Paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study with cross-over.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival ¿PFS) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2), 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P =.003) for doxorubicin (response rate ¿RR, 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P <.001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P =.38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients with breast cancer: a survey of the Breast International Group (BIG).

BACKGROUND: To collect oncologists' experience and opinion on adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was circulated among the members of the Breast International Group. RESULTS: A total of 277 oncologists from 28 countries participated in the survey. Seventy years is the age cut-off commonly used to define a patient as elderly. Biological age and the biological characteristics of the tumor are the most frequently used criteria to propose adjuvant chemotherapy to an elderly patient. Combination therapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil on days 1 and 8 is the most frequently prescribed regimen. Great interest exists in oral chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: There is interest among those who responded to the survey to validate a comprehensive geriatric assessment for use as a predictive instrument of toxicity and/or activity of anticancer therapy and to evaluate the role of a treatment option that is potentially less toxic and possibly as effective as polychemotherapy.

Randomized, controlled trial investigating short-term health-related quality of life with doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Group, Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer and the New Drug Development Group Study.

PURPOSE: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) or doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) as first-line chemotherapy treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients (n = 275) with anthracycline-naive measurable metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to AT (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as an intravenous bolus plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion) or AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. Dose escalation of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m(2)) was planned at cycle 2 to reach equivalent myelosuppression in the two groups. HRQOL was assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the EORTC Breast Module at baseline and the start of cycles 2, 4, and 6, and 3 months after the last cycle. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of the patients (n = 219) completed a baseline measure. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HRQOL between the two treatment groups. In both groups, selected aspects of HRQOL were impaired over time, with increased fatigue, although some clinically significant improvements in emotional functioning were seen, as well as a reduction in pain over time. Overall, global quality of life was maintained in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This information is important when advising women patients of the expected HRQOL consequences of treatment regimens and should help clinicians and their patients make informed treatment decisions.

Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10961 Multicenter Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) with a standard doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) regimen as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive and had bidimensionally measurable metastatic breast cancer. Two hundred seventy-five patients were randomly assigned to be treated with AT (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as an intravenous bolus plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion) or AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. A paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m(2)) dose escalation was planned at cycle 2 if no grade >or= 3 neutropenia occurred in cycle 1. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were response rate (RR), safety, overall survival (OS), and quality of life. RESULTS: A median number of six cycles were delivered in the two treatment arms. The relative dose-intensity and delivered cumulative dose of doxorubicin were lower in the AT arm. Dose escalation was only possible in 17% and 20% of the AT and AC patients, respectively. Median PFS was 6 months in the two treatments arms. RR was 58% versus 54%, and median OS was 20.6 versus 20.5 months in the AT and AC arms, respectively. The AT regimen was characterized by a higher incidence of febrile neutropenia, 32% versus 9% in the AC arm. CONCLUSION: No differences in the efficacy study end points were observed between the two treatment arms. Treatment-related toxicity compromised doxorubicin-delivered dose-intensity in the paclitaxel-based regimen

The impact of chemotherapy dose density and dose intensity on breast cancer outcome: what have we learned?

Optimising chemotherapy dose density and dose intensity are strategies aimed at improving outcomes in adjuvant therapy for patients with breast cancer. There are, in theory, at least five models allowing the delivery of a higher overall drug dose intensity. These are reviewed in this article and vary according to three main variables: the dose per course, the interval between doses and the total cumulative dose. Cyclophosphamide, anthracyclines and taxanes are among the most active agents for the treatment of breast cancer and, as such, they have been or are currently the focus of prospective, randomised clinical trials testing some of these dose-intensity models in the adjuvant setting. The results of recent trials suggest that anthracyclines, but not cyclophosphamide, are associated with better outcomes if used at higher doses per course and at higher cumulative doses. However, care has to be taken with premenopausal women where an increased dose of anthracycline per course but a reduced cumulative dose appears to produce a worse outcome. Moreover, decreasing the interval between doses, for anthracyclines and cyclophosphamide, does not seem to provide, so far, additional benefits for women with locally advanced breast cancer. This approach is not feasible with docetaxel, since an increase in dose density induces unwanted side-effects. These results represent our current state of knowledge, but clinical trials are being performed to evaluate further the effect of dose intensity, dose density and cumulative dose of key therapeutic agents on patient outcomes.

