A Dynamic Model of Hand-and-Foot Syndrome in Patients Receiving Capecitabine

For the purpose of developing a longitudinal model to predict hand-and-foot syndrome (HFS) dynamics in patients receiving capecitabine, data from two large phase III studies were used. Of 595 patients in the capecitabine arms, 400 patients were randomly selected to build the model, and the other 195 were assigned for model validation. A score for risk of developing HFS was modeled using the proportional odds model, a sigmoidal maximum effect model driven by capecitabine accumulation as estimated through a kinetic-pharmacodynamic model and a Markov process. The lower the calculated creatinine clearance value at inclusion, the higher was the risk of HFS. Model validation was performed by visual and statistical predictive checks. The predictive dynamic model of HFS in patients receiving capecitabine allows the prediction of toxicity risk based on cumulative capecitabine dose and previous HFS grade. This dose-toxicity model will be useful in developing Bayesian individual treatment adaptations and may be of use in the clinic.

Efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine with weekly paclitaxel for patients with metastatic breast cancer: a phase II report of the SAKK

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel and capecitabine have proven activity in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Paclitaxel increases the expression of thymidine phosphorylase, the enzyme that activates capecitabine. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine in combination with weekly paclitaxel largely as first-line therapy in patients with MBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 2002 to September 2004, 19 patients with MBC received oral capecitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14) plus i.v. paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15) in a 21-day cycle for a maximum of 6 cycles. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 19.3 months the overall response rate was 63% with 1 complete response (5%) and 11 partial responses (58%). Disease was stabilized in 1 patient (5%) and 3 patients had progressive disease (16%). Three patients were unable to be assessed for response to treatment. Median time to progression was 3.3 months, median time to treatment failure 3.0 months and median overall survival 13.8 months. A substantial number of patients experienced major side effects. The most common treatment-related adverse events were hand-foot syndrome (53%; grade 3: 37%), alopecia (42%; grade 3: 26%), diarrhea (32%; grade 3: 11%) and neurotoxicity (32%; grade 3: 16%). Hematologic toxicities were uncommon. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and paclitaxel appears to be active in MBC but the safety profile with the dosages used in this trial was unacceptably high and led to a short time to treatment failure. However, based on the efficacy data alternative schedules deserve further evaluation.

Patient-reported outcomes of patients with advanced biliary tract cancers receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine: a multicenter, phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GemCap) on patient-reported outcomes measured using clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality-of-life (QOL) measures in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had to manifest symptoms of advanced biliary tract cancer and have at least one of the following: impaired Karnofsky performance score (60 to 80), average analgesic consumption >or= 10 mg of morphine equivalents per day, and average pain intensity score of >or= 20 mm out of 100 mm. Treatment consisted of oral capecitabine 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) as a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks until progression. The primary end point was the number of patients categorized as having a CBR or stable CBR (SCBR) during the first three treatment cycles. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled (bile duct cancer, n = 36; gallbladder cancers, n = 8). The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events included hematologic toxicity and fatigue. After three cycles, 36% of patients achieved a CBR, and 34% achieved an SCBR. Over the full course of treatment, 57% of patients achieved a CBR, and 18% achieved an SCBR. Improved QOL was observed in patients with a CBR or SCBR. The objective response rate was 25%. Median time to progression and overall survival times were 7.2 months and 13.2 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy with GemCap is well tolerated and effective and leads to a high CBR rate. Patient-reported outcomes are useful for evaluating the effects of palliative chemotherapy in patients with biliary tract cancer.

