Safety of a 3-weekly schedule of carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin as first line chemotherapy in patients with ovarian cancer: preliminary results of the MITO-2 randomized trial

BACKGROUND: The MITO-2 (Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer) study is a randomized phase III trial comparing carboplatin plus paclitaxel to carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in first-line chemotherapy of patients with ovarian cancer. Due to the paucity of published phase I data on the 3-weekly experimental schedule used, an early safety analysis was planned. METHODS: Patients with ovarian cancer (stage Ic-IV), aged < 75 years, ECOG performance status ≤ 2, were randomized to carboplatin AUC 5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2), every 3 weeks or to carboplatin AUC 5 plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 30 mg/m(2), every 3 weeks. Treatment was planned for 6 cycles. Toxicity was coded according to the NCI-CTC version 2.0. RESULTS: The pre-planned safety analysis was performed in July 2004. Data from the first 50 patients treated with carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin were evaluated. Median age was 60 years (range 34–75). Forty-three patients (86%) completed 6 cycles. Two thirds of the patients had at least one cycle delayed due to toxicity, but 63% of the cycles were administered on time. In most cases the reason for chemotherapy delay was neutropenia or other hematological toxicity. No delay due to palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) was recorded. No toxic death was recorded. Reported hematological toxicities were: grade (G) 3 anemia 16%, G3/G4 neutropenia 36% and 10% respectively, G3/4 thrombocytopenia 22% and 4% respectively. Non-haematological toxicity was infrequent: pulmonary G1 6%, heart rhythm G1 4%, liver toxicity G1 6%, G2 4% and G3 2%. Complete hair loss was reported in 6% of patients, and G1 neuropathy in 2%. PPE was recorded in 14% of the cases (G1 10%, G2 2%, G3 2%). CONCLUSION: This safety analysis shows that the adopted schedule of carboplatin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin given every 3 weeks is feasible as first line treatment in ovarian cancer patients, although 37% of the cycles were delayed due to haematological toxicity. Toxicities that are common with standard combination of carboplatin plus paclitaxel (neurotoxicity and hair loss) are infrequent with this experimental schedule, and skin toxicity appears manageable

Azacitidine for the treatment of lower risk myelodysplastic syndromes: A retrospective study of 74 patients enrolled in an Italian named patient program

BACKGROUND: Azacitidine induces responses and prolongs overall survival compared with conventional care regimens in patients who have high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, limited data are available concerning the efficacy and safety of azacitidine in patients who have lower risk MDS. METHODS: The authors retrospectively evaluated 74 patients with International Prognostic Scoring System low-risk or intermediate 1-risk MDS, who received azacitidine on a national named patient program. At baseline, 84% of patients were transfusion-dependent, 57% had received erythropoietin, and 51% were aged >70 years. Azacitidine was administered subcutaneously for 5 days (n = 29 patients), 7 days (n = 43 patients), or 10 days (n = 2 patients) every month at a dose of 75 mg/m2 daily (n = 45 patients) or at a fixed dose of 100 mg daily (n = 29 patients) and for a median of 7 cycles (range, 1-30 cycles). RESULTS: According to the 2006 International Working Group criteria, overall response rate (ORR) was 45.9%, including complete responses (10.8%), partial responses (9.5%), hematologic improvements (20.3%), and bone marrow complete responses (5.4%). The ORR was 51.6% in 64 patients who completed ≥4 cycles of treatment. The median duration of response was 6 months (range, 1-30 months). After a median follow-up of 15 months, 71% of patients remained alive. A survival benefit was observed in responders versus nonresponders (94% vs 54% of patients projected to be alive at 2.5 years, respectively; P < .0014). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were myelosuppression (21.6%) and infection (6.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that azacitidine may be a feasible and effective treatment for patients with lower risk MDS. © 2010 American Cancer Society

Improved Outcomes With Retinoic Acid and Arsenic Trioxide Compared With Retinoic Acid and Chemotherapy in Non-High-Risk Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia: Final Results of the Randomized Italian-German APL0406 Trial

The initial results of the APL0406 trial showed that the combination of all-trans-retinoic acid (ATRA) and arsenic trioxide (ATO) is at least not inferior to standard ATRA and chemotherapy (CHT) in first-line therapy of low- or intermediate-risk acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). We herein report the final analysis on the complete series of patients enrolled onto this trial

