Milos J. Janicek

BACKGROUND: Constitutive activation of KIT receptor tyrosine kinase is critical in the pathogenesis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Imatinib mesylate, a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been shown in preclinical models and preliminary clinical studies to have activity against such tumors. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized, multicenter trial to evaluate the activity of imatinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor. We assessed antitumor response and the safety and tolerability of the drug. Pharmacokinetics were assessed in a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: A total of 147 patients were randomly assigned to receive 400 mg or 600 mg of imatinib daily. Overall, 79 patients (53.7 percent) had a partial response, 41 patients (27.9 percent) had stable disease, and for technical reasons, response could not be evaluated in 7 patients (4.8 percent). No patient had a complete response to the treatment. The median duration of response had not been reached after a median follow-up of 24 weeks after the onset of response. Early resistance to imatinib was noted in 20 patients (13.6 percent). Therapy was well tolerated, although mild-to-moderate edema, diarrhea, and fatigue were common. Gastrointestinal or intraabdominal hemorrhage occurred in approximately 5 percent of patients. There were no significant differences in toxic effects or response between the two doses. Imatinib was well absorbed, with pharmacokinetics similar to those reported in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia. CONCLUSIONS: Imatinib induced a sustained objective response in more than half of patients with an advanced unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Inhibition of the KIT signal-transduction pathway is a promising treatment for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors, which resist conventional chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of rituximab and cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) induction therapy in patients with newly diagnosed mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From March 1997 to May 1999, 40 previously untreated patients with stage II through IV MCL were treated with six cycles of rituximab and CHOP chemotherapy in a phase II trial. Pretreatment and interval peripheral-blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) specimens were also analyzed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for tumor-specific BCL-1/immunoglobulin H (IgH) translocations and clonal IgH rearrangements. Study end points included clinical and molecular response rates and long-term progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of patients achieved a complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu), and 48% of patients obtained a partial response (PR). However, 28 of the 40 patients have already relapsed or developed progressive disease with a median PFS of 16.6 months. Twenty-five patients had PCR-detectable BCL-1/IgH or clonal IgH products in PB or BM at diagnosis. Nine of the 25 informative patients had no evidence of PCR-detectable disease in PB or BM after rituximab and CHOP therapy. However, patients who achieved molecular remissions in PB or BM had PFS similar to patients without molecular remissions (16.5 v 18.8 months, P =.51). CONCLUSION: Favorable clinical and molecular response rates associated with rituximab and CHOP chemotherapy do not translate into prolonged PFS in MCL. Nevertheless, rituximab and combination chemotherapy may transiently clear PB or BM of detectable tumor cells, prompting additional consideration of antibody-based in vivo purging in subsequent clinical trials.

PURPOSE: To perform a phase I trial of recombinant human endostatin (rhEndostatin; EntreMed, Rockville, MD) given as a daily 20-minute intravenous (IV) injection in adult patients with refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The daily dose was increased from 15 to 240 mg/m(2) by a factor of 100% in cohorts of three patients. In the absence of dose-limiting toxicity, uninterrupted treatment was continued until the tumor burden increased by more than 50% from baseline. Correlative studies included dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of tumor blood flow, urinary vascular endothelial growth factor and basic fibroblast growth factor levels, rhEndostatin serum pharmacokinetics, and monitoring of circulating antibodies to rhEndostatin. RESULTS: There were no notable treatment related toxicities among 15 patients receiving a total of 50 monthly cycles of rhEndostatin. One patient with a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor had a minor response and two patients showed disease stabilization. Linearity in the pharmacokinetics of rhEndostatin was indicated by dose-proportionate increases in the area under the curve for the first dose and the peak serum concentration at steady state. Daily systemic exposure to rhEndostatin in patients receiving 240 mg/m(2)/d was approximately 50% lower than that provided by the therapeutically optimal dose in preclinical studies. CONCLUSION: rhEndostatin administered as a 20-minute daily IV injection at doses up to 240 mg/m(2) showed no significant toxicities. Evidence of clinical benefit was observed in three patients. Due to high variability between the peak and trough serum concentrations associated with the repeated short IV infusion schedule, daily serum drug levels only briefly exceeded concentrations necessary for in vitro antiangiogenic effects.

Article Tools Side Effects of Chemotherapy Article Tools OPTIONS & TOOLS Export Citation Track Citation Add To Favorites Rights & Permissions COMPANION ARTICLES No companion articles ARTICLE CITATION DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.3.697 Journal of Clinical Oncology - published online before print September 21, 2016 PMID: 10653887 Side Effects of Chemotherapy Eyal C. AttarxEyal C. AttarSearch for articles by this author , Thomas ErvinxThomas ErvinSearch for articles by this author , Milos JanicekxMilos JanicekSearch for articles by this author , Aaron DeykinxAaron DeykinSearch for articles by this author , John GodleskixJohn GodleskiSearch for articles by this author Show More Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2000.18.3.697 First Page Full Text PDF Figures and Tables © 2000 by American Society of Clinical Oncology