PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Piccart

Publications and source records attributed to M Piccart.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

The EORTC Breast Cancer Group: 40 years of research contributing to improve breast cancer management.

The EORTC Breast Cancer Group (EBCG) is a multidisciplinary international group created in 1962 in conjunction with the EORTC. This group has always focused its activities on the development of new cancer treatments and strategies for all categories of breast cancer. It has been active both in drug development, as well as in the development of new radiotherapy and surgical techniques to attempt to improve cure rates and loco-regional control. Over 40 years, the EBCG has performed dozens of clinical studies including several thousands of patients. Many of these studies have contributed to the clinical knowledge on the treatment of breast cancer and have influenced the standard management of this tumour. Beside its clinical research activities, the Group has also been very active in developing guidelines for breast cancer research, promoting high standards of care in conferences, as well as in fellowships and quality assurance programmes. EBCG is a founding member of the Breast InterGroup (BIG).

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2001

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of the oral farnesyl transferase inhibitor SCH 66336 given twice daily to patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: A single-agent dose-escalating phase I and pharmacokinetic study on the farnesyl transferase inhibitor SCH 66336 was performed to determine the safety profile, maximum-tolerated dose, and recommended dose for phase II studies. Plasma and urine pharmacokinetics were determined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: SCH 66336 was given orally bid without interruption to patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed solid tumors. Routine antiemetics were not prescribed. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled onto the study. Dose levels studied were 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, and 300 mg bid. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on days 1 and 15. At 400 mg bid, the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) consisted of grade 4 vomiting, grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, and the combination of grade 3 anorexia and diarrhea with reversible grade 3 plasma creatinine elevation. After dose reduction, at 300 mg bid, the DLTs consisted of grade 4 neutropenia, grade 3 neurocortical toxicity, and the combination of grade 3 fatigue with grade 2 nausea and diarrhea. The recommended dose for phase II studies is 200 mg bid, which was found feasible for prolonged periods of time. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed a greater than dose-proportional increase in drug exposure and peak plasma concentrations, with increased parameters at day 15 compared with day 1, indicating some accumulation on multiple dosing. Plasma half-life ranged from 4 to 11 hours and seemed to increase with increasing doses. Steady-state plasma concentrations were attained at days 7 through 14. A large volume of distribution at steady-state indicated extensive distribution outside the plasma compartment. CONCLUSION: SCH 66336 can be administered safely using a continuous oral bid dosing regimen. The recommended dose for phase II studies using this regimen is 200 mg bid.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

Phase II study of vinorelbine in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of vinorelbine in a phase II study in patients with progressive metastatic androgen-independent prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven men with progressive metastatic prostate cancer refractory to first-line or second-line hormonal therapy were treated with vinorelbine, a semisynthetic vinca-alkaloid. Vinorelbine was given, on an outpatient schedule, at 25 mg/m2 weekly for at least eight weeks or until progression or excessive toxicity. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included in the study, 33 being evaluable for tumour response, 36 for response to PSA, 21 for clinical benefit and 45 for toxicity. Median actual weekly dose was 19 mg/m2 (range 12.0-26.2 mg/m2). Six of thirty-six patients (17%) demonstrated a biologic response with a 50% or more decline in serum PSA on two consecutive measurements taken at least two weeks apart. The median duration of biologic response was 2.7 months. Two of three patients with measurable disease obtained an objective response but remained unconfirmed. No change disease was reported in 23 patients (49%). On entry into the study, 30 patients had symptomatic bone pain and required narcotic or non-narcotic analgesics. Clinical benefit from vinorelbine was achieved in 15 patients out of 21 (32% of the intent to treat analysis population and 71% of the assessable patients). Due to the low number of questionnaires (QLQ-C30) filled in, it was insufficient to allow any statistical analysis. The median survival was 10.2 months. Toxicity was mainly haematologic with 51% of patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 granulocytopenia. Three patients developed deep vein thrombosis. Non-haematologic toxicity, mainly nausea and neurotoxicity, was mild. CONCLUSION: The administration of weekly vinorelbine appears to be a safe treatment for those patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer and poor prognosis features who require chemotherapy. These results provide data for future investigation of vinorelbine in combination regimens.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2001

