Search

Background: Modified FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NAB) have been recommended as first-line therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). Due to the lack of evidence to directly compare them, we conducted this network meta-analysis to indirectly compare the effectiveness and toxicity of modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB.Methods: The eligible retrospective studies on treatments related to modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB up to 4 April 2020 were searched and assessed. We used the frequentist model to analyze the survival and toxicity data between different treatments. Pooled analysis for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and events of toxicity were analyzed in this study.Results: Twenty-two studies were involved in this network meta-analysis. The comparisons on OS and PFS showed that modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB had similar treatment efficacy (OS: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.78-1.63; PFS: HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.85-1.67). GEM-NAB was more effective than modified FOLFIRINOX based on the result of ORR (RR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.04-1.96). Moreover, our analysis showed a similar toxicity profile between modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB.Conclusions: The current evidence showed that modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB were similar in survival and toxicity. Many factors should be considered for in the formulation of optimal treatment, and our meta-analysis could provide some guidance to treatment selection in the first-line setting for advanced PC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This prospective trial was performed to verify whether microwave ablation (MWA) in combination with chemotherapy could provide superior survival benefit compared with chemotherapy alone.Materials and Methods: From March 1, 2015, to June 20, 2017, treatment-naïve patients with pathologically verified advanced or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to MWA plus chemotherapy group or chemotherapy group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), while the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), time to local progression (TTLP), and objective response rate (ORR). The complications and adverse events were also reported.Results: A total of 293 patients were randomly assigned into the two groups. One hundred forty-eight patients with 117 stage IV tumors were included in the MWA plus chemotherapy group. One hundred forty-five patients with 113 stage IV tumors were included in the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up period was 13.1 months and 12.4 months, respectively. Median PFS was 10.3 months (95% CI 8.0-13.0) in the MWA plus chemotherapy group and 4.9 months (95% CI 4.2-5.7) in the chemotherapy group (HR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.53; p < 0.0001). Median OS was not reached in the MWA plus chemotherapy group and 12.6 months (95% CI 10.6-14.6) in the chemotherapy group (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.53; p < 0.0001) using Kaplan-Meier analyses with log-rank test. The median TTLP was 24.5 months, and the ORR was 32% in both groups. The adverse event rate was not significantly different in the two groups.Conclusions: In patients with advanced NSCLC, longer PFS and OS can be achieved with the treatment of combined MWA and chemotherapy than chemotherapy alone.Key Points: • Patients treated with MWA plus chemotherapy had superior PFS and OS over those treated with chemotherapy alone. • The ORR of patients treated with MWA plus chemotherapy was similar to that of those treated with chemotherapy alone. • Complications associated with MWA were common but tolerable and manageable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract (UTUCs) are rare, with poorer stage-for-stage prognosis than urothelial carcinomas of the urinary bladder. No international consensus exists on the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with UTUCs after nephroureterectomy with curative intent. The POUT (Peri-Operative chemotherapy versus sUrveillance in upper Tract urothelial cancer) trial aimed to assess the efficacy of systemic platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with UTUCs.Methods: We did a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial at 71 hospitals in the UK. We recruited patients with UTUC after nephroureterectomy staged as either pT2-T4 pN0-N3 M0 or pTany N1-3 M0. We randomly allocated participants centrally (1:1) to either surveillance or four 21-day cycles of chemotherapy, using a minimisation algorithm with a random element. Chemotherapy was either cisplatin (70 mg/m2) or carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC]4·5/AUC5, for glomerular filtration rate <50 mL/min only) administered intravenously on day 1 and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) administered intravenously on days 1 and 8; chemotherapy was initiated within 90 days of surgery. Follow-up included standard cystoscopic, radiological, and clinical assessments. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival analysed by intention to treat with a Peto-Haybittle stopping rule for (in)efficacy. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01993979. A preplanned interim analysis met the efficacy criterion for early closure after recruitment of 261 participants.Findings: Between June 19, 2012, and Nov 8, 2017, we enrolled 261 participants from 57 of 71 open study sites. 132 patients were assigned chemotherapy and 129 surveillance. One participant allocated chemotherapy withdrew consent for data use after randomisation and was excluded from analyses. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved disease-free survival (hazard ratio 0·45, 95% CI 0·30-0·68; p=0·0001) at a median follow-up of 30·3 months (IQR 18·0-47·5). 3-year event-free estimates were 71% (95% CI 61-78) and 46% (36-56) for chemotherapy and surveillance, respectively. 55 (44%) of 126 participants who started chemotherapy had acute grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events, which accorded with frequently reported events for the chemotherapy regimen. Five (4%) of 129 patients managed by surveillance had acute grade 3 or worse emergent adverse events. No treatment-related deaths were reported.Interpretation: Gemcitabine-platinum combination chemotherapy initiated within 90 days after nephroureterectomy significantly improved disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced UTUC. Adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy should be considered a new standard of care after nephroureterectomy for this patient population.Funding: Cancer Research UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The standard of care for patients with resected stage I to stage III pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is adjuvant gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The role of adjuvant treatment in patients with subcentimeter, stage IA PDAC is unknown. The current study evaluated the effect of adjuvant treatment on survival outcomes among patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union Against Cancer stage IA (T1N0) resected PDAC using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB).Methods: A retrospective review of the NCDB was conducted for patients diagnosed with T1 (tumor limited to the pancreas and measuring ≤2 cm in greatest dimension), lymph node-negative (N0), resected PDAC between 2004 and 2013. Patient demographics, histology, adjuvant treatment, and survival trends were examined. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests were performed to determine the unadjusted association between overall survival (OS), tumor size, and treatment.Results: A total of 876 patients met the inclusion criteria. The patients had a mean age of 66.2 years (range, 32-90 years); approximately 83.3% were white (730 patients) and 53.1% were female (465 patients). Approximately 45.9% of the patients had moderately differentiated tumor histology (402 patients); 70.0% (613 patients) had tumors measuring 1 to 2 cm (T1c) and 30.0% (263 patients) had tumors measuring <1 cm (T1a/T1b). Approximately 94.2% of patients had negative surgical margins (815 patients) and 46.9% (410 patients) received adjuvant therapy. The median OS was significantly different for patients who received adjuvant therapy compared with patients who did not (70.7 months vs 46.9 months; P = .0001). For patients with tumors measuring <1 cm, survival was not found to be significantly different between patients who received adjuvant treatment compared with those who did not (not reached vs 85.3 months; P = .54). In the multivariable analysis, none of the covariates (treatment group, Charlson-Deyo Score, age, insurance, and facility status) demonstrated significant differences for patients with tumors measuring <1 cm.Conclusions: The current study is the first to demonstrate no survival benefit for adjuvant therapy in patients with resected subcentimeter PDAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy regimens, preferentially gemcitabine plus cisplatin, are generally considered the first-line standard of care for patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, no consensus has been reached regarding treatment following progression after first-line therapy. Camrelizumab (SHR-1210) is a humanised anti-programmed death-1 (anti PD-1) antibody. We present safety and preliminary antitumour activity of camrelizumab alone as second-line therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma and combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin as first-line therapy in this patient population.Methods: We report the results from two single-arm, phase 1 trials. Both trials included patients aged 18-70 years with histologically or cytologically confirmed nasopharyngeal carcinoma and confirmed metastatic disease or locoreginal recurrence, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients who received at least one previous line of treatment were enrolled at five academic hospitals in China into the dose-escalation and expansion trial to receive camrelizumab monotherapy intravenously at escalating doses of 1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, and 10 mg/kg, and a bridging dose of 200 mg per dose once every 2 weeks (monotherapy trial). Treatment-naive patients were enrolled from a single centre in China to receive six cycles of camrelizumab 200 mg (day 1), gemcitabine 1 g/m2 (days 1 and 8), and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 (day 1) every 3 weeks followed by camrelizumab 200 mg maintenance once every 3 weeks (combination trial). The primary endpoint of both trials was the safety and tolerability of the study treatment. Analyses were done per protocol. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02721589 (camrelizumab monotherapy trial) and NCT03121716 (camrelizumab combination trial). Both trials are ongoing, but are no longer enrolling patients.Findings: In the camrelizumab monotherapy trial, between March 31, 2016, and Sept 20, 2017, 121 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 93 patients were enrolled across the dose-escalation and expansion cohorts and received at least one dose of camrelizumab (safety population). 15 (16%) of 93 patients had treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4, the most common of which were elevated conjugated bilirubin concentration (three [3%] of 93 patients), stomatitis, anaemia, and increased concentrations of aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin, each of which occurred in two (2%) patients. Eight (9%) patients had a treatment-related serious adverse event. No dose-limiting toxic effects were observed during the dose-escalation phase. 31 (34%; 95% CI 24-44) of 91 evaluable patients on camrelizumab monotherapy had an overall response with a median follow-up of 9·9 months (IQR 8·1-11·7). In the camrelizumab combination trial, between April 18, 2017, and Aug 15, 2017, 24 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 23 patients were enrolled and treated (safety population). 20 (87%) of 23 patients had grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events: neutropenia (13 [57%] of 23 patients), anaemia (11 [48%] patients), leucopenia (11 [48%] patients), thrombocytopenia (seven [30%] patients), oedema (two [9%] patients), hyponatraemia (two [9%] patients), hypochloraemia (one [4%] patients), and rash (one [4%] patient). Two patients had treatment-related serious adverse events. No treatment-related deaths occurred in these trials. 20 (91% [95% CI 72-97]) of 22 evaluable patients had an overall response with a median follow-up time of 10·2 months (IQR 9·7-10·8).Interpretation: Camrelizumab is a well tolerated, potential treatment option for patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The combination of camrelizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin has a manageable toxicity profile and promising preliminary antitumour activity for this disease in treatment-naive patients. Randomised controlled trials are needed to further establish the role of immune checkpoint inhibition for nasopharyngeal carcinomas.Funding: Hengrui Medicine Co, Chinese National Natural Science Foundation project, Science and Technology Program of Guangdong, Pearl River Nova Program of Guangzhou. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the efficacy and toxicity profile of sequential intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) followed by gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin (GDP) on previously untreated high-risk, early stage upper aerodigestive tract natural killer/T-cell lymphoma (UADT-NKTCL).Methods and Materials: A phase 2 study was designed, and 40 high-risk patients with stage I(E)/II(E) UADT-NKTCL were enrolled between June 2010 and June 2014. High-risk patients were defined as those with at least 1 predefined risk factor: age >60 years, elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase, regional lymph node involvement, B symptoms, and primary tumor invasion. Patients received extended involved-site IMRT and GDP chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the 2-year progression-free survival rate. Secondary endpoints were the 2-year overall survival rate, overall response rate, and toxicity.Results: Median follow-up time was 60.1 months. The overall response rate and complete remission rate were 97.5% and 95.0%, respectively. The 2- and 5-year progression-free survival rates were 84.7% and 79.4%, and the corresponding overall survival rates were 89.9% and 82.1%, respectively. The most frequent radiation-induced toxicities were mild mucositis and skin reaction. Grade 3/4 neutropenia (12 of 40 patients), thrombocytopenia (7 of 40), and anemia (2 of 40) were observed during chemotherapy.Conclusions: First-line IMRT followed by GDP represents an effective and well-tolerated protocol for high-risk, early stage UADT-NKTCL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer frequently recurs after excision by transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT).Objective: To determine whether immediate post-TURBT intravesical instillation of gemcitabine reduces recurrence of suspected low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer compared with saline.Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized double-blind clinical trial conducted at 23 US centers. Patients with suspected low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer based on cystoscopic appearance without any high-grade or without more than 2 low-grade urothelial cancer episodes within 18 months before index TURBT were enrolled between January 23, 2008, and August 14, 2012, and followed up every 3 months with cystoscopy and cytology for 2 years and then semiannually for 2 years. Patients were monitored for tumor recurrence, progression to muscle invasion, survival, and toxic effects. The final date of follow-up was August 14, 2016.Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive intravesical instillation of gemcitabine (2 g in 100 mL of saline) (n = 201) or saline (100 mL) (n = 205) for 1 hour immediately following TURBT.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to recurrence of cancer. Secondary end points were time to muscle invasion and death due to any cause.Results: Among 406 randomized eligible patients (median age, 66 years; 84.7% men), 383 completed the trial. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 67 of 201 patients (4-year estimate, 35%) in the gemcitabine group and 91 of 205 patients (4-year estimate, 47%) in the saline group had cancer recurrence within 4.0 years (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.90; P<.001 by 1-sided log-rank test for time to recurrence). Among the 215 patients with low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer who underwent TURBT and drug instillation, 34 of 102 patients (4-year estimate, 34%) in the gemcitabine group and 59 of 113 patients (4-year estimate, 54%) in the saline group had cancer recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.81; P = .001 by 1-sided log-rank test for time to recurrence). Fifteen patients had tumors that progressed to muscle invasion (5 in the gemcitabine group and 10 in the saline group; P = .22 by 1-sided log-rank test) and 42 died of any cause (17 in the gemcitabine group and 25 in the saline group; P = .12 by 1-sided log-rank test). There were no grade 4 or 5 adverse events and no significant differences in adverse events of grade 3 or lower.Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with suspected low-grade non-muscle-invasive urothelial cancer, immediate postresection intravesical instillation of gemcitabine, compared with instillation of saline, significantly reduced the risk of recurrence over a median of 4.0 years. These findings support using this therapy, but further research is needed to compare gemcitabine with other intravesical agents.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00445601. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare a cohort of patients with platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PROC) treated with bevacizumab and gemcitabine (Bev-Gem) to that of patients treated only with gemcitabine (Gem).Methods: Between 2011 and 2017, we identified the Bev-Gem and Gem PROC groups. The regimen included 1000 mg/m2 of Gem on days 1, 8, and 15, and 15 mg/m2 of Bev on day 1, every 4 weeks. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the date of the administration of Bev-Gem or Gem until disease progression or death.Results: The Bev-Gem and Gem groups included 18 and 29 patients, respectively. More patients had advanced stage disease in the Bev-Gem group (p = 0.048); no other characteristics differed between the groups. The response rates [ratio of complete remission (CR) to partial remission (PR)] of Bev-Gem and Gem were 38.9 and 3.4%, respectively (p < 0.01). The clinical benefit rates [combined percentages of CR, PR, and stable disease] of the Bev-Gem and Gem groups were 88.9 and 41.4%, respectively (p = 0.04). PFS and OS of the Bev-Gem group were superior (p < 0.01, p = 0.03, respectively). Bev-Gem was the better prognostic factor of both PFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.17, p < 0.01] and OS (HR 0.31, p = 0.01). The frequency of hematologic and non-hematologic adverse effects was similar in each group.Conclusion: Bev-Gem regimens improved PFS and OS for PROC. Furthermore, the adverse effects of Bev-Gem were tolerable. Thus, Bev-Gem could be a candidate treatment strategy for PROC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although gemcitabine is a mainstay of pancreatic cancer therapy, it is only moderately effective, and it would be desirable to measure drug uptake in patients. 1-(2'-deoxy-2'-fluoroarabinofuranosyl) cytosine (FAC), is an analog of gemcitabine, and when labeled with F-18, it may be a potential surrogate PET tracer for the drug.Procedures: [18F]FAC was synthesized to a radiochemical purity of >96 %. The human tumor lines AsPC1, BxPC3, Capan-1, Panc1, and MiaPaca2 were grown orthotopically in nude mice. KPC mice that conditionally express oncogenic K-ras and p53 mutations in pancreatic tissue were also used. The intra-tumoral distributions of [14C]gemcitabine and [18F]FAC were mapped with autoradiography. The inter-tumor correlation between [14C]gemcitabine and [18F]FAC was established in the orthotopic tumors. Expression of the equilibrative and concentrative nucleoside transporters (ENT, CNT) in vitro was detected by western blotting. Drug uptake was characterized in vitro using [3H]gemcitabine and the effect of transporter inhibition on gemcitabine and FAC uptake was investigated. The relative affinity of cells for gemcitabine and FAC was tested in competition assays. The cell lines differed in sensitivity to transport inhibitors and in competition studies. There was a good in vivo correlation between the total uptake of [18F]FAC and [14C]gemcitabine, measured across all orthotopic tumors. Using the KPC and BxPC3 models, we found that [14C]gemcitabine and [18F]FAC were largely co-localized.Conclusions: In the lines examined here, [18F]FAC uptake correlates well with gemcitabine in vivo, supporting the notion that [18F]FAC can serve as a PET radiotracer surrogate to determine the uptake and distribution of gemcitabine within pancreatic tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Gemcitabine plus platinum is considered standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. However, no standard second-line therapy has been established for this disease. According to reports, S-1 exerts anti-tumor effects on advanced biliary tract cancer and gemcitabine is more effective via fixed dose-rate administration. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a combination of fixed dose-rate gemcitabine and S-1 after failure of gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy.Methods: This single-arm phase II study (clinical trial number: UMIN000005918) set the response rate as the primary endpoint and used a MiniMax two-stage design with a null hypothesis < 7% and alternative hypothesis ≥ 25%. Thirty-five patients were needed to yield a power of 90% and α value of 0.05. Patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2, div, 100-min period, day 1) and S-1 (40 mg/m2 twice daily, oral, days 1-7), every 2 weeks until disease progression or intolerable adverse events were observed.Results: Forty-one patients were enrolled, and 3 of 23 first-stage patients responded. The overall response rate was 9.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7-19.2%]. The median overall and progression-free survival were 7.0 [95% CI: 5.3-8.6] and 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.6-3.5), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were leukopenia (19.5%), neutropenia (19.5%), anemia (14.6%), thrombocytopenia (7.3%), and anorexia (4.8%).Conclusion: Second-line fixed dose-rate gemcitabine plus S-1 was not sufficiently effective and tolerable in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer refractory to gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus cisplatin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pancreatic cancer has a dismal prognosis with 5-year overall survival rate of around 5%. Although surgery is still the best option in operable cases, majority of the patients who present in locally advanced stages are deemed inoperable. Novel approaches are therefore needed for the management of around 80% of these inoperable locally advanced pancreatic cancers (LAPC). Hyperthermia (39-43 °C) is a potent radiosensitizer and further enhances the action of gemcitabine, also a known radiosensitizer. Thus through triple sensitization, a combination of hyperthermia, radiotherapy and gemcitabine could be expected to improve the therapeutic outcomes in LAPC.Methods: This phase II randomized trial, HEATPAC in unresectable LAPC, explores the feasibility and efficacy of concurrent thermochemoradiotherapy (HTCTRT) over chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) alone with pre- and post-intervention FOLFIRINOX at standard dosage and schedule. Following 4 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, patients with no metastasis and absence of gross peritoneal carcinomatosis would be randomized to either (a) control arm: concurrent CTRT with gemcitabine (400 mg/m2, weekly ×6) or (b) study arm: locoregional hyperthermia (weekly ×6 during radiotherapy) with concurrent CTRT (same as in control arm). All patients would receive simultaneous-integrated boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy to doses of 56Gy and 50.4Gy to the gross and clinical target volumes respectively delivered in 28 fractions over 5.5 weeks. Deep locoregional hyperthermia would be administered weekly and monitored with real-time intraduodenal multisensor thermometry probe. A temperature of 40-43 °C for 60 min would be aimed for each hyperthermia session. On completion of CTRT/HTCTRT, patients of both groups would receive an additional 8 cycles of FOLFIRINOX.Discussion: The expected 1-year baseline overall survival with CTRT alone is considered as 40%. With HTCTRT, a survival advantage of +20% is expected. Considering α = 0.05 and β = 0.80 for sample size computation, a total of 86 patients would be equally randomized into the two treatment groups. This phase II study if found to be safe and effective, would form the basis of a future phase III randomized study.Trial Registration: The trial has been registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02439593 ). The study has been approved by the Ethical Commissions of Basel and Zurich and is open for patient recruitment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Veliparib (ABT-888) is an oral PARP inhibitor expected to increase gemcitabine activity. This phase I determined the maximal tolerable dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of veliparib combined with gemcitabine.Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumors received veliparib (10-40-mg PO BID) on chemotherapy weeks with gemcitabine 500-750-mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8, and 15 (28-day cycle), or on days 1 and 8 (21-day cycle). The MTD, DLT, adverse events, PK, and PD were evaluated.Results: Eleven patients were enrolled on the 28-day schedule. The 28-day schedule was considered intolerable and amended to a 21-day schedule, with 20 patients enrolled. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were myelosuppression-related. The MTD was determined to be 750-mg/m2 gemcitabine IV on days 1 and 8- and 20-mg PO veliparib BID days 1-14 on a 21-day schedule. Of 27 patients evaluable for response, 3 had PR and 15 had SD. There was no evidence of any major drug-drug interaction, and PK parameter values for veliparib, gemcitabine, and dFdU were as expected. Analysis of PBMCs showed evidence of PARP inhibition and DNA damage associated with therapy.Conclusions: Gemcitabine at 750-mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8 combined with veliparib at a dose of 20-mg PO BID days 1-14 on a 21-day schedule is relatively well-tolerated, with manageable, expected toxicities. Clinical responses were observed in a pretreated population of patients, suggesting that this combination should be further evaluated in the phase II setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the various clinical and thyroid dosimetric parameters that could predict the risk of primary hypothyroidism (HT) after intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and to determine useful thyroid dose constraints to guide radiation therapy planning.Methods and Materials: From September 2009 to August 2012, 102 clinically euthyroid NPC patients were included in this study. All patients were treated with IMRT and randomized to induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemo-IMRT or concurrent chemo-IMRT alone. Thyroid function was evaluated by measuring thyroid-stimulating hormone and free thyroxine at each annual follow-up visit. Various clinical and dosimetric parameters (eg, V40 [percentage of thyroid volume receiving >40 Gy]) were obtained. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of HT.Results: Median follow-up was 48.8 months. Among the 102 patients, 44 (43.1%) developed HT within 2 years after radiation therapy. The median time to HT was 36.7 months (range, 24.9-49.0 months). The 1-year and 2-year cumulative incidence rates of HT were 33% and 44.5%, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that younger age, early T stage, minimum dose to the thyroid gland, V40, and V45 were associated with HT. On multivariate analysis, younger age (P=.017), early T stage (P=.005), and V40 (P=.009) remained statistically significant. Patients with V40 > 85% had significantly higher cumulative incidence rates of HT than patients with V40 ≤ 85% (P=.007).Conclusions: Thyroid V40 is predictive of primary HT after IMRT for NPC, and V40 ≤ 85% can be a useful dose constraint to adopt during IMRT planning without compromising tumor coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The renal safety of cisplatin-based chemotherapy has not been investigated in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract (UUT-UC) who retain a solitary kidney after nephroureterectomy. This study aimed to assess and compare the renal safety and efficacy of gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) and gemcitabine-carboplatin (GC) in these patients.Methods: The medical records of patients diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma at the Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center between January 2005 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The creatinine clearance (CrCl) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were used to assess renal function and were calculated using different formulas.Results: A total of 71 patients were enrolled in this study; 48 patients were on GP, and 23 were on GC. The renal function indicators (CrCl and eGFR) were all significantly lower after GP chemotherapy than at baseline, a phenomenon that was not observed in the GC group. Severe nephrotoxicities (SNTs) were reported in 12 patients on GP (25%) and zero on GC. SNT risk factors included a more than 20% decrease in eGFR after one GP cycle and the presence of diabetes (all p < 0.05). Among patients treated with first-line palliative chemotherapy (n = 32), GC (n = 13) patients had an ORR of 46.2%, which was not significantly different from GP patients (36.8%, n = 19), whereas GC patients tended to have a shorter OS than GP patients (9.2 vs. 29 months, p = 0.200).Conclusions: Our results confirm that GP has an adverse impact on the renal function of patients with UUT-UC who retain a solitary kidney, but it can be safely administered to the majority of these patients without inducing SNT. In specific patients, GC is an alternative to GP that has comparable efficacy and favourable renal toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: S-1 has systemic activity for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Here, the efficacy and safety of induction gemcitabine (GEM) and S-1 (GS) followed by chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and systemic chemotherapy using S-1 for LAPC were assessed.Methods: The treatment consisted of four cycles of induction GS (S-1 60, 80, or 100 mg/day based on body surface area for 14 days every 3 weeks plus GEM 1000 mg/m2 on days 8 and 15), followed by S-1 (80, 100, or 120 mg/day based on body surface area on days 1-14 and 22-35) and concurrent radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions). Maintenance chemotherapy with S-1 was started 1-4 weeks after CRT until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity was observed. The primary endpoint was 1-year survival.Results: A total of 30 patients with LAPC were enrolled. The median survival and progression-free survival were 21.3 and 12.7 months, respectively. Overall survival rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 73.3, 36.7, 23.3, and 16.7%, respectively. The median survival of 23 patients who received CRT was 22.9 months, with a 3-year survival rate of 30.4%. The two most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events during induction GS were neutropenia (63.3%) and biliary tract infection (20%). Toxicities during CRT or maintenance chemotherapy were generally mild.Conclusions: This regimen was feasible and highly active resulting in encouraging survival in patients with LAPC. Further investigations are warranted to elucidate the effectiveness of this treatment strategy in future studies. Clinical trials information: UMIN000006332. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous trials from our group suggested an overall survival benefit with five cycles of adjuvant full-dose epirubicin plus ifosfamide in localised high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremities or trunk wall, and no difference in overall survival benefit between three cycles versus five cycles of the same neoadjuvant regimen. We aimed to show the superiority of the neoadjuvant administration of histotype-tailored regimen to standard chemotherapy.Methods: For this international, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, multicentre trial, patients were enrolled from 32 hospitals in Italy, Spain, France, and Poland. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with localised, high-risk (high malignancy grade, 5 cm or longer in diameter, and deeply located according to the investing fascia), soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremities or trunk wall and belonging to one of five histological subtypes: high-grade myxoid liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour, and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive three cycles of full-dose standard chemotherapy (epirubicin 60 mg/m2 per day [short infusion, days 1 and 2] plus ifosfamide 3 g/m2 per day [days 1, 2, and 3], repeated every 21 days) or histotype-tailored chemotherapy: for high-grade myxoid liposarcoma, trabectedin 1·3 mg/m2 via 24-h continuous infusion, repeated every 21 days; for leiomyosarcoma, gemcitabine 1800 mg/m2 on day 1 intravenously over 180 min plus dacarbazine 500 mg/m2 on day 1 intravenously over 20 min, repeated every 14 days; for synovial sarcoma, high-dose ifosfamide 14 g/m2, given over 14 days via an external infusion pump, every 28 days; for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour, intravenous etoposide 150 mg/m2 per day (days 1, 2, and 3) plus intravenous ifosfamide 3 g/m2 per day (days 1, 2, and 3), repeated every 21 days; and for undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 intravenously over 90 min plus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 8 intravenously over 1 h, repeated every 21 days. Randomisation was stratified by administration of preoperative radiotherapy and by country of enrolment. Computer-generated random lists were prepared by use of permuted balanced blocks of size 4 and 6 in random sequence. An internet-based randomisation system ensured concealment of the treatment assignment until the patient had been registered into the system. No masking of treatment assignments was done. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The primary and safety analyses were planned in the intention-to-treat population. We did yearly futility analyses on an intention-to-treat basis. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01710176, and with the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials, number EUDRACT 2010-023484-17, and is closed to patient entry.Findings: Between May 19, 2011, and May 13, 2016, 287 patients were randomly assigned to a group (145 to standard chemotherapy and 142 to histotype-tailored chemotherapy), all of whom, except one patient assigned to standard chemotherapy, were included in the efficacy analysis (97 [34%] with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma; 64 [22%] with high-grade myxoid liposarcoma; 70 [24%] with synovial sarcoma; 27 [9%] with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour; and 28 [10%] with leiomyosarcoma). At the third futility analysis, with a median follow-up of 12·3 months (IQR 2·75-28·20), the projected disease-free survival at 46 months was 62% (95% CI 48-77) in the standard chemotherapy group and 38% (22-55) in the histotype-tailored chemotherapy group (stratified log-rank p=0·004; hazard ratio 2·00, 95% CI 1·22-3·26; p=0·006). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the standard chemotherapy group (n=125) were neutropenia (107 [86%]), anaemia (24 [19%]), and thrombocytopenia (21 [17%]); the most common grade 3 or higher adverse event in the histotype-tailored chemotherapy group (n=114) was neutropenia (30 [26%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported in both groups. In agreement with the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, the study was closed to patient entry after the third futility analysis.Interpretation: In a population of patients with high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma, we did not show any benefit of a neoadjuvant histotype-tailored chemotherapy regimen over the standard chemotherapy regimen. The benefit seen with the standard chemotherapy regimen suggests that this benefit might be the added value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy itself in patients with high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma.Funding: European Union grant (Eurosarc FP7 278472). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to oxaliplatin (L-OHP) therapy are well-documented, few reports have compared different therapies in terms of HSR occurrence. In this study, we compared the frequency and pattern of HSRs to modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6; 5-fluorouracil, levofolinate calcium and L-OHP infusions) and XELOX (capecitabine and L-OHP) therapies, and sought to identify risk factors associated with HSRs.Methods: Patients who had received mFOLFOX6 or XELOX chemotherapeutic regimens for unresectable colon or rectal cancer or as adjuvant chemotherapy following colon cancer surgery between April 2012 and August 2015 were included. Potential correlation between treatment modalities (regimen, dosage and route of administration of L-OHP, and injection timing for dexamethasone administration) and HSRs was assessed.Results: Among the 240 patients included in the study, 136 had received mFOLFOX6 therapy and 104 had received XELOX therapy. Although the frequency of HSRs did not differ between the two groups, incidence of HSRs in the first cycle was higher in the XELOX therapy group. Treatment method or cumulative dosage was not identified as a risk factor for HSR; however, the incidence of ≥grade-2 HSR was higher in cases where the cumulative L-OHP dosage was ≥600 mg/m2 and in patients in whom dexamethasone was not co-infused with L-OHP.Conclusion: Although HSR rates were comparable among patients treated with mFOLFOX6 and XELOX, HSRs tended to occur more frequently during the first cycle of XELOX therapy as compared to that with mFOLFOX6 therapy. Our findings warrant careful assessment of ≥grade-2 HSRs in patients who are prescribed cumulative L-OHP dosages of ≥600 mg/m2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Maintenance therapy improves outcomes in various tumour types, but cumulative toxic effects limit the choice of drugs. We investigated whether maintenance therapy with vinflunine would delay disease progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who had achieved disease control with first-line chemotherapy.Methods: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial in 21 Spanish hospitals. Eligible patients had locally advanced, surgically unresectable, or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, adequate organ function, and disease control after four to six cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine (carboplatin allowed after cycle four). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive vinflunine or best supportive care until disease progression. We initially used block randomisation with a block size of six. Four lists were created for the two stratification factors of starting dose of vinflunine and presence of liver metastases. After a protocol amendment, number of cisplatin and gemcitabine cycles was added as a stratification factor, and eight lists were created, still with a block size of six. Finally, we changed to a minimisation procedure to reduce the risk of imbalance between groups. Vinflunine was given every 21 days as a 20 min intravenous infusion at 320 mg/m2 or at 280 mg/m2 in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1, age 75 years or older, previous pelvic radiotherapy, or creatinine clearance lower than 60 mL/min. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival longer than 5·3 months in the vinflunine group, assessed by modified intention to treat. Comparison of progression-free survival between treatment groups was a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01529411.Findings: Between April 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2015, we enrolled 88 patients, of whom 45 were assigned to receive vinflunine and 43 to receive best supportive care. One patient from the vinflunine group was lost to follow-up immediately after randomisation and was excluded from the analyses. One patient in the best supportive care group became ineligible for the study and did not receive treatment due to a delay in enrolment, but was included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 15·6 months (IQR 8·5-26·0), 29 (66%) of 44 patients in the vinflunine group had disease progression and 24 (55%) had died, compared with 36 (84%) of 43 patients with disease progression and 32 (74%) deaths in the best supportive care group. Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (95% CI 2·0-11·1) in the vinflunine group and 4·2 months (2·1-6·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96, p=0·031). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 in the vinflunine group vs none of 42 in the best supportive care group), asthenia or fatigue (seven [16%] vs one [2%]), and constipation (six [14%] vs none). 18 serious adverse events were reported in the vinflunine group and 14 in the best supportive care group. One patient in the vinflunine group died from pneumonia that was deemed to be treatment related.Interpretation: In patients with disease control after first-line chemotherapy, progression-free survival exceeded the acceptable threshold with vinflunine maintenance therapy. Moreover, progression-free survival was longer with vinflunine maintenance therapy than with best supportive care. Vinflunine maintenance had an acceptable safety profile. Further studies of the role of vinflunine are warranted.Funding: Pierre-Fabre Médicament. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine a recommended dose for a biweekly combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy including gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and S-1 (GAS) for patients with locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (LAPC).Methods: Patients with borderline resectable or unresectable LAPC without distant metastasis were eligible for this study. The planned dosages of gemcitabine (mg/m2, day 1), nab-paclitaxel (mg/m2, day 1), and S-1 (mg/day, days 1-7) were 800/100/60-100 at level 1, and 1000/125/60-100 at level 2. The treatment cycle was repeated every 2 weeks, and patients were assessed for resectability and response to the treatment after 6 cycles. This study was registered with UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000016630).Results: We enrolled 16 patients with LAPC in this study. At dose level 1, one of 8 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). One of the next 8 patients also experienced DLT at dose level 2. Based on these results, level 2 was considered the recommended dose for this regimen. Pancreatectomy with curative intent could be performed in 13 of the 16 patients. R0 resection was performed in 12 of 13 patients.Conclusion: In conclusion, recommended doses for a biweekly GAS chemotherapy regimen were determined as nab-paclitaxel: 125 mg/m2, gemcitabine: 1000 mg/m2 on day 1, S-1: <1.25 m2, 60 mg; 1.25-1.5 m2, 80 mg; >1.5 m2, 100 mg twice a day on days 1-7. GAS chemotherapy showed good preliminary efficacy with mild toxicity in this study, and warrants a further phase 2 trial to investigate the efficacy of the GAS regimen for LAPC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma have traditionally been offered palliative chemotherapy alone, and the role of surgery in these patients remains unknown.Methods: A bi-institutional retrospective review was performed for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent resection of the primary tumor from 2008 to 2013. The primary outcome measured was postoperative overall survival. Secondary outcomes included postoperative disease-free survival and overall survival from the time of diagnosis.Results: Twenty-three patients were identified who met the study criteria with a median follow-up of 30 months. Metastatic sites included the liver (n = 16), the lung (n = 6), and the peritoneum (n = 2). Chemotherapy included FOLFIRINOX (n = 14) and gemcitabine-based regimens (n = 9), with a median of 9 cycles (range 2-31) prior to surgical treatment. Median time from diagnosis to surgery was 9.7 months (IQR 5.8-12.8). Median overall survival (OS) from surgery, disease-free survival, and OS from diagnosis were 18.2 months (95 % CI 11.8-35.5), 8.6 months (95 % CI 5.2-16.8), and 34.1 months (95 % CI 22.5-46.2), respectively. The 1- and 3-year OS from surgery were 72.7 % (95 % CI 49.1-86.7) and 21.5 % (95 % CI 4.3-47.2), respectively.Conclusion: Resection of the primary tumor in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma may be considered in highly selected patients with favorable imaging and CA 19-9 response following chemotherapy at high-volume centers providing multidisciplinary care. These patients should be enrolled in prospective clinical trials or institutional registries to better quantify the potential benefits of such a strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Outcomes are poor for patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma and no well established first-line chemotherapy is available for the disease. We compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma were recruited from 22 hospitals in China. Key inclusion criteria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and measurable lesions according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either gemcitabine (1 g/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (80 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1), or fluorouracil (4 g/m2 in continuous intravenous infusion over 96 h) and cisplatin (80 mg/m2 on day 1 given intravenously) once every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The randomisation was done centrally via an interactive phone response system using block randomisation with a size of six. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by the independent image committee in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one cycle of study drug. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01528618.Findings: Between Feb 20, 2012, and Oct 30, 2015, 362 patients were randomly assigned to a group (181 to the gemcitabine [plus cisplatin] group and 181 to the fluorouracil [plus cisplatin] group). Median follow-up time for progression-free survival was 19·4 months (IQR 12·1-35·6). The median progression-free survival was 7·0 months (4·4-10·9) in the gemcitabine group and 5·6 months (3·0-7·0) in the fluorouracil group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·55 [95% CI 0·44-0·68]; p<0·0001). A total of 180 patients in the gemcitabine group and 173 patients in the fluorouracil group were included in the safety analysis. Significantly different treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events between the gemcitabine and fluorouracil groups were leucopenia (52 [29%] vs 15 [9%]; <0·0001), neutropenia (41 [23%] vs 23 [13%]; p=0·0251), thrombocytopenia (24 [13%] vs three [2%]; p=0·0007), and mucosal inflammation (0 vs 25 [14%]; <0·0001). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in seven (4%) patients in the gemcitabine group and ten (6%) in the fluorouracil group. Six (3%) patients in the gemcitabine group and 14 (8%) patients in the fluorouracil group discontinued treatment because of drug-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths occurred in either group.Interpretation: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin prolongs progression-free survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The results establish gemcitabine plus cisplatin as the standard first-line treatment option for this population.Funding: Sun Yat-Sen University Clinical Research 5010 Programme, Chinese National Natural Science Foundation project (grant numbers 81372502 and 81201917), the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 program numbers 2012AA02A501 and 2012AA02A502), and the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong (grant number S2013010016564). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine is standard care for resected pancreatic cancer, S-1 has shown non-inferiority to gemcitabine for advanced disease. We aimed to investigate the non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer in terms of overall survival.Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority phase 3 trial undertaken at 33 hospitals in Japan. Patients who had histologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas, pathologically documented stage I-III, and no local residual or microscopic residual tumour, and were aged 20 years or older were eligible. Patients with resected pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2), intravenously administered on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks [one cycle], for up to six cycles) or S-1 (40 mg, 50 mg, or 60 mg according to body-surface area, orally administered twice a day for 28 days followed by a 14 day rest, every 6 weeks [one cycle], for up to four cycles) at the data centre by a modified minimisation method, balancing residual tumour status, nodal status, and institutions. The primary outcome was overall survival in the two treatment groups, assessed in the per-protocol population, excluding ineligible patients and those not receiving the allocated treatment. The protocol prespecified that the superiority of S-1 with respect to overall survival was also to be assessed in the per-protocol population by a log-rank test, if the non-inferiority of S-1 was verified. We estimated overall and relapse-free survival using the Kaplan-Meier methods, and assessed non-inferiority of S-1 to gemcitabine using the Cox proportional hazard model. The expected hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 0.87 with a non-inferiority margin of 1.25 (power 80%; one-sided type I error 2.5%). This trial is registered at UMIN CTR (UMIN000000655).Findings: 385 patients were randomly assigned to treatment between April 11, 2007, and June 29, 2010 (193 to the gemcitabine group and 192 to the S-1 group). Of these, three were exlcuded because of ineligibility and five did not receive chemotherapy. The per-protocol population therefore consisted of 190 patients in the gemcitabine group and 187 patients in the S-1 group. On Sept 15, 2012, following the recommendation from the independent data and safety monitoring committee, this study was discontinued because the prespecified criteria for early discontinuation were met at the interim analysis for efficacy, when all the protocol treatments had been finished. Analysis with the follow-up data on Jan 15, 2016, showed HR of mortality was 0.57 (95% CI 0.44-0.72, pnon-inferiority<0.0001, p<0.0001 for superiority), associated with 5-year overall survival of 24.4% (18.6-30.8) in the gemcitabine group and 44.1% (36.9-51.1) in the S-1 group. Grade 3 or 4 leucopenia, neutropenia, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase were observed more frequently in the gemcitabine