Search

Cisplatin is the most active agent currently employed in epithelial ovarian cancer. A meta-analysis of the Advanced Ovarian Cancer Trialists Group suggested that in terms of immediate survival platinum-based therapy was superior to nonplatinum regimens and that regimens including cisplatin were superior to single agent cisplatin given at the same doses. Intraperitoneal cisplatin seems to offer some clinical benefit when compared to systemic cisplatin in patients with minimal residual disease after initial surgery. An overview on the role of anthracyclines using data from the Advanced Ovarian Cancer Trialists Group and the Ovarian Cancer Meta-Analysis Project suggested that the addition of doxorubicin significantly improves survival and that the size of this benefit is of a similar magnitude to that of platinum. Carboplatin and cisplatin are equiactive, and the different spectrum of toxicities could offer an appropriate criterion for the choice of the platinum analogue to use in the individual patient. At present, there is no conclusive evidence that cisplatin dose intense regimens are beneficial, and the issue of dose intensity must still be considered experimental. The combination of cisplatin + paclitaxel is able to obtain a better progression-free survival and survival than the association cisplatin + cyclophosphamide. Phase I-II trials on regimens including platinum compounds, anthracyclines and paclitaxel are currently ongoing.

From June 1990 to October 1994, 111 advanced ovarian cancer patients with minimal (less than 2 cm) residual disease after platinum-based front-line chemotherapy and second-look laparotomy entered a cooperative randomized study aimed at evaluating the effectiveness and the toxicity of the addition of interferon-alpha2 to carboplatin, both intraperitoneally (ip) administered. Patients were randomized to receive either 3 courses of ip Carboplatin 400 mg/m2 Day 1 q 28 days (54 pts) (CBDCA) or ip interferon-alpha 25 x 10(6) U Day 1 + ip carboplatin 400 mg/m2 Day 2 q 28 days (57 pts) (CBDCA + IFN). Patients treated with interferon experienced more severe (WHO grade 3-4) leukopenia (28% vs 17.1%) and anemia (14% vs 4.2%). Fever (P = 0.000) and flu-like syndrome (P = 0.02) were significantly more frequent in the combination arm. No difference in gastroenteric, neurologic, or renal toxicity was observed. At a median follow-up time of 13 months (range 1-72) 71 patients showed a disease progression (31 CBDCA, 40 CBDCA + IFN) and 44 patients died (21 CBDCA, 23 CBDCA + IFN). Median progression-free survival was 11 months in the CBDCA group and 10 months in the CBDCA + IFN arm. Median survival was 22 and 29 months in CBDCA and CBDCA + IFN arm, respectively. In conclusion, intraperitoneal interferon-alpha does not seem to improve the results achievable with intraperitoneal carboplatin in this subset of patients, while the toxicity and the costs of the combination are consistently higher than with chemotherapy alone.

Thirty-two patients with advanced breast cancer have been treated with epirubicin 90 mg/m2, immediately followed by paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) infused over 3 hours, every 21 days. The starting paclitaxel dose was 135 mg/m2, increased in subsequent triplets of patients until the maximum tolerated dose was reached at 200 mg/m2. One hundred seventy-six courses have been administered; dose-related grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 66% of the courses, with 12 episodes of febrile neutropenia. Two patients showed a decline of left ventricular ejection fraction below 50% after six courses, but no signs of congestive heart failure have been reported. The response rate is 76% (95% confidence interval, 56% to 90%), with 14% complete remissions. This level of activity is encouraging considering that 84% of the patients had failed adjuvant chemotherapy (with anthracyclines in 14 cases), and 19 had progressive disease following hormone therapy for metastasis. In another study, the toxicity and activity of a salvage regimen consisting of paclitaxel 135 mg/m2 over 3 hours plus vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 in an intravenous bolus on day 1 were evaluated; vinorelbine was given again on day 8 (in 14 patients) or on day 3 (in 20 patients), and the courses were repeated every 3 weeks. Thirty-four previously treated patients with advanced breast cancer entered the study; 20 had received one prior line of chemotherapy, II had two lines, and three patients had three lines. Thirty-two patients had been exposed to anthracyclines. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 64% of the courses, with 13 episodes of febrile neutropenia; four episodes of grade 3 mucositis have been reported with vinorelbine days 1 and 3. A delay in the administration of chemotherapy was necessary in 17% of the courses with vinorelbine days 1 and 8 and 16% of the courses with vinorelbine days 1 and 3; moreover, the vinorelbine dose was reduced or the drug omitted on day 8 in 86% of the courses and on day 3 in 16% of the course. An objective response was achieved in 43% of the patients. In conclusion, the combination of paclitaxel plus vinorelbine is an active salvage regimen and can be administered at greater dose intensity with the day 1 and 3 schedule.

