to an improvement in the 1-year OS from 16.3% (95% CI, 8.0 to 27.4) to 43.4% (95% CI, 30.8 to 55.3; hazard ratio, 0.545; 95% CI, 0.362 to 0.820; P = .0036). The median OS in TMC and TMC-I arms was 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 8.1) and 10.1 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 12.6), respectively (P = .0052). The rate of grade 3 and above adverse events was 50% and 46.1% in TMC and TMC-I arms, respectively (P = .744). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first-ever randomized study to demonstrate that the addition of low-dose nivolumab to metronomic chemotherapy improved OS and is an alternative standard of care for those who cannot access full-dose checkpoint inhibitors.

Genomic Analysis of AZD1222 (ChAdOx1) Vaccine Breakthrough Infections in the City of Mumbai.

Background: This manuscript describes the genetic features of SARS-CoV-2 mutations, prevalent phylogenetic lineages, and the disease severity amongst COVID-19-vaccinated individuals in a tertiary cancer hospital during the second wave of the pandemic in Mumbai, India. Methods: This observational study included 159 COVID-19 patients during the second wave of the pandemic from 17th March to 1st June 2021 at a tertiary cancer care centre in Mumbai. The cohort comprised of healthcare workers, staff relatives, cancer patients, and patient relatives. For comparison, 700 SARS-CoV-2 genomes sequenced during the first wave (23rd April to 25th September 2020) at the same centre were also analysed. Patients were assigned to nonvaccinated (no vaccination or <14 days from the 1st dose, n = 92), dose 1(≥14 days from the 1st dose to <14 days from the 2nd dose, n = 29), and dose 2 (≥14 days from the 2nd dose, n = 38) groups. Primary measure was the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 genomic lineages among different groups. In addition, severity of COVID-19 was assessed according to clinical and genomic variables. Results: Kappa B.1.1671.1 and delta B.1.617.2 variants contributed to an overwhelming majority of sequenced genomes (unvaccinated: 40/92, 43.5% kappa, 46/92, 50% delta; dose 1: 14/29, 48.3% kappa, 15/29, 51.7% delta; and dose 2: 23/38, 60.5% kappa, 14/38 36.8% delta). The proportion of the kappa and delta variants did not differ significantly across the unvaccinated, dose 1, and dose 2 groups (p = 0.27). There was no occurrence of severe COVID-19 in the dose 2 group (0/38, 0% vs. 14/121, 11.6%; p = 0.02). SARS-CoV-2 genomes from all three severe COVID-19 patients in the vaccinated group belonged to the delta lineage (3/28, 10.7% vs. 0/39, 0.0%, p = 0.04). Conclusions: Sequencing analysis of SARS-COV-2 genomes from Mumbai during the second wave of COVID-19 suggests the prevalence of the kappa B.1.617.1 and the delta B.1.627.2 variants among both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Continued evaluation of genomic sequencing data from breakthrough COVID-19 is necessary for monitoring the properties of evolving variants of concern and formulating appropriate immune response boosting and therapeutic strategies.

RMAC study: A randomized study for evaluation of metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy in recurrent head and neck cancers post salvage surgical resection in those who are ineligible for re-irradiation.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant re-chemoradiation after salvage surgery improves disease-free survival in recurrent head and neck cancer. However, most patients are ineligible for re-irradiation and are kept on observation. We investigated the efficacy of metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy (MAC) in this group of patients compared to observation. METHODS: This was a randomized integrated phase II/III clinical trial. Adults with recurrent head and neck cancer, who had undergone salvage surgery, but were ineligible for adjuvant re-irradiation were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either MAC arm or observation. MAC consisted of weekly oral methotrexate (at a dose of 15 mg per square meter of body surface area) and celecoxib (at a dose of 200 mg orally twice daily) for 6 months. The primary endpoint of phase 2 was disease-free survival (DFS) while that of phase 3 was overall survival (OS). For phase 2, to detect an improvement in the hazard ratio (HR) 0.67 with MAC, with a type 1 error of 10% (1-sided), type 2 error of 30%, 105 patients were required. While for phase 3, with a target HR of 0.77, with a type 1 error of 5%, type 2 error of 20%, 318 patients were required. Here we report the results of phase 2 part of the study. RESULTS: At a median follow up of 30.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 25.3 to 35.1) the 1 year and 2-year DFS were 57.4% (95% CI, 42.8-69.5) and 37.6% (95% CI, 24.1-51) in MAC arm whereas the corresponding numbers were 62.3% (95% CI, 47.8 to 73.8) and 54.2%(95% CI, 39.8 to 66.5) in observation arm, respectively (hazard ratio for progression, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.87 to 2.47; P = 0.15). In the MAC arm, the 1 and 2 year OS was 78.7% (95% CI, 64.9 to 87.6) and 48% (95% CI, 34.1 to 62).The corresponding figures in the observation arm were 79.2% (95% CI, 65.7 to 87.9) and 65.5% (95% CI, 50.9 to 76.7) (hazard ratio for death, 1.7, 95% CI, 0.94 to 3.08; P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: The adjuvant 6-month metronomic schedule was ineffective in improving outcomes in recurrent head and neck cancers post salvage surgery who are ineligible for re-radiation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registry of India (CTRI)- CTRI/2016/04/006872 [Registered on 26/4/2016].

