Phase III trial comparing three doses of docetaxel for second-line treatment of advanced breast cancer

TRIO-012: a multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind phase III study of IMC-1121B plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel in previously untreated patients with HER2-negative, unresectable, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer

In this multinational, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial, Translational Research In Oncology (TRIO) will define the efficacy and safety of adding a novel antiangiogenic agent, IMC-1121B (ramucirumab), to standard first-line docetaxel chemotherapy for women with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. We will evaluate whether the addition of IMC-1121B prolongs progression-free survival and whether its use improves overall survival. Accrual is under way.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus docetaxel significantly improves time to progression without additive cardiotoxicity compared with docetaxel monotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer previously treated with neoadjuvant-adjuvant anthracycline therapy: results from a randomized phase III study

PURPOSE

To determine whether the combination of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and docetaxel significantly prolongs time to disease progression compared with docetaxel alone without an increase in cardiac toxicity in women with advanced breast cancer who had experienced relapse at least 1 year after prior adjuvant or neoadjuvant anthracycline therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This international, phase III study randomly assigned 751 patients to receive either docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) (n = 373) or PLD 30 mg/m(2) followed by docetaxel 60 mg/m(2) every 21 days (n = 378) and continued until disease progression or prohibitive toxicity. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), cardiac toxicity, and safety.

RESULTS

Treatment with PLD-docetaxel significantly improved median TTP from 7.0 to 9.8 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.77; P = .000001) and the ORR from 26% to 35% (P = .0085). OS was similar between the two groups (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.22). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were similar (78% v 72%), although a higher incidence of hand-foot syndrome (24% v 0%) and mucositis/stomatitis (12% v 1%) were observed in the PLD-docetaxel combination. Protocol-defined left ventricular ejection fraction decreases and congestive heart failure were reported in 5% and 1% in both treatment arms, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The PLD-docetaxel combination was more effective than docetaxel alone in women with metastatic breast cancer who had experienced relapse at least 1 year after prior adjuvant anthracycline therapy without an increase in cardiac toxicity, although mucocutaneous toxicity was more common.

Phase II trial of OGX-011 in combination with docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

Clusterin is an antiapoptotic protein activated in response to cellular stress. OGX-011 is a second-generation antisense oligonucleotide that inhibits clusterin expression. The primary objective of this phase II trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of the combination of OGX-011 and docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Women with measurable metastatic breast cancer and <or=1 chemotherapy regimen were eligible. Three loading doses of OGX-011 640 mg i.v. followed by weekly OGX-011 and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) (every 3 weeks) were given. A two-stage design was used with a hypothesis of H(0) <or=35% and H(a) >or=55%. Objective response in >or=6 of the first 14 patients was required for the trial to continue to the second stage.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were enrolled. A median of six cycles were delivered (range, 2-10). Five partial responses were confirmed for a 33% response rate (95% confidence interval, 11.8-61.6%) with a further 9 (60%) patients showing stable disease. The median duration of stable disease was 9.3 months. The median time to progression was 8 months (95% confidence interval, 5.62-9.43 months). Toxic effects were similar to those with single agent docetaxel. Although serum clusterin decreased on treatment, there was no relationship observed between the magnitude of decrease and response.

CONCLUSION

The combination of OGX-011 and docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) is well tolerated and clinical activity was seen in these patients with metastatic breast cancer, but there was an insufficient number of responses to meet the criteria for proceeding to the second stage of accrual.

