(Neo)adjuvant treatment in pancreatic cancer--the need for future trials.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant↗
Biomedical subjects
K H Link
Publications and source records attributed to K H Link.
Downstaging by regional chemotherapy of non-resectable isolated colorectal liver metastases.
AIMS: To improve the course of isolated non-resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) by hepatic arterial infusion treatment. Patients with CRLM have a worse prognosis than those whose liver metastases are resectable. Systemic (i.v.) chemotherapy for CRLM/colorectal metastases with 5-fluorouracil+folinic acid (5-FU+FA) i.v. may result in median survival times of 6.4-14.3 months. Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) with 5-fluorodeoxyuridine (5-FUDR) has been demonstrated in a meta-analysis of randomized trials to be superior to i.v. treatment/palliative care (median survival 15 vs. 10 months). The benefit of HAI with 5-FUDR, although recommended as treatment for CRLM, is severely compromised by the 5-FUDR induced hepatotoxicity, leading eventually to sclerosing cholangitis (SC)/liver cirrhosis. We have developed a stepwise protocol for HAI in CRLM, which is superior to HAI with 5-FUDR and to systemic chemotherapy. METHODS: Between 1982 and 1997, 168 CRLM patients were treated within the following protocols. In protocol A, 48 CRLM patients received HAI with 5-FUDR. In protocol B, 46 patients received 5-FUDR i.a. (HAI)+i.v. In protocol C 5-FU+FA were delivered via HAI in 24 patients with CRLM. In protocol D, based on in vitro phase II studies and the results of protocol C, mitoxantrone and mitomycin C were added to 5-FU+FA (MFFM). Fifty (50) CRLM patients received HAI with HFFM. RESULTS: The response rates, median survival time, systemic toxicity and SC rate were: 42%, 20.8 months, 0-19% and 38% for protocol A; 46%, 20.8 months, 0-20% and 41% for protocol B; 45%, 19.8 months, 4-25% and 0% for protocol C; and 66%, 27.4 months, 2-26% and 0% for protocol D. The surgically placed ports for HAI in protocols C and D functioned in 90%, 82% and 76% of patients, 6, 9, and 11 months after beginning HAI. Quality of life in protocol D was high. Nine patients from protocols C and D with either partial (PR, seven patients) or complete (CR, two patients) remissions received a secondary liver resection without hospital mortality, and seven of nine patients are alive 2-58 months after liver resection. The other two died 11 and 22 months after resection. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal treatment of CRLM was found to be protocol D: HAI with MFFM. The results of this protocol, including high remission rate, long median survival time, good port function, good quality of life and, interestingly, the possibility of downstaging and resecting primarily non-resectable metastases, seem to be superior to HAI with 5-FUDR or 5-FU+FA and to systemic chemotherapy with 5-FU+FA. This hypothesis is currently being examined in a phase III study (HAI with MFFM vs. 5-FU+FA i.v.).
Adult↗
Basic research supported developments of chemotherapy in nonresectable isolated colorectal liver metastases to a protocol of hepatic artery infusion using mitoxantrone, 5-FU + folinic acid and mitomycin C.
