Survival results of a randomised two-by-two factorial phase II trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with two and four courses of S-1 plus cisplatin (SC) and paclitaxel plus cisplatin (PC) followed by D2 gastrectomy for resectable advanced gastric cancer

BackgroundThe prognosis for stage III gastric cancer is unsatisfactory by D2 gastrectomy and S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy. Both S-1 plus cisplatin (SC) and paclitaxel plus cisplatin (PC) are promising regimens as neoadjuvant chemotherapy; however, the optimal duration remains unclear.Patients and methodsIn this 2×2 randomised phase II trial, stage III gastric cancer patients, those with a prognosis corresponding to stage III, and macroscopically resectable stage IV cases were randomised to two or four courses of S-1 (80 mg/m² for 21 d with 1 week rest)/cisplatin (60 mg/m² at day 8) or PC (80 and 25 mg/m², respectively, on days 1, 8, and 15 with 1 week rest) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The primary end-point was the 3-year overall survival (OS).ResultsBetween October 2009 and July 2011, 83 patients received 2 courses of SC (n = 21), 4 courses of SC (n = 20), 2 courses of PC (n = 21) and 4 courses of PC (n = 21). The 3-year OS was 60.9% for SC and 64.3% for PC and 64.3% for the two courses and 61.0% for the four courses. Subset analyses demonstrated no subgroup which showed any potential survival benefit by PC in comparison to SC or by four courses as in comparison to two courses.ConclusionsTwo courses of SC as neoadjuvant chemotherapy are recommended as a test arm of a future phase III study for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.Clinical trial numberUMIN-000002595.     

A randomised phase II study of combination chemotherapy with epirubicin,cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) or cisplatin and capecitabine (CX) in advanced gastric cancer

BackgroundBoth cisplatin/capecitabine (CX) and epirubicin plus CX (ECX) have clearly demonstrated efficacy against advanced gastric cancer (AGC).MethodsChemotherapy-naïve patients with histologically confirmed, measurable AGC were randomised to receive CX (cisplatin 75 mg/m² iv on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m² bid po on days 1–14) or ECX (epirubicin 50 mg/m² plus CX) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsOf the 91 registered patients, 45 patients were treated with CX and 44 with ECX. A total of 241 CX (median, 6; range, 1–12) and 201 ECX (median, 5; range, 1–11) cycles were delivered. Treatment duration was similar for both arms (4.4 for CX versus 4.2 months for ECX). There was no relevant difference in the occurrence of overall grade 3 or 4 toxicities between the CX and ECX arms (80% versus 78%, respectively; P = 0.516). However, none in the CX and 12% in the ECX arm discontinued treatment because of toxicity. There were no significant differences in therapeutic efficacy between CX and ECX with respect to the response rate (38% versus 37%, respectively) and PFS (6.4 versus 6.5 months).ConclusionBoth CX and ECX appear to be active as first-line chemotherapy for AGC, and the safety profiles are acceptable. Given the comparable efficacy results, CX could be a reasonable standard chemotherapy for untreated AGC patients.     

Biweekly irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan alone as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: A randomised phase III trial (TCOG GI-0801/BIRIP trial)

PurposeWe compared biweekly irinotecan plus cisplatin (BIRIP) with irinotecan alone as the second-line chemotherapy (SLC) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).MethodsPatients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer refractory to S-1-based first-line chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive BIRIP (irinotecan 60 mg/m² plus cisplatin 30 mg/m², every 2 weeks) or irinotecan alone (irinotecan 150 mg/m², every 2 weeks). The primary end-point was to show the superiority of BIRIP to irinotecan in terms of progression free survival (PFS).Results130 patients were enrolled. PFS was significantly longer in the BIRIP group (3.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0–4.7]) than in the irinotecan group (2.8 months [2], [3]; hazard ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.47–0.98; P = 0.0398). Median overall survival was 10.7 months in the BIRIP group and 10.1 months in the irinotecan group (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.69–1.44, P = 0.9823). The objective response rate was 22% in the BIRIP group and 16% in the irinotecan group (P = 0.4975). However, the disease control rate was significantly better in the BIRIP group (75%) than in the irinotecan group (54%, P = 0.0162). The incidences of grade 3 or worse adverse events did not differ between the two groups. Any grade elevation of serum creatinine was more common in the BIRIP group (25% versus 8%, P = 0.009), but any grade diarrhoea (17% versus 42%, P = 0.002) was more common in the irinotecan group.ConclusionBIRIP significantly prolonged PFS as compared with irinotecan alone and was tolerated as SLC, but did not demonstrate the survival benefit in this trial.     

PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative,dose-dense,dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin,paclitaxel and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel ± darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer—results at the time of surgery

BackgroundPreoperative chemotherapy is a recommended treatment of both primary operable and locally advanced breast cancer. Strategies to improve efficacy include the use of anthracyclines, taxanes, and intensified dose with bone marrow support.Patients and methodsPatients received neoadjuvant epirubicin 90 mg/m² plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m² followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m² (EC→T), each 3-weekly for four cycles (n = 370), or epirubicin 150 mg/m² followed by paclitaxel 225 mg/m² with pegfilgrastim followed by CMF (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m², methotrexate 40 mg/m², fluorouracil 600 mg/m²) on days 1 and 8 (E_dd→T_dd→CMF), each 2-weekly and for three cycles (n = 363). Patients were randomly allocated to either simultaneous darbepoetin alfa (DA) (n = 356) or none (n = 377).ResultsPathological complete response (pCR) rate (breast) was higher with E_dd→T_dd→CMF, 18.7% versus 13.2% with EC→T; P = 0.043, ypT0/Tis; ypN0 was reported in 20.9% versus 14.3% respectively; P = 0.019. Patients with grade 3 tumors and negative hormone receptor status had a significantly higher pCR rate. Mean hemoglobin values maintained higher with DA (13.6 versus 12.6 g/dl). E_dd→T_dd→CMF regimen showed more grade 3–4 mucositis, sensory neuropathy, and neurological complaints. Thromboembolic events were more frequent on DA (3% versus 6%; P = 0.055).ConclusionDose-dense and -intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with E_dd→T_dd→CMF was potentially superior to EC→T in terms of pCR. Primary use of DA did not affect pCR.     

A comparison between raltitrexed plus cisplatin and docetaxel plus cisplatin in concurrent chemoradiation for non-surgical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

PurposeChemoradiotherapy (CRT) is considered as a standard treatment for unresectable and inoperable esophageal cancer (EC) patients. However, no consensus has been reached regarding the optimal synchronous chemotherapy regimen and the best combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of raltitrexed plus cisplatin and docetaxel plus cisplatin to find a safe and effective concurrent chemotherapy schedule.Patients and methodsOur retrospective study included 151 EC patients treated with raltitrexed and cisplatin (RP) (n = 90) or docetaxel and cisplatin (DP) (n = 61) from 2011 till 2018. Survival outcomes and treatment related toxicity were analyzed between the two groups.ResultsPFS and OS were 18 and 34 months in the RP group, while 13 and 20 months in the DP group (P = 0.118 and P = 0.270). The 1-, 2-, 3-year survival rates of the RP group were 71.1, 55.4 and 46.4%. For the DP group, these were 63.9, 44.3 and 37.6%, respectively. Compared with DP group, RP group received a superior CR rate (68.9% versus 52.5%, P = 0.041). There was a trend that the total number of toxic reactions in RP group was lower than that in DP group (P = 0.058).ConclusionsEven RP and DP groups have the similar survival outcomes and toxicity, raltitrexed/cisplatin get a higher complete response rate. Our study suggests that raltitrexed combined with cisplatin is a safe and effective concurrent chemotherapy regimen and it might be used as an alternative for cisplatin/5-FU and cisplatin/docetaxel in CCRT for EC patients.     

Phase II feasibility study of preoperative chemotherapy with docetaxel,cisplatin, and fluorouracil for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