This phase II study combined paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) 135 mg/m2 by 3-hour infusion on day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 (in the first 14 patients) or on days 1 and 3 (in the subsequent 20 patients). The courses were repeated every 3 weeks. The second vinorelbine dose (on days 3 or 8) was reduced or omitted according to the toxicities encountered. Thirty-four patients have been treated to date; 21 had received one prior regimen of chemotherapy, 11 had two prior regimens, and two had three prior regimens. Only two patients (6%) had not been exposed to anthracyclines. One hundred twenty-six courses have been administered: 52 with vinorelbine given on days 1 and 8, and 74 with vinorelbine administered on days 1 and 3. The most frequent toxicity was grade 4 neutropenia, which occurred in 64% of the courses; 13 episodes of febrile neutropenia have been reported in eight patients. Filgrastim was administered in 43% of the courses because of febrile neutropenia or delayed recovery (> 72 hours) from grade 4 neutropenia. Mucositis was observed in 18% of the courses (12% grade 1, 3% grade 2, and 3% grade 3). The dose of vinorelbine was reduced or omitted in 86% of courses with the days 1 and 8 schedule, and in 48% of courses with the days 1 and 3 schedule. Among 28 evaluable patients, two complete and 10 partial responses have been observed (response rate, 43%, 95% confidence interval, 19% to 51%). Median duration of response is 5+ months (range, 1 to 15 months). In conclusion, this combination is active and has acceptable toxicities in anthracycline-pretreated breast cancer patients. The delivered dose intensity of vinorelbine is higher with the schedule adopted later in the study, with vinorelbine given on days 1 and 3.

Encouraging results with Paclitaxel are reported in ovarian cancer patients relapsing and progressing after platinum-based chemotherapy; however, the two populations have different probabilities of a response to a second-line treatment. Here we report the results achieved in 39 patients with platinum-refractory ovarian cancer, treated with Paclitaxel 175 mg/qm2 (or 135 mg/m2 if heavily pretreated) using 3-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks, in an attempt to verify the activity of this drug in platinum-resistant patients. The toxicity was mild to moderate and primarily hematologic and neurologic. The objective response rate is 12.8% with no complete responses. The response duration was brief and the median survival 6 (range 1-17) months. An accurate cost-benefit balance is necessary before routinely use of Paclitaxel in platinum-refractory patients. Further research is needed to determine the optimal role of Paclitaxel in the whole therapeutic strategy for ovarian cancer.

