Practice for Medical Oncology

Recklinghausen, Germany

Practice for Medical Oncology

Recklinghausen, Germany
SEARCH FILTERS
Time filter
Source Type

Boeck S.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Vehling-Kaiser U.,Practice for Medical Oncology | Waldschmidt D.,University of Cologne | Marten A.,University of Heidelberg | And 10 more authors.
Anti-Cancer Drugs | Year: 2010

To date, only limited toxicity data are available for the combination of erlotinib with either capecitabine or gemcitabine as front-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Within a randomized phase III trial, 281 treatment-naive patients were randomly assigned between capecitabine (2000 mg/m2/day, for 14 days, once every 3 weeks) plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 as a 30-min infusion) plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). In case of treatment failure, patients were crossed over to a second-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was the time to treatment failure of second-line therapy (TTF2). This interim analysis of toxicity contains safety data from the first 127 randomized patients. During first-line therapy, patients received a median number of three treatment cycles (range 0-13) in both the arms. Regarding chemotherapy, a treatment delay was observed in 12% of the cycles in arm A and in 22% of the cycles in arm B. Dose reductions of the cytostatic drug were performed in 18 and 27% of treatment cycles, respectively. Erlotinib dose reductions were performed in 6 and 11% of all cycles. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity was <10% in both the arms; major grade 3/4 toxicities in arms A and B were diarrhea (9 vs. 7%), skin rash (4 vs. 12%), and hand-foot syndrome (7 vs. 0%). No treatment-related death was observed. In conclusion, this interim safety analysis suggests that treatment with erlotinib 150 mg/day is feasible in combination with capecitabine or gemcitabine. © 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.


Heinemann V.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Vehling-Kaiser U.,Practice for Medical Oncology | Waldschmidt D.,University of Cologne | Marten A.,University of Heidelberg | And 16 more authors.
Gut | Year: 2013

AIO-PK0104 investigated two treatment strategies in advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a reference sequence of gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by 2nd-line capecitabine was compared with a reverse experimental sequence of capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine. Methods 281 patients with PC were randomly assigned to 1st-line treatment with either gemcitabine plus erlotinib or capecitabine plus erlotinib. In case of treatment failure (eg, disease progression or toxicity), patients were allocated to 2nd-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) after 1st- and 2nd-line therapy (TTF2; non-inferiority design). KRAS exon 2 mutations were analysed in archival tumour tissue from 173 of the randomised patients. Results Of the 274 eligible patients, 43 had locally advanced and 231 had metastatic disease; 140 (51%) received 2nd-line chemotherapy. Median TTF2 was estimated with 4.2 months in both arms; median overall survival was 6.2 months with gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine and 6.9 months with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine, respectively (HR 1.02, p=0.90). TTF for 1st-line therapy (TTF1) was significantly prolonged with gemcitabine/ erlotinib compared to capecitabine/erlotinib (3.2 vs 2.2 months; HR 0.69, p=0.0034). Skin rash was associated with both TTF2 (rash grade 0/1/2e4:2.9/4.3/ 6.7 months, p<0.0001) and survival (3.4/7.0/ 9.6 months, p<0.0001). Each arm showed a safe and manageable toxicity profile during 1st- and 2nd-line therapy. A KRAS wild-type status (52/173 patients, 30%) was associated with an improved overall survival (HR 1.68, ps0.005). Conclusion Both treatment strategies are feasible and demonstrated comparable efficacy; KRAS may serve as biomarker in patients with advanced PC treated with erlotinib.


Kruger S.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Boeck S.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Heinemann V.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Laubender R.P.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | And 15 more authors.
Acta Oncologica | Year: 2015

