Clinical Response to Chemotherapy and Hormone Therapy as First Treatment after Therapeutic Ovariectomy in Advanced Breast Cancer Patients

The results of chemotherapy and hormone therapy, administered after relapse of the disease, were evaluated in 106 patients with homogeneous clinical characteristics who were subjected to bilateral ovariectomy for advanced breast cancer, whether the response to castration was favorable or not. In spite of an unfavorable response to the ovariectomy, 40.0% of the patients responded to hormone therapy, whereas 31.5% of the cases did not benefit from the successive hormone therapy, although they had responded to ovariectomy. In contrast, 65%, after favorably responding to ovariectomy, showed regression of the neoplasm after chemotherapy for the relapse. This apparent discordance of the results could be due to the fact that response to castration is not the only valid parameter to identify hormone dependence of a breast cancer and/or that the breast cancer is composed, in various proportions, of hormone-sensitive and chemo-sensitive cells. The predominance of one of these 2 components could determine the response of the neoplasm to therapy. The authors conclude that a more extensive and accurate hormone typing of the patient could give more precise indications for the appropriate therapy.

5-Fluorouracil plus interferon alpha-2a compared to 5-fluorouracil alone in the treatment of advanced colon carcinoma: a multicentric randomized study

Biochemical modulation is one of the most interesting fields in cancer chemotherapy. Interferon-alpha (IFNalpha) is a cytokine that is able to influence the pharmacodynamics of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) through a number of mechanisms. With the aim of confirming some data emerging from the literature, we initiated a multicentric randomized study comparing the combination of 5FU and IFNalpha-2a with 5FU alone in the treatment of advanced or metastatic colon cancer. A group of 205 colon cancer patients (104 in the 5FU arm and 101 in the 5FU + IFNapha-2a arm) were included in the final intention-to-treat analysis. Rectal cancers were not considered eligible. All patients had measurable disease, were aged 75 years or less, had a Karnofsky index of at least 60 and had good bone marrow, renal, liver and cardiac functions. No previous chemo-immunotherapy was allowed. The treatment was 750 mg/m2 5FU (4 h i.v. infusion) on days 1 5 and then i.v. bolus weekly, starting from day 12, with or without IFNalpha-2a given s.c. three times weekly (starting dose 3 x 10(6) IU rising to 9 x 10(6) IU, if tolerated). Patients were treated until progression or, if responsive, for a maximum of 48 weeks and then observed for a period of 2 years. The primary end-point of the study was objective clinical response (OR); secondary parameters were time to progression, overall survival, and time to death after progression. WHO criteria were used for both clinical response and toxicity measurements. Dose reduction was planned a priori in the event of significant toxicity due to 5FU, IFNalpha-2a or both. Association between primary and secondary end-points and treatment was studied by univariate and multivariate analysis. Altogether, 47 patients achieved a documented response. A 25% OR was observed in the combination arm while a 21% OR was seen in the 5FU arm; this difference is not statistically significant (P = 0.6). Patients with a small tumour burden (below 5 cm2) showed a higher probability of response in both arms. Patients in the experimental arm had a higher but not statistically significant cumulative progression-free probability. Median survival was 47.1 weeks overall, while it was 43.7 and 48.5 weeks in the control and experimental arms, respectively. The combination was clearly more toxic than 5FU alone, leukopenia being the most frequent side-effect in the experimental arm and nausea and vomiting in the control arm. In conclusion these results are quite disappointing and 5FU + IFNalpha-2a can not be considered a standard treatment for advanced colon cancer.

Randomised phase II study of methotrexate (MTX) versus methotrexate plus lonidamine (MTX + LND) in recurrent and/or metastatic carcinoma of the head and neck

Between March 1990 and March 1992, 89 patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell cancer of the head and neck were randomised to receive either intravenous methotrexate (MTX) at a weekly dose of 40 mg/m2 plus lonidamine (LND) given orally at a starting dose of 75 mg three times daily for 3 days and then at a dose of 150 mg three times daily (arm MTX + LND) or methotrexate alone (arm MTX) at the same doses as arm MTX + LND. Complete remissions were observed in 10.5% of the patients in arm MTX + LND, and partial remissions in another 15.8%, yielding a 26.3% response rate. In arm MTX, only partial remissions were observed, yielding an overall response rate of 18.2%. Haematological toxicity was mild in both groups. Mild testicular pain (21%) and myalgias (31%) occurred only in patients treated with LND.