Search

Aim To assess patient perception toward oral chemotherapy for solid tumors, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology performed a large multi-institutional national survey. Methods A 17-item anonymous questionnaire including 7 general and 10 investigational questions with free-text, single-choice, or multiple-choice answers was administered. Analysis of response distribution according to predefined factors was described by summary measures and conducted by χ2 test and other nonparametric tests. Results From January to June 2010, 581 patients completed the questionnaire; data of 404 patients constituted the final study sample. Three groups could be distinguished according to treatment: IV chemotherapy (IV group, n = 313), oral chemotherapy (oral group, n = 48), or combined therapy (combined group, n = 43). Thirty-one (72%) patients in the combined group and 187 (60%) in the IV group expressed preference for oral therapy (p = 0.028). Limitations in family and work commitment were more frequently perceived by patients on IV than oral chemotherapy (147 (47%) vs 14 (29%) patients, pConclusions We observed a propensity from the patient perspective in favor of oral chemotherapy that was considered to have a lower impact on family and work commitments than IV chemotherapy. The treatment that patients were taking when the questionnaire was administered likely influenced their perception and related results.

Purpose Information about symptomatic toxicities of anticancer treatments is not based on direct report by patients, but rather on reports by clinicians in trials. Given the potential for under-reporting, our aim was to compare reporting by patients and physicians of six toxicities (anorexia, nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, and hair loss) within three randomized trials. Patients and Methods In one trial, elderly patients with breast cancer received adjuvant chemotherapy; in two trials, patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer received first-line treatment. Toxicity was prospectively collected by investigators (graded by National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0] or Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 3]). At the end of each cycle, patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaires, including toxicity-related symptom items. Possible answers were “not at all,” “a little,” “quite a bit,” and “very much.” Analysis was limited to the first three cycles. For each toxicity, agreement between patients and physicians and under-reporting by physicians (ie, toxicity reported by patients but not reported by physicians) were calculated. Results Overall, 1,090 patients (2,482 cycles) were included. Agreement between patients and physicians was low for all toxicities. Toxicity rates reported by physicians were always lower than those reported by patients. For patients who reported toxicity (any severity), under-reporting by physicians ranged from 40.7% to 74.4%. Examining only patients who reported “very much” toxicity, under-reporting by physicians ranged from 13.0% to 50.0%. Conclusion Subjective toxicities are at high risk of under-reporting by physicians, even when prospectively collected within randomized trials. This strongly supports the incorporation of patient-reported outcomes into toxicity reporting in clinical trials.

Vandetanib did not demonstrate any superiority alone or in combination with gemcitabine in the progression-free survival of patients affected by advanced biliary tract cancer compared with gemcitabine alone. The safety profile of vandetanib given (alone or in combination with gemcitabine) does not show any additional adverse events (AEs) or worsening of already known AEs. Background The management of biliary tract cancers (BTCs) is complex due to limited data on the optimal therapeutic approach. This phase II multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of vandetanib monotherapy compared with vandetanib plus gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus placebo in patients with advanced BTC. Patients and methods Patients were randomized in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to three treatment groups: vandetanib 300 mg monotherapy (V), vandetanib 100 mg plus gemcitabine (V/G), gemcitabine plus placebo (G/P). Vandetanib (300 mg or 100 mg) or placebo was given in single oral daily doses. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 was i.v. infused on day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were: objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, overall survival, duration of response, performance status and safety outcomes. Results A total of 173 patients (mean age 63.6 years) were recruited at 19 centers across Italy. Median (95% confidence intervals) PFS (days) were 105 (72–155), 114 (91–193) and 148 (71–225), respectively, for the V, V/G and G/P treatment groups, with no statistical difference among them (P = 0.18). No statistical difference between treatments was observed for secondary end points, except ORR, which slightly favored the V/G combination over other treatments. The proportion of patients reporting adverse events (AEs) was similar for the three groups (96.6% in V arm, 91.4% in the V/G arm and 89.3% in the G/P arm). Conclusions Vandetanib treatment did not improve PFS in patients with advanced BTC. The safety profile of vandetanib did not show any additional AEs or worsening of already known AEs. Clinical trial number NCT00753675.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the raltitrexed/5-fluorouracil/levofolinic acid combination regimen as first-line chemotherapy for elderly patients with advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Previously untreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer received raltitrexed 2 mg/m(2) i.v. plus levofolinic acid and 5-fluorouracil according to the De Gramont' schedule given every 2 weeks as first-line chemotherapy. Patients were re-evaluated after six cycles and chemotherapy was continued up to tolerance or disease progression. RESULTS: Seventy patients aged >/=65 years were accrued from 11 centers between September 2001 and July 2002. According to the intention-to-treat analysis, the overall response rate was 35% (95% CI 29.5% to 40.5%) including one complete response (1%) and 24 partial responses (34%). Twenty patients (31%) showed a stabilization of disease for a tumor growth control rate of 64% (95% CI 57% to 71%). The median overall survival was 12.5 months and the median time to disease progression was 6.5 months. No toxic deaths or allergic reaction were recorded. Grade 4 toxicities were non-existent. The main hematological toxicity was grade 3 neutropenia, which occurred in 9% of patients, and grade 3 anemia in only one case, while no case of graded 3 thrombocytopenia was observed. Grade 3 non-hematological toxicities were asthenia (11%), transient increase of transaminases (10%) and diarrhea (4%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the raltitrexed/5-fluorouracil/levolofinic acid combination is an effective and well tolerated regimen for the treatment of elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Its ease of administration and patient's tolerance warrant further investigation over 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid regimens.

Background The aim of the study was to test the clinical efficacy and toxicity profile of gemcitabine (GEM) in combination with cisplatin (CDDP) in a series of patients affected by unresectable and/or metastatic biliary tree carcinoma (BTC) previously untreated with chemotherapy. Patients and methods Overall 38 consecutive patients who satisfied eligibility criteria (10 with gall-bladder carcinoma and 28 with bile duct carcinoma) were included in this phase II study. Median age was 61 years with median PS 1. Treatment included GEM 1000 mg/m2/week as 30 min i.v. on days 1 and 8, and CDDP 75–80 mg/m2 on day 1 with adequate hydration protocol and forced diuresis. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks for three cycles before first re-evaluation of disease status. Results According to an intent-to-treat analysis a complete response (CR) was achieved in 1 patient (3%) with duration of 8 months. A partial response (PR) was recorded in 11 cases (29%; 95% CI 6% to 48%) with a median duration of 6.4 months (range 5–11 months) for an overall response rate (ORR) of 32%. Stable disease (SD) was seen in eight cases (21%), while the remaining 18 patients showed progressive disease (PD). Tumor growth control rate was 53%. Objective responses were recorded at loco-regional disease, liver and nodal metastases. Lung and peritoneal metastases did not respond. Time-to-progression was 4 months (range 2–11 months) and median overall survival was 8+ months (range 2–15 months). Side-effects were mild with few cases of grade 4 hematological toxicity. Transient and reversible liver toxicity was recorded in nearly one-quarter of patients. Infection without severe grade 4 neutropenia was observed in three cases. In no case was chemotherapy withdrawn for toxicity. Conclusions The GEM/CDDP regimen is active against advanced and/or metastatic BTC with a favourable toxicity profile. This regimen represents a reasonable therapeutic choice for palliation of advanced BTC. Inferences concerning overall survival are difficult to draw due to the phase II nature of the study.

This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan/cetuximab administered as third- or fourth-line therapy in a retrospective series of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to oxaliplatin and irinotecan. Patients and Methods: Most patients (90%) had been previously treated with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, and all had received oxaliplatin-based regimens before receiving irinotecan- based second-line treatment. Sixty patients with irinotecan-refractory colorectal cancer received a regimen comprising weekly irinotecan 120 mg/m 2 as a 1-hour intravenous infusion and cetuximab 400 mg/m 2 infused over 2 hours as the initial dose and 250 mg/m 2 infused over 1 hour for the subsequent administrations. A single treatment cycle comprised 4 weekly infusions followed by 2 weeks of rest. Results: According to an intent-to- treat analysis, a partial response was exhibited in 12 of 60 enrolled patients (20%; 95% confidence interval, 11%- 32%) with a median duration of 5.1 months (range, 3-7.4 months).The tumor growth control rate was 50% (95% confidence interval, 37%-63%). Objective responses did not correlate with performance status, number of sites of disease, and pretreatments or epidermal growth factor receptor status. The median progression-free survival was 3.1 months (range, 1.2-9 months), whereas median overall survival was 6 months (range, 2-13 months). Both survival parameters correlated with performance status at the beginning of treatment. The main grade 3/4 toxicities were nausea (33%), diarrhea (27%), leukopenia (18%), asthenia (13%), and acne-like reaction (13%). Conclusion: Our data suggest that the weekly irinotecan/cetuximab regimen is feasible in an outpatient setting and tolerated by most patients.At present, combinations of chemotherapy with cetuximab are being evaluated in patients with earlier-stage disease in a number of ongoing studies.

