Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in pre-treated malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients: a mono-institutional experience

Background

The major clinical problems of MPM management are the short duration of response and the early relapse. Currently, after the first-line standard pemetrexed/platinum combination there is not a defined regimen for the second line treatment of MPM, and the clinical benefits in fit patients are uncertain. We analyzed the feasibility of gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy in pretreated MPM patients.

Methods

Eligible patients should have relapsed after first-line chemotherapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin (24%) or carboplatin (76%); 53% of the patients had previously received trimodality treatment, 18% neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by pleurectomy/decortication, 29% were inoperable. Patients had to have PS = 0-2, adequate organ function, measurable disease.Chemotherapy was gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² days 1, 8 associated to the alternative platinum compound respect to 1st line, i.e. cisplatin 75 mg/m² or carboplatin AUC 5 day 1 every 3 weeks, for 3-6 cycles. Baseline staging and reassessment after cycles 3 and 6 were performed with CT-scan.

Results

Since 2006 17 relapsed MPM patients were referred to our centre. Patients were 12 males and 5 females; median age: 61 years (range 47-74); histology: 12 epithelial, 4 sarcomatoid and 1 biphasic. PS 1-2 (15:2).The combination of gemcitabine with carboplatin/cisplatin was administered as second line treatment in 13 (76%) patients, as third line in 4 (24%) patients. Two patients were lost to follow-up without re-evaluation, therefore radiologic and clinical response was assessable in 15 (88%) patients. Among evaluable patients 10 (67%) showed stable disease and 5 (33%) progressive disease. Symptoms improved in 8 (53%) cases. In the intent-to-treat population median survival was 28 weeks (range 13-168) and median time-to-treatment failure 15 weeks (range 3-75).Toxicity profile showed 2 (13%) grade 4 and 6 (40%) grade 3 thrombocytopenia, 4 (27%) grade 3 leucopenia, 3 (20%) grade 3 anaemia and 6 (40%) of grade 3 neutropenia. Grade 3 non haematological toxicities were nausea (14%) and asthenia (21%).

Conclusion

Gemcitabine-platinum regimens are able to control symptoms and disease progression with a modest toxicity profile. The present results from a small series of patients should be confirmed by a prospective trial in a larger cohort of patients.     

Raltitrexed in mesothelioma

Raltitrexed is a cytotoxic agent, rationally designed to inhibit a specific molecular target, thymidylate synthase. In contrast to other agents, raltitrexed inhibits thymidylate synthase directly and specifically in a mixed, noncompetitive manner, which may lead to an improved toxicity profile. After promising Phase II trials exploring the activity of raltitrexed either as a single agent or in combination with a platinum agent, a Phase III randomized study demonstrated that the combination of raltitrexed and cisplatin improves overall survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) and is superior compared with cisplatin alone, without harmful effect on health-related quality of life. Moreover, the cost-effectiveness analysis found raltitrexed plus cisplatin to be cost effective compared with cisplatin and compared with active supportive care. Based on these results, raltitrexed is registered for the treatment of MPM in several European countries. MPM is hard to treat and has a poor prognosis. New treatment options, such as a combination of cisplatin and raltitrexed, which improve patient outcomes with no detrimental effect on quality of life, are a welcome addition to our therapeutic portfolio.     

