A phase II study of cisplatin, etoposide and gemcitabine in an unfavourable group of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site

Case Report: Combined pembrolizumab, 5-fluorouracil, and cisplatin therapy were remarkably effective in p16-positive squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary

Background

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a malignant tumor without a known primary lesion with a frequency of 3-5%. It can be divided into favorable and unfavorable prognosis subsets. While recommended treatments are available for the former group, there is no established treatment for the latter. Here, we report the effective treatment of a 32-year-old woman with p16-positive squamous cell CUP with pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin therapy.

Case presentation

A 32-year-old woman presented with metastatic lesions in the liver, lung, bone, cervical region, abdominal region, and pelvic lymph nodes. She was diagnosed with p16-positive squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary origin. The patient received pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin therapy, which markedly reduced the metastasis and improved her Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status after two courses.

Conclusion

This case report highlights the potential of pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin therapy for treating CUP with an unfavorable prognosis. p16 positivity is worth examining for squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary origin, and if present, this therapy should be considered a promising treatment option.

Evaluation of survival benefits by platinums and taxanes for an unfavourable subset of carcinoma of unknown primary: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Although chemotherapeutic regimens containing a taxane or platinum agent have been widely recommended for unfavourable carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP), no evidence exists for the superiority of any administered regimens. To date, the efficacy has been mostly assessed in the limited setting of phase II trials, and few attempts have been made to synthesise all available data for survival outcomes.

Methods:

Electronic databases were searched from 1980 to 2011. Survival results were combined for each pre-specified category of regimens using a random-effects model, and meta-regression models were used to adjust for heterogeneity in some known prognostic factors.

Results:

A total of 32 studies were included for meta-analysis. Tendency towards better survival outcome by platinums or taxanes was indicated. After adjustment for important prognostic factors, however, the difference between the platinum-based and non-platinum regimens became no longer significant. Survival benefits by the taxane-based regimens remained significant, with a prolonged median survival time of 1.52 months (P=0.03) and a higher 1-year survival rate of 6.25% (P=0.05), but the benefit did not sustain for 2 years.

Conclusion:

Although no effective therapies have been established, this meta-analysis helps to fill an important gap of evidence. However, caution should still be taken because of the potential unmeasured confounding.

Paclitaxel, cisplatin and gemcitabine in treatment of carcinomas of unknown primary site, a phase II study

BACKGROUND

The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a combination of paclitaxel, cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with CUP, ECOG performance status 0-1 and age between 18 and 65 years old were treated with paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) day 1 and 8 in a three-week schedule.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients were enrolled between 1998 and 2008. Ninety-one patients had target lesions according to the RECIST guidelines. The overall response rate was 42.9% (39 patients), including five complete responses (5.5%) and 34 partial responses (37.4%). The median survival time was 10.7 months, and the survival rates at one and two years were 42% and 14%, respectively. The most frequent grade 3 or more adverse events were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. There were 3 treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination of paclitaxel, cisplatin and gemcitabine is an active regimen in patients with CUP with response and survival rates at least similar to other platinum- and taxane-containing regimens. The treatment was well tolerated by most patients although neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were relatively common. The present regimen represents an attractive regimen in younger CUP patients with a good performance status.

Gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site

The optimal therapy for carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUPS) is still under investigation. In this retrospective trial, we reported the response rates and overall and progression free survival of 23 CUPS patients that were treated with gemcitabine and cisplatin. The mean age of the patients was 54.95 (32-77). Sixteen (69.6%) of them were males and 7(30.4%) females. Totally 109 cycles with a mean of 6 were administered. Thirteen of 23 patients (56.5%) presented with only one metastatic site, and the liver is the most frequent metastatic site (39.1%). Histologic types were adenocarcinoma in 14 patients (60.8%), squamous carcinoma in 1 patient (4.8%), epithelioid cancer in 3 patients (13%) and undifferentiated cancer in 5 patients (21.7%). Three patient achieved a CR (13%), 4 patients achieved a PR (17.4%) and 8 patients had SD (34.8%) with an overall 30.4% response rate. However, 8 patients had progressive disease with a percentage of 34.8%. The median follow-up time was 10 months (3-42 months). The mean and median survival was 12.5 (3-42) months and 10 months (range, 3-42 months) and progression free survival was 5.5 months (range, 0-23 months). Gemcitabine plus cisplatin may be an effective treatment of CUPS. Therefore additional trials are needed especially with new chemotherapeutics.