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of a combination regimen of CPT-11 and mitomycin-c as second-line chemotherapy for pretreated patients with advanced, metastatic, or both, gastric adenocarcinoma. Materials and methods Patients with pretreated metastatic disease or early relapsed after adjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled. Entry criteria included histologic/cytologic diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma, age 18 to 75 years, performance status > or =70 (Karnofsky scale), bi-dimensionally measurable disease. Patients received CPT-11 and mitomycin-c at the dosage of 150 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, and 8 mg/m2 on day 1, respectively, every 4 weeks. The disease evaluation was done every 3 cycles. Results Among the 38 patients we observed, 1 (3%) complete response and 11 (29%) partial responses for an overall response rate of 32% according to an intent-to-treat analysis. The median duration of response was 6.5 months. The median time to progression was 4 months with a median overall survival 8 months. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and the only grade 3-4 observed toxicities were leukopenia (8%), neutropenia (21%), and anemia (5%). Conclusions The combination of CPT-11 and mitomycin-c is an active and well tolerated second-line treatment in pretreated gastric cancer patients. Further studies are needed to test its role in first-line treatment.

Purpose We performed this phase III study to compare the irinotecan, leucovorin (LV), and fluorouracil (FU) regimen (FOLFIRI) versus the oxaliplatin, LV, and FU regimen (FOLFOX4) in previously untreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods A total of 360 chemotherapy-naive patients were randomly assigned to receive, every 2 weeks, either arm A (FOLFIRI: irinotecan 180 mg/m2 on day 1 with LV 100 mg/m2 administered as a 2-hour infusion before FU 400 mg/m2 administered as an intravenous bolus injection, and FU 600 mg/m2 as a 22-hour infusion immediately after FU bolus injection on days 1 and 2 [LV5FU2]) or arm B (FOLFOX4: oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on day 1 with LV5FU2 regimen). Results One hundred sixty-four and 172 patients were assessable in arm A and B, respectively. Overall response rates (ORR) were 31% in arm A (95% CI, 24.6% to 38.3%) and 34% in arm B (95% CI, 27.2% to 41.5%; P = .60). In both arms A and B, median time to progression (TTP; 7 v 7 months, respectively), duration of response (9 v 10 months, respectively), and overall survival (OS; 14 v 15 months, respectively) were similar, without any statistically significant difference. Toxicity was mild in both groups: alopecia and gastrointestinal disturbances were the most common toxicities in arm A; thrombocytopenia and neurosensorial were the most common toxicities in arm B. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were uncommon in both arms, and no statistical significant difference was observed. Conclusion There is no difference in ORR, TTP, and OS for patients treated with the FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4 regimen. Both therapies seemed effective as first-line treatment in these patients. The difference between these two combination therapies is mainly in the toxicity profile.

Purpose: To verify the experience of the GOIM in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer patients with the FOLFIRI combination therapy. Patients and methods: Patients entered in three consecutive trials of the GOIM (protocols no. 9706, 9901, and 2301) were reported in this analysis. A total of 287 chemotherapy-naive patients were treated with FOLFIRI regimen: Irinotecan 180mg/m 2 on day 1 with LV5FU2 regimen (LV at 100mg/m 2 administered as a 2-hour infusion before FU at 400mg/m 2 as an intravenous bolus injection, and FU at 600mg/m 2 as a 22-hour infusion immediately after 5FU bolus injection on day 1 and 2); the treatment was repeated every 2 weeks. Results: 287 patients entered in these three trials, and 264 (92%) were evaluable for response. The overall response rate was 34.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 29% to 40%). When only assessable patients were analyzed, overall response rate was 37% (95% CI: 31% to 43%). Median time to progression, median duration of response and survival were 7 months, 10.5 months and 14 months, respectively. All but three patients were evaluable for toxicity which was globally mild; grade 3‐4 toxicity was uncommon, and gastrointestinal disturbances were the most common. Conclusions: FOLFIRI regimen is effective and well-tolerated as first-line treatment in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Further studies needed to evaluate the improvement in results with the addition of new drugs to this combination therapy.

In the last two decades the results of medical treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have constantly improved even if they are still far from being considered satisfactory. Today systemic cisplatin-based chemotherapy (CT) is able to increase survival and improve cancer-related symptoms in patients with advanced ‘wet’ stage III and metastatic stage IV NSCLC, but it not clear if the benefits of CT also apply to patients with poor performance status (PS) [1, 2]. PS is the most powerful independent prognostic factor in advanced NSCLC since it is a reliable measure of functional independence, ability to perform daily activities and work, and a strong predictor of survival and adverse events as well [3]. The vast majority of prospective phase III trials had been conducted stratifying patients according to stage (III versus IV) and PS (PS 0–1 versus 2). In a retrospective analysis by the Veteran Administration Lung Group including more than 5000 patients, PS recorded according to the Karnofsky Index was the strongest prognostic factor followed by extent of disease and weigh loss [3]. The same conclusion has been reached by more recent large trials using new regimens. The survival analysis of 1960 patients treated with cisplatin-based CT in five ECOG trials showed a median survival of 3.3 months for PS2 patients as compared to 9.4 months and 6.4 months recorded for PS0 and PS1 patients, respectively [4]. A similar analysis of 2531 patients included in fourteen SWOG trials also showed that a poor PS was the strongest independent predictor of shorter median survival (PS 0–1: 6.4 months; PS >_2. 3.3 months) and lower 1-year survival rate (20% versus 9%; P _2 was 3.8 months. Data from 1052 patients treated with cisplatin-based CT in seven EORTC trials showed that, after disease extent, PS was the most important determinant of outcome [6]. In all studies a better outcome was also associated to less disease extent, presence of less than 1 metastatic lesion, absence of liver, skin or bone metastases, basal haemoglobin levels >11 gr%, normal LDH and alkaline phosphatase levels, absence of symptoms due to metastatic disease, and a preserved appetite. Recently an analysis of 1436 patients treated with third-generation doublet regimens (ECOG E5592 and E1594 trials) allowed the identification of six independent poor prognostic factors including PS2, presence of skin or liver metastases, loss of appetite, presence of less than four metastatic sites, and no prior surgical treatment. A normogram using these six pretreatment prognostic factors was elaborated and validated to predict 1-and 2-year survival in CT-naive patients. This prognostic model could be potentially useful in clinical decision making and research planning [7]. Despite the negative influence of poor PS on survival parameters, the relationship between PS score and control of cancer-related symptoms deserves some comments. A significant proportion of patients with PS2 treated with CT may experience an improvement in tumor-related symptoms even if a better PS is associated with better control. A study on nearly 300 patients showed that 48% of PS2 patients and even 30% PS3 ones may experience an improvement of cancerrelated symptoms. However a better PS was a strong prognostic factor for higher symptomatic response [8]. Only one study specifically analysed quality of life (QoL) in the different PS sub-groups [9]. Patients with PS2 reported the worst scores at baseline assessment. The drop-out rate in PS2 patients was greater than in the other PS levels (PS2 35% versus PS1 23% versus PS0 18%). Nevertheless, PS2 pts had significant benefit from CT and, with the greater potential for palliation determined by worse baseline condition, showed an improvement in QoL even higher than that of patients with PS 0–1. Overall, median survival of PS2 patients is substantially shorter than that of PS 0–1 patients, being usually

A review of the incidence and management of anemia in elderly patients with head and neck carcinoma treated with systemic chemotherapy. The role of recombinant human erythropoietin in preventing or correcting chemotherapy-related anemia has been focused. Data concerning the prospective use of recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEpo) in a series of unfit elderly patients (EPs) treated with carboplatin plus 5-fluorouracil. Patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous rhEpo 10,000 U three times per week (TIW) (23 elderly patients) or no treatment (22 control patients). Recombinant hEpo was able to prevent anemia and to reduce transfusional requirements in treated patients as compared to untreated controls with a statistically significant difference. rhEpo also caused a positive effect on quality of life (QoL) parameters.

Our objective was to identify a new active three-drug combination regimen consisting of paclitaxel (PTX), epirubicin (EPI) and cisplatin as first-line line chemotherapy for advanced ovarian carcinoma. A phase I study was carried out to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of PXT and EPI in combination with a fixed dose of cisplatin every 4 weeks. Side-effects were recorded according to the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria. Patients were treated in cohorts of three with fixed-dose cisplatin 80 mg/m 2 and EPI 80 → 100 mg/ m 2 and PXT 100 → 160 mg/m 2 until DLT was reached. Once MTD was identified, a single-step phase II study was therefore carried out to test the clinical activity and panel of toxicity of such regimen. Objective responses were recorded according to the WHO criteria. Time to progression and overall survival (OS) were secondary endpoints. The DLT was myelosuppression and, in more detail, febrile neutropenia, which occurred at the fifth dose level (PTX 140 mg/m 2 , EPI 100 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 80 mg/ m 2 ) in two out of three patients. Other side-effects were grade 3 mucositis in two out of three patients and grade 3 anemia in one case. The combination of cisplatin 80 mg/m 2 plus EPI 80 mg/m 2 and PCT 140 mg/m 2 every 4 weeks was considered as the MTD. In the phase II study a complete response was observed in six patients (33%) and a partial response in nine cases (50%) for an overall response rate of 83% [95% confidence limits (CL) 59-96%]. Median time to progression of patients with measurable disease was 16.4 months. Median OS was not reached after a follow-up of 42 months. This study demonstrated that PTX and EPI can be safely administered in combination with cisplatin to fit patients with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma. The three-drug regimen of cisplatin 80mg/m 2 , EPI 80mg/m 2 and PTX 140 mg/m 2 every 4 weeks is very active, at least in terms of objective response rate. This level of activity overlaps with the 95% CL of the activity of cisplatin alone; however, it does encourage future trials of the combination.