Hodgkin lymphoma treatment with ABVD in the US and the EU: neutropenia occurrence and impaired chemotherapy delivery.

BACKGROUND: In newly diagnosed patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) the effect of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD)-related neutropenia on chemotherapy delivery is poorly documented. The aim of this analysis was to assess the impact of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) on ABVD chemotherapy delivery in HL patients. STUDY DESIGN: Data from two similarly designed, prospective, observational studies conducted in the US and the EU were analysed. One hundred and fifteen HL patients who started a new course of ABVD during 2002-2005 were included. The primary objective was to document the effect of neutropenic complications on delivery of ABVD chemotherapy in HL patients. Secondary objectives were to investigate the incidence of CIN and febrile neutropenia (FN) and to compare US and EU practice with ABVD therapy in HL. Pooled data were analysed to explore univariate associations with neutropenic events. RESULTS: Chemotherapy delivery was suboptimal (with a relative dose intensity < or = 85%) in 18-22% of patients. The incidence of grade 4 CIN in cycles 1-4 was lower in US patients (US 24% vs. EU 32%). Patients in both the US and the EU experienced similar rates of FN across cycles 1-4 (US 12% vs. EU 11%). Use of primary colony-stimulating factor (CSF) prophylaxis and of any CSF was more common in the US than the EU (37% vs. 4% and 78% vs. 38%, respectively). The relative risk (RR) of dose delays was 1.54 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-2.23, p = 0.036) for patients with vs. without grade 4 CIN and the RR of grade 4 CIN was 0.35 (95% CI 0.12-1.06, p = 0.046) for patients with vs. without primary CSF prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In this population of HL patients, CIN was frequent and FN occurrence clinically relevant. Chemotherapy delivery was suboptimal. CSF prophylaxis appeared to reduce CIN rates.

Incidence of febrile neutropenia and neutropenic infections in elderly patients receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy for breast cancer without primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors

There is concern about the potential increase of hematological toxicity in elderly patients treated with chemotherapy. Recently, primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) was proposed for elderly patients receiving moderately toxic chemotherapy. However, evidence for the benefits of this primary prophylaxis for elderly breast cancer patients is currently lacking. We retrospectively analyzed the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and neutropenic infections in elderly breast cancer patients receiving anthracycline-based chemotherapy without primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors. In addition, we assessed the direct costs of hospitalization for these complications. Febrile neutropenia or neutropenic infection occurred in 13% of the 46 patients. Further studies are needed to adequately evaluate the risk of neutropenic complications (NC) in elderly patients receiving standard-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer and the potential benefits of primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors. © 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Survival in 176 patients with inoperable non small cell lung cancer treated initially with chemotherapy in a district general hospital

In advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) platinum based chemotherapy with second generation drugs improves median survival (MS) to 8 months and 29% and 10% at 1 and 2 years. Platinum with a third generation drug can improve survival further (BMJ 1995;311: 899) (Spiro et al. Thorax 2004;59:828 Big Lung Trial; N Engl J Med 2003;346:92 ECOG study). NICE now recommends chemotherapy with platinum and a third generation drug for inoperable NSCLC as the first treatment modality. Methods: We audited survival of 176/461 consecutive patients referred for at least 3 courses of platinum and either gemcitabine or vinorelbine from July 2001 to December 2005. Minimal follow up 17 months. Chemotherapy was given on site. Radical radiotherapy for stage IIIA, palliative radiotherapy and second line drugs were given as felt appropriate. Results: 64% were male. 30 (17%) were <55 years ; 66 (37.5%) age 55–65 years; 63 (35.8%) aged 66–75 and 16 (9.1%) >75 years. 5 (2.8%) were stage II; 46 (26%) stage IIIA; 68 (38%) stage IIIB and 55 (30.8%) stage IV. 68 (38%) had 0– 2 courses; 63 (36%) 3 courses and 44 (25%) had 4 or more.

