A prospective randomized trial of thalidomide with topotecan compared with topotecan alone in women with recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma

Synergism of AZD6738, an ATR Inhibitor, in Combination with Belotecan, a Camptothecin Analogue, in Chemotherapy-Resistant Ovarian Cancer

Epithelial ovarian cancer remains the leading cause of mortality among all gynecologic malignancies owing to recurrence and ultimate development of chemotherapy resistance in the majority of patients. In the chemotherapy-resistant ovarian cancer preclinical model, we investigated whether AZD6738 (an ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related (ATR) inhibitor) could synergize with belotecan (a camptothecin analog and topoisomerase I inhibitor). In vitro, both chemotherapy-resistant and chemotherapy-sensitive ovarian cancer cell lines showed synergistic anti-proliferative activity with a combination treatment of belotecan and AZD6738. The combination also demonstrated synergistic tumor inhibition in mice with a chemotherapy-resistant cell line xenograft. Mechanistically, belotecan, a DNA-damaging agent, increased phospho-ATR (pATR) and phospho-Chk1 (pChk1) in consecutive order, indicating the activation of the DNA repair system. This consequently induced G2/M arrest in the cell cycle analysis. However, when AZD6738 was added to belotecan, pATR and pChk1 induced by belotecan alone were suppressed again. A cell cycle analysis in betotecan showed a sub-G1 increase as well as a G2/M decrease, representing the release of G2/M arrest and the induction of apoptosis. In ascites-derived primary cancer cells from both chemotherapy-sensitive and -resistant ovarian cancer patients, this combination was also synergistic, providing further support for our hypothesis. The combined administration of ATR inhibitor and belotecan proved to be synergistic in our preclinical model. This combination warrants further investigation in a clinical trial, with a particular aim of overcoming chemotherapy resistance in ovarian cancer.

Efficacy and Safety of Thalidomide for Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting

Purpose: A substantial number of cancer patients discontinue chemotherapy due to severe chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of thalidomide (THD) in CINV. Methods: We searched different databases to identify related studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of THD in CINV. The primary outcomes were CINV in the acute (0-24 h), delayed (24-120 h), and overall (0-120 h) phases, respectively. The secondary outcomes were the safety of THD and the patients' quality of life (QOL). Results: Fourteen randomized control trials (RCTs) including 1744 patients (42% male) reported the risk ratio (RR) and 95%CI of the THD group versus control group in reducing nausea and vomiting. Meta-analysis showed that THD statistically enhanced the complete response rate of nausea and vomiting in the delayed (nausea: RR = 1.69, 95%CI: 1.47-1.94; vomiting: RR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.26-1.51) and overall phases (nausea: RR = 1.54, 95%CI: 1.31-1.81; vomiting: RR = 1.31, 95%CI: 1.18-1.46). Furthermore, subgroup analysis based on THD dosage (100 vs 200 mg/day) demonstrated no statistical significance with respect to overlapping 95%CI. Thirty studies monitored the adverse events (AEs) of THD, all under grade 3 based on the CTCAE criteria. We compared the eight most common AEs; sedation, constipation, and drowsiness/dizziness were slightly frequent compared with controls. Conclusion: THD is an effective adjuvant and a potential alternative in reducing delayed and overall CINV. Other regimens might be added for CINV during the acute phase.

Metronomic Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Clinical Experience

Metronomic chemotherapy, continuous and dose-dense administration of chemotherapeutic drugs with lowered doses, is being evaluated for substituting, augmenting, or appending conventional maximum tolerated dose regimens, with preclinical and clinical studies for the past few decades. To date, the principle mechanisms of its action include impeding tumoral angiogenesis and modulation of hosts' immune system, affecting directly tumor cells, their progenitors, and neighboring stromal cells. Its better toxicity profile, lower cost, and easier use are main advantages over conventional therapies. The evidence of metronomic chemotherapy for personalized medicine is growing, starting with unfit elderly patients and also for palliative treatment. The literature reviewed in this article mainly demonstrates that metronomic chemotherapy is advantageous for selected patients and for certain types of malignancies, which make it a promising therapeutic approach for filling in the gaps. More clinical studies are needed to establish a solidified role for metronomic chemotherapy with other treatment models in modern cancer management.

Antiangiogenic therapy for primitive neuroectodermal tumor with thalidomide: A case report and review of literature

RATIONALE

Peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumor (PNET) is a kind of small round cell tumor derived from primitive neuroectodermal tumor.

PATIENT CONCERNS

PNET is a highly malignant tumor that is subordinated to Ewing sarcoma. It occurs predominantly in soft tissue and bone and rarely in the bronchi and lung. Traditional surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy are used for the treatment of PNET, but are usually ineffective.

DIAGNOSES

There was a rare case of a 17 year-old man diagnoses with primary pulmonary PNET.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient was treated by the remedy treatment with thalidomide after the poor effect of conventional radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

OUTCOMES

The patient survived without disease progression for 15 months and was in stable condition.

LESSONS

Thalidomide provides a choice for maintenance therapy in PNET.

Thalidomide and lenalidomide for recurrent ovarian cancer: A systematic review of the literature

The present review aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of thalidomide and lenalidomide, two immunomodulatory drugs with anti-angiogenic properties, in women with recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted whereby Medline and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched using terms associated with thalidomide, lenalidomide, and recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer. Published English language case reports, trials and studies that described the safety and efficacy of thalidomide or lenalidomide alone, or in combination with other drugs were reviewed. A total of 16 clinical studies involving 394 patients treated with thalidomide (n=188), lenalidomide (n=77) and 129 controls were identified, including five case reports (n=6), three case series (n=45), two phase I trials (n=27), four phase II trials (n=109), and two randomized phase III trials (n=207). In a pooled analysis of thalidomide investigated as a single drug, the overall clinical benefit rate was 43% (43/99) with a mean time to progression of 5.6 months. The response rate (complete response + partial response) was 25%. In a phase III trial, the combination of thalidomide and topotecan significantly increased the overall response rate compared with topotecan alone [14/30 (47%) vs. 8/39 (21%)]. In another phase III trial involving women with asymptomatic biochemical recurrence, compared with tamoxifen, thalidomide was not more effective. Lenalidomide was investigated in three phase I trials and in one phase II trial with an overall clinical benefit rate of 52% (34/65), and a mean time to progression of 4.6 months. The response rate (complete response + partial response) was 6%. Systemic toxicity of both drugs was noted in >77% of patients with pneumonitis/pneumonia, fatigue, neuropathy and venous thromboembolism reported as the most common side effects. Thalidomide and lenalidomide are moderately active in recurrent ovarian cancer. Thalidomide possesses synergistic effects with topotecan. The toxicity of both drugs is considerable and there is a greater amount of data available for thalidomide compared to lenalidomide.

Improvements in Clinical Trials Information Will Improve the Reproductive Health and Fertility of Cancer Patients

There are a number of barriers that result in cancer patients not being referred for oncofertility care, which include knowledge about reproductive risks of antineoplastic agents. Without this information, clinicians do not always make recommendations for oncofertility care. The objective of this study was to describe the level of reproductive information and recommendations that clinicians have available in clinical trial protocols regarding oncofertility management and follow-up, and the information that patients may receive in clinical trials patient information sheets or consent forms. A literature review of the 71 antineoplastic drugs included in the 68 clinical trial protocols showed that 68% of the antineoplastic drugs had gonadotoxic animal data, 32% had gonadotoxic human data, 83% had teratogenic animal data, and 32% had teratogenic human data. When the clinical trial protocols were reviewed, only 22% of the protocols reported the teratogenic risks and 32% of the protocols reported the gonadotoxic risk. Only 56% of phase 3 protocols had gonadotoxic information and 13% of phase 3 protocols had teratogenic information. Nine percent of the protocols provided fertility preservation recommendations and 4% provided reproductive information in the follow-up and survivorship period. Twenty-six percent had a section in the clinical trials protocol, which identified oncofertility information easily. When gonadotoxic and teratogenic effects of treatment were known, they were not consistently included in the clinical trial protocols and the lack of data for new drugs was not reported. Very few protocols gave recommendations for oncofertility management and follow-up following the completion of cancer treatment. The research team proposes a number of recommendations that should be required for clinicians and pharmaceutical companies developing new trials.