Background: Vinorelbine prolongs survival and improves quality of life in elderly patients with advanced non-smallcell lung cancer (NSCLC). Some studies have also suggested that gemcitabine is well tolerated and effective in such patients. We compared the effectiveness and toxicity of the combination of vinorelbine plus gemcitabine with those of each drug given alone in an open-label, randomized phase III trial in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods: Patients aged 70 years and older, enrolled between December 1997 and November 2000, were randomly assigned to receive intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m 2 of body surface area), gemcitabine (1200 mg/m 2 ), or vinorelbine (25 mg/m 2 ) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m 2 ). All treatments were delivered on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary endpoint was survival. Survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan–Meier method and analyzed by the Mantel–Haenszel test. Secondary endpoints were quality of life and toxicity. Results: Of 698 patients available for intention-to-treat analysis, 233 were assigned to receive vinorelbine, 233 to gemcitabine, and 232 to vinorelbine plus gemcitabine. Compared with each single drug, the combination treatment did not improve survival. The hazard ratio of death for patients receiving the combination treatment was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.44) that of patients receiving vinorelbine and 1.06 (95% CI = 0.86 to 1.29) that of patients receiving gemcitabine. Although quality of life was similar across the three treatment arms, the combination treatment was more toxic than the two drugs given singly. Conclusion: The combination of vinorelbine plus gemcitabine is not more effective than single-agent vinorelbine or gemcitabine in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95: 362–72]

Background. The 3-week schedule with docetaxel (DTC) 75–100 mg/m2 is associated with severe neutropenia, gastro-intestinal side-effects and fluid retention in a significant proportion of patients, which may be of concern in more elderly or poor performance status patients. A phase I–II trial was carried out to test the feasibility and the activity of a new bimonthly schedule of DCT. Patients and methods. The trial included a phase I study which aimed at the identification of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of DCT on a bimonthly schedule. The first group of three patients received DCT 40 mg/m2, and in absence of DLT, DCT dosage was escalated by 10 mg/m2/cycle until DLT was reached. In the phase II study, patients were randomized to receive: (a) standard 3-weekly DCT at the dose of 75 mg/m2 (calibration arm); or (b) bimonthly schedule with DCT at the dose recommended in the phase I study. All patients were pretreated with chemotherapy, mostly anthracycline-based regimens, for advanced/metastatic disease. Analysis of response rates, toxicity, and dose-intensity were the main aims of the study. Results. The DLT was represented by severe myelosuppression which was recorded in all patients treated at 70 mg/m2 dose level. Therefore, the MTD was 60 mg/m2 on a bimonthly schedule. However, the dose recommended for the phase II trial was 50 mg/m2, because no difference in delivered dose-intesity was seen between the 50 and 60 mg/m2 dose levels, and the latter dosage was still associated with grade 3 neutropenia in most patients. The parallel phase II study showed that the bimonthly schedule of DCT (50 mg/m2) allows to deliver the same dose-intensity of DCT 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Grade 3–4 side-effects were rather infrequent in patients treated with the bimonthly schedule. Overall response rate (ORR) was 41 and 44% for the DCT 50 mg/m2 bimonthly and the DCT 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, respectively. Conclusions. Data achieved in the phase I part of the study showed that DCT 50 mg/m2 every 15 days is the recommended dose for phase II studies, while results achieved in the phase II trial suggest that DCT 50 mg/m2 in a bimonthly schedule is active as second-line chemotherapy for MBC being able to induce an ORR in the range reported for DCT 75–100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The bimonthly schedule is, however, associated with relatively low toxicity. This characteristic may render the bimonthly schedule particularly attractive for future phase II trials of DCT in combination with other antineoplastic agents.

Introduction: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the gold standard in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although with relevant toxic effects. Both docetaxel (DCT) and gemcitabine (GEM) have shown activity as single agent in advanced NSCLC with a different toxicity profile and a lack of cross-resistance. Materials and methods: From April 2000 to May 2001, 47 consecutive patients were enrolled in a multicenter phase II trial. Main inclusion criteria included untreated patients with histologically confirmed NSCLC, age⩽70 years, stage IIIB/IV, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) 0–2, measurable disease, adequate hematologic, cardiac, hepatic and renal functions, and written informed consent. Treatment schedule consisted of DCT at the dosage of 50 mg/m 2 with conventional steroid premedication and GEM at the dosage of 2000 mg/m 2 . Both drugs were administered every 2 weeks without prophylactic use of growth factors. Results: Enrolled patients included 40 males and seven females with a median age of 65 years, and a median PS 1. There were 26 squamous carcinomas, 13 adenocarcinomas, and eight others, 13 stage IIIB and 34 stage IV. A total of 371 cycles were administered. Overall 18 partial responses were observed (38.3%); 14 patients were considered as stable disease and 13 showed progressive disease. Two treatment-not related deaths occurred before the first disease evaluation was performed. Median duration of response was 6 months (range 2–10) and median duration of survival was 10.5 months (range 1–25+). One year survival probability was 38% (95% CI 25–54%). In a statistical analysis responses were independent to histology or stage. Grade 3–4 toxicity, according NCI criteria, was mild with neutropenia in eight patients (17%), anemia in two patients (4%). Asthenia affected two patients and mucositis occurred in one patient. Conclusions: In our experience the biweekly combination of DCT and GEM is active and well tolerated and can be administered without G-CSF primary prophylaxis reducing treatment costs. It should be considered as a promising alternative to more toxic platinum-based regimens.

PURPOSE: This phase II multicenter trial was aimed at investigating the activity of epirubicin-vinorelbine combination as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-seven patients with metastatic breast cancer and no prior exposure to anthracyclines received the following regimen: epirubicin 100 mg/m2 by intravenous (IV) bolus infusion on day 1 plus vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 by 30-minute IV infusion on days 1 and 5, every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. All patients also received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G- CSF) on days 7 to 12 of every cycle. RESULTS: Objective responses, confirmed at least 4 weeks after the first documentation, were observed in 65 out of 92 assessable patients (70.6%; 95% CI, 62% to 80%). Disease remained stable in 17 patients (18.5%). Responses were observed in all disease sites, being 94% in soft tissue, 60% in bone, and 66% in visceral disease. Median time to response, median duration of response, median time to progression, and median overall survival were 2, 9, 10, and 26 months, respectively. The dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia, which was grade 4 in 36% of the patients, and was accompanied by fever in 26% of the cases. Grade 3 to 4 mucositis was encountered in 28% of the patients. Other toxicities were mild to moderate. No cardiotoxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: The epirubicin-vinorelbine combination with G-CSF support has been shown in this study to be highly active as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients, with significant although transient toxicity. This justifies further evaluation in the neoadjuvant setting and in early-stage breast cancer.

A multicenter phase I-II trial was carried out with the aim of identifying the dose-limiting toxicity and the maximum tolerated dose of vinorelbine (VNR) in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin at a dose of 20 mg/m2 every 15 days in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma. In the phase I part of the trial, VNR was given at a dose of 20 mg/m2 every 15 days to a group of 3 patients. In absence of unacceptable toxicity, VNR was escalated to 25, 30, and 35 mg/m2 for subsequent groups of 3 patients, until the dose-limiting toxicity was reached. No case of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia was recorded in these patients. Grade 4 neutropenia, grade 3 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3 mucositis were the dose-limiting toxicities recorded in patients treated with VNR 35 mg/m2. These side effects caused a substantial decrease in programmed dose intensity. Therefore 30 mg/m2 was considered the maximum tolerated dose of VNR in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 20 mg/m2, both given every 15 days. These dosages were employed for the treatment of further 18 patients included in phase II of the study. The overall response rate, calculated according to an intention to treat analysis, was 63% (95% CI: 44–80%), with 2 patients achieving a complete response. The median time to progression was 7.0 months or more (range 2–14 months). Median duration of objective responses was 8.4 months or more. The duration of the 2 complete responses was 9 and 14 months, respectively. Median duration of survival was 16.0 months or more (range from 4.0 to ≧24.0). Toxicity was generally mild and easily manageable. Neutropenia and mucositis were the most frequently recorded side effects. A case of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia was recorded in phase II of the study. In conclusion, the maximum tolerated dose of VNR in association with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is 30 mg/m2 on a bimonthly schedule. Moreover, the combination of VNR and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin is active against metastatic breast carcinoma and is associated with a good toxicity profile. Further studies with this combination regimen are warranted.