BRCA1 Functions as a Differential Modulator of Chemotherapy-induced Apoptosis

We have evaluated the role played by BRCA1 in mediating the phenotypic response to a range of chemotherapeutic agents commonly used in cancer treatment. Here we provide evidence that BRCA1 functions as a differential mediator of chemotherapy-induced apoptosis. Specifically, we demonstrate that BRCA1 mediates sensitivity to apoptosis induced by antimicrotubule agents but conversely induces resistance to DNA-damaging agents. These data are supported by a variety of experimental models including cells with inducible expression of BRCA1, siRNA-mediated inactivation of endogenous BRCA1, and reconstitution of BRCA1-deficient cells with wild-type BRCA1. Most notably we demonstrate that BRCA1 induces a 10–1000-fold increase in resistance to a range of DNA-damaging agents, in particular those that give rise to double-strand breaks such as etoposide or bleomycin. In contrast, BRCA1 induces a >1000-fold increase in sensitivity to the spindle poisons, paclitaxel and vinorelbine. Fluorescence-activated cell sorter analysis demonstrated that BRCA1 mediates G2/M arrest in response to both antimicrotubule and DNA-damaging agents. However, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and caspase-3 cleavage assays indicate that the differential effect mediated by BRCA1 in response to these agents occurs through the inhibition or induction of apoptosis. Therefore, our data suggest that BRCA1 acts as a differential modulator of apoptosis depending on the nature of the cellular insult.

Chemotherapy and TRAIL-mediated colon cancer cell death: the roles of p53, TRAIL receptors, and c-FLIP.

Tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) has recently attracted attention as a potential therapeutic agent in the treatment of cancer. We assessed the roles of p53, TRAIL receptors, and cellular Fas-associated death domain-like interleukin-1beta-converting enzyme inhibitory protein (c-FLIP) in regulating the cytotoxic effects of recombinant TRAIL (rTRAIL) alone and in combination with chemotherapy [5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin, and irinotecan] in a panel of colon cancer cell lines. Using clonogenic survival and flow cytometric analyses, we showed that chemotherapy sensitized p53 wild-type, mutant, and null cell lines to TRAIL-mediated apoptosis. Although chemotherapy treatment did not modulate mRNA or cell surface expression of the TRAIL receptors death receptor 4, death receptor 5, decoy receptor 1, or decoy receptor 2, it was found to down-regulate expression of the caspase-8 inhibitor, c-FLIP. Stable overexpression of the long c-FLIP splice form but not the short form was found to inhibit chemotherapy/rTRAIL-induced apoptosis. Furthermore, siRNA-mediated down-regulation of c-FLIP, particularly the long form, was found to sensitize colon cancer cells to rTRAIL-induced apoptosis. In addition, treatment of a 5-FU-resistant cell line with 5-FU down-regulated c-FLIP expression and sensitized the chemotherapy-resistant cell line to rTRAIL. We conclude that TRAIL-targeted therapies may be used to enhance conventional chemotherapy regimens in colon cancer regardless of tumor p53 status. Furthermore, inhibition of c-FLIP may be a vital accessory strategy for the optimal use of TRAIL-targeted therapies.

c-FLIP inhibits chemotherapy-induced colorectal cancer cell death

c-FLIP inhibits caspase 8 activation and apoptosis mediated by death receptors such as Fas and DR5. We studied the effect of c-FLIP on the apoptotic response to chemotherapies used in colorectal cancer (CRC) (5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan). Simultaneous downregulation of both c-FLIP splice forms c-FLIP(L) and c-FLIP(S) with siRNA synergistically enhanced chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in p53 wild-type (HCT116p53(+/+), RKO), null (HCT116p53(-/-)) and mutant (H630) CRC cell lines. Furthermore, overexpression of c-FLIP(L), but not c-FLIP(S), potently inhibited apoptosis induced by chemotherapy in HCT116p53(+/+) cells, suggesting that c-FLIP(L) was the more important splice form in mediating chemoresistance. In support of this, siRNA specifically targeted against c-FLIP(L) synergistically enhanced chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in a manner similar to the siRNA targeted against both splice forms. Inhibition of caspase 8 blocked the enhanced apoptosis induced by c-FLIP-targeted (FT) siRNA and chemotherapy. Furthermore, we found that downregulating cell surface DR5, but not Fas, also inhibited apoptosis induced by FT siRNA and chemotherapy. Interestingly, these effects were not dependent on activation of DR5 by its ligand TRAIL. These results indicate that c-FLIP inhibits TRAIL-independent, DR5- and caspase 8-dependent apoptosis in response to chemotherapy in CRC cells. Moreover, targeting c-FLIP in combination with existing chemotherapies may have therapeutic potential for the treatment of CRC.