Cisplatin has proven to be the most active single agent in the treatment of metastatic and recurrent squamous cell cancer of the cervix. In a previous southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) pilot study, the addition of cisplatin to a mitomycin-C, vincristine, and bleomycin (MVB) regimen resulted in a relatively high percentage of durable complete responses. To gain more experience with cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens, the SWOG initiated a phase II randomized trial of cisplatin, mitomycin-C plus cisplatin (MC), and MVB plus cisplatin (MVBC) in 119 patients with advanced squamous cell cancer of the cervix and no prior chemotherapy exposure. Because of slow patient accrual early in the trial, the cisplatin arm was discontinued. Five patients were declared ineligible according to protocol criteria. The three treatment groups were relatively well matched for age, prior radiation exposure, and sites of measurable disease. The overall objective response rates for cisplatin, MC, and MVBC treated patients were 33%, 25%, and 22%, respectively. Median response durations were greater than 6 months. Median survival durations associated with cisplatin, MC, and MVBC treatment were 17.0, 7.0, and 6.9 months, respectively. There were no drug-related deaths. Severe or life-threatening leukopenia and thrombocytopenia were observed in 18% to 24% of patients treated with MVBC and MC, but in none of those receiving cisplatin alone. We conclude that the low response rates and short durations of both response and survival observed in patients randomized to the two chemotherapy combinations suggest that only enhanced toxicity was gained through the addition of mitomycin-C or MVB to cisplatin in patients with advanced cervix cancer.
A total of 211 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (168 with tumors refractory to prior chemotherapy and 43 with no prior chemotherapy) from 33 different Southwest Oncology Group institutions had their tumors sampled and specimens shipped to two central laboratories for drug-sensitivity testing in a human tumor cloning assay. The 168 patients with a prior history of chemotherapy failure (median of four prior chemotherapeutic agents) were treated with the most effective agent(s) found in the cloning assay (23 patients), and those patients whose tumors did not form colonies in vitro or did not manifest any sensitivity to agent(s) were treated with a clinician's choice of agent(s) (101 patients). The remaining 44 of the 168 patients were not treated with chemotherapy because of deteriorating performance status or early death. The complete and partial response rate in patients treated according to assay results was 28% versus 11% for the patients treated according to clinician's choice (P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in survival between the two options (6.25 versus 7 months, respectively). The 43 patients with no history of prior chemotherapy were all treated with standard combination chemotherapy, and their clinical response was compared with their in vitro sensitivity to the same agents. Overall there was a 100% true-positive rate and 100% true-negative rate for the seven evaluable patients. From these data the authors conclude that use of the human tumor cloning assay may increase the response rate but not the survival for selected patients with advanced chemotherapy-refractory ovarian cancer. The study is weakened, however, by the many steps of patient selection necessitated by inadequate tumor colony formation in vitro and the inability to treat all patients (because of early death or a rapid decline in performance status). The assay does appear to be worthy of additional study for predicting response to combination chemotherapy in patients without a prior history of chemotherapy. Finally the use of central chemosensitivity testing laboratories is feasible for testing in vitro predictive assays in a cooperative group setting.
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.