PURPOSE Although gene expression profiling is a promising diagnostic technique to determine the tissue of origin for patients with cancer of unknown primary site (CUP), no clinical trial has evaluated yet site-specific therapy directed by this approach compared with empirical chemotherapy. We therefore performed a randomized study to assess whether such site-specific therapy improves outcome compared with empirical chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with CUP. PATIENTS AND METHODS Comprehensive gene expression profiling was performed by microarray analysis, and an established algorithm was applied to predict tumor origin. Patients with CUP were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard site-specific therapy or empirical paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC). The primary end point was 1-year survival rate. RESULTS One hundred thirty patients were randomly assigned and had sufficient biopsy tissue for molecular analysis. Efficacy analysis was performed for 50 and 51 patients in the site-specific therapy and empirical PC arms, respectively. Cancer types most commonly predicted were pancreatic (21%), gastric (21%), and lymphoma (20%). The 1-year survival rate was 44.0% and 54.9% for site-specific treatment and empirical PC ( P = .264), respectively. Median overall and progression-free survival were 9.8 and 5.1 months, respectively, for site-specific treatment versus 12.5 and 4.8 months for empirical PC ( P = .896 and .550, respectively). Median overall survival (16.7 v 10.6 months; P = .116) and progression-free survival (5.5 v 3.9 months; P = .018) were better for predicted more-responsive than less-responsive tumor types. CONCLUSION Site-specific treatment that was based on microarray profiling did not result in a significant improvement in 1-year survival compared with empirical PC, although prediction of the original site seemed to be of prognostic value.
Background: TAS-102 consists of α, α, α-trifluorothymidine (TFT) and an inhibitor of thymidine phosphorylase (TPI). We conducted a dose-escalation phase I study in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumours. Methods: TAS-102 was administered twice daily on days 1–5 and days 8–12 in a 28-day cycle to patients with solid tumours refractory to standard chemotherapy, to determine its maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and pharmacokinetics (PKs). MTD was evaluated in cycle 1. Results: Safety and PKs were evaluated in 21 patients treated with TAS-102 at 30, 40, 50, 60, or 70 mg m −2 per day. DLTs, such as grade 4 leucopenia, grade 4 neutropenia, and grade 4 thrombocytopenia, were observed in two patients at doses of 30 and 70 mg m −2 . α, α, α-trifluorothymidine and TPI exposures increased dose dependently, and the percentage of decrease in neutrophil count and TFT exposure were significantly correlated. The disease control rate was 50.0% with a median progression-free survival of 2.4 months in 18 colorectal cancer patients. The dose of TAS-102 was not increased above 70 mg m −2 per day because of the increased tendency for grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, and 70 mg m −2 per day was the recommended dose for phase II studies. Conclusions: TAS-102 at 70 mg m −2 per day was tolerated in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumours. Phase II studies are ongoing in patients with colorectal cancer.
Weekly paclitaxel seems to be active as second-line chemotherapy against metastatic and recurrent gastric cancer. Further study is needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of weekly paclitaxel.
IMPORTANCEAlthough profiling of gene expression and gene alterations by next-generation sequencing (NGS) to predict the primary tumor site and guide molecularly targeted therapy might be expected to improve clinical outcomes for cancer of unknown primary site (CUP), to our knowledge, no clinical trial has previously evaluated this approach.OBJECTIVE To assess the clinical use of site-specific treatment, including molecularly targeted therapy based on NGS results, for patients with CUP.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This phase 2 clinical trial was conducted at 19 institutions in Japan and enrolled 111 previously untreated patients with the unfavorable subset of CUP between March 2015 and January 2018, with 97 patients being included in the efficacy analysis. Eligibility criteria included a diagnosis of unfavorable CUP after mandatory examinations, including pathological evaluation by immunohistochemistry, chest-abdomen-pelvis computed tomography scans, and a positron emission tomography scan.INTERVENTIONS RNA and DNA sequencing for selected genes was performed simultaneously to evaluate gene expression and gene alterations, respectively. A newly established algorithm was applied to predict tumor origin based on these data. Patients received site-specific therapy, including molecularly targeted therapy, according to the predicted site and detected gene alterations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was 1-year survival probability. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate, safety, efficacy according to predicted site, and frequency of gene alterations. RESULTSOf 97 participants, 49 (50.5%) were women and the median (range) age was 64 (21-81) years. The cancer types most commonly predicted were lung (21 [21%]), liver (15 [15%]), kidney (15 [15%]), and colorectal (12 [12%]) cancer. The most frequent gene alterations were in TP53 (45 [46.4%]), KRAS (19 [19.6%]), and CDKN2A (18 [18.6%]). The 1-year survival probability, median OS, and median PFS were 53.1% (95% CI, 42.6%-62.5%), 13.7 months (95% CI, 9.3-19.7 months), and 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.3-7.1 months), respectively. Targetable EGFR mutations in tumor specimens were detected in 5 patients with predicted non-small-cell lung cancer (5.2%), 4 of whom were treated with afatinib; 2 of these patients achieved a durable PFS of longer than 6 months.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study's findings suggest that site-specific treatment, including molecularly targeted therapy based on profiling gene expression and gene alterations by NGS, can contribute to treating patients with the unfavorable subset of CUP.
BackgroundStandard treatment for unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) without distant metastasis is definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), in which the incidence of esophageal fistula (EF) is reported to be 10–12%. An ad hoc analysis of JCOG0303, a phase II/III trial of dCRT for patients with unresectable ESCC (including non-T4b), suggested that esophageal stenosis is a risk factor for EF. However, risk factors for EF in patients limited to T4b ESCC treated with dCRT have yet to be clarified. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for EF in T4b thoracic ESCC treated with dCRT.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of consecutive T4b thoracic ESCC patients who were treated with dCRT (cisplatin and fluorouracil) at Shizuoka Cancer Center between April 2004 and September 2015.ResultsExcluding 8 patients with esophageal fistula clearly attributable to other iatrogenic interventions, the data of 116 patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Esophageal fistula was observed in 28 patients (24%). Although the fistula was closed in 5 patients, overall survival was significantly shorter in patients who experienced esophageal fistula (8.0 vs. 26.8 months; p < 0.0001). Among four potential variables extracted in univariate analysis, namely, total circumferential lesion, elevated CRP level, elevated white blood cell count, and anemia, the first two were revealed as risk factors for esophageal fistula in multivariate analysis.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that total circumferential lesion and CRP ≥1.00 mg/dL are risk factors for esophageal fistula in T4b thoracic ESCC treated with dCRT.Trial registrationThis study was retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4486-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
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.