SARS-CoV-2 reinfection after previous infection and vaccine breakthrough infection through the second wave of pandemic in India: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: There are sparse longitudinal data on SARS-CoV-2 infection after previous infection and after partial or full vaccination. METHODS: This study of a cohort of healthcare workers used Kaplan-Meier analysis with appropriate definition of events and censoring and used Cox models to assess outcomes, with data cut-off on June 18, 2021. RESULTS: A total of 1806 individuals with median age of 32 (18-64) years, 1483 (82.1%) with at least one vaccine dose, 1085 (60.1%) with 2 vaccine doses, 408 (22.6%) with at least one episode of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 6 (1.47%) with 2 episodes of infection were included in the analysis. At median follow-up of 38.4 weeks after first SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=408), the 52-week probability of reinfection was 2.2% (95% CI, 1.0-4.91%); and at median follow-up of 13.3 weeks after second dose, the 16-week probability of breakthrough infection was 5.6% (95% CI, 4.33-7.23%), which was significantly higher among those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection versus with previous infection (6.4% vs 1.8%, p=0.016, adjusted Cox HR=3.49, 95% CI, 1.09-11.20, p=0.036) and females versus males (7.9% vs 3.8%, p=0.007, adjusted Cox HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19-3.56, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: There was low probability of reinfection after previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and higher vaccine breakthrough infections among females and those without previous infection.

Audit of screen failure in 15 randomised studies from a low and middle-income country.

Background: Growth and development in patient management occurs via randomised studies. Screen failure is a significant hurdle while conducting randomised studies. There is limited data available from low and middle-income countries about factors resulting in screen failure. Hence, this audit was performed to identify the proportion of patients who screen failed and to elucidate reasons for the same. Methods: This was an audit of 15 randomised studies performed by medical oncology solid tumour unit II of Tata Memorial Centre. The screening logs of these studies were acquired. From the screening logs, data regarding the number of patients who had screen failed & reason for the same were obtained. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: A total of 7,481 patients were screened for 15 randomised clinical studies. Out of these, 3,666 (49.0%) patients were enrolled into trials and 3,815 (51.0%) screen failed. The most common reason for screen failure was 'not meeting inclusion criteria' (54.9%) followed by declining to take treatment (22.2%). Other factors that affect enrolment were 'not willing to stay in the locality of the trial site' (6.2%), being recruited in other studies (3.7%), poor performance status (PS) (3.4%), non-compliance (2.2%), meeting exclusion criteria (0.9%) and 'other' (6.5%). Conclusion: The commonest causes of screen failure in lower and middle-income countries are non-meeting of inclusion criteria followed by declining to take treatment, not willing to stay in locality of trial site, recruited into other studies, poor PS, non-compliance, meeting exclusion criteria & 'other'. This information would help analysing and hence planning of newer strategies to decrease the rate of screen failure.

