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

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (22) ◽  
pp. 3217-3223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnaud D. Roth ◽  
Nicola Fazio ◽  
Roger Stupp ◽  
Stephen Falk ◽  
Jürg Bernhard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Carcinoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Infectious Complications ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Clinical Cancer Research ◽  
Advanced Gastric Carcinoma ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

PurposeThis 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.Patients and MethodsChemotherapy-naïve patients with measurable unresectable and/or metastatic gastric carcinoma, a performance status ≤ 1, and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function randomly received ≤ eight 3-weekly cycles of ECF (epirubicin 50 mg/m2on day 1, cisplatin 60 mg/m2on day 1, and fluorouracil [FU] 200 mg/m2/d on days 1 to 21), TC (docetaxel initially 85 mg/m2on day 1 [later reduced to 75 mg/m2as a result of toxicity] and cisplatin 75 mg/m2on day 1), or TCF (TC plus FU 300 mg/m2/d on days 1 to 14). Study objectives included response (primary), survival, toxicity, and quality of life (QOL).ResultsORR 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.ConclusionTime 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.

Concurrent chemotherapy plus cetuximab or chemotherapy followed by cetuximab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A randomized phase II selectional trial SWOG 0342

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7015-7015 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Kelly ◽  
R. S. Herbst ◽  
J. J. Crowley ◽  
J. McCoy ◽  
J. N. Atkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Concurrent Chemotherapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Egfr Signaling Pathway ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

7015 Background: Randomized clinical trials have failed to show a survival benefit for small molecule EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. In contrast, pilot trials of EGFR targeted antibodies plus chemotherapy have suggested enhanced anti-tumor activity. This large randomized phase II trial was designed to select a cetuximab -chemotherapy regimen for future evaluation in a phase III setting. Methods: Untreated patients (pts) with stage IIIB (by pleural effusion) or IV (without brain metastases) NSCLC, with a performance status of 0–1 and adequate organ function were randomized to received paclitaxel (P) 225 mg/m2 and carboplatin (Cb) AUC=6 every 3 weeks plus cetuximab (C) 400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2, weekly for 4 cycles followed by maintenance C or the same doses of PCb for 4 cycles followed by C. C was continued until disease progression or 1 year of therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival; the statistical design required a median survival of ≥ 10 months for a regimen to be selected for subsequent phase III trial evaluation. The probability of correctly choosing the superior arm is 91% when the true hazard ratio is 1.3. Results: From July 2004 to June 2005, 225 eligible pts were enrolled into the study. Preliminary results are described below: Conclusions: At the time of this analysis, efficacy and toxicity were similar in the two treatment arms; both regimens were well tolerated. Assuming these results are sustained, the concurrent regimen of PCb + cetuximab has met the criteria for continued evaluation. A phase II trial of PCb + cetuximab + bevacizumab (B) is in development in anticipation of a phase III trial testing PCbB ± cetuximab. Molecular correlative studies of the EGFR signaling pathway are ongoing. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Phase II trial of trimetrexate for patients with advanced gastric carcinoma

Cancer ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 86 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramesh K. Ramanathan ◽  
Stuart Lipsitz ◽  
Robert F. Asbury ◽  
Raman Qazi ◽  
Bernard R. Greenberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Carcinoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Advanced Gastric Carcinoma

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 Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive Group Study—FFCD 9803

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (21) ◽  
pp. 4319-4328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Bouché ◽  
Jean Luc Raoul ◽  
Franck Bonnetain ◽  
Marc Giovannini ◽  
Pierre Luc Etienne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Multicenter Phase ◽  
Independent Expert ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Cancérologie Digestive

Purpose 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. Patients and Methods One hundred thirty-six patients (two were ineligible) were enrolled onto the randomized multicenter phase II trial. Patients received LV 200 mg/m2 (2-hour infusion) followed by FU 400 mg/m2 (bolus) and FU 600 mg/m2 (22-hour continuous infusion) on days 1 and 2 every 14 days (LV5FU2; arm A), LV5FU2 plus cisplatin 50 mg/m2 (1-hour infusion) on day 1 or 2 (arm B), or LV5FU2 plus irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (2-hour infusion) on day 1 (arm C). Results 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. Conclusion Of the three regimens tested, the combination of LV5FU2-irinotecan is the most promising and will be assessed in a phase III trial.