Background: Drug-induced skin toxicity may correlate with treatment efficacy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy or biological agents. The correlation of the capecitabine-associated hand-foot skin reaction (HFS) on outcome parameters in pancreatic cancer (PC) has not yet been investigated. Methods: Within the multicentre phase III AIO-PK0104 trial, patients with confirmed advanced PC were randomly assigned to first-line treatment with either capecitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm A) or gemcitabine plus erlotinib (150 mg/day, arm B). A cross-over to either gemcitabine (arm A) or capecitabine (arm B) was performed after failure of the first-line regimen. Data on skin toxicity were correlated with efficacy study endpoints using uni- and multivariate analyses. To control for guarantee-time bias (GTB), we focused on subgroup analyses of patients who had completed two and three or more treatment cycles. Results: Of 281 randomised patients, skin toxicity data were available for 255 patients. Median time to capecitabine-attributed HFS was two cycles, 36 of 47 (77%) HFS events had been observed by the end of treatment cycle three. Considering HFS during first-line treatment in 101 patients treated with capecitabine for at least two cycles within the capecitabine plus erlotinib arm, time to treatment failure after first- and second-line therapy (TTF2) and overall survival (OS) both were significantly prolonged for the 44 patients (44%) with HFS compared to 57 patients without HFS (56%) (TTF2: 7.8 vs. 3.8 months, HR 0.50, p = 0.001; OS: 10.4 vs. 5.9 months, HR 0.55, p = 0.005). A subgroup analysis of 70 patients on treatment with capecitabine for at least three cycles showed similar results (TTF2: 8.3 vs. 4.4 months, HR 0.53, p = 0.010; OS: 10.4 vs. 6.7 months, HR 0.62, p = 0.056). Conclusion: The present subgroup analysis from AIO-PK0104 suggests that HFS may serve as an independent clinical predictor for treatment outcome in capecitabine-treated patients with advanced PC. © 2015 Informa Healthcare.


PubMed | Klinikum Magdeburg, Onkonet Onkologie Ravensburg, Klinikum Stuttgart, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Kronach and 13 more.
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2017

LBA3506 Background: In patients (pts) with KRAS, wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) a head to head comparison of anti-EGFR- and anti-VEGF-directed first-line therapy has not been reported with regard to the FOLFIRI backbone. The AIO KRK-0306 study was therefore designed as a randomized multicenter trial to compare the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab to FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in mCRC pts not pretreated for metastatic disease.Pts were randomized to FOLFIRI (Tournigand regimen) every two wks plus cetuximab (400 mg/m day 1, followed by 250 mg/m wkly = arm A) or bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every two wks = arm B). The intent-to-treat (ITT) population comprised all pts who had at least completed one application of therapy. While recruitment initially was independent of KRAS status, an amendment confined inclusion to KRAS wildtype (WT) tumors. Recruitment was completed in October 2012. The primary study endpoint was objective response rate (ORR, investigators read).Among 735 pts of the ITT-population, KRAS-WT was identified in 592. Of these, 297 pts were randomized to arm A and 295 to arm B. Median age was 64 years, 66% of pts were male, and ECOG PS 0-1 was observed in 98% of pts. Median duration of treatment was 4.7 mo vs 5.3 mo, respectively. While in the ITT analysis, ORR was comparable in arms A vs B (62% vs 57%, odds ratio 1.249), a significant superiority was found for assessable pts in arm A. Median PFS of the ITT population was nearly identical (10.3 vs 10.4 mo, HR 1.04, p=0.69), however, overall survival (OS) showed a significantly better outcome in arm A vs arm B (28.8 vs 25.0 mo, HR 0.77, p=0.0164, 95% CI: 0.620-0.953). Sixty-day mortality was low in both arms (1.01% vs 2.71%).ORR was comparable between arms in the ITT analysis, but favored arm A in assessable pts. Significantly superior OS was observed in KRAS-WT patients receiving cetuximab plus FOLFIRI as first-line treatment.NCT00433927.


Jehn C.F.,University Hospital Charite | Diel I.J.,Practice for Medical Oncology and Gynaecology Am Rosengarten | Overkamp F.,Practice for Medical Oncology | Kurth A.,THEMISTOCLES GLUCK Hospital Ratingen | And 3 more authors.
Anticancer Research | Year: 2016

Background: Bone is a frequent site of metastases in advanced cancer and is associated with significant skeletal morbidity. Current treatment options are aimed at preserving and improving functional independence and quality of life. Materials and Methods: A review of current literature focusing on diagnostic tools and treatment approaches of bone metastasis in advanced cancer was performed and conclusions were incorporated into diagnostic and treatment algorithms. Results: Radiologic imaging has added valuable tools for screening and diagnostics of bone metastasis. Clinical management of skeletal metastasis includes improved pain management, introduction of bone modifying agents and advancements in surgical and radiation therapy. We propose three algorithms enhancing the sensitivity of diagnostics and improving multidisciplinary management of vertebral and non-vertebral bone metastasis. Conclusion: Bone metastases are an expression of a systemic disease. Treatment options include highly specialized modalities yet need to be tailored to individual needs. Algorithms help standardize treatment procedures and can improve treatment outcome in a multidisciplinary setting.


