Near miss or standard of care? DPYD screening for cancer patients receiving fluorouracil

5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and its pro-drug capecitabine are widely used anticancer agents. Most 5-FU catabolism is dependent on dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) encoded by the DPYD gene, and DPYD variants that reduce DPD function increase 5-FU toxicity. Most DPD deficient patients are heterozygous and can be treated with reduced 5-FU dosing. We describe a patient with a genotype associated with near complete absence of DPD function, and severe and likely fatal toxicity with 5-FU treatment. The patient was treated effectively with alternative systemic therapy. Routine pretreatment DPYD genotyping is recommended by the European Medicines Agency, and guidelines for use of 5-FU in DPD deficient patients are available. However, outside the province of Quebec, routine pretreatment screening for DPD deficiency remains unavailable in Canada. It is likely our patient would have died from 5-FU toxicity under the current standard of care, but instead provides an example of the potential benefit of DPYD screening on patient outcomes

Toward a Functional Definition of a “Rare Disease” for Regulatory Authorities and Funding Agencies

AbstractBackgroundThe designation of a disease as “rare” is associated with some substantial benefits for companies involved in new drug development, including expedited review by regulatory authorities and relaxed criteria for reimbursement. How “rare disease” is defined therefore has major financial implications, both for pharmaceutical companies and for insurers or public drug reimbursement programs. All existing definitions are based, somewhat arbitrarily, on disease incidence or prevalence.ObjectivesWhat is proposed here is a functional definition of rare based on an assessment of the feasibility of measuring the efficacy of a new treatment in conventional randomized controlled trials, to inform regulatory authorities and funding agencies charged with assessing new therapies being considered for public funding.MethodsIt involves a five-step process, involving significant negotiations between patient advocacy groups, pharmaceutical companies, physicians, and public drug reimbursement programs, designed to establish the feasibility of carrying out a randomized controlled trial with sufficient statistical power to show a clinically significant treatment effect.Results and ConclusionsThe steps are as follows: 1) identification of a specific disease, including appropriate genetic definition; 2) identification of clinically relevant outcomes to evaluate efficacy; 3) establishment of the inherent variability of measurements of clinically relevant outcomes; 4) calculation of the sample size required to assess the efficacy of a new treatment with acceptable statistical power; and 5) estimation of the difficulty of recruiting an adequate sample size given the estimated prevalence or incidence of the disorder in the population and the inclusion criteria to be used

The Potential Clinical and Economic Value of Primary Tumour Identification in Metastatic Cancer of Unknown Primary Tumour: A Population-Based Retrospective Matched Cohort Study.

PurposeSeveral genomic tests have recently been developed to identify the primary tumour in cancer of unknown primary tumour (CUP). However, the value of identifying the primary tumour in clinical practice for CUP patients remains questionable and difficult to prove in randomized trials.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess the clinical and economic value of primary tumour identification in CUP using a retrospective matched cohort study.MethodsWe used the Manitoba Cancer Registry to identify all patients initially diagnosed with metastatic cancer between 2002 and 2011. We defined patients as having CUP if their primary tumour was found 6 months or more after initial diagnosis or never found during the course of disease. Otherwise, we considered patients to have metastatic cancer from a known primary tumour (CKP). We linked all patients with Manitoba Health databases to estimate their direct healthcare costs using a phase-of-care approach. We used the propensity score matching technique to match each CUP patient with a CKP patient on clinicopathologic characteristics. We compared treatment patterns, overall survival (OS) and phase-specific healthcare costs between the two patient groups and assessed association with OS using Cox regression adjustment.ResultsOf 5839 patients diagnosed with metastatic cancer, 395 had CUP (6.8%); 1:1 matching created a matched group of 395 CKP patients. CUP patients were less likely to receive surgery, radiation, hormonal and targeted therapy and more likely to receive cytotoxic empiric chemotherapeutic agents. Having CUP was associated with reduced OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.1-1.58), but this lost statistical significance with adjustment for treatment differences. CUP patients had a significant increase in the mean net cost of initial diagnostic workup before diagnosis and a significant reduction in the mean net cost of continuing cancer care.ConclusionIdentifying the primary tumour in CUP patients might enable the use of more effective therapies, improve OS and allow more efficient allocation of healthcare resources

Non-hormonal systemic therapy in men with hormone-refractory prostate cancer and metastases: a systematic review from the Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-based Care's Genitourinary Cancer Disease Site Group

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer that has recurred after local therapy or disseminated distantly is usually treated with androgen deprivation therapy; however, most men will eventually experience disease progression within 12 to 20 months. New data emerging from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of chemotherapy provided the impetus for a systematic review addressing the following question: which non-hormonal systemic therapies are most beneficial for the treatment of men with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) and clinical evidence of metastases? METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs or meta-analyses examining first-line non-hormonal systemic (cytotoxic and non-cytotoxic) therapy in patients with HRPC and metastases that reported at least one of the following endpoints: overall survival, disease control, palliative response, quality of life, and toxicity. Excluded were RCTs of second-line hormonal therapies, bisphosphonates or radiopharmaceuticals, or randomized fewer than 50 patients per trial arm. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology were searched for relevant trials. Citations were screened for eligibility by four reviewers and discrepancies were handled by consensus. RESULTS: Of the 80 RCTs identified, 27 met the eligibility criteria. Two recent, large trials reported improved overall survival with docetaxel-based chemotherapy compared to mitoxantrone-prednisone. Improved progression-free survival and rates of palliative and objective response were also observed. Compared with mitoxantrone, docetaxel treatment was associated with more frequent mild toxicities, similar rates of serious toxicities, and better quality of life. More frequent serious toxicities were observed when docetaxel was combined with estramustine. Three trials reported improved time-to-disease progression, palliative response, and/or quality of life with mitoxatrone plus corticosteroid compared with corticosteroid alone. Single trials reported improved disease control with estramustine-vinblastine, vinorelbine-hydrocortisone, and suramin-hydrocortisone compared to controls. Trials of non-cytotoxic agents have reported equivocal results. CONCLUSION: Docetaxel-based chemotherapy modestly improves survival and provides palliation for men with HRPC and metastases. Other than androgen deprivation therapy, this is the only other therapy to have demonstrated improved overall survival in prostate cancer in RCTs. Further investigations to identify more effective therapies for HRPC including the use of systemic therapies earlier in the natural history of prostate cancer are warranted

Application of a policy framework for the public funding of drugs for rare diseases

BACKGROUND: In many countries, decisions about the public funding of drugs are preferentially based on the results of randomized trials. For truly rare diseases, such trials are not typically available, and approaches by public payers are highly variable. In view of this, a policy framework intended to fairly evaluate these drugs was developed by the Drugs for Rare Diseases Working Group (DRDWG) at the request of the Ontario Public Drug Programs. OBJECTIVE: To report the initial experience of applying a novel evaluation framework to funding applications for drugs for rare diseases. METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study. MEASURES: Clinical effectiveness, costs, funding recommendations, funding approval. KEY RESULTS: Between March 2008 and February 2013, eight drugs were evaluated using the DRDWG framework. The estimated average annual drug cost per patient ranged from 28,000 to 1,200,000 Canadian dollars (CAD). For five drugs, full evaluations were completed, specific funding recommendations were made by the DRDWG, and funding was approved after risk-sharing agreements with the manufacturers were negotiated. For two drugs, the disease indications were determined to be ineligible for consideration. For one drug, there was insufficient natural history data for the disease to provide a basis for recommendation. For the five drugs fully evaluated, 32 patients met the predefined eligibility criteria for funding, and five were denied based on predefined exclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The framework improved transparency and consistency for evaluation and public funding of drugs for rare diseases in Ontario. The evaluation process will continue to be iteratively refined as feedback on actual versus expected clinical and economic outcomes is incorporated. © 2014 Society of General Internal Medicine

The impact of seasonal operating room closures on wait times for oral cancer surgery