We performed a dose-escalation study to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) plus a fixed dose of epirubicin. Epirubicin was administered as a 90 mg/m2 bolus immediately followed by a 3-hour infusion of paclitaxel starting at 135 mg/m2 and escalating by 20mg/m2 for each triplet of patients as long as no dose-limiting toxicity had occurred; courses were repeated every 3 weeks. The MTD was defined as that at which any of the following toxicities occurred in at least two of six patients: absolute neutrophil count less than 500/microliter for more that 7 days or less than 100/microliter for more than 3 days; any episode of febrile neutropenia requiring intravenous antibiotics and hospitalization; grade 4 thrombocytopenia requiring platelet transfusion; failure to recover absolute neutrophil count to > or = 1,500/microliter and/or platelets to > or = 100,000/microliter by day 28; and any grade > or = 3 nonhematologic toxicity. Two MTDs were defined: the first without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (MTD 1) and the second with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor given either to accelerate recovery of grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 72 hours or immediately in case of febrile neutropenia (MTD 2); granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was never used prophylactically. To date, 22 patients have been entered into the study; the median patient age was 55 years (age range, 30 to 66 years). Nineteen (86%) patients had received adjuvant chemotherapy that included anthracyclines in 12 cases (55%). The viscera were the dominant sites of disease in 55% of patients. Median baseline ventricular ejection fraction was 58% (range, 53% to 67%). Short-lasting grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 61% of courses; however, only four episodes of febrile neutropenia were recorded. Grade 4 thrombocytopenia was reported in 8% and grade 3 anemia in 3% of courses; four patients experienced peripheral neuropathy (three patients grade 1, one patient grade 2); complete alopecia was universal. The cardiac effects of the combination were surprisingly low: median ejection fraction at study entry was 58%, and after a cumulative dose 1,080 mg/m2 it was 56%. Three complete responses and 12 partial responses have been documented for an overall response rate of 83.3% (95% confidence interval, 58% to 96%). In conclusion, neutropenia is the most frequent toxicity of this novel combination. However, the MTD has not yet been reached. The combination of epirubicin plus paclitaxel is highly active, and no signs of cumulative myocardiopathy have been observed.

It has been demonstrated, both in breast cancer cell lines and in metastatic breast cancer patients with cutaneous lesions that could be biopsied, that treatment with interferon beta (IFN-B) can increase expression of both estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptors (PgR). To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of IFN and tamoxifen, 33 metastatic breast cancer patients were treated with the following regimen: IFN-B, 6.0 million units intramuscularly IU 3 times a week for two consecutive weeks followed by IFN-B 6.0 million IU im 3 times a week with concomitant tamoxifen 20 mg orally daily. Patients were pre and postmenopausal with median age of 60 years, median ECOG PS of 0, either ER positive or unknown, and had not received prior hormone therapy for metastatic disease. Overall objective response was observed in 9 (27%) patients. Complete response was observed in 2 cases and partial response in 7 patients. Median duration of response was 7 months (range 2-10). A higher response rate was observed in patients with predominantly soft tissue disease (38%) compared to patients with either dominant bone (18%) or visceral lesions (17%). Toxicity was mild and reversible: low grade fever in 30% of patients and flu-like symptoms in 9% of cases. It appears that IFN-B does not improve the efficacy of tamoxifen in an unselected population of metastatic breast cancer.

In cancers limited to the abdominal cavity the intraperitoneal administration of antineoplastic drugs could be the treatment of choice because of both the limited systemic toxicity and the pharmacokinetic advantage. Preclinical studies suggest that the combination of Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) and mitoxantrone have a synergistic effect. On this basis, we conducted a study to verify the feasibility of the intraperitoneal administration of these drugs in patients with malignant ascites. Cohorts of three patients were treated with a fixed dose of mitoxantrone (6 mg/m2) and escalating doses of TNF (from 60 up to 200 mcg/m2), intraperitoneally, given for two hours once a week for at least four weeks. Seventeen patients with malignant ascites entered into the study. All but two patients received the planned four cycles. Sixty-six cycles were given. The most common side effects were fever (21-44% of cycles), chills (8-44%), fatigue (19-33%), loss of appetite (17-57%), malaise (25-43%), myalgia (33%), pain injection (25-83%), nausea/vomiting (33-64%). Severe fatigue, malaise and anorexia were observed only at doses of 200 mcg/m2 of TNF. Weekly intraperitoneal administration of mitoxantrone (6 mg/m2) and TNF (200 mcg/m2) is a feasible regimen with acceptable toxicity. The activity of this combination should be studied in properly designed phase II trials.