CD117 expression in fibroblasts-like stromal cells indicates unfavorable clinical outcomes in ovarian carcinoma patients

The stem cell factor (SCF) receptor CD117 (c-kit), is widely used for identification of hematopoietic stem cells and cancer stem cells. Moreover, CD117 expression in carcinoma cells indicates a poor prognosis in a variety of cancers. However the potential expression in tumor microenvironment and the biological and clinical impact are currently not reported. The expression of CD117 was immunohistochemically evaluated in a serial of 242 epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) cases. Thirty-eight out of 242 cases were CD117 positive in fibroblast-like stromal cells and 22 cases were positive in EOC cells. Four cases were both positive in fibroblast-like stromal cells and EOC cells for CD117. CD117 expression in fibroblast-like stromal cells in ovarian carcinoma was closely linked to advanced FIGO stage, poor differentiation grade and histological subtype (p<0.05), and it was significantly associated with poor overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) (Kaplan-Meier analysis; p<0.05, log-rank test). CD117 expression in ovarian carcinoma cells was not associated with these clinicopathological variables. The CD117 positive fibroblast-like stromal cells were all positive for mesenchymal stem/stromal cell (MSC) marker CD73 but negative for fibroblast markers fibroblast activation protein (FAP) and α smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), indicating that the CD117+/CD73+ fibroblast-like stromal cells are a subtype of mesenchymal stem cells in tumor stroma, although further characterization of these cells are needed. It is concluded herewith that the presence of CD117+/CD73+ fibroblast-like stromal cells in ovarian carcinoma is an unfavorable clinical outcome indication.

The emerging role of anti-angiogenic therapy in ovarian cancer (review)

The introduction of new therapeutic agents into clinical practice of ovarian cancer, in addition to the role of surgery and chemotherapy, has been the subject of numerous studies because this tumor remains worldwide the most lethal gynecological cancer. It is now known that angiogenesis plays a vital role for ovarian physiology, but also in ovarian carcinogenesis and so it has become the main target of ovarian cancer treatment. In this review, the most common molecular pathways of angiogenesis have been investigated leading to the identification of novel targets, including monoclonal antibodies and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The fundamental targets of anti-angiogenic drugs are vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and its ligand, but also platelet-derived growth factor, fibroblast growth factor and angiopoietin. Moreover, improved knowledge of angiogenic process allowed the discovery of other molecules, such as semaphorins, neuropilins, clusterin, some transcriptional factors, and the identification of features, including stemness, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, downregulation of certain microRNAs, the alteration of immune system, that contribute to angiogenesis and possibly to resistance mechanisms. The following patent and literature review aim to highlight recent findings of approved and novel anti-angiogenic drugs that make the treatment of patients with ovarian cancer a rapidly growing field of oncology.

Angiogenesis inhibitors in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer

Treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer involves surgical management with staging or debulking surgery and chemotherapy with a platinum and taxane-containing regimen. Despite achieving a 70-80 % complete remission, patients often will recur. Novel therapies are needed to improve the treatment of ovarian cancers. Tumor angiogenesis is a critical process involved in the growth and metastasis of ovarian cancer. Numerous phase II trials with angiogenesis inhibitors have been reported and have led to the development and completion of several recent phase III trials in both upfront and recurrent ovarian cancers. Future studies will need to focus on how and when to incorporate angiogenesis inhibitors in the treatment armamentarium for ovarian cancers.