The combination of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5‐fluorouracil (DCF) as preoperative treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has not been investigated. We carried out a multicenter phase II feasibility study of preoperative chemotherapy with DCF for ESCC. Patients with clinical stage II/III ESCC (International Union Against Cancer TNM classification system, 6th edition) were eligible. Chemotherapy consisted of i.v. docetaxel (70–75 mg/m²) and cisplatin (70–75 mg/m²) on day 1, and continuous infusion of fluorouracil (750 mg/m²/day) on days 1–5. Antibiotic prophylaxis on days 5–15 was mandatory. This regimen was repeated every 3 weeks with a maximum of three cycles allowed. After completion of chemotherapy, esophagectomy with extended lymphadenectomy was carried out. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of protocol treatment. Forty‐two eligible patients were enrolled. During chemotherapy, the most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities were neutropenia (83%), anorexia (7%), and stomatitis (5%). Forty‐one (98%) patients underwent surgery. The completion rate of protocol treatment was 90.5% (38/42). No treatment‐related death was observed and the incidence of operative morbidity was tolerable. According to RECIST, the overall response rate after the completion of DCF was 64.3%. Pathological complete response was achieved in 17%. The estimated 2‐year progression‐free survival and overall survival were 74.5% and 88.0%, respectively. Although these data are preliminary, preoperative DCF was well tolerated. Antitumor activity was highly promising and warrants further investigation. This trial was registered with University Hospital Medical Information Network (no. UMIN000002396).     

Randomized trial on adjuvant treatment with FOLFIRI followed by docetaxel and cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid for radically resected gastric cancer

BackgroundSome trial have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant fluoropirimidine with or without platinum compounds compared with surgery alone. ITACA-S study was designed to evaluate whether a sequential treatment of FOLFIRI [irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/LV)] followed by docetaxel plus cisplatin improves disease-free survival in comparison with 5-FU/LV in patients with radically resected gastric cancer.Patients and methodsPatients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m² day 1, LV 100 mg/m² as 2 h infusion and 5-FU 400 mg/m² as bolus, days 1 and 2 followed by 600 mg/m²/day as 22 h continuous infusion, q14 for four cycles) followed by docetaxel 75 mg/m² day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m² day 1, q21 for three cycles (sequential arm) or De Gramont regimen (5-FU/LV arm).ResultsFrom February 2005 to August 2009, 1106 patients were enrolled, and 1100 included in the analysis: 562 in the sequential arm and 538 in the 5-FU/LV arm. With a median follow-up of 57.4 months, 581 patients recurred or died (297 sequential arm and 284 5-FU/LV arm), and 483 died (243 and 240, respectively). No statistically significant difference was detected for both disease-free [hazard ratio (HR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85–1.17; P = 0.974] and overall survival (OS) (HR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82–1.18; P = 0.865). Five-year disease-free and OS rates were 44.6% and 44.6%, 51.0% and 50.6% in the sequential and 5-FU/LV arm, respectively.ConclusionsA more intensive regimen failed to show any benefit in disease-free and OS versus monotherapy.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01640782.     

Phase I trial of olaparib in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of patients with advanced breast,ovarian and other solid tumors

BackgroundTo establish the maximum tolerated dose, determine safety/tolerability and evaluate the pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of olaparib in combination with cisplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors.Patients and methodsPatients aged ≥18 years with advanced solid tumors, who had progressed on standard treatment, were assigned to a treatment cohort and received oral olaparib [50–200 mg twice daily (bid); 21-day cycle] continuously or intermittently (days 1–5 or 1–10) in combination with cisplatin (60–75 mg/m² intravenously) on day 1 of each cycle.ResultsDose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of grade 3 neutropenia (cisplatin 75 mg/m² with continuous olaparib 100 mg bid or 200 mg bid; n = 1 each) and grade 3 lipase elevation (cisplatin 75 mg/m² with olaparib 100 mg bid days 1–10 or 50 mg bid days 1–5; n = 1 each) were reported. Olaparib and cisplatin doses were subsequently reduced to 50 mg bid days 1–5 and 60 mg/m², respectively; no DLTs were reported for patients receiving this regimen. The most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (16.7%), anemia (9.3%) and leucopenia (9.3%). Thirty patients (55.6%) received colony-stimulating factors for hematologic support. The overall objective response rate was 41% for patients with measurable disease, and 43% and 71% among patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation who had ovarian and breast cancer, respectively.ConclusionsOlaparib in combination with cisplatin 75 mg/m² was not considered tolerable; intermittent olaparib (50 mg bid, days 1–5) with cisplatin 60 mg/m² improved tolerability. Promising antitumor activity in patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations was observed and warrants further investigation.     

