Quality of life and quality-adjusted time without toxicity in palliatively treated head-and-neck cancer patients

Metronomic chemotherapy in cancer treatment: new wine in an old bottle

Over the past two decades, metronomic chemotherapy has gained considerable attention and has demonstrated remarkable success in the treatment of cancer. Through chronic administration and low-dose regimens, metronomic chemotherapy is associated with fewer adverse events but still effectively induces disease control. The identification of its antiangiogenic properties, direct impact on cancer cells, immunomodulatory effects on the tumour microenvironment, and metabolic reprogramming ability has established the intrinsic multitargeted nature of this therapeutic approach. Recently, the utilization of metronomic chemotherapy has evolved from salvage treatment for metastatic disease to adjuvant maintenance therapy for high-risk cancer patients, which has been prompted by the success of several substantial phase III trials. In this review, we delve into the mechanisms underlying the antitumour effects of metronomic chemotherapy and provide insights into potential combinations with other therapies for the treatment of various malignancies. Additionally, we discuss health-economic advantages and candidates for the utilization of this treatment option.

Quality-Adjusted Survival in Patients with Recurrence of Breast Cancer Diagnosed by Asymptomatic or Symptomatic Opportunities

After radical surgery for breast cancer, screening to diagnose recurrence in asymptomatic patients is not recommended. We retrospectively evaluated quality-adjusted survival. Included were fifty-seven recurrent breast cancer patients who died. Survival was partitioned into 3 health states by two different definitions: definition a) time with toxicities due to chemotherapy before progression (TOX1), time from the diagnosis of recurrence to progression without toxicities (TWiST1), and time from progression to death (REL1); definition b) time from the diagnosis of recurrence to death with toxicities (TOX2), without toxicities or hospitalization (TWiST2), and with hospitalization (REL2). Q-TWiST was calculated by multiplying the time in each health state by its utility (uTOX, uTWiST, and uREL). In threshold analyses, uTOX and uREL ranged from 0.0 to 1.0 whereas uTWiST was maintained at 1.0. We compared the patients with (n=32) and without (n=25) symptoms at the time of the diagnosis of recurrence. There was no difference in overall survival after primary surgery, although survival after the diagnosis of recurrence was significantly longer in the asymptomatic patients (p<0.01). Q-TWiST1 and Q-TWiST2 from the diagnosis of recurrence in the asymptomatic patients were significantly longer. Q-TWiST2 from primary surgery in the asymptomatic patients was significantly longer with some combinations of higher uTOX2 and lower uREL2. In conclusion, the asymptomatic detection of recurrence was associated with significantly longer quality-adjusted survival in comparison to symptomatic detection with some combinations of uTOX2 and uREL2. A prospective evaluation would clarify adequate follow-up methods after radical surgery for breast cancer.

Results of Phase III Randomized Trial for Use of Docetaxel as a Radiosensitizer in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer, Unsuitable for Cisplatin-Based Chemoradiation

PURPOSE

There is a lack of published literature on systemic therapeutic options in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) undergoing chemoradiation. Docetaxel was assessed as a radiosensitizer in this situation.

METHODS

This was a randomized phase II/III study. Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with LAHNSCC planned for chemoradiation and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and who were cisplatin-ineligible were randomly assigned in 1:1 to either radiation alone or radiation with concurrent docetaxel 15 mg/m² once weekly for a maximum of seven cycles. The primary end point was 2-year disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

The study recruited 356 patients between July 2017 and May 2021. The 2-year DFS was 30.3% (95% CI, 23.6 to 37.4) versus 42% (95% CI, 34.6 to 49.2) in the RT and Docetaxel-RT arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.673; 95% CI, 0.521 to 0.868; P value = .002). The corresponding median overall survival (OS) was 15.3 months (95% CI, 13.1 to 22.0) and 25.5 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 32.5), respectively (log-rank P value = .035). The 2-year OS was 41.7% (95% CI, 34.1 to 49.1) versus 50.8% (95% CI, 43.1 to 58.1) in the RT and Docetaxel-RT arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.747; 95% CI, 0.569 to 0.980; P value = .035). There was a higher incidence of grade 3 or above mucositis (22.2% v 49.7%; P < .001), odynophagia (33.5% v 52.5%; P < .001), and dysphagia (33% v 49.7%; P = .002) with the addition of docetaxel.

CONCLUSION

The addition of docetaxel to radiation improved DFS and OS in cisplatin-ineligible patients with LAHNSCC.[Media: see text].

Low-cost oral metronomic chemotherapy versus intravenous cisplatin in patients with recurrent, metastatic, inoperable head and neck carcinoma: an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Regimens for palliation in patients with head and neck cancer recommended by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) have low applicability (less than 1-3%) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) because of their cost. In a previous phase 2 study, patients with head and neck cancer who received metronomic chemotherapy had better outcomes when compared with those who received intravenous cisplatin, which is commonly used as the standard of care in LMICs. We aimed to do a phase 3 study to substantiate these findings.