Palliative Chemotherapy for Malignant Ascites Secondary to Ovarian Cancer

Although research has shown that palliative chemotherapy is beneficial compared to lack of treatment (Schorge JO, Schaffer JI, Halvorson LM, et al. ed. Williams Gynecology. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical; 2008.), other studies show aggressive end-of-life treatment adversely affects quality of life and shortens life span (Arriba L, Fader A, Frasure H, von Gruenigen V. A review of issues surrounding quality of life among women with ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;119(2):390-396.). Without a consensus on palliative chemotherapy, underutilization during end of life prevails, and likely will continue without additional research (Barbera L, Elit L, Krzyzanowska M, et al. End of life care for women with gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;118(2):196-201.). This article aims to evaluate and examine existing chemotherapy for palliation of malignant ascites secondary to ovarian cancer and compare commonly used regimens. Agents will be evaluated by their modes of administration. Oral agents include cyclophosphamide and thalidomide, and intraperitoneal vehicles include taxane-based agents, platinum-based agents, antibiotics, and biologic agents. In addition, cost, ethics, and quality of life discussions factor into this review. Palliative care’s goal is to find a balance between life expectancy and symptom relief with minimal adverse effects.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase II Study of AMG 386 Combined With Weekly Paclitaxel in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

Purpose

To estimate the efficacy and toxicity of AMG 386, an investigational peptide-Fc fusion protein that neutralizes the interaction between the Tie2 receptor and angiopoietin-1/2, plus weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Patients and Methods

Patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 once weekly [QW], 3 weeks on/1 week off) plus intravenous AMG 386 10 mg/kg QW (arm A), AMG 386 3 mg/kg QW (arm B), or placebo QW (arm C). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response, CA-125 response, safety, and pharmacokinetics.

Results

One hundred sixty-one patients were randomly assigned. Median PFS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.3 to 8.1 months) in arm A, 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 8.0 months) in arm B, and 4.6 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 6.7 months) in arm C. The hazard ratio for arms A and B combined versus arm C was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.12; P = .165). Further analyses suggested an exploratory dose-response effect for PFS across arms (Tarone's test, P = .037). Objective response rates for arms A, B, and C were 37%, 19%, and 27%, respectively. The incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) in arms A, B, and C was 65%, 55%, and 64%, respectively. Frequent AEs included hypertension (8%, 6%, and 5% in arms A, B, and C, respectively), peripheral edema (71%, 51%, and 22% in arms A, B, and C, respectively), and hypokalemia (21%, 15%, and 5% in arms A, B, and C, respectively). AMG 386 exhibited linear pharmacokinetic properties at the tested doses.

Conclusion

AMG 386 combined with weekly paclitaxel was tolerable, with a manageable and distinct toxicity profile. The data suggest evidence of antitumor activity and a dose-response effect, warranting further studies in ovarian cancer.

A prospective clinical trial of lenalidomide with topotecan in women with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Lenalidomide is an anti-angiogenic IMiD(®) immunomodulatory drug. The objective of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), overall safety profile, and activity of oral lenalidomide in combination with topotecan in women with advanced epithelial ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinoma.

METHODS

In this Phase I/II open-label, dose-escalation study, patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinoma with disease progression or recurrence following first-line therapy with a platinum agent and paclitaxel were eligible. The Phase I trial utilized a standard dose-escalation design to define the MTD and evaluate the safety profile of lenalidomide and topotecan. The starting doses were lenalidomide 5 mg, days 1-14, and intravenous topotecan 1.25 mg/m(2), days 1-5 of a 21-day cycle. Only the lenalidomide dose was escalated, in 5-mg increments up to 25 mg. Toxicity was graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. The Phase II portion was designed to evaluate the antitumor activity based on objective response rate of lenalidomide and topotecan.

RESULTS

Five women with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma were enrolled, each receiving 5 mg oral lenalidomide and 1.25 mg/m(2) topotecan. Four patients discontinued because of dose-limiting toxicity, most commonly grade 4 neutropenia (n = 3). One patient discontinued because of lack of therapeutic effect. The study was terminated early for reasons of toxicity.

CONCLUSION

The addition of lenalidomide to topotecan is not a feasible drug combination in women with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma because of dose-limiting toxicity.

