Saggar J.K.,University of Toronto |
Fung A.S.,University of Toronto |
Patel K.J.,University of Toronto |
Tannock I.F.,University of Toronto |
Tannock I.F.,Princess Margaret Cancer Center
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics | Year: 2013
Poor distribution of anticancer drugs within solid tumorsmaylimit their effectiveness. Here,wecharacterize the distribution within solid tumors of biomarkers of drug effect. γ-H2AX, cleaved-caspase-3 or -6, and Ki67 were quantified in tumor sections in relation to blood vessels (recognized by CD31) using monoclonal antibodies and immunohistochemistry. To validate their use, we compared their time-dependent distribution with that of (i) fluorescent doxorubicin and (ii) a monoclonal antibody that detects melphalan-induced DNA adducts. The biomarkers were then used to quantify the distribution of docetaxel in relation to tumor blood vessels. Activation of γ-H2AX was evaluated following in vitro exposure of tumor cells to multiple drugs. Distributions of doxorubicin in MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 xenografts and of melphalan- inducedDNAadducts in MCF-7 and EMT-6 tumors decreased with distance from blood vessels, similar to the distributions of (i) γ-H2AX at 10 minutes, (ii) cleaved caspase-3 or -6, and (iii) change in Ki67 at 24 hours following treatment. The distribution of these biomarkers following treatment with docetaxel also decreased with increasing distance from tumor blood vessels. Activation of γ-H2AX occurred within 1 hour after exposure to several drugs in culture. Multiple anticancer drugs show a decrease in activity with increasing distance from tumor blood vessels; poor drug distribution is an important cause of drug resistance. The above biomarkers may be used in designing strategies to overcome therapeutic resistance by modifying or complementing the limited spatial distribution of drug activity in solid tumors. © 2013 American Association for Cancer Research.
Schlumberger M.,University Paris - Sud |
Tahara M.,National Cancer Center Hospital East |
Wirth L.J.,Massachusetts General Hospital |
Robinson B.,University of Sydney |
And 15 more authors.
New England Journal of Medicine | Year: 2015
Results The median progression-free survival was 18.3 months in the lenvatinib group and 3.6 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.21; 99% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.31; P<0.001). A progression-free survival benefit associated with lenvatinib was observed in all prespecified subgroups. The response rate was 64.8% in the lenvatinib group (4 complete responses and 165 partial responses) and 1.5% in the placebo group (P<0.001). The median overall survival was not reached in either group. Treatment-related adverse effects of any grade, which occurred in more than 40% of patients in the lenvatinib group, were hypertension (in 67.8% of the patients), diarrhea (in 59.4%), fatigue or asthenia (in 59.0%), decreased appetite (in 50.2%), decreased weight (in 46.4%), and nausea (in 41.0%). Discontinuations of the study drug because of adverse effects occurred in 37 patients who received lenvatinib (14.2%) and 3 patients who received placebo (2.3%). In the lenvatinib group, 6 of 20 deaths that occurred during the treatment period were considered to be drug-related.Conclusions Lenvatinib, as compared with placebo, was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival and the response rate among patients with iodine-131-refractory thyroid cancer. Patients who received lenvatinib had more adverse effects. (Funded by Eisai; SELECT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01321554.) Copyright © 2015 Massachusetts Medical Society.Background Lenvatinib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, fibroblast growth factor receptors 1 through 4, platelet-derived growth factor receptor á, RET, and KIT, showed clinical activity in a phase 2 study involving patients with differentiated thyroid cancer that was refractory to radioiodine (iodine-131).Methods In our phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study involving patients with progressive thyroid cancer that was refractory to iodine-131, we randomly assigned 261 patients to receive lenvatinib (at a daily dose of 24 mg per day in 28-day cycles) and 131 patients to receive placebo. At the time of disease progression, patients in the placebo group could receive open-label lenvatinib. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included the response rate, overall survival, and safety.
Oza A.M.,Princess Margaret Cancer Center |
Cibula D.,General University Hospital |
Benzaquen A.O.,University of Barcelona |
Poole C.,Coventry University |
And 15 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2015
Background: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib has shown antitumour activity in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer with or without BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of olaparib in combination with chemotherapy, followed by olaparib maintenance monotherapy, versus chemotherapy alone in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Methods: In this randomised, open-label, phase 2 study, adult patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent, high-grade serous ovarian cancer who had received up to three previous courses of platinum-based chemotherapy and who were progression free for at least 6 months before randomisation received either olaparib (200 mg capsules twice daily, administered orally on days 1-10 of each 21-day cycle) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2, administered intravenously on day 1) and carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 4 mg/mL per min, according to the Calvert formula, administered intravenously on day 1), then olaparib monotherapy (400 mg capsules twice daily, given continuously) until progression (the olaparib plus chemotherapy group), or paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 on day 1) and carboplatin (AUC 6 mg/mL per min on day 1) then no further treatment (the chemotherapy alone group). Randomisation was done by an interactive voice response system, stratified by number of previous platinum-containing regimens received and time to disease progression after the previous platinum regimen. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, analysed by intention to treat. Prespecified exploratory analyses included efficacy by BRCA mutation status, assessed retrospectively. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01081951, and has been completed. Findings: Between Feb 12 and July 30, 2010, 173 patients at 43 investigational sites in 12 countries were enrolled into the study, of whom 162 were eligible and were randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (81 to the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 81 to the chemotherapy alone group). Of these randomised patients, 156 were treated in the combination phase (81 in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 75 in the chemotherapy alone group) and 121 continued to the maintenance or no further treatment phase (66 in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 55 in the chemotherapy alone group). BRCA mutation status was known for 107 patients (either at baseline or determined retrospectively): 41 (38%) of 107 had a BRCA mutation (20 in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 21 in the chemotherapy alone group). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group (median 12·2 months [95% CI 9·7-15·0]) than in the chemotherapy alone group (median 9·6 months [95% CI 9·1-9·7) (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·34-0·77]; p=0·0012), especially in patients with BRCA mutations (HR 0·21 [0·08-0·55]; p=0·0015). In the combination phase, adverse events that were reported at least 10% more frequently with olaparib plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone were alopecia (60 [74%] of 81 vs 44 [59%] of 75), nausea (56 [69%] vs 43 [57%]), neutropenia (40 [49%] vs 29 [39%]), diarrhoea (34 [42%] vs 20 [27%]), headache (27 [33%] vs seven [9%]), peripheral neuropathy (25 [31%] vs 14 [19%]), and dyspepsia (21 [26%] vs 9 [12%]); most were of mild-to-moderate intensity. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events during the combination phase were neutropenia (in 35 [43%] of 81 patients in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group vs 26 [35%] of 75 in the chemotherapy alone group) and anaemia (seven [9%] vs five [7%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 12 (15%) of 81 patients in the olaparib plus chemotherapy group and 16 of 75 (21%) patients in the chemotherapy alone group. Interpretation: Olaparib plus paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by maintenance monotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin alone, with the greatest clinical benefit in BRCA-mutated patients, and had an acceptable and manageable tolerability profile. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.
Sahgal A.,Princess Margaret Cancer Center
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2013
Vertebral compression fracture (VCF) is increasingly recognized as an adverse event after spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). We report a multi-institutional study aimed at clarifying the risk and predictive factors associated with VCF. A total of 252 patients with 410 spinal segments treated with SBRT were included. The primary outcome was the development of VCF (a new VCF or progression of a baseline VCF). In addition to various patient-, treatment-, and tumor-specific factors, the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Scoring (SINS) system was applied to determine predictive value. The median follow-up was 11.5 months (range, 0.03 to 113 months). The median and mean overall survival rates were 16 and 26 months, respectively. We observed 57 fractures (57 of 410, 14%), with 47% (27 of 57) new fractures and 53% (30 of 57) fracture progression. The median time to VCF was 2.46 months (range, 0.03 to 43.01 months), and 65% occurred within the first 4 months. The 1- and 2-year cumulative incidences of fracture were 12.35% and 13.49%, respectively. Multivariable analysis identified dose per fraction (greatest risk for ≥ 24 Gy v 20 to 23 Gy v ≤ 19 Gy), in addition to three of the six original SINS criteria: baseline VCF, lytic tumor, and spinal deformity, as significant predictors of VCF. Caution must be observed when treating with ≥ 20 Gy/fraction, in particular, for patients with lytic tumor, spinal misalignment, and a baseline VCF. Frequent short-term follow-up is required, as nearly two thirds of all VCF occurred within the first 4 months. We also conclude that SINS may have utility in predicting patients at high risk of SBRT-induced VCF.
Puts M.T.E.,University of Toronto |
Santos B.,University of Toronto |
Hardt J.,University of Toronto |
Monette J.,McGill University |
And 4 more authors.
Annals of Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: Our previous systematic review of geriatric assessment (GA) in oncology included a literature search up to November 2010. However, the quickly evolving field warranted an update. Aims of this review: (i) provide an overview of all GA instruments developed and/or in use in the oncology setting; (ii) evaluate effectiveness of GA in predicting/modifying outcomes (e.g. treatment decision impact, treatment toxicity, mortality, use of care). Materials and methods: Systematic review of literature published between November 2010 and 10 August 2012. English, Dutch, French and German-language articles reporting cross-sectional or longitudinal, intervention or observational studies of GA instruments were included. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Two researchers independently reviewed abstracts, abstracted data and assessed the quality using standardized forms. A meta-analysis method of combining proportions was used for the outcome impact of GA on treatment modification with studies included in this update combined with those included in our previous systematic review on the use of GA. Results: Thirty-five manuscripts reporting 34 studies were identified. Quality of most studies was moderate to good. Eighteen studies were prospective, 11 cross-sectional and 5 retrospective. Three studies examined treatment decisionmaking impact and found decisions changed for fewer than half of assessed patients (weighted percent modification is 23.2% with 95% confidence interval (20.3% to 26.1%). Seven studies reported conflicting findings regarding predictive ability of GA for treatment toxicity/complications. Eleven studies examined GA predictions of mortality, and reported that instrumental activities of daily living, poor performance status and more numerous GA deficits were associated with increased mortality risk. Other outcomes could not be meta-analyzed. Conclusion: Consistent with our previous review, several domains of GA are associated with adverse outcomes. However, further research examining effectiveness of GA on treatment decisions and oncologic outcomes is needed. © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved.