Conservative treatment of esophageal cancer with radiation therapy has afforded few long-term survivors. In order to improve outcome, patients with locoregional disease were treated using a combined modality approach. Patients were treated with chemotherapy consisting of a 96-hour continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), 1,000 mg/m2/d, days 1 to 4 and days 29 to 32; cisplatin 75 mg/m2, day 1 and 29; and radiation 3,000 rad, days 1 to 19. In the absence of progressive disease, patients underwent esophagectomy. One hundred twenty-eight patients were registered of whom 113 were eligible and 106 were evaluable. Toxicity included gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, mucositis, and myelosuppression. One hundred two patients completed chemoradiotherapy. Following its completion, 11 patients refused surgery, six were considered poor surgical risks, and 14 had progressive disease. Of the remaining 71 patients, 16 had unresectable disease, 13 had residual disease which was incompletely resected, 24 had disease which could be completely resected, and 18 were without disease on pathologic examination. The overall operability rate was 63% and the overall resectability rate, 49%. Surgical mortality was 11%. Eighty-nine of 113 eligible patients have died, with a median survival of 12 months and a 2-year survival of 28%. The median postsurgical survival for all 71 patients was 14 months and was 32 months for those patients attaining complete remission (CR). Combined modality therapy remains an investigational approach. Attempts should be directed at increasing response rate to initial therapy. A randomized comparison between combined modality treatment and radiation therapy is necessary to definitively determine the usefulness of this more aggressive approach.
The term soft tissue sarcoma refers to a large variety of malignant tumors arising in extraskeletal connective tissues that connect, support, and surround discrete anatomic structures. All visceral organs also contain a connective stroma that can undergo malignant transformation. Because of the histological similarities of this group of tumors and their relative rarity, treatment prescriptions for patients that have disseminated disease are most often uniform. In this study, we asked the question whether adding a third drug (cyclophosphamide or actinomycin D) to Adriamycin (Adr [Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH])-(3,3-dimethyl-1-triazeno)- imidazole-4-carboxamide (DTIC) would improve the response rate and/or survival. A unique feature of this cooperative group clinical trial was the mandatory pathology review of the histological material. All patients of the Southwest Oncology Group between June 1, 1976, and November 17, 1979, who had a biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of a soft tissue sarcoma with convincing clinical or biopsy-documented evidence of metastatic disease were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized to receive (1) Adr, 60 mg/m2 intravenously, day 1, and DTIC, 250 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (104 patients); (2) Adr and DTIC as in (1) and cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m2, day 1 (112 patients); or (3) Adr and DTIC as in (1) and actinomycin D, 1.2 mg/m2, day 1, (119 patients). There was no statistically significant difference in response rates (33%, 34%, and 24%) (P = .25). Median durations of response were 31 weeks in the Adr-DTIC arm, 26 weeks in the cyclophosphamide-DTIC-Adr arm, and 23 weeks in the Adr-DTIC-Actinomycin D arm (P = .78). Median durations of survival were 37, 42, and 50 weeks, respectively. Again, no statistically significant differences were observed (P = .59). Toxicities from each of these treatment arms were formidable and were equivalent. Prognostic factor analysis showed a prognosis based on bone marrow reserve, sex, and pathology subtype favorable to patients.
Previous studies showed that downregulation of pyrimidine salvage underlies resistance against 5-azacytidine (AZA), indicating an important role for de novo pyrimidine synthesis in AZA resistance. Because de novo pyrimidine synthesis is inhibited by the immunomodulator teriflunomide and its pro-drug leflunomide, we examined the effect of combined treatment with AZA and teriflunomide on AZA resistance to develop a novel strategy to cancel and prevent AZA resistance. Teriflunomide markedly inhibited the growth of AZA-resistant human leukemia cell lines (R-U937 and R-HL-60) in comparison with their AZA-sensitive counterparts (U937 and HL-60). In the presence of a non-toxic concentration of teriflunomide (1 μM), AZA induced apoptosis in AZA-resistant cells and leukemia cells from AZA-resistant patients. AZA acted as a DNA methyltransferase 3A inhibitor in AZA-resistant cells in the presence of 1 μM teriflunomide. Although AZA-sensitive cells acquired AZA resistance after continuous treatment with AZA for 42 days, the growth of AZA-sensitive cells continuously treated with the combination of AZA and teriflunomide was significantly inhibited in the presence of AZA, demonstrating that the combined treatment prevented AZA resistance. These results suggest that combined treatment with AZA and teriflunomide can be a novel strategy to overcome AZA resistance.
Small cell lung cancer patients who failed primary systemic therapy or who failed after response were randomly assigned to salvage treatment with etoposide (VP-16) and cisplatin (CDDP) or bis-chloro-ethylnitrosourea, thiotepa, vincristine, and cyclophosphamide (BTOC). Good risk patients were those who had tolerated prior chemotherapy well, those who had not had prior radiation therapy, and those who were 65 years of age or younger. Patients with a history of poor tolerance, prior radiation therapy, or those who were older than 65 years of age were classified as poor risk. Forty-five patients were randomized to the BTOC regimen and 58 to the VP-16/CDDP regimen. The overall remission rate was 13% (13 of 103 patients). Good risk patients treated with the BTOC regimen had a remission rate of 27% (three of 11 patients), which was the same rate as patients treated with the VP-16/CDDP regimen (three of 11 patients). Poor risk patients had remission rates of 9% (three of 34 patients) with the BTOC regimen and 9% (four of 47 patients) with the VP-16/CDDP regimen. The median survival time from the start of therapy was 16 weeks for all patients. BTOC good risk patients had a median survival time of 10 weeks, as compared with 14 weeks for poor risk patients. VP-16/CDDP good risk patients had a median survival time of 35 weeks, as compared with 12 weeks for poor risk patients. Although based on small numbers, the advantage in survival time for good risk patients treated with VP-16/CDDP over those treated with BTOC is statistically significant. Prior exposure to VP-16 did not influence the outcome of patients treated with VP-16/CDDP. Both regimens produced moderate toxicity, but were generally well tolerated. It was concluded that VP-16/CDDP may be a useful salvage treatment for good risk patients, despite its limited remission rate. Also, it was found that BTOC has no value for patients in this setting and that neither regimen helps patients who are poor risk.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.