SOCS‐1 gene delivery cooperates with cisplatin plus pemetrexed to exhibit preclinical antitumor activity against malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor with poor prognosis for which an effective therapy remains to be established. This study investigated the therapeutic potential of gene delivery using suppressor of cytokine signaling 1 (SOCS‐1), an endogenous inhibitor of intracellular signaling pathways, for the treatment of MPM. We infected MPM cells (MESO‐4, H28 and H226) with adenovirus‐expressing SOCS‐1 vector to examine the effect of SOCS‐1 overexpression on MPM cells. We evaluated the antitumor effect of SOCS‐1 gene delivery combined with cisplatin plus pemetrexed by cell proliferation, apoptosis and invasion assay. We also investigated the regulation of NF‐κB and STAT3 signaling related to apoptotic pathways. Furthermore, we evaluated the inhibition of tumor growth by SOCS‐1 gene delivery combined with cisplatin plus pemetrexed in vivo. SOCS‐1 gene delivery cooperated with cisplatin plus pemetrexed to inhibit cell proliferation, invasiveness and induction of apoptosis in MPM cells. SOCS‐1 regulated NF‐κB and STAT3 signaling to induce apoptosis in MESO‐4 and H226 cells. Furthermore, SOCS‐1 gene delivery cooperated with cisplatin plus pemetrexed to regulate NF‐κB signaling and significantly inhibit tumor growth of MPM in vivo. These results suggest that SOCS‐1 gene delivery has a potent antitumor effect against MPM and a potential for clinical use in combination with cisplatin plus pemetrexed.     

Randomized phase II trial of pemetrexed/cisplatin with or without CBP501 in patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma

Background

CBP501, a synthetic duodecapeptide, increases cisplatin influx into tumor cells through an interaction with calmodulin enhancing cisplatin cytotoxicity, and effects cell cycle progression by abrogating DNA repair at the G2 checkpoint. In phase I clinical trials of CBP501 alone or in combination with cisplatin, the most common toxicity was infusion-related urticaria. Activity of CBP501 plus cisplatin was observed in patients with ovarian cancer and mesothelioma, including some patients previously treated with cisplatin.

Methods

Chemotherapy naïve patients with unresectable MPM were stratified by histology and performance status, and randomized 2:1 to pemetrexed/cisplatin plus CBP501 25 mg/m² IV (Arm A) or pemetrexed/cisplatin alone (Arm B). The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) at 4 months.

Results

65 patients were randomized, and 63 were treated. Patient characteristics in the two arms were balanced. Based on independent radiology review of the treated population, 25/40 patients (63%) in Arm A and 9/23 (39%) in Arm B had PFS ≥ 4 mo; the median PFS was 5.1 mo (95% CI, 3.9, 6.5) vs 3.4 mo (2.5, 6.7). Median OS was 13.3 mo (9.2, 16.3) in Arm A and 12.8 (6.5, 16.1) in Arm B. Adverse events were not different than expected from standard chemotherapy, and comparable in the two arms, aside from infusion reactions which occurred in 70% of patients treated with CBP501.

Conclusions

While this randomized phase II trial met its primary endpoint of PFS at 4 months, other parameters such as response rate and overall survival suggest that the addition of CBP501 does not improve the efficacy of standard chemotherapy for MPM.     

A phase I trial of sorafenib combined with cisplatin/etoposide or carboplatin/pemetrexed in refractory solid tumor patients

Introduction

Sorafenib has demonstrated single agent activity in non-small cell (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Carboplatin/pemetrexed (CbP) and cisplatin/etoposide (PE) are commonly used in the treatment of these diseases.

Methods

A phase I trial escalating doses of sorafenib in combination with fixed doses of PE (Arm A) or CbP (Arm B) was performed using a 3-patient cohort design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLT); DLT were assessed in the first cycle. The trial was subsequently amended with closure of Arm B and to include Arm C with a reduced dose of carboplatin.

Results

Between 9/2007 and 9/2008, 20 pts were treated on the trial; median age 62 (range 42-73), male/female ratio 12/8, PS 0/1 ratio 6/14, and median number of prior therapies 2 (range 1-4). The most common tumor types were NSCLC and SCLC. On Arm A at dose level 0 (sorafenib 200 mg BID), 2 of 4 patients experienced DLT; 2 patients were enrolled at dose level −1 (sorafenib 200 mg QD) without DLT, but this arm was closed due to slow accrual. On Arm B, 2 of 3 patients experienced DLT at dose level 0 (sorafenib 200 mg BID). On Arm C at dose level 0 (sorafenib 200 mg BID), 1 of 6 patients experienced DLT, and at dose level +1 (sorafenib 400 mg BID) 2 of 5 patients experienced a DLT.

Conclusions

The MTD of sorafenib was 200 mg BID continuously in combination with carboplatin (AUC of 5) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m² every 3 weeks. However, only 6 patients were treated at this dose level, and the results should be interpreted cautiously.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as second-line or beyond treatment in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma pretreated with platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive neoplasm that responds poorly to chemotherapy. Although treatment with pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin serves as first-line chemotherapy for MPM, the optimal second-line and beyond therapy has not yet been fully examined.

Methods

Between March 2008 and October 2011, 17 consecutive Japanese patients pretreated with at least one regimen of platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy received gemcitabine and vinorelbine. Responses, survival time, and toxicity were retrospectively evaluated.

Results

Response [partial response (PR) + complete response (CR)] and disease control [stable disease (SD) + PR + CR] rates were 18 and 82 %, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) after combination chemotherapy was 6.0 months, whereas the median overall survival (OS) was 11.2 months. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and anemia were observed in 41 and 29 % of patients, respectively, and one patient experienced febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicities included constipation (6 %) and phlebitis (6 %).

Conclusion

Combination chemotherapy using gemcitabine with vinorelbine was shown to have moderate activity in Japanese MPM patients pretreated with platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy. A further multicenter phase II trial is warranted to confirm the efficacy and safety of this combination treatment.     

Overview on ongoing or planned clinical trials in Europe

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a locally invasive malignancy, but only a minority of patients can benefit by surgical resection. Among chemotherapeutic agents only vinorelbine, edatrexate, gemcitabine and raltitrexed have demonstrated response rates >20%. The largest randomised trial in MPM showed an improved median survival with cisplatin and pemetrexed versus cisplatin alone from 9.3 to 12.1 months. For the present overview about 70 requests of information were sent to the major European centres of thoracic oncology. The most widespread study treatment in Europe is an 'Extended Access Program (EAP)' evaluating pemetrexed alone or combined with cisplatin or carboplatin with about 1500 enrolled patients. Two other international randomized studies compare pemetrexed plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone, and the role of Ranpirnase (Onconase) in MPM. Important national trials are ongoing: in the UK the addressed questions were the role of radical surgery (MARS Trial), the role of chemotherapy (MS-01 trial) and the role of VATS on active treatment of pleural effusion. In Switzerland the SAKK group phase III study explores in a comparative way the value of hemithoracic radiotherapy after primary treatment with cisplatin/pemetrexed followed by surgery. In Italy, 2 phase II trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (pemetrexed plus cisplatin in Rome, pemetrexed plus carboplatin in Padua) followed by surgery and radiotherapy are active. With the important exception of UK, the most evident element is the overwhelming presence of pemetrexed in the ongoing and future clinical trials. Pemetrexed has influenced not only the clinical practice, but also the patient enrolment in clinical trials.     

Raltitrexed in mesothelioma

Raltitrexed is a cytotoxic agent, rationally designed to inhibit a specific molecular target, thymidylate synthase. In contrast to other agents, raltitrexed inhibits thymidylate synthase directly and specifically in a mixed, noncompetitive manner, which may lead to an improved toxicity profile. After promising Phase II trials exploring the activity of raltitrexed either as a single agent or in combination with a platinum agent, a Phase III randomized study demonstrated that the combination of raltitrexed and cisplatin improves overall survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) and is superior compared with cisplatin alone, without harmful effect on health-related quality of life. Moreover, the cost–effectiveness analysis found raltitrexed plus cisplatin to be cost effective compared with cisplatin and compared with active supportive care. Based on these results, raltitrexed is registered for the treatment of MPM in several European countries. MPM is hard to treat and has a poor prognosis. New treatment options, such as a combination of cisplatin and raltitrexed, which improve patient outcomes with no detrimental effect on quality of life, are a welcome addition to our therapeutic portfolio.     

