Gemcitabine and cisplatin in a concomitant alternating chemoradiotherapy program for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer: a pharmacology-guided schedule

Gemcitabine-Based Chemoradiation in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: Systematic Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Platinum-based concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) improves locoregional control and overall survival of locoregionally advanced (LA) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) when compared to radiotherapy alone, but this approach is hampered by significant toxicity. Therefore, alternative ways to enhance the radiation effects are worth investigating. Gemcitabine (2',2'-difluorodeoxycytidine), in addition to its activity against a variety of solid tumors, including SCCHN, is one of the most potent radiosensitizers, and it has an overall favorable safety profile. In this paper, the clinical experience with gemcitabine-based chemoradiation in the treatment of patients with LA-SCCHN is reviewed.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the literature on the clinical experience with radiotherapy combined with either single-agent gemcitabine or gemcitabine/cisplatin-based polychemotherapy for the treatment of patients with LA-SCCHN. We also searched abstracts in databases of major international oncology meetings from the last 20 years. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for complete response rate and grade 3-4 acute mucositis rate.

RESULTS

A total of 13 papers were eligible for the literature review. For schedules using a gemcitabine dose intensity (DI) below 50 mg/m(2) per week, the complete response rate was 86% (95% CI, 74%-93%) with grade 3-4 acute mucositis rate of 38% (95% CI, 27%-50%) and acceptable late toxicity. In one of the studies employing such low DIs, survival data were provided showing a 3-year overall survival of 50%. Compared with DI ≥50 mg/m(2) per week, there was no difference in the complete response rate (71%; 95% CI, 55%-83%; p = .087) but a significantly higher (p < .001) grade 3-4 acute mucositis rate of 74% (95% CI, 62%-83%), often leading to treatment interruptions (survival data provided in 8 studies; 3-year overall survival, 27%-63%). Late toxicity comprising mainly dysphagia was generally underreported, whereas information about xerostomia and skin fibrosis was scarce.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the radiosensitizing potential of gemcitabine and suggests that even very low dosages (less than 50 mg/m(2) per week) provide a sufficient therapeutic ratio and therefore should be further investigated. Refinements in radiation schemes, including intensity-modulated radiation therapy, in combination with low-dose gemcitabine and targeted agents, such as cetuximab, are currently being investigated.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) has become the standard treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC). This approach is hampered by significant toxicity. This paper reviews the studies using gemcitabine as an alternative radio-sensitizer for CCRT in patients with LAHNC. In this capacity, despite its mild intrinsic toxicity, gemcitabine comes with high rates of severe mucositis when used in dosages exceeding 50 mg/m(2) per week. CCRT with low-dose gemcitabine provides a sufficient therapeutic ratio, combining clinical activity, similar to the higher-dose regimens, with lower toxicity. Further investigation is warranted.

Sepsis in head and neck cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and radiation: Literature review and consensus

The reporting of infection/sepsis in chemo/radiation-treated head and neck cancer patients is sparse and the problem is underestimated. A multidisciplinary group of head and neck cancer specialists from Italy met with the aim of reaching a consensus on a clinical definition and management of infections and sepsis. The Delphi appropriateness method was used for this consensus. External expert reviewers then evaluated the conclusions carefully according to their area of expertise. The paper contains seven clusters of statements about the clinical definition and management of infections and sepsis in head and neck cancer patients, which had a consensus. Furthermore, it offers a review of recent literature in these topics.

Local and systemic pathogenesis and consequences of regimen-induced inflammatory responses in patients with head and neck cancer receiving chemoradiation

Treatment-related toxicities are common among patients with head and neck cancer, leading to poor clinical outcomes, reduced quality of life, and increased use of healthcare resources. Over the last decade, much has been learned about the pathogenesis of cancer regimen-related toxicities. Historically, toxicities were separated into those associated with tissue injury and those with behavioural or systemic changes. However, it is now clear that tissue-specific damage such as mucositis, dermatitis, or fibrosis is no longer the sole consequence of direct clonogenic cell death, and a relationship between toxicities that results in their presentation as symptom clusters has been documented and attributed to a common underlying pathobiology. In addition, the finding that patients commonly develop toxicities representing tissue injury outside radiation fields and side effects such as fatigue or cognitive dysfunction suggests the generation of systemic as well as local mediators. As a consequence, it might be appropriate to consider toxicity syndromes, rather than the traditional approach, in which each side effect was considered as an autonomous entity. In this paper, we propose a biologically based explanation which forms the basis for the diverse constellation of toxicities seen in response to current regimens used to treat cancers of the head and neck.

