Search

Introduction: Nivolumab is the first checkpoint inhibitor approved for the treatment of nonsquamous NSCLC. We report results from the nivolumab Italian expanded access program focusing on never-smokers and patients with EGFR-mutant nonsqamous NSCLC., Methods: Nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) was administered upon physicians' request to patients who had relapsed after one or more prior systemic treatments for stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous NSCLC. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab., Results: Of 1588 patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, 305 (19.2%) were never-smokers. EGFR status was available for 1395 patients. Of the 102 patients (6.4%) with EGFR mutation-positive tumors, 51 (50%) were never-smokers. The objective response rate was significantly higher in patients with wild-type EGFR than patients with EGFR-mutant tumors (19.6% versus 8.8% [p = 0.007]), in former and current smokers than in never-smokers (21.5% versus 9.2% [p = 0.0001]), and in never-smokers with wild-type EGFR than in never-smokers with mutant EGFR (11.0% versus 1.9% [p = 0.04]). There was no significant difference in objective response rate between smokers with wild-type EGFR and smokers with mutant EGFR (22.0% versus 20.6%). There was no statistically significant difference in median progression-free survival or in median overall survival. The median overall survival times were 11 months in patients with EGFR wild-type tumors versus 8.3 months in patients with EGFR-mutant tumors, 11.6 months in smokers versus 10.0 months in never-smokers, 11.0 months in never-smokers with EGFR wild-type tumors versus 5.6 months in never-smokers with EGFR-mutant tumors, and 14.1 months in smokers with EGFR-mutant tumors versus 11.3 months in smokers with EGFR wild-type tumors., Conclusions: The data on the Italian expanded access program in populations with nonsquamous NSCLC suggest that subgroups of patients could benefit differently from nivolumab according to their EGFR mutational status and smoking habits. These results warrant further investigation., (Copyright © 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We report the results from a first-line phase III randomized clinical trial on metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of adding bevacizumab (B) to standard first-line chemotherapy (CT)., Patients and Methods: mCRC patients were randomized to receive first-line CT (FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4) plus B (arm A) or CT only (arm B). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR) and safety. Three hundred and fifty patients and 310 events were required to have an 80% statistical power to detect a difference in PFS between the groups., Results: Between November 2007 and March 2012, 376 patients were randomized. About 60% of patients received FOLFOX4 and 40% FOLFIRI. After a median follow-up of 36 months, 343 progressions and 275 deaths had been observed in the overall population. The median PFS was 9.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2-10.3] and 8.4 (95% CI 7.2-9.0) months for arms A and B, respectively, with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.70-1.07; P = 0.182). No statistically significant differences in OS or ORR were observed. B-containing regimens were associated with more frequent hypertension, bleeding, proteinuria and asthenia., Conclusions: The addition of B to standard first-line CT for mCRC did not provide a benefit in terms of PFS, OS or ORR. Further research is warranted to better identify the target population., Clinical Trial Number: NCT01878422., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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/m(2) i.v. + 5-FU; 400 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus + 5-FU; 600 mg/m(2) 22-h continuous infusion, days 1 and 2 + CPT-11; 180 mg/m(2) 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.

Background: To determine whether the addition of leucovorin to the combination 5-fluorouracil plus levamisole prolongs disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with radically resected colon cancer (Dukes' B(2-3) and C)., Patients and Methods: Patients (1703) were accrued between March 1992 and February 1995 in a large-scale clinical trial within five Italian cooperative groups. After stratification for center, patients were randomized as follows: arm A, 5-fluorouracil [450 mg/m(2) intravenous (i.v.) bolus on days 1-5] and levamisole (150 mg orally for 3 days, every 14 days for 6 months) versus arm B, 6-S-leucovorin (100 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus on days 1-5) followed by 5-fluorouracil (370 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus on days 1-5), plus levamisole (as arm A), every 4 weeks for six cycles., Results: After a median follow-up of 6.4 years no significant difference was seen for either disease-free survival (58% versus 60%, not significant) or 5-year overall survival (68% versus 71%, not significant), respectively. Gastrointestinal toxicity (World Health Organization grade 3/4) was more frequent in arm B (8% versus 18%, not significant)., Conclusions: In this trial the schedules used showed no statistically significant differences in terms of disease-free survival or overall survival in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) mouthwashes in the prevention of severe mucositis induced by high doses of chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Ninety consecutive patients affected by solid tumors and undergoing high-dose chemotherapy with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation rescue were randomized to receive placebo versus GM-CSF mouthwash 150 micro g/day. Patients were stratified on the basis of the conditioning treatment and the consequent different risk of severe oral mucositis. Treatment was administered from the day after the end of chemotherapy until the resolution of stomatitis and/or neutrophil recovery., Results: The statistical analyses were intention-to-treat and involved all patients who entered the study. The severity of stomatitis was evaluated daily by the physicians according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria. Both study and control groups were compared with respect to the frequency [30% versus 36%, chi(2) exact test, not significant (NS)] and mean duration (4.8 +/- 4.7 versus 4.4 +/- 2.7 days, t-test, NS) of severe stomatitis (grade > or =3). Oral pain was evaluated daily by patients themselves by means of a 10 cm analog visual scale: the mean (+/- standard error of the mean) maximum mucositis scores were 4.8 +/- 3.5 versus 4.2 +/- 3.5 cm (t-test, NS). Furthermore, 15/46 patients in the study group (33%) and 19/44 patients in the control group experienced pain requiring opioids (chi(2) exact test, NS)., Conclusion: We did not find any evidence to indicate that prophylaxis with GM-CSF mouthwash can help to reduce the severity of mucositis in the setting of the patients we studied.

Background: Different 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) schedules and/or biochemical modulators may result in different mechanisms of cytotoxicity, potentially affecting the correlation between thymidylate synthase (TS) expression and the clinical response to the fluoropyrimidine., Patients and Methods: TS levels were measured immunohistochemically on archival specimens of colorectal cancer metastases from 124 patients homogeneously treated in a series of clinical trials at our institutions with: (A) leucovorin (LV)-modulated infusional 5-FU (n = 48); (B) LV-modulated bolus 5-FU (n = 41); (C) methotrexate (MTX)-modulated bolus 5-FU (n = 35)., Results: A statistically significant correlation between TS levels and the clinical response was observed with the regimens involving continuous infusion and/or LV modulation (response rate in patients with low and high TS: 66% versus 24%, P = 0.003, and 50% versus 0%, P = 0.0001, in group A and B, respectively). Conversely, TS levels failed to predict the clinical response within the group of patients treated with MTX-modulated bolus 5-FU (response rate 21% versus 13%, P = 0.50, with low and high TS, respectively). Consistently, the median time to progression/overall survival time in patients with low and high TS were 9 versus 6 months/19 versus 14 months (P = 0.009/0.035, group A), 8 versus 2 months/12 versus 6 months (P = 0.002/0.0006, group B) and 3 versus 2 months/12 versus 13 months (P = 0.14/0.74, group C)., Conclusions: The correlation between intratumoral TS levels and the clinical response to 5-FU depends strongly on the schedule of administration/biochemical modulators that are used in different 5-FU regimens. These data strengthen the notion that different 5-FU schedules have different mechanisms of cytotoxicity.

Background: We have recently suggested that bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) may work via a RNA directed mechanism while continuous infusion 5-FU may kill cells via a thymidylate synthase related pathway. It may thus be possible to selectively modulate each schedule biochemically. We have compared an alternating regimen of bolus and continuous infusion 5-FU, selectively modulated for the schedule of administration, with modulated bolus 5-FU in advanced colorectal cancer patients., Patients and Methods: Two hundred fourteen patients from nineteen Italian centers were randomized to the control arm consisting of biweekly cycles of MTX, 200 mg/m2 on day 1, followed by bolus 5-FU 600 mg/m2 on day 2 and 6-S-leucovorin rescue, or to the experimental arm consisting of two biweekly cycles of the same regimen as in the control arm alternated to three weeks of continuous infusion 5-FU (200 mg/m2 day) + weekly bolus 6-S-leucovorin, 20 mg/m2., Results: Nine CR and twenty-seven PR were obtained on one hundred eleven evaluable patients treated in experimental arm (RR = 32%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 24%-42%), while two CR and eleven PR were observed among one hundred three evaluable patients in control arm (RR = 13%, 95% CI: 7%-21%). WHO grade 3-4 toxicity occurred in 13% of cycles of experimental arm and in 8% of cycles in control arm. The PFS was significantly longer in experimental arm (6.2 vs. 4.3 months, odds ratio 0.66, P = 0.003), while the overall survival was similar in both arms (14.8 months in experimental arm vs. 14.1 months in control arm); quality of life was similar as well. Eighty percent of patients receiving second-line chemotherapy in control arm were treated with continuous infusion 5-FU., Conclusions: Alternating, schedule-specific biochemical modulation of FU is more active than MTX --> 5-FU as first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. However, the overall survival was similar suggesting that alternating bolus and infusional 5-FU upfront may be as effective as giving them in sequence as first- and second-line treatment.