METHODS

We did an open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial at the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Center, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India. We enrolled adult patients (aged 18-70 years) who planned to receive palliative systemic treatment for relapsed, recurrent, or newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1 and measurable disease, as defined by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors. We randomly assigned (1:1) participants to receive either oral metronomic chemotherapy, consisting of 15 mg/m² methotrexate once per week plus 200 mg celecoxib twice per day until disease progression or until the development of intolerable side-effects, or 75 mg/m² intravenous cisplatin once every 3 weeks for six cycles. Randomisation was done by use of a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with a block size of four, and patients were stratified by primary tumour site and previous cancer-directed treatment. The primary endpoint was median overall survival. Assuming that 6-month overall survival in the intravenous cisplatin group would be 40%, a non-inferiority margin of 13% was defined. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. All patients who completed at least one cycle of the assigned treatment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India, CTRI/2015/11/006388, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between May 16, 2016, and Jan 17, 2020, 422 patients were randomly assigned: 213 to the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 209 to the intravenous cisplatin group. All 422 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, and 418 patients (211 in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 207 in the intravenous cisplatin group) were included in the per-protocol analysis. At a median follow-up of 15·73 months, median overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis population was 7·5 months (IQR 4·6-12·6) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group compared with 6·1 months (3·2-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·773 [95% CI 0·615-0·97, p=0·026]). In the per-protocol analysis population, median overall survival was 7·5 months (4·7-12·8) in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group and 6·1 months (3·4-9·6) in the intravenous cisplatin group (unadjusted HR for death 0·775 [95% CI 0·616-0·974, p=0·029]). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed in 37 (19%) of 196 patients in the oral metronomic chemotherapy group versus 61 (30%) of 202 patients in the intravenous cisplatin group (p=0·01).

INTERPRETATION

Oral metronomic chemotherapy is non-inferior to intravenous cisplatin with respect to overall survival in head and neck cancer in the palliative setting, and is associated with fewer adverse events. It therefore represents a new alternative standard of care if current NCCN-approved options for palliative therapy are not feasible.

FUNDING

Tata Memorial Center Research Administration Council.

TRANSLATIONS

For the Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, Oriya, Bengali, and Punjabi translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Beyond conventional chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy in squamous cell cancer of the oral cavity

The focus of this review article is to throw light on non-conventional systemic chemotherapy that affects the tumour microenvironment and potentially has a favourable impact on the management of squamous cell cancer of the oral cavity. A metronomic combination of weekly methotrexate and celecoxib seems equally effective to single agent cisplatin in the palliative setting, but needs phase III testing. The same metronomic combination seems inferior to paclitaxel-cetuximab. Triple drug metronomic chemotherapy (methotrexate, celecoxib, and erlotinib) is still under development with promising data from pilot studies. Metronomic chemotherapy also seems beneficial in the curative setting but results of confirmatory studies are eagerly awaited. The low rate of adverse events and low cost make this regimen an attractive alternative. Both in vivo and in-vitro data suggests that numerous drugs like anthelmintics, DMARDs, antimalarials can be repurposed for Head and Neck Cancers. However, there is a dearth of clinical studies reported till date.

Palliative chemotherapy in head and neck cancer: balancing between beneficial and adverse effects

Introduction: Head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) is the sixth most common cancer in the world. Almost 2/3rds of patients have recurrent or metastatic (R/M) HNSCC. Treatment options for R/M HNSCC have evolved, with relatively little change in survival. Thus, it is imperative that management decisions must balance efficacy with toxicity and emphasize the importance of maintaining the patient's quality of life (QOL).Areas covered: We cover the various chemotherapeutic options available for R/M HNSCC including single agent chemotherapy, platinum-based doublets and triplet options. The role of cetuximab, immunotherapy and oral metronomic chemotherapy (OMCT) is also reviewed. We discuss the management of patients with platinum-refractory disease.Expert opinion: In all patients with R/M HNSCC, we recommend assessment of extent of disease, patient symptomatology, performance status, affordability and availability of logistic and social support. In patients with PD-L1 CPS =/> 20, pembrolizumab is an option. In patients with PD-L1 CPS < 20, pembrolizumab/cisplatin/5FU or cisplatin/5FU/cetuximab (EXTREME) may be considered based on affordability and availability. Options available that have a lower toxicity and can help to maintain the patient's QOL include; single agent chemotherapy, carboplatin/paclitaxel combination chemotherapy, sequential combination chemotherapy followed by cetuximab, replacing 5FU with docetaxel (TPEx regime) and OMCT.

Phase I/II Study of Palliative Triple Metronomic Chemotherapy in Platinum-Refractory/Early-Failure Oral Cancer

PURPOSE

Platinum-resistant oral cancer has a dismal outcome with limited treatment options. We conducted a phase I/II study to identify the optimal biologic dose (OBD) of methotrexate when given along with erlotinib and celecoxib and to assess the efficacy of this three-drug regimen in advanced oral cancer.

METHODS

Patients with platinum-resistant or early-failure squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity were eligible for this study. They were orally administered erlotinib 150 mg once per day, celecoxib 200 mg twice per day, and methotrexate per week. The primary end point of phase I was to determine the OBD of methotrexate, and that of phase II was to determine the 3-month progression-free survival. The OBD of methotrexate was determined on the basis of the clinical benefit rate at 2 months and circulating endothelial cell level at day 8, using a de-escalation model. Pharmacokinetic evaluation was performed during phase I. Phase II consisted of an expansion cohort of 76 patients.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were recruited in phase I, and 9 mg/m2 methotrexate was identified as the OBD. A total of 91 patients were recruited, and the median follow-up was 6.8 months (range, 0 to 16.8 months). The 3-month progression-free survival rate was 71.1% (95% CI, 60.5% to 79.3%), the 6-month overall survival rate was 61.2% (95% CI, 49.2% to 67.8%), and the response rate was 42.9% (95% CI, 33.2% to 53.1%; n = 39). The mean Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck Trial Outcome Index score at day 8 was improved by 6.1 units (standard deviation, 13.6 units) and was maintained around this magnitude ( P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Triple oral metronomic chemotherapy with erlotinib, methotrexate, and celecoxib is efficacious in platinum-refractory oral cavity cancers and represents a new therapeutic option in patients with poor prognosis.