PubMed | THEMISTOCLES GLUCK Hospital Ratingen, Practice for Medical Oncology and Gynaecology am Rosengarten, Practice for Urology Bonn Rhein Sieg, University Hospital Charite and Practice for Medical Oncology
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Anticancer research | Year: 2016

Bone is a frequent site of metastases in advanced cancer and is associated with significant skeletal morbidity. Current treatment options are aimed at preserving and improving functional independence and quality of life.A review of current literature focusing on diagnostic tools and treatment approaches of bone metastasis in advanced cancer was performed and conclusions were incorporated into diagnostic and treatment algorithms.Radiologic imaging has added valuable tools for screening and diagnostics of bone metastasis. Clinical management of skeletal metastasis includes improved pain management, introduction of bone modifying agents and advancements in surgical and radiation therapy. We propose three algorithms enhancing the sensitivity of diagnostics and improving multidisciplinary management of vertebral and non-vertebral bone metastasis.Bone metastases are an expression of a systemic disease. Treatment options include highly specialized modalities yet need to be tailored to individual needs. Algorithms help standardize treatment procedures and can improve treatment outcome in a multidisciplinary setting.


Ormanns S.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Siveke J.T.,Technical University t Mu nchen | Heinemann V.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Heinemann V.,German Cancer Research Center | And 21 more authors.
BMC Cancer | Year: 2014

Background: The role of pERK, pAKT and p53 as biomarkers in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has not yet been defined.Methods: Within the phase III study AIO-PK0104 281 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer received an erlotinib-based 1st-line regimen. Archival tissue from 153 patients was available for central immunohistochemistry staining for pERK, pAKT and p53. Within a subgroup analysis, biomarker data were correlated with efficacy endpoints and skin rash using a Cox regression model.Results: Fifty-five out of 153 patients were classified as pERKlow and 98 patients as pERKhigh; median overall survival (OS) was 6.2 months and 5.7 months, respectively (HR 1.29, p = 0.16). When analysing pERK as continuous variable, the pERK score was significantly associated with OS (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.0-1.12, p = 0.05). Twenty-one of 35 patients were pAKTlow and 14/35 pAKThigh with a corresponding median OS of 6.4 months and 6.8 months, respectively (HR 1.03, p = 0.93). Four out of 50 patients had a complete loss of p53 expression, 20 patients a regular expression and 26 patients had tumors with p53 overexpression. The p53 status had no impact on OS (p = 0.91); however, a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) (6.0 vs 1.8 months, HR 0.24, p = 0.02) and a higher rate of skin rash (84% vs 25%, p = 0.02) was observed for patients with a regular p53 expression compared to patients with a complete loss of p53.Conclusion: pERK expression may have an impact on OS in erlotinib-treated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer; p53 should be further investigated for its potential role as a predictive marker for PFS and skin rash.Trial registration: NCT00440167 (registration date: February 22, 2007). © 2014 Ormanns et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.


Boeck S.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Jung A.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Laubender R.P.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | Neumann J.,Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich | And 16 more authors.
British Journal of Cancer | Year: 2013

Background:We aimed to identify molecular epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tissue biomarkers in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients treated with the anti-EGFR agent erlotinib within the phase 3 randomised AIO-PK0104 study.Methods:AIO-PK0104 was a multicenter trial comparing gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced PC; primary study end point was the time-to-treatment failure after first- and second-line therapy (TTF2). Translational analyses were performed for KRAS exon 2 mutations, EGFR expression, PTEN expression, the EGFR intron 1 and exon 13 R497K polymorphism (PM). Biomarker data were correlated with TTF, overall survival (OS) and skin rash.Results:Archival tumour tissue was available from 208 (74%) of the randomised patients. The KRAS mutations were found in 70% (121 out of 173) of patients and exclusively occurred in codon 12. The EGFR overexpression was detected in 89 out of 181 patients (49%) by immunohistochemistry (IHC), and 77 out of 166 patients (46%) had an EGFR gene amplification by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH); 30 out of 171 patients (18%) had a loss of PTEN expression, which was associated with an inferior TTF1 (first-line therapy; HR 0.61, P=0.02) and TTF2 (HR 0.66, P=0.04). The KRAS wild-type status was associated with improved OS (HR 1.68, P=0.005); no significant OS correlation was found for EGFR-IHC (HR 0.96), EGFR-FISH (HR 1.22), PTEN-IHC (HR 0.77), intron 1 (HR 0.91) or exon 13 R497K PM (HR 0.83). None of the six biomarkers correlated with the occurrence of skin rash.Conclusion:The KRAS wild-type was associated with an improved OS in erlotinib-treated PC patients in this phase 3 study; it remains to be defined whether this association is prognostic or predictive. © 2013 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Loading Practice for Medical Oncology collaborators
Loading Practice for Medical Oncology collaborators