Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE: To determine the toxicity and efficacy of combined therapy with cisplatin and prolonged infusion topotecan as front line therapy in women with epithelial ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with previously untreated, measurable and non-measurable epithelial ovarian cancer, stages Ic-IV were eligible. Patients were treated with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, followed by topotecan 0.3 to 0.4 mg/m(2)/day given as a continuous infusion over 14-21 days, every 28 days. Dose levels and duration of infusion were adjusted for toxicity as appropriate. Patients were evaluated for response to treatment and treatment toxicity by standard NYGOG criteria. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled. Among the 20 patients with post-surgical residual disease >2 cm, 80% [95% CI (56.3%, 94.3%)] demonstrated an objective response to therapy. The median progression-free survival for all 60 patients enrolled was 19.3 months with a median overall survival of 45.6 months given the median follow-up of 55 months (range 6-81 months). Five year survival is estimated to be 41%. Toxicity was observed in the first four patients treated with topotecan (0.4 mg/m(2)/day x 21 days) and dosing was continued at 0.3 mg/m(2)/day x 14 days thereafter. Of the 56 patients treated at the amended dose level, marrow suppression continued to be dose-limiting, with 86% of patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, 55% experiencing grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia and 50% of patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 anemia. Nonetheless, only 11/245 cycles administered were associated with febrile neutropenia and/or infection (8 port-related). Other non-hematologic toxicity was as expected. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: This large, multicenter phase II study of prolonged infusion topotecan in combination with cisplatin demonstrated similar response, time to progression and survival compared with reported results of taxane and platinum combinations. Hematologic toxicity was greater but tolerated. Further studies investigating topotecan in combination with platinum therapy as a first line agent are warranted

A phase II trial, using neoadjuvant chemotherapy and intraperitoneal (IP) consolidation, was conducted in patients with locally advanced, potentially resectable gastric cancer or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction, both staged as T3N0, T4N0, or any TN1 or TN2 disease. Preoperative chemotherapy consisted of two cycles of irinotecan 75 mg/m(2) with cisplatin 25 mg/m(2)/week for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week break. Unless disease progression was encountered, surgery was performed and followed by two courses of adjuvant therapy with IP floxuridine 3 g x 3 days plus IP cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 3. Of 32 evaluable patients, 29 (90.6%) underwent surgery, and 25 (86.2%) had R0 on resection. Evidence of primary-tumor downstaging was documented in at least one half of the patients. Toxicity of induction therapy was primarily grade 3/4 neutropenia (38.2%/8.8%), grade 3 diarrhea (20.6%), and grade 3 nausea/vomiting (14.7%). Except for three catheter complications, toxicities with IP therapy were infrequent. After a median follow-up of 28.0 months in 32 patients, 10 patients (31.3%) had no evidence of disease, 4 (12.5%) were alive with disease, 13 (40.6%) had died from disease, and 5 (15.6%) died from unrelated causes. Among 25 patients who underwent R0 resection, there were no local recurrences. Sites of first recurrences were outside the abdominal cavity in seven patients, in the liver in two, and in the abdominal cavity in four patients. Median overall survival for all 32 patients was 36.5 months from the start of treatment after median follow-up of 28 months, whereas median disease-specific survival had not been reached at the time of this analysis. For patients with R0 resection, median overall survival was 48 months after median follow-up of 35 months. The data suggest that an approach consisting of systemic induction therapy, curative surgery with high R0 resection rates, and IP adjuvant therapy has acceptable toxicity and encouraging survival outcomes

Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of gynecologic cancer deaths and accounts for 4% of women's cancer diagnoses and 5% of all cancer mortalities. Despite the ability of current chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery to put patients in remission, most patients with advanced cancer will eventually relapse. Many advances in the treatment of ovarian cancer have been reported in the past several years and a historical background is provided. Attention will then turn to analogs of current chemotherapeutic agents, new cytotoxic drugs, targeted molecular therapy, intraperitoneal therapy and immunotherapy. This review will give a perspective on current drugs, potential agents and upcoming clinical trials

PURPOSE: We performed a phase I study of a day (D) 1 and D4 bortezomib administration once every 2 weeks to determine the recommended phase II dose and toxicity profile, and the extent of 20S proteasome inhibition obtained. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumors or lymphomas were treated with bortezomib at 0.25 to 1.9 mg/m2 on D1 and D4, every 2 weeks. 20S proteasome levels in blood were assayed at baseline and at 1, 4, and 24 hours postdose in cycle 1. RESULTS: On this D1 and D4 every 2 weeks' schedule, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was evident at the 1.75 and 1.9 mg/m2 dose levels, most commonly in patients receiving individual total doses > or = 3.0 mg. The main DLT was peripheral neuropathy evident at the higher doses and in patients previously exposed to neurotoxic agents. Other DLTs included diarrhea and fatigue; grade 3 thrombocytopenia was also noted. Reversible inhibition of 20S proteasome activity was dose dependent and best fit a total dose (mg) per fraction rather than mg/m2; 70% of baseline activity was inhibited by a dose of 3.0 to 3.5 mg given on D1 and on D4 every other week. Antitumor effects short of confirmed partial responses were observed in patients with melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma. CONCLUSION: Bortezomib (PS-341) is a novel antineoplastic agent that is well tolerated at doses not exceeding 3.0 mg (equivalent to 1.75 mg/m2), repeated on D1 and D4 every other week. This dose correlates with 70% inhibition of 20S proteasome activity. DLTs include neuropathy, fatigue, and diarrhea

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicity of Doxil with low-dose continuous infusion topotecan and subsequently with low-dose oral topotecan. Other specific aims were preliminary assessment of activity in advanced ovarian and tubal malignancies, pharmacokinetics of oral topotecan, and correlation of response with topoisomerase I and II expression in tumors. METHODS: Eligible patients had histopathologically documented advanced cancers beyond standard therapy, performance status <2, and adequate organ functions. Doxil (30-40 mg/m2 i.v.) was given on day 1, with topotecan either oral topotecan 0.4 mg/m2 bid for 14 days or continuous infusion topotecan (0.3-0.4 mg/m2/d) for 14 to 21 days, in 28-day cycles. Fifty-seven patients, 23 with epithelial ovarian or tubal cancers were enrolled. Plasma levels of lactone form of topotecan were determined on patients receiving oral topotecan. RESULTS: Grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia and grade 3 diarrhea were dose-limiting toxicities at the highest dose levels explored. Doxil (40 mg/m2/day 1) and continuous infusion topotecan at 0.4 mg/m2/days 1 to 14 could be safely given and is the recommended phase II dose. Oral topotecan was limited by low and erratic plasma topotecan levels and frequent gastrointestinal toxicity. Particularly long partial responses and stable disease were observed in patients with epithelial ovarian or tubal cancers. Clinical benefit (objective responses and stable diseases) correlated with elevated expression of both topoisomerases by immunohistochemistry in four of six epithelial ovarian or tubal cancer tumor samples. CONCLUSION: Doxil with 14-day topotecan infusion is a well-tolerated regimen and suitable for study in platinum-resistant or refractory ovarian or tubal cancers. Frequent gastrointestinal toxicity and/or erratic absorption complicate treatment with a longer topotecan infusion or with oral topotecan, respectively, and these combinations are not recommended