Docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil; docetaxel and cisplatin; and epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as systemic treatment for advanced gastric carcinoma: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research. Treatment of patients with advanced gastric carcinoma with a 5-fluorouracil-based or a cisplatin-based regimen: two parallel randomized phase II studies. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Randomized multicenter phase II trial of a biweekly regimen of fluorouracil and leucovorin (LV5FU2), LV5FU2 plus cisplatin, or LV5FU2 plus irinotecan in patients with previously untreated metastatic gastric cancer: a Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive Group Study--FFCD 9803. Quality of life in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomized trial comparing docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-FU (TCF) with epirubicin, cisplatin, 5-FU (ECF). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck. Controlled evaluation of three drug combination regimens versus fluorouracil alone for the therapy of advanced gastric cancer. North Central Cancer Treatment Group. A randomized, comparative study of combination chemotherapies in advanced gastric cancer: 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (FP) versus 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, and 4'-epirubicin (FPEPIR). Kyoto Research Group for Chemotherapy of Gastric Cancer (KRGCGC). Mature results from a randomized Phase II trial of cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil and radiotherapy with or without tirapazamine in patients with resectable Stage IV head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. A randomized study comparing two regimens of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in multimodal therapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. Cisplatin, fluorouracil, and docetaxel in unresectable head and neck cancer. A Randomized Study of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Is Chemotherapy Useful after Complete Remission? Neoadjuvant cisplatin, methotrexate, and vinblastine chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a randomised controlled trial. International collaboration of trialists. Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life. Prospectively randomized trial of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-risk colon cancer. Randomized trial comparing epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and methotrexate in advanced esophagogastric cancer. Biweekly oxaliplatin, fluorouracil and leucovorin versus cisplatin, fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Addition of bevacizumab to bolus fluorouracil and leucovorin in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a randomized phase II trial. Neoadjuvant therapy with cisplatin/fluorouracil vs cisplatin/UFT in locally advanced squamous cell head and neck cancer. Cisplatin-cyclophosphamide-mitomycin combination chemotherapy with supportive care versus supportive care alone for treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Superior survival with capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: phase III trial results. Randomized comparison between chemotherapy plus best supportive care with best supportive care in advanced gastric cancer. 5-Fluorouracil versus folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil in advanced, hormone-resistant prostate cancer: a prospective randomized pilot trial. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. [Randomized trial of initial chemotherapy with cisplatin alone or in combination in 241 advanced carcinomas of the upper respiratory and digestive tract]. Randomized phase III study comparing irinotecan combined with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid to cisplatin combined with 5-fluorouracil in chemotherapy naive patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophagogastric junction. Randomised comparison of combination chemotherapy plus supportive care with supportive care alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Prospective randomized trial of the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma using chemotherapy with cisplatin, dacarbazine, and tamoxifen alone or in combination with interleukin-2 and interferon alfa-2b. A phase III trial of ifosfamide with or without cisplatin in carcinosarcoma of the uterus: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Phase III study of docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil compared with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a report of the V325 Study Group. Randomized trial of the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer with combination therapy incorporating the oral pyrimidine 1-hexylcarbamoyl-5-fluorouracil. Neoadjuvant cisplatin-methotrexate chemotherapy for invasive bladder cancer -- Nordic cystectomy trial 2.
This randomized phase II trial evaluated two docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to overall response rate (ORR) for comparison in a phase III trial with epirubicin-cisplatin-fluorouracil (ECF) as first-line advanced gastric cancer therapy.
                Chemotherapy-naïve patients with measurable unresectable and/or metastatic gastric carcinoma, a performance status <or= 1, and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function randomly received <or= eight 3-weekly cycles of ECF (epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1, cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1, and fluorouracil [FU] 200 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 21), TC (docetaxel initially 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 [later reduced to 75 mg/m(2) as a result of toxicity] and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1), or TCF (TC plus FU 300 mg/m(2)/d on days 1 to 14). Study objectives included response (primary), survival, toxicity, and quality of life (QOL).
                ORR was 25.0% (95% CI, 13% to 41%) for ECF, 18.5% (95% CI, 9% to 34%) for TC, and 36.6% (95% CI, 23% to 53%) for TCF (n = 119). Median overall survival times were 8.3, 11.0, and 10.4 months for ECF, TC, and TCF, respectively. Toxicity was acceptable, with one toxic death (TC arm). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurred in more treatment cycles with docetaxel (TC, 49%; TCF, 57%; ECF, 34%). Global health status/QOL substantially improved with ECF and remained similar to baseline with both docetaxel regimens.
                Time to response and ORR favor TCF over TC for further evaluation, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting. A trend towards increased myelosuppression and infectious complications with TCF versus TC or ECF was observed. Although many drug combination therapies have been proposed, there is no standard therapy for patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. The superiority of combination therapy over monochemotherapy has not been demonstrated convincingly. To explore the role of monochemotherapy, the authors evaluated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), modulated by 6S-leucovorin (6S-LV) and a cisplatin-containing regimen, which was comprised of epirubicin, etoposide, and cisplatin with the addition of the reversal agent lonidamine (EEP-L).
                After stratification according to performance status (PS) and resection of the primary tumor, 72 patients with advanced gastric carcinoma were randomized to 2 parallel Phase II trials with 5-FU/6S-LV and EEP-L, respectively. Thirty-six patients in Study A received bolus 6S-LV, 100 mg/m2, followed by bolus 5-FU, 370 mg/m2, on Days 1-5 and 36 others in Study B received epirubicin, 30 mg/m2, on Days 1 and 5; etoposide, 100 mg/m2, on Days 1, 3, and 5; cisplatin, 30 mg/m2, on Days 2 and 4; and lonidamine, 150 mg/day.
                There were 6 partial responses (18.2%) (95% confidence interval [CI] +/- 13.2) in Study A and 7 partial responses (21.9%) (95% CI +/- 14.3) in Study B. Partial responses were more frequent in patients with resected tumors or with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 0-1. The median duration of response was 8.8 and 8.3 months, respectively, in Study A and Study B. The median survival reached 8 months in Study A and 9 months in Study B. In the whole population of patients survival was significantly higher in patients with a PS of 0-1 (P < 0.05). Patients with a PS of 0-1 and a resected tumor had the significantly longest survival both in EEP-L treated patients and in all evaluable patients in the two studies. The most frequent World Health Organization Grade 3-4 toxic effects were gastrointestinal in Study A and hematologic in Study B. No treatment-related death was observed.
