A systematic literature analysis of correlative studies in low-dose metronomic chemotherapy trials

Global trajectory and future prospects of metronomic chemotherapy research: A scientometric analysis (2000-2022)

This scientometric study aimed to provide a first comprehensive overview of the global research landscape of Metronomic Chemotherapy (MC) from 2000 to 2022 using a data-driven approach to identify key trends, collaborations, and potential opportunities. This study highlights the increasing prevalence of MC, with annual outputs increasing substantially over the same timeframe. The United States contributed the most to MC research, followed by Italy and China, while there was a lack of collaborative research efforts between countries and organizations. Through keyword co-occurrence analysis, we identified emerging interdisciplinary research areas, such as "nanoparticles," "immunotherapy," and "antitumor immunity." Our citation analysis identified the most influential authors, institutions, and journals, providing a comprehensive overview of the structure of knowledge and dissemination of MC research. Although the number of publications has decreased since 2019, the analysis indicates that this field has received substantial scholarly attention. These discoveries are extremely important for researchers, funding organizations, and policymakers because they highlight the need for more collaboration, interdisciplinary approaches, and resource allocation in underrepresented fields. This study concludes with recommendations for guiding future research and collaboration, resulting in a larger impact and fostering substantial advancements in MC research.

Metronomic Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment: Clinical and Preclinical Data between Lights and Shadows

Metronomic chemotherapy (mCHT), defined as continuous administration of low-dose chemotherapeutic agents with no or short regular treatment-free intervals, was first introduced to the clinic in international guidelines in 2017, and, since then, has become one of the available strategies for the treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC). Despite recent successes, many unsolved practical and theoretical issues remain to be addressed. The present review aims to identify the “lights and shadows” of mCHT in preclinical and clinical settings. In the preclinical setting, several findings indicate that one of the most noticeable effects of mCHT is on the tumor microenvironment, which, over the last twenty years, has been demonstrated to be pivotal in supporting tumor cell survival and proliferation. On the other hand, the direct effects on tumor cells have been less well-defined. In addition, critical items to be addressed are the lack of definition of an optimal biological dose (OBD), the method of administration of metronomic schedules, and the recognition and validation of predictive biomarkers. In the clinical context—where mCHT has mainly been used in a metastatic setting—low toxicity is the most well-recognised light of mCHT, whereas the type of study design, the absence of randomised trials and uncertainty in terms of doses and drugs remain among the shadows. In conclusion, growing evidence indicates that mCHT is a suitable treatment option for selected metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. Moreover, given its multimodal mechanisms of action, its addition to immunological and targeted therapies might represent a promising new approach to the treatment of MBC. More preclinical data are needed in this regard, which can only be obtained through support for translational research as the key link between basic science and patient care.

Metronomic Chemotherapy for Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Literature Review

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is the ultimately lethal form of prostate cancer. Docetaxel chemotherapy was the first life-prolonging treatment for mCRPC; however, the standard maximally tolerated dose (MTD) docetaxel regimen is often not considered for patients with mCRPC who are older and/or frail due to its toxicity. Low-dose metronomic chemotherapy (LDMC) is the frequent administration of typically oral and off-patent chemotherapeutics at low doses, which is associated with a superior safety profile and higher tolerability than MTD chemotherapy. We conducted a systematic literature review using the PUBMED, EMBASE, and MEDLINE electronic databases to identify clinical studies that examined the impact of LDMC on patients with advanced prostate cancer. The search identified 30 reports that retrospectively or prospectively investigated LDMC, 29 of which focused on mCRPC. Cyclophosphamide was the most commonly used agent integrated into 27/30 (90%) of LDMC regimens. LDMC resulted in a clinical benefit rate of 56.8 ± 24.5% across all studies. Overall, there were only a few non-hematological grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported. As such, LDMC is a well-tolerated treatment option for patients with mCRPC, including those who are older and frail. Furthermore, LDMC is considered more affordable than conventional mCRPC therapies. However, prospective phase III trials are needed to further characterize the efficacy and safety of LDMC in mCRPC before its use in practice.

A Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Study of Low-Dose Metronomic Treatment With Novel Oral Paclitaxel Formulations in Combination With Ritonavir in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors

ModraPac001 (MP1) and ModraPac005 (MP5) are novel oral paclitaxel formulations that are coadministered with the cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitor ritonavir (r), enabling daily low-dose metronomic (LDM) treatment. The primary aim of this study was to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of MP1/r and MP5/r. The second aim was to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) as LDM treatment. This was an open-label phase 1 trial. Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled according to a classical 3+3 design. After initial employment of the MP1 capsule, the MP5 tablet was introduced. Safety was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.02. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on days 1, 2, 8, and 22 for determination of paclitaxel and ritonavir plasma concentrations. In this study, 37 patients were treated with up to twice-daily 30-mg paclitaxel combined with twice-daily 100-mg ritonavir (MP5/r 30-30/100-100) in 9 dose levels. Dose-limiting toxicities were nausea, (febrile) neutropenia, dehydration and vomiting. At the MTD/RP2D of MP5/r 20-20/100-100, the maximum paclitaxel plasma concentration and area under the concentration-time curve until 24 hours were 34.6 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 79%) and 255 ng • h/mL (coefficient of variation, 62%), respectively. Stable disease was observed as best response in 15 of 31 evaluable patients. Based on these results, LDM therapy with oral paclitaxel coadministrated with ritonavir was considered feasible and safe. The MTD and RP2D were determined as MP5/r 20-20/100-100. Further clinical development of MP5/r as an LDM concept, including potential combination treatment, is warranted.