Evaluation of HER2, p53, bcl-2, topoisomerase II-alpha, heat shock proteins 27 and 70 in primary breast cancer and metastatic ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease. Predictive biological markers (BM) of responsiveness to therapy need to be identified. Evaluation of BM is mainly done at the primary site. However, in the adjuvant therapy of breast cancer, the main goal is control of micrometastases. It is still unknown whether heterogeneity in the expression of BM between the primary site and its micrometastases exists. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the expression of some BM with potential predictive value from the primary breast cancer site and metastatic ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Focality (percentage of positive cells) and intensity staining scores were evaluated for each marker. Freshly cut sections (4 microm) from embedded blocks of breast cancer fixed in formalin or bouin were put onto superfrost slides (Menzel-Gläser). Protein expression was evaluated immunohistochemically (IHC) using monoclonal antibodies against: topo II-alpha (clone KiS1, 1 microg/ml, Roche) with a trypsine pre-treatment (P); HSP27 (clone G3.1, 1/60, Biogenex), HSP70 (clone BRM.22, 1/80, Biogenex) and HER2 (clone CB11, 1/40, Novocastra; without P); p53 (clone D07, 1/750, Dako) and bcl-2 (clone 124, 1/60, Dako) with citrate buffer as P. RESULTS: Overall, the percentage of discordant marker status in the primary tumour and its metastatic lymph nodes was 2% for HER2, 6% for p53, 15% for bcl-2, 19% for topoisomerase II-alpha, 24% for HSP27 and 30% for HSP70. For the subgroup of patients with positive BM in the primary tumour, the percentage of discordance was 6% for HER2, 7% for p53, 14% for bcl-2, 19% for HSP70, 21% for topoisomerase II-alpha and 36% for HSP27. For the subgroup of patients with positive BM in the lymph nodes, the percentage of discordance was 9% for bcl-2, 15% for HER2 and p53, 21% for topoisomerase II-alpha, 22% for HSP27 and 25% for HSP70. CONCLUSIONS: 1) No biological marker had 100% concordant results. 2) Although some discordant cases might be explained by the limitations of the IHC technique, future studies aiming to evaluate the predictive value of BM in the adjuvant therapy of breast cancer should take into account a possible difference in BM expression between the primary and the metastatic sites.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

An EORTC phase I study of epirubicin in combination with fixed doses of cyclophosphamide and infusional 5-fu (CEF-infu) as primary treatment of large operable or locally advanced/inflammatory breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The association of continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin (50 mg/m2 q 3 weeks) and a platinum compound (cisplatin or carboplatin) was found to be very active in patients with either locally advanced/inflammatory (LA/I) [1, 2] or large operable (LO) breast cancer (BC) [3]. The same rate of activity in terms of response rate (RR) and response duration was observed in LA/I BC patients when cisplatin was replaced by cyclophosphamide [4]. The dose of epirubicin was either 50 mg/m2 [ 1, 2, 3] or 60 mg/m2/cycle [4]. The main objective of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of epirubicin when given in combination with fixed doses of cyclophosphamide and infusional 5-fluorouracil (CEF-infu) as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with LO or LA/I BC for a maximum of 6 cycles. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had LO or LA/I BC, a performance status 0-1, adequate organ function and were <65 years old. Cyclophosphamide was administered at the dose of 400 mg/m2 day 1 and 8, q 4 weeks and infusional 5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2/day was given day 1-28, q 4 weeks. Epirubicin was escalated from 30 to 45 and to 60 mg/m2 day 1 and 8; dose escalation was permitted if 0/3 or 1/6 patients experienced dose limiting toxicity (DLT) during the first 2 cycles of therapy. DLT for epirubicin was defined as febrile neutropenia, grade 4 neutropenia lasting for >7 days, grade 4 thrombocytopenia, or any non-haematological toxicity of CTC grade > or =3, excluding alopecia and plantar-palmar erythrodysesthesia (this toxicity was attributable to infusional 5-fluorouracil and was not considered a DLT of epirubicin). RESULTS: A total of 21 patients, median age 44 years (range 29-63) have been treated. 107 courses have been delivered, with a median number of 5 cycles per patient (range 4-6). DLTs on cycles I and 2 on level 1, 2, 3: grade 3 (G3) mucositis occurred in 1/10 patients treated at the third dose level. An interim analysis showed that G3 PPE occurred in 5/16 pts treated with the 28-day infusional 5-FU schedule at the 3 dose levels. The protocol was subsequently amended to limit the duration of infusional 5-fluorouracil infusion from 4 to 3 weeks. No G3 PPE was detected in 5 patients treated with this new schedule. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes that epirubicin 60mg/m2 day 1 and 8, cyclophosphamide 400mg/m2 day 1 and 8 and infusional 5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2/day day 1-21. q 4 weeks is the recommended dose level. Given the encouraging activity of this regimen (15/21 clinical responses) we have replaced infusional 5-fluorouracil by oral capecitabine in a recently activated study.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of weekly oral therapy with vinorelbine in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC).