Phase II trials in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary: a pooled data analysis

BACKGROUND

The management of carcinoma of unknown primary site remains debatable. The literature data consists of about 29 phase-II studies investigating 38 regimens, providing a broad range of response rates (RR).

METHODS

We performed a pooled published data analysis to identify the factors influencing RR in these 29 studies.

RESULTS

In front-line treatment, the overall RR was 31% (430/1,380). At least nine factors significantly influenced the reported RR, excluding drugs under investigation, such as the impact factor of the journal, single-centre study, some eligibility criteria, central radiological review, sample size calculation based on statistical hypothesis and stratification. Two drugs seem to improve RR: cisplatin and doxorubicin. Two drugs seem to be associated with a worse RR: irinotecan and carboplatin.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled data analysis illustrates that in a phase II trial setting, it is impossible to attribute the variation in RR solely to the modification of drugs under investigation.

Irinotecan plus carboplatin for patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site

Carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP) is rarely encountered in clinical practice and optimal chemotherapy has not yet been established. This phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of combined irinotecan+carboplatin therapy in chemotherapy-naive patients with CUP. Irinotecan was administered at 60 mg m(-2) as a 90-min intravenous infusion on days 1, 8 and 15. Carboplatin was administered at an area-under-the curve of 5 mg ml(-1) min as a 60-min intravenous infusion on day 1. This cycle was repeated every 28 days for up to six cycles. Forty-five patients were enrolled in the study. An intent-to-treat analysis revealed an objective response rate to the treatment of 41.9% (95% confidence interval, 27.0-57.9%). The median time to progression was 4.8 months and the median survival was 12.2 months. The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 44 and 27%, respectively. The most frequent grade 3 or more severe adverse events were leukopaenia (21%), neutropaenia (33%), anaemia (25%) and thrombocytopaenia (20%). Thus, the combination of irinotecan plus carboplatin was found to be active in patients with CUP. Therefore, the regimen may be one of the potentially available chemotherapeutic options for community standard of care in patients with a good performance status.

Forty years experience of treating cancer of unknown primary

Cancer of unknown primary site (CUP) is not a rare tumour. It accounts as the seventh to eighth most frequently diagnosed cancer in a general medical oncology service. Since CUP is not a homogeneous disease and it consists of different favourable and unfavourable sub-sets, treatment of each clinicopathological entity requires a unique approach. The spectrum of therapeutic management includes both locoregional and systemic therapy and should intend to offer optimal benefit to favourable CUP patients and palliative care to unfavourable cases. This review article provides both a historical outline of CUP treatment as well as a helpful therapeutic guide to every oncologist who treats CUP patients.

A Clinical Review of the Investigation and Management of Carcinoma of Unknown Primary in a Single Cancer Network

AIMS

Carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) is a common encounter in oncological practice and represents 2.0-6.0% of all invasive malignancies. Evidence to support particular therapeutic strategies in this patient population is scarce, and empirical therapies are frequently derived from research on patients where the primary tumour site is known.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed the management of all patients recorded to have a diagnosis of CUP in a single cancer centre over a period of 12 months. Health records were reviewed documenting the CUP subtype, the investigations carried out both in the referring cancer unit and subsequently at the cancer centre and the recommended treatment (type and regimen), together with survival. The outcomes were examined in respect to a number of prognostic factors. Statistical tests were considered significant at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-six patients were recorded to have a diagnosis of CUP, representing 3.7% of all referrals to the cancer centre. The median age of patients was 68 years (range 32-94 years), and 52.0% were women. The three most common CUP subgroups were CUP-liver/multiple sites (25.0%), CUP-bone (21.0%) and CUP-brain (16.0%). The remaining subgroups occurred at frequencies of less than 10% each. Histological confirmation was only obtained in 55.0% of cases. Even within a single subtype, 41 patients with CUP-liver/multiple sites underwent a total of 19 different investigations before any treatment being given. Forty-seven (28.0%) patients received radiotherapy, 30 (18.0%) received chemotherapy and 58 (35.0%) received supportive care alone. Nine different 5-fluorouracil-containing regimens were used in 11 patients treated with chemotherapy for CUP-liver. The overall median survival for all patients was 4.0 months. Survival was better in patients with a good performance status (0-1) and absent liver metastases (median survival 15.0 months; 95% confidence interval 8.0-22.1) and those who received chemotherapy (median survival 13.0 months; 95% confidence interval 7.4-18.6). Multivariate analysis confirmed female gender (P = 0.006), a good performance status (0/1) (P < 0.0001) and absent liver metastases (P = 0.002) as favourable prognostic indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

The appropriate management of patients with CUP is unclear and this study revealed a high degree of variation in clinical practice. This area is in urgent need of clinical research to ensure that the treatment of CUP is evidence based. Until such time, clinical recommendations are suggested for the investigation and treatment of such patients. Therapeutic progress will be facilitated by designating a clinical lead for CUP in each clinical network.