Capecitabine in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

Recent data suggest a potential activity and a good tolerability of capecitabine in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

AIMS

To evaluate capecitabine activity and safety in a wide cohort of advanced HCC patients.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 143 capecitabine-treated patients (January 2010 to December 2017) in three centers of the Veneto Oncology Network.

RESULTS

Capecitabine was administered in second and third line, but also in first line instead of sorafenib in Child-Pugh B patients (70%), compromised clinical conditions (14%) or contraindications to antiangiogenetics (16%). Median overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP) were 6.9 and 2.8 months, respectively. There were no differences in OS and TTP between the 32 patients treated with non-metronomic scheme (2000 mg/day for 14 days) and the 111 patients treated with metronomic scheme (1000 mg/day) after correction for prognostic factors at baseline with a propensity score analysis. Capecitabine was more active in patients intolerant to sorafenib than in those progressing during treatment (p = 0.024). At least one adverse event (mainly hematological) was experienced by 73% of patients but discontinuation was necessary only in 11 (8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Capecitabine can be considered an active and safe option in advanced HCC, especially for patients unfit for other treatments.

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.

Metronomic capecitabine vs. best supportive care in Child-Pugh B hepatocellular carcinoma: a proof of concept

There is a relative lack of evidence about systemic treatments in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and moderate liver dysfunction (Child-Pugh B). In this multicenter study we retrospectively analyzed data from Child-Pugh B-HCC patients naïve to systemic therapies, treated with MC or best supportive care (BSC). To reduce the risk of selection bias, an inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was adopted. Propensity score was generated including: extrahepatic spread; macrovascular invasion; performance status, alphafetoprotein > 400 ng/ml, Child- Pugh score [B7 vs. B8-9]. We identified 35 MC-treated patients and 70 controls. Median overall survival was 7.5 [95% CI: 3.733-11.267]in MC-patients and 5.1 months [95% CI: 4.098-6.102] in the BSC group (p = 0.013). In patients treated with MC, median progression-free survival was 4.5 months (95% CI: 2.5-6.5). The univariate unweighted Cox regression showed a 42% reduction in death risk for patients on MC (95%CI: 0.370-0.906; p = 0.017). After weighting for potential confounders, death risk remained essentially unaltered. In the MC group, 12 patients (34.3%) experienced at least one adverse event, the most common of which were: fatigue (17.1%), hand-foot syndrome (8.5%), thrombocytopenia (8.5%), and neutropenia (5.7%). MC seems a safe option for Child-Pugh B-HCC patients. Its potential antitumour activity warrants prospective evaluations.

Metronomic capecitabine as second-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib discontinuation

PURPOSE

Metronomic capecitabine (MC) is a well-tolerated systemic treatment showing promising results in one retrospective study, as second-line therapy after sorafenib failure, in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

117 patients undergoing MC were compared to 112 patients, eligible for this treatment, but undergoing best supportive care (BSC) after sorafenib discontinuation for toxicity or HCC progression. The two groups were compared for demographic and clinical features. A multivariate regression analysis was conducted to detect independent prognostic factors. To balance confounding factors between the two groups, a propensity score model based on independent prognosticators (performance status, neoplastic thrombosis, causes of sorafenib discontinuation and pre-sorafenib treatment) was performed.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing MC showed better performance status, lower tumor burden, lower prevalence of portal vein thrombosis, and better cancer stage. Median (95% CI) post-sorafenib survival (PSS) was longer in MC than in BSC patients [9.5 (7.5-11.6) vs 5.0 (4.2-5.7) months (p < 0.001)]. Neoplastic thrombosis, cause of sorafenib discontinuation, pre-sorafenib treatment and MC were independent prognosticators. The benefit of capecitabine was confirmed in patients after matching with propensity score [PSS: 9.9 (6.8-12.9) vs. 5.8 (4.8-6.8) months, (p = 0.001)]. MC lowered the mortality risk by about 40%. MC achieved better results in patients who stopped sorafenib for adverse events than in those who progressed during it [PSS: 17.3 (10.5-24.1) vs. 7.8 (5.2-10.1) months, (p = 0.035)]. Treatment toxicity was low and easily manageable with dose modulation.

CONCLUSIONS

MC may be an efficient and safe second-line systemic therapy for HCC patients who discontinued sorafenib for toxicity or tumor progression.