Efficacy of gemcitabine and cetuximab combination treatment in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) may be curable with surgery, radiation and chemotherapy in its early stages. However, recurrence and metastasis often prevail following primary treatment in advanced stage cases and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In this study we investigated the combination therapy of gemcitabine and cetuximab for HNSCC. The UM-SCC-6 and UM-SCC-23 HNSCC cell lines were analyzed following treatment with gemcitabine and cetuximab. To determine the mechanism of action of this combination treatment, the cell cycle distributions following gemcitabine and/or cetuximab treatment were analyzed by flow cytometry and apoptosis assay. Gemcitabine and cetuximab combination treatment exerted an enhanced cytotoxic effect. The cell cycle analysis demonstrated that cells accumulated in the S phase following gemcitabine treatment and G1 arrest occurred following cetuximab treatment. An increase in sub-G1 phase cells was also observed following treatment with the two drugs. In an apoptosis assay, caspase 3/7 activity was found to be higher when administering a combination of gemcitabine and cetuximab compared to each agent administered alone. Gemcitabine and cetuximab are individually effective against HNSCC and an enhanced growth inhibitory effect may be expected when these agents are used in combination.

Is the combination of Cetuximab with chemo-radiotherapy regimens worthwhile in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer? A review of current evidence

The administration of Cetuximab in combination with radiotherapy and chemotherapy has shown clear survival improvements within the locally advanced and the relapsed/metastatic settings respectively. These results have provided the clinical rational for the inclusion of Cetuximab into chemo-radiation regimens. Trials assessing the combination of Cetuximab with induction chemotherapy, concomitant chemo-radiotherapy or both are reviewed. Taken together, their results suggest that the addition of Cetuximab is promising in trials of induction chemotherapy, showing almost uniformly response rates higher than historical controls. In combination with concomitant hyperfractionated radiotherapy and Cisplatin the results of the RTOG 0522 trial do not suggest any benefit. However a positive effect cannot be excluded with other schedules. Although feasibility has been universally suggested, adding Cetuximab implies some toxicity enhancement. Single local and systemic toxicities are more frequent and supposedly the overall treatment intensity is increased. Moreover the drug-specific toxicities are potentially severe and deserve timely recognition and management.

Swallowing dysfunction in head and neck cancer patients treated by radiotherapy: review and recommendations of the supportive task group of the Italian Association of Radiation Oncology

PURPOSE

Dysphagia is a debilitating complication in head and neck cancer patients (HNCPs) that may cause a high mortality rate for aspiration pneumonia. The aims of this paper were to summarize the normal swallowing mechanism focusing on its anatomo-physiology, to review the relevant literature in order to identify the main causes of dysphagia in HNCPs and to develop recommendations to be adopted for radiation oncology patients. The chemotherapy and surgery considerations on this topic were reported in recommendations only when they were supposed to increase the adverse effects of radiotherapy on dysphagia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The review of literature was focused on studies reporting dysphagia as a pre-treatment evaluation and as cancer and cancer therapy related side-effects, respectively. Relevant literature through the primary literature search and by articles identified in references was considered. The members of the group discussed the results and elaborated recommendations according to the Oxford CRBM levels of evidence and recommendations. The recommendations were revised by external Radiation Oncology, Ear Nose and Throat (ENT), Medical Oncology and Speech Language Pathology (SLP) experts.

RESULTS

Recommendations on pre-treatment assessment and on patients submitted to radiotherapy were given. The effects of concurrent therapies (i.e. surgery or chemotherapy) were taken into account.

CONCLUSIONS

In HNCPs treatment, disease control has to be considered in tandem with functional impact on swallowing function. SLPs should be included in a multidisciplinary approach to head and neck cancer.

Changes in lognormal shape parameter guide design of patient-specific radiochemotherapy cocktails

Uptake of radiopharmaceuticals and chemotherapeutic drugs is nonuniform at the microscopic level. Their distributions are typically lognormal, suggesting that failure in chemotherapy and targeted radionuclide therapy may be attributable, in part, to the characteristics of this biologically ubiquitous distribution. The lognormal problem can be overcome by using cocktails of 2 or more agents, tailored such that at least 1 agent is strongly incorporated by every cell in the target population. Therefore, critical assessment of the tissue uptake of each cocktail component is warranted.

METHODS

Cellular incorporation of the α-particle-emitting radiochemical ((210)Po-citrate) and 2 anticancer drugs (daunomycin and doxorubicin) was determined using flow cytometry. The role of their lognormal distribution in clonogenic cell survival was evaluated.