The cost-effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer: A comparison of no chemotherapy and first, second, and third generation regimens for patients with differing prognoses

Background

The risk of recurrence following surgery in women with early breast cancer varies, depending upon prognostic factors. Adjuvant chemotherapy reduces this risk; however, increasingly effective regimens are associated with higher costs and toxicity profiles, making it likely that different regimens may be cost-effective for women with differing prognoses. To investigate this we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of four treatment strategies: (1) no chemotherapy, (2) chemotherapy using cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) (a first generation regimen), (3) chemotherapy using Epirubicin-CMF (E-CMF) or fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC60) (a second generation regimens), and (4) chemotherapy with FEC60 followed by docetaxel (FEC-D) (a third generation regimen). These adjuvant chemotherapy regimens were used in three large UK-led randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

A Markov model was used to simulate the natural progression of early breast cancer and the impact of chemotherapy on modifying this process. The probability of a first recurrent event within the model was estimated for women with different prognostic risk profiles using a parametric regression-based survival model incorporating established prognostic factors. Other probabilities, treatment effects, costs and quality of life weights were estimated primarily using data from the three UK-led RCTs, a meta-analysis of all relevant RCTs, and other published literature. The model predicted the lifetime costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost-effectiveness of the four strategies for women with differing prognoses. Sensitivity analyses investigated the impact of uncertain parameters and model assumptions.

Findings

For women with an average to high risk of recurrence (based upon prognostic factors and any other adjuvant therapies received), FEC-D appeared most cost-effective assuming a threshold of £20,000 per QALY for the National Health Service (NHS). For younger low risk women, E-CMF/FEC60 tended to be the optimal strategy and, for some older low risk women, the model suggested a policy of no chemotherapy was cost-effective. For no patient group was CMF chemotherapy the preferred option. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated cost-effectiveness results to be particularly sensitive to the treatment effect estimate for FEC-D and the future price of docetaxel.

Interpretation

To our knowledge, this analysis is the first cost-effectiveness comparison of no chemotherapy, and first, second, and third generation adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer patients with differing prognoses. The results demonstrate the potential for different treatment strategies to be cost-effective for different types of patients. These findings may prove useful for policy makers attempting to formulate cost-effective treatment guidelines in the field of early breast cancer.     

A Phase II Trial of First-Line Combination Chemotherapy With Cisplatin,Pemetrexed, and Nivolumab for Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A Study Protocol

Background

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of combination chemotherapy with cisplatin, pemetrexed, and nivolumab for unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

Malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) used to be a rare disease, but is recently increasing in incidence. Most MPMs were thought to have a causal relationship with asbestos exposure. However, a DNA sequence similar to simian virus 40 has been detected in MPM tumor cells, which suggests a role of viral infection in its etiology. MPM predominantly afflicts men over 60 years old, with a male to female ratio of 3 to 1. MPM is a challenging disease in all aspects, including diagnosis, staging and treatment. Its diagnosis requires a panel of immunohistochemical stains. Multimodal treatment including surgery has shown significant benefit in highly selected patients. Most cytotoxic drugs administered as a single agent have been evaluated, but none have consistently demonstrated response rates greater than 20%. The combination of gemcitabine plus cisplatin has become a standard regimen, although there has been significant variability in response rates between studies. The novel antifolates pemetrexed and raltitrexed are promising agents and undergoing 3 phase III studies. One of these studies is the largest trial ever conducted in MPM patients, which randomized 456 patients into cisplatin with or without pemetrexed groups. The median survival time was 12.1 months in the cisplatin with pemetrexed arm and 9.3 months in the cisplatin alone arm (p = 0.02). Another of these studies is currently being conducted to compare cisplatin with or without raltitrexed. The third study is comparing pemetrexed alone to supportive care. The results of these trials are expected to define the role of chemotherapy for patients with MPM.     

