Phase II trial of Oxaliplatin and 5-Fluorouracil/Leucovorin combination in epithelial ovarian carcinoma relapsing within 2 years of platinum-based therapy

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of Oxaliplatin and 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)/Leucovorin (LV) combination in ovarian cancer relapsing within 2 years of prior platinum-based chemotherapy in a phase II trial. Methods Eligible patients had at least one prior platinum-based chemotherapy regimen, elevated CA-125 ≥ 60 IU/l, radiological evidence of disease progression and adequate hepatic, renal and bone marrow function. Patients with raised CA-125 levels alone as marker of disease relapse were not eligible. Oxaliplatin (85 mg/m 2) was given on day 1, and 5-Fluorouracil (370 mg/m 2) and Leucovorin (30 mg) was given on days 1 and 8 of a 14-day cycle. Results Twenty-seven patients were enrolled. The median age was 57 years (range 42-74 years). The median platinum-free interval (PFI) was 5 months (range 0-17 months) with only 30% of patients being platinum sensitive (PFI > 6 months). Six patients (22%) had two prior regimens of chemotherapy. A total of 191 cycles were administered (median 7; range 2-12). All patients were evaluable for toxicity. The following grade 3/4 toxicities were noted: anemia 4%; neutropenia 15%; thrombocytopenia 11%; neurotoxicity 8%; lethargy 4%; diarrhea 4%; hypokalemia 11%; hypomagnesemia 11%. Among 27 enrolled patients, 20 patients were evaluable for response by WHO criteria and 25 patients were evaluable by Rustin's CA-125 criteria. The overall response rate (RR) by WHO criteria was 30% (95% CI: 15- 52) [three complete responses (CRs) and three partial responses (PRs)]. The CA-125 response rate was 56% (95% CI: 37-73). Significantly, a 25% (95% CI: 9-53) radiological and a 50% (95% CI: 28-72) CA-125 response rate were noted in platinum resistant patients (PFI < 6 months). The median response duration was 4 months (range 3-12) and the median overall survival was 10 months. Conclusion Oxaliplatin and 5-Fluorouracil/ Leucovorin combination has a good safety profile and is active in platinum-pretreated advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Outcomes in gastric and junctional cancer using neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy (epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine) and radical surgery

Background The MAGIC/UK Medical Research Council (MRC) trial set the standard of care for treatment of resectable gastric and junctional adenocarcinoma, demonstrating that perioperative chemotherapy with epirubicin, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (ECF) confers a survival benefit over surgery alone. The randomized ECF for advanced and locally advanced esophagogastric cancer (REAL-2) trial showed that, in the metastatic setting, the EOX regimen (epirubicin, oxaliplatin and capecitabine) is as effective as ECF, with a favourable toxicity profile. Methods Consecutive patients with resectable gastric or junctional adenocarcinoma treated with perioperative EOX, between 2007 and 2012, were retrospectively analysed. Results Fifty-nine patients (12 female, 47 male), commenced EOX therapy; 47 underwent surgery. A good pathological response was seen in 34 %, (16/47). Disease recurrence occurred in 19 patients (19/47, 40 %). Median overall survival was 22 months, with 4-year survival of 47 %. Chemotoxicities were consistent with those previously reported for this regimen. Conclusion This study in a high-volume centre demonstrates that EOX in resectable gastric and junctional adenocarcinoma is associated with a reasonable safety profile, and efficacy consistent with that reported for ECF.

Oxaliplatin induces hyperexcitability at motor and autonomic neuromuscular junctions through effects on voltage-gated sodium channels