RESULTS

The shape parameter of the lognormal distribution was found to be correlated to both intracellular agent concentration and cell survival. Although no difference emerged between the shape parameters for citrate within the first 2 logs of cell kill, those for daunomycin and doxorubicin changed significantly.

CONCLUSION

Changes in the value of the lognormal shape parameter and slope of the cellular drug uptake curves can be used to rapidly screen radiopharmaceuticals and other cytotoxic agents to formulate more effective cocktails for cancer therapy.

Cisplatin-based chemoradiation plus cetuximab in locally advanced head and neck cancer: a phase II clinical study

BACKGROUND

Intensification of chemoradiation for advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is unlikely due to toxicity. Cetuximab combined either with radiotherapy or with chemotherapy showed favourable toxic profile with positive results in both combinations. Therefore, cetuximab could intensify chemoradiation without worsening toxicity. We conducted a phase II study of chemoradiation and cetuximab.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had stage III-IV M0 HNSCC. Treatment consisted of three cycles of cisplatin (20 mg/m(2)/day × 5 days) and fluorouracil (200 mg/m(2)/day × 5 days) rapidly alternated to three split courses of radiotherapy up to 70 Gy and concurrent weekly cetuximab. The primary end point of the study was complete response (CR) rate. Secondary end points were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Fourty-five patients were enrolled: median age was 56 years, 38 had stage IV disease and 40 nodal involvement. CR occurred in 32 patients (71%). PFS and OS was 21+ months and 32.6+, respectively. Acute grade 3-4 toxic effects were in the expected range, but grade 3 radiodermatitis occurred in 33 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of cetuximab, cisplatin, fluorouracil and radiotherapy leads to a very high proportion of CR and it is feasible with toxic effects similar to those expected by radiochemotherapy. The only unexpected toxicity was skin toxicity: grade 3 radiodermatitis occurred in 73% of the patients.

Oncolysis using herpes simplex virus type 1 engineered to express cytosine deaminase and a fusogenic glycoprotein for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To determine if prodrug conversion of fluorocytosine to fluorouracil by an engineered herpes virus, OncoVEX(GALV/CD), enhances oncolytic therapy of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

DESIGN

We assessed the ability of OncoVEX(GALV/CD) and OncoVEX(GFP) to infect, replicate within, and lyse 4 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma lines in vitro. The effects of adding fluorocytosine with OncoVEX(GALV/CD) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma was permissive to green fluorescent protein expression in100% of cells by OncoVEX(GFP) at a multiplicity of infection of 1 after 48 hours and supported logarithmic viral replication. Virus caused more than 60% cell death 6 days after exposure to virus at a multiplicity of infection of 0.1 in 3 of the 4 cell lines. Fluorocytosine did not enhance cytotoxicity induced by OncoVEX(GALV/CD) at a multiplicity of infection of 0.1. However, for the least-sensitive SCC25 cell line, virus at a multiplicity of infection of 0.01 was cytotoxic to only 4% of cells after 6 days but was cytotoxic to 35% of cells with fluorocytosine.

CONCLUSIONS

OncoVEX(GALV/CD) efficiently infects, replicates within, and lyses head and neck squamous cell carcinoma at relatively low viral doses. Prodrug conversion by cytosine deaminase did not enhance therapy at viral doses that cause efficient cytotoxicity but may have beneficial effects in less-sensitive cell lines at low viral doses.

Modulation of the sensitivity in Chinese hamster cells to photons and fast neutrons by cisplatin, vinblastine, and bleomycin

Normal tissue toxicity resulting from chemoradiotherapy is of significant clinical concern. This study used normal Chinese hamster fibroblasts from lung (V79) and ovary (CHO-K1) to assess the modulation of cellular response to photons and neutrons by cisplatin, vinblastine, and bleomycin. Based on the colony formation assay, the drug concentration corresponding to 50% cell survival (EC50) of V79 cells was 1.50 ± 0.21 µmol/L for cisplatin, 0.97 ± 0.06 nmol/L for vinblastine, and 1.68 ± 0.11 µmol/L for bleomycin. The corresponding values for CHO-K1 cells were significantly lower for vinblastine (0.54 ± 0.02 nmol/L) and bleomycin (0.49 ± 0.13 µmol/L), but not for cisplatin (1.57 ± 0.20 µmol/L). No radiosensitivity enhancement was apparent when cells were exposed to p(66)/Be neutrons or photons (60Co γ-rays) in the presence of these drugs at EC50 concentrations. These data suggest that concurrent use of these drugs with radiation for the treatment of lung and ovarian diseases radiation does not exacerbate radiation-induced normal tissue toxicity, regardless of the quality of radiation. The relatively higher sensitivity of the ovarian cells to vinblastine and bleomycin might constitute a limitation in the use of these drugs for the treatment of lung lesions.