Ipsilateral breast recurrence after breast conserving surgery in patients with small (≤2 cm) breast cancer treated with modern adjuvant therapies

Background

Modern multimodality treatment greatly influences the rate and the predictive factors for ipsilateral cancer recurrence (IBR) after breast conserving surgery.

Material and nethods

The study is based on 1297 patients with pT1 breast cancer and treated with breast conserving surgery in February 2001-August 2005. The median duration of follow-up was 57 months.

Results

IBR occurred in 27 (2.1%) patients. It was located in the quadrant of prior breast resection in 17 (63%) cases. The median time to an IBR was 41 months (range, 6-78) regardless of whether the recurrence was located in the same or in another quadrant. Omission of radiotherapy was associated with a higher IBR incidence, HR 10,344 (95% CI 1904-56,184; p = 0.007). The IBRs occurred particularly often, in 27% of the 11 patients who refused radiotherapy. Patients diagnosed with ER+ cancer had a lower risk of IBR when compared with those with ER−/HER2+ cancer, HR 0.215 (95% CI 0.049-0.935; p = 0.040).

Conclusions

The risk of IBR was low during the first 5 years after breast resection among patients with pT1 breast cancer and treated with modern surgical and adjuvant therapies. The majority IBRs still occur at or close to the prior resection site underlining the importance of local therapies. Omission of radiotherapy was the most significant risk factor for IBR.     

Pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin in previously treated locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin in locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.

Methods

Fifty-three locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy received pemetrexed 500 mg/m² plus cisplatin 75 mg/m² or carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 every 21 days, with dexamethasone, folic acid and vitamin B12 being administered.

Results

Median age was 52 years. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was 0-2. Thirty-eight patients had stage IV tumors. Thirty-seven patients had adenocarcinoma (including 6 alveolar carcinoma patients), and fourteen patients had squamous cell carcinoma. Thirty-four patients were treated in second line, 15 in third line, and 4 in fourth line. Seven patients (13.2%) showed partial response; Thirty-six (67.9%) had stable disease. The median progression free survival time was 6.0 months and the median overall survival time was 10.0 months. The 1-year survival rate was 40.9%. Five (9.4%) and four (7.5%) patients experienced grade 3 or 4 leukopenia and thrombocytopenia, respectively. Nonhematological toxicities included grade 3 nausea/vomiting in 1 patient (1.9%), grade 3 rash in 1 patient, grade 4 diarrhea in 1 patient (1.9%) and grade 4 creatinine increase in 1 patient (1.9%).

Conclusion

Locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy could benefit from pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin chemotherapy with tolerable adverse events.     

Concurrent cetuximab, cisplatin, and radiation for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in vitro

Background and purpose

For locoregionally advanced HNSCC, chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin or another platinum compound is considered as one of the standard treatment regimes. Cisplatin has improved the loco-regional control, but also increased especially the acute side effects. Cetuximab blocks ligand binding and receptor activation by binding to the extracellular domain of the EGFR. The blockade of EGFR signaling in combination with cytotoxic drugs or with radiotherapy could be a novel effective management with a relatively favourable toxicity for HNSCC. In the present study we have examined in vitro a potentially novel effective management for HNSCC, cetuximab combined with cisplatin and radiotherapy.

Materials and methods

Seven head and neck SCC cell lines were studied. Cetuximab concentrations of 0.22-8.20 nM and cisplatin concentrations of 0.038-0.220 μg/ml were used. In order to test the concurrent use of cetuximab, cisplatin and radiation, the cells were treated with the desired drug concentrations immediately after irradiation, plated into 96-well culture plates, and incubated for 4 weeks. The number of positive wells was counted. The PE was calculated and fraction survival data were fitted to the LQ model. AUC value was obtained with numerical integration. The types of interaction were analyzed.

Results

Cetuximab and cisplatin constantly induced an additive or supra-additive effect when combined with irradiation in the seven HNSCC cell lines tested.