Surveillance or Metastasis-Directed Therapy for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer Recurrence: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Phase II Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 446-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piet Ost ◽  
Dries Reynders ◽  
Karel Decaestecker ◽  
Valérie Fonteyne ◽  
Nicolaas Lumen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Local Progression ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

Purpose Retrospective studies suggest that metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) for oligorecurrent prostate cancer (PCa) improves progression-free survival. We aimed to assess the benefit of MDT in a randomized phase II trial. Patients and Methods In this multicenter, randomized, phase II study, patients with asymptomatic PCa were eligible if they had had a biochemical recurrence after primary PCa treatment with curative intent, three or fewer extracranial metastatic lesions on choline positron emission tomography–computed tomography, and serum testosterone levels > 50 ng/mL. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either surveillance or MDT of all detected lesions (surgery or stereotactic body radiotherapy). Surveillance was performed with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) follow-up every 3 months, with repeated imaging at PSA progression or clinical suspicion for progression. Random assignment was balanced dynamically on the basis of two factors: PSA doubling time (≤ 3 v > 3 months) and nodal versus non-nodal metastases. The primary end point was androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)–free survival. ADT was started at symptomatic progression, progression to more than three metastases, or local progression of known metastases. Results Between August 2012 and August 2015, 62 patients were enrolled. At a median follow-up time of 3 years (interquartile range, 2.3-3.75 years), the median ADT-free survival was 13 months (80% CI, 12 to 17 months) for the surveillance group and 21 months (80% CI, 14 to 29 months) for the MDT group (hazard ratio, 0.60 [80% CI, 0.40 to 0.90]; log-rank P = .11). Quality of life was similar between arms at baseline and remained comparable at 3-month and 1-year follow-up. Six patients developed grade 1 toxicity in the MDT arm. No grade 2 to 5 toxicity was observed. Conclusion ADT-free survival was longer with MDT than with surveillance alone for oligorecurrent PCa, suggesting that MDT should be explored further in phase III trials.

NCRI CLL201 Trial: A Randomized Phase II Trial of Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide and Mitoxantrone (FCM) with or without Rituximab in Previously Treated CLL.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 752-752 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hillmen ◽  
Christopher Pocock ◽  
Dena Cohen ◽  
Kim Cocks ◽  
Hazem A. Sayala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Early Death ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Color Flow ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract Standard front-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide. Adding mitoxantrone (FCM) or rituximab (FCR) appears to improve responses although no large randomized trials have been reported. We report a randomized Phase II trial of FCM and FCM-R in relapsed CLL. FCM was oral fludarabine (24mg/m2 for 5 days) and cyclophosphamide (150mg/m2 for 5 days) plus i.v. mitoxantrone (6mg/m2) on Day 1 of each cycle. FCM-R was identical with rituximab on Day 1 of each cycle (375mg/m2 cycle 1; 500mg/m2 cycles 2 to 6). Prophylaxis with aciclovir and co-trimoxazole was given. The primary end-point was response by NCI Criteria 2 months after therapy. Complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery (CR(i)) was defined according to the 2007 CLL Guidelines - clinical CR with a morphologically normal marrow but persistent cytopenias (i.e. platelets <100x109/l and/or neutrophils <1.5x109/l). In addition, minimal residual disease in the marrow was studied 2 months after therapy by four-color flow cytometry with MRD negativity defined as <0.01% CLL cells. 52 patients were entered into the trial with 26 in each arm. The median age was 65 (32–79) with 79% men. 42% had a β2m >4. The median number of prior therapies was 2 (1–6), 31 had prior fludarabine and 6 (12%) were refractory to or relapsed <6 months after fludarabine. 26/44 (59%) had unmutated VH genes (15/22 FCM-R; 11/22 FCM). 11 patients had deletion of 11q (FCM-R 5, FCM 6) and 1 patient had >20% 17p deleted cells (FCM-R). 36/52 (69%) received 4 or more cycles of therapy with no difference between FCM and FCM-R (18/26). Responses are shown in the Table. 35 SAE’s were reported in 23 patients. There was no difference in the number of patients with SAE’s between the arms (FCM 11, FCM-R 12). 6/7 patients (86%) who had 4 or more prior therapies reported an SAE, compared to 17/45 patients (38%) who had less than 4. 16 SAE’s were suspected to be related to FCM-R and 10 related to FCM. In summary, FCM-R is an effective therapy for relapsed CLL with over two-thirds of patients responding. The study design does not allow a statistical comparison between FCM and FCM-R but the results suggest that adding rituximab to FCM results in a higher complete response rate (CR + CR i = 43% for FCM-R and 13% for FCM) with more patients achieving MRD negativity (5 after FCM-R; 2 after FCM). The results of this randomised Phase II trial justify the study of FC with mitoxantrone and/or rituximab in larger randomized Phase III trials. Responses in 46 evaluable patients (remaining 6 not yet evaluable) All patients FCM FCM-R Number of patients 46 23 23 Overall response rate 29 (63%) 13 (57%) 16 (70%) CR 5 (11%) 1 (4%) 4 (17%) CR(i) 8 (17%) 2 (9%) 6 (26%) PR 16 (35%) 10 (43%) 6 (26%) SD/PD 12 (26%) 7 (30%) 5 (22%) Early Death (before assessment) 4 (9%) 2 (9%) 2 (9%) Withdrew consent (before assessment) 1 (2%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) MRD negative 7 (15%) 2 (9%) 5 (22%)