BACKGROUND: A phase I dose-escalation study of a new formulation of oral vinorelbine was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a once weekly regimen and preliminary pharmacokinetic profile in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC). Twenty-six patients were treated at dose levels ranging from 60 to 100 mg/m2/week. Pharmacokinetics was assessed during the first administration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer and had received no more than two prior chemotherapy regimens for ABC. RESULTS: The MTD was 100 mg/m2/week due to the occurrence of dose-limiting neutropenia, nausea/vomiting and constipation in five of six patients. Toxicities at 80 mg/m2/week were manageable, neutropenia being the main toxicity (grade 3-4 seen in 10 of 13 patients). Nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea were common but rarely severe. Vinorelbine was rapidly absorbed with maximum blood concentration (Cmax) of 103.8 +/- 41.6 ng x ml(-1) observed 1.2 +/- 0.8 hours (Tmax) after administration of 80 mg/m2. Pharmacokinetic exposure increased linearly with dose. Area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and concentration measured 24 hours after drug intake (C24h) were significantly correlated with depletion of neutrophils. Objective tumour responses were reported in 6 of the 14 evaluable patients treated at doses > or = 80 mg/m2/week. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of oral vinorelbine appears comparable to that of intravenous dosing. The recommended phase II dose is 80 mg/m2/week and requires regular monitoring of neutrophil counts.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2001

D-TRP-6-LHRH (Triptorelin) is not effective in ovarian carcinoma: an EORTC Gynaecological Cancer Co-operative Group Study.

Between March and September 1988, 74 patients with progressive ovarian cancer after prior platinum-based therapy were treated with the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist Triptorelin (Decapeptyl degrees). Treatment consisted of i.m. injection of 3.75 mg of microencapsulated Triptorelin on days 1, 8 and 28 followed by 4-weekly injections until tumor progression. No objective responses were observed. Eleven out of 68 evaluable patients (16%) had stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 5 months in patients with disease stabilization and 2 months for all evaluable patients. The median survival for patients with disease stabilization was 17 months, whereas for all patients it was 4 months. The treatment was well tolerated; the only reported adverse events were incidental hot flushes. This study showed that the LHRH agonist Triptorelin has only modest efficacy in patients pretreated with platinum-containing chemotherapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

The predictive value of HER2 in breast cancer.

Measurement of molecular markers predictive of response to therapy should enable more selective and effective utilization of anticancer agents. The predictive value of HER2 remains a complex and inconclusive subject. In metastatic breast cancer, HER2-positive, ER-positive patients can show responses to endocrine treatment, but experience shorter time to progression and survival than HER2-negative patients. In the adjuvant setting, weak, retrospective evidence suggests that tamoxifen is potentially harmful in HER2-positive patients and that there is no benefit from prolonged tamoxifen therapy. It has not yet been demonstrated conclusively that HER2 positivity increases resistance to adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-FU (CMF), but there are indications that HER2-positive patients benefit more from adequately dosed anthracyclines than from CMF. The greatest value of HER2 as a predictive marker lies in the prediction of response to therapies that target HER2, such as Herceptin. Patients with strongly HER2-positive breast cancer derive significant clinical benefit from single-agent and combined Herceptin therapy. HER2 testing has become an integral part of the optimal management of the breast cancer patient. Best current practice in adjuvant breast cancer therapy based on the current knowledge of the potential predictive power of HER2 constitutes not denying tamoxifen to HER2-positive, ER-positive patients or CMF to HER2-positive patients. Outside of clinical trials, adequately dosed anthracycline-based chemotherapy is the current preferred adjuvant treatment option for HER2-positive patients.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2001

Closing remarks and treatment guidelines.