Oxaliplatin, an effective cytotoxic treatment in combination with 5-fluorouracil for colorectal cancer, is associated with sensory, motor and autonomic neurotoxicity. Motor symptoms include hyperexcitability while autonomic effects include urinary retention, but the cause of these side-effects is unknown. We examined the effects on motor nerve function in the mouse hemidiaphragm and on the autonomic system in the vas deferens. In the mouse diaphragm, oxaliplatin (0.5 mM) induced multiple endplate potentials (EPPs) following a single stimulus, and was associated with an increase in spontaneous miniature EPP frequency. In the vas deferens, spontaneous excitatory junction potential frequency was increased after 30 min exposure to oxaliplatin; no changes in resting Ca(2+) concentration in nerve terminal varicosities were observed, and recovery after stimuli trains was unaffected.In both tissues, an oxaliplatin-induced increase in spontaneous activity was prevented by the voltage-gated Na(+) channel blocker tetrodotoxin (TTX). Carbamazepine (0.3 mM) also prevented multiple EPPs and the increase in spontaneous activity in both tissues. In diaphragm, beta-pompilidotoxin (100 microM), which slows Na(+) channel inactivation, induced multiple EPPs similar to oxaliplatin's effect. By contrast, blockers of K(+) channels (4-aminopyridine and apamin) did not replicate oxaliplatin-induced hyperexcitability in the diaphragm. The prevention of hyperexcitability by TTX blockade implies that oxaliplatin acts on nerve conduction rather than by effecting repolarisation. The similarity between beta-pompilidotoxin and oxaliplatin suggests that alteration of voltage-gated Na(+) channel kinetics is likely to underlie the acute neurotoxic actions of oxaliplatin.

A Phase I and Pharmacokinetic Study of OSI-7904L, a Liposomal Thymidylate Synthase Inhibitor in Combination with Oxaliplatin in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Cancer.

OSI-7904L is a liposomal formulation of a potent thymidylate synthase (TS) inhibitor. This phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK) of OSI-7904L administered in combination with oxaliplatin every 21 days in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. METHOD: A 3+3 study design was utilized at predefined dose levels. Polymorphisms in the TS enhancer region and XPD enzyme were investigated as potential predictors of efficacy and toxicity. RESULTS: Fourteen patients received 76 cycles of treatment. At the highest dose level (OSI-7904L 9 mg/m(2), oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2)) investigated, one of nine patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 oral mucositis with cycle 1 and five further patients required dose reductions. The toxicity profile of stomatitis, diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, sensory neuropathy and skin rash was consistent with that expected for a TS inhibitor/oxaliplatin combination regimen. PK analysis showed high interpatient variability with no detectable interaction between OSI-7904L and oxaliplatin. Partial radiological responses were documented in two patients. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended regimen for further investigation is OSI-7904L 9 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2).

Chemotherapy-Induced CXC-Chemokine/CXC-Chemokine Receptor Signaling in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Cells Confers Resistance to Oxaliplatin through Potentiation of Nuclear Factor-κB Transcription and Evasion of Apoptosis

Constitutive activation of nuclear factor (NF)-kappa B is linked with the intrinsic resistance of androgen-independent prostate cancer (AIPC) to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Interleukin-8 (CXCL8) is a transcriptional target of NF-kappa B whose expression is elevated in AIPC. This study sought to determine the significance of CXCL8 signaling in regulating the response of AIPC cells to oxaliplatin, a drug whose activity is reportedly sensitive to NF-kappa B activity. Administration of oxaliplatin to PC3 and DU145 cells increased NF-kappa B activity, promoting antiapoptotic gene transcription. In addition, oxaliplatin increased the transcription and secretion of CXCL8 and the related CXC-chemokine CXCL1 and increased the transcription and expression of CXC-chemokine receptors, especially CXC-chemokine receptor (CXCR) 2, which transduces the biological effects of CXCL8 and CXCL1. Stimulation of AIPC cells with CXCL8 potentiated NF-kappa B activation in AIPC cells, increasing the transcription and expression of NF-kappa B-regulated antiapoptotic genes of the Bcl-2 and IAP families. Coadministration of a CXCR2-selective antagonist, AZ10397767 (Bioorg Med Chem Lett 18:798-803, 2008), attenuated oxaliplatin-induced NF-kappa B activation, increased oxaliplatin cytotoxicity, and potentiated oxaliplatin-induced apoptosis in AIPC cells. Pharmacological inhibition of NF-kappa B or RNA interference-mediated suppression of Bcl-2 and survivin was also shown to sensitize AIPC cells to oxaliplatin. Our results further support NF-kappa B activity as an important determinant of cancer cell sensitivity to oxaliplatin and identify the induction of autocrine CXCR2 signaling as a novel mode of resistance to this drug.

The addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer: results of the MRC COIN trial.

Background: In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival.
Methods: In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448.
Findings: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3—29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4—30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87—1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0—12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1—13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82—1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5—27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5—24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5—31·7).
Interpretation: This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended.

Cells deficient in the base excision repair protein, DNA polymerase beta, are hypersensitive to oxaliplatin chemotherapy

A significant proportion of human cancers overexpress DNA polymerase beta (Pol beta), the major DNA polymerase involved in base excision repair. The underlying mechanism and biological consequences of overexpression of this protein are unknown. We examined whether Pol beta, expressed at levels found in tumor cells, is involved in the repair of DNA damage induced by oxaliplatin treatment and whether the expression status of this protein alters the sensitivity of cells to oxaliplatin. DNA damage induced by oxaliplatin treatment of HCT116 and HT29 colon cancer cells was observed to be associated with the stabilization of Pol beta protein on chromatin. In comparison with HCT116 colon cancer cells, isogenic oxaliplatin-resistant (HCT-OR) cells were found to have higher constitutive levels of Pol beta protein, faster in vitro repair of a DNA substrate containing a single nucleotide gap and faster repair of 1,2-GG oxaliplatin adduct levels in cells. In HCT-OR cells, small interfering RNA knockdown of Pol beta delayed the repair of oxaliplatin-induced DNA damage. In a different model system, Pol beta-deficient fibroblasts were less able to repair 1,2-GG oxaliplatin adducts and were hypersensitive to oxaliplatin treatment compared with isogenic Pol beta-expressing cells. Consistent with previous studies, Pol beta-deficient mouse fibroblasts were not hypersensitive to cisplatin treatment. These data provide the first link between oxaliplatin sensitivity and DNA repair involving Pol beta. They demonstrate that Pol beta modulates the sensitivity of cells to oxaliplatin treatment. Oncogene (2010) 29, 463-468; doi:10.1038/onc.2009.327; published online 19 October 2009

Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial

Background: When cure is impossible, cancer treatment should focus on both length and quality of life. Maximisation of time without toxic effects could be one effective strategy to achieve both of these goals. The COIN trial assessed preplanned treatment holidays in advanced colorectal cancer to achieve this aim. Methods: COIN was a randomised controlled trial in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. Patients received either continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination (arm A), continuous chemotherapy plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent (arm C) chemotherapy. In arms A and B, treatment continued until development of progressive disease, cumulative toxic effects, or the patient chose to stop. In arm C, patients who had not progressed at their 12-week scan started a chemotherapy-free interval until evidence of disease progression, when the same treatment was restarted. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and B is described in a companion paper. Here, we compare arms A and C, with the primary objective of establishing whether overall survival on intermittent therapy was non-inferior to that on continuous therapy, with a predefined non-inferiority boundary of 1·162. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. Findings: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to continuous and 815 to intermittent therapy). Median survival in the ITT population (n=815 in both groups) was 15·8 months (IQR 9·4—26·1) in arm A and 14·4 months (8·0—24·7) in arm C (hazard ratio [HR] 1·084, 80% CI 1·008—1·165). In the per-protocol population (arm A, n=467; arm C, n=511), median survival was 19·6 months (13·0—28·1) in arm A and 18·0 months (12·1—29·3) in arm C (HR 1·087, 0·986—1·198). The upper limits of CIs for HRs in both analyses were greater than the predefined non-inferiority boundary. Preplanned subgroup analyses in the per-protocol population showed that a raised baseline platelet count, defined as 400 000 per µL or higher (271 [28%] of 978 patients), was associated with poor survival with intermittent chemotherapy: the HR for comparison of arm C and arm A in patients with a normal platelet count was 0·96 (95% CI 0·80—1·15, p=0·66), versus 1·54 (1·17—2·03, p=0·0018) in patients with a raised platelet count (p=0·0027 for interaction). In the per-protocol population, more patients on continuous than on intermittent treatment had grade 3 or worse haematological toxic effects (72 [15%] vs 60 [12%]), whereas nausea and vomiting were more common on intermittent treatment (11 [2%] vs 43 [8%]). Grade 3 or worse peripheral neuropathy (126 [27%] vs 25 [5%]) and hand—foot syndrome (21 [4%] vs 15 [3%]) were more frequent on continuous than on intermittent treatment. Interpretation: Although this trial did not show non-inferiority of intermittent compared with continuous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer in terms of overall survival, chemotherapy-free intervals remain a treatment option for some patients with advanced colorectal cancer, offering reduced time on chemotherapy, reduced cumulative toxic effects, and improved quality of life. Subgroup analyses suggest that patients with normal baseline platelet counts could gain the benefits of intermittent chemotherapy without detriment in survival, whereas those with raised baseline platelet counts have impaired survival and quality of life with intermittent chemotherapy and should not receive a treatment break.

