Cuzick J.,Queen Mary, University of London |
DeCensi A.,Oncologia Medica |
DeCensi A.,Italian National Cancer Institute |
Arun B.,University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center |
And 10 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2011
In March, 2010, a group of breast cancer experts met to develop a consensus statement on breast cancer prevention, with a focus on medical and therapeutic interventions. We present the conclusions in this Review. First we agreed that the term chemoprevention is inappropriate and suggested that the term preventive therapy better represents this feature of management. Two selective oestrogen-receptor modulators-tamoxifen and raloxifene-are so far the only medical options approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for preventive therapy. Of these tamoxifen has greater efficacy and can be used in premenopausal women, but raloxifene has fewer side-effects. Two newer drugs in this class, lasofoxifene and arzoxifene, also show efficacy and possibly a better overall risk-benefit profile, but need further assessment. Aromatase inhibitors might be more efficacious, and results of prevention trials are eagerly awaited. Newer agents, notably bisphosphonates and metformin, have shown promise in observational studies and need to be assessed in randomised prevention trials. Other agents, such as aspirin, other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, COX-2 inhibitors, retinoids, rexinoids, and dietary components have limited effects or are in the early phases of investigation. New contralateral tumours in women with breast cancer might be generally useful as a model for prevention, as has been seen for tamoxifen. If valid such a model would facilitate the design of simpler, cheaper, and better-focused trials for assessing new agents. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.
Tabernero J.,Autonomous University of Barcelona |
Garcia-Carbonero R.,University of Seville |
Cassidy J.,Beatson Laboratories |
Cassidy J.,Roche Holding AG |
And 17 more authors.
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2013
Purpose: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIb study evaluated adding sorafenib to first-line modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Experimental Design: Patients were randomized to sorafenib (400 mg b.i.d.) or placebo, combined with mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2; levo-leucovorin 200 mg/m2; fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus and 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion) every 14 days. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Target sample was 120 events in 180 patients for >85% power (two-sided α = 0.20) to detect an HR = 0.65. Results: Of 198 patients randomized, median PFS for sorafenib plus mFOLFOX6 was 9.1 months versus 8.7 months for placebo plus mFOLFOX6 (HR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.64-1.23; P = 0.46). There was no difference between treatment arms for overall survival. Subgroup analyses of PFS and overall survival showed no difference between treatment arms by KRAS or BRAF status (mutant and wild type). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events in the sorafenib and placebo arms were neutropenia (48% vs. 22%), peripheral neuropathy (16% vs. 21%), and grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (20% vs. 0%). Treatment discontinuation because of adverse events was 9% and 6%, respectively. Generally, dose intensity (duration and cumulative doses) was lower in the sorafenib arm than in the placebo arm. Conclusion: This study did not detect a PFS benefit with the addition of sorafenib to first-line mFOLFOX6 for mCRC. KRAS and BRAF status did not seem to impact treatment outcomes but the subgroups were small. These results do not support further development of sorafenib in combination with mFOLFOX6 in molecularly unselected patients with mCRC. ©2013 AACR.
Del Mastro L.,Instituto Nazionale Per la Ricerca Sul Cancro |
Boni L.,Instituto Toscano Tumori |
Michelotti A.,U. O. Oncologia Medica I |
Gamucci T.,S. C. Oncologia Medica |
And 13 more authors.
JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association | Year: 2011
Context: Premenopausal patients with breast cancer are at high risk of premature ovarian failure induced by systemic treatments, but no standard strategies for preventing this adverse effect are yet available. Objective: To determine the effect of the temporary ovarian suppression obtained by administering the gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue triptorelin during chemotherapy on the incidence of early menopause in young patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Patients: The PROMISE-GIM6 (Prevention of Menopause Induced by Chemotherapy: A Study in Early Breast Cancer Patients - Gruppo Italiano Mammella 6) study, a parallel, randomized, open-label, phase 3 superiority trial, was conducted at 16 sites in Italy and enrolled 281 patients between October 2003 and January 2008. The patients were premenopausalwomenwith stage I through III breast cancerwhowere candidates foradjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Assuminga 60% rate of early menopause in the group treated with chemotherapy alone, it was estimated that 280 patients had to be enrolled to detect a 20% absolute reduction in early menopause in the group treated with chemotherapy plus triptorelin. The intention-to-treat analysis was performed by including all randomized patients and using imputed values for missing data. Interventions: Before beginning chemotherapy, patients were randomly allocated to receive chemotherapy alone or combined with triptorelin. Triptorelin was administered intramuscularly at a dose of 3.75 mg at least 1 week before the start of chemotherapy and then every 4 weeks for the duration of chemotherapy. Main Outcome Measure: Incidence of early menopause (defined as no resumption of menstrual activity and postmenopausal levels of follicle-stimulating hormone and estradiol 1 year after the last cycle of chemotherapy). Results: The clinical and tumor characteristics of the 133 patients randomized to chemotherapy alone and the 148 patients randomized to chemotherapy plus triptorelin were similar. Twelve months after the last cycle of chemotherapy (last follow-up, August 18, 2009), the rate of early menopause was 25.9% in the chemotherapy-alone group and 8.9% in the chemotherapy plus triptorelin group, an absolute difference of -17% (95% confidence interval, -26% to -7.9%; P<.001). The odds ratio for treatment-related early menopause was 0.28 (95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.59; P<.001). Conclusion: The use of triptorelin-induced temporary ovarian suppression during chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer reduced the occurrence of chemotherapy-induced early menopause. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00311636. ©2011 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
De Angelis V.,Oncologia Medica
American Journal of Surgery | Year: 2015
Background The neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in the peripheral blood is considered an easily assessable prognostic factor in cancer patients. We evaluated the predictive significance of the NLR in patients affected by gastric cancer that underwent gastric resection. Methods From July 2003 to March 2012, 156 patients who had undergone gastrectomy with curative intent for gastric adenocarcinoma were included. Data were retrieved from a prospective collected database. NLR was calculated from lymphocyte and neutrophil counts on routine blood tests taken before surgery. Survival analyses were generated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were carried out by the Cox proportional hazard model. Results The median follow-up time for surviving patients was 38 months (range 1 to 108 months) and median preoperative NLR was 2.3 (range.47 to 19.73). Subjects were dichotomized at the N/L value of 2.3. Median survival of patients with NLR below the median was around 60 months compared with the 36 months of patients with an NLR above the median. A multivariate analysis established a significant and independent relationship between the NLR and the overall survival with a P value of less than.05. Conclusions The results suggest that the elevated preoperative NLR predicts poor overall survival following resection for gastric adenocarcinoma. It may be used as a simple, reliable prognostic factor for risk stratification. © 2015 Elsevier Inc.
Pignata S.,Italian National Cancer Institute |
Scambia G.,Catholic University of the Sacred Heart |
Katsaros D.,Presidio |
Gallo C.,The Second University of Naples |
And 25 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: Carboplatin plus paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks is standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. A weekly paclitaxel schedule combined with carboplatin every 3 weeks prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival in a Japanese phase 3 trial. The aim of our study was to assess whether a weekly schedule of carboplatin plus paclitaxel is more effective than the same drugs given every 3 weeks. Methods: We did a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study at 67 institutions in Italy and France. Women with FIGO stage IC-IV ovarian cancer, an ECOG performance status of 2 or lower, and who had never received chemotherapy were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL per min) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) every 3 weeks for six cycles or carboplatin (AUC 2 mg/mL per min) plus paclitaxel (60 mg/m2) every week for 18 weeks. Randomisation was done by computer-based minimisation, stratified by centre, residual disease after surgery, and ECOG performance status. The study was not blinded. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival and quality of life (assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Ovarian Trial Outcome Index [FACT-O/TOI] score), and analysis was by modified intention to treat. This report presents the final analysis. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00660842. Findings: 822 patients were enrolled into the study between Nov 20, 2008, and March 1, 2012; 12 withdrew their consent immediately after randomisation and were excluded, and 810 were eligible for analysis. 404 women were allocated treatment every 3 weeks and 406 were assigned to the weekly schedule. After median follow-up of 22·3 months (IQR 16·2-30·9), 449 progression-free survival events were recorded. Median progression-free survival was 17·3 months (95% CI 15·2-20·2) in patients assigned to treatment every 3 weeks, versus 18·3 months (16·8-20·9) in women allocated to the weekly schedule (hazard ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·80-1·16; p=0·66). FACT-O/TOI scores differed significantly between the two schedules (treatment-by-time interaction p<0·0001); with treatment every 3 weeks, FACT-O/TOI scores worsened at every cycle (weeks 1, 4, and 7), whereas for the weekly schedule, after transient worsening at week 1, FACT-O/TOI scores remained stable. Fewer patients assigned to the weekly group than those allocated treatment every 3 weeks had grade 3-4 neutropenia (167 [42%] of 399 patients vs 200 [50%] of 400 patients), febrile neutropenia (two [0·5%] vs 11 [3%]), grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (four [1%] vs 27 [7%]), and grade 2 or worse neuropathy (24 [6%] vs 68 [17%]). Three deaths during the study were attributed to chemotherapy; two women died who were allocated treatment every 3 weeks and one death was recorded in the group assigned the weekly regimen. Interpretation: A weekly regimen of carboplatin and paclitaxel might be a reasonable option for first-line treatment of women with advanced ovarian cancer. Funding: None. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.
Labianca R.,Oncologia Medica |
Sobrero A.,Oncologia Medica |
Isa L.,Oncologia Medica |
Cortesi E.,Oncologia Medica |
And 11 more authors.