The human epidermal growth factor receptor HER2 or C-erbB-2/neu is a tyrosine kinase membrane receptor, which when activated, induces a phosphorylation cascade in cytoplasmic kinases leading to increased protein transcription and cellular growth. HER2 plays an important role in the biology of breast cancer, an observation that has led to the selection of HER2 as a potential target for breast cancer treatment. Trastuzumab (Herceptin) is the first anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody that has shown a survival benefit in metastatic breast cancer patients with HER2-positive tumours (Norton et al., Proc ASCO 2000 18, 127a (abstract 483)). Tumour HER2 status should no longer be ignored because of its direct implications for the optimal management of breast cancer patients. A high priority for future research is to refine and standardise HER2 testing in order to minimise false-negative results. Furthermore, this procedure would overcome current issues relating to test reproducibility between pathology laboratories and definitions of HER2 positivity. In the meantime, a HER2-positive status on testing using any approved technique has implications for clinical practice (Fig. 1). The treatment algorithm given in Fig. 1 considers the lack of level 1, evidence-based studies that demonstrate convincingly the value of HER2 as a predictive marker for resistance or sensitivity to classic forms of breast cancer therapy (Piccart et al., Eur J Cancer 2000, 36, 1755-1761). In addition, the algorithm incorporates the available data from 1999-2000, which were generated from prospective trials exploring the value of trastuzumab both as a single agent and in combination with chemotherapy.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗
PubMed2001

Introduction.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2001

Closing remarks and treatment guidelines.

The human epidermal growth factor receptor HER2 or C-erbB-2/neu is a tyrosine kinase membrane receptor, which when activated, induces a phosphorylation cascade in cytoplasmic kinases leading to increased protein transcription and cellular growth. HER2 plays an important role in the biology of breast cancer, an observation that has led to the selection of HER2 as a potential target for breast cancer treatment. Trastuzumab (Herceptin(R)) is the first anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody that has shown a survival benefit in metastatic breast cancer patients with HER2-positive tumours (Norton et al., Proc ASCO 2000 18, 127a (abstract 483)). Tumour HER2 status should no longer be ignored because of its direct implications for the optimal management of breast cancer patients. A high priority for future research is to refine and standardise HER2 testing in order to minimise false-negative results. Furthermore, this procedure would overcome current issues relating to test reproducibility between pathology laboratories and definitions of HER2 positivity. In the meantime, a HER2-positive status on testing using any approved technique has implications for clinical practice (Fig. 1). The treatment algorithm given in Fig. 1 considers the lack of level 1, evidence-based studies that demonstrate convincingly the value of HER2 as a predictive marker for resistance or sensitivity to classic forms of breast cancer therapy (Piccart et al., Eur J Cancer 2000, 36, 1755-1761). In addition, the algorithm incorporates the available data from 1999-2000, which were generated from prospective trials exploring the value of trastuzumab both as a single agent and in combination with chemotherapy.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2001

An overview of HER2.

HER2 is a transmembrane growth factor receptor found in normal and malignant breast epithelial cells. Phosphorylation of the intracellular tyrosine kinase results in intracellular signaling and activation of genes involved in cell growth. Overexpression of HER2 has independent prognostic significance in early breast cancer and may also predict response to hormonal and cytotoxic therapies, although this latter role is less well studied. Prospective stratification of HER2 status in current clinical trials may more accurately delineate these roles. Anti-HER2 therapy, using a humanized monoclonal antibody, has enhanced survival when given with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. A potential limitation to its use in the adjuvant setting is the increased incidence of cardiotoxicity in patients treated either concurrently or previously with anthracyclines; carefully designed prospective adjuvant trials are currently being launched. HER2 is a relatively new prognostic marker and holds promise for predicting response to various therapies and for target-specific therapy.

Animals↗
PubMed2000

Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen in premenopausal metastatic breast cancer: a randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical or medical castration and antiestrogenic treatment with tamoxifen are common endocrine treatments for premenopausal women with breast cancer. However, tamoxifen therapy induces high levels of plasma estradiol, with unknown long-term effects. In this study, we investigated the effect of combining estrogen suppression with the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist buserelin and estradiol receptor blockade with tamoxifen to determine whether the high estradiol levels induced by tamoxifen could be reduced and whether the antitumor effects would be better. METHODS: In a three-arm, randomized, prospective trial, from 1988 through 1995, a total of 161 premenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer were randomly assigned to treatment with buserelin, tamoxifen, or both. Patients with steroid receptor-negative tumors or with tumors of unknown receptor status who had a disease-free interval of less than 2 years were excluded. The median follow-up was 7.3 years, during which 76% of the patients died, all of breast cancer. Patient and tumor characteristics were well balanced among treatment groups. All P values are from two-sided tests. RESULTS: Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen was superior to treatment with buserelin or tamoxifen alone by objective response rate (48%, 34%, and 28% of patients who could be evaluated, respectively; P =.11 [chi(2) test]), median progression-free survival (9.7 months, 6.3 months, and 5.6 months; P =.03), and overall survival (3.7 years, 2.5 years, and 2.9 years; P =.01). Actuarial 5-year survival percentages were 34.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 20.4%-48.0%), 14.9% (95% CI = 3.9%-25.9%), and 18.4% (95% CI = 7.0%-29.8%), respectively. No differences in antitumor effects were observed between single-agent treatment groups. During combined treatment or treatment with buserelin alone, plasma estradiol levels were suppressed equally; in contrast, during treatment with tamoxifen alone, plasma estradiol levels increased threefold to fourfold over pretreatment levels. CONCLUSION: Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen was more effective and resulted in longer overall survival than treatment with either drug alone.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Summary measures and statistics in the analysis of quality of life data: an example from an EORTC-NCIC-SAKK locally advanced breast cancer study.