Oxaliplatin/capecitabine versus oxaliplatin/infusional 5-FU in advanced colorectal cancer: The MRC COIN Trial.

Background:

COIN compared first-line continuous chemotherapy with the same chemotherapy given intermittently or with cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC).


Methods:

Choice between oxaliplatin/capecitabine (OxCap) and oxaliplatin/leucovorin (LV)/infusional 5-FU (OxFU) was by physician and patient choice and switching regimen was allowed. We compared OxCap with OxFU and OxCap+cetuximab with OxFU+cetuximab retrospectively in patients and examined efficacy, toxicity profiles and the effect of mild renal impairment.


Results:

In total, 64% of 2397 patients received OxCap(±cetuximab). Overall survival, progression free survival and overall response rate were similar between OxCap and OxFU but rate of radical surgeries was higher for OxFU. Progression free survival was longer for OxFU+cetuximab compared with OxCap+cetuximab but other efficacy measures were similar. Oxaliplatin/LV/infusional 5-FU (±cetuximab) was associated with more mucositis and infection whereas OxCap(±cetuximab) caused more gastrointestinal toxicities and palmar-plantar erythema. In total, 118 patients switched regimen, mainly due to toxicity; only 16% came off their second regimen due to intolerance. Patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) 50–80?ml?min-1 on OxCap(±cetuximab) or OxFU+cetuximab had more dose modifications than those with better renal function.


Conclusions:

Overall, OxFU and OxCap are equally effective in treating aCRC. However, the toxicity profiles differ and switching from one regimen to the other for poor tolerance is a reasonable option. Patients with CrCl 50–80?ml?min-1 on both regimens require close toxicity monitoring.

The CXCR2 antagonist, SCH-527123, shows antitumor activity and sensitizes cells to oxaliplatin in preclinical colon cancer models

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Recent studies showed that interleukin-8 (IL-8) and its receptors (CXCR1 and CXCR2) are significantly upregulated in both the tumor and its microenvironment, and act as key regulators of proliferation, angiogenesis, and metastasis. Our previous study showed that IL-8 overexpression in colorectal cancer cells triggers the upregulation of the CXCR2-mediated proliferative pathway. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the CXCR2 antagonist, SCH-527123, inhibits colorectal cancer proliferation and if it can sensitize colorectal cancer cells to oxaliplatin both in vitro and in vivo. SCH-527123 showed concentration-dependent antiproliferative effects in HCT116, Caco2, and their respective IL-8-overexpressing variants colorectal cancer cell lines. Moreover, SCH-527123 was able to suppress CXCR2-mediated signal transduction as shown through decreased phosphorylation of the NF-κB/mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)/AKT pathway. These findings corresponded with decreased cell migration and invasion, while increased apoptosis in colorectal cancer cell lines. In vivo results verified that SCH-527123 treatment decreased tumor growth and microvessel density when compared with vehicle-treated tumors. Importantly, these preclinical studies showed that the combination of SCH-527123 and oxaliplatin resulted in a greater decrease in cell proliferation, tumor growth, apoptosis, and angiogenesis that was superior to single-agent treatment. Taken together, these findings suggest that targeting CXCR2 may block tumor proliferation, migration, invasion, and angiogenesis. In addition, CXCR2 blockade may further sensitize colorectal cancer to oxaliplatin treatment.