Randomized phase II trial of the multi-kinase inhibitor sorafenib versus interferon (IFN) in treatment-naïve patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4501-4501 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Escudier ◽  
C. Szczylik ◽  
T. Demkow ◽  
M. Staehler ◽  
F. Rolland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Grade 3

4501 Background: Sorafenib, an oral multi-kinase inhibitor that targets tumor growth and vascularization, significantly prolonged PFS in a Phase III trial with previously treated mRCC patients. This randomized Phase II trial investigated the efficacy and tolerability of sorafenib compared with IFN in first-line therapy of patients with clear-cell RCC. Methods: Untreated patients with mRCC were stratified by MSKCC prognostic score and randomized to receive continuous oral sorafenib 400 mg bid or IFN 9 million units tiw, with an option of dose escalation (600 mg bid sorafenib) or crossover from IFN to sorafenib upon disease progression. The study assessed PFS at 99 events as primary objective, best response (RECIST), overall survival, health-related quality of life, and adverse events (AEs). Results: Baseline characteristics of 188 patients (sorafenib n=97; IFN n = 91) were: median age 62.0 years; MSKCC score: 57% low, 41% intermediate, 1% high; prior nephrectomy: 82%; ECOG 0:1, 55.3%:44.7%. As of January 6, 2006, PFS events have been reported for 64 (34%) patients. Preliminary data showed drug-related AEs of any severity (sorafenib vs IFN) in 50.5% vs 51.6% of patients (≥grade 3: 8.2% vs 11.0%), including diarrhea (24.7% vs 5.5%), fatigue (14.4% vs 20.9%), fever (2.1% vs 18.7%), hypertension (13.4% vs 0%), nausea (5.2% vs 13.2%), flu-like syndrome (1.0% vs 6.6%), hand-foot skin reaction (6.2% vs 0%), and rash/desquamation (4.1% vs 0%). Drug-related metabolic/laboratory abnormalities at grade 3 (no grade 4) comprised hypophosphatemia (21.7% vs. 0%), lipase elevation (5.6% vs. 11.1%), anemia (0% vs. 5.3%) and hypoalbuminemia (0% vs. 3.6%). Five patients receiving IFN withdrew from treatment due to AEs, whereas only one patient withdrew from sorafenib. Conclusions: Sorafenib was generally well tolerated in RCC patients in the first-line setting, with relatively infrequent drug-related AEs ≥grade 3. Full PFS data will be presented at the meeting. [Table: see text]