Quality of Life (QL) is now included as an endpoint in many phase III cancer clinical trials. Numerous statistical techniques have been presented in the literature to analyse QL data but there is still no agreement as to what is the optimal approach of analysis. In this paper we, therefore, present and compare various techniques which have all appeared in the literature and which may be globally described as summary measures and summary statistics. These techniques are illustrated using data from an EORTC clinical trial in locally advanced breast cancer (EORTC trial 10921). It is also explained in this paper how and when these techniques may be used in other cancer settings. For EORTC trial 10921, it is shown that by choosing different techniques different conclusions may be drawn concerning the QL outcome. This highlights the importance of choosing an appropriate primary statistical method and for describing it a priori in the protocol and analysis plan. In this paper, we show the importance of performing sensitivity or supportive analysis to support conclusions drawn from the primary analysis.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed2000

Randomised trial of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: quality of life evaluation using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Rotterdam symptom checklist.

The aim of the study was to compare the quality of life (QL) of patients treated with single-agent paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. 331 patients with advanced breast cancer were randomised, with 294 eligible for analysis. Patients completed both the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) with six additional items, at baseline and after the third, fifth and seventh cycles of chemotherapy. A significant difference in progression-free survival in favour of doxorubicin caused a bias in the data with differences in expected completion rates of questionnaires beyond cycle three. Therefore, statistical comparisons were performed only for the first three cycles. Baseline compliance was 64% and 61% for the QLQ-C30 and RSCL questionnaires, respectively. Doxorubicin was associated with significantly more nausea/vomiting (P=0.001), loss of appetite (P=0.010) and a greater burden of disease and treatment (P=0.044), but with less bone pain (P=0.042) and rash (P=0.045) than paclitaxel. Both treatments were associated with improved emotional function and reduction in psychological distress at cycle 3. Longitudinal data suggested that doxorubicin was associated with less pain, specifically bone pain. Doxorubicin was more active but may have had more side-effects during the first three cycles. Long-term QL outcomes could not be assessed.

Antineoplastic Agents↗
PubMed2000

Identification and interpretation of clinical and quality of life prognostic factors for survival and response to treatment in first-line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer.

The aim of the project was to identify clinical and quality of life (QL) factors that together predict survival and response to chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Potential prognostic factors were studied in 187 women with baseline QL data from a trial of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy. Demographic and clinical factors studied were age, performance status, dominant site of disease and preceding disease-free interval (DFI). Factors from the EORTC QLQ-C30 were all function scales, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, dyspnoea, insomnia, loss of appetite and global QL. The proportional hazards regression model with stratification for treatment, and the logistic regression model adjusting for treatment arm were used for univariate and multivariate analyses of survival and response to treatment, respectively. For survival, multiple sites of visceral disease, pain, global QL and fatigue were significant prognostic factors in the univariate analysis. The final multivariate model predicted poor survival with multiple sites of visceral disease (P=0.003), DFI </=2 years (P=0.026) and pain (P=0.003). For response, age, dyspnoea, fatigue and global QL were significant predictive factors in the univariate analysis. The final multivariate model for response selected DFI (P=0.009), multiple sites of visceral disease (P=0.037) and dyspnoea (P=<0.001) using forward selection, but model instability was indicated by the inclusion of fatigue and emotional function in the final model when backward selection was used. In addition to known clinical factors, patient-assessed QL variables appear to be prognostic for survival and response to chemotherapy in women with advanced breast cancer. However, identification of prognostic factors from responses to questionnaires may be unstable, and their reliability and clinical utility should be tested prospectively.

Adolescent↗