                The efficacy of 5-FU, modulated with 6S-LV, is moderate in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma, similar to cisplatin-containing regimens. PS and other prognostic factors could influence the response rate, which does not appear to be a reliable parameter for evaluating the outcome of chemotherapy trials. To evaluate whether treatment with single-agent docetaxel would result in longer survival than would best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who had previously been treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Secondary end points included assessment of response (docetaxel arm only), toxicity, and quality of life.
                Patients with performance statuses of 0 to 2 and stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer with either measurable or evaluable lesions were eligible for entry onto the study if they had undergone one or more platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and if they had adequate hematology and biochemistry parameters. They were excluded if they had symptomatic brain metastases or if they had previously been treated with paclitaxel. Patients were stratified by performance status and best response to cisplatin chemotherapy and were then randomized to treatment with docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) (49 patients) or 75 mg/m(2) (55 patients) or best supportive care. Patients in both arms were assessed every 3 weeks.
                One hundred four patients (103 of whom were eligible for entry onto the study) were well balanced for prognostic factors. Of 84 patients with measurable lesions, six (7. 1%) achieved partial responses (three patients at each dose level). Time to progression was longer for docetaxel patients than for best supportive care patients (10.6 v 6.7 weeks, respectively; P <.001), as was median survival (7.0 v 4.6 months; log-rank test, P =.047). The difference was more significant for docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) patients, compared with corresponding best supportive care patients (7.5 v 4.6 months; log-rank test, P =.010; 1-year survival, 37% v 11%; chi(2) test, P =.003). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 11 patients treated with docetaxel 100 mg/m(2), three of whom died, and in one patient treated with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2). Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicity, with the exception of diarrhea, occurred at a similar rate in both the docetaxel and best supportive care groups.
                Treatment with docetaxel is associated with significant prolongation of survival, and at a dose of 75 mg/m(2), the benefits of docetaxel therapy outweigh the risks. To determine the efficacy and safety of a biweekly regimen of leucovorin (LV) plus fluorouracil (FU) alone or in combination with cisplatin or irinotecan in patients with previously untreated metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma and to select the best arm for a phase III study.
                One hundred thirty-six patients (two were ineligible) were enrolled onto the randomized multicenter phase II trial. Patients received LV 200 mg/m(2) (2-hour infusion) followed by FU 400 mg/m(2) (bolus) and FU 600 mg/m(2) (22-hour continuous infusion) on days 1 and 2 every 14 days (LV5FU2; arm A), LV5FU2 plus cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) (1-hour infusion) on day 1 or 2 (arm B), or LV5FU2 plus irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) (2-hour infusion) on day 1 (arm C).
                The overall response rates, which were confirmed by an independent expert panel, were 13% (95% CI, 3.4% to 23.3%), 27% (95% CI, 14.1% to 40.4%), and 40% (95% CI, 25.7% to 54.3%) for arms A, B, and C, respectively. Median progression-free survival and overall survival times were 3.2 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 4.6 months) and 6.8 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 11.1 months) with LV5FU2, respectively; 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.5 to 6.3 months) and 9.5 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 12.2 months) with LV5FU2-cisplatin, respectively; and 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 8.3 months) and 11.3 months (95% CI, 9.3 to 13.3 months) with LV5FU2-irinotecan, respectively.
                Of the three regimens tested, the combination of LV5FU2-irinotecan is the most promising and will be assessed in a phase III trial. Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important outcome after treatment for upper gastrointestinal carcinoma. This study aimed to compare HRQOL in patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC) receiving either a standard or an experimental treatment.
                Seventy-one patients have been treated in Cancer Institute (Tehran, Iran) with docetaxel, cisplatin, 5 FU (TCF) or epirubicin, cisplatin, 5-FU (ECF) and were followed from Jan 2002 to Jan 2005. End points were response rate, HRQOL and survival. HRQOL was assessed using the EORCT QLQ-C30 at baseline and after the third cycle of chemotherapy.
                The baseline HRQOL scores were comparable between two groups. After treatment improvement was seen in a number of items and domains except for cognitive functioning, and diarrhoea. Pain decreased and physical functioning improved in both groups. However, only the TCF group showed statistically and clinically meaningful improvement in global QOL (P = 0.001). Surgical and pathologic response was better with TCF but there was no difference in survival rate between two groups.
                Docetaxel based treatment (TCF) showed better palliation and improvement of global QOL as compared with epirubicin based treatment (ECF). However, it seems that regardless of treatment offered, effective chemotherapy was the most important factor affecting QOL in these patients. The monoclonal antibody trastuzumab has survival benefit when given with chemotherapy to patients with early, operable, and metastatic breast cancer that has HER2 (also known as ERBB2) overexpression or amplification. We aimed to assess event-free survival in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without 1 year of trastuzumab.
                We compared 1 year of treatment with trastuzumab (given as neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment; n=117) with no trastuzumab (118), in women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer treated with a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen consisting of doxorubicin, paclitaxel, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. Randomisation was done with a computer program and minimisation technique, taking account of geographical area, disease stage, and hormone receptor status. Investigators were informed of treatment allocation. A parallel cohort of 99 patients with HER2-negative disease was included and treated with the same chemotherapy regimen. Primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN86043495.
                Trastuzumab significantly improved event-free survival in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (3-year event-free survival, 71% [95% CI 61-78; n=36 events] with trastuzumab, vs 56% [46-65; n=51 events] without; hazard ratio 0.59 [95% CI 0.38-0.90]; p=0.013). Trastuzumab was well tolerated and, despite concurrent administration with doxorubicin, only two patients (2%) developed symptomatic cardiac failure. Both responded to cardiac drugs.
                The addition of neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered for women with HER2-positive locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer to improve event-free survival, survival, and clinical and pathological tumour responses.
                F Hoffmann-La Roche.
                Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. We investigated a phase III randomized trial to compare efficacy and tolerance of CDDP + 5-FU to CDDP + VP16, both given intravenously in patients with unresectable advanced head and neck cancer. The 197 eligible patients were paired off successively on the basis of tumor sites and UICC stage. Comparisons were made through sequential closed plans. In 179 patients, tumor beds and cervical lymph nodes were irradiated, and 20 patients underwent salvage surgical procedures. Cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil showed a response (CR + PR) rate of 15% greater than that observed with cisplatin plus etoposide (alpha=0.05, power 70%). Complete responses played a major role in the CDDP + 5-FU regimen. Furthermore, we noted a higher cervical node regression with this chemotherapy combination. Because radiotherapy was administered after chemotherapy, we could not analyze the mean duration response for each protocol. No significant difference in survival existed between the two groups. Myelosuppression was the most frequent sign of toxicity observed, especially with the CDDP + VP16 regimen. Mucositis was rare with allopurinol protection. In the CDDP + 5-FU group, one patient had grade 4 cardiac dysfunction, and 3 patients exhibited unconsciousness that may be related to cerebral vascular damage. Thirteen patients died, with 8 cases related to septic shock (5 CPPP + VP16 and 3 CDDP + 5-FU). Cisplatin plus 5-FU chemotherapy showed a satisfactory efficacy and acceptable toxicity profile compared with CDDP + VP16, with caution to patients with a cardiac or vascular history. Although we could not show a benefit in survival with the CDDP + 5-FU protocol, this trial supports literature data and confirms that this regimen may be proposed as a first-line therapy in advanced cancer of the head and neck. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness of fluorouracil (5-FU), doxorubicin, and methyl lomustine (CCNU) (FAMe), 5-FU, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (FAP), and FAMe alternating with triazinate (TZT) when compared with a standard therapy of 5-FU alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer.
                Two hundred fifty-two eligible patients selected for study had proven locally unresectable and/or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma. The majority had nonmeasureable disease. They were randomly assigned to receive one of the three drug combination regimens or to 5-FU alone administered by rapid injection in 5-day course. Survival was the primary study end point.
                None of the three drug combinations showed a significant advantage over 5-FU alone in improved performance score, weight gain, or patient survival. Each of the three combinations was more toxic than 5-FU alone.
                FAMe, FAP, or FAMe alternating with TZT cannot be recommended for the therapy of advanced gastric carcinoma. Therapy of this disease should remain an experimental endeavor. It would seem reasonable to prove the value of any new treatment approach by a randomized comparison to simple therapy with 5-FU alone. Sixty patients with inoperable or recurrent gastric cancers were randomly assigned into 2 treatment regimens: the FP regimen, consisting of cisplatin (CDDP, 50 mg/body, d1) + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU, 250 mg/body, d2-d5), or the FPEPIR regimen, CDDP+5-FU (FP) + 4'-epirubicin (EPIR, 30 mg/m2, d2), administered intravenously every 2 weeks. The objective responses were evaluated in 43 patients (FP: 21; FPEPIR: 22). The response rates were 24% (5PR/21) for FP and 27% (6PR/22) for FPEPIR. Objective responses were seen in 1 primary lesion and 4 metastatic lesions in patients on the FP regimen, and in 3 primary lesions and 4 metastatic lesions in patients on the FPEPIR regimen. The 6 month and 1 year survival rates were 34% and 13% for FP, and 55% and 27% for FPEPIR, respectively (not significant). Significantly higher survival rates were demonstrated in those patients with recurrent cancers (p < 0.01) and those who responded to the FPEPIR regimen (p < 0.05). Drug toxicities were assessed in 56 patients, and were in general mild and well tolerated. However, the FP regimen induced significantly less neutropenia (p < 0.01) and less complete alopecia (p < 0.01) than the did FPEPIR regimen. These results suggest that FPEPIR may be a more beneficial regimen for the treatment of gastric cancer than FP, and may be indicated for further clinical trials. The objective of this article was to report the results from a randomized trial that evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of adding tirapazamine (TPZ) to chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC).
                Sixty-two patients with lymph node-positive, resectable, TNM Stage IV HNSCC were randomized to receive either 2 cycles of induction chemotherapy (TPZ, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil [5-FU]) followed by simultaneous chemoradiotherapy (TPZ, cisplatin, and 5-FU) or to receive the same regimen without TPZ. Patients who did not achieve a complete response at 50 Grays underwent surgical treatment. Stratification factors for randomization included tumor site, TNM stage, and median tumor oxygen tension. The primary endpoint was complete lymph node response.
                The addition of TPZ resulted in increased hematologic toxicity. There was 1 treatment-related death from induction chemotherapy. The complete clinical and pathologic response rate in the lymph nodes was 90% and 74% for the standard treatment arm and the TPZ arm, respectively (P = .08) and 89% and 90% at the primary site in the respective treatment arms (P = .71). The 5-year overall survival rate was 59%, the cause-specific survival rate was 68%, the rate of freedom from recurrence was 69%, and the locoregional control rate was 77% for the entire group. There was no difference with regard to any of the outcome parameters between the 2 treatment arms. The significant long-term toxicity rate also was found to be similar between the 2 arms.
                The addition of TPZ increased hematologic toxicity but did not improve outcomes in patients with resectable, Stage IV HNSCC using the protocol administered this small randomized study. The combination of induction and simultaneous chemoradiotherapy resulted in excellent survival in these patients. Two regimens of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for previously untreated patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer were compared with the goal of identifying a regimen with a greater than 50% complete response (CR) rate. Patients with a performance status of 0 to 2 and normal end-organ function were randomized to receive either four cycles of neoadjuvant methotrexate, cisplatin, and continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (MPF) (arm A), or four cycles of bleomycin, cisplatin, and methotrexate (PBM) alternating with cisplatin and 5-FU (PF) (arm B). Patients with a performance status of greater than 2 or a carbon monoxide diffusion capacity of less than 50% of the predicted value were assigned to the arm A regimen but were analyzed separately (arm C). Local therapy consisted of surgery (for patients with resectable disease) or radiation therapy followed by two cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with the regimen that was administered initially. Of the 42 patients who were evaluated, 16 were randomized to arm A, 13 to arm B, and 13 to arm C. The clinical CR rate was 19% on arm A (95% confidence interval, 0% to 38%), 39% on arm B (95% confidence interval, 12% to 66%) (P = 0.41), and 54% on arm C (95% confidence interval, 27% to 81%). At a median follow-up time of 35 months, the 2-year actuarial survival rate was 61% on arm A, 69% on arm B (the P value was not significant), and 38% on arm C. The 2-year survival rate for all 42 patients who were treated was 57% and the median survival time was 31 months. Toxicities of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on all arms consisted of mild to moderate myelosuppression and renal toxicity. The incidence of moderate to severe mucositis was significantly higher on arm A than arm B (P = 0.02). Two cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy were administered to only 11 of 42 patients due to patient refusal or cumulative toxicity. In conclusion, both neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens resulted in similar response and survival rates, but mucositis was more severe with arm A. However, since neither regimen was likely to cause a CR rate of greater than 50%, this study was closed to further patient accrual. Phase 2 studies suggest that the standard regimen of cisplatin and fluorouracil (PF) plus docetaxel (TPF) improves outcomes in squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. We compared TPF with PF as induction chemotherapy in patients with locoregionally advanced, unresectable disease.
