Platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer : current status

Cisplatin and carboplatin are active in previously untreated patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with mean response rates (RRs) of 50 and 32%, respectively. In pretreated patients the RR to cisplatin/carboplatin monotherapy declines markedly to <10%. Cisplatin and carboplatin have been combined with many other cytotoxics. In first-line setting high activity has been observed in combination with taxanes or vinorelbine (RRs consistently ∼60%). It appears that these newer combinations are superior to older regimens with etoposide (RRs 30 to 50%) or 5-fluorouracil (RRs 40 to 60%). Cisplatin-/carboplatin-based regimens with infusional 5-FU and epirubicin/paclitaxel/vinorelbine achieve high RRs of around 60 to 80%. However these regimens are difficult to administer in all patients because they require central venous access for continuous 5-FU infusion. In pretreated MBC the combinations of cisplatin-taxane/vinorelbine/gemcitabine or carboplatin-docetaxel/vinorelbine yield RRs of 40 to 50%, which are higher than those achieved with platinum-etoposide/5-FU. In locally advanced disease cisplatin-based regimens achieve very high RRs (>80%). This would suggest that in chemotherapy-naïve patients platinum-based therapy might have an important role to play. Additionally the synergy demonstrated between platinum compounds, taxanes and herceptin, in preclinical and clinical studies is of immense importance and the results of the two ongoing Breast Cancer International Research Group randomized phase III studies are eagerly awaited. These studies may help clarify the role of platinum compounds in the treatment of metastatic and possibly early breast cancer. © 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer : the Leicester (UK) experience

Aims: After failure of anthracycline- and taxane-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer, treatment options until recently were limited. Until the introduction of capecitabine and vinorelbine, no standard regimen was available. We conducted a retrospective study to determine the efficacy and toxicity of platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Materials and methods: Forty-two women with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines (93%) and/or taxanes (36%) received mitomycin-vinblastine-cisplatin (MVP) (n = 23), or cisplatin-etoposide (PE) (n = 19), as first-, second- and third-line treatment at a tertiary referral centre between 1997 and 2002. Chemotherapy was given every 3 weeks as follows: mitomycin-C (8 mg/m 2) (cycles 1, 2, 4, 6), vinblastine (6 mg/m 2), and cisplatin (50 mg/m 2) all on day 1; and cisplatin (75 mg/m 2) and etoposide (100 mg/m 2) on day 1 and (100 mg/m 2) orally twice a day on days 2-3. Results: The response rate for 40 evaluable patients (MVP: n = 23; PE: n = 17) was 18% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9-32%). The response rate to MVP was 13% (95% CI: 5-32%, one complete and two partial responses) and to PE 24% (10-47%, four partial responses). Disease stabilised in 43% (26-63%) and 47% (26-69%) of women treated with MVP and PE, respectively. After a median follow-up of 18 months, 37 women (MVP: n = 19; PE: n = 18) died from their disease. Median (range) progression-free survival and overall survival were 6 months (0.4-18.7) and 9.9 months (1.3-40.8), respectively. Median progression-free survival for the MVP and PE groups was 5.5 and 6.2 months (Log-rank, P = 0.82), and median overall survival was 10.2 and 9.4 months (Log-rank, P = 0.46), respectively. The main toxicity was myelosuppression. Grades 3-4 neutropenia was more common in women treated with PE than in women treated with MVP (74% vs 30%; P = 0.012), but the incidence of neutropenic sepsis, relative to the number of chemotherapy cycles, was low (7% overall). The toxicity-related hospitalisation rate was 1.2 admissions per six cycles of chemotherapy. No treatment-related deaths occurred. MVP and PE chemotherapy have modest activity and are safe in women with metastatic breast cancer. © 2005 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Sensorineural hearing loss after treatment for head and neck cancer : a review of the literature

Background Definitive cisplatin-based is increasingly delivered as the treatment of choice for patients with head and neck cancer. Sensorineural hearing loss is a significant long term side effect of cisplatin-based chemoradiation and is associated with potential major quality of life issues for patients. Purpose The purpose of this manuscript was to review the mechanism behind sensorineural hearing loss in patients treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiation, including incidence, the contributions of radiotherapy and cisplatin to sensorineural hearing loss and the impact of the toxicity on patient quality of life. Methods Database searches were conducted through PubMed (National Centre for Biotechnology Information) and OvidSP Medline via the Queensland University of Technology Library website. General article searches were conducted through the online search engine Google Scholar. Articles were excluded if the full-text was unavailable, they were not in English or if they were published prior to 1990. Keywords included hearing loss, ototoxicity, cancer, quality of life, cisplatin and radiotherapy. Results/Discussion The total number of journal articles accessed was 290. Due to exclusion criteria, 129 articles were deemed appropriated for review. Findings indicated that sensorineural hearing loss is a significant, long term complication for patients treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiation. Current literature recognises the ototoxic effects of cisplatin and cranial irradiation as separate entities, however the impact of combined modality therapy on sensorineural hearing loss is seldom reported. Multiple risk factors for hearing loss are described, however there are contradictory opinions on incidence and severity and the exact radiation dose threshold responsible for inducing hearing loss in patients receiving combined modality therapy. Sensorineural hearing loss creates a subset of complexities for patients with head and neck cancer and that these patients face significant quality of life impairment. Conclusion The literature review identified that sensorineural hearing loss is a major quality of life issue for patients treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiation for head and neck cancer. Further investigation evaluating the contribution of cisplatin-based chemoradiation to sensorineural hearing loss and the subsequent effect on patient quality of life is warranted.