A phase II study of the effectiveness of docetaxel (Taxotere) in women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with polychemotherapy. Hellenic Cooperative Interhospital Group in Oncology

Successful Treatment of Pulmonary Metastasis and Local Recurrence of Angiosarcoma with Docetaxel

Angiosarcoma of the face and scalp of the elderly frequently recurs locally, metastasizes early despite various treatments, and has a poor prognosis. We describe a patient who had angiosarcoma of the scalp with pulmonary metastasis. Local recurrence occurred after excision and local and arterial administration of IL-2. A weekly administration method of docetaxel was therefore selected, resulting in complete remission of the pulmonary metastasis and a partial response of the local recurrence. This favorable clinical outcome in our case suggests that docetaxel therapy may be an option for the treatment of angiosarcoma of the scalp with pulmonary metastasis.

A randomized feasibility study of docetaxel versus vinorelbine in advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel and vinorelbine have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This prospective feasibility study compared the efficacy of these two treatments in MBC.

METHODS

Patients with MBC progressing following anthracycline treatment were randomly assigned to either docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)day 1 q3W) or vinorelbine (25mg/m(2) day 1 q2W). Patients were eligible to cross over at progression. Objective response rates (ORR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were measured.

RESULTS

37 patients were randomised. 2 patients were excluded due to protocol violations. Of 35 remaining patients 17 received docetaxel and 18 received vinorelbine per protocol. ORR was 12.5% and 6.0% respectively for docetaxel and vinorelbine. The median time to progression was 10.4 weeks (range 6-14 weeks) in docetaxel arm and 7.6 weeks (range 4-11 weeks) in vinorelbine arm (p = .82). The clinical benefit rate (defined as complete response, partial response plus stable disease) was 44% in the docetaxel arm and 12% in the vinorelbine arm. Based on intent to treat the median OS in the docetaxel arm was 34 weeks (95% CI, 20.7-48) and 21.2 weeks (95% CI, 17-25.4) in vinorelbine arm (p = .388). 16 patients crossed over, 5 from docetaxel to vinorelbine and 11 from vinorelbine to docetaxel. At cross over the ORR was 0% and 18% on cross over to vinorelbine and docetaxel respectively with a median TTP of 17.3 weeks (95% CI, 16.3-18.1) and 18.7 weeks (95% CI, 13.9-23.4) for those receiving vinorebine and docetaxel at cross over respectively. Vinorelbine however was much better tolerated with fewer grade 3-4 toxicity events (n = 4) than docetaxel (n = 27).

DISCUSSION

While docetaxel resulted in a longer TTP and OS in this study it did not reach statistical significance. TTP duration for those patients who crossed over was similar, but overwhelmingly vinorelbine had fewer significant grade 3-4 toxicities than docetaxel. Only two previous randomized studies have compared the efficacy of single agent docetaxel and vinorelbine following prior anthracycline exposure, one in an unselected population [16], and the other, HERNATA, in HER2 positive disease with trastuzumab used in both arms [17]. The patients randomized in this study were relatively heavily pretreated with the majority having received 2-3 lines of prior treatment for their metastatic disease. The lower response rates with vinorelbine as compared to docetaxel in this study concur with results reported in other studies [16]. However, the numbers in both this study and the other unselected study [16] are small and need to be interpreted with caution. With regard to toxicity, in the present study, grade 3-4 hematological adverse events and infection were tenfold greater with docetaxel as compared with vinorelbine, consistent with results in HERNATA [17]. While others have reported a significantly higher number of overall grade 3-4 toxicities with vinorelbine [16], the fact that, as in HERNATA, discontinuations due to toxicities in that study [16] were significantly greater with docetaxel as compared to vinorelbine suggests either the toxicity data collected did not reflect the true toxicities on treatment or that docetaxel toxicities were in some way more severe or protracted leading to more numerous discontinuations [16]. Larger randomized studies are needed to determine (1) the efficacy of docetaxel versus vinorelbine in anthracycline pretreated disease and (2) the efficacy of vinorelbine after prior taxane exposure, and particularly how it may compares both with regard to efficacy and tolerability with other possible regimens that may utilized such as carboplatin-gemcitabine [20] or eribulin [21]. The longer as well as comparable TTP at cross over for both agents compared to that upfront suggests there may be enrichment at cross over of a group of patients who are not only fit for further treatment but are more likely to a derive continued benefit from additional treatment.

