Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: To ascertain if hepatic or renal dysfunction or prior pelvic radiation (XRT) leads to increased toxicity at a given dose of irinotecan and to characterize the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its major metabolites in patients with hepatic or renal dysfunction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults with tumors appropriate for irinotecan therapy and who had abnormal liver or renal function tests or had prior radiation to the pelvis were eligible. Patients were assigned to one of four treatment cohorts: I, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) > or = 3x upper limit of normal and direct bilirubin <1.0 mg/dl; II, direct bilirubin 1.0-7.0 mg/dl; III, creatinine 1.6-5.0 mg/dl with normal liver function; IV, prior pelvic XRT with normal liver and renal function. Starting with reduced doses of either 145 or 225 mg/m(2), irinotecan was administered every 3 weeks to at least three patients within each cohort. Irinotecan and its metabolites in the blood were measured in all patients. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were evaluable for toxicity. No dose-limiting toxicity was seen in cohort I, although only three patients were treated and at a dose of 225 mg/m(2). Patients with elevations of direct bilirubin had dose-limiting toxicities, even though the starting dose was 145 mg/m(2). These same patients appeared to have comparable exposure to the active metabolite SN-38 as normal patients treated with full-dose irinotecan. Patients with elevations of creatinine or with prior pelvic radiotherapy did not appear to have increased risk of toxicity at the doses explored in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with elevated bilirubin treated with irinotecan have an increased risk of toxicity and a dose reduction is recommended. Patients with elevated AST, creatinine or prior pelvic radiation do not appear to have increased sensitivity to irinotecan, but the data are not adequate to support a specific dosing recommendation.

This article gives a brief discussion of "state-of-the-art" therapeutic strategies for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction tumors, with an emphasis on combined-modality therapy. In addition, we review the results of a multimodality trial conducted using a new agent against esophageal cancer, oxaliplatin. In this trial, the emphasis was on the efficacy and toxicity of oxaliplatin in combination with protracted infusion 5-fluorouracil and radiation. A secondary endpoint of the study was the relationship between efficacy and toxicity to specific intratumoral gene expressions within the primary esophageal tumor.

Surgical resection for selected patients with hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer can cure approximately one-fourth of these patients. The addition of regional chemotherapy as an attempt to improve this statistic has been extensively investigated in clinical trials. As part of a multidisciplinary educational program, a series of debates on various topics in oncology are held at the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, involving the medical, surgical, and radiation oncology departments. One such debate focused on the use of regional chemotherapy after potentially curative resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. The representative medical and surgical oncology fellows (N.I.K. and B.P.M.), with guidance from their respective mentors (C.G.L., J.F.G., and N.J.P.), presented concise reviews from the literature arguing for and against the use of regional chemotherapy in this setting. They appear as Parts 1 and 2 in this article. This exercise is purely educational and does not in any way reflect the opinion or the clinical practice of the authors. .

BACKGROUND: Advanced pancreatic cancer has limited treatment options. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is frequently used in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Preclinical studies suggest synergism between trimetrexate (TMTX),5-FU, and leucovorin (NFL). AIM: We conducted a phase II trial to evaluate the activity and safety of NFL in pancreatic cancer. METHOD: Eligible patients (n = 21) with untreated advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with 110 mg/m2 intravenous (IV) THTX on day 1 and 200 mg/m2 IV leucovorin prior to 500 mg/m2 IV 5-FU on day 2. Oral leucovorin (15 mg every 6 h for seven doses) started intravenous 24 h later. RESULTS: Treatment was administered for 6 wk followed by a 2-wk rest period. Response was evaluated every 8 wk. All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Most patients (80%) had distant metastases. Forty-five cycles of chemotherapy were administered. The most common serious toxicities were Grade 3 diarrhea (23.8%) and nausea and vomiting (14.2%). The response rate was 4.1% (95% CI, 0-23%), median survival was 6.8 mo, and 1-yr survival was 19%. CONCLUSION: Treatment with NFL is well-tolerated in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The median survival and 1-yr survival in these patients with poor prognosis compares favorably with other treatment options.

PURPOSE: To investigate the hypothesis that a systemic agent designed to inhibit dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the first enzyme in the fluoropyrimidine degradative pathway, could improve the effective amount of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) delivered to a tumor resulting in enhanced response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility included cytologically or pathologically verified diagnosis of colorectal cancer that recurred during or within 12 months of completion of adjuvant therapy, representing patients generally considered resistant to fluorinated pyrimidine therapy. Stratification was into two cohorts: recurrence while receiving adjuvant therapy, and relapse within 12 months of completing adjuvant therapy. Treatment consisted of 28 days of oral therapy every five weeks with eniluracil and 5-FU administered in a 10:1 ratio. The daily dose of eniluracil was 10 mg/m2 with 5-FU 1 mg/m2, divided into two doses. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients are evaluable for response: 9 relapsed during therapy and 16 relapsed within one year of adjuvant therapy. In the first group, there was one partial response (9%; 95% CI 0-41%); in the second cohort there was one confirmed complete response (5%; 95% CI 0-23%) and one unconfirmed partial response, for an overall response rate of 10%. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen lacks significant activity in this target population. Pre-treatment intratumoral DPD expression was not assessed, therefore the mechanism of fluorinated pyrimidine resistance cannot be specifically attributed to elevated DPD levels. Attempting restoration of chemotherapy sensitivity through blockade of enzymes or signal transduction molecules responsible for resistance is rational, provided that tumor target expression is the basis for trial entry.