Conclusions

We evaluated concurrent cetuximab, cisplatin, and radiation for HNSCC cell lines. Preliminary efficacy results are encouraging, and further development of this targeted combined modality paradigm is warranted.     

Economic evaluation of four follow-up strategies after curative treatment for breast cancer: results of an RCT

Background

An economic evaluation was performed alongside a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN 74071417) investigating the cost-effectiveness of nurse-led telephone follow-up instead of hospital visits, and of a short educational group programme (EGP) in the first year after breast cancer treatment.

Method

This economic evaluation (n = 299) compared the one-year costs and the effects of four follow-up strategies: (1) hospital follow-up; (2) nurse-led telephone follow-up; (3) hospital follow-up plus EGP; and (4) nurse-led telephone follow-up plus EGP. Costs were measured using cost diaries and hospital registrations. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured using the EQ-5D. Outcomes were expressed in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

Results

Hospital follow-up plus EGP yielded most QALYs (0.776), but also incurred the highest mean annual costs (€4914). The ICER of this strategy versus the next best alternative, nurse-led telephone follow-up plus EGP (0.772 QALYs and €3971), amounted to €235.750/QALY. Hospital and telephone follow-up without EGP both incurred higher costs and less QALYs than telephone follow-up plus EGP and were judged inferior. Hospital follow-up plus EGP was not considered cost-effective, therefore, telephone follow-up plus EGP was the preferred strategy. The probability of telephone follow-up plus EGP being cost-effective ranged from 49% to 62% for different QALY threshold values. Secondary and sensitivity analyses showed that results were robust.

Conclusion

Nurse-led telephone follow-up plus EGP seems an appropriate and cost-effective alternative to hospital follow-up for breast cancer patients during their first year after treatment.     

Treatment of small cell lung cancer with TRA-8 in combination with cisplatin and radiation

Background

Limited stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents a minority of SCLC. Despite extensive clinical trials, standard treatment remains cisplatin-based chemotherapy and thoracic irradiation (TI). This study focused on the interaction of cisplatin/radiation with the anti-human DR5 monoclonal antibody TRA-8 in SCLC cells. TRA-8 binds specifically to DR5 and has been shown to activate apoptosis.

Methods

Four human SCLC cell lines were utilized for experimentation (SCLC-41, SCLC-58, SCLC-68, and SCLC-74). Immunoblot analysis was used to determine relative protein levels of DR5, DR4 and pro-caspase 8 for each cell line. Using a tetrazolium-based assay (XTT), the IC₅₀ values for cisplatin with or without TRA-8 were determined for the SCLC cell lines. Four SCLC lines were assayed with a combination of TRA-8 (10 μg/ml), 2 Gy radiation and various concentrations of cisplatin. Apoptosis was evaluated using Annexin V-FITC and cleaved caspase immunoblotting. Using a SCLC-58 subcutaneous xenograft model, treatment began 21 d after tumor cell injection. Treatment included weekly cisplatin (4 mg/kg) and radiation of 1 Gy (24 h after cisplatin) and TRA-8 (200 μg) was administered i.p. twice weekly for three weeks.

Results

Immunoblot analysis showed similar levels of DR5 for all cell lines with variable levels of DR4. Various concentrations of TRA-8 antibody (?10 μg/ml) induced no significant cytotoxicity in the SCLC cell lines. The in vitro combination treatment with TRA-8 (10 μg/ml), 1.25 μg/ml cisplatin and 2 Gy radiation showed increased cytotoxicity when compared to combinations without TRA-8. Furthermore, the triple combination demonstrated the greatest amount of apoptosis as measured by Annexin V staining. The in vivo studies showed the combination of 1 Gy, cisplatin and TRA-8 extended the tumor doubling time to 44 d as compared to any doublet treatment groups that ranged from 12 to 20 d. Analysis of survival data showed 100% of the combination group (RT + cisplatin + TRA-8) were alive 65d after treatment began whereas all doublet treatment groups showed 50% or less survival.