Phase III study of gemcitabine plus docetaxel compared with capecitabine plus docetaxel for anthracycline-pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

Patients with metastatic breast cancer who are pretreated with anthracyclines frequently receive taxane-based combinations. This phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-docetaxel (GD) with capecitabine-docetaxel (CD) in advanced breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to GD (G 1,000 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8; D 75 mg/m(2) day 1) or CD (C 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily days 1 through 14; D 75 mg/m(2) day 1) every 21 days. Comparison of progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary objective.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were balanced between arms (N = 305). Median PFS was 8.05 months (95% CI, 6.60 to 8.71) for GD and 7.98 (95% CI, 6.93 to 8.77) for CD (log-rank P = .121). Overall response rate (ORR) was 32% in both arms, and overall survival (OS) was not different between arms (P = .983). Time to treatment failure (TTF; defined as discontinuation, progressive disease, death as a result of any cause, or the start of a new anticancer therapy) was superior in the GD arm (P = .059). Hematologic toxicity was similar in both arms, except for grades 3 to 4 leukopenia (GD, 78%; CD, 66%; P = .025) and transfusions (GD, 17%; CD, 7%; P = .0051). Grades 3 to 4 diarrhea, mucositis, and hand-and-foot syndrome were significantly higher in the CD arm. Fewer patients in the GD arm discontinued because of drug-related adverse events (13% v 27% in CD; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

No difference was observed between GD and CD arms in PFS, ORR, and OS. TTF was longer in the GD arm. These findings, combined with a nonhematologic toxicity profile that favors GD over approved doses of CD, suggest that gemcitabine may be a better option than capecitabine in combination with docetaxel in this clinical setting.

Docetaxel-related side effects and their management

Docetaxel is an effective treatment approved in five key cancers, but its effectiveness in clinical practice can be compromised by sub-optimal side-effect management. The aim of this review was to investigate the extent of the published work on specific docetaxel-related side effects and to provide, where possible, evidence-based recommendations for their prevention and management. PubMed and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) databases were systematically searched for articles published in English over the past 5 years and 2 years, respectively, and pertaining to six side effects identified as being common to the majority of docetaxel regimens and indications and of particular relevance to the oncology nurse. The Cochrane library was also searched. A total of 103 citations were identified, 14 of which discussed strategies for the prevention or management of febrile neutropenia (n=6), hypersensitivity reactions (3), fluid retention (1) and nail changes (4). No articles were identified that related to asthenia or neuropathy. Based on the literature review, evidence/guidelines-based advice for the use of G-CSF in febrile neutropenia is provided. The evidence base with respect to the other side effects does not permit the formulation of recommendations. It is the experience of the authors, however, that the severity of symptoms experienced by patients is generally mild and the side effects are for the most part easily managed with prophylactic and supportive care measures. It is, therefore, important to share and build on experiences, through research and discussion, to maximise the healthcare professional's ability to offer the best standard of care to patients.

Paclitaxel and docetaxel in the treatment of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Paclitaxel and docetaxel are considered fundamental drugs in the treatment of breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To review the current role of taxanes in the treatment breast cancer, with emphasis on data from randomized trials comparing the two taxanes.

METHODS

We have reviewed the available evidence in the literature to gauge the results of therapy of early and advanced breast cancer with taxanes.

RESULTS

Clinically benefits were first shown in metastatic setting. More recently, benefits have also been seen in the therapy of early-stage disease. It seems reasonable to consider either drug as standard treatment for node-positive early stage or metastatic breast cancer. Future studies should explore the optimal way of combining taxanes with novel biological and cytotoxic drugs.

CONCLUSION

Based on existing evidence, clinicians should choose a taxane-based regimen for their patients, according to clinical activity, toxicity profile, pharmacokinetics, and a dosing schedule that best meets the therapeutic needs and convenience.

A phase II evaluation of weekly docetaxel in the treatment of recurrent or persistent endometrial carcinoma: a study by the Gynecologic Oncology Group

OBJECTIVE

A phase II study was conducted to evaluate the anti-tumor activity and adverse effects of weekly docetaxel in patients with previously treated endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Eligible patients were to have measurable disease with no more than one prior chemotherapy regimen. Docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) was administered intravenously over 1 h on days 1, 8 and 15. Cycles were repeated every 28 days until progression of disease or adverse effects prohibited further therapy.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were entered onto this study, of whom 26 were eligible and evaluable. All patients had received prior platinum with twenty (76.9%) having received prior treatment with paclitaxel. There were two (7.7%) partial responses, eight patients (30.8%) with stable disease, and fourteen patients (53.8%) with increasing disease. The most frequently reported adverse events were leucopenia, neutropenia, gastrointestinal, constitutional and peripheral neuropathy. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS

Docetaxel, at the dose and schedule tested, has modest activity in this patient population.