Antivascular therapy for epithelial ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is the fifth largest cancer killer in women. Improved understanding of the molecular pathways implicated in the pathogenesis of ovarian cancer has led to the investigation of novel targeted therapies. Ovarian cancer is characterized by an imbalance between pro- and antiangiogenic factors in favor of angiogenesis activation. Various antivascular strategies are currently under investigation in ovarian cancer. They can schematically be divided into antiangiogenic and vascular-disrupting therapies. This paper provides a comprehensive review of these new treatments targeting the tumor vasculature in this disease. Promising activities have been detected in phase II trials, and results of phase III clinical trials are awaited eagerly.

Current role and future aspects of topotecan in relapsed ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer deaths in women. It is associated with a poor prognosis, as the majority of patients present with advanced disease and relapse after radical surgery, and following chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel.

OBJECTIVE

To review the role of topotecan in the treatment of advanced and relapsed ovarian cancer, and the efficacy and safety of novel dosing regimens and formulations of topotecan. It will also discuss further options of combination of topotecan with other cytotoxic agents and targeted therapies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The authors searched for relevant references in the MEDLINE database and in congress abstracts of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

RESULTS

Topotecan is an established second-line therapy for advanced and relapsed ovarian cancer; a regimen of 1.5 mg/m(2)/day 1-5 has been approved in the USA and many other western countries. Topotecan is well tolerated; associated haematological toxicity is generally manageable, reversible and non-cumulative. A number of alternative dosing regimens and formulations have been investigated in an attempt to improve the toxicity profile of topotecan without compromising anti-tumour activity. A novel oral formulation of topotecan has shown clinical promise in patients with advanced and relapsed disease. Administration of i.v. topotecan on a weekly basis produced encouraging results in several phase II trials, with less haematological toxicity and similar response rates to the day 1-5 regimen. Also, recent early studies demonstrate that topotecan is effective in combination with several other therapeutic agents in the relapsed setting.

CONCLUSION

The peer-reviewed literature reports that topotecan is an effective, well tolerated treatment option for relapsed ovarian cancer.

Topotecan for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapeutic agents such as topotecan can be used to treat ovarian cancer. The effects of using topotecan as a therapeutic agent have not been previously been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of topotecan for the treatment of ovarian cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (Issue 4, 2006); Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group (CGCRG) Specialised Register (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1990 to 27 July 2006); EMBASE (January 1990 to 27 July 2006); The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) database (to 1 August 2006); CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) (January 1990 to 27 July 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which randomized patients with ovarian cancer to single or combined use of topotecan versus interventions without topotecan, or different remedies of topotecan.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted and analysed data.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies including 1323 participants were eligible for this review (Gordon 2004a; Gore 2001a; Gore 2002; Hoskins 1998; Huinink 2004; Placido 2004) All studies, as reported, were identified as being of poor methodological quality. Topotecan had comparable effectiveness to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) compared with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), (16.1 weeks versus 17.0 weeks; p = 0.095). Overall survival (OS) time was similar in participants using PLD compared with topotecan (56.7 weeks versus 60 weeks; p = 0.341). Topotecan was more hematologically toxic compared with paclitaxel or PLD, relative risks (RRs) of hematological events: ranged from 1.03 to 14.46 and 1.73 to 27.12 respectively. A 21-day cycle of topotecan was more toxic than a 42-day cycle (RRs of hematological and non-hematological events ranged from 1.03 to 8). Intravenous and oral topotecan had comparable toxicity. Topotecan delayed progression more effectively compared with paclitaxel (23.1 weeks versus 14 weeks, p = 0.0021). Participants were more likely to respond to topotecan on a 21-day cycle as opposed to a 42-day cycle (RR 7.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 55.36). Small tumor diameter, sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy was associated with better prognosis. Small sample size, methodological flaws and poor reporting of the included trials made measurement bias of the trials difficult to assess.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topotecan appears to have a similar level of effectiveness as paclitaxel and PLD, though with different patterns of side effects. Larger, well-designed RCTs are required in order to define an optimal regime.