Effect of Early Palliative Care on Quality of Life of Advanced Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care (EPC) is an important aspect of cancer management but, to our knowledge, has never been evaluated in patients with head and neck cancer. Hence, we performed this study to determine whether the addition of EPC to standard therapy leads to an improvement in the quality of life (QOL), decrease in symptom burden, and improvement in overall survival. METHODS: Adult patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region planned for palliative systemic therapy were allocated 1:1 to either standard systemic therapy without or with comprehensive EPC service referral. Patients were administered the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for head and neck cancer (FACT-H&N) questionnaire at baseline and every 1 month thereafter for 3 months. The primary endpoint was a change in the QOL measured at 3 months after random assignment. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Ninety patients were randomly assigned to each arm. There was no statistical difference in the change in the FACT-H&N total score (P = .94), FACT-H&N Trial Outcome Index (P = .95), FACT-general total (P = .84), and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale scores at 3 months between the 2 arms. The median overall survival was similar between the 2 arms (hazard ratio for death = 1.01, 95% confidence interval = 0.74 to 1.35). There were 5 in-hospital deaths in both arms (5.6% for both, P = .99). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase III study, the integration of EPC in head and neck cancer patients did not lead to an improvement in the QOL or survival.

Diclofenac versus tramadol for mucositis related pain in head and neck cancer patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation-a phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis related pain during CTRT in head and neck cancers is a common problem. Unfortunately, in spite of it being common, there is limited evidence for selection of systemic analgesic in this situation. Hence, this study was designed to compare the analgesic effect of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (diclofenac) versus a weak opioid (tramadol). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an open-label, parallel design, superiority randomised controlled study. In this study, head and neck cancer patients undergoing radical or adjuvant chemoradiation, who had grade 1 or above mucositis (in accordance with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03) and had pain related to it were randomly assigned to either diclofenac or tramadol for mucositis related pain control. The primary endpoint was analgesia after the first dose. The secondary endpoints were the rate of change in analgesic within 1 week, adverse events and quality of life. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight patients were randomised, 66 in diclofenac and 62 in tramadol arm. The median area under the curve for graph of pain across time after first dose of pain medication for the diclofenac arm and the tramadol arm was 348.936 units (range: 113.64-1,969.23) and 420.87 (101.97-1,465.96), respectively, (p = 0.05619). Five patients (8.1%) in the tramadol arm and 11 patients (16.7%) in the diclofenac arm required a change in analgesic within 1 week of starting the analgesic (p = 0.184). There was no statistically significant difference in any adverse events between the two arms. However, the rate of any grade of renal dysfunction was numerically higher in the diclofenac arm (10.6% versus 4.8%, p = 0.326). CONCLUSION: In this phase 3 study, evaluating diclofenac and tramadol for chemoradiation induced mucositis pain, there was no statistical difference in analgesic activity of these two drugs.

Low-cost oral metronomic chemotherapy versus intravenous cisplatin in patients with recurrent, metastatic, inoperable head and neck carcinoma: an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Regimens for palliation in patients with head and neck cancer recommended by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have low applicability (less than 1-3%) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) because of their cost. In a previous phase 2 study, patients with head and neck cancer who received metronomic chemotherapy had better outcomes when compared with those who received intravenous cisplatin, which is commonly used as the standard of care in LMICs. We aimed to do a phase 3 study to substantiate these findings. METHODS: We did an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial at the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Center, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India. We enrolled adult patients (aged 18-70 years) who planned to receive palliative systemic treatment for relapsed, recurrent, or newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1 and measurable disease, as defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to receive either oral metronomic chemotherapy, consisting of 15 mg/m2 methotrexate once per week plus 200 mg celecoxib twice per day until disease progression or until the development of intolerable side-effects, or 75 mg/m2 intravenous cisplatin once every 3 weeks for six cycles. Randomisation was done by use of a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with a block size of four, and patients were stratified by primary tumour site and previous cancer-directed treatment. The primary endpoint was median overall survival. Assuming that 6-month overall survival in the intravenous cisplatin group would be 40%, a non-inferiority margin of 13% was defined. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. All patients who completed at least one cycle of the assigned treatment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India, CTRI/2015/11/006388, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2016, and Jan 17, 2020, 422 patients were randomly assigned: 213 to the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 209 to the intravenous cisplatin group. All 422 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, and 418 patients (211 in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 207 in the intravenous cisplatin group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. At a median follow-up of 15·73 months, median overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis population was 7·5 months (IQR 4·6-12·6) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group compared with 6·1 months (3·2-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·773 [95% CI 0·615-0·97, p=0·026]). In the per-protocol analysis population, median overall survival was 7·5 months (4·7-12·8) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 6·1 months (3·4-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·775 [95% CI 0·616-0·974, p=0·029]). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in 37 (19%) of 196 patients in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group versus 61 (30%) of 202 patients in the intravenous cisplatin group (p=0·01). INTERPRETATION: Oral metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to intravenous cisplatin with respect to overall survival in head and neck cancer in the palliative setting, and is associated with fewer adverse events. It therefore represents a new alternative standard of care if current NCCN-approved options for palliative therapy are not feasible. FUNDING: Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council. TRANSLATIONS: For the Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, Oriya, Bengali, and Punjabi translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Beyond conventional chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy in squamous cell cancer of the oral cavity.