Conclusions

These studies showed increased cytotoxicity when TRA-8 was added to radiation/cisplatin in SCLC. This effect was demonstrated in vitro and in vivo. TRA-8 represents a promising new agent in the treatment of SCLC.     

Carcinoma of the Collecting Ducts of Bellini of the Kidney: Adjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Multikinase Inhibition with Sunitinib

Background

Carcinoma of the collecting ducts (CDC) of Bellini of the kidney is very rare but is among the most aggressive urologic entities.

Patients and Methods

Radical nephrectomy revealed CDC in stage pT3a pN2 M0 G3 in 2 male patients. Four courses of adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine were given.

Results

Subsequent restaging revealed local recurrence and lymph node metastases. Both patients were operated on again, and metastatic CDC was found. Second-line therapy with sunitinib was administered. After 2 cycles, multiple liver, lung, and bone metastases and mediastinal lymphopathy occurred. Eight weeks later, the patients died, with a survival of 8 months from initial diagnosis.

Conclusion

Nephrectomy, adjuvant gemcitabine/cisplatin, and sunitinib therapy did not alter the course of disease in these patients. Gross resection of disease was rapidly followed by local recurrence and, subsequently, widespread dissemination of disease. Clinical trial investigation is urgently needed because of the aggressive and refractory nature of CDC.     

Retreatment of recurrent malignant pleural mesothelioma with cisplatin and pemetrexed

Combination chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed is the most active first-line regimen for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, no drugs have been approved for second-line treatment of MPM, with effective regimens remaining to be identified for patients in relapse. We have now evaluated the combination of cisplatin and pemetrexed for retreatment of patients with recurrent MPM. Four men with MPM, all of whom received initial treatment with cisplatin and pemetrexed, underwent retreatment with this drug combination. Two of the patients achieved an objective response to the first-line chemotherapy with no evidence of disease progression for 6.4 or 11.4 months, respectively. The other two patients had stable disease with a duration of 7.8 or 5.0 months, respectively. The two patients who showed an objective response to first-line chemotherapy showed a partial response to retreatment, with a time to progression of 5.0 or 8.2 months, whereas the other two patients had progressive disease with a time to progression of 1.0 or 1.4 months, respectively. Retreatment with cisplatin plus pemetrexed was generally well tolerated. Retreatment with cisplatin and pemetrexed is a potential therapeutic option for certain patients with recurrent epithelioid MPM, possibly including those who show tumor regression with a time to progression of 6 months or more after the initial chemotherapy. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy of such retreatment and to clarify the criteria for patient selection.     

Comparison of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel in patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare survival outcomes and toxicities between concurrent radiotherapy with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil and that with cisplatin plus paclitaxel in patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed data from 93 locally advanced cervical carcinoma patients (stage IB to IVA) who had been treated by concurrent radiotherapy with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (CF, n=45) vs. cisplatin plus paclitaxel (CP, n=48) as primary therapy. Toxicities and survival outcomes were compared.

Results

In the CP group, there were higher frequencies of severe (grade 3 or 4) leukopenia (79.2%, as compared to 11.1% in the CF group), severe neutropenia (77.1%, as compared to 8.9% in the CF group) and severe peripheral neuropathy (12.5%, as compared to 2.2% in the CF group). In the CF group, there were higher frequencies of severe nausea (33.3%, as compared to 14.6% in the CP group) and severe hyponatremia (11.1%, as compared to 0% in the CP group). Five-year DFS of the CF and CP groups was 67.4% and 79.1%, respectively (p=NS). Five year OS of the CF and CP groups was 79.6% and 80.9%, respectively (p=NS).

Conclusion

Concurrent radiotherapy with cisplatin plus paclitaxel showed increased leukopenia, neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy, but less gastrointestinal toxicity (nausea) than that with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil. Survival outcome between these two groups was not statistically different in this study. Large prospective randomized controlled studies will be needed to confirm this result.