group, whereas stomatitis and diarrhoea were more frequently experienced in the S-1 group.Interpretation: Adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 can be a new standard care for resected pancreatic cancer in Japanese patients. These results should be assessed in non-Asian patients.Funding: Pharma Valley Center, Shizuoka Industrial Foundation, Taiho Pharmaceutical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A randomized clinical trial has found that the addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine (GEM-E) for pancreatic cancer led to a modest increase in survival. The aim of this national population-based retrospective study was to compare the effectiveness of GEM-E to GEM alone for pancreatic cancer patients in real clinical practice.Methods: Patients with pancreatic cancer (ICD-10: C25) with prescription claims of gemcitabine or erlotinib between Jan 1, 2007 and Dec 31, 2012 were retrospectively identified from the Korean Health Insurance claims database. To be included in the study population, patients were required to have had a histological or cytological diagnosis within one year before chemotherapy. Patients treated with prior radiotherapy, surgery, or chemotherapy were excluded to reduce heterogeneity. Overall survival from the initiation of therapy and the medical costs of GEM-E and GEM were compared.Results: A total of 4,267 patients were included in the analysis. Overall survival was not significantly longer in patients treated with GEM-E (median 6.77 months for GEM-E vs. 6.68 months for GEM, p = 0.0977). There was also no significant difference in the respective one-year survival rates (27.0 % vs. 27.3 %; p = 0.5988). Multivariate analysis using age, gender, and comorbidities as covariates did not reveal any significant differences in survival. Based on this relative effectiveness, the incremental cost per life year gained over GEM was estimated at USD 70,843.64 for GEM-E.Conclusions: GEM-E for pancreatic cancer is not more effective than GEM in a real-world setting, and it does not provide reasonable cost-effectiveness over GEM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and toxicity of chronomodulated capecitabine administered in the morning and at noon according to a specific time schedule (Brunch Regimen: Breakfast and Lunch) as a part of first-line XELOX chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.Methods: A total of 30 treatment-naïve colorectal cancer patients with metastatic disease were included. Oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus chronomodulated oral capecitabine 2000 mg/m(2) per day were administered (50 % dose at 8:00 a.m. and 50 % dose at 12:00 noon on days 1-14, every 21 days). All adverse events, treatment responses and survival were evaluated. In addition, pharmacokinetic profile of capecitabine was examined in a subset of 5 patients.Results: Median age was 57.1 years (range 32-77 years). Median follow-up was 19 months (range 3-36 months). Three patients (10 %) had complete response, 13 patients (43.3 %) had partial response and 4 patients (13.3 %) had stabile disease. Ten patients had progressive disease at their first evaluation (33.3 %). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10 months (range 2-36 months). There were no grade 4 toxicities. One patient (3.3 %) had grade 3 neutropenia. Hand-foot syndrome developed in three patients (10 %): 6.6 %, grade 1 and 3.3 %, grade 2.Conclusions: Chronomodulated XELOX seems to represent a promising therapeutic option in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma due to good tumor control and favorable toxicity profile. Phase III randomized trials are required to assess the actual clinical efficacy and side effect profile of this regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bortezomib is a selective reversible proteasome inhibitor with proapoptotic effects. Preclinical and phase I clinical data suggest activity of bortezomib in NSCLC, either as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapeutic agents including gemcitabine and cisplatin.Methods: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with inoperable stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were administered bortezomib 1 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 and 8, and starting on day 21 (cycle 2), bortezomib (days 1 and 8) in combination with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2), (days 1 and 8), and cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) (day 1) in cycles of 21 days. Up to 8 cycles of combination therapy could be administered; single-agent bortezomib was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.Results: Fifty-three patients [median age 66 years; 79.2 % male; 96.2 % stage IV; performance status (ECOG) 0/1 73.6/26.4 %; adenocarcinoma 45.3 %, squamous cell carcinoma 41.5 %] were enrolled. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 43 for efficacy. Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicity consisted of neutropenia (22.6 %) and thrombocytopenia (17 %). Grade 2-4 non-hematologic adverse events were fever (9.4 %), fatigue (20.8 %), infection (18.9 %), and dyspnea (15.1 %). There was no >grade 2 neurotoxicity. Febrile neutropenia occurred in two (1.9 %) patients, and there were three possibly treatment-related deaths (5.4 %). In the intention-to-treat population, the objective response rate was 17 % (95 % CI 6.9-27.1 %). No difference in response rate was observed for squamous versus other histology (18.2 vs. 16.1 %, p = 0.845). The median progression-free survival was 2.5 months, the median overall survival 10.6 months and the 1-year survival rate 38.1 %.Conclusion: The incorporation of bortezomib into the gemcitabine/cisplatin regimen, in the dose and schedule used in this study, could not improve the efficacy of the chemotherapy regimen and has not to be further investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With the aging of the global population, an increasing number of elderly are diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Although systematic chemotherapy has been one of the primary treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer worldwide, the elderly cannot always tolerate standard platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, thus resulting in treatment failure. To reduce toxicity, single-agent chemotherapy is often used to treat the elderly with non-small cell lung cancer; however, this may increase the risk of treatment failure due to an inadequate dose. It has been shown that compound kushen injection in combination with chemotherapy can enhance the efficacy and reduce the toxicity. The aim of this trial is to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy versus platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Methods: This multicenter study will be an open-label, randomized controlled trial. Three hundred seventy elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer will be randomly divided into experimental (n = 185) and control groups (n = 185) to receive compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy or standard platinum-based doublet chemotherapy for two cycles. After two cycles, the disease control rate, objective response rate, clinical symptoms, quality of life, Karnofsky Performance Status, and side effects will be assessed. Follow-up evaluations will be performed every 8 weeks to evaluate the progression-free and overall survival.Discussion: Before the trial was designed, compound kushen injection was shown to be effective for lung cancer through basic experiments and clinical trials. This study will determine whether or not the efficacy of compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy is comparable to that of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy, and whether or not the toxicity of compound kushen injection in combination with single-agent chemotherapy is lower than that of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy.Trial Registration: ChiCTR-IPR-14005484 (16 November 2014). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is associated with poor survival. This study compared the outcomes of patients with unresectable ICC treated with hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) plus systemic chemotherapy (SYS) with the outcomes of patients treated with SYS alone.Methods: Consecutive patients with ICC were retrospectively reviewed. Clinicopathologic data were reviewed. Survival rates were compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank testing.Results: Between January 2000 and August 2012, 525 patients with ICC were evaluated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and 236 patients with unresectable tumors (locally advanced or metastatic) were analyzed. Disease was confined to the liver in 104 patients, who underwent treatment with combined HAI and SYS (n = 78 or 75%) or SYS alone (n = 26 or 25%). The response rate in the combined group was better than the rate in the group receiving SYS alone, although this did not reach statistical significance (59% vs 39%, P = .11). Overall survival for the combined group was longer than overall survival for the patients who received SYS alone (30.8 vs 18.4 months, P < .001), and this difference was maintained when patients with portal lymph node disease were included in the survival analysis (29.6 months with HAI and SYS [n = 93] vs 15.9 months with SYS [n = 74], P < .001). Eight patients who initially presented with unresectable tumors responded enough to undergo complete resection and had a median overall survival of 37 months (range, 10.4-92.3 months).Conclusions: In patients with unresectable ICC confined to the liver or with limited regional nodal disease, a combination of SYS and HAI chemotherapy is associated with greater survival than SYS alone. Cancer 2016;122:758-765. © 2015 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To estimate the response rate of gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and doxorubicin in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma, we conducted a phase II clinical trial. Patients with renal insufficiency cannot receive standard cisplatin-based chemotherapy for urothelial carcinoma, and carboplatin-based regimens have proved unsatisfactory. Secondary end points for this study included overall survival, safety of the regimen, and safety of same-day pegfilgrastim dosing.Methods: A two-stage design was chosen with target response rate of 40%. Key inclusion criteria were metastatic or unresectable urothelial carcinoma, no prior chemotherapy, glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min, and no dialysis. Gemcitabine (900 mg/m(2)), paclitaxel (135 mg/m(2)), and doxorubicin (40 mg/m(2)) were administered on day 1 of each 14-day cycle. Pegfilgrastim was given with every cycle on either day 1 or optionally day 2.Results: Forty patients were enrolled and 39 were treated. Median age was 72 years (range 51-89). There were 7 complete and 15 partial responses, for a response rate of 56.4% (95% confidence interval, 39.6-72.2). Most cycles (82.8%) were given with same-day pegfilgrastim. Notable grade 3 and 4 nonhematologic toxicities were fatigue and mucositis (10.3% each). There were 4 episodes of neutropenic fever (4 of 198 cycles [2%]; 4 of 39 patients [10.3%]) and no treatment-related deaths. Median overall survival was 14.4 months.Conclusion: The combination of gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and doxorubicin is effective first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and renal insufficiency. Neutropenic prophylaxis was acceptable whether pegfilgrastim was given immediately or 24 hours after chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To confirm whether a previously observed association between RECQ1 A159C variant and clinical outcome of resectable pancreatic cancer patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation is reproducible in another patient population prospectively treated with postoperative chemoradiation.Methods and Materials: Patients were selected, according to tissue availability, from eligible patients with resected pancreatic cancer who were enrolled on the NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9704 trial of 5-fluorouacil (5-FU)-based chemoradiation preceded and followed by 5-FU or gemcitabine. Deoxyribonucleic acid was extracted from paraffin-embedded tissue sections, and genotype was determined using the Taqman method. The correlation between genotype and overall survival was analyzed using a Kaplan-Meier plot, log-rank test, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.Results: In the 154 of the study's 451 eligible patients with evaluable tissue, genotype distribution followed Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (ie, 37% had genotype AA, 43% AC, and 20% CC). The RECQ1 variant AC/CC genotype carriers were associated with being node positive compared with the AA carrier (P=.03). The median survival times (95% confidence interval [CI]) for AA, AC, and CC carriers were 20.6 (16.3-26.1), 18.8 (14.2-21.6), and 14.2 (10.3-21.0) months, respectively. On