The focus of this review article is to throw light on non-conventional systemic chemotherapy that affects the tumour microenvironment and potentially has a favourable impact on the management of squamous cell cancer of the oral cavity. A metronomic combination of weekly methotrexate and celecoxib seems equally effective to single agent cisplatin in the palliative setting, but needs phase III testing. The same metronomic combination seems inferior to paclitaxel-cetuximab. Triple drug metronomic chemotherapy (methotrexate, celecoxib, and erlotinib) is still under development with promising data from pilot studies. Metronomic chemotherapy also seems beneficial in the curative setting but results of confirmatory studies are eagerly awaited. The low rate of adverse events and low cost make this regimen an attractive alternative. Both in vivo and in-vitro data suggests that numerous drugs like anthelmintics, DMARDs, antimalarials can be repurposed for Head and Neck Cancers. However, there is a dearth of clinical studies reported till date.

Phase I/II Study of Palliative Triple Metronomic Chemotherapy in Platinum-Refractory/Early-Failure Oral Cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum-resistant oral cancer has a dismal outcome with limited treatment options. We conducted a phase I/II study to identify the optimal biologic dose (OBD) of methotrexate when given along with erlotinib and celecoxib and to assess the efficacy of this three-drug regimen in advanced oral cancer. METHODS: Patients with platinum-resistant or early-failure squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity were eligible for this study. They were orally administered erlotinib 150 mg once per day, celecoxib 200 mg twice per day, and methotrexate per week. The primary end point of phase I was to determine the OBD of methotrexate, and that of phase II was to determine the 3-month progression-free survival. The OBD of methotrexate was determined on the basis of the clinical benefit rate at 2 months and circulating endothelial cell level at day 8, using a de-escalation model. Pharmacokinetic evaluation was performed during phase I. Phase II consisted of an expansion cohort of 76 patients. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were recruited in phase I, and 9 mg/m2 methotrexate was identified as the OBD. A total of 91 patients were recruited, and the median follow-up was 6.8 months (range, 0 to 16.8 months). The 3-month progression-free survival rate was 71.1% (95% CI, 60.5% to 79.3%), the 6-month overall survival rate was 61.2% (95% CI, 49.2% to 67.8%), and the response rate was 42.9% (95% CI, 33.2% to 53.1%; n = 39). The mean Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck Trial Outcome Index score at day 8 was improved by 6.1 units (standard deviation, 13.6 units) and was maintained around this magnitude (P = .001). CONCLUSION: Triple oral metronomic chemotherapy with erlotinib, methotrexate, and celecoxib is efficacious in platinum-refractory oral cavity cancers and represents a new therapeutic option in patients with poor prognosis.

Palliative chemotherapy in carcinoma nasopharynx.

INTRODUCTION: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma is a rare malignancy. We conducted an audit of systemic therapies received in palliative setting in carcinoma nasopharynx and studied their outcomes. METHODS: Patients who underwent first-line palliative systemic chemotherapy between January 2014 and April 2017 for carcinoma nasopharynx at the department of medical oncology at authors' institute were selected for this analysis. Toxicities, responses, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. In addition, a Quality-Adjusted Time without Symptoms or Toxicity analysis with threshold utility analysis was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included in this analysis. The indication of palliative chemotherapy was locoregionally recurrent disease in 25 (49.0%) patients and metastatic disease in 26 (51.0%) patients. The overall response rate was 62.0% (n = 33). The median PFS was 225 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 164-274 days) and median OS was 513 days (95% CI: 286-931 days). The restricted mean TOX state duration was 2.6 days (95% CI: 0.3-4.9), restricted mean TWiST duration was 219.2 days (95% CI: 184.0-254.4), and restricted mean REL duration was 74.3 days (95% CI: 38.1-110.4). CONCLUSION: Systemic cytotoxic therapy in nasopharyngeal cancers is associated with high response rates and clinically meaningful PFS; with low duration of time spent in adverse events.

A randomized phase 3 trial comparing nimotuzumab plus cisplatin chemoradiotherapy versus cisplatin chemoradiotherapy alone in locally advanced head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Because the addition of nimotuzumab to chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer improved outcomes in a phase 2 study, the authors conducted a phase 3 study to confirm these findings. METHODS: This open-label, investigator-initiated, phase 3, randomized trial was conducted from 2012 to 2018. Adult patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who were fit for radical chemoradiation were randomized 1:1 to receive either radical radiotherapy (66-70 grays) with concurrent weekly cisplatin (30 mg/m2 ) (CRT) or the same schedule of CRT with weekly nimotuzumab (200 mg) (NCRT).The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); key secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), duration of locoregional control (LRC), and overall survival (OS). An intent-to-treat analysis also was performed. RESULTS: In total, 536 patients were allocated equally to both treatment arms. The median follow-up was 39.13 months. The addition of nimotuzumab improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.89; P = .004), LRC (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.89; P = .006), and DFS (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.92; P = .008) and had a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.65-1.08; P = .163). Grade 3 through 5 adverse events were similar between the 2 arms, except for a higher incidence of mucositis in the NCRT arm (66.7% vs 55.8%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of nimotuzumab to concurrent weekly CRT improves PFS, LRC, and DFS. This combination provides a novel alternative therapeutic option to a 3-weekly schedule of 100 mg/m2 cisplatin in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who are treated with radical-intent CRT.

Quality of life and quality-adjusted time without toxicity in palliatively treated head-and-neck cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Quality-adjusted time without toxicity (Q-TWiST) and quality of life (QOL) are indicators of benefit provided by different chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: This was a prospective study, in which adult head-and-neck (H and N) cancer patients, treated with metronomic chemotherapy were enrolled. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General H and N (FACT-G and H and N) version 4 pro formas were self-administered before the start of chemotherapy and then at 2, 4, and 6 months. FACT QOL and Q-TWiST analysis were then performed. RESULTS: There was an improvement in the social well-being (P = 0.370), emotional well-being (P = 0.000), functional well-being (P = 0.000), H and N cancer subscale (P = 0.001), FACT H and N trial outcome index (P = 0.000), FACT G-total score (P = 0.000), and FACT H and N total score (P = 0.000) with palliative chemotherapy. The QTWiST value for a utility score of 0.25 for toxicity and relapse state was 145.93 days. CONCLUSION: Metronomic chemotherapy is associated with improvement in QOL and has a low duration of time spent in toxicity state.

Distress Management in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Before Start of Palliative Chemotherapy: A Practical Approach.

PURPOSE: This study reports the incidence of distress, the factors associated with distress, and a practical strategy to resolve distress in patients with head and neck cancer who are starting palliative chemotherapy. METHODS: Adult patients with head and neck cancer planned for palliative chemotherapy underwent distress screening before the start of treatment as part of this single-arm prospective study. Patients who had a distress score > 3 on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) distress thermometer were counseled initially by the clinician. Those who continued to have high distress after the clinician-led counseling were referred to a clinical psychologist and were started on palliative chemotherapy. After counseling, distress was measured again. The relation between baseline distress and compliance was tested using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were enrolled, and the number of patients with high distress was 89 (44.5% [95% CI, 37.8% to 51.4%]). The number of patients who had a decrease in distress after clinician-led counseling (n = 88) was 52 (59.1% [95% CI, 48.6% to 68.8%]) and after psychologist-led counseling (n = 32) was 24 (75.0% [95% CI, 57.6% to 72.2%]; P = .136). Compliance rates did not differ between the patients with or without a high level of distress at baseline (74.2% v 77.4%, P = .620). CONCLUSION: The incidence of baseline distress is high in patients awaiting the start of palliative chemotherapy. It can be resolved in a substantial number of patients using the strategy of clinician-led counseling, with additional referral to a clinical psychologist as required. Patients with a greater number of emotional problems usually require psychologist-led counseling.