Metronomic capecitabine versus best supportive care as second-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study

Preliminary studies suggest that capecitabine may be safe and effective in HCC patients. The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of metronomic capecitabine as second-line treatment. This multicentric study retrospectively analyzed data of HCC patients unresponsive or intolerant to sorafenib treatment with metronomic capecitabine or best supportive care (BSC).Median progression free survival was 3.1 months in patients treated with capecitabine (95%CI: 2.7-3.5). Median overall survival was 12.0 months (95% CI: 10.7-15.8) in patients receiving capecitabine, while 9.0 months (95% CI: 6.5-13.9) in patients receiving BSC. The result of univariate unweighted Cox regression model shows a 46% reduction in death risk for patients on capecitabine (95%CI: 0.357-0.829; p  =0.005) compared to patients receiving BSC alone. After weighting for potential confounders, death risk remained essentially unaltered (45%; 95%CI: 0.354-0.883; p = 0.013). Metronomic capecitabine seems a safe second-line treatment for HCC patients in terms of management of adverse events, showing a potential anti-tumour activity which needs further evaluation in phase III studies.

Metronomic chemotherapy: A relook at its basis and rationale

Metronomic administration of chemotherapy has long been recognized as having a different biological effect from maximal tolerated dose (MTD) administration. Preclinical studies have demonstrated these differences quite elegantly and many clinical trials have also demonstrated reproducible activity albeit small, in varied solid malignancies even in patients who were heavily pretreated. However, the concept of metronomic chemotherapy has been plagued by lack of a clear definition resulting in the published literature that is rather varied and confusing. There is a need for a definition that is mechanism(s)-based allowing metronomics to be distinguished from standard MTD concept. With significant advances made in understanding cancer biology and biotechnology, it is now possible to attain that goal. What is needed is both a concerted effort and adequate funding to work towards it. This is the only way for the oncology community to determine how metronomic chemotherapy fits in the overall cancer management schema.

Metastatic breast cancer patients treated with low-dose metronomic chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide and celecoxib: clinical outcomes and biomarkers of response

BACKGROUND

Preclinical results showing therapeutic effect and low toxicity of metronomic chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (Cy) + celecoxib (Cel) for mammary tumors encouraged its translation to the clinic for treating advanced breast cancer patients (ABCP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single-arm, mono-institutional, non-randomized, phase II, two-step clinical trial (approved by Bioethics Committee and Argentine Regulatory Authority) was designed. Patients received Cy (50 mg po.d) + Cel (200 mg p.o.bid). Patient eligibility criteria included: ABCP who progressed to anthracyclines, taxanes and capecitabine, ≤4 chemotherapy schemes, with good performance status. Several pro- and anti-angiogenic molecules and cells were determined as biomarkers. Informed consent was signed by all patients. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit (CB).

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled. Main clinical outcomes were prolonged disease stabilization and partial remission in 10/20 and 1/20 patients, respectively. CB was 55 %, and time to progression (TTP) was 21.1 weeks. Median TTP in patients who achieved CB was 35.6 weeks, and mean overall survival was 44.20 weeks. There were no grade 3/4 toxicities associated with treatment. Circulating endothelial cells (CECs) increased at the time of progression in patients who showed CB (P = 0.014). Baseline CECs and circulating endothelial progenitor cells showed marginal associations with TTP. Serum VEGF decreased (P = 0.050), sVEGFR-2 increased (P = 0.005) and VEGF/sVEGFR-2 ratio decreased during treatment (P = 0.041); baseline VEGF and VEGF/sVEGFR-2 were associated with TTP (P = 0.035 and P = 0.030, respectively), while sVEGFR-2 did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment was effective, showing low toxicity profile and excellent tolerability. The combination had anti-angiogenic effect. Increased levels of CEC could be useful for detecting progression. Baseline VEGF and VEGF/sVEGFR-2 values could be useful as early predictors of response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ANMAT#4596/09.

Metronomic capecitabine as second-line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma after sorafenib failure

BACKGROUND

No standard second-line treatments are available for hepatocellular carcinoma patients who fail sorafenib therapy. We assessed the safety and efficacy of metronomic capecitabine after first-line sorafenib failure.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving metronomic capecitabine between January 2012 and November 2014. The primary end-point was safety, secondary end-point was efficacy, including time-to-progression and overall survival.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients (80% Child-Pugh A, 80% Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C) received metronomic capecitabine (500 mg/bid). Median treatment duration was 3.2 months (range 0.6-31). Fourteen (53%) patients experienced at least one adverse event. The most frequent drug-related adverse events were bilirubin elevation (23%), fatigue (15%), anaemia (11%), lymphoedema (11%), and hand-foot syndrome (7.6%). Treatment was interrupted in 19 (73%) for disease progression, in 4 (15%) for liver deterioration, and in 1 (3.8%) for adverse event. Disease control was achieved in 6 (23%) patients. Median time-to-progression was 4 months (95% confidence interval 3.2-4.7). Median overall survival was 8 months (95% confidence interval 3.7-12.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Metronomic capecitabine was well tolerated in hepatocellular carcinoma patients who had been treated with sorafenib. Preliminary data show potential anti-tumour activity with long-lasting disease control in a subgroup of patients that warrants further evaluation in a phase III study.