Capecitabine and vinorelbine as first-line treatment in elderly patients (> or =65 years) with metastatic breast cancer. A phase II trial (SAKK 25/99)

BACKGROUND: We evaluated previously established regimens of capecitabine plus vinorelbine in older patients with advanced breast cancer stratified for presence versus absence of bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients > or =65 years who had received no prior chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer received up to six 21-day cycles of vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 + 8 with oral capecitabine on days 1-14 (1,000 vs. 1,250 mg/m(2) daily in patients with vs. without bone involvement). RESULTS: Median age was 72 years in patients with bone metastases (n = 47) and 75 years in patients without bone metastases (n = 23). Response rates were 43% (95% confidence interval, CI, 28.3-58.8) and 57% (95% CI = 34.5-76.8), respectively. Median time to progression was 4.3 (95% CI = 3.5-6.0 months) and 7.0 months (CI = 4.1-8.3), respectively. Neutropenia was the most common toxicity, with grade 3/4 occurring in 43 and 39%, respectively. Pulmonary embolism was seen in 5 and grade 3 thrombosis in 3 patients. Other toxicities were mild to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: These regimens of capecitabine and vinorelbine are active and well tolerated in patients with advanced breast cancer > or =65 years. Response rates were comparable to published results. The lower capecitabine doses appeared appropriate given the advanced age, bone involvement and prior radiotherapy.

Bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for colon cancer (AVANT): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial

Background: Bevacizumab improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess the use of bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma. Methods: Patients from 330 centres in 34 countries were enrolled into this phase 3, open-label randomised trial. Patients with curatively resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma were randomly assigned (1: 1: 1) to receive FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), leucovorin 200 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus plus 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) plus fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus plus 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion on day 2) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles; bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOX4 (every 2 weeks for 12 cycles) followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks); or bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg plus XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 2 weeks plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-15) every 3 weeks for eight cycles followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks). Block randomisation was done with a central interactive computerised system, stratified by geographic region and disease stage. Surgery with curative intent occurred 4-8 weeks before randomisation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed for all randomised patients with stage III disease. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00112918. Findings: Of the total intention-to-treat population (n=3451), 2867 patients had stage III disease, of whom 955 were randomly assigned to receive FOLFOX4, 960 to receive bevacizumab-FOLFOX4, and 952 to receive bevacizumab-XELOX. After a median follow-up of 48 months (range 0-66 months), 237 patients (25%) in the FOLFOX4 group, 280 (29%) in the bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 group, and 253 (27%) in the bevacizumab-XELOX group had relapsed, developed a new colon cancer, or died. The disease-free survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1.17 (95% CI 0.98-1.39; p=0.07), and for bevacizumab-XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1.07 (0.90-1.28; p=0.44). After a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the overall survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab-FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1.27 (1.03-1.57; p=0.02), and for bevacizumab-XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1.15 (0.93-1.42; p=0.21). The 573 patients with high-risk stage II cancer were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were neutropenia (FOLFOX4: 477 [42%] of 1126 patients, bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 416 [36%] of 1145 patients, and bevacizumab-XELOX: 74 [7%] of 1135 patients), diarrhoea (110 [10%], 135 [12%], and 181 [16%], respectively), and hypertension (12 [1%], 122 [11%], and 116 [10%], respectively). Serious adverse events were more common in the bevacizumab groups (bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 297 [26%]; bevacizumab-XELOX: 284 [25%]) than in the FOLFOX4 group (226 [20%]). Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving FOLFOX4, two receiving bevacizumab-FOLFOX4, and five receiving bevacizumab-XELOX. Interpretation: Bevacizumab does not prolong disease-free survival when added to adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III colon cancer. Overall survival data suggest a potential detrimental effect with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in these patients. On the basis of these and other data, we do not recommend the use of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with curatively resected stage III colon cancer.

A phase I study of the oral platinum agent satraplatin in sequential combination with capecitabine in the treatment of patients with advanced solid malignancies.

