[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The randomized phase II OPUS (Oxaliplatin and Cetuximab in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer) study showed that tumor KRAS mutation status was predictive for outcome in patients receiving cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 (oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil/folinic acid) as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
The biomarker analysis was extended through the use of additional DNA samples extracted from stained tissue sections. KRAS and BRAF tumor mutation status was determined for new (and for BRAF, existing) samples using a PCR technique. Clinical outcome was reassessed according to mutation status. Overall survival data are presented.
Of 315 KRAS evaluable patient samples (93%), 179 tumors (57%) were KRAS wild type. Eleven of 309 (4%) KRAS/BRAF evaluable tumors (all KRAS wild type) carried BRAF mutations. The addition of cetuximab to FOLFOX-4 significantly improved progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.567, P = 0.0064) and response (odds ratio 2.551, P = 0.0027) in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors. A favorable effect on survival was also observed.
These results confirm the efficacy of cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 in the first-line treatment of patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC and confirm KRAS mutation status as an effective predictive biomarker. The small number of tumors with BRAF mutations precluded the drawing of definitive conclusions concerning the predictive or prognostic utility of this biomarker.
Annals of Oncology 06/2011; 22(7):1535-46. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdq632 · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: A phase III trial demonstrated that cetuximab is the first agent in 30 years to improve survival when added to platinum-based chemotherapy (platinum-fluorouracil) first line for recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). This analysis of the trial assessed the impact of treatment on quality of life (QoL).
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and QLQ-Head and Neck 35 (QLQ-H&N35) module were used to assess QoL.
Of 442 patients randomly assigned, 291 (QLQ-C30) and 289 (QLQ-H&N35) patients completed at least one evaluable questionnaire. For QLQ-C30, cycle 3 and month 6 mean scores for platinum-fluorouracil plus cetuximab were not significantly worse than those for platinum-fluorouracil. Pattern-mixture analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in the global health status/QoL score in the cetuximab arm (P = 0.0415) but no treatment differences in the social functioning scale. For QLQ-H&N35, the mean score for the cetuximab arm was not significantly worse than that for the chemotherapy arm for all symptom scales at all post-baseline visits. At cycle 3, some symptom scores significantly favored the cetuximab arm (pain, swallowing, speech problems, and social eating).
Adding cetuximab to platinum-fluorouracil does not adversely affect the QoL of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN.
Annals of Oncology 03/2010; 21(10):1967-73. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdq077 · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin (LV) are standard first-line treatments for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The aim of this multicentre, open-label, phase IIIb study was to assess the addition of oxaliplatin to two different 5-FU regimens.
Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomised to arm A [two-weekly oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) + either continuous intravenous infusion (CIV) of 5-FU without LV or two-weekly bolus and CIV 5-FU + LV (LV5FU2)] or arm B (5-FU CIV or LV5FU2 alone). Irinotecan monotherapy was planned on progression.
A total of 725 patients were enrolled. After a fixed follow-up of 2 years for each patient, 2-year survival rates were 27.3% and 24.8% in arms A and B, respectively (hazard ratio 0.93; 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.10). The addition of oxaliplatin significantly improved response rates (54.1 versus 29.8%; P < 0.0001) and median progression-free survival (7.9 versus 5.9 months; P < 0.0001). The most common grade 3-4 toxic effects were neutropenia (arm A, 33%; arm B, 5%), diarrhoea (arm A, 14%; arm B, 8%), and fatigue (arm A, 9%; arm B, 8%).
Despite improved rates of tumour control, these results failed to demonstrate a survival benefit from the addition of oxaliplatin to infused 5-FU and lend further support to the use of sequential monotherapy in some patients with mCRC.
Annals of Oncology 10/2008; 20(2):244-50. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdn638 · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Combination of intravenous (i.v.) vinorelbine and docetaxel was shown to be feasible and effective in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In an effort to improve patient convenience, we investigated in first-line treatment a regimen alternating i.v. and oral vinorelbine in combination with docetaxel.
Forty-nine patients (median age, 53 years) with MBC received a maximum of 6 cycles consisting of i.v. vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) plus docetaxel 60 mg/m(2) given on day 1, and oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m(2) on day 15 every 3 weeks in an open-label, multicentre phase II study (recommended dose established in phase I study ).