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody combined with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma after radical radiotherapy: a multicentre,open-label,phase II clinical trial

BackgroundWe conducted a single-arm phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects (AEs) of an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody, nimotuzumab, combined with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) as first-line treatment in recurrent metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma after radical radiotherapy.MethodsPatients who met the eligibility criteria were recruited from ten institutions (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01616849). A Simon optimal two-stage design was used to calculate the sample size. All patients received weekly nimotuzumab (200 mg) added to cisplatin (100 mg/m² D1) and 5-fluorouracil (4 g/m² continuous infusion D1–4) every 3-weekly for a maximum of six cycles. Primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and AEs.ResultsA total of 35 patients were enrolled (13 in stage 1 and 22 in stage 2). Overall ORR and DCR were 71.4% (25/35) and 85.7% (30/35), respectively. Median PFS and OS were 7.0 (95% CI 5.8–8.2) months and 16.3 (95% CI 11.4–21.3) months, respectively. Unplanned exploratory analyses suggest that patients who received ≥2400 mg nimotuzumab and ≥4 cycles of PF had superior ORR, PFS and OS than those who did not (88.9% versus 12.5%, P < 0.001; 7.4 versus 2.7 months, P = 0.081; 17.0 versus 8.0 months, P = 0.202). Favourable subgroups included patients with lung metastasis [HR_OS 0.324 (95% CI 0.146–0.717), P = 0.008] and disease-free interval of >12 months [HR_OS 0.307 (95% CI 0.131–0.724), P = 0.004], but no difference was observed for metastatic burden. The only major grade 3/4 AE was leukopenia (62.9%).ConclusionCombination nimotuzumab-PF chemotherapy demonstrates potential efficacy, and is well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy regimen in recurrent metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.     

A randomized,phase 2 study of cetuximab plus cisplatin with or without paclitaxel for the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BackgroundB490 (EudraCT# 2011-002564-24) is a randomized, phase 2b, noninferiority study investigating the efficacy and safety of first-line cetuximab plus cisplatin with/without paclitaxel (CetCis versus CetCisPac) in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN).Patients and methodsEligible patients had confirmed R/M SCCHN (oral cavity/oropharynx/larynx/hypopharynx/paranasal sinus) and no prior therapy for R/M disease. Cetuximab was administered on day 1 (2-h infusion, 400 mg/m²), then weekly (1-h infusions, 250 mg/m²). Cisplatin was given as a 1-h infusion (CetCis arm: 100 mg/m²; CetCisPac arm: 75 mg/m²) on day 1 of each cycle for a maximum of six cycles. Paclitaxel was administered as a 3-h infusion (175 mg/m²) on day 1 of each cycle. After six cycles, maintenance cetuximab was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). We assumed a noninferiority margin of 1.40 as compatible with efficacy.ResultsA total of 201 patients were randomized 1 : 1 to each regimen; 191 were assessable. PFS with CetCis (median, 6 months) was noninferior to PFS with CetCisPac (median, 7 months) [HR for CetCis versus CetCisPac 0.99; 95% CI: 0.72–1.36,P = 0.906; margin of noninferiority (90% CI of 1.4) not reached]. Median overall survival was 13 versus 11 months (HR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.53–1.11,P = 0.117). The overall response rates were 41.8% versus 51.7%, respectively (OR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.38–1.20,P = 0.181). Grade ≥3 adverse event rates were 76% and 73% for CetCis versus CetCisPac, respectively, while grade 4 toxicities were lower in the two-drug versus three-drug arm (14% versus 33%,P = 0.015). No toxic death or sepsis were reported and cardiac events were negligible (1%).ConclusionThe two-drug CetCis regimen proved to be noninferior in PFS to a three-drug combination with CetCisPac. The median OS of both regimens is comparable with that observed in EXTREME, while the life-threatening toxicity rate appeared reduced.Clinical trial numberEudraCT# 2011-002564-24.     

Phase I/II trial of 2‐weekly docetaxel combined with cisplatin plus fluorouracil in metastatic esophageal cancer (JCOG0807)