Concurrent doxorubicin plus docetaxel is not more effective than concurrent doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in operable breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive axillary nodes: North American Breast Cancer Intergroup Trial E 2197

PURPOSE

The combination of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) is a standard adjuvant regimen. Doxorubicin and docetaxel (AT) is one of the most active cytotoxic regimens for metastatic breast cancer. The purpose of this trial was to determine whether adjuvant AT improved disease-free survival compared with AC in operable breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women with invasive breast cancer were eligible if there were one to three positive lymph nodes or if the node-negative tumor was greater than 1 cm. Patients were randomly assigned after surgery to receive doxorubicin (60 mg/m(2)) plus either cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m(2); AC) or docetaxel (60 mg/m(2); AT) given every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by hormone therapy for patients with estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR)-positive tumors.

RESULTS

There were 2,882 eligible patients enrolled. After a median follow-up of 79.5 months, there was no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS; 85% in both arms) or overall survival (91% v 92%) at 5 years. The hazard ratio for AC versus AT was 1.02 (95% CI for DFS, 0.86 to 1.22; P = .78). In an exploratory analysis of prespecified stratification factors by ER and PR expression there were trends toward improved DFS for AT in ER/PR-negative disease. Grade 3 neutropenia associated with fever or infection occurred more often with AT (26% v 10%; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

AT did not improve DFS or overall survival in this population, and was associated with more toxicity.

Metastatic breast cancer: the treatment challenge

As therapeutic options have multiplied, chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has become increasingly complex. Furthermore, advances in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer, in particular the development of taxane-based regimens, have led to increased use of adjuvant chemotherapy. As a result, the decisions regarding the treatment of patients presenting with MBC have become more difficult, because many patients are likely to have received a variety of adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. The primary goal of treatment for MBC is palliation of disease--usually with prolongation of survival--with minimal toxicity. However, there is currently no "gold standard" in this setting, and the literature supports many choices for first- and second-line treatment. Other issues as yet unsettled in these patients are (1) whether to combine >or= 2 drugs or to use each drug alone until disease progression; (2) how to use novel targeted biologic agents; and (3) how to treat patients with HER2-overexpressing tumors after adjuvant treatment with trastuzumab. The role of taxanes, antimetabolites, and targeted agents in patients with MBC will be discussed in this review, particularly in the context of previous adjuvant therapy. The controversy surrounding the use of doublet or sequential therapy will also be discussed. Although considerable advances have been made toward answering these questions, many additional uncertainties have arisen, and further well-designed randomized studies are needed.

Loading doses for costly cancer biologicals: a cause for concern or tilting at windmills?

The emergence of novel, effective but expensive biological therapies is significantly improving outcomes for many patients with cancer, but also substantially increasing treatment costs. Monoclonal antibodies with long half-lives have often been developed using loading doses to hasten the achievement of a therapeutic dose. Although the benefits of loading doses have not been proven, we caution against abandoning this practice on uncertain theoretical grounds. Rather, the issue of loading doses should be seen in the broader context of how best to define the optimal dose, schedule and duration of treatment through novel clinical trial designs.

Treatment of metastatic breast cancer: looking towards the future

The armamentarium for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer is increasing with the introduction of newer chemotherapeutic agents and the development of molecular targeted therapies. The clinical utility of anthracyclines in advanced breast cancer has been limited by significant adverse events; therefore the taxanes are increasingly used in the metastatic setting. Trastuzumab with a taxane as first-line therapy is now standard of care for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer. Other targeted therapies, including the antiangiogenesis agents such as bevacizumab, are being investigated both as monotherapy and in combination regimens. While the number of available agents is growing rapidly, challenges remain concerning appropriate dose, schedule, treatment duration and management of drug resistance. This paper reviews recent data regarding the established and investigational medical treatments for endocrine-refractory metastatic breast cancer, and presents treatment recommendations.

