Pathological complete response and residual DCIS following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast carcinoma

Patients who have no residual invasive cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast carcinoma have a better overall survival than those with residual disease. Many classification systems assessing pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy include residual ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) only in the definition of pathological complete response. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patients with residual DCIS only have the same prognosis as those with no residual invasive or in situ disease. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database identified 435 patients, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer between February 1985 and February 2003. Of these, 30 (7%; 95% CI 5-9%) had no residual invasive disease or DCIS and 20 (5%; CI 3-7%) had residual DCIS only. With a median follow-up of 61 months, there was no statistical difference in disease-free survival, 80% (95% CI 60-90%) in those with no residual invasive or in situ disease and 61% (95% CI 35-80%) in those with DCIS only (P = 0.4). No significant difference in 5-year overall survival was observed, 93% (95% CI 75-98%) in those with no residual invasive or in situ disease and 82% (95% CI 52-94%) in those with DCIS only (P = 0.3). Due to the small number of patients and limited number of events in each group, it is not possible to draw definitive conclusions from this study. Further analyses of other databases are required to confirm our finding of no difference in disease-free and overall survival between patients with residual DCIS and those with no invasive or in situ disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Treatment of canine osteosarcoma with surgery, carboplatin, doxorubicin and piroxicam

Thirteen dogs with histologically confirmed osteosarcoma were treated with surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. None of the dogs had evidence of metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. The chemotherapy protocol consisted of four cycles of doxorubicin (15mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (150-220mg/m(2)) intravenously every three weeks. Both cytotoxic agents were administered concurrently. Oral piroxicam was administered at a dose of 0.3mg/kg once daily for the duration of the protocol. The treatment protocol was well tolerated. Only four patients developed mild neutropaenia or self-limiting gastrointestinal signs. Median disease free interval and survival time were 210 days and 450 days respectively.

Treatment of falciparum malaria in the age of drug-resistance

The growing problem of drug resistance has greatly complicated the treatment for falciparum malaria. Whereaschloroquine and sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine could once cure most infections, this is no longer true and requiresexamination of alternative regimens. Not all treatment failures are drug resistant and other issues such asexpired antimalarials and patient compliance need to be considered. Continuation of a failing treatment policyafter drug resistance is established suppresses infections rather than curing them, leading to increasedtransmission of malaria, promotion of epidemics and loss of public confidence in malaria control programs.Antifolate drug resistance (i.e. pyrimethamine) means that new combinations are urgently needed particularlybecause addition of a single drug to an already failing regimen is rarely effective for very long. Atovaquone/proguanil and mefloquine have been used against multiple drug resistant falciparum malaria with resistance toeach having been documented soon after drug introduction. Drug combinations delay further transmission ofresistant parasites by increasing cure rates and inhibiting formation of gametocytes. Most currentlyrecommended drug combinations for falciparum malaria are variants of artemisinin combination therapy wherea rapidly acting artemisinin compound is combined with a longer half-life drug of a different class. Artemisininsused include dihydroartemisinin, artesunate, artemether and companion drugs include mefloquine, amodiaquine,sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine, lumefantrine, piperaquine, pyronaridine, chlorproguanil/dapsone. The standard ofcare must be to cure malaria by killing the last parasite. Combination antimalarial treatment is vital not only tothe successful treatment of individual patients but also for public health control of malaria.

Which drug combination for hormone-refractory prostate cancer

Patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer have a progressive disease with a median survival of similar to 11 months, and currently no treatment offers a survival advantage. The standard drug treatment is a corticosteroid and chemotherapy with mitoxantrone. In a comparison of docetaxel every 3 weeks and prednisone, versus mitoxantrone and prednisone, with a follow-up of similar to 21 months, there were less deaths in the docetaxel group than in the mitoxantrone group (166 of 335 patients and 201 of 337 patients, respectively). Docetaxel also prolonged the duration of survival compared with mitoxantrone (18.9 and 16.5 months, respectively). When given with prednisone, docetaxel was also shown to reduce pain and serum prostate specific antigen levels and improve quality of life compared with mitoxantrone/prednisone. In another trial in hormone-resistant prostate cancer patients, which compared docetaxel and estramustine with mitoxantrone and prednisone during a median follow-up of 32 months, there were fewer deaths with docetaxel/estramustine than with mitoxantrone/prednisone, which were 217 of 338 and 235 of 336 patients, respectively. Median survival was also longer in the docetaxel and estramustine group than in the mitoxantrone/prednisone group (17.5 and 15.6 months, respectively). In conclusion, two combinations (docetaxel/prednisone and docetaxel/estramustine) have been shown to be superior to mitoxantrone/prednisone in hormone-refractory prostate cancer and both should be considered for use. With the present information, there is little to distinguish between these combinations.

Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridisation of breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy

We analysed the molecular genetic profiles of breast cancer samples before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with combination doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC). DNA was obtained from microdissected frozen breast core biopsies from 44 patients before chemotherapy. Additional samples were obtained before the second course of chemotherapy (D21) and after the completion of the treatment (surgical specimens) in 17 and 21 patients, respectively. Microarray-based comparative genome hybridisation was performed using a platform containing approx5800 bacterial artificial chromosome clones (genome-wide resolution: 0.9 Mb). Analysis of the 44 pretreatment biopsies revealed that losses of 4p, 4q, 5q, 12q13.11–12q13.12, 17p11.2 and 17q11.2; and gains of 1p, 2p, 7q, 9p, 11q, 19p and 19q were significantly associated with oestrogen receptor negativity. 16q21–q22.1 losses were associated with lobular and 8q24 gains with ductal types. Losses of 5q33.3–q4 and 18p11.31 and gains of 6p25.1–p25.2 and Xp11.4 were associated with HER2 amplification. No correlations between DNA copy number changes and clinical response to AC were found. Microarray-based comparative genome hybridisation analysis of matched pretreatment and D21 biopsies failed to identify statistically significant differences, whereas a comparison between matched pretreatment and surgical samples revealed a statistically significant acquired copy number gain on 11p15.2–11p15.5. The modest chemotherapy-driven genomic changes, despite profound loss of cell numbers, suggest that there is little therapeutic selection of resistant non-modal cell lineages.

Randomized controlled trial of an educational intervention for managing fatigue in women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of a psychoeducational intervention in improving cancer-related fatigue. Patients and Methods This randomized controlled trial involved 109 women commencing adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I or II breast cancer in five chemotherapy treatment centers. Intervention group patients received an individualized fatigue education and support program delivered in the clinic and by phone over three 10- to 20-minute sessions 1 week apart. Instruments included a numeric rating scale assessing confidence with managing fatigue; 11-point numeric rating scales measuring fatigue at worst, average, and best; the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue and Piper Fatigue Scales; the Cancer Self-Efficacy Scale; the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30; and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. For each outcome, separate analyses of covariance of change scores between baseline (T1) and the three follow-up time points (T2, T3, and T4) were conducted, controlling for the variable's corresponding baseline value. Results Compared with the intervention group, mean difference scores between the baseline (T1) and immediate after the test (T2) assessments increased significantly more for the control group for worst and average fatigue, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue, and Piper fatigue severity and interference measures. These differences were not observed between baseline and T3 and T4 assessments. No significant differences were identified for any pre- or post-test change scores for confidence with managing fatigue, cancer self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, or quality of life. Conclusion Preparatory education and support has the potential to assist women to cope with cancer-related fatigue in the short term. However, further research is needed to identify ways to improve the potency and sustainability of psychoeducational interventions for managing cancer-related fatigue.

SCOTROC 2A: Carboplatin followed by docetaxel or docetaxel gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

The feasibility of sequential carboplatin followed by docetaxel-based therapy for untreated ovarian cancer was determined. Patients received four q3w cycles of carboplatin AUC 7, then four q3w cycles of either docetaxel 100 mg m(-2) (day 1) (arm A); docetaxel 75 mg m(-2) (day 8) and gemcitabine 1250 mg m(-2) (days 1,8) (arm B) or docetaxel 25 mg m(-2) and gemcitabine 800 mg m(-2) (both given weekly (days 1,8,15)) (arm C). A total of 44 patients were randomised to each treatment arm. None of the arms demonstrated an eight cycle completion rate (70.5/72.7/45.5% in arms A/B/C, respectively), which was statistically greater than 60% (P = 0.102, P = 0.056, P = 0.982) which was our formal feasibility criteria, although only the completion rate in arm C was clearly worse than this level. The overall response rate (ORR) after carboplatin was 65.7% in 70 evaluable patients. In evaluable patients, ORRs after docetaxel-based cycles were: arm A 84.0% (21 out of 25); arm B 77.3% (17 out of 22); arm C 69.6% (16 out of 23). At follow-up (median 30 months), median progression-free survival times were: arm A 15.5 months (95% Cl: 10.5 - 20.6); arm B 18.1 months (95% Cl: 15.9 - 20.3); arm C, 13.7 months (95% Cl: 12.8 - 14.6). Neutropenia was the predominant grade 3 - 4 haematological toxicity: 77.8/85.7/54.4% in arms A/B/C, respectively. Dyspnoea was markedly increased in both gemcitabine-containing arms (P = 0.001) but was worse in arm C. Although just failing to rule out eight cycle completion rates less than 60%, within the statistical limitations of these small cohorts, the overall results for arms A and B are encouraging. Larger phase III studies are required to test these combinations.