We carried out a phase I/II trial of adding 2‐weekly docetaxel to cisplatin plus fluorouracil (CF) therapy (2‐weekly DCF regimen) in esophageal cancer patients to investigate its safety and antimetastatic activity. Patients received 2‐weekly docetaxel (30 mg/m² [dose level (DL)1] or 40 mg/m² [DL2] with a 3 + 3 design in phase I, on days 1 and 15) in combination with fixed‐dose CF (80 mg/m² cisplatin, day 1; 800 mg/m² fluorouracil, days 1–5) repeated every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) in phase I and central peer review‐based response rate in phase II. At least 22 responders among 50 patients were required to satisfy the primary endpoint with a threshold of 35%. Sixty‐two patients were enrolled in phase I and II. In phase I, 10 patients were enrolled with DLT of 0/3 at DL1 and 2/7 in DL2. Considering DLT and treatment compliance, the recommended phase II dose was determined as DL1. In phase II, the response rate was 62% (P < 0.0001; 95% confidence interval, 48–75%); median overall survival and progression‐free survival were 11.1 and 5.8 months, respectively. Common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (25%), anemia (36%), hyponatremia (29%), anorexia (24%), and nausea (11%). No febrile neutropenia was observed. Pneumonitis caused treatment‐related death in one patient. The 2‐weekly DCF regimen showed promising antimetastatic activity and tolerability. A phase III study comparing this regimen with CF therapy is planned by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group. This study was registered at the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN 000001737.     

Survival without toxicity for cisplatin plus pemetrexed versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine in chemonaïve patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A risk-benefit analysis of a large phase III study

BackgroundIn a large phase III study, cisplatin and pemetrexed had non-inferior efficacy and better tolerability compared with cisplatin and gemcitabine in chemonaïve patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The current analysis characterised the clinical benefit (i.e. survival) relative to clinical risk (i.e. drug-related toxicity) of the doublets.Patients and methodsA total of 1669 patients (of 1725 randomised) received 500 mg/m² pemetrexed IV followed by 75 mg/m² cisplatin IV on day 1 or gemcitabine 1250 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 and 75 mg/m² cisplatin on day 1, administered every 3 weeks for up to 6 cycles. Survival without toxicity (i.e. clinical benefit to risk) was defined as the time from randomisation to the first occurrence of any grade 3 or 4 drug-related toxicity or death, and was analysed using Kaplan–Meier and Cox methods.ResultsIn the overall patient population, survival without grade 3 or 4 drug-related toxicity was significantly longer for patients treated with cisplatin and pemetrexed versus cisplatin and gemcitabine (HR = 0.70; P < 0.001), as was survival without grade 4 drug-related toxicity (HR = 0.83; P < 0.001). For patients with non-squamous NSCLC, survival without toxicity with cisplatin and pemetrexed was superior to cisplatin and gemcitabine for grade 3 or 4 drug-related toxicity (HR = 0.64; P < 0.001) and for grade 4 drug-related toxicity (HR = 0.77; P < 0.001), whereas no treatment-arm difference was observed in the squamous subgroup.ConclusionsPatients with non-squamous NSCLC treated with front-line cisplatin and pemetrexed have superior survival without toxicity (i.e. clinical benefit-to-risk profile) compared with patients treated with cisplatin and gemcitabine.     

Randomized multicenter phase II trial of cisplatin and ifosfamide with or without paclitaxel in recurrent or metastatic carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group (HeCOG) study

BackgroundWe undertook a randomized phase II trial to test whether the addition of paclitaxel (Taxol) to the cisplatin and ifosfamide (IP) combination could improve objective response (OR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with recurrent or metastatic cancer of the uterine cervix.Patients and methodsOne hundred and fifty-three patients were randomly allocated to receive either the IP regimen (ifosfamide 1.5 g/m², daily, on days 1–3 and cisplatin 70 mg/m² on day 2) or the same combination with the addition of paclitaxel 175 mg/m² on day 1 [ifosfamide, paclitaxel and cisplatinum (ITP) regimen]. Cycles were administered every 4 weeks on an outpatient basis.ResultsA modest increase in neurotoxicity was observed with the triplet combination. OR rate was significantly higher in the ITP group (59% versus 33%, P = 0.002). Median PFS was 7.9 and 6.3 months for patients in the ITP and IP arms, respectively (P = 0.023). Median OS was 15.4 months and 13.2 months in the ITP and IP arms, respectively (P = 0.048). In multivariate analysis, the triplet yielded a hazard ratio of 0.70 for relapse or progression (P = 0.046) and 0.75 for death (P = 0.124) compared with the doublet.ConclusionThe ITP combination merits further investigation in randomized phase III studies.     