Biweekly docetaxel-containing chemotherapy may be the optimal schedule

The dosing schedule of docetaxel may affect its clinical activity and toxicity profile. Although triweekly docetaxel has higher antitumor activity but more severe hematological toxicity, weekly docetaxel seems to have less activity or fewer adverse events. To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of biweekly docetaxel and mitoxantrone in patients with advanced breast cancer, the regimen consisting of docetaxel (60 mg/m), and mitoxantrone (8 mg/m) was administered intravenously to 59 patients every 2 weeks. Most (54.2%) of the patients experienced objective responses. The median time to progression for the whole group was 6.8 months. The median time to progression for patients with complete or partial response was 10.3 months, but only 3.6 months for patients with stable or progressive disease (P<0.001). Grade III/IV adverse events of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and nausea/vomiting were documented in 61.0, 6.8, 3.4, 3.4, and 3.4% of the patients, respectively. The median overall survival was 16.9 months. In conclusion, biweekly use of docetaxel and mitoxantrone is a highly effective and well-tolerated regimen for patients with advanced breast cancer. The optimal dosage of docetaxel in combination with chemotherapeutic regimen may be given every 2 weeks.

Taxane vs. taxane: is the duel at an end? A commentary on a phase-III trial of doxorubicin and docetaxel versus doxorubicin and paclitaxel in metastatic breast cancer: results of the ERASME 3 study

Taxanes (paclitaxel and docetaxel) comprise a class of mitotic inhibitors which considered highly active chemotherapeutic agents against cancer cells, and have become a cornerstone in the treatment of patients with early and advanced breast cancer. Following the initial generation of trials conducted to prove their efficacy, investigators turned to explore which taxane is superior in terms of efficacy, side effects, and quality of life based on head-to-head comparisons of paclitaxel versus docetaxel containing regimens. Moreover, many trials conducted to evaluate the optimal taxane dosing and schedule. This commentary discusses the ERASME 3 trial which compared the quality of life after four courses of doxorubicin combination with either paclitaxel or docetaxel, and also, it reviews all trials compared paclitaxel to docetaxel in both early and metastatic disease settings, in terms of efficacy, dosing, schedule, and toxicity profile.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of gemcitabine administered at fixed-dose rate, combined with docetaxel/melphalan/carboplatin, with autologous hematopoietic progenitor-cell support, in patients with advanced refractory tumors

The purpose of this trial was to define the maximum tolerated duration (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), regimen-related toxicities (RRT), and pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine infused at a fixed dose rate (FDR) of 10 mg/m2/min, combined with docetaxel/melphalan/carboplatin, using autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The duration of gemcitabine infusion was incrementally escalated as a single treatment on day -6 or as 4 daily infusions on days -5 to -2. Gemcitabine was followed by docetaxel (300 or 350 mg/m2) on day -5, and then melphalan (50 mg/m2/day) and carboplatin (333 mg/m2/day) on days -4 to -2. Fifty-two patients with refractory tumors were accrued with a median age of 40 (range: 6-66), a median of 3 (1-6) prior chemotherapy regimens, and 3 (1-7) organs involved. The gemcitabine MTD was defined at 20 hours (total dose 12,000 mg/m2) on both schedules. The DLT was enteritis. Three patients died from aspiration, catheter-related sepsis, and enteritis, respectively. The tumor response rate was 91%, with 50% complete responses. At current 2-year median follow-up, the event-free and overall survival (EFS, OS) rates are 54% (median 26 months) and 79% (median not reached), respectively. Gemcitabine area under the curve (AUC), but not clearance, increased linearly with infusion duration, and correlated with grade 3 RRT. Docetaxel showed a linear increase of its AUC and similar clearance compared with prior reports at lower doses. In conclusion, ASCT-supported infusions of gemcitabine at FDR could be prolonged up to 20 hours. The resulting gemcitabine/docetaxel/melphalan/carboplatin combination was highly active in refractory cancers and should be further tested in disease-specific trials.