Pharmacoethnicity of docetaxel-induced severe neutropenia: integrated analysis of published phase II and III trials

BACKGROUND

Ethnic differences in drug susceptibility and toxicity are a major concern, not only in drug development but also in the clinical setting. We review the toxicity profiles of docetaxel according to dose and ethnicity.

METHODS

We analyzed phase II and III clinical trials that included a once-every-3-weeks single-agent docetaxel arm. Logistic regression analysis was applied to identify the significant variables affecting the reported incidence of docetaxel-induced severe neutropenia.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified studies conducted in Asia [odds ratio (OR) 19.0; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 3.64-99.0] and docetaxel dose (OR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03-1.13) as independent variables for the incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant difference in the incidence of docetaxel-induced severe neutropenia between Asian and non-Asian clinical studies. Physicians and pharmacists should consider ethnic diversity in docetaxel toxicity when interpreting the results of clinical trials.

A phase II trial of docetaxel (Taxotere) as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer

The efficacy and tolerability of docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer was investigated. In addition, the efficacy of a 3-day prophylaxis against cumulative dose-related fluid retention was examined with methylprednisolone 32 mg twice daily for 3 days starting 12 and 3 h before the docetaxel infusion together with oral cetirizine 10 mg 12 and 3 h before start of docetaxel for prevention of acute hypersensitivity reactions. According to the intent to treat-analysis 35% (95%CI: 25; 46) of the 94 patients entered responded to therapy. Their median survival was 12 months (range 0-20 months). The respective response rate for the 87 patients eligible for response evaluation was 37% (95%CI: 27; 48). Their median duration of response was 8 months (range 3-12 months), their median time to progression was 4 months (range 1-12 months). The corresponding response rate in the eligible patient cohort with anthracycline-resistant disease was 28% (95%CI: 15; 45) and increased to 44% (95%CI: 30; 59) in the cohort with non-anthracycline-resistant disease. Patients with visceral metastases responded in 36% and patients with > or = 3 organs involved in 33%. In a retrospective analysis, the 3-day premedication of corticosteroids and antihistamines proved to be as effective as the established but more toxic 5-day regimen in delaying and preventing the occurrence of docetaxel derived toxicities especially the cumulative fluid retention. In conclusion, docetaxel represents one of the most active agents for second-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer, especially for anthracycline-resistant patients. Due to comparable effectiveness of the 5-day regimen which is widely used by others and the 3-day premedication tested in this trial the latter proved to be more favourable and was therefore recommended for future therapies.

A phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of tipifarnib in combination with docetaxel in patients with advanced solid malignancies

PURPOSE

This phase I study assessed the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs), safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of combined tipifarnib and docetaxel treatment in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The study protocol was sensitive to myelosuppression, as both drugs have been associated with this adverse event. Due to myelosuppression incidence, and in order to determine the MTD of docetaxel, multiple treatment regimens were employed. Tipifarnib was administered orally at 200 or 300 mg, twice daily (BID) for 21 days, 14 days, or 7 days for multiple 21-day cycles; intravenous (i.v.) docetaxel was administered on day 1 of each cycle at 60, 75, or 85 mg/m2.

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients entered into the study. For each drug, MTDs were identified (tipifarnib: 300 mg BID for 14 days with 60 mg/m2 docetaxel; tipifarnib: 200 mg BID for 14 days with 75 mg/m2 docetaxel). The major dose-limiting toxicity was myelosuppression, particularly febrile neutropenia (44%). Mutual pharmacokinetic interactions (the effect of docetaxel on tipifarnib pharmacokinetics and the effect of tipifarnib on docetaxel pharmacokinetics) were not evident, as maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and the area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) values of both tipifarnib and docetaxel were similar (p > or = 0.43) whether the two drugs were concomitantly administered or not. Seven of 31 evaluable patients (23%) had an objective response, 11 (35%) had stable disease (six > or = 24 weeks), and the overall clinical benefit rate (objective response and/or stable disease > or = 24 weeks) was 42%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the high incidence of febrile neutropenia necessitated a multiple scheduling adaptation of tipifarnib compared to the original protocol, the apparent lack of mutual pharmacokinetic interactions, the ability to coadminister tipifarnib and docetaxel near single-agent MTDs, and suggestive evidence of efficacy make this drug combination attractive for further examination.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in combination with vinorelbine as salvage treatment in pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: a multicentre phase II study