501 Background: 1-year trastuzumab with chemotherapy is the standard adjuvant treatment for HER2+ breast cancer patients (pts). The efficacy of less extended trastuzumab exposure is still under investigation. The Short-HER study is an independent, non-profit study aimed to test the non-inferiority of 9 weeks vs 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab. Methods: This is a phase III, multicenter, Italian trial where pts with HER2+ breast cancer were randomly assigned to: Arm A (Long) AC or ECx4 followed by 4 courses of 3-weekly docetaxel in combination with trastuzumab, followed by 14 additional courses of 3-weekly trastuzumab; or Arm B (Short) 3 courses of 3-weekly docetaxel plus weekly trastuzumab for 9 doses followed by FEC x3. When indicated, radiation therapy was administered after the completion of chemotherapy. Hormonal therapy started at the completion of chemotherapy for pts with hormone receptor positive tumors. This is a non-inferiority trial with disease-free survival (DFS) as primary end-point.Overall survival (OS) is evaluated as second primary analysis outcome. The sample size of 1250 pts has been estimated based on a hazard ratio =4. Sixty-eight% of the pts had ER+ tumors. Characteristics were balanced between the two arms. At the time of this writing, 95% of the planned DFS events have been reported. 105 Grade ≥2 cardiac events have been reported, 78 in arm A (long) and 27 in arm B (short). Grade 3-4 cardiac events were 20 in arm A and 11 in arm B. Conclusions: Shorter trastuzumab administration almost halves the rate of severe cardiac toxicity. Final DFS data will be available at the time of the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT00629278.

Despite the skilled use of opioid analgesics, which is crucial to the relief of cancer pain, there is a lack of evidence to support many aspects of current clinical practice. Therefore, there is a significant need for more effective treatment options. New opioids have been marketed in the past years, including hydrocodone and oxymorphone. Moreover, mixed opioids with combined mechanisms of action have been developed; one such agent, tapentadol, is a centrally acting oral analgesic that possesses a combined mechanism of action: μ-opioid receptor activation with norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. Drug development strategies involving naloxone have been initiated to reduce peripheral opioid-related adverse effects. The rationale is based on the local antagonist activity of naloxone in intestinal opioid receptors and the negligible oral bioavailability of naloxone, particularly in a prolonged-release formulation. New delivery systems have been developed to provide rapid analgesia with potent opioid drugs such as fentanyl. Despite the upcoming availability of these new drugs and technologies that will add to existing types of opioid medication, their benefits and liabilities will ultimately need to be determined by the individual physician and individual patient experiencing pain.

The treatment of recurrent or progressive ovarian cancer has limited therapeutic potential. The clinical outcome of second-line therapy largely depends on the potential chemo-sensitivity of the tumor expressed during up-front chemotherapy, as well as on the treatment-free interval from the last course of cytotoxic therapy. However, the identification of agents such as tamoxifen (TAM) at nontoxic doses, able to act synergistically with standard chemotherapy, may be useful to overcome resistance. Fifty patients with recurrent or progressive ovarian cancer following platinum (P)-based chemotherapy (28 platinum-resistant and 22 platinum-sensitive) entered a Phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of P re-challenge with the addition of TAM as a chemotherapy response modulator. The choice of the P compound (100 mg/m2 cisplatin or 400 mg/m2 carboplatin, q3 weeks) was made on the basis of the prior total cisplatin dose and the presence of neurotoxicity. TAM was administered at the doses of 80 mg/day for 30 days followed by 40 mg/day for the remaining period of treatment. Toxicity consisted mainly of mild to moderate nausea and vomiting (76%), peripheral neuropathy (43%), nephrotoxicity (4%), anemia (16%), leukopenia (58%) and thrombocytopenia (16%). The overall response to the P-TAM combination was 50% (complete response 30%; partial response 20%) with a median duration of 8.5 months (3-42). Sixty-four percent of the P-sensitive and 39% of the P-resistant patients responded (59% and 33%, respectively, for those bearing measurable disease). The overall median survival was 23 (3-48) and 19 months for the patients with measurable disease (20 months for the P-resistant group). This phase II trial confirmed the activity for a re-challenge employing a P compound and TAM in clinically defined P-resistant ovarian cancer patients. The mild toxicity profile and the relatively low cost of the treatment render further investigations on the P-TAM regimen worthwhile.

The combination regimen CPT-11 plus bolus and infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) with high-dose leucovorin (hybrid regimen LV5FU2) has been tested for activity and toxicity against advanced colorectal carcinoma in a randomised, multicenter phase II trial.A total of 102 chemotherapy-naïve patients were randomised in a 1:2 fashion to receive: leucovorin 100 mg/m2 administered as a two-hour infusion before 5-FU 400 mg/m2 as an intravenous bolus, and FU 600 mg/m2 as a 22-hour infusion immediately after 5-FU bolus injection repeated on days 1 and 2 (LV5FU2 regimen, arm A, 34 patients) or CPT-11 at 180 mg/m2 (150 mg/m2 for patients of ageor = 70 and75 years) only on day 1 immediately before LV5FU2 therapy (LV5FU2 + CPT-11 regimen, arm B 68 patients). Both treatments were repeated every two weeks. The presence of a calibration arm assured consistency and more realistic evaluation of results achieved with the LV5FU2 + CTP-II regimen.Thirty-three and sixty-four patients were evaluable in arm A and B, respectively. The overall response rate was 18% in arm A (95% CI: 7%-34%) and 40% in arm B (95% CI: 28%-52%). Median time to progression, median duration of response and survival were similar in both groups. Responders (CR + PR) survived statistically longer than non-responders only in arm B (20 vs. 10 months, P = 0.0016). All patients were evaluable for toxicity which was mild in both groups; gastrointestinal disturbances were the most common. There were no treatment-related deaths. Grade 3-4 toxicity was uncommon in both arms.The addition of CPT-11 to the hybrid LV5FU2 regimen provided a significant overall response rate (40%) with relatively mild toxicity. The overall response rate was 18% in patients treated with LV5FU2 alone in the calibration arm. Thus, considering other encouraging data from the literature, the CPT-11 + FU-LV combination therapy can be regarded as a new, very effective treatment option for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer patients.

In the authors' previous experience, the addition of epidoxorubicin to the FA-FU regimen obtained a better response rate than that of FA-FU alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Furthermore, considering the good efficacy and mild toxicity observed with the addition of etoposide to the FA-FU combination in the German study, the authors conducted a trial to explore the efficacy and tolerability of the ELFE regimen (epirubicin, folinic acid, fluorouracil, and etoposide) in previously untreated advanced gastric cancer patients. Of the 55 patients entered, 51 were evaluable for efficacy. Four complete responses (8%) and 21 partial responses (41%) were observed, with an overall response rate of 49% (95% CI: 35-63%). The median duration of response and survival were 6 and 8 months, respectively. Responder patients showed a significantly better median survival duration than nonresponders (12 vs. 4 months, respectively; p < 0.0001). Toxicity was evaluated in all patients: only 1 patient refused to continue therapy despite low toxicity. As expected, the major toxicities observed were gastrointestinal disturbance, leukopenia, and loss of hair. In conclusion, the ELFE combination regimen appears to be effective and well tolerated for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND The objectives of the current study were: 1) to verify whether the addition of modulating low doses of interferon-2b (IFN) to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and levofolinic acid (1-FA) could improve clinical results in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma; and 2) to evaluate the role of tumor burden and liver involvement as prognostic factors. METHODS A total of 204 untreated patients were randomized to receive 1-FA at 100 mg/m2 and 5-FU at 375 mg/m2 for 5 consecutive days with or without IFN every 3 weeks. IFN was given subcutaneously at 3 MU/day for 7 days starting 2 days before chemotherapy administration. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of hepatic disease (H+ or H−) and to total tumor burden defined as “low” or “high” using an area of 10 cm2 as the cutoff value. Thus, four patient categories were obtained: Group 1: H+ ≥ 10 cm2; Group 2: H+ < 10 cm2; Group 3: H− ≥ 10 cm2; and Group 4: H− < 10 cm2. RESULTS No differences were observed in the objective response rate (23% for the combination of 1-FA and 5-FU vs. 24% for the 1-FA, 5-FU, and IFN regimen), median duration of response (11 months vs. 10 months), time to progression (5 months in both arms), and median survival (11 months vs. 12 months). A statistically significant improvement in response rate was observed in patients with limited liver involvement versus those with massive involvement independent of the chemotherapy arm (44% vs. 22%; P = 0.02). Overall survival also was improved in patients with limited liver disease (P = 0.0001) and in those without liver involvement (P = 0.004). Multivariate analysis confirmed these data and identified response and female gender as positive prognostic factors. Toxic side effects (mainly diarrhea, mucositis, and fever) were statistically more frequent in the IFN arm. CONCLUSIONS The addition of low modulating doses of IFN to the regimen of 5-FU and I-FA failed to increase the response rate and survival of patients with advanced colorectal adenocarcinoma and significantly worsened toxicity. High tumor burden and the presence of liver involvement were confirmed prospectively as poor prognostic factors and should be taken in account in designing future Phase II or comparative trials. Cancer 1999;85:535–45. © 1999 American Cancer Society.

In recent years, the introduction of targeted therapies into clinical practice seems to offer incremental benefits in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), mainly when they are employed in combination with optimal chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. In this paper, we focus on Cetuximab and its role in the treatment of mCRC.

We carried out an open, randomized, phase III, multicenter clinical trial to compare, in neo-adjuvant setting, the clinical response and toxicity of the combination chemotherapy cisplatin + 5-FU with the same combination plus s.c. recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) in patients with advanced (stage III IV) head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Regimen A was the classical Al Sarraf treatment: 100 mg/m2 cisplatin i.v. on day 1 plus 1000 mg m(-2) day(-1) 5-FU on days 1-5 as a continuous infusion. Regimen B was the same as regimen A plus 4.5 MIU/day rIL-2 s.c. on days 8-12 and 15-19. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks for three cycles. A total of 33 patients were enrolled in the study; 30 were evaluable for toxicity and 28 for response. Seventeen patients were assigned to group A and 16 were assigned to group B. Three patients (20%) of group A and 4 (31%) of group B had a complete response, 9 patients (60%) of group A and 6 (46%) of group B had a partial response, with an overall response rate of 12 patients (80%) for group A and 10 patients (77%) for group B. Two patients (13%) of group A and 3 patients (23%) group B had stable disease; 1 patient (7%) of group A had progressive disease. Thus, there was not a statistically significant difference in response rate between the two groups and therefore there was no benefit from the addition of immunotherapy with rIL-2 to the standard chemotherapy. Both regimens were well tolerated. There were 2 toxic deaths (6.7%), 1 from hematological causes in group A and I from cardiac causes in group B. Myelosuppression and gastrointestinal toxicity, mainly nausea/vomiting and stomatitis, were the most frequent toxicities. The calculated number of patients for the sample has not yet been reached; however, the projection of our present results suggests that it is highly improbable that a clinically significant difference between the two treatment groups will be observed even if the calculated patient sample size is achieved.

A multicentric, prospective phase III study was carried out with the aim of testing the so-called 'worst drug rule' hypothesis, which suggests the use of an effective but 'less active' regimen that first eradicates tumoral cells resistant to a second effective and 'more active' regimen. With respect to this hypothesis, we considered the cisplatin plus vinorelbine regimen (CCDP/VNR) as the more active regimen compared with the non-cisplatin-containing regimen of ifosfamide plus high-dose epirubicin (IFO/EPI). Thus, a randomized study was carried out to compare the sequencial strategy of three cycles of CDDP/VNR followed by three cycles of IFO/EPI with the opposite sequence in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. A total of 100 consecutive previously untreated patients with stage III-IV non-small-cell lung cancer were centrally randomized in two arms according to stage of disease and the performance status. Patients allocated to arm A received CDDP (100 mg m-2 on day 1) plus VNR (25 mg m-2 i.v. on days 1 and 8) every 21 days for three cycles (step 1) followed, after restaging, by three cycles of IFO (2.5 g m-2 with mesna on day 1) plus high-dose EPI (100 mg m-2 on day 1) every 21 days (step 2). Patients in arm B received the opposite sequence. Type and rates of objective response were evaluated after step 1 and step 2 in agreement with WHO criteria and an intent-to-treat analysis. Patients were also analysed for toxicity patterns, time to progression and survival. After the first three cycles (step 1), overall response rate (ORR), calculated according to an intent-to-treat analysis, was 47% and 21% for arm A and arm B respectively (P = 0.0112). ORR for stage III patients was 55% and 14% for arm A and B respectively (P = 0.0097). In stage IV patients ORR was higher in arm A than in arm B (42% vs 28%) but not statistically significant (P = 0.4). Clinical responses to the shift of chemotherapy (step 2) showed that no patient pretreated with CDDP/VNR and subsequently treated with IFO/EPI showed further response, whereas in the inverse sequence arm CDDP/VNR was able to induce 26% partial response (PR) rate in patients pretreated with IFO/EPI. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0.037). The overall median time to progression (TTP) of arm A and arm B did not significantly differ (6 vs 4 months; P = 0.665). However, median TTP of stage III patients was, respectively, 7 months for arm A and only 3 months for arm B. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0.049). Median overall survival (OS) was 9 and 7 months respectively for arm A and arm B. Despite this trend the difference was not significant (P = 0.328). Median OS of stage III patients showed a statistically significant advantage for arm A over arm B (13 vs 7 months, P = 0.03). In addition, no statistically significant difference in OS was recorded for stage IV patients (both arms 7 months, P = 0.526). Our data do not confirm Day's 'worst drug rule' hypothesis, at least in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with the above-mentioned regimens. The combination of CDDP and VNR seems more active, at least in terms of response rate, than the IFO/EPI, which performed poorly.

BACKGROUND The combination of vinorelbine (VNR), cisplatin (CDDP), and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has previously been shown to be active in recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCHNC). This multicenter Phase II study was carried out with the aim of evaluating the effectiveness of this combination in patients with previously untreated, unresectable locally advanced SCHNC. METHODS Sixty patients with previously untreated, unresectable SCHNC were treated with CDDP 80 mg/m2 on Days 1, 5-FU 600 mg/m2 as a 4-hour infusion on Days 2-5, and VNR 25 mg/m2 iv bolus on Days 2 and 8. There were 15 patients with laryngeal carcinoma, 19 patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma, 15 with carcinoma in the oral cavity, 5 with carcinoma in the hypopharynx, and 4 with carcinoma in the maxillary sinus. Most patients (78%) had Stage IV disease. After achievement of the best possible objective response, patients were subjected to definitive locoregional treatment, i.e., radiotherapy and/or surgery, as appropriate. RESULTS All patients completed the induction chemotherapy. After a mean of 3.86 cycles per patient, the overall response rate was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82-94%), with a complete response rate of 23% (95% CI, 14-26%). Complete responses were more frequently seen in patients with N0-1 disease than in those with N2-3 disease (P = 0.037). No other statistically significant correlation between type of response and extent of disease was noted. Toxicity consisted mainly of myelosuppression and gastrointestinal side effects. After definitive locoregional treatment, 58% of patients were clinically free of disease. These patients included those who had complete response after induction chemotherapy, 19 of 39 patients who had partial response, and 2 with stable disease. Median disease free survival was 16 months, and median overall survival was 23 months. CONCLUSIONS The combination regimen of CDDP, 5-FU, and VNR was very active in previously untreated SCHNC. It was well tolerated in most cases, and neurotoxicity was not a major side effect. This regimen, which does not require hospitalization, should be compared with standard chemotherapy, such as the combination of CDDP and continuous-infusion 5-FU. Cancer 1997; 79:1394-400. © 1997 American Cancer Society.

Fifty-five consecutive patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) (n = 57) were treated with a combination of levofolinic acid (I-FA) 100 mg/m2 plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 340 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1-3, cyclophosphamide (CTX) 600 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1 and mitoxantrone (DHAD) 12 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1. DHAD dose was progressively escalated by 2 mg/m2/cycle up to 18 mg/m2 in the absence of dose-limiting toxicities. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) was given s.c. in order to prevent neutropenia. DHAD dosage could be increased to 18 mg/m2 in 66 out of 317 cycles of chemotherapy (21%). In most patients the dose-limiting toxicity was represented by myelosuppression. A statistically significant correlation was found between median white blood cell (WBC) or absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir and DHAD dose level. Moreover, a statistically significant correlation was observed between the number of chemotherapeutic cycles, nadir ANC and WBC, and the occurrence of anemia and thrombocytopenia of increasing severity. These data suggest the occurrence of progressive cumulative bone marrow toxicity. Although patients who reached different DHAD levels showed differences in mean dose intensity, such differences were not statistically significant. No correlation was found between the increase in dose intensity and type, rate or duration of objective responses. In patients with metastatic breast cancer the overall response rate was 72% (95% CL 57-84%) with a 18% complete response rate. Median duration of response was 12 and 11 months, respectively, for complete and partial responses. Projected median survival of the whole series of patients with MBC was 18 months. These data demonstrate that the combination of 5-FU with I-FA, CTX and DHAD is very active against MBC. G-CSF use allows the increase DHAD dosage up to 18 mg/m2/cycle, but its use may be linked to the occurrence of sometimes severe cumulative hematological toxicity.

