A randomized, phase II study of afatinib versus cetuximab in metastatic or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BackgroundAfatinib is an oral, irreversible ErbB family blocker that has shown activity in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated lung cancer. We hypothesized that the agent would have greater antitumor activity compared with cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients, whose disease has progressed after platinum-containing therapy.Patients and methodsAn open-label, randomized, phase II trial was conducted in 43 centers; 124 patients were randomized (1 : 1) to either afatinib (50 mg/day) or cetuximab (250 mg/m(2)/week) until disease progression or intolerable adverse events (AEs) (stage I), with optional crossover (stage II). The primary end point was tumor shrinkage before crossover assessed by investigator (IR) and independent central review (ICR).ResultsA total of 121 patients were treated (61 afatinib, 60 cetuximab) and 68 crossed over to stage II (32 and 36 respectively). In stage I, mean tumor shrinkage by IR/ICR was 10.4%/16.6% with afatinib and 5.4%/10.1% with cetuximab (P = 0.46/0.30). Objective response rate was 16.1%/8.1% with afatinib and 6.5%/9.7% with cetuximab (IR/ICR). Comparable disease control rates were observed with afatinib (50%) and cetuximab (56.5%) by IR; similar results were seen by ICR. Most common grade ≥3 drug-related AEs (DRAEs) were rash/acne (18% versus 8.3%), diarrhea (14.8% versus 0%), and stomatitis/mucositis (11.5% versus 0%) with afatinib and cetuximab, respectively. Patients with DRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were 23% with afatinib and 5% with cetuximab. In stage II, disease control rate (IR/ICR) was 38.9%/33.3% with afatinib and 18.8%/18.8% with cetuximab.ConclusionAfatinib showed antitumor activity comparable to cetuximab in R/M HNSCC in this exploratory phase II trial, although more patients on afatinib discontinued treatment due to AEs. Sequential EGFR/ErbB treatment with afatinib and cetuximab provided sustained clinical benefit in patients after crossover, suggesting a lack of cross-resistance

Docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil plus vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer after anthracycline therapy failure

This multicentre, randomised phase III study compared docetaxel with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine in patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure of neo/adjuvant or one line of palliative anthracycline-based chemotherapy. One hundred and seventy-six metastatic breast cancer patients were randomised to receive docetaxel (100 mg m−2) every 3 weeks or 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine: 5-fluorouracil (750 mg m−2 per day continuous infusion) D1–5 plus vinorelbine (25 mg m−2) D1 and D5 of each 3-week cycle. Eighty-six patients received 516 cycles of docetaxel; 90 patients received 476 cycles of 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine. Median time to progression (6.5 vs 5.1 months) and overall survival (16.0 vs 15.0 months) did not differ significantly between the docetaxel and 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine arms, respectively. Six (7%) complete responses and 31 (36%) partial responses occurred with docetaxel (overall response rate 43%, 95% confidence interval: 32–53%), while 4 (4.4%) complete responses and 31 (34.4%) partial responses occurred with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine (overall response rate 38.8%, 95% confidence interval: 29–49%). Main grade 3–4 toxicities were (docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine): neutropenia 82% vs 67%; stomatitis 5% vs 40%; febrile neutropenia 13% vs 22%; and infection 2% vs 7%. There was one possible treatment-related death in the docetaxel arm and five with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine. In anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients, docetaxel showed comparable efficacy to 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine, but was less toxic

CXCR3 Antagonism of SDF-1(5-67) Restores Trabecular Function and Prevents Retinal Neurodegeneration in a Rat Model of Ocular Hypertension

Glaucoma, the most common cause of irreversible blindness, is a neuropathy commonly initiated by pathological ocular hypertension due to unknown mechanisms of trabecular meshwork degeneration. Current antiglaucoma therapy does not target the causal trabecular pathology, which may explain why treatment failure is often observed. Here we show that the chemokine CXCL12, its truncated form SDF-1(5-67), and the receptors CXCR4 and CXCR3 are expressed in human glaucomatous trabecular tissue and a human trabecular cell line. SDF-1(5-67) is produced under the control of matrix metallo-proteinases, TNF-α, and TGF-β2, factors known to be involved in glaucoma. CXCL12 protects in vitro trabecular cells from apoptotic death via CXCR4 whereas SDF-1(5-67) induces apoptosis through CXCR3 and caspase activation. Ocular administration of SDF-1(5-67) in the rat increases intraocular pressure. In contrast, administration of a selective CXCR3 antagonist in a rat model of ocular hypertension decreases intraocular pressure, prevents retinal neurodegeneration, and preserves visual function. The protective effect of CXCR3 antagonism is related to restoration of the trabecular function. These data demonstrate that proteolytic cleavage of CXCL12 is involved in trabecular pathophysiology, and that local administration of a selective CXCR3 antagonist may be a beneficial therapeutic strategy for treating ocular hypertension and subsequent retinal degeneration

Late Pennsylvanian and Early Permian chondrichthyan microremains from San Salvador Patlanoaya (Puebla, Mexico).

International audienc

A randomized, phase II study of afatinib versus cetuximab in metastatic or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

Afatinib is an oral, irreversible ErbB family blocker that has shown activity in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated lung cancer. We hypothesized that the agent would have greater antitumor activity compared with cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients, whose disease has progressed after platinum-containing therapy.status: publishe

Short-term health-related quality of life and symptom control with docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (TPF), 5-fluorouracil (PF) for induction in unresectable locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer patients (EORTC 24971/TAX 323)

BACKGROUND: The EORTC 24971/TAX 323, a phase III study of 358 patients with unresectable locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, showed an improved progression-free and overall survival (OS) with less toxicity when docetaxel (T) was added to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) for induction and given before radiotherapy (RT). The impact of the addition of docetaxel on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and symptoms was investigated. METHODS: HRQOL was assessed at baseline, at end of cycle 2, and 4, 6, and 9 months after completion of RT using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (QLQ-C30) and the EORTC QLQ Head and Neck Cancer-Specific Module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35). The primary HRQOL scale was global HRQOL per protocol. RESULTS: Compliance to HRQOL assessments was 97% at baseline, but dropped to 54% by 6 months. Data were analysed up to 6 months. There was a trend towards improved global HRQOL during the treatment period. At 6 months after the end of RT, global HRQOL was higher in the TPF arm than in the PF arm, but the low compliance does not allow to draw definitive conclusions. Swallowing and coughing problems decreased more in the TPF arm than in the PF arm at the end of cycle 2, but to a limited extent. CONCLUSION: Induction chemotherapy with TPF before RT not only improves survival and reduces toxicity compared with PF but also seems to improve global HRQOL in a more sustainable manner