Background Operating room slowdowns occur at specific intervals in the year as a cost-saving measure. We aim to investigate the impact of these slowdowns on the care of oral cavity cancer patients at a Canadian tertiary care centre. Methods A total of 585 oral cavity cancer patients seen between 1999 and 2015 at the London Health Science Centre (lhsc) Head and Neck Multidisciplinary Clinic were included in this study. Operating room hours and patient load from 2006 to 2014 were calculated. Our primary endpoint was the wait time from consultation to definitive surgery. Exposure variables were defined according to wait time intervals occurring during time periods with reduced operating room hours. Results Overall case volume rose significantly from 2006 to 2014 (p \u3c 0.001), while operating room hours remained stable (p = 0.555). Patient wait times for surgery increased from 16.3 days prior to 2003 to 25.5 days in 2015 (p = 0.008). Significant variability in operating room hours was observed by month, with lowest reported for July and August (p = 0.002). The greater the exposure to these months, the more likely patients were to wait longer than 28 days for surgery (odds ratio per day [or]: 1.07, 95% confidence interval [ci]: 1.05 to 1.10, p \u3c 0.001). Individuals seen in consultation preceding a month with below average operating room hours had a higher risk of disease recurrence and/or death (hazard ratio [hr]: 1.59, 95% ci: 1.10 to 2.30, p = 0.014). Conclusions Scheduled reductions in available operating room hours contribute to prolonged wait times and higher disease recurrence. Further work is needed to identify strategies maximizing efficient use of health care resources without negatively affecting patient outcomes

High-throughput testing in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma identifies agents with preferential activity in human papillomavirus-positive or negative cell lines.

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is a common cancer diagnosis worldwide. Despite advances in treatment, HNSCC has very poor survival outcomes, emphasizing an ongoing need for development of improved therapeutic options. The distinct tumor characteristics of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive vs. HPV-negative disease necessitate development of treatment strategies tailored to tumor HPV-status. High-throughput robotic screening of 1,433 biologically and pharmacologically relevant compounds at a single dose (4 μM) was carried out against 6 HPV-positive and 20 HPV-negative HNSCC cell lines for preliminary identification of therapeutically relevant compounds. Statistical analysis was further carried out to differentiate compounds with preferential activity against cell lines stratified by the HPV-status. These analyses yielded 57 compounds with higher activity in HPV-negative cell lines, and 34 with higher-activity in HPV-positive ones. Multi-point dose-response curves were generated for six of these compounds (Ryuvidine, MK-1775, SNS-032, Flavopiridol, AZD-7762 and ARP-101), confirming Ryuvidine to have preferential potency against HPV-negative cell lines, and MK-1775 to have preferential potency against HPV-positive cell lines. These data comprise a valuable resource for further investigation of compounds with therapeutic potential in the HNSCC

Cisplatin and fluorouracil with or without panitumumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SPECTRUM): an open-label phase 3 randomised trial

Background: Previous trials have shown that anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies can improve clinical outcomes of patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We assessed the efficacy and safety of panitumumab combined with cisplatin and fluorouracil as first-line treatment for these patients. Methods: This open-label phase 3 randomised trial was done at 126 sites in 26 countries. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years; had histologically or cytologically confi rmed SCCHN; had distant metastatic or locoregionally recurrent disease, or both, that was deemed to be incurable by surgery or radiotherapy; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less; and had adequate haematological, renal, hepatic, and cardiac function. Patients were randomly assigned according to a computer-generated randomisation sequence (1:1; stratifi ed by previous treatment, primary tumour site, and performance status) to one of two groups. Patients in both groups received up to six 3-week cycles of intravenous cisplatin (100 mg/m(2) on day 1 of each cycle) and fl uorouracil (1000 mg/m(2) on days 1-4 of each cycle); those in the experimental group also received intravenous panitumumab (9 mg/kg on day 1 of each cycle). Patients in the experimental group could choose to continue maintenance panitumumab every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival and was analysed by intention to treat. In a prospectively defi ned retrospective analysis, we assessed tumour human papillomavirus (HPV) status as a potential predictive biomarker of outcomes with a validated p16-INK4A (henceforth, p16) immunohistochemical assay. Patients and investigators were aware of group assignment; study statisticians were masked until primary analysis; and the central laboratory assessing p16 status was masked to identifi cation of patients and treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials. gov, number NCT00460265. Findings: Between May 15, 2007, and March 10, 2009, we randomly assigned 657 patients: 327 to the panitumumab group and 330 to the control group. Median overall survival was 11.1 months (95% CI 9.8-12.2) in the panitumumab group and 9.0 months (8.1-11.2) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.873, 95% CI 0.729-1.046; p = 0.1403). Median progression-free survival was 5.8 months (95% CI 5.6-6.6) in the panitumumab group and 4.6 months (4.1-5.4) in the control group (HR 0.780, 95% CI 0.659-0.922; p = 0.0036). Several grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more frequent in the panitumumab group than in the control group: skin or eye toxicity (62 [19%] of 325 included in safety analyses vs six [2%] of 325), diarrhoea (15 [5%] vs four [1%]), hypomagnesaemia (40 [12%] vs 12 [4%]), hypokalaemia (33 [10%] vs 23 [7%]), and dehydration (16 [5%] vs seven [2%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in 14 patients (4%) in the panitumumab group and eight (2%) in the control group. Five (2%) of the fatal adverse events in the panitumumab group were attributed to the experimental agent. We had appropriate samples to assess p16 status for 443 (67%) patients, of whom 99 (22%) were p16 positive. Median overall survival in patients with p16-negative tumours was longer in the panitumumab group than in the control group (11.7 months [95% CI 9.7-13.7] vs 8.6 months [6.9-11.1]; HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.58-0.93]; p = 0.0115), but this difference was not shown for p16-positive patients (11.0 months [7.3-12.9] vs 12.6 months [7.7-17.4]; 1.00 [0.62-1.61]; p = 0.998). In the control group, p16-positive patients had numerically, but not statistically, longer overall survival than did p16-negative patients (HR 0.70 [95% CI 0.47-1.04]). Interpretation: Although the addition of panitumumab to chemotherapy did not improve overall survival in an unselected population of patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN, it improved progression-free survival and had an acceptable toxicity profile. p16 status could be a prognostic and predictive marker in patients treated with panitumumab and chemotherapy. Prospective assessment will be necessary to validate our biomarker findings