Sixty-three percent of the patient had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy and 78% presented visceral involvement. Twenty-four responses were documented and validated by an independent panel review, yielding response rates of 49% (95% CI: 34-64) in the 49 enrolled patients and 55.8% (95% CI: 40-71) in the 43 evaluable patients. Median duration of response was 9.4 months. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 5.5 and 33.2 months, respectively. Neutropenia was the main dose-limiting toxicity but complications were uncommon, four patients having experienced febrile neutropenia and one having developed neutropenic infection. Other frequently reported adverse events included alopecia, fatigue, stomatitis, constipation, diarrhoea and nausea, which were rarely severe.
This regimen alternating oral and i.v. vinorelbine in combination with docetaxel is effective and manageable. Vinorelbine i.v. per oral day 1 per day 15-docetaxel day 1 every 3 weeks represents a convenient option to combine docetaxel and vinorelbine for the palliative treatment of MBC.
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology 09/2008; 63(5):937-43. DOI:10.1007/s00280-008-0816-5 · 2.77 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In patients with untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), progression-free survival (PFS) was longer with bevacizumab + interferon (IFN)-alpha than IFN + placebo (AVOREN trial). In this hypothesis-generating study, subgroup analysis was carried out to determine the effect of IFN dose reduction.
A total of 649 patients received IFN 9 MIU s.c. three times weekly plus bevacizumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 2 weeks until disease progression. The IFN dose was reduced to 6 or 3 MIU with the development of IFN-attributed toxicity. Differences between treatment arms in PFS, response rate and tolerability were analysed in the reduced-dose group.
IFN dose was reduced in 131 patients in the bevacizumab + IFN arm and 97 patients in the IFN + placebo arm during the trial. PFS rates in the bevacizumab + reduced-dose IFN group were comparable with the total population (Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free rate at 1 year: 0.524 versus 0.427). Bevacizumab + reduced-dose IFN was well tolerated, with substantial decreases in the rate of adverse events following dose reduction.
This retrospective subgroup analysis suggests that the dose of IFN can be reduced to manage side-effects while maintaining efficacy in patients with mRCC receiving bevacizumab + IFN.
Annals of Oncology 05/2008; 19(8):1470-6. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdn161 · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: XRP6258 is a novel taxoid with a low affinity for P-glycoprotein. This multicenter phase II study assessed the activity of XRP6258 in the treatment of taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer (MBC).
XRP6258 was administered as a 1-h i.v. infusion every 3 weeks at 20 mg/m(2) (then, in the absence of severe toxicity, at 25 mg/m(2) from cycle 2). The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) guidelines.
Seventy-one patients were enrolled. The median relative dose intensity was 0.98. The ORR was 14% (two complete, eight partial responses). Eighteen patients (25%) had stable disease of >3 months duration. At a median follow-up of 20.0 months, the median time to progression was 2.7 months, and the median overall survival 12.3 months. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (73%) and leucopenia (55%), with a low febrile neutropenia rate (3%) and infrequent grade 3/4, treatment-related, non-hematological AEs (<5% patients for any AE). Two deaths were reported, one related to study drug and one to unknown cause.
XRP6258 was active and well tolerated in this group of MBC patients with taxane-resistant disease. These results support the further clinical development of this agent.
Annals of Oncology 04/2008; 19(9):1547-52. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdn171 · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to investigate the combination of vinorelbine (VRL) alternating intravenous (i.v.) and oral in combination with docetaxel (DCT) as first-line chemotherapy of patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Tested doses were 60 or 70 mg m(-2) given on day 1 for DCT, 20 to 25 mg m(-2) for i.v. VRL on day 1, 60 mg m(-2) on day 8 or day 15 for oral VRL. Day 1 was administered every 3 weeks. Three to six patients were treated per dose level.
The median age of the 30 treated patients was 60 years. Four patients were non evaluable for the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and were replaced. Reported dose-limiting toxicities were 11 omissions of oral VRL for neutropenia, two cases of febrile neutropenia and two grade 4 neutropenia >or=7 days. Dose levels using DCT doses >60 mg m(-2) and/or i.v. VRL doses >20 mg m(-2) met the criteria for MTD. Most frequent toxicities were febrile neutropenia in seven patients and neutropenic infection in four patients (one fatal). Therefore, the recommended schedule was established at i.v. VRL 20 mg m(-2) with DCT 60 mg m(-2) on day 1 and oral VRL 60 mg m(-2) given on day 15 every 3 weeks. At this recommended schedule, only one of six patients experienced febrile neutropenia. Among 22 patients evaluable for tumour response, 2 complete and 10 partial responses were reported. Pharmacokinetics of combined VRL and DCT demonstrated the absence of mutual interaction.
