Concomitant Cisplatin and Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: 10-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Phase III Trial (SAKK 10/94)

To compare the long-term outcome of treatment with concomitant cisplatin and hyperfractionated radiotherapy versus treatment with hyperfractionated radiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.

Predictors of severe late radiotherapy-related toxicity after hyperfractionated radiotherapy with or without concomitant cisplatin in locally advanced head and neck cancer. Secondary retrospective analysis of a randomized phase III trial (SAKK 10/94)

This secondary analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for severe late radiotherapy (RT)-related toxicity after treatment with hyperfractionated RT +/- concomitant cisplatin in locally advanced head and neck cancer.

Physical examination during chemoradiation predicts outcome of locally advanced head and neck cancer. Secondary results of a randomized phase III trial (SAKK 10/94)

OBJECTIVES To analyze the prognostic value of clinical tumor response during chemoradiation for locally advanced head and neck cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS The locoregional response at 50.4Gy was assessed by physical examination (PE) in patients treated within the randomized trial SAKK 10/94 using hyperfractionated radiotherapy (RT), median total dose 74.4Gy with or without cisplatin 20mg/m(2) chemotherapy on 5 consecutive days during weeks 1 and 5 or 6 of RT. Response was classified as a complete response (CR), complete response with uncertainty (Cru), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD). The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) due to any cause. Secondary endpoints included locoregional-recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards (PH) models were applied to analyze the associations between survival endpoints and clinical tumor response. RESULTS A total of 136, 131 and 97 patients were evaluable for response at the primary tumor, lymph nodes and both sites combined, respectively. At 50.4Gy 57/136 (42%), 46/131 (35%) and 21/97 (22%) patients had a good response (CR/Cru vs. PR/SD) at the primary tumor, the lymph nodes, and both sites combined, respectively. The median follow-up times were 11.4, 9.6 and 11.4years for the three groups. Good responses were all significantly associated with improved TTF, LRRFS, DMFS and OS in univariate analysis whereas good response at the primary tumor and lymph nodes remained significantly associated with TTF and OS after multivariate Cox PH models. CONCLUSIONS Locoregional response at 50.4Gy was identified as predictor of oncologic outcome. PE during treatment should not be underestimated in clinical practice.

Impact of weight loss on survival after chemoradiation for locally advanced head and neck cancer: secondary results of a randomized phase III trial (SAKK 10/94).

BACKGROUND To analyze the impact of weight loss before and during chemoradiation on survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer. METHODS From 07/1994-07/2000 a total of 224 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were randomized to either hyperfractionated radiation therapy alone or the same radiation therapy combined with two cycles of concomitant cisplatin. The primary endpoint was time to any treatment failure (TTF); secondary endpoints were locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). Patient weight was measured 6 months before treatment, at treatment start and treatment end. RESULTS The proportion of patients with >5% weight loss was 32% before, and 51% during treatment, and the proportion of patients with >10% weight loss was 12% before, and 17% during treatment. After a median follow-up of 9.5 years (range, 0.1 - 15.4 years) weight loss before treatment was associated with decreased TTF, LRRFS, DMFS, cancer specific survival and OS in a multivariable analysis. However, weight loss during treatment was not associated with survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Weight loss before and during chemoradiation was commonly observed. Weight loss before but not during treatment was associated with worse survival.

Bevacizumab continuation versus no continuation after first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III non-inferiority trial (SAKK 41/06)

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is a standard option for first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. We assessed whether no continuation is non-inferior to continuation of bevacizumab after completing first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS In an open-label, phase III multicentre trial, patients with mCRC without disease progression after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab were randomly assigned to continuing bevacizumab at a standard dose or no treatment. CT scans were done every 6 weeks until disease progression. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A non-inferiority limit for hazard ratio (HR) of 0.727 was chosen to detect a difference in TTP of 6 weeks or less, with a one-sided significance level of 10% and a statistical power of 85%. RESULTS The intention-to-treat population comprised 262 patients: median follow-up was 36.7 months. The median TTP was 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.1-5.4] months for bevacizumab continuation versus 2.9 (95% CI 2.8-3.8) months for no continuation; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.58-0.96). Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated. The median overall survival was 25.4 months for bevacizumab continuation versus 23.8 months (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.63-1.1; P = 0.2) for no continuation. Severe adverse events were uncommon in the bevacizumab continuation arm. Costs for bevacizumab continuation were estimated to be ∼30,000 USD per patient. CONCLUSIONS Non-inferiority could not be demonstrated for treatment holidays versus continuing bevacizumab monotheray, after 4-6 months of standard first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. Based on no impact on overall survival and increased treatment costs, bevacizumab as a single agent is of no meaningful therapeutic value. More efficient treatment approaches are needed to maintain control of stabilized disease following induction therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00544700.