Inactivation of NF- B by 3,3'-diindolylmethane contributes to increased apoptosis induced by chemotherapeutic agent in breast cancer cells

Constitutive activation of Akt or nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kappaB) has been reported to play a role in de novo resistance of cancer cells to chemotherapeutic agents, which is a major cause of treatment failure in cancer chemotherapy. Previous studies have shown that 3,3'-diindolylmethane (DIM), a major in vivo acid-catalyzed condensation product of indole-3-carbinol, is a potent inducer of apoptosis, inhibitor of tumor angiogenesis, and inactivator of Akt/NF-kappaB signaling in breast cancer cells. However, little is known regarding the inactivation of Akt/NF-kappaB that leads to chemosensitization of breast cancer cells to chemotherapeutic agents, such as Taxotere. Therefore, we examined whether the inactivation Akt/NF-kappaB signaling caused by B-DIM could sensitize breast cancer cells to chemotherapeutic agents both in vitro and in vivo. MDA-MB-231 cells were simultaneously treated with 15 to 45 micromol/L B-DIM and 0.5 to 1.0 nmol/L Taxotere for 24 to 72 h. Cell growth inhibition assay, apoptosis assay, electrophoretic mobility shift assay, and Western blotting were done. The combination treatment of 30 micromol/L B-DIM with 1.0 nmol/L Taxotere elicited significantly greater inhibition of cell growth compared with either agent alone. The combination treatment induced greater apoptosis in MDA-MB-231 cells compared with single agents. Moreover, we found that NF-kappaB activity was significantly decreased in cells treated with B-DIM and Taxotere. We also have tested our hypothesis using transfection studies, followed by combination treatment with B-DIM/Taxotere, and found that combination treatment significantly inhibited cell growth and induced apoptosis in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells mediated by the inactivation of NF-kappaB, a specific target in vitro and in vivo. These results were also supported by animal experiments, which clearly showed that B-DIM sensitized the breast tumors to Taxotere, which resulted in greater antitumor activity mediated by the inhibition of Akt and NF-kappaB. Collectively, our results clearly suggest that inhibition of Akt/NF-kappaB signaling by B-DIM leads to chemosensitization of breast cancer cells to Taxotere, which may contribute to increased growth inhibition and apoptosis in breast cancer cells. The data obtained from our studies could be a novel breakthrough in cancer therapeutics by using nontoxic agents, such as B-DIM, in combination with other conventional therapeutic agents, such as Taxotere.

Achievements in systemic therapies in the pregenomic era in metastatic breast cancer

Over the last decades, the introduction of several new agents into clinical practice has significantly improved disease control and obtained some, albeit rare, survival benefits in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Despite these results, the choice of treatment for the majority of patients is still empirically based, since the only two predictive factors with level 1 evidence for clinical use are hormonal receptor status for endocrine therapy and HER-2 status for trastuzumab therapy. Important improvements in the endocrine therapy of both pre- and postmenopausal women with hormone-responsive disease have been achieved. For premenopausal women, ovarian function suppression with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs combined with tamoxifen has become the standard treatment, although aromatase inhibitors plus ovarian function suppression are under evaluation. In postmenopausal patients, aromatase inhibitors have proved to be superior to standard endocrine therapies in either first- or second-line treatment and a novel antiestrogen compound, fulvestrant, has been introduced in clinical practice. Chemotherapy remains the treatment of choice for hormone unresponsive or resistant patients. Anthracyclines and taxanes have been used either alone or in combination as first-line chemotherapy, but with the more frequent use of these agents in the adjuvant setting, new standards are needed for first-line chemotherapy, and new and more efficacious treatments are required. In the subgroup of patients with tumors that overexpress HER-2, the use of trastuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy has modified the natural history of these tumors, even if only about one out of two patients obtains a clinical response. In this review we summarize the main achievements and the currently available treatment options for patients with MBC.