Auxiliadora Gómez‐España

PURPOSE: To assess the activity and toxicity of the combination of gemcitabine plus dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) in a randomized, multicenter, phase II study using DTIC alone as a control arm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously treated advanced STS were randomly assigned to receive either fixed-dose rate gemcitabine (10 mg/m2/min) at 1800 mg/m2 followed by DTIC at 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks, or DTIC alone at 1200 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary end point of the study was progression-free rate (PFR) at 3 months. RESULTS: From November 2005 to September 2008, 113 patients were included. PFR at 3 months was 56% for gemcitabine plus DTIC versus 37% for DTIC alone (P = .001). Median progression-free survival was 4.2 months versus 2 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.86; P = .005), and median overall survival was 16.8 months versus 8.2 months (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.90; P = .014); both favored the arm of gemcitabine plus DTIC. Gemcitabine plus DTIC was also associated with a higher objective response or higher stable disease rate than was DTIC alone (49% v 25%; P = .009). Severe toxicities were uncommon, and treatment discontinuation for toxicity was rare. Granulocytopenia was the more common serious adverse event, but febrile neutropenia was uncommon. Asthenia, emesis, and stomatitis were the most frequent nonhematologic effects. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine and DTIC is active and well tolerated in patients with STS, providing in this phase II randomized trial superior progression-free survival and overall survival than DTIC alone. This regimen constitutes a valuable therapeutic alternative for these patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this phase III trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus Spanish-based continuous-infusion high-dose fluorouracil (FU) plus oxaliplatin (FUOX) regimens as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 348 patients were randomly assigned to receive XELOX (oral capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 bid for 14 days plus oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks) or FUOX (continuous-infusion FU 2,250 mg/m2 during 48 hours on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, and 36 plus oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on days 1, 15, and 29 every 6 weeks). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in efficacy between XELOX and FUOX arms, which showed, respectively, median time to tumor progression (TTP; 8.9 v 9.5 months; P = .153); median overall survival (18.1 v 20.8 months; P = .145); and confirmed response rate (RR; 37% v 46%; P = .539). The safety profile of the two regimens was similar, although there were lower rates of grade 3/4 diarrhea (14% v 24%) and grade 1/2 stomatitis (28% v 43%), and higher rates of grade 1/2 hyperbilirubinemia (37% v 21%) and grade 1/2 hand-foot syndrome (14% v 5%) with XELOX versus FUOX, respectively. CONCLUSION: This randomized study shows a similar TTP of XELOX compared with FUOX in the first-line treatment of MCRC, although there was a trend for slightly lower RR and survival. XELOX can be considered as an alternative to FUOX.

PURPOSE: The aim of this phase III trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab alone with those of bevacizumab and capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) as maintenance treatment following induction chemotherapy with XELOX plus bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of bevacizumab, capecitabine, and oxaliplatin every 3 weeks followed by XELOX plus bevacizumab or bevacizumab alone until progression. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) interval; secondary endpoints were the overall survival (OS) time, objective response rate (RR), time to response, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 480 patients (XELOX plus bevacizumab, n = 239; bevacizumab, n = 241); there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The median follow-up was 29.0 months (range, 0-53.2 months). There were no statistically significant differences in the median PFS or OS times or in the RR between the two arms. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities in the XELOX plus bevacizumab versus bevacizumab arms were diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome, and neuropathy. CONCLUSION: Although the noninferiority of bevacizumab versus XELOX plus bevacizumab cannot be confirmed, we can reliably exclude a median PFS detriment >3 weeks. This study suggests that maintenance therapy with single-agent bevacizumab may be an appropriate option following induction XELOX plus bevacizumab in mCRC patients.

BACKGROUND: The Maintenance in Colorectal Cancer trial was a phase III study to assess maintenance therapy with single-agent bevacizumab versus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. An ancillary study was conducted to evaluate the circulating tumor cell (CTC) count as a prognostic and/or predictive marker for efficacy endpoints. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred eighty patients were included. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and after three cycles. CTC enumeration was carried out using the CellSearch® System (Veridex LLC, Raritan, NJ). Computed tomography scans were performed at cycle 3 and 6 and every 12 weeks thereafter for tumor response assessment. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival (PFS) interval for patients with a CTC count ≥3 at baseline was 7.8 months, versus the 12.0 months achieved by patients with a CTC count <3 (p = .0002). The median overall survival (OS) time was 17.7 months for patients with a CTC count ≥3, compared with 25.1 months for patients with a lower count (p = .0059). After three cycles, the median PFS interval for patients with a low CTC count was 10.8 months, significantly longer than the 7.5 months for patients with a high CTC count (p = .005). The median OS time for patients with a CTC count <3 was significantly longer than for patients with a CTC count ≥3, 25.1 months versus 16.2 months, respectively (p = .0095). CONCLUSIONS: The CTC count is a strong prognostic factor for PFS and OS outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer patients.