Randomised phase III trial of second-line irinotecan plus cisplatin versus irinotecan alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer refractory to S-1 monotherapy: TRICS trial

AimThe optimal second-line regimen for treating advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains unclear. While irinotecan (CPT-11) plus cisplatin (CDDP) combination therapy and CPT-11 monotherapy have been explored in the second-line setting, the superiority of second-line platinum-based therapies for AGC patients initially treated with S-1 monotherapy has not yet been evaluated; therefore, we aimed to examine the survival benefit of CPT-11/CDDP combination over CPT-11 monotherapy.MethodsAGC patients showing progression after S-1 monotherapy for advanced cancer or recurrence within 6 months after completion of S-1 adjuvant therapy were randomly allocated to CPT-11/CDDP (CPT-11, 60 mg/m²; CDDP, 30 mg/m², q2w) or CPT-11 (150 mg/m², q2w).ResultsSixty-eight advanced and 95 recurrent cases were evaluated. The median overall survivals were 13.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.8–17.6) and 12.7 (95% CI: 10.3–17.2) months for CPT-11/CDDP and CPT-11, respectively (hazard ratio: 0.834; 95% CI: 0.596–1.167, P = 0.288). No significant differences were observed in the secondary end-points, including progression-free survival (4.6 [95% CI: 3.4–5.9] versus 4.1 [95% CI: 3.3–4.9] months) and response rate (16.9% [95% CI: 8.8–28.3] versus 15.4% [95% CI: 7.6–26.5]). The incidences of grade 3–4 anaemia (16% versus 4%) and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase levels (5% versus 0%) were higher for CPT-11/CDDP than for CPT-11. Exploratory subgroup analysis revealed that CPT-11/CDDP was significantly more effective for intestinal-type AGC, compared with CPT-11 (overall survival: 15.8 versus 14.0 months; P = 0.019).ConclusionNo survival benefit was observed upon adding CDDP to CPT-11 after S-1 monotherapy failure.     

A prospective multicentre phase II study of cisplatin and weekly docetaxel as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer (KCSG HN07-01)

BackgroundThe purpose of this phase II study was to determine the efficacy and toxicity of cisplatin and weekly docetaxel combination chemotherapy as a first-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer.Patients and MethodsRecurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer patients were enrolled and received a combination of weekly docetaxel (35 mg/m² on Day1 and Day8) and cisplatin (70 mg/m² D1) every 21 days, for up to a maximum of 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate, and the secondary endpoints included toxicity of combination chemotherapy, progression-free survival, overall survival and 1-year survival rate.ResultsIn total, 47 patients were enrolled and analysed, and 46 patients (97.9%) completed the planned protocol. In an intent-to-treat analysis, 6 patients (12.8%) achieved complete response (CR) and 27 patients (57.4%) showed partial response (PR), with an objective response rate of 70.2%. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 9.6 months (95% C.I. 5.7–13.5 months) and 28.5 months (95% C.I. 16.9–40.1 months), respectively, and the 1-year survival rate was 89.9%. The common grade 3 adverse events were stomatitis (1.2%), neutropenia (0.8%), anaemia (0.8%), infection (0.8%) and diarrhoea (0.8%). Grade 4 adverse events were not observed in this study.ConclusionsThe combination chemotherapy of cisplatin and weekly docetaxel is highly effective and shows favourable toxicity as a first-line chemotherapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer.     

Mitomycin C with continuous fluorouracil or with cisplatin in combination with radiotherapy for locally advanced anal cancer (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase II study 22011-40014)

PurposeTo assess the feasibility and activity of radio-chemotherapy with mitomycin C (MMC) and cisplatin (CDDP) in locally advanced squamous cell anal carcinoma with reference to radiotherapy (RT) combined with MMC and fluorouracil (5-FU).Patients and methodsPatients with measurable disease >4 cm N0 or N+ received RT (36 Gy + 2 week gap + 23.4 Gy) with either MMC/CDDP or MMC/5-FU (MMC 10 mg/m² d1 of each sequence; 5-FU 200 mg/m²/day c.i.v. daily; CDDP 25 mg/m² weekly). Forty patients/arm were needed to exclude a RECIST objective response rate (ORR), 8 weeks after treatment, of <75% (Fleming 1, α = 10%, β = 10%).ResultsThe ORR was 79.5% (31/39) (lower bound confidence interval [CI]: 68.8%) with MMC/5-FU versus 91.9% (34/ 37) (lower bound CI: 82.8%) with MMC/CDDP. In the MMC/5-FU group, two patients (5.1%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity versus 11 (29.7%) in the MMC/CDDP group. Nine grade 3 haematological events occurred with MMC/CDDP versus none with 5-FU/MMC. The rate of other toxicities did not differ. There was no toxic death. Thirty-one patients in the MMC/5-FU arm (79.5%) and 18 in the MMC/CDDP arm (48.6%) were fully compliant with the protocol treatment (p = 0.005).ConclusionsRadio-chemotherapy with MMC/CDDP seems promising as only MMC/CDDP demonstrated enough activity (RECIST ORR >75%) to be tested further in phase III trials; MMC/5-FU did not. MMC/CDDP also had an overall acceptable toxicity profile.     