Annals of Oncology | Year: 2011
Background: In advanced colorectal cancer, chemotherapy is usually administered without pauses and until progression but patients can experience cumulative toxicity and cannot tolerate a heavy therapeutic charge. Aim: The aim of the present trial was to evaluate whether an intermittent chemotherapy with levo-leucovorin + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) + irinotecan (CPT-11) was at least as effective as the same regimen given continuously, both administered until progression, in patients affected with advanced colorectal cancer and not previously exposed to chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients, materials and methods: A total of 337 patients from 27 institutions were randomised between levo-leucovorin, 100/mg/m2 i.v. + 5-FU; 400 mg/m2 i.v. bolus + 5-FU; 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion, days 1 and 2 + CPT-11; 180 mg/m2 day 1, administered every 2 weeks 2 months on and 2 months off (arm A) and the same regimen administered continuously (arm B), until progression in both arms. The main end point was overall survival (OS), the secondary progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. Results: At a median follow-up of 41 months, OS was 18 months in arm A and 17 months in arm B [hazard ratio (HR), 0.88]. Also PFS was comparable in the two groups (6 months in both, with HR, 1.03), and even grades 3-4 toxicity (mainly myelosuppression, fever and diarrhoea) was similar. Second-line oxaliplatin-based treatment was administered in a similar percentage (66%) in the two arms. The median chemotherapy-free period (drug holiday) in arm A was 3.5 months. Conclusion: Reducing the charge of therapy in this population did not diminish the efficacy of treatment. Further studies with this strategy, including biologicals, are warranted. © The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.
Pignata S.,Instituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione GPascale IRCCS |
Lorusso D.,Fondazione IRCCS Instituto Nazionale Tumori |
Scambia G.,Catholic University of the Sacred Heart |
Sambataro D.,Unita di Oncologia Medica |
And 20 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2015
Background: Inhibition of angiogenesis is a valuable treatment strategy for ovarian cancer. Pazopanib is an anti-angiogenic drug active in ovarian cancer. We assessed the effect of adding pazopanib to paclitaxel for patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory advanced ovarian cancer. Methods: We did this open-label, randomised phase 2 trial at 11 hospitals in Italy. We included patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer previously treated with a maximum of two lines of chemotherapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and no residual peripheral neurotoxicity. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 with or without pazopanib 800 mg daily, and stratified by centre, number of previous lines of chemotherapy, and platinum-free interval status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01644825. This report is the final analysis; the trial is completed. Findings: Between Dec 15, 2010, and Feb 8, 2013, we enrolled 74 patients: 37 were randomly assigned to receive paclitaxel and pazopanib and 37 were randomly assigned to receive paclitaxel only. One patient, in the paclitaxel only group, withdrew from the study and was excluded from analyses. Median follow-up was 16·1 months (IQR 12·5-20·8). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the pazopanib plus paclitaxel group than in the paclitaxel only group (median 6·35 months [95% CI 5·36-11·02] vs 3·49 months [2·01-5·66]; hazard ratio 0·42 [95% CI 0·25-0·69]; p=0·0002). We recorded no unexpected toxic effects or deaths from toxic effects. Adverse events were more common in the pazopanib and paclitaxel group than in the paclitaxel only group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (11 [30%] in the pazopanib group vs one [3%] in the paclitaxel group), fatigue (four [11%] vs two [6%]), leucopenia (four [11%] vs one [3%]), hypertension (three [8%] vs none [0%]), raised aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase (three [8%] vs none), and anaemia (two [5%] vs five [14%]). One patient in the pazopanib group had ileal perforation. Interpretation: Our findings suggest that a phase 3 study of the combination of weekly paclitaxel plus pazopanib for patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory advanced ovarian cancer is warranted. Funding: National Cancer Institute of Napoli and GlaxoSmithKline. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.
Scartozzi M.,Marche Polytechnic University |
Giampieri R.,Marche Polytechnic University |
MacCaroni E.,Marche Polytechnic University |
Del Prete M.,Marche Polytechnic University |
And 7 more authors.
British Journal of Cancer | Year: 2012
Background: Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) represents a predictive factor in colorectal cancer patients treated with the angiogenesis inhibitor PTK/ZK. We explored the role of pre-treatment LDH serum levels in colorectal cancer patients receiving first-line bevacizumab.Methods:Metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line bevacizumab was eligible. A control group including all consecutive patients treated with chemotherapy alone was also considered. Pre-treatment LDH serum levels were collected for all cases.Results:Median progression-free survival (PFS) in the control group for patients with high and low LDH levels was 4.2 and 8 months, respectively (P=0.0003). Median overall survival (OS) was 19.6 and 34.9 months for patients with high and low LDH levels, respectively (P=0.0014). In the bevacizumab group, partial responses were seen in 14 (58%) high-LDH and 8 (14%) low-LDH patients (P=0.0243), respectively, median PFS was 7.3 and 8.5 months, respectively (P=0.2), and median OS was 22 and 26.6 months, respectively (P=0.7). Conclusion: High LDH levels correlated with worse prognosis. Bevacizumab seemed capable of improving clinical outcome in this specific group of patients who usually present with an adverse natural history. The improved response rate also suggests a role for LDH as a predictive marker. © 2012 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved.