Search

Background: The discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). Patients and methods: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1: 1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 x 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 x 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival. Results: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39). Conclusion: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, an

Contains fulltext : 153599pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: The discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 x 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 x 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, and re

Contains fulltext : 153599pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: The discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 x 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 x 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, and re

Contains fulltext : 153599pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: The discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 x 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 x 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, and re

BACKGROUND: Chronotherapy is one of the several approaches to increase efficacy and reduce toxicity of chemotherapy. In a phase II study in the second-line in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), we found that chronomodulated XELOX (XELOX(30Chron)) was a well-tolerated regimen with potentially reduced toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and forty-one patients with unresectable mCRC were enrolled in a randomized study comparing standard XELOX (XELOX(30)), arm A, and XELOX(30Chron), arm B-both with short-time infusion of oxaliplatin-with the primary aim of reducing overall toxicity. RESULTS: Overall toxicity grade 2-4 was 90% versus 85%, P = 0.47 and grade 3-4 was 31% versus 37%, P = 0.6 in arm A and B, respectively. We found no significant differences in median overall survival (17.6 versus 15.5 months; P = 0.068) and median progression-free survival (8.9 versus 8.8 months; P = 0.7). The incidence of grade 3 neuropathy was 16% in arm A and 19% in arm B (P = 0.7) after a cumulative dose of oxaliplatin of 1000 mg/m(2). CONCLUSION: XELOX(30Chron) does not reduce toxicity or improve efficacy. A 30-min infusion of oxaliplatin is safe and does not increase the severity of chronic neuropathy.

Chronotherapy is one of the several approaches to increase efficacy and reduce toxicity of chemotherapy. In a phase II study in the second-line in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), we found that chronomodulated XELOX (XELOX(30Chron)) was a well-tolerated regimen with potentially reduced toxicity.

Chronotherapy is one of the several approaches to increase efficacy and reduce toxicity of chemotherapy. In a phase II study in the second-line in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), we found that chronomodulated XELOX (XELOX(30Chron)) was a well-tolerated regimen with potentially reduced toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin in combination with capecitabine prolongs survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Chronomodulation might reduce toxicity and improve efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A phase II study examining chronomodulated XELOX(30) (XELOX(30chron)): oxaliplatin: 130 mg/m(2) on day 1, as a 30-min infusion between 1 and 3 p.m. Capecitabine: total daily dose of 2000 mg/m(2), 20% of the dose between 7 and 9 a.m. and 80% of the dose between 6 and 8 p.m. in patients with mCRC resistant to irinotecan. Seventy-one patients were enrolled. Response rate was 18%; median progression-free survival 5.1 months and median overall survival (OS) 10.2 months. Platelet count and performance status were significantly correlated to OS in multivariate analyses. Neurotoxicity grade 2 and 3 was seen in 25% and 2% of patients, respectively, other grade 3 toxic effects were as follows: nausea 6%, vomiting 3%, diarrhoea 12% (3% experienced grade 4) and palmoplantart erytem 9%. CONCLUSION: XELOX(30chron) is a convenient second-line regimen with efficacy and safety profile similar to other oxaliplatin schedules. To further investigate chronomodulated XELOX, we have started a Nordic randomised phase II study comparing XELOX(30) and XELOX(30chron) as first-line therapy in patients with mCRC.

Background: Oxaliplatin in combination with capecitabine prolongs survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Chronomodulation might reduce toxicity and improve efficacy. Patients and methods: A phase II study examining chronomodulated XELOX30 (XELOX30chron): oxaliplatin: 130 mg/m2 on day 1, as a 30-min infusion between 1 and 3 p.m. Capecitabine: total daily dose of 2000 mg/m2, 20% of the dose between 7 and 9 a.m. and 80% of the dose between 6 and 8 p.m. in patients with mCRC resistant to irinotecan. Seventy-one patients were enrolled. Response rate was 18%, median progression-free survival 5.1 months and median overall survival (OS) 10.2 months. Platelet count and performance status were significantly correlated to OS in multivariate analyses. Neurotoxicity grade 2 and 3 was seen in 25% and 2% of patients, respectively, other grade 3 toxic effects were as follows: nausea 6%, vomiting 3%, diarrhoea 12% (3% experienced grade 4) and palmoplantart erytem 9%. Conclusion: XELOX30chron is a convenient second-line regimen with efficacy and safety profile similar to other oxaliplatin schedules. To further investigate chronomodulated XELOX, we have started a Nordic randomised phase II study comparing XELOX30 and XELOX30chron as first-line therapy in patients with mCRC. © The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Background: The efficacy of oxaliplatin combined with capecitabine (XELOX) as second-line therapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (ACRC) resistant to irinotecan is not well established. Oxaliplatin induces acute, cold-induced neuropathy in most patients. The incidence is claimed to be infusion rate-dependent and therefore a 2-h infusion is recommended. Patients and methods: For practical and economic reasons, but also for patient's convenience, we performed a phase II study to examine XELOX30 (capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 as a 30 min infusion on day 1) in patients with ACRC resistant to irinotecan. In addition the pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin was studied. Results: From November 2002 to September 2003, 70 patients with ACRC were treated with XELOX30. Median age was 62 (range 33-74 years) years and median performance status was 1 (range 0-2). The median number of courses was four (range 1-12) and median cumulative dose of oxaliplatin was 530 (range 125-1560) mg/m2. The response rate was 17% (95% CI 10-23), median time to progression (TTP) was 5.4 months (95% CI 4.6-6.4) and median survival 9.5 months (95% CI 8.5-11.2). White blood cell count (WBC) and performance status were significantly correlated to TTP. Neurotoxicity was moderate: grade 1 56%, grade 2 17% and grade 3 6%. Other grade 3 toxicities were nausea/ vomiting 9%, diarrhoea 14% and PPE 8%. The maximum blood concentration and total body clearance of oxaliplatin was higher than previously reported in studies examining 2-h infusions, but the volume of distribution and terminal half-life was in close agreement with previous results. Conclusion: XELOX30 is a very convenient second-line regimen in ACRC with an activity and safety profile similar to other oxaliplatin schedules. © 2005 European Society for Medical Oncology.