                We randomly assigned eligible patients between the ages of 18 and 70 years who had stage III or stage IV disease and no distant metastases to receive either TPF (docetaxel and cisplatin, day 1; fluorouracil by continuous infusion, days 1 to 5) or PF every 3 weeks for four cycles. Patients without progression of disease received radiotherapy within 4 to 7 weeks after completing chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival.
                A total of 358 patients underwent randomization, with 177 assigned to the TPF group and 181 to the PF group. At a median follow-up of 32.5 months, the median progression-free survival was 11.0 months in the TPF group and 8.2 months in the PF group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death in the TPF group, 0.72; P=0.007). Treatment with TPF resulted in a reduction in the risk of death of 27% (P=0.02), with a median overall survival of 18.8 months, as compared with 14.5 months in the PF group. There were more grade 3 or 4 events of leukopenia and neutropenia in the TPF group and more grade 3 or 4 events of thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, stomatitis, and hearing loss in the PF group. The rates of death from toxic effects were 2.3% in the TPF group and 5.5% in the PF group.
                As compared with the standard regimen of cisplatin and fluorouracil, induction chemotherapy with the addition of docetaxel significantly improved progression-free and overall survival in patients with unresectable squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00003888 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
                Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society. Objective. The aim of this study is to verify whether consolidation chemotherapy with Cisplatin improves disease-free survival and/or overall survival in patients affected by epithelial ovarian cancer.Methods. A multicenter study examined 122 randomized patients in complete remission as judged by laparoscopy or laparotomy following first-line chemotherapy consisting of ACy (Adriamycin + Cyclophosphamide), PCy (Cisplatin + Cyclophosphamide), or Mitoxantrone + Carboplatin. Sixty-one of these patients were treated with 3 cycles of 5-Fluorouracil (FU) 500 mg/m2 for 5 days followed by Cisplatin at 100 mg/m2 on the 6th or 7th day every 28 days; the other 61 received no further treatment (nihil group).Results. Sixty patients in the Cisplatin arm were evaluable. There were 36 relapses in the FU+Cisplatin arm and 30 in the nihil arm. Peritoneal relapses were 25% for Cisplatin treatment vs. 16.4 % for nihil. There were 29 deaths in the Cisplatin arm vs. 27 for nihil. Median overall survival time (95 months with Cisplatin vs. 96 months in the nihil group) and median disease-free survival (66 months with Cisplatin vs. 73 in the nihil group) were similar in both arms (p=0.66 and p=0.41, respectively). There were no significant differences in tumor stage and grade between the two arms. Seven patients presented a second neoplasm during follow-up: six in the nihil arm, but only one patient in the Cisplatin arm. Death in these patients was due to the second neoplasm and not to progression of ovarian cancer.Conclusion. Three courses of additional platinum+FU treatment after five cycles of first-line chemotherapy without FU produced no increase in overall survival or disease-free survival. Several non-randomised trials have shown that transitional-cell carcinoma of the bladder is a moderately chemosensitive tumour. We investigated whether the addition of neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy to radical surgery or radiotherapy would improve survival.
                Patients with T2 G3, T3, T4a, N0-NX, or M0 transitional-cell carcinoma of the bladder undergoing curative cystectomy or full-dose external-beam radiotherapy were randomly assigned three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin, methotrexate, and vinblastine, with folinic acid rescue, n=491) or no chemotherapy (n=485). When possible, clinical tumour response was assessed cytoscopically after completion of chemotherapy but before cystectomy or radiotherapy; histopathologically assessed response was on cystectomy samples. We recorded every 6 months locoregional persistence or relapse of tumour, appearance of distant metastases, survival, and cause of death.
                Median follow-up of patients still alive was 4.0 years. 485 patients died, and 78.6% of deaths were due to transitional-cell carcinoma. Chemotherapy mortality was 1% and operative (cystectomy) mortality was 3.7%. Kaplan-Meier curves compared by means of the log-rank test gave a calculated absolute difference between groups in 3-year survival of 5.5% (95% CI -0.5 to 11.0, p=0.075; 55.5% for chemotherapy, 50.0% for no chemotherapy). Median survival in the chemotherapy group was 44 months compared with 37.5 months for the no-chemotherapy group. 32.5% of cystectomy samples contained no tumour after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
                Three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy before cystectomy or radiotherapy did not give the 10% improvement in 3-year survival that was judged to be necessary for introduction into routine use. The chemotherapy regimen was associated with a higher pathological complete-response rate in primary tumours, but there was no clear evidence that it would increase survival. In 1995 a meta-analysis of randomised trials investigating the value of adding chemotherapy to primary treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) suggested a small survival benefit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy in each of the primary treatment settings. However, the meta-analysis included many small trials and trials with differing eligibility criteria and chemotherapy regimens.
                The aim of the Big Lung Trial was to confirm the survival benefits seen in the meta-analysis and to assess quality of life and cost in the supportive care setting. A total of 725 patients were randomised to receive supportive care alone (n = 361) or supportive care plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 364).
                65% of patients allocated chemotherapy (C) received all three cycles of treatment and a further 27% received one or two cycles. 74% of patients allocated no chemotherapy (NoC) received thoracic radiotherapy compared with 47% of the C group. Patients allocated C had a significantly better survival than those allocated NoC: HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89, p = 0.0006), median survival 8.0 months for the C group v 5.7 months for the NoC group, a difference of 9 weeks. There were 19 (5%) treatment related deaths in the C group. There was no evidence that any subgroup benefited more or less from chemotherapy. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the pre-defined primary and secondary quality of life end points, although large negative effects of chemotherapy were ruled out. The regimens used proved to be cost effective, the extra cost of chemotherapy being offset by longer survival.
                The survival benefit seen in this trial was entirely consistent with the NSCLC meta-analysis and subsequent similarly designed large trials. The information on quality of life and cost should enable patients and their clinicians to make more informed treatment choices. This study had two major goals: (1) to assess the effectiveness of a regimen of fluorouracil (5-FU) plus levamisole plus leucovorin as postoperative surgical adjuvant therapy for patients with high-risk colon cancer, and (2) to evaluate 6 months versus 12 months of chemotherapy.
                Patients with poor-prognosis stage II or III colon cancer were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant chemotherapy with either intensive-course 5-FU and leucovorin combined with levamisole, or a standard regimen of 5-FU plus levamisole. Patients were also randomly assigned to receive either 12 months or 6 months of chemotherapy, which resulted in four treatment groups.