We have investigated the possibility of inducing a kinetic recruitment of breast cancer cells by the in vivo administration of recombinant human Growth Hormone (rhGH). Twelve patients with advanced breast cancer received rhGH i.m. for 2 days immediately before the first course of chemotherapy. The following biological parameters have been evaluated before and 24 hours after rhGH administration: tumor TLI, tumor IGF-I content, serum IGF-I concentration. The mean tumor TLI values before and after rhGH were 1.3% and 2.6% respectively; median tumor and serum IGF-I levels before rhGH were 4.64 ng/g and 63.5 ng/ml respectively; after the administration of rhGH median tumor IGF-I content was 1.8 and median serum IGF-I level was 112 ng/ml. These data suggest that, in vivo, rhGH stimulates breast cancer cell proliferation; the mitogenic stimulus is likely due to the local production of IGF-I induced by rhGH.

A randomised study was conducted in 62 patients with advanced breast cancer to assess whether granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) would yield an increase in the dose intensity of a standard-dose CEF regimen through an acceleration of chemotherapy administration. Patients received CEF (cyclophosphamide 600 mg m-2, epidoxorubicin 60 mg m-2 and fluorouracil 600 mg m-2) i.v. on day 1 or the same chemotherapy, plus GM-CSF 10 micrograms kg-1 s.c. starting from day 4, repeated as soon as haematopoietic recovery from nadir occurred. Patients in the CEF + GM-CSF group received chemotherapy at a median interval of 16 days compared with 20 days in the control group. This led to a significant increase (P = 0.02) in the dose intensity actually administered in the third, fourth and sixth cycles: +28%, +25%, +20% respectively. Non-haematological toxicity was mild. GM-CSF had to be reduced or suspended in 50% of patients because of toxicity. Haematological toxicity, mainly cumulative anaemia and thrombocytopenia, was manageable. An increase in response rate for patients with measurable disease, of borderline statistical significance (P = 0.088, P for trend = 0.018), from 42% in the CEF group to 69% in the CEF + GM-CSF group, was observed. This randomised trial indicates that GM-CSF is useful for chemotherapy acceleration. Accelerated CEF + GM-CSF is a moderately dose-intensive regimen that can be administered in an outpatient clinic and is associated with a high objective response.

Lonidamine (150 mg x 3 day orally, days 1-5) plus high dose epidoxorubicin (120 mg/m2 intravenously, day 3) was tested in 26 patients with refractory or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer, to assess the anti-tumour activity and the toxicity of this combination of drugs. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 24 for tumour response. Two complete responses (8.3%) and six partial responses (25.0%) were recorded for a total response rate of 33.3%. 6 of 8 responding patients were pretreated with anthracyclines. Stable disease was obtained in 7 patients (29.2%). Toxicity was acceptable; only 1 (3.8%) patient stopped chemotherapy because of a left ventricular ejection rate reduction > 20%. The most relevant side-effect was leucopenia (grade 3-4, 34.6%). In conclusion, the association of lonidamine and high-dose epidoxorubicin has promising activity as second-line treatment in patients with refractory or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer.

A total of 295 patients with lytic bone metastases from breast cancer were randomized to receive chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus pamidronate (Aredia) 45 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were time to progressive bone disease (evaluated by blind extramural review), and improvement in pain (according to a 6-point self-assessment scale). Secondary endpoints included incidence of bone-related complications (pathological fractures, tumor-induced hypercalcemia, need for radiotherapy), sclerotic response of lytic lesions, WHO performance status, and analgesic score. Median time to bone progression was 249 days and 168 days in the pamidronate and control groups respectively (p = 0.02). Marked improvement in bone pain was observed in 44% of patients receiving pamidronate compared to 30% in controls (p = 0.025). With respect to secondary endpoints, pamidronate reduced the need for radiotherapy (66 times vs. 82 times in controls), and median time to radiotherapy was 697 days with pamidronate, 571 in the control arm. No severe adverse reactions or worsening of chemotherapy-induced toxicities were observed during 1598 pamidronate infusions. We conclude that intravenous pamidronate is well tolerated, significantly prolongs time to progressive bone disease, and significantly improves bone pain in patients with osteolytic metastases from breast cancer.