PURPOSE: The pulmonary effects of concurrent radiation therapy and chemotherapy were studied in patients enrolled in a phase I trial for esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pulmonary function tests were performed prospectively before and after combined-modality therapy (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and radiation therapy) in 20 patients with esophageal cancer. Cumulative and differential lung DVH analysis from 0 to 5400 cGy in 25-cGy intervals was performed for the last 15 patients. Correlation between radiation exposure in various dose ranges and percent reduction in pulmonary function tests was calculated as an exploratory analysis. RESULTS: Significant reductions in carbon monoxide diffusion capacity corrected for hemoglobin (12.3%) and total lung capacity (2.5%) were evident at a median of 15.5 days after radiation therapy. DVH analysis revealed that the single dose of maximum correlation between lung volume radiation exposure and lung function reduction was less than 1000 cGy for all pulmonary functions. The percent lung volume that received a total dose between 700 and 1000 cGy maximally correlated with the percent reductions in total lung capacity and vital capacity, and the absolute lung volume that received a total dose between 700 and 1000 cGy maximally correlated with the percent reductions in total lung capacity, vital capacity, and carbon monoxide diffusion capacity. DISCUSSION: Significant declines in carbon monoxide diffusion capacity and total lung capacity are evident immediately after the administration of conformal radiation therapy, oxaliplatin, and 5-fluorouracil for esophageal cancer. Other lung functions remain statistically unchanged. The percent or absolute lung volume that received a total dose between 700 and 1000 cGy may be significantly correlated with the percent decline of carbon monoxide diffusion capacity, total lung capacity, and vital capacity. These associations will be evaluated further in a follow-up study.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities(DLTs), and pharmacokinetics of S-1, a combination of tegafur, 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine (CDHP), and oxonic acid, administered once daily in patients with advanced cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eighteen patients with refractory malignancies were treated with S-1 administered once daily for 21 consecutive days, followed by a 1-week break. Of 16 evaluable patients, 6 were treated at a dose of 50 mg/m(2)/day, and 10 were treated at 60 mg/m(2)/day. RESULTS: DLTs were observed in 1 of 6 evaluable patients treated with 50 mg/m(2)/day and in 4 of 10 evaluable patients treated with 60 mg/m(2)/day. DLTs included diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, and hyperbilirubinemia. The maximum tolerated dose was 50 mg/m(2)/day. Pharmacokinetic data are consistent with potent modulation of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) by CDHP, with prolonged half-life and 5-FU AUC at least 10-fold higher than reported in previous studies of equitoxic doses of tegafur modulated by uracil. Pharmacodynamic analysis demonstrated a correlation between diarrhea grade and both 5-FU C(max) (r = 0.57, P < 0.05) and 5-FU area under the curve (r = 0.74, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The recommended Phase II dose of S-1 administered once daily for 21 consecutive days of 28 is 50 mg/m(2). The pharmacokinetic data presented provide evidence of 5-FU modulation by CDHP. Pharmacodynamic analyses suggest that the utility of pharmacology-based dosing of S-1 should be explored in future trials. Evaluation of once-daily dosing of S-1 in malignancies for which fluoropyrimidines have known antitumor activity is warranted.

PURPOSE: To identify a dose and schedule of oxaliplatin (OXP) to be safely administered in combination with protracted-infusion (PI) fluorouracil (5-FU) and external-beam radiation therapy (XRT) for patients with primary esophageal carcinoma (EC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility included therapeutically naive EC patients with clinical disease stages II, III, or IV. Initial doses and schedules for cycle 1 consisted of OXP 85 mg/m(2) on days 1, 15, and 29; PI 5-FU 180 mg/m(2) for 24 hours for 35 days; and XRT 1.8 Gy in 28 fractions starting on day 8. At completion of cycle 1, eligible patients could undergo an operation or begin cycle 2 without XRT. Postoperative patients were eligible for cycle 2. Stage IV patients were allowed three cycles in the absence of disease progression. OXP and 5-FU increases were based on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) encountered in cohorts of three consecutive patients. RESULTS: Thirty-eight eligible patients received therapy: 22 noninvasively staged as IV and 16 noninvasively staged as II and III. Thirty-six patients completed cycle 1, 29 patients started cycle 2, and 24 patients completed cycle 2. The combined-modality therapy was well tolerated, but DLT prevented OXP and 5-FU escalation. No grade 4 hematologic toxicity was noted. Eleven grade 3 and two grade 4 clinical toxicities were noted in eight patients. After cycle 1, 29 patients (81%) had no cancer in the esophageal mucosa. Thirteen patients underwent an operation with intent to resect the esophagus; five patients (38%) exhibited pathologic complete responses. CONCLUSION: OXP 85 mg/m(2) on days 1, 15, and 29 administered with PI 5-FU and XRT is safe, tolerable, and seems effective against primary EC. The role of OXP in multimodality regimens against EC deserves further evaluation.

As the roles of specific genes and their functions in cancer etiology and progression become defined, the necessity of looking at multiple genes and their interaction becomes clearer. In gastrointestinal cancer, tumor suppressor and promoter genes, cell cycle control and angiogenic factors, repair genes, and metabolic genes have been examined as they relate to prognosis and therapeutic outcomes. To date, most correlative studies for specific molecular parameters have been done retrospectively. Methodologies, sample sizes, and definitions differ. The following analysis provides a brief review of the current state of knowledge and recent research on the most commonly studied molecular markers, and the newer areas of inquiry attempting to define how to use molecular-genetic features of individual tumors as targets for more effective therapies. Consideration is given to the design of trials employing molecular targets as outcome factors.