Objectives The aim was to determine if combined pemetrexed, cisplatin, and cetuximab was efficacious and safe as first-line treatment in advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods In this single-arm, multicenter clinical trial, patients with Stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous NSCLC received first-line therapy consisting of pemetrexed (500mg/m 2 ) and cisplatin (75mg/m 2 ) on Day 1 (21-day cycles) plus weekly cetuximab (400mg/m 2 loading dose, then 250mg/m 2 ) for 4–6 cycles. Non-progressing patients received maintenance therapy consisting of pemetrexed and cetuximab as above until disease progression. All patients received vitamin supplementation, dexamethasone, and antihistamine prophylaxis. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), 1-year survival rate, translational research (TR) and safety. Results Of the 113 patients receiving study drug, 109 were protocol-qualified. All patients completed ≥1 cycle of induction, and 51 (45%) and 49 (43%) patients completed ≥1 cycle of maintenance with pemetrexed and cetuximab, respectively. The ORR ( n =109) was 38.5% (80% confidence interval [CI], 32.3–45.1%), all partial responses. Median PFS was 5.8 (80% CI, 4.4–6.7) months. One-year survival rate was 45% (80% CI, 39–51%). In exploratory analyses, there was some preliminary evidence of potential prognostic relationships with efficacy outcomes for epidermal growth factor receptor and thyroid transcription factor-1 protein expression, but not for KRAS mutation or for thymidylate synthase or folate receptor-alpha protein expression. Seventy-three (64.6%) patients had study drug-related Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs). Drug-related serious AEs were reported in 31 (27.4%) patients. There were 3 (2.7%) potentially drug-related deaths on-study or within 30 days of follow up. Conclusion Pemetrexed, cisplatin, and cetuximab appeared efficacious and tolerable in advanced nonsquamous NSCLC patients. The TR outcomes are hypothesis-generating given the study's size and nonrandomized nature.

Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but the evidence of its efficacy among ECOG performance status (PS)2 patients is weak because these patients are usually excluded from clinical trials; concern exists about tolerability and feasibility of standard chemotherapy in these patients. No prospective randomized trial has tested the addition of cisplatin to single-agent chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and PS2. CAPPA-2 was a multicenter, randomized phase 3 study for first-line treatment of PS2 patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients, aged 18-70, were eligible if they had stage IV or IIIB with malignant pleural effusion or metastatic supraclavicular nodes (TNM VI edition) and adequate organ function. Patients in standard arm received gemcitabine 1200 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8. Patients in experimental arm received cisplatin 60 mg/m2 day I plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8. All treatments were repeated every 3 weeks, up to 4 cycles, unless disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). To have 80% power of detecting hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, corresponding to an increase in median OS from 4.8 to 6.8 months, 285 deaths were required. The study was stopped in June 2012 after the enrolment of 57 patients, due to the slow accrual and the report of positive results from a similar study. Median OS was 3.0 months with single-agent gemcitabine and 5.9 months with cisplatin plus gemcitabine (HR 0.52,95% CI 0.28-0.98, p = 0.039). Combination chemotherapy produced longer PFS (median 1.7 vs. 3.3 months, HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.89, p = 0.017) and higher response rate (4% vs. 18%, p = 0.19), without substantial increase in toxicity. The addition of cisplatin to single-agent gemcitabine improves survival as first-line treatment of PS2 patients with advanced NSCLC. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND Doxifluridine (5-dFUR) is a fluoropyrimidine derivative that has been shown to be active on a variety of solid tumors. The clinical use of intravenous (i.v.) 5-dFUR as a bolus injection or short term infusion has been limited because of its unpredictable severe neurotoxicity. Unlike fluorouracil (5-FU), 5-dFUR is effective when administered orally. METHODS This randomized, parallel-group, Phase II trial of two schedules of 5-dFUR was conducted between April 1993 and September 1994. A total of 130 previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic colorectal carcinoma were randomized to receive oral levo-leucovorin (l-leucovorin) 25 mg/dose followed by oral 5-dFUR 750 mg/m2 twice daily for 4 days every 12 days (arm A) or i.v. l-leucovorin 25 mg/dose followed by i.v. 5-dFUR 3000 mg/m2 for 5 days every 21 days (arm B). RESULTS The two treatment arms were well balanced in terms of age, sex, and disease extension. Metastases were present in more than 90% of the total population, with the liver being the most common site. A median of 7 oral courses (range, 1–15) and 5 intravenous courses (range, 1–9) were administered. Intent-to-treat analysis rate of the randomized patients revealed a response rate of 15% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7–26) in arm A and 41% (95% CI, 29–54) in arm B. However, 7 cases in arm A and 12 in arm B were inadequately treated, and the response rates, according to standard analysis, were respectively 17% (95% CI, 8–28) and 51% (95% CI, 37–65). The median time to treatment failure was 4 months (range, 1–23) and 7 months (range, 1–9), respectively, for the two groups; median survival was 11 months (range, 1–24) in both groups. National Cancer Institute Grade 3 and 4 diarrhea were observed in 25% of the orally treated patients and in 18% of those receiving i.v. treatment. Stomatitis was reported mainly in arm B (15%). Mild and moderate neurotoxicity was observed in 6% of the patients in both arms; no severe neurotoxicity was reported. CONCLUSIONS 5-dFUR with l-leucovorin, administered either orally or intravenously, produces response rates that are similar to those offered by the regimens containing 5-FU that are usually used to treat advanced colorectal carcinoma. This study documents the good tolerance of the i.v. schedule administered as a 1-hour infusion; furthermore, oral administration seems to be promising and feasible as a home treatment. Cancer 1996;78:2087-93.

Two doses of megestrol acetate (MA) have been prospectively compared in a random fashion as treatment for cancer-related anorexia-cachexia syndrome (ACS) in 122 patients with progressive soft tissue sarcoma, colorectal, lung, head and neck and renal cancer resistant to systemic chemotherapy. After 30 days of MA, 55% of patients receiving MA at 160 mg day-1 reported an increase in appetite, 27% of patients no variation and 18% complained of a decrease in appetite. Patients treated with MA at 320 mg day-1 reported an increase in appetite in 68% of cases, a stabilisation in 20% of cases and a decrease in 12%. Although an increase in appetite was more frequently observed in patients receiving MA at 320 mg day-1, however this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.305). After 30 days of MA, 31% of patients treated with MA at 160 mg day-1 showed an increase in body weight, 25% a stabilisation and 44% a decrease. In the group of patients treated with MA at 320 mg day-1, 45% reported an increase in body weight, 16% no change and 23% weight loss. Although there was a trend favouring the higher dose of MA, overall analysis however failed to detect any statistically significant difference between the two treatment arms (P = 0.242). Twenty-seven patients pretreated with 160 mg day-1 and 23 patients treated with 320 mg day-1 received further therapy with MA at the dose of 320 and 480 mg day-1 respectively. In the group of 22 patients treated with 320 mg day-1 four (18%) reported an increase in body weight, eight (36%) an improvement in appetite, but none had an increase in performance status. Among the 20 evaluable patients treated with 480 mg day-1, two (10%) had an increase in body weight, four (20%) an improvement in appetite, but none reported an increase in performance status. No difference in median survival was detected between the two arms. Toxicity was mild and predictable. In conclusion, the data achieved in the present study confirm the clinical safety and effectiveness of oral MA in the management of ACS in patients with advanced cancer resistant to systemic chemotherapy. Moreover, data concerning the dose escalation of MA dosage in unresponsive patients suggest that a step by step increase in MA dosage could be the best way of administering MA for the management of ACS and that the increase of MA dosage over 480 mg day-1 will probably be useless in the vast majority of cases. Data on body weight suggest that after 2 weeks' therapy MA could be stopped or its dosage tailored to patients' needs since the majority of patients respond after only 15 days of MA.

Many patients with advanced gastric cancer cannot be treated with intensive chemotherapy. In an attempt to provide a feasible regimen for such patients, the combination of etoposide, leucovorin and fluorouracil (ELF) has been developed with promising results. The present study involved 42 patients with advanced gastric cancer who where unsuitable for cisplatin- or anthracycline-containing regimens because of their age (24 patients over 65 years), poor performance status (12) or the presence of concomitant illness (6). The treatment consisted of etoposide 120 mg/m2 i.v., 1-leucovorin 150 mg/m2 i.v. and fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 i.v. for 3 consecutive days every 3 weeks. Among the 41 evaluable patients, there was a 32% objective response rate (95% confidence interval 19-48%), with 7% of complete remissions. The median response duration was 4 months, the median time to progression in all patients was 5 months and the median overall survival was 10 months. No drug-related deaths or WHO grade 4 side effects were observed. On the basis of these results, we concluded that the ELF regimen is feasible and that its activity warrants randomized studies comparing the ELF combination with fluorouracil plus folinic acid.

Background Socioeconomic status can potentially affect prognosis of cancer patients. Our aim was to describe potential differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment, and survival by education level in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) enrolled in clinical trials of first-line treatment. Methods Individual data of Italian patients with advanced NSCLC (stage IV, or IIIB with supraclavicular nodes or malignant pleural effusion), ECOG performance status (PS) 0–2, enrolled in four phase III randomized trials conducted between 1996 and 2005 were pooled. Information about education was available for 1680 of 1709 patients (98.3%). Patients were divided in two groups according to education level: high (patients with at least high school diploma) or low (those with less than high school diploma). Survival analyses were stratified by treatment arm within trial. Results There were 312 (19%) and 1368 (81%) patients with high and low education, respectively. Education level was significantly different among birth cohorts, with a time-trend toward higher education level. Patients with high education were significantly younger (median age 65 vs. 70), were less frequently unfit at diagnosis (ECOG PS2 5% vs. 16%), and their tumor type was more frequently adenocarcinoma (47% vs. 37%). Number of treatment cycles received was not significantly different between education groups. Median survival was 9.4 and 7.6 months in high and low education, respectively (p = 0.012). At multivariable analysis, female sex, better PS and high education level (Hazard Ratio 0.85, 95%CI 0.73–0.99, p = 0.03) were independently associated with longer survival. Conclusions In Italian patients enrolled in four randomized trials of first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC, high education was significantly more frequent among younger patients, and was associated with lower proportion of PS2 patients. Education level did not significantly affect number of chemotherapy cycles received. Overall survival was longer in patients with high education, after adjustment for PS and other prognostic factors. The exact underlying mechanisms of the independent prognostic role of education level are substantially unknown, but lead-time bias (anticipation in diagnosis and time to inclusion in the trial), differences in adherence to care outside the trial procedures, differences in comorbidities and life-style factors may all contribute.