                Eight hundred ninety-one of 915 patients entered (97.4%) were eligible. The median follow-up duration is 5.1 years for patients still alive. There was a difference among the four treatment groups with respect to patient survival, and a significant duration-by-regimen interaction was observed. Specifically, standard 5-FU plus levamisole was inferior to 5-FU plus leucovorin plus levamisole when treatment was given for 6 months (5-year survival rate, 60% v 70%; P < .01).
                There was no significant improvement in patient survival when chemotherapy was given for 12 months compared with 6 months. When chemotherapy was given for 6 months, standard 5-FU plus levamisole was associated with inferior patient survival compared with intensive-course 5-FU plus leucovorin plus levamisole. These data suggest that 5-FU plus levamisole for 6 months should not be used in clinical practice, whereas 6 months of treatment with 5-FU plus leucovorin plus levamisole is effective. We report the results of a prospectively randomized study that compared the combination of epirubicin, cisplatin, and protracted venous infusion fluorouracil (5-FU) (ECF regimen) with the standard combination of 5-FU, doxorubicin, and methotrexate (FAMTX) in previously untreated patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer.
                Two hundred seventy-four patients with adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma were randomized and analyzed for survival, tumor response, toxicity, and quality of life (QL).
                The overall response rate was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36% to 54%) with ECF and 21% (95% CI, 13% to 29%) with FAMTX (P = .0002). Toxicity was tolerable and there were only three toxic deaths. The FAMTX regimen caused more hematologic toxicity and serious infections, but ECF caused more emesis and alopecia. The median survival duration was 8.9 months with ECF and 5.7 months with FAMTX (P = .0009); at 1 year, 36% (95% CI, 27% to 45%) of ECF and 21% (95% CI, 14% to 29%) of FAMTX patients were alive. The median failure-free survival duration was 7.4 months with ECF and 3.4 months with FAMTX (P = .00006). The global QL scores were better for ECF at 24 weeks, but the remaining QL data showed no differences between either arm of the study. Hospital-based cost analysis on a subset of patients was similar for each arm and translated into an increment cost of $975 per life-year gained.
                The ECF regimen results in a survival and response advantage, tolerable toxicity, better QL and cost-effectiveness compared with FAMTX chemotherapy. This regimen should now be considered the standard treatment for advanced esophagogastric cancer. To compare a bi-weekly infusion of leucovorin (LV) 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for 2 days, plus oxaliplatin (LV5- FU2-oxaliplatin) and LV5-FU2-cisplatin (CDDP) regimens with respect to toxicity, objective response rates, time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced gastric cancer.
                Patients received LV5-FU2- oxaliplatin (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2), day 1; folinic acid 200 mg/m(2), days 1-2; 5-FU 400 mg/m(2), i.v. bolus, days 1-2; 5-FU 600 mg/m(2), 22-hour continuous infusion, days 1-2) or LV5- FU2-CDDP (CDDP 50 mg/m(2), day 1; plus LV5-FU2). A total of 72 patients were enrolled into this study (36 vs. 36).
                A total of 305 cycles were administered in the LV5-FU2-oxaliplatin arm (median 8) and 272 cycles in the LV5-FU2-CDDP arm (median 8). Grades 3-4 toxicity were as follows (LV5-FU2-oxaliplatin %/LV5-FU2-CDDP %; p<0.05): neutropenia 5/49, thrombocytopenia 2/6, anemia 6/16 nausea/vomiting 2/15, and mucositis 0/3. Response rate of LV5-FU2-oxaliplatin was 41% (partial response/PR 41%, stable disease/SD 31%, progressive disease/PD 28%; 95% confidence internal/95% CI 27-58) and of LV5-FU2-CDDP was 25% (PR 25%, SD 36%, PD 39%; 95% CI 14-41; p =0.013). The median TTP of the patients in the LV5-FU2-oxaliplatin arm was 8 months and 6 months for those in the LV5- FU2-CDDP arm (p=0.073). The median survival time of the patients in the LV5-FU2-oxaliplatin arm was 10 months and 7 months for those in the LV5-FU2-CDDP arm (p=0.003).
                Our study showed that oxaliplatin may be substituted for cisplatin with LV5-FU2 with favorable safety and efficacy profile. The encouraging results from our study support the effectiveness of oxaliplatin-fluoropyrimidine- containing chemotherapy in gastric cancer and could provide a new core on which to add other agents in future investigations. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, increases survival when combined with irinotecan-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This randomized, phase II trial compared bevacizumab plus fluorouracil and leucovorin (FU/LV) versus placebo plus FU/LV as first-line therapy in patients considered nonoptimal candidates for first-line irinotecan.
                Patients had metastatic CRC and one of the following characteristics: age > or = 65 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1 or 2, serum albumin < or = 3.5 g/dL, or prior abdominal/pelvic radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned to FU/LV/placebo (n = 105) or FU/LV/bevacizumab (n = 104). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival, response rate, response duration, and quality of life. Safety was also assessed.
                Median survival was 16.6 months for the FU/LV/bevacizumab group and 12.9 months for the FU/LV/placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; P = .16). Median progression-free survival was 9.2 months (FU/LV/bevacizumab) and 5.5 months (FU/LV/placebo); hazard ratio was 0.50; P = .0002. Response rates were 26.0% (FU/LV/bevacizumab) and 15.2% (FU/LV/placebo) (P = .055); duration of response was 9.2 months (FU/LV/bevacizumab) and 6.8 months (FU/LV/placebo); hazard ratio was 0.42; P = .088. Grade 3 hypertension was more common with bevacizumab treatment (16% v 3%) but was controlled with oral medication and did not cause study drug discontinuation.
                Addition of bevacizumab to FU/LV as first-line therapy in CRC patients who were not considered optimal candidates for first-line irinotecan treatment provided clinically significant patient benefit, including statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival. This study compared the activity and toxicity of fluorouracil (5-FU)/ cisplatin with the combination tegafur and uracil (UFT)/cisplatin in the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced-stage III or IV (MO)-head and neck cancer. A total of 67 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by either a continuous infusion of 5-FU 1,000 mg/m2/day on days 2 through 6 (group 1) or oral administration of UFT 300 mg/m2/day on days 2 through 20 (group 2). Both treatments were repeated every 21 days for four cycles. Responding patients received locoregional standard radiotherapy (50 to 70 Gy) after chemotherapy. Group 1 was comprised of 34 patients, 30 of whom were men, with a median age of 57.5 years; 79% of this group had a Karnofsky performance status of 90% to 100%; 70% had a squamous and 29% an undifferentiated histology. The majority (85%) had stage IV disease. Of the 33 patients in group 2, 29 were men. The median age was 56 years. Most (88%) had a performance status of 90% to 100%. More patients had a squamous than an undifferentiated histology (82% vs 18%) and most (88%) had stage IV disease. Overall response in group 1 was 73% (21% complete) compared with 79% (18% complete) in group 2. At a median follow-up of 84 months, no significant differences have emerged in overall survival, 15 vs 37 months, or time to progression, 8.5 vs 14.5 months, for groups 1 and 2, respectively. Toxicity was also similar, except for phlebitis, which occurred significantly more often in group 1 (71% vs 9%). Cisplatin/UFT was as effective as the classic cisplatin/5-FU regimen and has the advantages of outpatient oral administration and a lower incidence of phlebitis. Patients with TNM stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer have short survival times. Previous controlled studies comparing chemotherapy and supportive care for the treatment of this type of cancer have not given consistent results, have included patients with different disease stages, and have rarely reported drug dose intensity.