This phase I study established the recommended doses and schedules of the combination alternating i.v. and oral VRL with DCT, this recommended regimen being further explored in a phase II study.
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology 08/2007; 60(3):365-73. DOI:10.1007/s00280-006-0375-6 · 2.77 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Intravenous bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin is the standard adjuvant treatment for colon cancer. The oral fluoropyrimidine capecitabine is an established alternative to bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. We evaluated capecitabine in the adjuvant setting.
We randomly assigned a total of 1987 patients with resected stage III colon cancer to receive either oral capecitabine (1004 patients) or bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen; 983 patients) over a period of 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was at least equivalence in disease-free survival; the primary safety end point was the incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxic effects due to fluoropyrimidines.
Disease-free survival in the capecitabine group was at least equivalent to that in the fluorouracil-plus-leucovorin group (in the intention-to-treat analysis, P<0.001 for the comparison of the upper limit of the hazard ratio with the noninferiority margin of 1.20). Capecitabine improved relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04) and was associated with significantly fewer adverse events than fluorouracil plus leucovorin (P<0.001).
Oral capecitabine is an effective alternative to intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer.
New England Journal of Medicine 06/2005; 352(26):2696-704. DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa043116 · 55.87 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Oral capecitabine achieves a superior response rate with an improved safety profile compared with bolus 5-fluorouracil-leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We report here the results of a large phase III trial investigating adjuvant oral capecitabine compared with 5-FU/LV (Mayo Clinic regimen) in Dukes' C colon cancer.
Patients aged 18-75 years with resected Dukes' C colon carcinoma were randomized to receive 24 weeks of treatment with either oral capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) twice daily, days 1-14 every 21 days (n = 993), or i.v. bolus 5-FU 425 mg/m(2) with i.v. leucovorin 20 mg/m(2) on days 1-5, repeated every 28 days (n = 974).
Patients receiving capecitabine experienced significantly (P <0.001) less diarrhea, stomatitis, nausea/vomiting, alopecia and neutropenia, but more hand-foot syndrome than those receiving 5-FU/LV. Fewer patients receiving capecitabine experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia/sepsis and stomatitis (P <0.001), although more experienced grade 3 hand-foot syndrome than those treated with 5-FU/LV (P <0.001). Capecitabine demonstrates a similar, favorable safety profile in patients aged <65 years or > or = 65 years old.
Based on its improved safety profile, capecitabine has the potential to replace 5-FU/LV as standard adjuvant treatment for patients with colon cancer. Efficacy results are expected to be available in Keywords: Adjuvant treatment, capecitabine, chemotherapy, colorectal cancer
Annals of Oncology 01/2004; 14(12):1735-43. · 7.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Patient preference as well as concerns and difficulties with intravenous access and pharmaco-economic issues have driven the development of oral vinorelbine.
Four phase II studies were conducted in chemotherapy-naive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and as first-line chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer (ABC). As recommended in the phase I dose-finding study, the first step used a weekly dose of 80 mg/m2. This regimen was associated with an excessive rate of early deaths (10%) due to complicated neutropenia and led to discontinuation of the first two studies. In a second step, the dose of 60 mg/m2/week was given for the first three courses and subsequently increased to 80 mg/m2/week, in the absence of severe neutropenia.
One hundred and thirty eight patients (76 with NSCLC and 62 with ABC) received this regimen, of whom only five were unable to undergo dose escalation. The incidence of febrile neutropenia and neutropenic sepsis were low (2.9 and 3.6%, respectively). Although severe events were uncommon, nausea/vomiting and diarrhoea were frequent and primary prophylaxis with antiemetics should be recommended.
Overall, the safety profile of oral vinorelbine at 60 mg/m2/week for the first three courses with escalation to 80 mg/m2 is qualitatively comparable to that of i.v. vinorelbine at standard doses. Similarly to i.v. chemotherapy, close haematological monitoring is necessary.
Annals of Oncology 01/2002; 12(12):1677-81. DOI:10.1023/A:1013567022670 · 7.04 Impact Factor