Exemestane Versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Women With Early Breast Cancer: NCIC CTG MA.27—A Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial

PURPOSE In patients with hormone-dependent postmenopausal breast cancer, standard adjuvant therapy involves 5 years of the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors anastrozole and letrozole. The steroidal inhibitor exemestane is partially non-cross-resistant with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors and is a mild androgen and could prove superior to anastrozole regarding efficacy and toxicity, specifically with less bone loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS We designed an open-label, randomized, phase III trial of 5 years of exemestane versus anastrozole with a two-sided test of superiority to detect a 2.4% improvement with exemestane in 5-year event-free survival (EFS). Secondary objectives included assessment of overall survival, distant disease-free survival, incidence of contralateral new primary breast cancer, and safety. RESULTS In the study, 7,576 women (median age, 64.1 years) were enrolled. At median follow-up of 4.1 years, 4-year EFS was 91% for exemestane and 91.2% for anastrozole (stratified hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.18; P = .85). Overall, distant disease-free survival and disease-specific survival were also similar. In all, 31.6% of patients discontinued treatment as a result of adverse effects, concomitant disease, or study refusal. Osteoporosis/osteopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, vaginal bleeding, and hypercholesterolemia were less frequent on exemestane, whereas mild liver function abnormalities and rare episodes of atrial fibrillation were less frequent on anastrozole. Vasomotor and musculoskeletal symptoms were similar between arms. CONCLUSION This first comparison of steroidal and nonsteroidal classes of aromatase inhibitors showed neither to be superior in terms of breast cancer outcomes as 5-year initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer by two-way test. Less toxicity on bone is compatible with one hypothesis behind MA.27 but requires confirmation. Exemestane should be considered another option as up-front adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Efficacy and safety of the Betamethasone valerate 0.1% plaster in mild-to-moderate chronic plaque psoriasis: a randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled, phase III study

Corticosteroids are a versatile option for the treatment of mild-to-moderate psoriasis due to their availability in a wide range of potencies and formulations. Occlusion of the corticosteroid is a widely accepted procedure to enhance the penetration of the medication, thereby improving its effectiveness. Betamethasone valerate (BMV) is a moderately potent corticosteroid that is available as a cream, ointment, and lotion. A ready-to-use occlusive dressing, which provides a continuous sustained release of BMV, has been developed for the treatment of psoriasis.

Interpreting Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98: a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, early breast cancer

The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study is a four-arm trial comparing 5 years of monotherapy with tamoxifen or with letrozole or with sequences of 2 years of one followed by 3 years of the other for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early invasive breast cancer. From 1998 to 2003, BIG -98 enrolled 8,010 women. The enhanced design f the trial enabled two complementary analyses of efficacy and safety. Collection of tumor specimens further enabled treatment comparisons based on tumor biology. Reports of BIG 1-98 should be interpreted in relation to each individual patient as she weighs the costs and benefits of available treatments.

Radiotherapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: recursive partitioning analysis of the EORTC 26981/22981-NCIC CE3 phase III randomized trial

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and National Cancer Institute of Canada trial on temozolomide (TMZ) and radiotherapy (RT) in glioblastoma (GBM) has demonstrated that the combination of TMZ and RT conferred a significant and meaningful survival advantage compared with RT alone. We evaluated in this trial whether the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) retains its overall prognostic value and what the benefit of the combined modality is in each RPA class. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred seventy-three patients with newly diagnosed GBM were randomly assigned to standard postoperative RT or to the same RT with concomitant TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ. The primary end point was overall survival. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer RPA used accounts for age, WHO performance status, extent of surgery, and the Mini-Mental Status Examination. RESULTS: Overall survival was statistically different among RPA classes III, IV, and V, with median survival times of 17, 15, and 10 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 32%, 19%, and 11%, respectively (P < .0001). Survival with combined TMZ/RT was higher in RPA class III, with 21 months median survival time and a 43% 2-year survival rate, versus 15 months and 20% for RT alone (P = .006). In RPA class IV, the survival advantage remained significant, with median survival times of 16 v 13 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 28% v 11%, respectively (P = .0001). In RPA class V, however, the survival advantage of RT/TMZ was of borderline significance (P = .054). CONCLUSION: RPA retains its prognostic significance overall as well as in patients receiving RT with or without TMZ for newly diagnosed GBM, particularly in classes III and IV.

Gemcitabine plus capecitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group

This phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (GemCap) versus single-agent Gem in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Randomized trial of daily versus weekly administration of 2-chlorodeoxyadenosine in patients with hairy cell leukemia: a multicenter phase III trial (SAKK 32/98)

Daily administration of 2-chlorodeoxyadenosine (Cladribine, CDA) is a standard treatment for hairy cell leukemia, but may cause severe neutropenia and neutropenic fever. This trial compared toxicity and efficacy of weekly versus daily CDA administration. One hundred patients were randomized to receive standard (CDA 0.14 mg/kg/day day 1-5 [Arm A]) or experimental treatment (CDA 0.14 mg/kg/day once weekly for 5 weeks [Arm B]). The primary endpoint was average leukocyte count within 6 weeks from randomization. Secondary endpoints included response rates, other acute hematotoxicity, acute infection rate, hospital admission, remission duration, event-free, and overall survival. There was no significant difference in average leukocyte count. Response rate (complete + partial remission) at week 10 was 78% (95% confidence interval (CI) 64-88%) in Arm A and 68% (95% CI 54-80%) in Arm B (p = 0.13). Best response rates during follow-up were identical (86%) in both arms. No significant difference was found in the rate of grade 3+4 leukocytopenia (94%vs. 84%), grade 3+4 neutropenia (90%vs. 80%), acute infection (44%vs. 40%), hospitalization (38%vs. 34%), and erythrocyte support (22%vs. 30%) within 10 weeks. Overall, these findings indicate that there are no apparent advantages in toxicity and efficacy by giving CDA weekly rather than daily.

Clinical benefit and quality of life in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine versus gemcitabine alone: a randomized multicenter phase III clinical trial--SAKK 44/00-CECOG/PAN.1.3.001

To compare clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (Cap) versus single-agent Gem for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Rituximab Maintenance for a Maximum of 5 Years After Single-Agent Rituximab Induction in Follicular Lymphoma: Results of the Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial SAKK 35/03.

PURPOSE Rituximab maintenance therapy has been shown to improve progression-free survival in patients with follicular lymphoma; however, the optimal duration of maintenance treatment remains unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred seventy patients with untreated, relapsed, stable, or chemotherapy-resistant follicular lymphoma were treated with four doses of rituximab monotherapy in weekly intervals (375 mg/m(2)). Patients achieving at least a partial response were randomly assigned to receive maintenance therapy with one infusion of rituximab every 2 months, either on a short-term schedule (four administrations) or a long-term schedule (maximum of 5 years or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), and toxicity were secondary end points. Comparisons between the two arms were performed using the log-rank test for survival end points. RESULTS One hundred sixty-five patients were randomly assigned to the short-term (n = 82) or long-term (n = 83) maintenance arms. Because of the low event rate, the final analysis was performed after 95 events had occurred, which was before the targeted event number of 99 had been reached. At a median follow-up period of 6.4 years, the median EFS was 3.4 years (95% CI, 2.1 to 5.3) in the short-term arm and 5.3 years (95% CI, 3.5 to not available) in the long-term arm (P = .14). Patients in the long-term arm experienced more adverse effects than did those in the short-term arm, with 76% v 50% of patients with at least one adverse event (P < .001), five versus one patient with grade 3 and 4 infections, and three versus zero patients discontinuing treatment because of unacceptable toxicity, respectively. There was no difference in OS between the two groups. CONCLUSION Long-term rituximab maintenance therapy does not improve EFS, which was the primary end point of this trial, or OS, and was associated with increased toxicity.

Docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil; docetaxel and cisplatin; and epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as systemic treatment for advanced gastric carcinoma: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research

This randomized phase II trial evaluated two docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to overall response rate (ORR) for comparison in a phase III trial with epirubicin-cisplatin-fluorouracil (ECF) as first-line advanced gastric cancer therapy.

Adding cetuximab to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK

BACKGROUND: To determine the activity and tolerability of adding cetuximab to the oxaliplatin and capecitabine (XELOX) combination in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a multicenter two-arm phase II trial, patients were randomized to receive oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks alone or in combination with standard dose cetuximab. Treatment was limited to a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with good performance status entered the trial. Objective partial response rates after external review and radiological confirmation were 14% and 41% in the XELOX and in the XELOX + Cetuximab arm, respectively. Stable disease has been observed in 62% and 35% of the patients, with 76% disease control in both arms. Cetuximab led to skin rash in 65% of the patients. The median overall survival was 16.5 months for arm A and 20.5 months for arm B. The median time to progression was 5.8 months for arm A and 7.2 months for arm B. CONCLUSION: Differences in response rates between the treatment arms indicate that cetuximab may improve outcome with XELOX. The correct place of the cetuximab, oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combinations in first-line treatment of MCC has to be assessed in phase III trials.