                The present trial was designed to assess the safety and the effect on survival of supportive care alone versus chemotherapy with cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and mitomycin combined with appropriate supportive care in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer.
                Patients (n = 102) with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned to one of two treatment regimens. The combined modality group (52 patients) received supportive care along with cisplatin (75 mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (400 mg/m2), and mitomycin (10 mg/m2) given intravenously at 3-week intervals. The supportive care group (50 patients) received supportive care alone. Randomization was stratified on the basis of histology (squamous versus nonsquamous cell carcinoma), performance status (Karnofsky), and weight loss (during the 6 months preceding randomization). The two groups were well matched for age and sex. Survival analysis was performed after the last patient died.
                The median number of chemotherapy cycles was 3.5 per patient. Mean weekly delivered doses of drugs were as follows: cisplatin, 22.1 mg/m2; cyclophosphamide, 118 mg/m2; and mitomycin, 2.9 mg/m2. Toxic effects due to chemotherapy were generally mild, but peripheral neuropathy and hematologic and renal toxic effects were observed. In the supportive care group, mean survival was 6.1 months (median, 4.0 months); six patients lived at least 12 months and two lived at least 18 months. In the combined modality group, mean survival was 11.3 months (median, 8.5 months); 20 patients lived at least 12 months, 13 lived at least 18 months, and five lived at least 24 months. Difference in survival was statistically significant (P < .0001). Survival was directly related to initial performance status in both groups (P < .01) and was significantly (P < .01) longer for patients with squamous cell carcinoma than for those with nonsquamous cell carcinoma.
                The combination of supportive care and cisplatin-cyclophosphamide-mitomycin therapy offers a survival advantage over supportive care alone in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
                Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, generally considered to be unresponsive or marginally responsive to chemotherapy, can be treated with chemotherapy, with an expectation of prolonging patient survival. Although the results of the present study are encouraging, clinical research should continue to be directed toward developing more effective treatments for this disease. Docetaxel and capecitabine, a tumor-activated oral fluoropyrimidine, show high single-agent efficacy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and synergy in preclinical studies. This international phase III trial compared efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine/docetaxel therapy with single-agent docetaxel in anthracycline-pretreated patients with MBC.
                Patients were randomized to 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 255) or to docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 256).
                Capecitabine/docetaxel resulted in significantly superior efficacy in time to disease progression (TTP) (hazard ratio, 0.652; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.545 to 0.780; P =.0001; median, 6.1 v 4.2 months), overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.634 to 0.947; P =.0126; median, 14.5 v 11.5 months), and objective tumor response rate (42% v 30%, P =.006) compared with docetaxel. Gastrointestinal side effects and hand-foot syndrome were more common with combination therapy, whereas myalgia, arthralgia, and neutropenic fever/sepsis were more common with single-agent docetaxel. More grade 3 adverse events occurred with combination therapy (71% v 49%, respectively), whereas grade 4 events were slightly more common with docetaxel (31% v 25% with combination).
                The significantly superior TTP and survival achieved with the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), with the manageable toxicity profile, indicate that this combination provides clear benefits over single-agent docetaxel 100 mg/m(2). Docetaxel/capecitabine therapy is an important treatment option for women with anthracycline-pretreated MBC. The extent to which chemotherapy may relieve tumour-related symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival in patients with gastric cancer is not known in spite of the extensive use of this treatment modality. The aim of this study was to estimate any gain in the quantity and quality of life produced by chemotherapy in these patients.
                Between January 1991 and February 1995, 61 patients with gastric cancer were randomized to either chemotherapy in addition to best supportive care or to best supportive care. Chemotherapy was allowed in the latter group if the supportive measures did not lead to palliation. Chemotherapy was the ELF-regimen consisting of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and etoposide, or, in elderly patients with poor performance, a 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin regimen (FLv). Quality of life was evaluated with the EORTC-QLQ-C30 instrument.
                More patients in the chemotherapy group (45%, 14/31) had an improved or prolonged high quality of life for a minimum period of 4 months compared to those in the best supportive care group (20%, 6/30, P < 0.05). A similar difference was seen in the treating physician's evaluation of whether the patient was subjectively improved or continued to do well for at least 4 months (17/31, 55% versus 6/30, 20%, P < 0.01). Overall survival was longer in the chemotherapy group (median 8 vs. 5 months) although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.12). After corrections for imbalances in pretreatment characteristics, chemotherapy treatment was, however, associated with a survival benefit (P = 0.003). Also, the quality-adjusted survival time and time to disease progression were longer for patients randomized to chemotherapy (median 5 vs. 2 months, P = 0.03).
                The results show that chemotherapy can add to both quantity and quality of life in advanced gastric cancer. The number of patients who benefit from treatment is, however, still rather limited. Results of cytotoxic chemotherapy for hormone-resistant prostate cancer are not impressive. One of the substances which seems to have a therapeutic benefit is 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). The effect of 5-FU can be modulated by addition of folinic acid (FA). We tested in a prospective, randomized phase II trial monotherapy with 5-FU versus the combination of 5-FU and high-dose FA.
                25 patients received 600 mg/m2 5-FU, and 24 patients 400 mg/m2 FA plus 600 or 400 mg/m2 5-FU. They were treated for two cycles for 5 days in a 21-day interval followed by a weekly single-day application until progression occurred. Pain remission, toxicity, time to progression and survival were evaluated.
                Both regimens led to a pain remission in nearly 70% of the patients. Mucosal side effects like diarrhea and stomatitis occurred more often in the combination arm, whereas leukopenias were more frequent in the monotherapy are. We observed no statistically significant difference between the two treatment arms regarding time to progression and survival.