Oral metronomic chemotherapy is a therapeutic option which is particularly attractive due to its ease of administration and low toxic burden. Its mechanism of action probably involves antiangiogenetic effect rather than a classical antiproliferative effect like standard maximally tolerated dose-based regimens.A retrospective analysis of 61 patients with advanced breast carcinoma was carried out with the aim of reporting activity in terms of response rate, control of tumor-related symptoms, outcome, and toxicity. All patients had hormonal therapy-resistant metastatic disease and had previously received two lines of chemotherapy. The first cohort of 22 patients received oral cyclophosphamide at 50 mg/day without interruption until re-evaluation or progressive disease, while the second cohort of 39 patients had oral cyclophosphamide at the above dose plus oral low-dose methotrexate at 2.5 mg orally twice a week.Overall, a partial response with a median duration of 6 months (range 4-9 months) according to the RECIST criteria was recorded in 18% of patients (95% confidence intervals, CI=8%-28%), and stable disease with a median duration of 5 months (range 3-8 months) was recorded in 35% of cases (95% CI=22%-49%) for a tumor growth control rate of 52%. Symptom control was achieved in 54% of cases. Toxicity was very mild and easily manageable. No cases of extra-hematological grade 3 toxicity were observed. Grade 3 non-febrile neutropenia were recorded in 3% of cases. Liver toxicity was represented by elevation of transaminases in 20 cases (33%), mainly in the cohort of patients receiving cyclophosphamide plus methotrexate.Although retrospectively recorded, the data presented in this study support the use of oral metronomic chemotherapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer. Significant clinical activity was seen in heavily pretreated patients without severe grade 3-4 side-effects. Further studies are warranted to optimise the treatment schedule and to select patients who may benefit from such an approach.

There were 42 patients with advanced gastrointestinal carcinomas (GA) enrolled in the study. In the Phase I part of the study we identified the MTD of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) in combination with levofolinic acid 100 mg/m2 per week intravenously plus hydroxyurea 1 g/m2 per week given by mouth in 3 refracted doses starting 6 hours after 5FU was administered. This treatment was given weekly for 6 consecutive weeks followed by a 15-day rest period. We were not able to increase 5FU weekly dosage above 700 mg/m2 due to the occurrence of grade 3-4 gastrointestinal toxicity. Thus 5FU was employed at 600 mg/m2 per week for the Phase II part of the study. Among 20 evaluable patients with measurable metastatic colorectal cancer, 1 patient had CR of 6.0+ months and 7 patients had PR with a mean duration of 6.2+ months, for an overall response rate of 40%. Four patients (20%) showed stable disease, and 8 patients progressed. The mean survival of the whole group was 5+ months (range: 3.0-12.8). This treatment was very well tolerated by most patients, with grade 3 diarrhea in 10% of cases and grade 3 vomiting in 20% of patients. Hydroxyurea (HU), employed at this dosage, seems not to increase 5FU/FA-related toxicity. This regimen is quite active in the management of advanced colorectal carcinoma, and may be safely given on an out-patient basis. A Phase III randomized trial may be established if HU improves results achievable with the 5FU-FA combination.

Thirty evaluable patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region previously treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy were treated with a combination of methotrexate, vinblastine, epidoxorubicin, and bleomycin as second-line chemotherapy. Besides surgery and/or radiotherapy all patients had previously received chemotherapy as induction therapy or as palliation for recurrent disease. Only 20% of patients achieved a partial objective response with a mean duration of 5.6 months (range 3.2-6.2), and 30% of patients had a stabilization of disease with a mean duration of 4.2+ months (range 3.8-6.0). Patients who responded had rhinopharyngeal carcinoma, poorly differentiated histology, or they had not been previously treated with radiotherapy. All remaining patients (50%) progressed. Toxicity was significant with grade 3-4 leukopenia in 30% of cases, grade 2-3 mucositis in 40% of patients, and grade 2-3 vomiting in 43% of cases. In consideration of the dismal clinical results and of the significant toxicity recorded, we do not recommend to use this combination as second-line therapy in recurrent head and neck cancer. Further chemotherapy should be reserved to carefully selected cases with a reasonably high chance of response.

Various reports have documented the efficacy of the combination of etoposide, doxorubicin and cisplatin (EAP) in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, although other studies have not confirmed such results. This multicentre phase II study was designed to try to define the efficacy and tolerability of the original EAP regimen. From January 1990 to May 1992, 96 patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer were treated every 3 weeks with etoposide (120 mg/m2) on days 4, 5 and 6, doxorubicin (20 mg/m2) on days 1 and 7, and cisplatin (40 mg/m2) on days 2 and 8. All of the patients had measurable lesions, and were to receive a maximum of six cycles. A total of 416 courses was given (median four/patient), 27% with a delay of > or = 2 weeks. Objective responses were achieved in 34 of the 91 evaluable patients (37%: confidence interval 27-47%), with complete response (CR) in 11 (12%) and partial response (PR) in 23 (25%). The median duration of response was 6 months (range 1-19), and the median survival of the 96 eligible patients was 9 months. Side-effects (WHO grade 3-4) were leucopenia (30%), thrombocytopenia (9%) and mucositis (10%). We conclude that the EAP regimen is active in inducing major objective responses (12% of CR), and that treatment is feasible in patients with good performance status.

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen (TAM) has been shown to be active against the bicalutamide-induced breast events (BEs) gynecomastia, and breast pain in patients with prostate cancer (PC). Optimal doses and schedules are not yet established. Debate still exists about whether prophylaxis with TAM is more effective than treatment of BEs when diagnosed. The results of a randomized study comparing TAM prophylaxis vs. TAM therapy are presented. METHODS: One hundred seventy-six patients with prostate cancer (PC) who were candidates for bicalutamide monotherapy were randomized to receive TAM 20 mg daily orally within 1 month from the onset of BEs (arm A) vs. TAM 10 mg daily starting simultaneously with bicalutamide (arm B). TAM was administered for up to 1 year. BEs were evaluated by a self-administered visual analogue scale. Neither ultrasonography nor calipers were used to measure the degree of gynecomastia. RESULTS: In arm A, BEs showed a prevalence, increasing with time up to 78.3%. After therapy with TAM they persisted in 27.7% of cases. Two patients (3%) interrupted TAM therapy because of dizziness, and 3 patients (4%) interrupted bicalutamide therapy because of painful gynecomastia. In arm B, the prevalence of BEs was 35% after 12 months of therapy. The difference in BEs between the 2 arms was statistically significant (P < .0001). The differences in prevalence of gynecomastia and breast pain between the 2 arms both favored TAM prophylaxis (P < .0001 and P < .001, respectively). Up to 35% of patients had BEs of low intensity, never requiring bicalutamide withdrawal. Two patients (3%) interrupted the treatment because of gastrointestinal intolerance. No difference emerged between the 2 arms in terms of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, plasma testosterone levels, and tumor progression. CONCLUSION: Bicalutamide-induced BEs can be prevented to a significant degree by prophylaxis with TAM 10 mg/day or effectively treated with TAM therapy 20 mg/day. Persisting BEs are of higher intensity after therapy than after prophylaxis.

In advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), substantial similarities in terms of treatment efficacy and survival have emerged over the years between the different systemic chemotherapy regimens used. More recently, other topics such as histotype, maintenance therapy and quality of life have been explored to ameliorate this plateau. We present the treatment rationale and study design of the ERACLE (induction pEmetrexed and cisplatin followed by maintenance pemetRexed versus cArboplatin-paCLitaxel and bEvacizumab followed by maintenance bevacizumab) trial. Patients enrolled in the ERACLE trial are randomized between combination treatment arms: (A) cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1 and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks for six cycles followed (in responders or with stable disease) by pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks until progression; and (B) carboplatin AUC 6 day 1, plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) day 1 and plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg, every 3 weeks for six cycles followed (in responders or patients with stable disease) by bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the difference in terms of quality of life between treatment arms. together with co-primary endpoints represented by the EuroQoL group (EQ-5D) questionnaire total score and the EQ-5D visual analog scale. Secondary endpoints are the evaluation of treatment activity and exploratory evaluation of treatment efficacy.