PURPOSE

To investigate the activity and tolerance of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in combination with vinorelbine in pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND TREATMENT

Thirty-six women with metastatic breast cancer were enrolled. The median age was 64 years, 80% of the patients had a performance status of 0-1, 30 (83%) had visceral disease and 83% had received prior taxanes while 50% anthracyclines. Treatment consisted of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (40 mg/m2 on day 1) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15) every 4 weeks.

RESULTS

In an intention-to-treat analysis 2 (6%) complete and 12 (33%) partial responses were observed (overall response rate 39%; 95% CI: 23-54.8%); 8 (22%) and 14 (39%) patients experienced stable and progressive disease, respectively. The median TTP was 6.5 months and the median survival time 14.2 months. The 1-year survival rate was 54.1%. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia occurred in 21 (58%) patients, grade 3-4 anemia in four (11%) and grade 4 thrombocytopenia in one (3%). Two (6%) patients developed febrile neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicity was mild and easily manageable. There was no clinically important cardiac toxicity or treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and vinorelbine is an active and well tolerated salvage regimen in patients with metastatic breast cancer which merits further evaluation.

Capecitabine plus docetaxel combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer

Doxifluridine(5'-DFUR)is converted to its metabolite 5-FU by the enzyme thymidine phosphorylase(TP). TP is expressed significantly higher in tumor tissue than in normal tissue. Capecitabine(N4-pentoxylcarbonyl -5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine)is a pro-drug of 5'-DFUR and a novel fluoropyrimidine carbamate that is converted to 5-FU preferentially in tumor tissue through a three-step enzymatic cascade. Expression of TP in tumor tissue may clinically predict efficacy of capecitabine. Induction of TP activity has brought about enhancement of capecitabine efficacy by taxanes in human cancer xenografts. In addition, a phase III study directly comparison docetaxel monotherapy and docetaxel plus capecitabine has been conducted for metastatic breast cancer patients who had received anthracyclines. The overall response rate of the combination group was 42%(n=255), and that of the monotherapy group was 30%(n=256)(p=0.006). The primary endpoints were time to disease progression, and time to treatment failure, and these parameters were superior in the combination arm than in the single arm, suggesting that capecitabine sensitization by docetaxel might be a new approach to breast cancer treatment.

Vinorelbine and Cisplatin for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Salvage Regimen in Patients Progressing After Docetaxel and Anthracycline Treatment

PURPOSE

To assess the antitumor efficacy and safety of a combination of vinorelbine (VNR) and cisplatin in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and docetaxel.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-six patients with assessable metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and docetaxel (adjuvant n = 1, palliative n = 20, both n = 15) were studied. Cisplatin was given at 75 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by 25 mg/m2 VNR on days 1 + 8 in a 5-minute i.v. infusion. Courses were repeated every 3 weeks. Treatment was continued until disease progression, excess toxicity, or patient refusal. Patients were classified according to their response to anthracyclines according to criteria published previously: 1) Anthracycline and/or docetaxel resistant were patients who progressed during treatment with anthracyclines and docetaxel or within 4 months after cessation of treatment (metastatic). In addition, adjuvant patients who progressed within 6 months after completion of chemotherapy belong to this group. 2) Anthracycline and/or docetaxel relapsed were either metastatic patients who responded initially and then progressed after 4 months of completing an anthracycline- and docetaxel-based chemotherapy or patients who progressed after 6 months from completion of anthracycline/docetaxel-based adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Two patients (5.6%) achieved a complete response (CR) and 15 patients (41.6%) achieved a partial response (PR), for an overall response rate (OR) of 47.2% (95% confidence interval, 31-63). Of 18 patients relapsed to anthracycline/docetaxel, 2 had a CR (11%) and 8 a PR (44.4%), giving an objective response of 55.5%. Stable disease (SD) was observed in one patient (5.5%); seven patients had progressive disease (PD) (39%). Among the 18 resistant patients, 7 PRs (39%) were observed (p = 0.5), one patient (5.5%) had stable disease, 10 patients (55.5%) progressed. The median time to progression (TTP) was 16 weeks and median overall survival 36 weeks. Relapsed patients had a longer TTP than resistant patients (24 vs. 8 weeks, p = 0.05) but similar survival (48 vs. 24 weeks, p = 0.173). All patients were assessed for toxicity. The main toxicity was neutropenia grade 3 and 4 in 47% of patients. Febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization was absent. There were no treatment-related deaths. Thrombocytopenia grade 3 and 4 occurred in four patients (11%). Phlebitis, orthostatic hypotension, and asthenia, all reversible, were observed in 3% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This cisplatin/VNR regimen is well tolerated and active in patients who failed anthracyclines and docetaxel treatment. The response rate, TTP, and survival data are high and indicate that cisplatin/VNR may have a place as salvage treatment in this group of patients. If these results can be verified in multi-institutional trials, this combination of drugs would merit investigation as part of a first-line therapy in breast cancer.