Abstract Background. The broad spectrum of antitumor activity of both the oral platinum analogue satraplatin (S) and capecitabine (C), along with the advantage of their oral administration, prompted a clinical study aimed to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination. Patients and methods. Four dose levels of S (mg/m(2)/day) and C (mg/m(2)/day) were evaluated in adult patients with advanced solid tumors: 60/1650, 80/1650, 60/2000, 70/2000; a course consisted of 28 days with sequential administration of S (days 1-5) and C (days 8-21) followed by one week rest. Results. Thirty-seven patients were treated, 24 in the dose escalation and 13 in the expansion phase; at the MTD, defined at S 70/C 2000, two patients presented dose limiting toxicities: lack of recovery of neutropenia by day 42 and nausea with dose skip of C. Most frequent toxicities were nausea (57%), diarrhea (51%), neutropenia (46%), anorexia, fatigue, vomiting (38% each). Two partial responses were observed in platinum sensitive ovarian cancer and one in prostate cancer. Conclusion. At S 70/C 2000 the combination of sequential S and C is tolerated with manageable toxicities; its evaluation in platinum and fluorouracil sensitive tumor types is worthwhile because of the easier administration and lack of nephro- and neurotoxicity as compared to parent compounds.

Oral cancer treatments and adherence: medication event monitoring system assessment for capecitabine

Background: Oncological treatments are traditionally administered via intravenous injection by qualified personnel. Oral formulas which are developing rapidly are preferred by patients and facilitate administration however they may increase non-adherence. In this study 4 common oral chemotherapeutics are given to 50 patients, who are still in the process of inclusion, divided into 4 groups. The aim is to evaluate adherence and offer these patients interdisciplinary support with the joint help of doctors and pharmacists. We present here the results for capecitabine. Materials and Methods: The final goal is to evaluate adhesion in 50 patients split into 4 groups according to oral treatments (letrozole/exemestane, imatinib/sunitinib, capecitabine and temozolomide) using persistence and quality of execution as parameters. These parameters are evaluated using a medication event monitoring system (MEMS®) in addition to routine oncological visits and semi-structured interviews. Patients were monitored for the entire duration of treatment up to a maximum of 1 year. Patient satisfaction was assessed at the end of the monitoring period using a standardized questionary. Results: Capecitabine group included 2 women and 8 men with a median age of 55 years (range: 36−77 years) monitored for an average duration of 100 days (range: 5-210 days). Persistence was 98% and quality of execution 95%. 5 patients underwent cyclic treatment (2 out of 3 weeks) and 5 patients continuous treatment. Toxicities higher than grade 1 were grade 2−3 hand-foot syndrome in 1 patient and grade 3 acute coronary syndrome in 1 patient both without impact on adherence. Patients were satisfied with the interviews undergone during the study (57% useful, 28% very useful, 15% useless) and successfully integrated the MEMS® in their daily lives (57% very easily, 43% easily) according to the results obtained by questionary at the end of the monitoring period. Conclusion: Persistence and quality of execution observed in our Capecitabine group of patients were excellent and better than expected compared to previously published studies. The interdisciplinary approach allowed us to better identify and help patients with toxicities to maintain adherence. Overall patients were satisfied with the global interdisciplinary follow-up. With longer follow up better evaluation of our method and its impact will be possible. Interpretation of the results of patients in the other groups of this ongoing trial will provide us information for a more detailed analysis.

Sorafenib in Combination With Capecitabine: An Oral Regimen for Patients With HER2-Negative Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose Sorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic/antiproliferative activity. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIB trial assessed sorafenib with capecitabine for locally advanced or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative breast cancer. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to first-or second-line capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) orally twice a day for days 1 to 14 of every 21-day cycle with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice a day or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results In total, 229 patients were enrolled. The addition of sorafenib to capecitabine resulted in a significant improvement in PFS versus placebo (median, 6.4 v 4.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.81; P = .001) with sorafenib favored across subgroups, including first-line (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.82) and second-line (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.04) treatment. There was no significant improvement for overall survival (median, 22.2 v 20.9 months; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.23; P = .42) and overall response (38% v 31%; P = .25). Toxicities (sorafenib v placebo) of any grade included rash (22% v 8%), diarrhea (58% v 30%), mucosal inflammation (33% v 21%), neutropenia (13% v 4%), hypertension (18% v 12%), and hand-foot skin reaction/hand-foot syndrome (HFSR/HFS; 90% v 66%); grade 3 to 4 toxicities were comparable between treatment arms except HFSR/HFS (44% v 14%). Reasons for discontinuation in the sorafenib and placebo arms included disease progression (63% v 82%, respectively), adverse events (20% v 9%, respectively), and death (0% v 1%, respectively). Conclusion Addition of sorafenib to capecitabine improved PFS in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The dose of sorafenib used in this trial resulted in unacceptable toxicity for many patients. A phase III confirmatory trial has been initiated with a reduced sorafenib dose.

