PurposeWe conducted a cooperative group phase II study to assess antitumor activity and toxicity of sorafenib in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had received prior treatment for their disease.Patient and MethodsPatients were eligible if they had measurable disease and had previously received an anthracycline and/or a taxane in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or metastatic setting. The primary end point of the study was tumor response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). The study was designed in two stages. Sorafenib was administered as 400 mg twice daily on days 1 through 28 of each 4-week cycle.ResultsTwenty-three patients were enrolled with a median age of 54 years (range, 37 to 70 years). Twenty-two (96%) had prior anthracycline treatment and 16 (70%) had prior taxane treatment. Patients received sorafenib for a median of two cycles (range, one to 15 cycles) with a median follow-up of 2.4 years (range, 2.2 to 2.6 years). There were no grade 4 toxicities and few grade 3 toxicities. Among the 20 patients eligible for efficacy analysis, no patients experienced a partial response or complete response per RECIST criteria. Thus, the trial stopped at the end of the first stage per study design. Two patients (10%; 90% CI, 1.8% to 28.3%) achieved stable disease lasting longer than 6 months.ConclusionSorafenib as a single agent, although well tolerated, did not exhibit activity when measured by tumor shrinkage in patients with MBC who had received prior treatment. Further research should focus on combinations with standard therapy and end points more sensitive to effects of targeted agents, such as disease stabilization.
This retrospective study indicates that Ki-67 and ploidy may have stronger prognostic impact on OS and DFS than other parameters investigated after adjusting for stage and tumor grade. Prospective studies to elucidate the mechanism and prognostic significance of these findings are necessary.
The use of PS-341 alone or in combination with gemcitabine did not result in an overall survival and RR better than that expected for gemcitabine alone. Based on the lack of efficacy and the toxicity seen in our trial, there does not appear to be a role for PS-341 in pancreatic adenocarcinoma with either of the schedules used in this trial.
The GBU index may be recommended as a supplementary stratification factor for certain future phase III trials in metastatic lung or colorectal cancer where patient heterogeneity is a particular concern. The GBU represents a relatively modest increase to the cost and patient burden of a clinical trial given the additional control that is achieved over the potentially confounding concomitant to the treatment variable.
This study effectively rules out any clinically meaningful benefit for IFN-gamma as surgical adjuvant treatment for patients with high-risk colon cancer. Although significant enhancement of nonspecific immune function was seen with this dosage administration schedule of IFN-gamma, this was not associated with any demonstrable antitumor effect.
The bolus administration of EP with E following P for the first two cycles of chemotherapy was the most effective regimen, with especially encouraging survival for LD patients.
Purpose
The aims of this trial were to assess the safety and efficacy of two different dosing schedules of irinotecan (CPT-11) in recurrent glioma patients, to assess irinotecan pharmacokinetics in patients on enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) and steroids, and to correlate with toxicity and response to treatment.
Methods
Sixty-four recurrent glioma patients were included in this study. Schedule A patients received irinotecan weekly (125 mg/m2/w) for four out of six weeks. Schedule B patients received irinotecan every three weeks at a dose of 300 mg/m2. A 20% dose reduction was implemented for patients who had received prior nitrosureas. Treatment was continued until unacceptable toxicity, tumor progression or patient withdrawal.
Results
There was no difference in confirmed responses between the two groups (6.3%). PFS at 6 months was 6.25% (2/32 patients) on schedule A and 18.75% (6/32 patients) on schedule B but median OS (5.1 versus 5.5 months), and survival at one year (19%) was similar for both arms. The most common grade 3–4 toxicities on schedules A/B were: thrombocytopenia (15.6%/21.9%), diarrhea (6.3%/12.5%) and nausea and vomiting (0%/15.7%). One toxic death due to infection in the absence of neutropenia occurred in schedule B. EIAEDs reduced SN-38 and CPT-11 area under the curve and increased CPT-11 cleareance. This effect was more prominent in schedule A patients. Steroids did not alter CPT-11 pharmacokinetics in either schedule.
Conclusions
Single agent irinotecan has modest activity in patients with recurrent gliomas, independently of the administration schedule. Irinotecan administration on an every 3 week schedule resulted in longer PFS-6, at the expense of more toxicity. EIAEDs alter CPT-11 pharmacokinetics in this group of patients, and should be taken into consideration when determining optimal dosing.
Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin, at doses of 1000 mg/m(2) and 100 mg/m(2), respectively, showed moderate activity in patients with pancreatic ACA. Based on the results of this study further evaluation of this combination is warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.