[Palliative chemotherapy and CUP-syndrome: medical intentions versus patients' attitudes in decision making]

The following case report is about a 55 year old male patient with CUP-syndrome. After developing a malignant bowel obstruction he received five cycles of a palliative chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and irinotecan. The focus is on medical intentions and goals concerning palliative chemotherapy and on discussing patients' attitudes towards chemotherapy. Communication is identified as fundamental skill in shared decision making. On the one hand it improves Patients' satisfaction and palliative care and on the other hand it reduces psychological and existential suffering. In tumors of unknown primary site regimens with different combinations of Platin, Taxol, Etoposide, Irinotecan and Gemcitabine showed responses up to 46% and a survival benefit with an overall median survival up to 12 months and even long term survival.

Les carcinomes de primitif inconnu

PURPOSE

Carcinoma of unknown primary site is a common clinical syndrome, accounting for 2% of cancer patients. Diagnosis is a recurrent challenge for internists. Treatment is difficult and prognosis is still poor. This review presents one synthesis of diagnosis strategies and therapeutic trials. It envisages the interest of new molecular biology methods as well as therapeutic perspectives.

CURRENT KNOWLEDGE AND KEY POINTS

Pathologic examination completed with immunohistochemical tests, and, depending on cases, with electron microscopy, cytogenetics, and molecular biology is a key-point for diagnosis. Diagnosis work-up, based on histological type and on individualization of some clinical presentation, proceeds in three steps. Positron emission tomography is recommended when a curative treatment is planed, particularly in cases of isolated metastasis. Functional status analysed using the performance status and simple biologic parameters (serum lactate dehydrogenase, serum alkaline phosphatase) permit us to assess prognosis. Chemotherapy is offered for patients with a good general health status.

FUTURE PROSPECTS AND PROJECTS

Further evaluation of positron emission tomography, as well as cost-benefit analyses, is warranted. Further randomised trials are necessary to determine the optimal chemotherapy regimen in good-risk patients and the interest of chemotherapy in patients with poor-risk disease. Gene expression profiling and proteomic evaluation, as well as pharmacogenomic offer new investigation fields.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine with either vinorelbine or paclitaxel in the treatment of carcinomas of unknown primary site

BACKGROUND

: To date, the standard treatment for patients who have carcinoma of unknown primary site has not been established.

METHODS

: In this randomized Phase II study, 66 previously untreated patients (33 patients per arm) with carcinomas of unknown primary site received cisplatin (35 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) with either paclitaxel (70 mg/m2) or vinorelbine (25 mg/m2), and all drugs were administered intravenously on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Twenty-nine patients (44%) presented with > or =2 involved sites. The pathologic diagnosis was mainly adenocarcinoma (48 patients; 72.7%) and squamous carcinoma (7 patients; 10.6%).

RESULTS

: In the first arm, 16 patients (48.5%) experienced an objective response, and 9 patients (27.2%) had disease stabilization. In the vinorelbine-containing arm, 14 patients (42.3%) experienced an objective response, and 8 patients (24.2%) had disease stabilization. The median response duration and the median time to progression were similar in both treatment arms; the median overall survival was 9.6 months (95% confidence interval, 7.11-12.09 months) for patients who received the cisplatin/gemcitabine/paclitaxel regimen and 13.6 months (95% confidence interval, 6.61-20.59 months) for patients who received the vinorelbine combination. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were more frequent in the paclitaxel-containing arm.

CONCLUSIONS

: Both combinations satisfied the 2-step design, demonstrating antitumor activity without relevant differences in response rates or response duration; however, the vinorelbine-containing regimen yielded superior results both in terms of overall survival (13.6 months vs 9.6 months) and in terms of treatment tolerability. Therefore, according to a pick the winner attitude, the combination of cisplatin/gemcitabine/vinorelbine may be considered in the design of future randomized, Phase III trials for patients with carcinomas of unknown primary site.