Phase I-II parallel study of docetaxel on a bimonthly schedule in refractory metastatic breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The 3-week schedule with docetaxel (DTC) 75-100 mg/2 is associated with severe neutropenia, gastro-intestinal side-effects and fluid retention in a significant proportion of patients, which may be of concern in more elderly or poor performance status patients. A phase I-II trial was carried out to test the feasibility and the activity of a new bimonthly schedule of DCT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The trial included a phase I study which aimed at the identification of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of DCT on a bimonthly schedule. The first group of three patients received DCT 40 mg/m2, and in absence of DLT, DCT dosage was escalated by 10 mg/m2/cycle until DLT was reached. In the phase II study, patients were randomized to receive: (a) standard 3-weekly DCT at the dose of 75 mg/m2 (calibration arm); or (b) bimonthly schedule with DCT at the dose recommended in the phase I study. All patients were pretreated with chemotherapy, mostly anthracycline-based regimens, for advanced/metastatic disease. Analysis of response rates, toxicity, and dose-intensity were the main aims of the study.

RESULTS

The DLT was represented by severe myelosuppression which was recorded in all patients treated at 70 mg/m2 dose level. Therefore, the MTD was 60 mg/m2 on a bimonthly schedule. However, the dose recommended for the phase II trial was 50 mg/m2, because no difference in delivered dose-intesity was seen between the 50 and 60 mg/m2 dose levels, and the latter dosage was still associated with grade 3 neutropenia in most patients. The parallel phase II study showed that the bimonthly schedule of DCT (50 mg/m2) allows to deliver the same dose-intensity of DCT 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Grade 3-4 side-effects were rather infrequent in patients treated with the bimonthly schedule. Overall response rate (ORR) was 41 and 44% for the DCT 50 mg/m2 bimonthly and the DCT 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Data achieved in the phase I part of the study showed that DCT 50 mg/m2 every 15 days is the recommended dose for phase II studies, while results achieved in the phase II trial suggest that DCT 50 mg/m2 in a bimonthly schedule is active as second-line chemotherapy for MBC being able to induce an ORR in the range reported for DCT 75-100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The bimonthly schedule is, however, associated with relatively low toxicity. This characteristic may render the bimonthly schedule particularly attractive for future phase II trials of DCT in combination with other antineoplastic agents.

Docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil plus vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer after anthracycline therapy failure