A randomized phase II trial of weekly docetaxel plus either cisplatin or oxaliplatin in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer: Preliminary results

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4566-4566
Author(s):  
S. Sym ◽  
S. Park ◽  
J. Park ◽  
K. Kwon ◽  
I. Jung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Preliminary Results ◽  
Weekly Docetaxel ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Significant Difference

4566 Background: Docetaxel, in combination with cisplatin or oxaliplatin, has demonstrated efficacy against AGC. This randomized phase II trial evaluated two weekly docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to objective response rate (ORR) as first-line therapy in AGC. Methods: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with measurable unresectable and/or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma and a performance status ≤2 were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel (35 mg/m2) weekly on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle plus either cisplatin (60 mg/m2 on day 1) (arm A) or oxaliplatin (120 mg/m2 on day 1) (arm B). Toxicity was assessed on days 1, 8, and 21 of each cycle, and response was evaluated every 2 cycles. Results: Between March 2007 and December 2008, 61 eligible patients entered. In Arm A, 29 patients were evaluable for objective response and 31 for safety. In Arm B, 28 patients were evaluable for objective response and 30 for safety. Median age was 52 years and disease status was comparable for both arms. Ten of 29 (34.5%) patients had a confirmed objective response in the arm A (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.1–51.8%) and 11 of 28 (39.2%) patients had a confirmed objective response in the arm B (95% CI 21.1- 57.2%). No significant difference was noted between the arms both for ORR (p=0.202) or for disease control (58.6% and 82.1%, respectively, p=0.082). Median progression free survival time was 4.4 month in the arm A and 4.3 months in the arm B (Hazard ratio = 0.936; 95% CI, 0.503–1.744; p = 0.836). There was no relevant difference in the occurrence of overall grade ¾ toxicity between the two arms (51.6% vs. 46.6%, respectively; p=0.800). Neutropenia was the most common grade 3/4 toxicity (32.3% vs. 36.6%, respectively). There was one treatment related death in Arm B. Conclusions: The preliminary results showed that both treatment arms have similar clinical efficacy as front-line treatment in AGC. Each regimen has a manageable tolerability profile. The accrual is ongoing. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) alone or in combination with cetuximab as first-line treatment for advanced biliary cancer: Final analysis of a randomized phase II trial (BINGO).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4032-4032 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Malka ◽  
Laetitia Fartoux ◽  
Vanessa Rousseau ◽  
Tanja Trarbach ◽  
Eveline Boucher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Mutational Analysis ◽  
Metabolic Response ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

4032 Background: Gemcitabine-platinum chemotherapy (CTx) regimens are widely accepted as first-line standard of care for patients (pts) with advanced biliary cancers (ABC). EGFR overexpression has been observed in ABC, suggesting that the combination with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies may be appropriate. Methods: Patients with ABC, WHO performance status (PS) 0-1, and without prior palliative CTx were eligible for this international, open-label, two-stage, non-comparative, randomized phase II trial. Patients received GEMOX (gemcitabine, 1 g/m² [10 mg/m²/min] at day [D]1 + oxaliplatin, 100 mg/m² at D2, arm A) or GEMOX + cetuximab (500 mg/m² at D1 or 2, arm B), every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was crude 4-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate (H0, <40%; H1, ≥60%; planned sample size, 100 pts, increased to 150 pts by amendment to allow subgroup analyses). Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), PFS, overall survival (OS), and toxicity (NCI-CTC v3.0). Exploratory endpoints included early metabolic response as assessed by PET at 1 month, and tumor KRAS mutational analysis. Results: From Oct. 2007 to Dec. 2009, we enrolled 150 pts (median age, 62 years; male, 57%; metastatic, 79%; cholangiocarcinoma, 84%; median follow-up, 30 months) (Table). Conclusions: GEMOX-cetuximab regimen was well tolerated and met its primary endpoint (4-month PFS ≥60%). However, median PFS and OS were similar in both arms. Exploratory analyses (e.g., KRAS tumor status) are underway to identify pt subgroups deriving benefit from the addition of cetuximab to CTx. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document