Global Lung Oncology Branch trial 3 (GLOB3): final results of a randomised multinational phase III study alternating oral and i.v. vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus docetaxel plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Background: The study compared the efficacy of a first-line treatment with day 1 i.v. vinorelbine (NVBiv) and day 8 oral vinorelbine (NVBo) versus docetaxel (DCT) in a cisplatin-based combination in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, in terms of time to treatment failure (TTF), overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tolerance and quality of life (QoL).Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 80 mg/m² with NVBiv 30 mg/m² on day 1 and NVBo 80 mg/m² on day 8 every 3 weeks, after a first cycle of NVBiv 25 mg/m² on day 1 and NVBo 60 mg/m² on day 8 (arm A) or cisplatin 75 mg/m² and DCT 75 mg/m² on day 1 every 3 weeks (arm B), for a maximum of six cycles in both arms.Results: From 2 February 2004 to 1 January 2006, 390 patients were entered in a randomised study and 381 were treated. The patient characteristics are as follows (arms A/B): metastatic (%) 80.5/84.8; patients with three or more organs involved (%) 45.3/40.8; median age 59.4/62.1 years; male 139/146; squamous (%) 34.2/33.5; adenocarcinoma (%) 41.6/39.3; median TTF (arms A/B in months) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 3.2 (3.0–4.2), 4.1 (3.4–4.5) (P = 0.19); overall response (arms A/B) (95% CI): 27.4% (21.2% to 34.2%), 27.2% (21.0% to 34.2%); median PFS (arms A/B in months) (95% CI): 4.9 (4.4–5.9), 5.1 (4.3–6.1) (P = 0.99) and median OS (arms A/B in months) (95% CI): 9.9 (8.4–11.6), 9.8 (8.8–11.5) (P = 0.58). The median survival for squamous histology was 8.87/9.82 months and for adenocarcinoma 11.73/11.60 months for arms A and B, respectively. Main haematological toxicity was grade 3–4 neutropenia: 24.4% (arm A) and 28.8% (arm B). QoL as measured by the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale was similar in both arms.Conclusions: Both arms provided similar efficacy in terms of response, time-related parameters and QoL, with an acceptable tolerance profile. In the current Global Lung Oncology Branch trial 3, NVBo was shown to be effective as a substitute for the i.v. formulation. This can relieve the burden of the i.v. injection on day 8 and can optimise the hospital's resources and improve patient convenience.     

nab-Paclitaxel plus carboplatin or gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line treatment of patients with triple-negative metastatic breast cancer: results from the tnAcity trial

BackgroundMetastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) has a poor prognosis and aggressive clinical course. tnAcity evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin (nab-P/C), nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G), and gemcitabine plus carboplatin (G/C) in patients with mTNBC.Patients and methodsPatients with pathologically confirmed mTNBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic BC received (1 : 1 : 1) nab-P 125 mg/m² plus C AUC 2, nab-P 125 mg/m² plus G 1000 mg/m², or G 1000 mg/m² plus C AUC 2, all on days 1, 8 q3w. Phase II primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), percentage of patients initiating cycle 6 with doublet therapy, and safety.ResultsIn total, 191 patients were enrolled (nab-P/C, n = 64; nab-P/G, n = 61; G/C, n = 66). PFS was significantly longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G [median, 8.3 versus 5.5 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.59 [95% CI, 0.38–0.92]; P = 0.02] or G/C (median, 8.3 versus 6.0 months; HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.37–0.90]; P = 0.02). OS was numerically longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G (median, 16.8 versus 12.1 months; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.47–1.13]; P = 0.16) or G/C (median, 16.8 versus 12.6 months; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.52–1.22]; P = 0.29). ORR was 73%, 39%, and 44%, respectively. In the nab-P/C, nab-P/G, and G/C groups, 64%, 56%, and 50% of patients initiated cycle 6 with a doublet. Grade ≥3 adverse events were mainly hematologic.ConclusionsFirst-line nab-P/C was active in mTNBC and resulted in a significantly longer PFS and improved risk/benefit profile versus nab-P/G or G/C.     

Final results of a multi-institutional phase II trial of reirradiation with concurrent weekly cisplatin and cetuximab for recurrent or second primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BackgroundThe optimal regimen of chemotherapy and reirradiation (re-XRT) for recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is controversial. We report the final outcomes of a multicenter phase II trial evaluating cetuximab and cisplatin-based chemotherapy concurrent with re-XRT for patients with recurrent HNSCC.Materials and methodsPatients with unresectable recurrent disease or positive margins after salvage surgery arising within a previously irradiated field with KPS ≥ 70 were eligible for this trial. Cetuximab 400 mg/m² was delivered as a loading dose in week 1 followed by weekly cetuximab 250 mg/m² and cisplatin 30 mg/m² concurrent with 6 weeks of intensity-modulated radiotherapy to a dose of 60–66 Gy in 30 daily fractions. Patients who previously received both concurrent cetuximab and cisplatin with radiation or who received radiotherapy less than 6 months prior were ineligible.ResultsFrom 2009 to 2013, 48 patients enrolled on this trial, 2 did not receive any protocol treatment. Of the remaining 46 patients, 34 were male and 12 female, with a median age of 62 years (range 36–85). Treatment was feasible and only 1 patient did not complete the treatment course. Common grade 3 or higher acute toxicities were lymphopenia (46%), pain (22%), dysphagia (13%), radiation dermatitis (13%), mucositis (11%) and anorexia (11%). There were no grade 5 acute toxicities. Eight grade 3 late toxicities were observed, four of which were swallowing related. With a median follow-up of 1.38 years, the 1-year overall survival (OS) was 60.4% and 1-year recurrence-free survival was 34.1%. On univariate analysis, OS was significantly improved with young age (P = 0.01). OS was not associated with radiation dose, surgery before re-XRT or interval from prior XRT.ConclusionsConcurrent cisplatin and cetuximab with re-XRT is feasible and offers good treatment outcomes for patients with high-risk features. Younger patients had significantly improved OS.ClinicalTrials.Gov IdentifierNCT00833261     

Weekly topotecan and cisplatin (TOPOCIS) as neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for locally-advanced squamous cervical carcinoma: Results of a phase II multicentric study

ObjectivesThe aim of this phase II multicentric study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy with weekly topotecan and cisplatin in locally-advanced squamous cervical cancer.Patients and methodsFrom November 2008 to January 2011, 92 patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled. Eligibility criteria were: squamous or adenosquamous cervical cancer; clinical stages IB2, IIA, IIB; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS) ? 2; neutrophils ? 1500/μL; platelets ? 100,000/μL, normal renal and liver function. Treatment consisted of six courses of weekly topotecan (2 mg/m²) and cisplatin (40 mg/m²). All responsive and stable patients were submitted to radical surgery, while progressed cases underwent definitive radiotherapy ± chemotherapy. Primary end-point was evaluation of efficacy and toxicity. All patients are evaluable for toxicity and efficacy.ResultsNinety-six percent of patients completed the six planned courses of chemotherapy, and 95% of courses were administered at a full dose and without interruption or delay. Mean age was 49 years (35–64 years). FIGO Stage distribution was 30 IB2, 13 IIA and 49 IIB. Treatment was well tolerated and no death occurred. G3–G4 haematological toxicity was observed in 28% of patients (5% out of cycles). Support therapies (blood transfusions and/or erythropoietin and/or Granocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor) were given to 24% of patients. Clinical response rate was 77%. The nine progressed cases were irradiated, while the remaining 83 patients were submitted to radical surgery. An overall pathologic response was observed in 67% of patients, with an optimal response rate of 32% and a disease downstage in 57% of patients. Nodal metastases occurred in 36% of patients. Adjuvant therapy (radiotherapy and or chemotherapy) was prescribed in 55% of patients, because of lymph node metastases, parametrial or vaginal involvement or cut-through margins. Median follow-up was 18 months: 76% of patients are alive and free from recurrence, 24% of patients relapsed and 13% died.ConclusionsWeekly topotecan and cisplatin showed an acceptable toxicity profile; the promising response rate warrants further investigation.