This multicentre, randomised phase III study compared docetaxel with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine in patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure of neo/adjuvant or one line of palliative anthracycline-based chemotherapy. One hundred and seventy-six metastatic breast cancer patients were randomised to receive docetaxel (100 mg m(-2)) every 3 weeks or 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine: 5-fluorouracil (750 mg m(-2) per day continuous infusion) D1-5 plus vinorelbine (25 mg m(-2)) D1 and D5 of each 3-week cycle. Eighty-six patients received 516 cycles of docetaxel; 90 patients received 476 cycles of 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine. Median time to progression (6.5 vs 5.1 months) and overall survival (16.0 vs 15.0 months) did not differ significantly between the docetaxel and 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine arms, respectively. Six (7%) complete responses and 31 (36%) partial responses occurred with docetaxel (overall response rate 43%, 95% confidence interval: 32-53%), while 4 (4.4%) complete responses and 31 (34.4%) partial responses occurred with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine (overall response rate 38.8%, 95% confidence interval: 29-49%). Main grade 3-4 toxicities were (docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine): neutropenia 82% vs 67%; stomatitis 5% vs 40%; febrile neutropenia 13% vs 22%; and infection 2% vs 7%. There was one possible treatment-related death in the docetaxel arm and five with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine. In anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients, docetaxel showed comparable efficacy to 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine, but was less toxic.

Phase I study of docetaxel in combination with cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer

This phase I was study conducted to establish the maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicity, and recommended dose of docetaxel in combination with cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Twenty-six patients were treated with cyclophosphamide (600 mg m(-2), intravenous bolus) followed by docetaxel (60, 75 or 85 mg m(-2), 1-h intravenous infusion) every 3 weeks. The maximum tolerated dose was docetaxel 85 mg m(-2) with cyclophosphamide 600 mg m(-2), the dose-limiting toxicity being febrile neutropenia. Grade 4 neutropenia was experienced by all patients, but was generally brief. Otherwise, the combination was well tolerated with few acute and no chronic non-haematological toxicities of grade 3/4. Activity was observed at all dose levels and disease sites, and the overall response rate was 42% (95% confidence interval 22-61%). The pharmacokinetics of docetaxel were not modified by cyclophosphamide coadministration. These findings establish a recommended dose of docetaxel 75 mg m(-2) in combination with cyclophosphamide 600 mg m(-2) every three weeks for phase II evaluation.

Vinorelbine and cisplatin in metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with anthracyclines

PURPOSE

To assess the antitumor efficacy and safety of a vinorelbine and cisplatin combination in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-three patients with assessable metastatic breast cancer with previous exposure to anthracyclines (adjuvant n = 6, palliative n = 47) were studied. Cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 was given followed by 25 mg/m2 vinorelbine (VNR) on days 1 + 8, in a five-min i.v. infusion. Courses were repeated every three weeks on an outpatient basis. Treatment continued until disease progression, excess toxicity or patient refusal. Patients were classified according to their response to anthracyclines: anthracycline refractory patients were patients who had never responded under an anthracycline regimen. Anthracycline resistant patients were either metastatic patients who progressed within four months of completing anthracycline-based chemotherapy or patients who progressed within six months of completion of an anthracycline adjuvant treatment. Patients who progressed four months after the end of an anthracycline regimen in metastatic setting or six months after the end of an anthracycline regimen in adjuvant setting were considered as patients previously treated with anthracyclines and were called 'relapsed'.

RESULTS

Four patients (8%) achieved a complete response (CR) and twenty-two patients (41%) achieved a partial response (PR) with an overall response rate (OR) of 49% (95% confidence interval (CI): 35-63). Stable disease (SD) was observed in five patients (9%), twenty-two patients had progressive disease (PD). Responses according to previous sensitivity to anthracycline were as follow: 5 refractory patients achieved a PR from 14 patients (36%). Seven of sixteen resistant patients responded (44%), six with PR and one with CR. Among 23 'relapsed' patients, 14 responses were observed (61%), with 3 CR and 11 PR. There was no statistical difference in RR among the three groups. The median duration of response for all patients was 7 months, the median time to progression (TTP) 5 months and median overall survival 12 months. All patients were assessed for toxicity. The main toxicity was neutropenia grade 3 and 4 in 49% of patients. Febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization was uncommon (2 patients). There were no treatment related deaths. Despite potential overlapping neurologic toxicities of the two drugs, only eight patients (15%) developed neuropathy, which was, however, mild (grades 1 and 2).

CONCLUSIONS

This cisplatin VNR regimen is well tolerated and active in patients who failed anthracyclines. The response rate, TTP and survival data are encouraging and indicate that cisplatin VNR may have a place as second-line treatment alternative to taxanes or other less active regimens. If these results can be verified in multi-institution trials, this combination of drugs would merit investigation as first-line therapy in this patient population.