No abstract

No abstract

Our results indicate that (1) the cytotoxicity of irinotecan was likely due to the drug itself and not to its metabolite SN-38, and (2) that irinotecan uptake was more predictive of its cytotoxicity than topoisomerase I availability and activity in these two cell lines.

In this study, paclitaxel or docetaxel combined with doxorubicin were not significantly different in terms of QoL scores and efficacy, but had different toxicity profiles.

BackgroundChemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains a major problem that seriously impairs the quality of life (QoL) in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy regimens. Complementary medicines, including homeopathy, are used by many patients with cancer, usually alongside with conventional treatment. A randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of a complex homeopathic medicine, Cocculine, in the control of CINV in non-metastatic breast cancer patients treated by standard chemotherapy regimens.MethodsChemotherapy-naïve patients with non-metastatic breast cancer scheduled to receive 6 cycles of chemotherapy including at least three initial cycles of FAC 50, FEC 100 or TAC were randomized to receive standard anti-emetic treatment plus either a complex homeopathic remedy (Cocculine, registered in France for treatment of nausea and travel sickness) or the matching placebo (NCT00409071 clinicaltrials.gov). The primary endpoint was nausea score measured after the 1st chemotherapy course using the FLIE questionnaire (Functional Living Index for Emesis) with 5-day recall. Secondary endpoints were: vomiting measured by the FLIE score, nausea and vomiting measured by patient self-evaluation (EVA) and investigator recording (NCI-CTC AE V3.0) and treatment compliance.ResultsFrom September 2005 to January 2008, 431 patients were randomized: 214 to Cocculine (C) and 217 to placebo (P). Patient characteristics were well-balanced between the 2 arms. Overall, compliance to study treatments was excellent and similar between the 2 arms. A total of 205 patients (50.9%; 103 patients in the placebo and 102 in the homeopathy arms) had nausea FLIE scores > 6 indicative of no impact of nausea on quality of life during the 1st chemotherapy course. There was no difference between the 2 arms when primary endpoint analysis was performed by chemotherapy stratum; or in the subgroup of patients with susceptibility to nausea and vomiting before inclusion. In addition, nausea, vomiting and global emesis FLIE scores were not statistically different at any time between the two study arms. The frequencies of severe (Grade ≥ 2) nausea and vomiting were low in our study (nausea: P: 17.6% vs C: 15.7%, p=0.62; vomiting: P: 10.8% vs C: 12.0%, p=0.72 during the first course).ConclusionThis double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomised Phase III study showed that adding a complex homeopathic medicine (Cocculine) to standard anti-emetic prophylaxis does not improve the control of CINV in early breast cancer patients.

Patients at high risk for RBC transfusion according to the ELYPSE model could be given prophylactic EPO with significantly reduced RBC transfusions and no significant impact on side-effects, progression-free survival, and OS.

Advanced ovarian carcinoma in early progression (o6 months) (AOCEP) is considered resistant to most cytotoxic drugs. Gemcitabine (GE) and oxaliplatin (OXA) have shown single-agent activity in relapsed ovarian cancer. Their combination was tested in patients with AOCEP in phase II study. Fifty patients pre-treated with platinum -taxane received q3w administration of OXA (100 mg m -2 , d1) and GE (1000 mg m -2 , d1, d8, 100-min infusion). Patient characteristics were a : median age 64 years (range 46 -79),and 1 (84%) or 2 (16%) earlier lines of treatment. Haematological toxicity included grade 3 -4 neutropaenia (33%), anaemia (8%), and thrombocytopaenia (19%). Febrile neutropaenia occurred in 3%. Non-haematological toxicity included grade 2 -3 nausea or vomiting (34%), grade 3 fatigue (25%),and grade 2 alopecia (24%). Eighteen (37%) patients experienced response. Median progression-free (PF) and overall survivals (OS) were 4.6 and 11.4 months, respectively. The OXA -GE combination has high activity and acceptable toxicity in AOCEP patients. A comparison of the doublet OXA -GE with single-agent treatment is warranted.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of capecitabine plus docetaxel (XT) versus epirubicin plus docetaxel (ET) as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods: Patients with no prior chemotherapy for MBC were randomized to 3-weekly cycles of either XT (capecitabine 1,000 mg/m² twice daily, days 1–14; docetaxel 75 mg/m², day 1) or ET (epirubicin 75 mg/m², day 1; docetaxel 75 mg/m², day 1). The primary endpoint was non-progression rate 6 months after randomization. The planned sample size was 106 patients based on a randomized, phase II selection design. Results: Between April 2004 and January 2007, 68 patients were randomized, giving 82% power to select the best regimen according to a 6-month non-progression rate. Slow accrual led to premature study termination. Baseline characteristics were generally well balanced between arms. The 6-month non-progression rates were 75.8% with XT versus 65.7% with ET (p = 0.36). After 42 months’ median follow-up, median progression-free survival was 12.4 versus 6.8 months, respectively (p = 0.040). The safety profiles were consistent with previous experience. Conclusion: Further larger studies are warranted to validate these results. Despite more grade 3 hand-foot syndrome, first-line XT may be a valid alternative to ET, potentially improving efficacy.