                Although both regimens led to a pain remission, side effects are too severe to recommend these protocols for standard treatment of hormone-resistant prostate cancer. In 1986, a protocol comparing primary radiation therapy (RT) plus hydroxyurea (HU) to irradiation plus fluorouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin (CF) was activated by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) for the treatment of patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma. The goals were to determine the superior chemoradiation regimen and to quantitate the relative toxicities.
                All patients had biopsy-proven invasive squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Patients underwent standard clinical staging studies and their tumors were found to be International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics stages IIB, III, or IVA. Negative cytologic washings and para-aortic lymph nodes were required for entry. Patients were randomized to receive either standard whole pelvic RT with concurrent 5-FU infusion and bolus CF or the same RT plus oral HU.
                Of 388 randomized patients, 368 were eligible; 177 were randomized to CF and 191 to HU. Adverse effects were predominantly hematologic or gastrointestinal in both regimens. Severe or life-threatening leukopenia was more common in the HU group (24%) than in the CF group (4%). The difference in progression-free survival (PFS) was statistically significant in favor of the CF group (P = .033). The sites of progression in the two treatment groups were not substantially different. Survival was significantly better for the patients randomized to CF (P = .018).
                This study demonstrates that for patients with locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix, the combination of 5-FU and CF with RT offers patients better PFS and overall survival than HU, and with manageable toxicity. Two hundred and forty-one patients, with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck, were randomized to receive three courses of induction chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimens were delivered every 3 weeks, and consisted in 1) cisplatin, 80 mg/m2 given alone (CDDP regimen), or 2) in combination with vincristine, 1 mg, d 1, methotrexate 10 mg/m2 d 1, 2, 3, and bleomycin 10 mg/m2, d 1, 2, and 3 (MOB-P). Tolerance was significantly better with the CDDP regimen (p less than 0.05); severe side effects, affecting mainly digestive tract, and bone marrow, were encountered in 7% of the patients in the CDDP group, vs 15% in the MOB-P group, without death related to pancytopenia. Short-term results were better for patients treated by the MOB-P regimen, with a 42% response rate (including 9 complete responses) vs 22% with the CDDP regimen (p = 0.01). A superiority of combination chemotherapy was more significant for primary sites than regional lymph nodes. The relapse-free survival was not statistically different in the 2 groups, as well as the 2 years overall survival. Among responders, the survival was found highly correlated with a good initial general status (p less than 0.01), and with the highest total doses of cisplatin (p less than 0.02).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) We aimed to establish the superiority (or noninferiority if superiority was not achieved) in terms of time to progression (TTP) of irinotecan/5-fluorouracil (IF) over cisplatin/5-fluorouracil (CF) in chemonaive patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach/esophagogastric junction.
                Patients received either IF: i.v. irinotecan 80 mg/m(2) 30 min, folinic acid 500 mg/m(2) 2 h, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 2000 mg/m(2) 22 h, for 6/7 weeks or CF: cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) 1-3 h, with 5-FU 1000 mg/m(2)/day 24 h, days 1-5, every 4 weeks.
                In all, 333 patients were randomized and treated (IF 170, CF 163). Patient characteristics were balanced except more IF patients had Karnofsky performance status 100%. TTP for IF was 5.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.8-5.8] and 4.2 months (95% CI 3.7-5.5) for CF (P = 0.088). Overall survival (OS) was 9.0 versus 8.7 months, response rate 31.8% versus 25.8%, time to treatment failure (TTF) 4.0 versus 3.4 months for IF and CF, respectively. The difference in TTF was statistically significant (P = 0.018). IF was better in terms of toxic deaths (0.6% versus 3%), discontinuation for toxicity (10.0% versus 21.5%), severe neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and stomatitis, but not diarrhea.
                IF did not yield a significant TTP or OS superiority over CF, and the results of noninferiority of IF were borderline. However, IF may provide a viable, platinum-free front-line treatment alternative for metastatic gastric cancer. To compare the length of survival and quality of life in patients given combination chemotherapy in addition to supportive care and in patients given only supportive care.
                Randomised study.
                Gastrointestinal oncology departments.
                40 previously untreated patients with histologically confirmed, measurable colorectal cancer that was locally recurrent or metastatic.
                Patients were allocated randomly to receive chemotherapy or only supportive care in a ratio of 2:1 according to performance status, metastatic disease of the liver, and weight loss in the six months before entering the study. Chemotherapy consisted of four week cycles of intravenous leucovorin (200 mg/m2/day) followed by 5-fluorouracil (550 mg/m2/day) and cisplatin (20 mg/m2/day), each drug being given on the first four days of the cycle.
                Length of survival and quality of life score with an optimised functional living index-cancer scale.
                Overall survival was significantly longer for patients given chemotherapy (11.0 months) than for those receiving supportive care alone (5.0 months; p = 0.006). Despite common association of chemotherapy with mild to moderate gastrointestinal symptoms, there was no significant difference between the two groups in global or subgroup quality of life scores. In patients with abnormal scores before treatment, quality of life seemed better in the chemotherapy arm.
                In this sample of patients with disseminated colorectal cancer the chemotherapy regimen was an effective form of palliative treatment. The combination of chemotherapy with immunotherapeutic agents such as interleukin-2 and interferon alfa-2b has been reported to provide improved treatment results in patients with metastatic melanoma, compared with the use of chemotherapy alone. We have performed a prospective randomized trial in patients with metastatic melanoma, comparing treatment with chemotherapy to treatment with chemoimmunotherapy.
                One hundred two patients with metastatic melanoma were prospectively randomized to receive chemotherapy composed of tamoxifen, cisplatin, and dacarbazine or this same chemotherapy followed by interferon alfa-2b and interleukin-2. Objective responses, survival, and toxicity in the two groups were evaluated at a median potential follow-up of 42 months.
                In 52 patients randomized to receive chemotherapy, there were 14 objective responses (27%), including four complete responses. In 50 patients randomized to receive chemoimmunotherapy, there were 22 objective responses (44%) (P2 = .071), including three complete responses. In both treatment groups, the duration of partial responses was often short, and there was a trend toward a survival advantage for patients receiving chemotherapy alone (P2 = .052; median survival of 15.8 months compared with 10.7 months). Treatment-related toxicities were greater in patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy.