Adhésion thérapeutique en oncologie : persistance, qualité d'exécution et satisfaction des patients sous traitement oral et MEMS®

Introduction: en oncologie apparaissent sur le marché depuis quelques années de nouveaux traitements en formulation orale facilitant l'administration et améliorant la qualité de vie du patient mais augmentant le risque de non adhésion et d'erreurs de posologie. L'observation par MEMS® (Medication Event Monitoring System) permet le suivi et l'encadrement du traitement oral et par le biais d'entretiens semi structurés menés par le pharmacien, ouvre la discussion sur les problèmes révélés par cette prise en charge. Méthode: étude non randomisée prospective uni centrique regroupant 50 patients inclus dans 3 groupes de traitements oncologiques oraux courants (capecitabine, letrozole/exemestane, imatinib/sunitinib) bénéficiant d'un suivi oncologique classique et équipés d'un MEMS® pour un an maximum. La persistance et la qualité d'exécution sont les deux paramètres mesurés grâce aux données récoltées électroniquement. Les entretiens sont dédiés à la prévention de la non adhésion et à la gestion des effets secondaires médicamenteux. La satisfaction est évaluée par un questionnaire à la fin du suivi. Résultats: à ce jour 38 patients ont été inclus dans l'étude. Les données complètes sont disponibles pour les 19 premiers patients dont 10 sous capecitabine et 9 sous letrozole/exemestane. Dans ce collectif l'âge médian est de 66 ans avec une majorité de femmes (11:8). La persistance à 10 jours est de 85% et la qualité d'exécution de 99%. Les toxicités observées supérieures à grade 1 sont 1 syndrome mains-pieds (G3) et 1 syndrome coronarien aigu (G3). Le questionnaire de fin de suivi relève une satisfaction de 85% des patients pour les entretiens proposés (57% utiles, 28% très utiles, 15% inutiles) et le succès quant à l'intégration du MEMS® dans leur quotidien (57% très facile, 43% facile). Conclusion: la persistance et la qualité d'exécution observées dans notre collectif sont excellentes. La satisfaction retrouvée auprès des patients reflète le besoin d'un soutien complémentaire face à la complexité de la maladie oncologique. La gestion pluridisciplinaire profite tant aux patients qu'au binôme médecin-pharmacien par l'amélioration de la communication globale entre les divers acteurs et par l'identification précoce des risques de non adhésion. La poursuite de cette étude et l'analyse des futures données permettra de mesurer le réel impact de notre intervention et de justifier le bénéfice pour des patients sous traitement similaire.

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.

PURPOSE: 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. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral Cap 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks or until progression. CBR criteria and QOL indicators were assessed over this period. CBR was defined as improvement from baseline for >or= 4 consecutive weeks in pain (pain intensity or analgesic consumption) and Karnofsky performance status, stability in one but improvement in the other, or stability in pain and performance status but improvement in weight. RESULTS: Of 319 patients, 19% treated with GemCap and 20% treated with Gem experienced a CBR, with a median duration of 9.5 and 6.5 weeks, respectively (P < .02); 54% of patients treated with GemCap and 60% treated with Gem had no CBR (remaining patients were not assessable). There was no treatment difference in QOL (n = 311). QOL indicators were improving under chemotherapy (P < .05). These changes differed by the time to failure, with a worsening 1 to 2 months before treatment failure (all P < .05). CONCLUSION: There is no indication of a difference in CBR or QOL between GemCap and Gem. Regardless of their initial condition, some patients experience an improvement in QOL on chemotherapy, followed by a worsening before treatment failure.