OBJECTIVE: Since the developments in systemic chemotherapy of metastasized colorectal cancer have not resulted in substantial gains in survival times, we wished to improve the course of isolated nonresectable colorectal liver metastases (CPLM) by hepatic arterial infusion treatment. BACKGROUND: Patients (pts) with CRLM have a worse fate than those pts whose liver metastases could be resected. Systemic (i.v.) chemotherapy for CRLM/colorectal metastases does not improve survival to a relevant level (median survival time (med. surv.) after 5-Fluorouracil + Folinic Acid (5-FU + FA) i.v.: 6.4-14.3 months (m)). Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) with 5-Fluorode-oxyuridine (5-FUDR) has been demonstrated in a metaanalysis of randomized trials to be superior to i.v. treatment/palliative care (med. surv.: 15 vs. 10 m). The benefit of HAI with 5-FUDR, although recommended as treatment for CRLM, is severely compromised by the 5-FUDR induced hepatotoxicity, leading eventually to sclerosing cholangitis (SC)/liver scirrhosis. We have stepwise developed a protocol for HAI of CRLM, which is superior to HAI with 5-FUDR, and, most evidently, to systemic chemotherapy. PATIENTS/METHODS: Between 1982-1997, 222 CR (L) M patients were treated within subsequent protocols (Table). In protocol A, 68 CRLM pts received HAI with 5-FUDR (A1: nonrandomized pts; A2: randomized pts). In protocol B (randomized pts.), 46 pts received 5-FUDR i.a. (via HAI) + i.v. In protocol C, systemic chemotherapy with 5-FU + FA was conducted in 34 pts with metastasized colorectal cancers, including CRLM. In protocol D 5-FU + FA was delivered via HAI in 25 pts with CRLM. In protocol E, based on in vitro phase II studies and the results of protocol D, Mitoxantrone and Mitomycin C were added to 5-FU + FA (MFFM). Fifty (50) CRLM pts received HAI with MFFM. RESULTS: The response rates, med. surv. times, systemic toxicity and SC rates are shown in the table. HAI with MFFM produced objective responses in 66%, the med. surv. was 27.4 m, and no SC occurred. The ports surgically placed for HAI, e.g., in protocols D and E, functioned in 90%, 82%, and 76% 6, 9, and 11 m after start of the HAI. Quality of life in protocol E was high. Nine pts from protocols D + E with either partial (PR, 7 pts) or complete (CR, 2 pts) remissions received a secondary liver resection without hospital mortality, and 7/9 pts are living 2-58 m after liver resection, 2/9 pts died 11 and 22 m after resection. [table: see text] SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS: Our learning curve to achieve optimal treatment of CRLM resulted in a protocol using HAI with MFFM. The results of this protocol (E) including the high remission rate, long median survival time, good port function, high quality of life, and, most interestingly, the possibility to downstage and resect primarily nonresectable metastases, seem to be superior to HAI with 5-FUDR of 5-FU + FA and to systemic chemotherapy with 5-FU + FA. This hypothesis is currently examined in a phase III study (HAI with MFFM vs. 5-FU + FA i.v.).
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
Surgery and multimodal treatments in pancreatic cancer--a review on the basis of future multimodal treatment concepts.
BACKGROUND: To improve the surgical outcome after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinomas, multimodal treatment concepts need to be applied and improved. In spite of several positive studies, and the fact that multimodality treatment is the standard concept in major centers for pancreatic cancer surgery, a recent trial shed some doubt on the positive effect of adjuvant radiochemotherapy, so that the majority with reservations about multimodal treatment feel confirmed in their opinion that surgical treatment alone is sufficient therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer. The controversy among those for and against adjuvant treatment need an up-to-date review of the indications and results achievable with various treatment modalities. PATIENTS/METHODS: The literature on the indications and results of adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapies in pancreatic cancer was reviewed to provide a solid base for current recommendations and future developments. A special view was concentrated on the biology of the disease in the spontaneous course, after surgery and during/after various palliative and adjuvant/neoadjuvant treatment modalities, to characterize the disease for an optimally targeted treatment in conjunction with surgical removal of the tumor. The results of systemic and regional chemotherapy and radiotherapy either alone or in combination, before, during, and after surgery, were critically analyzed with respect to the oncological possibilities and pitfalls of each treatment method. RESULTS: In two randomized trials, one testing postoperative radiochemotherapy (GITSG), and one postoperative chemotherapy (Bakkevold), the adjuvant treatment achieved a significant prolongation of the median survival time. The 5- and 10-year survival rates were improved in the GITSG study. The EORTC-GITCCG trial could not confirm the benefit of adjuvant radiochemotherapy. This study had a different design than the GITSG trial. Several historical control studies supported the beneficial effect of postoperative radiochemotherapy. In three historical control trials using regional chemotherapy, one with intraoperative radiotherapy, the survival times were improved vs. surgery alone. Intraoperative or postoperative radiotherapy as single modalities might reduce local relapses, but a survival advantage is still debated. Preoperative neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy has several advantages (downstaging, devitalizing margins and lymph node metastases, compatibility of treatment vs. postoperative radiochemotherapy), and does not seem to increase the postoperative morbidity. Several trials have confirmed the feasibility of this concept, but no survival advantage has yet been proven. Systemic and regional chemotherapy is able to downstage primarily nonresectable pancreatic cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative adjuvant radiochemotherapy with up-to-date protocols can be recommended for routine treatment, if the surgeon or the patient desires to improve the usually remote prognosis after surgery alone. For those being undecisive or against adjuvant therapy, the participation in trials, e.g., ESPAC 1 and 2 studies, is strongly recommended. Regarding our own positive experience with adjuvant regional chemotherapy and in view of the postresectional progression pattern, we currently favour adjuvant radiochemotherapy, with the chemotherapy delivered regionally via the celiac axis. This concept will be tested vs. surgery alone in the ESPAC 2 trial. Neoadjuvant therapies have a great potential, but should be conducted within studies, such as pre-, intra-, or postoperative radiotherapy.