A phase II trial of low-dose gemcitabine and radiation alternated to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil: an active and manageable regimen for stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BACKGROUND

The addition of gemcitabine may be a reasonable way to enhance the activity of the alternating cisplatin/5-fluorouracil and radiation regimen considered the referring approach for patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head and neck at the National Institute for Cancer Research of Genoa.

METHODS

Three courses of cisplatin, 20mg/m(2)/day and 5-fluorouracil, 200mg/m(2)/day, days 1-5 (weeks 1, 4, and 7) alternated to 3 courses of radiotherapy at standard fractionation (weeks 2-3, 5-6, 8-9) up to 60Gy, and gemcitabine, 50mg/m(2) on monday of each week of radiation, were administered to 47 patients with stage IV (42 patients) or relapsed after surgery (5 patients), SCC of the oral cavity, pharynx or larynx.

RESULTS

Eighty-five percent of the patients completed the planned treatment. Main grade 3-4 acute toxicities were: mucositis (40%), neutropenia (26%) and thrombocytopenia (30%). Twenty-seven patients reached a complete response (57%). Seven partial responders were rendered disease-free by surgery (final complete response rate: 72%). At a median follow-up of 37 months, 3-year overall survival, progression-free survival and loco-regional control are 50%, 43% and 54%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of gemcitabine at low dose to our referring alternating regimen is feasible and very active. It may improve the long-term outcomes despite an acceptable increase of acute mucoseal toxicity.

Use of an orthovoltage X-ray treatment unit as a radiation research system in a small-animal cancer model

Background

We explore the use of a clinical orthovoltage X-ray treatment unit as a small-animal radiation therapy system in a tumoral model of cervical cancer.

Methods

Nude mice were subcutaneously inoculated with 5 × 10⁶ HeLa cells in both lower limbs. When tumor volume approximated 200 mm³ treatment was initiated. Animals received four 2 mg/kg intraperitoneal cycles (1/week) of cisplatin and/or 6.25 mg/kg of gemcitabine, concomitant with radiotherapy. Tumors were exposed to 2.5 Gy/day nominal surface doses (20 days) of 150 kV X-rays. Lead collimators with circular apertures (0.5 to 1.5 cm diameter) were manufactured and mounted on the applicator cone to restrict the X-ray beam onto tumors. X-ray penetration and conformality were evaluated by measuring dose at the surface and behind the tumor lobe by using HS GafChromic film. Relative changes in tumor volume (RTV) and a clonogenic assay were used to evaluate the therapeutic response of the tumor, and relative weight loss was used to assess toxicity of the treatments.

Results

No measurable dose was delivered outside of the collimator apertures. The analysis suggests that dose inhomogeneities in the tumor reach up to ± 11.5% around the mean tumor dose value, which was estimated as 2.2 Gy/day. Evaluation of the RTV showed a significant reduction of the tumor volume as consequence of the chemoradiotherapy treatment; results also show that toxicity was well tolerated by the animals.

Conclusion

Results and procedures described in the present work have shown the usefulness and convenience of the orthovoltage X-ray system for animal model radiotherapy protocols.

Modulation of radiosensitivity in Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts by cisplatin

The effects of cisplatin exposure time, concentration, and irradiation sequence on the sensitivity of Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts (V79) to gamma-ray exposure were examined. Based on clonogenic cell survival, the cisplatin concentrations corresponding to 50% cell survival (EC(50)) for exposure times of 1 h to 7 days followed a 2-phase exponential decay and ranged from 28.26 +/- 3.32 to 1.53 +/- 0.24 micromol/L, respectively. When cells were treated at EC(50) for exposures of less than 4 h and irradiated immediately, cisplatin inhibited the effect of radiation. Exposures of 4-6 h did not affect radiosensitivity. For exposures of 8-12 h, radiosensitization was observed, which disappeared at 14 h and reappeared for much longer cisplatin treatments. At the lowest achievable EC(50) (1.53 micromol/L), radiosensitization was observed if irradiation was delayed for 1-8 h. This enhancement in radiosensitivity disappeared for irradiation delays of 10-12 h, but reappeared when irradiation was delayed for 14-18 h. These data demonstrate that the mode of interaction between cisplatin and gamma-irradiation depends on the concentration and exposure time of cisplatin, as well as on the timing of irradiation after cisplatin administration. Consideration of changes in cell cycle kinetics may contribute to the improvement of treatment outcomes in adjuvant chemoradiotherapy involving cisplatin.