Iris Burkholder

Sorafenib is a multi-kinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic and antiproliferative activity. The activity of sorafenib in progressive hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients was investigated in a phase II clinical study. Progressive HRPC patients received sorafenib 400 mg bid p.o. continuously. Only patients with no prior chemotherapy, and either one-unidimensional measurable lesion according to RECIST-criteria or increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values reflecting a hormone-refractory situation, were eligible for study entry. The primary study objective was the rate of progression-free survival of >/=12 weeks (PFS12). Secondary end points were overall response, overall survival, and toxicity. Fifty-seven patients with PC were enrolled. Two patients had to be withdrawn from the set of eligible patients. According to RECIST criteria, 4 patients out of 55 evaluable patients showed stable disease (SD). According to PSA-response, we saw 11 patients with SD PSA and 2 patients were responders at 12 weeks (PFS12=17/55=31%). Among the 257 adverse events, 15 were considered drug related of maximum CTC-grade 3. Twenty-four serious adverse events occurred in 14 patients (14/55=26%). Seven of them were determined to be drug related. No treatment-related death was observed. Sorafenib has antitumour activity in HRPCP when evaluated for RECIST- and PSA-based response. Further investigation as a component of combination regimens is necessary to evaluate its definite or overall clinical benefit for HRPCP.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether cisplatin-based chemotherapy (gemcitabine, vinorelbine, and cisplatin [GVP]) prolongs overall survival in comparison to cisplatin-free chemotherapy (gemcitabine and vinorelbine [GV]) as first-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between September 1999 and June 2001, 300 patients with NSCLC stage IIIB with malignant pleural effusion or stage IV disease were randomly assigned to receive GV (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) + vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or GVP (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) + vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 + cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 2 every 3 weeks). Primary end point of the study was overall survival. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-seven patients (GV, 143 patients; GVP, 144 patients) were eligible for analysis. At the time of analysis, April 15, 2002, 209 patients (GV, 103 patients; GVP, 106 patients) of 287 patients had died (73%). No statistically significant difference was observed for overall survival (P =.73; median survival, 35.9 versus 32.4 weeks; 1-year survival rate, 33.6% versus 27.5%) as well as for event-free survival (P =.35; median time-to-event, 19.3 versus 22.3 weeks) between GV and GVP. Two hundred fourteen patients were assessable for best response. The overall response rates were 13.0% for GV versus 28.3% for GVP (P =.004; complete responders, 0% versus 3.8%; partial responders, 13.0% versus 24.5%). Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity was significantly lower in the GV treatment arm compared with GVP. No statistically significant difference in quality of life was observed. CONCLUSION: In this phase III study, the cisplatin-based GVP regimen showed no survival benefit as first-line chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC when compared with the cisplatin-free GV regimen, which was substantially better tolerated.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with recurrent glioma includes neurosurgical resection, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy. In most cases, a full course of radiotherapy has been applied after primary diagnosis, therefore application of re-irradiation has to be applied cauteously. With modern precision photon techniques such as fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT), a second course of radiotherapy is safe and effective and leads to survival times of 22, 16 and 8 months for recurrent WHO grade II, III and IV gliomas.Carbon ions offer physical and biological characteristics. Due to their inverted dose profile and the high local dose deposition within the Bragg peak precise dose application and sparing of normal tissue is possible. Moreover, in comparison to photons, carbon ions offer an increased relative biological effectiveness (RBE), which can be calculated between 2 and 5 depending on the GBM cell line as well as the endpoint analyzed. Protons, however, offer an RBE which is comparable to photons.First Japanese Data on the evaluation of carbon ion radiation therapy for the treatment of primary high-grade gliomas showed promising results in a small and heterogeneous patient collective. METHODS DESIGN: In the current Phase I/II-CINDERELLA-trial re-irradiation using carbon ions will be compared to FSRT applied to the area of contrast enhancement representing high-grade tumor areas in patients with recurrent gliomas. Within the Phase I Part of the trial, the Recommended Dose (RD) of carbon ion radiotherapy will be determined in a dose escalation scheme. In the subsequent randomized Phase II part, the RD will be evaluated in the experimental arm, compared to the standard arm, FSRT with a total dose of 36 Gy in single doses of 2 Gy.Primary endpoint of the Phase I part is toxicity. Primary endpoint of the randomized part II is survival after re-irradiation at 12 months, secondary endpoint is progression-free survival. DISCUSSION: The Cinderella trial is the first study to evaluate carbon ion radiotherapy for recurrent gliomas, and to compare this treatment to photon FSRT in a randomized setting using an ion beam delivered by intensity modulated rasterscanning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01166308.