Lenalidomide treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes with chromosome 5q deletion: Results from the National Registry of the Italian Drug Agency

Objective: The most typical cytogenetic aberration in myelodysplastic syndromes is del(5q), which, when isolated, is associated with refractory anaemia and good prognosis. Based on high rates of erythroid response and transfusion independence, Lenalidomide (LEN) became the standard treatment. This multi-centre study was designed to supplement Italian Registry data on LEN by addressing prescription, administration appropriateness, haematological and cytogenetic responses and disease evolution. Methods: MORE study was an observational, non-interventional, multi-centre, retrospective and prospective study. Cases were recruited from 45 Haematological Centres throughout Italy. Data were collected from the Italian National Registry for Lenalidomide administration and supplemented by a MORE data form. Results: Data from 190/213 patients were analysed. In all, 149 had been diagnosed by conventional cytogenetics (GROUP A) and 41 only by FISH (GROUP B). Overall erythroid response was obtained in 92.8% of cases. Overall cytogenetic remission was achieved in 22.6% of cases. Disease progression occurred in 15.6% of cases. Clonal cytogenetic evolution characterised progression to AML but not to higher risk MDS. Conclusions: Erythroid response to Lenalidomide was similar in MDS with isolated del(5q) and with del(5q) plus one anomaly. Progression to AML or higher risk MDS showed different cytogenetic features

Adjuvant anastrozole versus exemestane versus letrozole, upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen, in endocrine-sensitive breast cancer (FATA-GIM3): a randomised, phase 3 trial

Background: Uncertainty exists about the optimal schedule of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors and, to our knowledge, no trial has directly compared the three aromatase inhibitors anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. We investigated the schedule and type of aromatase inhibitors to be used as adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Methods: FATA-GIM3 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of six different treatments in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that had been completely removed by surgery, any pathological tumour size, and axillary nodal status. Key exclusion criteria were hormone replacement therapy, recurrent or metastatic disease, previous treatment with tamoxifen, and another malignancy in the previous 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned in an equal ratio to one of six treatment groups: oral anastrozole (1 mg per day), exemestane (25 mg per day), or letrozole (2·5 mg per day) tablets upfront for 5 years (upfront strategy) or oral tamoxifen (20 mg per day) for 2 years followed by oral administration of one of the three aromatase inhibitors for 3 years (switch strategy). Randomisation was done by a computerised minimisation procedure stratified for oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status; previous chemotherapy; and pathological nodal status. Neither the patients nor the physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The minimum cutoff to declare superiority of the upfront strategy over the switch strategy was assumed to be a 2% difference in disease-free survival at 5 years. Primary efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all patients for whom at least one safety case report form had been completed. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00541086. Findings: Between March 9, 2007, and July 31, 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled into the study. After a median follow-up of 60 months (IQR 46–72), 401 disease-free survival events were reported, including 211 (11%) of 1850 patients allocated to the switch strategy and 190 (10%) of 1847 patients allocated to upfront treatment. 5-year disease-free survival was 88·5% (95% CI 86·7–90·0) with the switch strategy and 89·8% (88·2–91·2) with upfront treatment (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·73–1·08; p=0·23). 5-year disease-free survival was 90·0% (95% CI 87·9–91·7) with anastrozole (124 events), 88·0% (85·8–89·9) with exemestane (148 events), and 89·4% (87·3 to 91·1) with letrozole (129 events; p=0·24). No unexpected serious adverse reactions or treatment-related deaths occurred. Musculoskeletal side-effects were the most frequent grade 3–4 events, reported in 130 (7%) of 1761 patients who received the switch strategy and 128 (7%) of 1766 patients who received upfront treatment. Grade 1 musculoskeletal events were more frequent with the upfront schedule than with the switch schedule (924 [52%] of 1766 patients vs 745 [42%] of 1761 patients). All other grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in less than 2% of patients in either group. Interpretation: 5 years of treatment with aromatase inhibitors was not superior to 2 years of tamoxifen followed by 3 years of aromatase inhibitors. None of the three aromatase inhibitors was superior to the others in terms of efficacy. Therefore, patient preference, tolerability, and financial constraints should be considered when deciding the optimal treatment approach in this setting. Funding: Italian Drug Agency