The clinical significance of occult gastrointestinal primary tumours in metastatic cancer: A population retrospective cohort study

© 2018 by the Korean Cancer Association. Purpose The purpose of this study was to estimate the incidence of occult gastrointestinal (GI) primary tumours in patients with metastatic cancer of uncertain primary origin and evaluate their influence on treatments and overall survival (OS). Materials and Methods We used population heath data from Manitoba, Canada to identify all patients initially diagnosed with metastatic cancer between 2002 and 2011. We defined patients to have occult primary tumour if the primary was found at least 6 months after initial diagnosis. Otherwise, we considered primary tumours as obvious. We used propensity-score methods to match each patient with occult GI tumour to four patients with obvious GI tumour on all known clinicopathologic features. We compared treatments and 2-year survival data between the two patient groups and assessed treatment effect on OS using Cox regression adjustment. Results Eighty-three patients had occult GI primary tumours, accounting for 17.6% of men and 14% of women with metastatic cancer of uncertain primary. A 1:4 matching created a matched group of 332 patients with obvious GI primary tumour. Occult cases compared to the matched group were less likely to receive surgical interventions and targeted biological therapy, and more likely to receive cytotoxic empiric chemotherapeutic agents. Having an occult GI tumour was associated with reduced OS and appeared to be a nonsignificant independent predictor of OS when adjusting for treatment differences. Conclusion GI tumours are the most common occult primary tumours in men and the second most common in women. Patients with occult GI primary tumours are potentially being undertreated with available GI site-specific and targeted therapies

Repurposing Albendazole: new potential as a chemotherapeutic agent with preferential activity against HPV-negative head and neck squamous cell cancer.

Albendazole is an anti-helminthic drug that has been shown to exhibit anti-cancer properties, however its activity in head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) was unknown. Using a series of in vitro assays, we assessed the ability of albendazole to inhibit proliferation in 20 HNSCC cell lines across a range of albendazole doses (1 nM-10 μM). Cell lines that responded to treatment were further examined for cell death, inhibition of migration and cell cycle arrest. Thirteen of fourteen human papillomavirus-negative HNSCC cell lines responded to albendazole, with an average IC50 of 152 nM. In contrast, only 3 of 6 human papillomavirus-positive HNSCC cell lines responded. Albendazole treatment resulted in apoptosis, inhibition of cell migration, cell cycle arrest in the G2/M phase and altered tubulin distribution. Normal control cells were not measurably affected by any dose tested. This study indicates that albendazole acts to inhibit the proliferation of human papillomavirus-negative HNSCC cell lines and thus warrants further study as a potential chemotherapeutic agent for patients suffering from head and neck cancer