Inhibitory Effects Of A Cured Antibacterial Bonding System On Viability And Metabolic Activity Of Oral Bacteria.

To evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of Clearfil SE Protect (CP) and Clearfil SE Bond (CB) after curing and rinsed against five individual oral microorganisms as well as a mixture of bacterial culture prepared from the selected test organisms. Bacterial suspensions were prepared from single species of Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus, Streptococcus gordonii, Actinomyces viscosus and Lactobacillus lactis, as well as mixed bacterial suspensions from these organisms. Dentin bonding system discs (6 mm×2 mm) were prepared, cured, washed and placed on the bacterial suspension of single species or multispecies bacteria for 15, 30 and 60 min. MTT, Live/Dead bacterial viability (antibacterial effect), and XTT (metabolic activity) assays were used to test the two dentin system's antibacterial effect. All assays were done in triplicates and each experiment repeated at least three times. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Scheffe's f-test (5%). Greater than 40% bacteria killing was seen within 15 min, and the killing progressed with increasing time of incubation with CP discs. However, a longer (60 min) period of incubation was required by CP to achieve similar antimicrobial effect against mixed bacterial suspension. CB had no significant effect on the viability or metabolic activity of the test microorganisms when compared to the control bacterial culture. CP was significantly effective in reducing the viability and metabolic activity of the test organisms. The results demonstrated the antimicrobial efficacy of CP both on single and multispecies bacterial culture. CP may be beneficial in reducing bacterial infections in cavity preparations in clinical dentistry.

Perception Of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgeons, Orthodontists And Laypersons In Relation To The Harmony Of The Smile.

Harmony is one of the main objectives in surgical and orthodontic treatment and this harmony must be present in the smile, as well as in the face. The aim of the present study was to assess the perceptions of professionals and laypersons in relation to the harmony of the smile of patients with or without vertical maxillary alterations. Sixty observers (oral and maxillofacial surgeons, orthodontists and laypersons) reported the degree of harmony of six smiles using an objective questionnaire and the participants indicated if there was a need for corrective surgery or not. The classification of observers was recorded on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Mixed regression was used to determine differences between the three groups. Statistically significant differences were found only for the harmony of the smile between the oral and maxillofacial surgeons and laypersons, with laypersons being more critical when assessing the smile. There was no statistical difference between the other groups for the harmony of the smile or the indication of corrective surgery. The patterns of greater or lesser harmony determined by observers during the smile were similar to those found in the literature as the ideal standard in relation to vertical maxillary positioning. Laypersons had a tendency to be more critical in relation to facial harmony than surgeons, although no statistical differences were found in the other groups in relation to the harmony of the smile or indication for the corrective surgery. In addition, the patterns of greater or lesser harmony of the smile determined by the participants were similar to those found in the literature as the ideal standard in relation to vertical maxillary positioning. Overall, the present study demonstrates that adequate interaction between surgeons, orthodontists and laypersons is essential in order to achieve facial harmony with orthodontic and/or surgical treatment. Opinion of specialists and laypersons about the smile in relation to the vertical positioning of the maxilla.

[do Elderly Individuals With A Cognitive Handicap Have Worse Oral Health?].

A comparison of the oral health of elderly people with and without a cognitive handicap was assessed. The cognitive condition, the indices of decayed, missing, filled teeth (DMFT), decayed, filled roots (DFR), the need for dental treatment, the presence of plaque (P), calculus (C), the community periodontal index (CPI), the rate of periodontal attachment loss (PAL), edentulism, prosthetic use and the need for prosthetics were evaluated in a complex probabilistic sample by conglomerates of the elderly (65-74 years). PASW(r) 17.0 was used for the statistical analyses with correction for the design effect, applying the Mann Whitney and chi-square test with 95% reliability. A total of 736 elderly individuals were interviewed and examined. Those with cognitive impairment had higher average DMFT, DFR and lower average healthy sextant CPI, a lower prevalence of sextants without plaque/calculus, use of prosthetics and higher prevalence of edentulism and need for prosthetics. Elderly individuals with a cognitive handicap had poorer oral health.