multivariate analysis, patients with the AC/CC genotypes were associated with worse survival than patients with the AA genotype (hazard ratio [HR] 1.54, 95% CI 1.07-2.23, P=.022). This result seemed slightly stronger for patients on the 5-FU arm (n=82) (HR 1.64, 95% CI 0.99-2.70, P=.055) than for patients on the gemcitabine arm (n=72, HR 1.46, 95% CI 0.81-2.63, P=.21).Conclusions: Results of this study suggest that the RECQ1 A159C genotype may be a prognostic or predictive factor for resectable pancreatic cancer patients who are treated with adjuvant 5-FU before and after 5-FU-based chemoradiation. Further study is needed in patients treated with gemcitabine to determine whether an association exists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Radiation-induced lymphopenia (RIL) is associated with inferior survival in patients with glioblastoma, lung cancer, and pancreatic cancer. We asked whether stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) decreases severity of RIL compared to conventional chemoradiation therapy (CRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).Methods and Materials: Serial total lymphocyte counts (TLCs) from patients enrolled in a prospective trial of SBRT for LAPC were compared to TLCs from an existing database of LAPC patients undergoing definitive CRT. SBRT patients received 33 Gy (6.6 Gy × 5 fractions). CRT patients received a median dose of 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy × 28 fractions) with concurrent 5-fluorouracil (77%) or gemcitabine (23%) therapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA) were used to identify associations between clinical factors and post-treatment TLC and between TLC and survival.Results: Thirty-two patients received SBRT and 101 received CRT. Median planning target volume (PTV) was smaller in SBRT (88.7 cm(3)) than in CRT (344.6 cm(3); P<.001); median tumor diameter was larger for SBRT (4.6 cm) than for CRT (3.6 cm; P=.01). SBRT and CRT groups had similar median baseline TLCs. One month after starting radiation, 71.7% of CRT patients had severe lymphopenia (ie, TLC <500 cells/mm(3) vs 13.8% of SBRT patients; P<.001). At 2 months, 46.0% of CRT patients remained severely lymphopenic compared with 13.6% of SBRT patients (P=.007). MVA demonstrated that treatment technique and baseline TLCs were significantly associated with post-treatment TLC at 1 but not 2 months after treatment. Higher post-treatment TLC was associated with improved survival regardless of treatment technique (hazard ratio [HR] for death: 2.059; 95% confidence interval: 1.310-3.237; P=.002).Conclusions: SBRT is associated with significantly less severe RIL than CRT at 1 month in LAPC, suggesting that radiation technique affects RIL and supporting previous modeling studies. Given the association of severe RIL with survival in LAPC, further study of the effect of radiation technique on immune status is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate whether the selection of first-line chemotherapy based on ERCC1 and RRM1 mRNA expression levels would improve clinical outcomes in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.Materials and Methods: Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to the experimental and control arms; the experimental arm received gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) if ERCC1 and RRM1 expression was low, gemcitabine/vinorelbine (GV) if ERCC1 was high and RRM1 was low, docetaxel/carboplatin (DC) if ERCC1 was low and RRM1 was high, and docetaxel/vinorelbine (DV) if both were high. In the control arm, patients received DC.Results: This study was prematurely terminated after the futility analysis of 43 progression-free survival (PFS) events. A total of 55 patients (n = 26 in the experimental arm, n = 29 in the control arm) were evaluable for efficacy and toxicity. Nineteen (73.1%) patients were assigned to receive GC, 0 (0.0%) to GV, 4 (15.4%) to DC, and 3 (11.5%) to DV in the experimental arm. The overall response rates were 42.3 and 48.3% in the experimental and control arms, respectively, which were not statistically different (P = 0.657). The median PFS was 5.2 months in the experimental arm and 5.4 months in the control arm (P = 0.286). The median overall survival was 17.4 months in the experimental arm and 12.6 months in the control arm (P = 0.638). The occurrence of grade 3 or higher neutropenia (69.2 vs. 93.1%, P = 0.035) and febrile neutropenia (3.8 vs. 24.1%, P = 0.054) was more common in the control arm.Conclusion: ERCC1 and RRM1 mRNA expression-based chemotherapy did not improve clinical outcomes in advanced NSCLC (NCT01648517). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine have not been clarified in Japanese patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. No pharmacokinetic profile of co-administration of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine has been reported. We conducted a phase I/II study of the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics in Japanese patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.Methods: The patients were administered 125 mg/m(2) nab-paclitaxel followed by 1000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine on day 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or withdrawal of consent, whichever occurred first. The primary endpoints were tolerability in phase I and overall response rate according to RECIST in phase II.Results: A total of 34 patients were enrolled. At the time of 1-year follow-up analysis since the last patient enrollment, the objective response rate by independent review committee was 58.8% (20 of 34 patients; 95% confidence interval [CI], 40.7-75.4%). The median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.1-8.3) and 13.5 months (95% CI, 10.6--not reached), respectively. Main adverse drug reactions of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (70.6%), leukopenia (55.9%), anemia (14.7%), lymphocytopenia (14.7%), thrombocytopenia (14.7%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (11.8%). There were no treatment-related deaths and no marked differences in pharmacokinetics of combined paclitaxel and gemcitabine in historical comparison between co-administration and monotherapies.Conclusions: Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine regimen showed highly promising efficacy with manageable safety profile under careful observation and with appropriate supportive care in Japanese patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.Clinical Trial Number: JapicCTI-121987. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Combined treatment with cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) is the standard of care for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC). Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) potently and selectively inhibits MEK1/2, an intracellular kinase and has shown activity in ABC. The objective of the ABC-04 trial was to establish the recommended dose of selumetinib in combination with CisGem in patients with ABC.Methods: Eligible patients were ≥ 18 years, had histologically or cytologically-confirmed unresectable recurrent or metastatic biliary tract, gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma, WHO performance status 0-2, and adequate major organ function. Patients may have had prior surgery, radiotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy, but no prior CisGem and no prior chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Patients received cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Selumetinib capsules were taken daily. Patients received up to 8 cycles of CisGem and could receive selumetinib until disease progression. A dose de-escalation scheme was used to determine the recommended dose of selumetinib. The first dose level was 75 mg bd. Patients were recruited in cohorts of 3 and assessed for dose limiting toxicity (DLT) during the first cycle of treatment.Results: Thirteen patients were recruited, of whom 12 were evaluable for DLT (1 did not start treatment). All evaluable patients received the starting dose of selumetinib 75 mg bd and one patient experienced a DLT (cardiac chest pain). The median number of days selumetinib was taken (adjusted for the number of days of dose interruptions) was 171.5 (IQR: 75.5 to 344). Two patients remained on treatment at 14 and 19 months post registration. There were 3 temporary and 1 permanent interruptions of selumetinib in cycle 1. Eight patients were evaluable for objective response (RECIST v1.1): 3 had a partial response and 5 stable disease. The median PFS was 6.4 months (IQR 5.2 to 13.7). Toxicities related to selumetinib were mostly related to oedema and rash, grade 1-2 and manageable. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that the AUC(0-t), AUC(0-∞) and Cmax of selumetinib increased by 12, 11 and 30 % respectively when it was administered with CisGem, while Cmax for the N-desmethyl metabolite of selumetinib decreased by 40 %. There was no evidence that the time of Cmax for selumetinib or N-desmethyl metabolite of selumetinib were different when selumetinib was administered alone or with CisGem.Conclusion: The recommended dose of selumetinib when combined with CisGem was 75 mg bd. Translational studies are underway to identify biomarkers that may predict outcome (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01242605 July 6(th) 2010). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: MUC1 is a tumour-associated antigen expressed by many solid tumours, including non-small-cell lung cancer. TG4010 is a modified vaccinia Ankara expressing MUC1 and interleukin 2. In a previous study, TG4010 combined with chemotherapy showed activity in non-small-cell lung cancer and the baseline value of CD16, CD56, CD69 triple-positive activated lymphocytes (TrPAL) was shown to be potentially predictive of TG4010 efficacy. In this phase 2b part of the phase 2b/3 TIME trial, we further assess TG4010 in combination with first-line chemotherapy and use of the TrPAL biomarker in this setting.Methods: In this phase 2b part of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 trial, we recruited previously untreated patients aged 18 years or older with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer without a known activating EGFR mutation and with MUC1 expression in at least 50% of tumoural cells. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) by an external service provider to subcutaneous injections of 10(8) plaque-forming units of TG4010 or placebo from the beginning of chemotherapy every week for 6 weeks and then every 3 weeks up to progression, discontinuation for any reason, or toxic effects, stratified according to baseline value of TrPAL (≤ or > the upper limit of normal [ULN]) and, in addition, a dynamic minimisation procedure was used, taking into account chemotherapy regimen, histology, addition or not of bevacizumab, performance status, and centre. Patients, site staff, monitors, the study funder, data managers, and the statistician were masked to treatment identity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed every 6 weeks, to validate the predictive value of the TrPAL biomarker. If patients with TrPAL values of less than or equal to the ULN had a Bayesian probability of more than 95% that the true hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival was less than 1, and if those with TrPAL values of greater than the ULN had a probability of more than 80% that the true HR for progression-free survival was more than 1, the TrPAL biomarker would be validated. We did primary analyses in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses in those who had received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one valid post-baseline safety assessment. Monitors, site staff, and patients are still masked to treatment assignment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01383148.Findings: Between April 10, 2012, and Sept 12, 2014, we randomly allocated 222 patients (TG4010 and chemotherapy 111 [50%]; placebo and chemotherapy 111 [50%]). In the whole population, median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 5·4-6·7) in the TG4010 group and 5·1 months (4·2-5·9) in the placebo group (HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·55-0·98]; one-sided p=0·019). In patients with TrPAL values of less than or equal to the ULN, the HR for progression-free survival was 0·75 (0·54-1·03); the posterior probability of the HR being less than 1 was 98·4%, and thus the primary endpoint was met. In patients with TrPAL values of greater than the ULN, the HR for progression-free survival was 0·77 (0·42-1·40); the posterior probability of the HR being greater than 1 was 31·3%, and the primary endpoint was not met. We noted grade 1-2 injection-site reactions in 36 (33%) of 110 patients in the TG4010 group versus four (4%) of 107 patients in the placebo group. We noted no grade 3 or 4 nor serious adverse events deemed to be related to TG4010 only. Four (4%) patients presented grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to TG4010 and other study treatments (chemotherapy