Aim To assess the activity and safety of non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet®) in combination with docetaxel and trastuzumab as first-line treatment of patients with HER-2/neu-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and methods The maximum tolerated dose of the combination was defined in the phase I part of the study. In the phase II part, 45 HER-2/neu-positive MBC patients were enrolled to receive 6–8 cycles of Myocet® 50 mg/m2 (day 1), docetaxel 30 mg/m2 (days 2 and 9) plus trastuzumab (day 2, 4 mg/kg followed by 2 mg/kg/week) every 21 d until unacceptable toxicity or progression occurred. Objective response (primary end-point) and treatment tolerability were assessed according to World Health Organisation criteria. Cardiotoxicity was defined as signs and/or symptoms of congestive heart failure and/or a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Results The overall response rate was 55.6% (complete response 8.9%, partial response 46.7%), with a median time-to-progression of 10.9 months (C.I. 8.7–15.0). Median overall survival was not reached. The most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events were granulocytopaenia (60.0%), leukocytopenia (43.2%) and alopecia (35.6%). Grade 3–4 diarrhoea, pain, oral and skin toxicity (4.4%, each) and nausea/vomiting, thrombocytopenia and elevated alkaline phosphatase (2.2%, each) were also reported. In 2 patients LVEF fell to 15%. LVEF median values remained stable from baseline to the end of the study (60%). Conclusions The combination of Myocet®, docetaxel and trastuzumab is safe and shows promising activity as first-line treatment of HER-2-positive MBC.

Objective To investigate the activity and toxicity of metronomic chemotherapy with low-dose oral cyclophosphamide (CTX) and methotrexate (MTX) in patients with metastatic CRPC that progresses after docetaxel. Patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) that progresses after docetaxel may benefit from receiving further chemotherapy. Methods Patients were treated with CTX 50 mg/d p.o. plus MTX 2.4 mg p.o. twice per week without rest periods. All patients received simultaneous luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogue. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response was defined as a 50% reduction on 2 evaluations at least 4 weeks apart. Objective response was measured according to the RECIST criteria. Pain relief was analyzed with the McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire. Simon's 2-stage design for phase II study was used. Time to progression and progression-free and overall survival were computed. Toxicity was recorded according to the CTC-NCCN criteria. Results A PSA decrease ≥50% was recorded in 15 of 58 evaluable patients (25%), and objective partial response in 3 (18%) and stable disease in 4 (24%) of 17 patients with measurable disease. Disease in 10 patients (59%) progressed. Pain intensity decreased in 16 (30%), increased in 18 (33%), and remained stable in 18 (33%) patients. Five patients discontinued narcotic analgesics for a mean duration of 12 weeks. Transitory grade 3 leukopenia was observed in 4 cases (7%), grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 2 (3%), and grade 2 anemia in 4 (7%). Conclusion This study demonstrates the feasibility, activity, and tolerability of oral low-dose CTX and MTX given on a metronomic schedule in patients with CRPC progressing after docetaxel-based chemotherapy.

Purpose Carboplatin/paclitaxel is the standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer-2 (MITO-2), an academic multicenter phase III trial, tested whether carboplatin/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) was more effective than standard chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IC to IV ovarian cancer (age ≤ 75 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2) were randomly assigned to carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 or to carboplatin AUC 5 plus PLD 30 mg/m2, every 3 weeks for six cycles. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). With 632 events in 820 enrolled patients, the study would have 80% power to detect a 0.80 hazard ratio (HR) of PFS. Results Eight hundred twenty patients were randomly assigned. Disease stages III and IV were prevalent. Occurrence of PFS events substantially slowed before obtaining the planned number. Therefore, in concert with the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, final analysis was performed with 556 events, after a median follow-up of 40 months. Median PFS times were 19.0 and 16.8 months with carboplatin/PLD and carboplatin/paclitaxel, respectively (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.13; P = .58). Median overall survival times were 61.6 and 53.2 months with carboplatin/PLD and carboplatin/paclitaxel, respectively (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.12; P = .32). Carboplatin/PLD produced a similar response rate but different toxicity (less neurotoxicity and alopecia but more hematologic adverse effects). There was no relevant difference in global quality of life after three and six cycles. Conclusion Carboplatin/PLD was not superior to carboplatin/paclitaxel, which remains the standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer. However, given the observed CIs and the different toxicity, carboplatin/PLD could be considered an alternative to standard therapy.

Forty patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCHNC) were treated with a combination of levofolinic acid 100 mg/m2+5-fluorouracil 375 mg/m2 in a 4-hour infusion plus cisplatin 20 mg/m2 in a 2-hour infusion for 5 consecutive days, repeated every 21-28 days. In the group of 20 previously untreated patients, a 90% overall response rate (ORR) with a 30% complete response rate (CRR) was obtained. In the group of 20 pretreated patients with recurrent and/or metastatic SCHNC, a 55% ORR with 15% CRR was achieved. This treatment was given on an outpatient basis and was generally very well tolerated with only 2 patients requiring hospitalization. Grade 1-2 gastrointestinal and hematological side effects were the most frequent toxicities. One patient had grade 4 liver toxicity, 1 had grade 4 anemia, and 1 grade 3 neurotoxicity. This treatment seems very active in both previously untreated and pretreated patients. However, in the latter group the mean duration of complete response (12.2+ months) and of partial response (7.4+ months) are, in our opinion, still unsatisfactory.

Objective: According to experimental findings, oxycodone (OX) could have some advantages over morphine (MO) in clinical models of visceral pain. It was hypothesized that OX could have some advantages over MO in terms of efficacy and dose escalation in pancreatic cancer pain. Methods: Sixty patients with pancreatic cancer with a pain intensity rating of 4/10 who required opioids were included in the study. Patients were randomized to receive 30mg/d of sustained release oral MO or sustained release oral OX (20mg/d). Opioid doses were increased according to the clinical needs. Daily doses of opioids, pain and symptom intensity were recorded at admission (T0) and at weekly intervals for the subsequent 4 weeks (T1, T2, T3, and T4), with an extension at 8 weeks (T8). Opioid escalation index (OEI) as percentage (OEI %) and in mg (OEI mg) was calculated. Results: Nineteen and 20 patients in groups OX and MO, respectively, were followed for the entire period of study (T4). No differences between groups were found in age (P=0.400), Karnofsky (P=0.667), or escalation indexes at T4 and T8 (OEImg, P=0.945 and OEI %, P=0.295). No statistical differences in pain and symptoms intensity between the groups were observed. Conclusion: OX and MO provided similar analgesia and adverse effects with similar escalating doses in patients with pancreatic cancer pain, resembling observations reported in the general cancer pain population. The experimental hypothesis that OX would be superior to MO in the clinical model of pancreatic cancer pain was not confirmed. © 2010 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Aim The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that initial pain intensity is not a predictive factor of poor opioid response in advanced cancer patients, as suggested by a recent work. Methods A secondary analysis of one-hundred-sixty-seven patients referred for treatment of cancer-related pain was conducted. Pain intensity at admission was recorded and patients were divided in three categories of pain intensity: mild, moderate and severe. Patients were offered a treatment with opioid dose titration, according to department policy. Data regarding opioid doses and pain intensity were collected after dose titration was completed. Four levels of opioid response were considered: (a) good pain control, with minimal opioid escalation and without relevant adverse effects; (b) good pain control requiring more aggressive opioid escalation, for example doubling the doses in four days; (c) adequate pain control associated with the occurrence of adverse effects; (d) poor pain control with adverse effects. Results Seventy-six, forty-four, forty-one and six patients showed a response a, b, c, and d, respectively. No correlation between baseline pain intensity categories and opioid response was found. Patients with response ‘b’ and ‘d’ showed higher values of OEI mg. Conclusion Baseline pain intensity does not predict the outcome after an appropriate opioid titration. It is likely that non-homogeneous pain treatment would have biased the outcome of a previous work.

Two decades ago best supportive care was considered a valid therapeutic option for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients until the evidence derived from meta-analysis showed symptom improvement and a survival advantage from systemic chemotherapy. A further advantage was reported when docetaxel and pemetrexed were used as second-line treatment after failure of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Furthermore, the biologic therapies targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor – erlotinib and gefitinib – have modified the therapeutic approach to second- and third-line treatment of NSCLC patients. In fact, to date, erlotinib is the only drug to be licensed for third-line therapy worldwide. So, third-line represents a new frontier to be assessed in advanced NSCLC patients. Third-line therapy is very hard to define correctly as it is difficult to interpret the currently available evidence-based data. A better knowledge of cellular biology will certainly encourage clinical research and could allow oncologists to best select patients and treatments. Here we review the state of the art of third-line therapy in the treatment of NSCLC patients.

Colon cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Approximately three quarters of patients are diagnosed with disease limited to the bowel wall or surrounding lymph nodes. Over the past decade, significant progress has been made in the treatment of localized colon cancer. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy has improved prognosis in stage III disease, but much work remains to be done in optimizing adjuvant treatment. The FOLFOX4 regimen is now considered standard treatment for stage III disease. Combinations of irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) have not proven to be more effective than 5-FU/folinic acid. In stage II, the value of post-operative treatment remains controversial, but the identification of histopathological and molecular prognostic factors would allow selection of patients who can benefit from adjuvanttreatment. The inclusion of molecular targeted agents in combination regimens with cytotoxins, which have already proven effective in advanced disease, is the main field of development in the most recent protocols of adjuvant therapy.