Adenocarcinoma↗
[The coexistence of 2 different neuroendocrine tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract and pancreas].
HISTORY AND CLINICAL FINDINGS: A 41-year-old obese patient presented with cramp-like abdominal pain, watery diarrhoea with partly digested food particles, projectile vomiting and newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus. For the preceding 6 years he had been treated for recurrent gastric and duodenal ulcers. Although the fasting gastrin level was raised and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome suspected, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and coeliac angiography at another hospital had failed to discover a tumor. INVESTIGATIONS: Biochemical tests were unremarkable except for an increased GPT concentration, slight fasting hyperglycemia and hypertriglyceridemia. The gastrin and chromogranin A levels were markedly elevated (15,590 pg/ml and 584.2 U/l, respectively). Gastroscopy revealed, in addition to multiple small duodenal ulcers, a round polypoid mass (diameter of 0.7 cm) lateral to the papilla of Vater, histologically an APUDoma. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) revealed a 0.5 cm long compression of the duct of Wirsung in the region of the head of the pancreas. Liver metastases were excluded by magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Endosonography showed a ca. 4 mm space-occupying lesion in the region of the body of the pancreas. Octreotide scintigraphy demarcated two foci at the level of the head of the pancreas (somatostatin-receptor positive). TREATMENT AND COURSE: After a pylorus-preserving partial duodenopancreatectomy with lymph node dissection N1/N2, histology confirmed a gastrinoma of the duodenum and a glucagonoma of the pancreas (pT3pN1pMx). Postoperatively the patient became symptom-free and both the blood sugar level and the tumor marker were normal. CONCLUSION: Combined ERCP, endosonography and scintigraphy are more sensitive than other radiological examinations (CT and MRI) in diagnosing and localizing neuroendocrine tumours of the gastrointestinal tract. Despite the low incidence of such tumours, the possible synchronous occurrence of several such tumour should not be ignored.
Adult↗
Resection and radiochemotherapy of pancreatic cancer--the future?
BACKGROUND: To improve the surgical outcome after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinomas, multimodal treatment concepts need to be applied and improved. The controversies among those being pro and contra adjuvant treatment need an up-to-date review of the indications and results achievable with various treatment modalities. PATIENTS/METHODS: The literature regarding the indications and results of adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapies in pancreatic cancer was reviewed to provide a solid base for current recommendations and future developments. The biology of the disease in the spontaneous course, after surgery and during/after various palliative and adjuvant/neoadjuvant treatment modalities was focussed on, to characterise the disease for an optimally targeted treatment in conjunction with surgical removal of the tumour. The results of systemic and regional chemotherapy and radiotherapy, either alone or in combination, before, during and after surgery were critically analysed with respect to the oncological possibilities and pitfalls of each treatment method. RESULTS: In two randomised trials, one testing postoperative radiochemotherapy (GITSG), and one postoperative chemotherapy, the adjuvant treatment achieved a significant prolongation of the median survival time. The 5-year and 10-year survival rates were improved in the GITSG study. The EORTC-GITCCG trial could not confirm the benefit of adjuvant radiochemotherapy. This study had a different design than the GITSG trial. Several historical control studies supported the beneficial effect of postoperative radiochemotherapy. In three historical control trials using regional chemotherapy, one with intraoperative radiotherapy, the survival times were improved compared with surgery alone. Intraoperative or postoperative radiotherapy as single modalities might reduce local relapses, but a survival advantage is still debated. Preoperative neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy has several advantages (downstaging, devitalising margins and lymph node metastases, compatibility of treatment vs. postoperative radiochemotherapy), and does not seem to increase the postoperative morbidity. Several trials have confirmed the feasibility of this concept, but no survival advantage has yet been proven. Systemic and regional chemotherapy is able to downstage primarily nonresectable pancreatic cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative adjuvant radiochemotherapy with up-to-date protocols can be recommended for routine treatment, if the surgeon or the patient desires to improve the usually remote prognosis after surgery alone. For those being indecisive or against adjuvant therapy, the participation in trials, e.g. the ESPAC 1 and 2 studies, is strongly recommended. Regarding our own positive experience with adjuvant regional chemotherapy and in view of the postresectional progression pattern, we currently favour adjuvant radiochemotherapy, with the chemotherapy delivered regionally via the celiac axis. This concept will be tested against surgery alone in the ESPAC 2 trial. Neoadjuvant therapies have a great potential, but should be conducted within studies, such as pre-, intra-, or postoperative radiotherapy.
Adenocarcinoma↗
Adjuvant radiochemotherapy--what is the patients benefit?
BACKGROUND: Local relapse is a major problem after potentially curative rectal cancer surgery. Although the incidence of local recurrences may be reduced by specialized surgical techniques such as total mesorectal excision (TME), local relapse rates of 20% or higher are the surgical reality today. Studies using adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy, chemotherapy, radiochemotherapy or immunotherapy have tried to reduce local relapse rates and distant progression. Postoperative radiochemotherapy has been the recommended standard, after complete resection of Union Internationale Contra la Cancrum (UICC) stages II and III rectal cancers. In view of recent positive results with preoperative radiotherapy of TME without adjuvant therapy, we found it important to review the literature to update the recommendable adjuvant procedure in rectal cancer. METHOD/PATIENTS: The literature from 1985 to May 1998 was reviewed for studies trying to either confirm or improve adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer. Only randomized controlled trials were analyzed with regard to their effectiveness in reducing the absolute rates of local recurrence and improving survival. RESULTS: Two trials applying adjuvant radiotherapy were able to demonstrate the reduction of local relapse rates, one trial with marginal significance, both without impact on survival. Four trials involving 1104 patients with rectal cancer stages UICC II-III compared postoperative radiochemotherapy with either surgical controls, adjuvant radiotherapy or conventional radiochemotherapy. In these trials, local relapse rates were significantly reduced by 11-18%, and survival rates significantly improved by 10-14%. Severe acute toxicities occurred in 50-61% of the patients, compromising compatibility, and caused death in 0-1%. Small-bowel obstruction leading to surgery was noted in 2-6% and to death in up to 2% of the patients. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) improved local control and survival after surgery of locally advanced disease/local relapse. CONCLUSION: In view of four trials demonstrating a significant benefit of postoperative radiochemotherapy and with regard to recent still-debatable results of preoperative short-term radiotherapy optimal surgery with lowest local relapse rates plus postoperative radiochemotherapy remains the actual recommendable standard for rectal cancer surgery in R0 resected tumors stages UICC II+III.
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant↗
Multimodal therapy in rectal cancer.
The possibilities and results of multimodal treatment in rectal cancer were reviewed with respect to the results of surgical treatment only. Based on the results of 4 studies, reducing local relapse rates and increasing long-term survival rates significantly, postoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) + chemotherapy (CT) should remain the recommended standard for R0 resected UICC II and III rectal cancers. Preoperative neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) reduced local relapse rates in 8 studies, and extended survival in one study that evaluated all eligible patients. Preoperative RT may evolve as standard, if the patient selection is improved and postoperative morbidity and long-term toxicity are reduced. Postoperative adjuvant RT reduced local relapses significantly in a single trial, and no impact on survival time is reported. Since postoperative RT is inferior to preoperative RT, this treatment cannot be recommended, if RT is chosen as a single treatment modality as an adjunct to surgery. Preoperative RCT + CT downstages resectable and nonresectable tumors and induces a higher sphincter preservation rate. This treatment may be routinely applied in nonresectable primary tumors or local relapses. Intraoperative RT could be added to this concept or be used together with preoperative/postoperative RT with the same indications. The results of local tumor excisions may be improved with pre- or postoperative RCT + CT.
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
Thymidylate synthase is a predictor for response and resistance in hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy.
The value of intratumoral thymidylate synthase (TS) quantitation as a predictive parameter for hepatic artery infusion (HAI) chemotherapy in patients with colorectal liver metastases was investigated. Relative TS mRNA levels were determined in 29 tumor samples using a quantitative RT-PCR amplification method. The median level of expression was 3.0 x 10(-3) (no units) and varied considerably among the tumors over a range of 135-fold. Patients with low TS levels were 4.1-fold more likely to respond (P < 0.03) compared to patients with high TS levels. Our results indicate that TS quantitation is a valuable predictive marker for tumor response to HAI therapy.
Adult↗
Celiac artery adjuvant chemotherapy. Results of a prospective trial.
CONCLUSION: Celiac artery infusion (CAI) seems to be a qualified and successful method for adjuvant treatment of pancreatic cancer. To improve the dismal prognosis of resected pancreatic cancer patients, we performed postoperative regional chemotherapy via the celiac axis. BACKGROUND: From 1994-1995, 20 patients with pancreatic cancer (18 ductal adenocarcinoma, 2 cystadenocarcinoma) received adjuvant celiac axis intra-arterial infusions (CAI) after resection of their tumors. Sixteen patients had macroscopically complete tumor removal (R0/R1 resection, 80% of the patients), whereas four patients had gross residual disease remaining after resection (R2 resection, 20% of the patients). Postoperative tumor stages were UICC I in 1 patient, UICC II in 3 patients, and UICC III in 16 patients. METHODS: CAI was performed for six postoperative cycles via catheters placed into the celiac artery using Seldinger's technique. The chemotherapeutic protocol consisted of mitoxantrone (Novantron), Wyeth-Lederle (Münster, Germany) 10 mg/m2 (d 1), folinic acid (Leucovorin, Wyeth-Lederle, or Rescuvolin, Medac, Hamburg, Germany) 170 mg/m2 for 10 min, followed by 5-FU (Fluoroblastin, Farmitalia, Freiburg, Germany) 600 mg/m2 for 120 min (d 2-4), and Cisplatin (Cisplatin-medac, Medac) 60 mg/m2 (d 5). The cycles were repeated after a rest period of 4 wk. Cisplatin infusions were accompanied by supportive antiemetic (8 mg Tropisetrone i.v. [Navoban, Sandoz, Nürnberg, Germany] and 8 mg Dexametason i.v.) and diuretic measures. RESULTS: Toxicity WHO III occurred in 8% of 100 cycles, and no toxic side effects WHO IV were encountered. The median survival of 21 mo in the treated group was nearly twice as long as the 9.3 mo of a historical matched control group (p < 0.0003). CAI seems to be a qualified and successful method for adjuvant treatment of pancreatic cancer.
Adult↗
Multimodal therapies in ductal pancreatic cancer. The future.
CONCLUSIONS: Intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy via the celiac axis combined with external beam radiotherapy might be an effective method for palliative and perioperative multimodal treatment in pancreatic cancer. To improve the dismal prognosis in resectable and nonresectable pancreatic cancer, the results of multimodal palliative, adjuvant, and neoadjuvant therapies were reviewed and put into perspective with the results of two intra-arterial palliative and adjuvant treatment studies conducted at our department. The benefits and pitfalls of each method were outweighed, resulting in a concept for performing intra-arterial chemotherapy with radiotherapy in nonresectable stage UICC-III pancreatic cancer that eventually will be developed as a combined neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment of all potentially resectable ductal pancreatic carcinomas.
Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast↗
[Duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection--a standard method in chronic pancreatitis].
In patients with chronic pancreatitis the inflammatory process in the pancreatic head is frequently the pacemaker of the disease. In these cases an inflammatory tumor develops which leads to local complications in half of the patients. Duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection, contrary to procedures used in the past, offers the possibility to preserve stomach, duodenum, biliary tree, and the insulin secretory capacity. Duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection is a subtotal resection of the pancreatic head. In a series of 380 patients the hospital mortality rate was 0.8%, the frequency of reoperation 5.3%, and the median hospitalisation time 13.9 days. The early postoperative glucose metabolism was deteriorated in 2% and improved in 9% of cases. After a median follow-up time of 6 years, 88% of the patients were completely painfree or suffered pain rarely. Sixty-three percent were gainfully employed; the late mortality was 8.9%. Only 10% of the patients had further bouts of pancreatitis. The decisive advantage of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection over Kausch-Whipple resection is preservation of the endocrine pancreatic function and of neighbouring organs.
Blood Glucose↗
Palliative and adjuvant regional chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer.
To improve the dismal prognosis of patients (pts) with pancreatic cancer we treated 32 patients with non-resectable (UICC III, 17 pts; UICC IV, 15 pts--group 1) and 20 patients with resected (UICC I, 1 pt; UICC II, 3 pts; UICC III, 16 pts--group 2) pancreatic cancer with palliative (group I) and adjuvant post-operative (group II) coeliac axis intra-arterial cyclic infusions (CAI). CAI consisted of mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2 on day 1, folinic acid 170 mg/m2 and 5-FU 600 mg/m2 during days 2-4, and cis-platinum 60 mg/m2 on day 5 for up to 11 (group I) or six (group II) cycles. In a total of 211 cycles toxicities at the level of WHO III occurred in 0-6% and of WHO IV in 0%. The median survival times, compared with institutional historical controls (treated vs controls), were 12 vs 4.8 months in UICC III (P < 0.006) and 4 vs 2.9 months in UICC IV (P < 0.05) group I pts, and 21 vs 9.3 months in group II (P < 0.0003). Hepatic disease progression appeared to be suppressed with CAI, which also appears to be effective for palliative and adjuvant treatment in non-resectable and resected pancreatic cancer.
Adult↗
Regional celiac artery infusion as adjuvant treatment after pancreatic cancer resection.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The dismal course of pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients after resection is determined by the biology of the disease preventing R-0 resections. In the spontaneous course after resection, patients frequently develop either local recurrences, liver metastases and/or peritoneal metastases. Postoperative radiochemotherapy may extend survival and reduce local recurrences without influence on hepatic progression. We performed adjuvant celiac artery infusion in pancreatic cancer, to find out whether this treatment prolongs survival and changes the biology of the disease after resection, especially by reducing liver metastasis. METHODS: 20 patients received cyclic celiac artery infusions (CAI) after resection of their pancreatic cancer (18 ductal, 2 cystadenocarcinoma). The treatment consisted of 6 cycles intraarterial infusion using Seldinger's technique with mitoxantrone (Novantron, Wyeth-Lederle, Germany) 10 mg/m2 dl, 5-fluorouracil + folinic acid (Fluroblastin, Farmitalia, Germany + Leucovorin, Wyeth-Lederle) 600 mg/m2 + 170 mg/m2 d2-4, and cis-platinum (Cisplatin, Bristol, München, Germany) 60 mg/m2 d5. The patients were monitored for toxicity, development of disease progression and survival. RESULTS: The median survival time was 21 months, and only 15% of the patients developed liver metastases. The median survival time of the CAI-treated patient group compared favorably to the median survival of 9.3 months in a matched historical control group. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant celiac artery infusion seemed to prolong median survival and the occurrence of liver metastases appeared to be delayed or reduced.
Adenocarcinoma↗
Intraperitoneal regional chemotherapy with mitroxantrone.
Pharmacokinetic considerations and tests with cell lines and individual cell suspensions from metastatic human solid tumor biopsies suggested testing the efficacy of mitoxantrone (NOV) in intraperitoneal regional chemotherapy (IPRC). Twenty-seven patients with intraperitoneal metastatic disease of various solid tumors received cyclic IPRC with NOV for treatment of malignant ascites (N = 16) or of peritoneal carcinomatosis (N = 11) at a NOV instillate concentration of 10 micrograms/ml. A total of 125 cycles (1-5 per patient) were applied. Response and toxicity were registered according to WHO criteria. The response rate (CR+PR) was 56 percent in malignant ascites, 45 percent in peritoneal carcinomatosis, and 52 percent overall. There were no systemic toxicities. Regional side effects were bacteriemia (4 of 125 cycles), pain (2 of 125 cycles), small bowel stricture (1 of 27 patients), and small bowel perforation (1 of 27 patients). From these results we can conclude that NOV appears to be effective in IPRC for malignant ascites and peritoneal carcinomatosis at tolerable toxicities.
Antineoplastic Agents↗
In vitro pharmalogic rationale for intraperitoneal regional chemotherapy.
We performed basic in vitro studies on cell lines and individual tumor cell suspensions to support the concept of intraperitoneal regional chemotherapy, and to improve the rationale for drug selection in this regional chemotherapeutic method. We defined the concentration-response behavior and the dependence of drug cytotoxicity on time using the two human colorectal carcinoma cell lines HT29 and NMG 64/84. In addition, the drugs concentration-response behavior and cytotoxic potency for IPRC after a single drug exposure at 10 micrograms/ml (5-FU at 100 micrograms/ml) was preclinically defined with in vitro phase II studies using single cell suspensions of human solid tumor biopsies in the human tumor colony assay (HTCA). The drugs doxorubicin (ADM), cisplatin (CDDP), epidoxorubicin (EPI), 5-fluorouracy (5-FU), 5-fluorodeoxyuridine (5-FUDR), melphalan (LPAM), mitomycin C (MMC), and mitroxantrone were incubated at increasing concentrations up to 1000 micrograms/ml at 10, 30, 60, 360, and 1440 minutes with the cell lines. These drugs, as well as vindesine (VDS) and mafosfamide (MAF) were also tested in the HTCA at increasing concentrations. The HTCA response rates at 10 micrograms/ml (5-FU and MAF at 100 micrograms/ml) were used for in vitro phase II comparisons of potential drug clinical activities. All test drugs showed a time- and concentration-dependent cytotoxic activity against the cell lines. Based on the cytotoxicity test results with HT29 and NMG 64/84, specific times were recommended for clinical therapy with each drug. In the HTCA, the drugs showed different cytotoxic concentration responses. The concentration-response behavior of each drug varied in individual tumor biopsies of the same histology. Comparing the response rates at 1 microgram/ml (5-FU and MAF 10 micrograms/ml) and 10 micrograms/ml (5-FU and MAF 100 micrograms/ml), an overall increase of in vitro response by a factor of 2.1 +/- 0.7 (1.1-3.7) was noted. We were able to prove this principle qualification of various test drugs in our in vitro studies and to suggest the optimal exposure times for their use in intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Based on these results, NOV was successfully used in an IPRC clinical study.
Antineoplastic Agents↗
Adjuvant treatment of colon and rectal cancer: impact of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and immunotherapy on routine postsurgical patient management. Forschungsgruppe Onkologie Gastrointestinaler Tumoren (FOGT).
Colon cancer patients with UICC stage III or T4 N0 M0 stage II should receive postoperative adjuvant therapy, since relapse rates are high and surgical outcome has been improved by adjuvant treatment. The standard treatment is 5-fluourouracil plus levamisole; an alternative option is the combination of 5-fluourouracil and folinic acid. Stage II (T3 N0 M0) colon cancer patients should not receive adjuvant treatment outside of studies. Rectal cancer patients of stage II or III should receive postoperative radiochemotherapy with 45-54.4 Gy and 5-fluourouracil as standard treatment. Patients not eligible for radiotherapy may receive adjuvant chemotherapy only. Studies need to be conducted to improve adjuvant therapy in colorectal cancer. All qualified patients should be treated within these studies requiring sufficient patient numbers, as well as comparable surgical procedures, proper patient selection and stratification criteria, drug and dose intensities. Intraportal infusion may be as effective as systemic adjuvant treatment; the tumor type and stage for which benefit from this kind of treatment is consistently significant needs to be defined, since intraportal infusion of all resectable colorectal cancers is overtreatment. Both surgery and histopathological staging may be improved in some centers, and these require standardization and quality control.
Colonic Neoplasms↗
Quality assurance by specification and achievement of goals in palliative cancer treatment.
As the goals of palliative cancer treatments have not always been clearly specified, this paper describes how frequently the goals of palliative cancer treatment can be specified according to a given definition and how frequently those specified goals can be achieved. The clinical problems of 171 cancer patients were discussed in the Interdisciplinary Oncologic Conference (IOC) of the Cancer Centre University of Ulm (CCUU) and recommendations concerning further diagnostic treatments and/or therapy were provided. These recommendations had been documented and analysed retrospectively. The goals were classified as either cure or palliation or further investigation. If the goal was palliation, it was investigated whether or not the goal was specified as either alleviation of existing problems or prevention of impending problems. The achievement of the specified goals was assessed. Palliation was the goal of treatment in 119 (71%) of the 168 evaluable recommendations. In 83 of the 119 cases (70%), immediate treatment was recommended. The goal was specified in 57 (69%) of the 83 recommendations and could be realized in 24 of 57 specified cases (42%). Patients in this group survived longer (p < 0.01) than patients in whom the goals could not be achieved. Impending problems could be prevented more often (p = 0.001) in 14 out of 18 cases, while existing problems could be alleviated in only 10 out of 34 cases. It is concluded that specification of the goals of palliation is necessary because it is impossible to decide if a goal of treatment could be achieved or not unless the goal of treatment has been defined (as existing/impending problem). The prevention of impending problems could be investigated in prospectively controlled clinical trials.
Adult↗