or bevacizumab) versus 11 (10%) in the placebo group. No serious adverse event was related to the combination of TG4010 with other study treatments. The most frequent severe adverse events were neutropenia (grade 3 29 [26%], grade 4 13 [12%] in the TG4010 group vs grade 3 22 [21%], grade 4 11 [10%] in the placebo group), anaemia (grade 3 12 [11%] vs grade 3 16 [15%]), and fatigue (grade 3 12 [11%], grade 5 one [1%] vs grade 3 13 [12%]; no grade 4 events).Interpretation: TG4010 plus chemotherapy seems to improve progression-free survival relative to placebo plus chemotherapy. These data support the clinical value of the TrPAL biomarker in this clinical setting; because the primary endpoint was met, the trial is to continue into the phase 3 part.Funding: Transgene, Avancées Diagnostiques pour de Nouvelles Approches Thérapeutiques (ADNA), and OSEO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Optimization of chemotherapy effectiveness in metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) is a major endpoint to enhance the possibility of curative intent surgery. FOLFIRI3 has shown promising results as second-line chemotherapy for mCRC patients previously exposed to oxaliplatin. The clinical efficacy of FOLFIRI3 was never determined in association with bevacizumab in non-previously treated mCRC patients.Methods: We conducted a phase II clinical trial to characterize the response rate and toxicity profile of FOLFIRI3-bevacizumab as initial treatment for mCRC. Sixty-one patients enrolled in 3 investigation centers were treated with FOLFIRI3-bevacizumab (median of 10 cycles) followed by a maintenance therapy combining bevacizumab and capecitabine. Levels of plasma angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay at baseline.Results: Overall response rate (ORR) was 66.7% (8% of complete and 58% of partial responses). The disease control rate was 91.7%. After a median time of follow-up of 46.7 months, 56 patients (92%) had progressed or died. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 12.7 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.7-15.8 months). The median overall survival (OS) was 24.5 months (95% CI: 10.6-38.3 months). Twenty-one patients underwent curative intent-surgery including 4 patients with disease initially classified as unresectable. Most common grade III-IV toxicities were diarrhea (15%), neutropenia (13%), asthenia (10%), and infections (4%). Hypertension-related medications needed to be increased in 3 patients. In multivariate analysis, surgery of metastases and Ang-2 levels were the only independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. Indeed, baseline level of Ang-2 above 5 ng/mL was confirmed as an independent prognostic factor for progression free survival (HR = 0.357; 95% CI: 0.168-0.76, p = 0.005) and overall survival (HR = 0.226; 95% CI: 0.098-0.53, p = 0.0002).Conclusions: As front-line therapy, FOLFIRI-3-bevacizumab is associated with an acceptable toxicity and induced promising objective response rates. However, unfavorable clinical outcomes were observed in patients with high levels of angiopoietin-2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A standard treatment for unresectable advanced-stage intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) has not yet been established. Although neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and liver transplantation are associated with long-term survival in select patients, the outcomes of CCRT for advanced-stage unresectable IHCC remain unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the outcomes of CCRT in patients with unresectable advanced-stage IHCC.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients with unresectable advanced stage (stage IVa or IVb) IHCC who were pathologically diagnosed and treated at National Cancer Center, Korea, from June 2001 to March 2012. Of the total of 92 patients, 25 (27.1%) received capecitabine plus cisplatin (XP) chemotherapy with external radiotherapy (RT) (XP-CCRT group) and 67 (72.8%) received XP chemotherapy alone (XP group). The clinical characteristics and outcomes of the 2 groups were compared.Results: The 92 patients comprised 72 male and 20 female patients, with a median age of 58 years (range 26-78 years). The baseline clinical characteristics of the 2 groups were similar. Patients in the XP-CCRT group received a mean 44.7 Gy of RT and a mean 5.6 cycles of XP chemotherapy, whereas patients in the XP group received a mean 4.0 cycles. The disease control rate was higher in the XP-CCRT group than in the XP group, but the difference was not statistically significant (56.0% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.217). Although neutropenia was significantly more frequent in the XP-CCRT than in the XP group (48% vs. 9%, p < 0.001), the rates of other toxicities and > grade 3 toxicities did not differ. At a median follow-up of 5.3 months, PFS (4.3 vs. 1.9 months, p = 0.001) and OS (9.3 vs. 6.2 months, p = 0.048) were significantly longer in the XP-CCRT than in the XP group.Conclusions: XP-CCRT was well tolerated and was associated with longer PFS and OS than XP chemotherapy alone in patients with unresectable advanced IHCC. Controlled randomized trials are required to determine whether XP-CCRT is a primary treatment option for patients with unresectable advanced IHCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Elderly cancer patients form a heterogeneous population in which therapeutic decision-making is often difficult. The aim of this randomised phase II trial was to evaluate the feasibility and activity of weekly docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG) followed by erlotinib after progression (arm A) vs erlotinib followed by DG after progression (arm B) in fit elderly patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods: Elderly chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were selected after a comprehensive geriatric assessment (socioeconomic, cognitive, depression, ADL and IADL assessments). The primary endpoint was the time to second progression (TTP2). Overall survival (OS), the time to first progression (TTP1) and safety were secondary endpoints.Results: Between July 2006 and November 2008, 22 centres enrolled 100 patients. TTP2 was 7.5 and 5.8 months in arm A and arm B, respectively; TTP1 was 4.7 and 2.7 months; and the median OS time was 9.4 and 7.1 months; the respective 1-year survival rates were 36.2 and 31.4%. There was no major unexpected toxicity.Conclusion: These results suggest that weekly DG, followed by erlotinib, is a promising treatment for fit elderly patients with NSCLC; the efficacy of the reverse sequence was insufficient to recommend it for EGFR-non-selected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This phase II study is performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine combined with preoperative radiotherapy (RT) in Chinese patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).Methods: Between February 2007 and December 2008, 62 patients with LARC were treated with capecitabine (825 mg/m(2), twice daily) and concurrent RT (50.4 Gy/28 fractions). Patients underwent surgery after 6-8 weeks of combined therapy, followed by 4 cycles of adjuvant capecitabine (1,250 mg/m(2), twice daily on days 1-14, every 3 weeks). The primary endpoint was the rate of pathologic complete response (pCR).Results: Fifty-eight patients (93.5%) completed the preoperative chemoradiation course as initially planned. The most severe hematologic adverse event was leucopenia, which occurred with grade 2 intensity in 12 (19.7%) patients and grade 3 in 2 (3.3%) patients. Grade 3 diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome (HFS) were observed in one (1.6%) and two (3.3%) patients, respectively. However, no grade 4 toxicity was observed. There were no treatment-related deaths during this study. Of the 59 patients treated with surgery, all had radial margins (R0 resections). Among the 29 patients with the primary tumor ≤5 cm from the anal verge, 18 (62.1%) underwent sphincter-preserving surgical resections. pCR was found in eight patients (13.6%). The pathologic stage was lower than the initial clinical stage in 57.6% (34/59), 63.4% (26/41), and 81.4% (48/59) of the resected tumors for the primary tumor (T), lymph node (N), and combined TN categories, respectively. The estimate of disease-free survival and overall survival at 24 months were 80.6% (95% CI, 70.8-90.4%) and 92.5% (95% CI, 85.9-99.1%), respectively.Conclusion: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine and RT appears to be a safe, well-tolerated, and effective neoadjuvant treatment modality for LARC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The AIO KRK-0104 randomised phase II trial investigated the efficacy and safety of two capecitabine-based regimens: combination of capecitabine and irinotecan (CAPIRI) plus cetuximab (CAPIRI-C) and combination of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX) plus cetuximab (CAPOX-C) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Treatment-related skin toxicity (ST) was evaluated separately for capecitabine and cetuximab. The present analysis investigates the correlation of capecitabine-attributed ST (Cape-ST) and parameters of treatment efficacy.Methods: Patients with mCRC were randomised to cetuximab (400 mg m(-2), day 1, followed by 250 mg m(-2) weekly) plus CAPIRI (irinotecan 200 mg m(-2), day 1; capecitabine 800 mg m(-2), twice daily, days 1-14, every 3 weeks), or cetuximab plus CAPOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg m(-2), day 1; capecitabine 1000 mg m(-2), twice daily, days 1-14, every 3 weeks).Results: Of 185 recruited patients, 149 (CAPIRI-C, n=78; CAPOX-C, n=71) received study treatment beyond the first tumour assessment and were evaluable for efficacy. Capecitabine-attributed ST, predominantly hand-foot syndrome, was observed in 32.2% of patients. Capecitabine-attributed ST grade 1-3 was associated with a significantly higher disease control rate (DCR) (97.9 vs 86.1%, P=0.038) compared with grade 0 toxicity. Moreover, Cape-ST grade 1-3 related to a markedly longer progression-free survival (PFS) (9.9 vs 5.6 months, P<0.001) and overall survival (OS) (32.8 vs 22.4 months, P=0.008). Separate analyses of treatment arms indicated that the effect of Cape-ST on PFS remained significant for both arms, whereas the effect on OS remained apparent as a strong trend.Conclusion: This analysis supports the hypothesis that for the evaluated regimens, a correlation exists between Cape-ST and treatment efficacy regarding DCR, PFS, and OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A dose-finding study was performed to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended dose (RD) of escalating the doses of capecitabine and fixed doses of irinotecan and oxaliplatin on a biweekly schedule for metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC). A pharmacogenomic analysis was performed to investigate the association between SNPs and treatment outcome.Methods: Eighty-seven chemotherapy-naïve mCRC patients were recruited through a two-step study design; 27 were included in the dose-finding study and 60 in the pharmacogenomic analysis. Oxaliplatin (85 mg m(-2)) and CPT-11 (150 mg m(-2)), both on day 1, and capecitabine doses ranging from 850 to 1500 mg m(-2) bid on days 1-7 were explored. Peripheral blood samples were used to genotype 13 SNPs in 10 genes related to drug metabolism or efficacy. Univariate and multivariate Cox analysis was performed to examine associations between SNPs, ORR and PFS.Results: The capecitabine RD was 1000 mg m(-2) bid. Diarrhoea and neutropenia were the DLTs. After a median follow-up of 52.5 months, the median PFS and OS were 12 (95% CI; 10.6-13.4) and 27 months (95% CI; 17.2-36.8), respectively.The GSTP1-G genotype, the Köhne low-risk category and use of a consolidation approach strongly correlated with decreased risk of progression. Patients with all favourable variables showed a median PFS of 42 months vs 3.4 months in the group with all adverse factors. A superior clinical response was obtained in patients with one GSTP1-G allele as compared with GSTP1-AA carriers (P=0.004).Conclusion: First-line therapy with oxaliplatin, irinotecan and capecitabine is efficient and well-tolerated. The GSTP1 polymorphism A>G status was significantly associated with ORR and PFS in mCRC treated with this triplet therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Only a few clinical trials have been conducted in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. Therefore, there is no current consensus on the treatment of these patients. We conducted a randomised phase II study of the modified FOLFIRI.3 (mFOLFIRI.3; a regimen combining 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), folinic acid, and irinotecan) and modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX; a regimen combining folinic acid, 5-FU, and oxaliplatin) regimens as second-line treatments in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.Methods: The primary end point was the 6-month overall survival rate. The mFOlFIRI.3 regimen