                With the treatment regimens used in this study, the addition of immunotherapy to combination chemotherapy increased toxicity but did not increase survival. The use of combination chemoimmunotherapy regimens is not recommended in the absence of well-designed, prospective, randomized protocols showing the benefit of this treatment strategy. The aims of this study were to substantiate the previously reported activity of ifosfamide in patients with advanced, persistent, or recurrent carcinosarcoma (mixed mesodermal sarcoma) of the uterus, and to determine whether the addition of cisplatin results in an improved response or survival. Secondarily, we sought to determine the toxicity of ifosfamide-cisplatin in this patient population.
                Patients were randomized to receive ifosfamide (1.5 g/m(2)/day) times 5 days every 3 weeks for eight courses with mesna uroprotection, with or without cisplatin (20 mg/m(2)/day) times 5 days. No patient had received previous chemotherapy.
                Of 224 patients entered on this study, 30 were ineligible for a variety of reasons, leaving 194 evaluable patients. Early in the study, the dose of the combination regimen was reduced by 20% (1 day) because of toxicity. The investigational arms were balanced for age, grade, and Gynecologic Oncology Group performance status. Percentages of adverse effects reported in 191 patients receiving chemotherapy included (ifosfamide/cisplatin-ifosfamide) grade 3 or 4 granulocytopenia (36/60), grade 3 or 4 anemia (8/17), grade 3 or 4 central nervous system toxicity (19/14), and grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy (1/12). Treatment may have contributed to the deaths of 6 patients treated with full doses of ifosfamide and cisplatin for 5 days. The proportion of patients responding to ifosfamide alone versus ifosfamide-cisplatin therapy was (0.36 versus 0.54) overall, 0.47 versus 0.61 for pelvic, 0.21 versus 0.54 for lung, and 0.33 versus 0.40 for "other" metastatic sites of measurable disease. The relative odds ratio of response adjusted for measurable sites of disease was 1.82 (P = 0.03, one-tailed test; 95% lower confidence limit, 1.06). Progression-free survival (PFS) and survival data suggest that the combination offers a slight prolongation of PFS (relative risk, 0.73; 95% upper confidence limit, 0.94; P = 0.02, one-tailed test), but no significant survival benefit (relative risk, 0.80, 95% upper confidence limit, 1.03; P = 0.071, one-tailed test).
                The addition of cisplatin to ifosfamide appears to offer a small improvement in progression-free survival over ifosfamide alone in the management of advanced carcinosarcoma of the uterus; the added toxicity may not justify the use of this combination.
                Copyright 2000 Academic Press. In the randomized, multinational phase II/III trial (V325) of untreated advanced gastric cancer patients, the phase II part selected docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) over docetaxel and cisplatin for comparison against cisplatin and fluorouracil (CF; reference regimen) in the phase III part.
                Advanced gastric cancer patients were randomly assigned to docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (day 1) plus fluorouracil 750 mg/m2/d (days 1 to 5) every 3 weeks or cisplatin 100 mg/m2 (day 1) plus fluorouracil 1,000 mg/m2/d (days 1 to 5) every 4 weeks. The primary end point was time-to-progression (TTP).
                In 445 randomly assigned and treated patients (DCF = 221; CF = 224), TTP was longer with DCF versus CF (32% risk reduction; log-rank P < .001). Overall survival was longer with DCF versus CF (23% risk reduction; log-rank P = .02). Two-year survival rate was 18% with DCF and 9% with CF. Overall response rate was higher with DCF (chi2 P = .01). Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 69% (DCF) v 59% (CF) of patients. Frequent grade 3 to 4 toxicities for DCF v CF were: neutropenia (82% v 57%), stomatitis (21% v 27%), diarrhea (19% v 8%), lethargy (19% v 14%). Complicated neutropenia was more frequent with DCF than CF (29% v 12%).
                Adding docetaxel to CF significantly improved TTP, survival, and response rate in gastric cancer patients, but resulted in some increase in toxicity. Incorporation of docetaxel, as in DCF or with other active drug(s), is a new therapy option for patients with untreated advanced gastric cancer. The purpose of the present trial was to clarify the efficacy of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy including an oral fluoropyrimidine anticancer drug, the 1-hexylcarbamoyl-5-fluorouracil (HCFU), for the treatment of colon cancer.
                Patients with clinical stage Dukes' B and C colon cancer, who had been treated surgically, were assigned to a chemotherapy group treated with mitomycin C, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and HCFU and to a control group that received no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy.
                Of the 1,001 patients registered for the study, 17 (1.7%) were ineligible. The incidence of toxicity was significantly higher in the chemotherapy group than in the control group. However, there were few severe side effects and no deaths related to the treatment. Overall survival showed no significant difference between the groups. The disease-free survival or the recurrence-free intervals was significantly higher in the chemotherapy group than in the control group. The incidence of hepatic recurrence was significantly (P=0.003) lower in the chemotherapy group than in the control group.
                The results of this study demonstrated the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer, i.e., combined chemotherapy that included the 5-FU oral anticancer drug HCFU. In the first Nordic cystectomy trial (1986-1989) a chemotherapy combination of cisplatin-doxorubicin and external radiation seemed to improve the long-term survival after cystectomy in patients with stage T3-T4a bladder carcinomas. The aim of this study was to investigate if solely neoadjuvant chemotherapy could influence survival in patients with advanced urothelial bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy.
                The study (1991-1997) recruited 317 patients with T2-T4aNXM0 urothelial bladder tumours. The patients were randomly allocated to three courses of cisplatin-methotrexate or no pretreatment before cystectomy, eight were subsequently excluded due to protocol violation.
                Chemotherapy according to protocol was administered to 74% (115/155) of the patients in the experimental arm. No chemotherapy related mortality was observed. Of remaining patients in the experimental arm, 14 did not receive any chemotherapy, nine discontinued after one course and 14 after two courses due to side effects. Median follow-up time among censored patients was 5.3 years. Estimated 5-year overall survival was 53% in the experimental arm and 46% in the control arm (n.s. log-rank test). The proportion of patients with pathological stage pT0 was 26.4% in the experimental arm and 11.5% in the control arm (p = 0.001). Risk of locoregional relapse and distant metastases was similar in the study arms.
                The chemotherapy regimen was well tolerated. Despite substantial downstaging no statistically significant survival benefit with the neoadjuvant therapy could be seen after 5 years of follow-up.
Chemotherapy significantly improves survival in comparison to best supportive care. In addition, combination chemotherapy improves survival compared to single-agent 5-FU. All patients should be tested for their HER-2 status and trastuzumab should be added to a standard fluoropyrimidine/cisplatin regimen in patients with HER-2 positive tumours. Two and three-drug regimens including 5-FU, cisplatin, with or without an anthracycline, as well as irinotecan or docetaxel-containing regimens are reasonable treatment options for HER-2 negative patients.