consisted of irinotecan (70 mg m(-2); days 1 and 3), leucovorin (400 mg m(-2); day 1), and 5-FU (2000 mg m(-2); days 1 and 2) every 2 weeks. The mFOLFOX regimen was composed of oxaliplatin (85 mg m(-2); day 1), leucovorin (400 mg m(-2); day 1), and 5-FU (2000 mg m(-2); days 1 and 2) every 2 weeks.Results: Sixty-one patients were randomised to mFOLFIRI.3 (n=31) or mFOLFOX (n=30) regimen. The six-month survival rates were 27% (95% confidence interval (CI)=13-46%) and 30% (95% CI=15-49%), respectively. The median overall survival periods were 16.6 and 14.9 weeks, respectively. Disease control was achieved in 23% (95% CI=10-42%) and 17% patients (95% CI=6-35%), respectively. The number of patients with at least one grade 3/4 toxicity was identical (11 patients, 38%) in both groups: neutropenia (7 patients under mFOLFIRI.3 regimen vs 6 patients under mFOLFOX regimen), asthaenia (1 vs 4), vomiting (3 in both), diarrhoea (2 vs 0), and mucositis (1 vs 2).Conclusion: Both mFOLFIRI.3 and mFOLFOX regimens were tolerated with manageable toxicity, offering modest activities as second-line treatments for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, previously treated with gemcitabine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: Preclinical data suggest gemcitabine may have schedule-dependent activity favoring prolonged infusion. We sought to determine the recommended phase II dose (RPTD) and toxicity of gemcitabine when given as a continuous intravenous (CIVI) over 96 h.Patients and Methods: Gemcitabine was initially given at 1 mg/m(2)/d for 48, then 72, and finally 96 h. The dose was then increased to 2, 4, 6, 10, 15, 20, and 25 mg/m(2)/d. Dose levels of 7, 8, 9 mg/m(2)/d as 96-h infusion were added later after a protocol modification. After identifying the RPTD using an every 3-wk schedule, we then evaluated the feasibility of repeating the infusion every 2 wk, and then weekly for 3 of 4 wk.Results: Thirty-four patients with a variety of tumor types received a total of 126 cycles of therapy (median of 2 cycles, range 1-10 cycles). The RPTD was 8 mg/m(2)/d every 3 wk, and 6 mg/m(2)/d every 2 wk. The most common grade 2 or higher toxicities at all dose levels (>or= grade 2) included fever (n = 14), dyspnea (n = 7), mucositis (n = 6), hypotension (n = 6), nausea/vomiting (n = 6), and fatigue (n = 5). Neutropenia and/or thrombocytopenia were uncommon.Conclusion: Administration of gemcitabine as a 96-h infusion results in a markedly different toxicity profile and RPTD than when given by a conventional 30-min infusion. The RPTD was 8 mg/m(2)/d (32 mg/m(2)/course) when given every 3 wk, or 6 mg/m(2)/d (24 mg/m(2)/course) when given every 2 wk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Undifferentiated carcinoma (UC) of the pancreas is a rare subtype of pancreatic cancer. Although UC has been considered a highly aggressive malignancy, no clinical studies have addressed the efficacy of chemotherapy for unresectable UC. Therefore, we conducted multicenter retrospective study to investigate the efficacy of chemotherapy in patients with UC of the pancreas.Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted at 17 institutions in Japan between January 2007 and December 2017. A total of 50 patients treated with chemotherapy were analyzed.Results: The median overall survival (OS) in UC patients treated with chemotherapy was 4.08 months. The details of first-line chemotherapy were as follows: gemcitabine (n = 24), S-1 (n = 12), gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (n = 6), and other treatment (n = 8). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.61 months in the gemcitabine group, 2.96 months in the S-1 group, and 4.60 months in the gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel group. Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel significantly improved PFS compared with gemcitabine (p = 0.014). The objective response rate (ORR) was 4.2% in the gemcitabine group, 0.0% in the S-1 group, and 33.3% in the gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel group. Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel also showed a significantly higher ORR compared with both gemcitabine and S-1 (gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel vs. gemcitabine: p = 0.033; gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel vs. S-1: p = 0.034). A paclitaxel-containing first-line regimen significantly improved OS compared with a non-paclitaxel-containing regimen (6.94 months vs. 3.75 months, respectively; p = 0.041). After adjustment, use of a paclitaxel-containing regimen in any line was still an independent predictor of OS (hazard ratio for OS, 0.221; 95% confidence interval, 0.076-0.647; p = 0.006) in multiple imputation by chained equation.Conclusions: The results of the present study indicate that a paclitaxel-containing regimen would offer relatively longer survival, and it is considered a reasonable option for treating patients with unresectable UC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recently, patients who received induction chemotherapy plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma were found to have survival advantages compared with those receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone in two large randomized trials. Based on these two trials, we present a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare gemcitabine and cisplatin (GP) versus cisplatin, fluorouracil, and docetaxel (TPF) for induction chemotherapy to treat locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Methods: We constructed a Markov model to compare the cost and effectiveness of GP versus TPF. Clinical data including the frequency of adverse events, recurrence and death obtained from two randomized phase III trials were used to calculate transition probabilities and costs. Health utilities were estimated from the literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, expressed as dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), were calculated, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios less than $27,534.25/QALY (3 × the per capita GDP of China, 2018) were considered cost-effective. One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored the robustness of the model.Results: Our base case model found that the total cost was $53,082.68 in the GP group and $45,482.66 in the TPF group. The QALYs were 6.82 and 4.11, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio favoured the GP regimen, at an incremental cost of $2,804.44 per QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that treatment with the GP regimen was cost-effective 100% of the time at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $27,534.25‬/QALY.Conclusion: In this model, GP was estimated to be cost-effective compared with cisplatin, fluorouracil, and docetaxel for patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma from the payer's perspectives in the China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Median age for the diagnosis of metastatic bladder cancer (MBC) is 73 years. The feasibility of chemotherapy in older patients is controversial. Our objectives were to assess associations linking age to first line chemotherapy regimen selection, early chemotherapy discontinuation, and 1-year mortality in everyday practice.Materials and Methods: Between 1999 and 2011, 197 consecutive patients aged≥70 years with MBC referred to 4 hospitals were included in the AGEVIM multicenter cohort. At baseline, we recorded performance status (PS); tumor characteristics; the Charlson Comorbidity Index; and plasma creatinine, hemoglobin, and albumin. Early discontinuation data were available for 193 patients, and overall 1-year mortality for 180 patients. We assessed the probabilities of initial cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy (CCC), early discontinuation (≤2 cycles), and 1-year mortality, using multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling.Results: Among the 193 patients (mean age: 76±4.3y), with 2 metastatic site in median 43.5% received CCC, 36.3% gemcitabine and carboplatin, and 20.2% gemcitabine alone. The probability of CCC decreased with age independently from sex, PS, creatinine clearance, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (P<0.0001), early discontinuation occurred in 24.9% of patients. Factors independently associated with global chemotherapy early discontinuation were age (adjusted odds ratioper additional year = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.02-1.20; P = 0.01) and higher metastatic-site number (adjusted odds ratioper additional site = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.08-1.95; P = 0.01). The number of patients was too small for a robust analysis of factors associated with early chemotherapy discontinuation in each chemotherapy regiment subgroup. Independent predictors of 1-year mortality (median = 9.6 mo) were early discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 4.77 [2.85-7.96] when PS<2 and 20.6 [9.43-44.82] when PS≥2; P<0.0001), albumin<35g/l (aHR = 3.06 [1.81-5.17], P = 0.0001), creatinine clearance<30ml/min (aHR = 2.96 [1.45-6.06], P = 0.009), and higher metastatic-site number (aHR = 1.34 [1.14-1.56], P<0.0001).Conclusion: Less than half of older patients with MBC received initial CCC and 25% had≤2 cycles of chemotherapy. Older age was associated with decreased CCC prescription, independently from known contraindications, and with global chemotherapy early discontinuation, but not with 1-year mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chemotherapy (CTX) with gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and paclitaxel (GOP) has demonstrated efficacy with an overall response rate (ORR) of approximately 50% in patients with multiply relapsed or cisplatin-refractory germ cell cancer (GCC) or both within a phase II study. We analyzed the efficacy and safety of GOP in routine clinical practice within a registry of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group.Methods: Overall, 63 patients with refractory GCC, who received GOP because of progression under cisplatin-based treatment or relapse after high-dose CTX, were included in this database. Patient characteristics, response rate, toxicity, progression-free and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. For further risk stratification, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.Results: GOP was applied as second to eighth treatment line (median fourth) after cisplatin-based CTX. The ORR was 44% with complete remissions achieved in 8 patients (4 patients with CTX plus additional residual tumor resections and 4 patients with CTX alone) and partial remissions achieved in 19 of all for best response evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival and OS were 4.0 months (95% CI: 3.08-4.94) and 13.3 months (95% CI: 9.50-17.06), respectively. Long-term OS of>2 years was achieved in 13 (21%), and grade III and IV toxicities, mainly thrombocytopenia and leukopenia, occurred in 29 patients.Conclusion: Our results were similar compared with the previous results from the phase II study with a distinct activity with an ORR of 44%, and a long-term OS in 21% of the patients. Our data support the recommendation to use GOP ± secondary surgery in patients with multiply refractory metastatic GCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the oncologic outcomes and prognostic factors between metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and UC of the bladder (UCB) after cisplatin-based chemotherapy.Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with metastatic UTUC and UCB after methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin (MVAC) or gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy between 1997 and 2014 at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses with Cox proportional hazard models were also performed to assess the effect of prognostic factors.Results: Totally, 203 patients were enrolled into our study, including 120 patients with UTUC and 83 patients with UCB. For patients with UTUC, the median PFS was 7.3 months vs. 4.0 months (P<0.001), and the median OS was 17.0 months vs. 10.5 months (P<0.001) for MVAC and gemcitabine/cisplatin, respectively. For patients with UCB, the median PFS (P = 0.35) and OS (P = 0.06) of the 2 groups were insignificant. In multivariate analyses, number of metastatic sites was the identical prognostic factor for OS between UTUC (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.74; 95% CI: 1.63-4.62; P<0.001) and UCB (HR = 3.12; 95% CI: 1.52-6.39; P = 0.002). Presence of liver metastasis (HR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.05-2.23; P = 0.03) and MVAC chemotherapy (HR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.35-0.83; P<0.001) were significantly correlated to survival only for UTUC, not for UCB.Conclusion: Our study suggests discordant oncologic outcomes and prognostic factors between metastatic UTUC and UCB after cisplatin-based chemotherapy. A prospective study is warranted to validate our results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]