Phase I study of toremifene in patients with advanced cancer

A phase II trial of interferon-alpha and toremifene in advanced renal cell cancer patients

Treatment options for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma are limited. Interferon-alpha has an overall response rate of 10-15% in phase II and III clinical trials and is considered a standard option for patients. Though the anti-estrogen toremifene has shown only modest single agent activity in renal cell carcinoma, evidence for synergy of anti-estrogens with interferon-alpha exists in renal cell and other cancers. Therefore, a phase II trial was undertaken to test the combination of interferon-alpha and toremifene in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Thirteen patients with measurable metastatic or unresectable local disease were treated with interferon-alpha at a dose of 5 million units/m2 three times a week and daily oral toremifene at 300 mg daily in divided doses. Patients were treated for 12 weeks and then restaged. Clinical response was the primary endpoint of the trial. Four patients (31%) had evidence of stable disease at 12 weeks, while the remaining nine patients (69%) progressed on treatment. Toxicity was moderate, with grade 2 or 3 fatigue, nausea and anorexia each noted in 31% of patients. We conclude that the combination of interferon-alpha plus toremifene demonstrates no significant activity in advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Effects of the new generation selective estrogen receptor modulator EM-652 and oral administration of estradiol valerate on circulating, brain, and adrenal beta-endorphin and allopregnanolone levels in intact fertile and ovariectomized rats

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of oral estradiol valerate (EV); EM-652, a new-generation selective estrogen receptor modulator; and both agents on central and peripheral beta-endorphin (beta-EP) and allopregnanolone levels in fertile and ovariectomized rats.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

Animal laboratory in an academic research environment.

ANIMALS

Thirteen groups of eight Wistar female rats received oral EV (0.01 or 0.05 mg/kg of body weight daily), EM-652 (0.1, 1, or 5 mg/kg daily), or EV (0.05 mg/kg daily) and EM-652 (0.1, 1, or 5 mg/kg/daily) for 14 days.

INTERVENTION(S)

beta-Endorphin levels content in the hypothalamus, hippocampus, anterior and neurointermediate pituitary, and plasma were measured. Allopregnanolone levels in the hypothalamus, hippocampus, anterior pituitary, adrenal glands, and serum were measured.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

beta-Endorphin and allopregnanolone levels.

RESULT(S)

In ovariectomized rats, administration of EV or EM-652 reverses changes in beta-EP and allopregnanolone levels induced by ovariectomy. Administration of EM-652 plus EV prevents the increase in beta-EP and allopregnanolone levels induced by EV in the hippocampus, hypothalamus, and pituitary but not in the adrenal glands and serum.

CONCLUSIONS

In ovariectomized rats, EM-652 has an estrogen-like action that becomes antiestrogenic in the presence of EV administration. In fertile animals, EM-652 exerts estrogen-like or slight antiestrogenic effects.

Raloxifene analog LY 117018 effects on central and peripheral beta-endorphin

Raloxifene is a selective estrogen receptor modulator with a benzothiophene structure, that exerts an estrogen-like action on some target tissues and an anti-estrogenic action on the uterus and breasts. A limited number of data are available on the effect of raloxifene on neuroendocrine function. Since beta-endorphin (beta-EP) is considered a marker of neuroendocrine function, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of a 14 day treatment with a raloxifene analog, LY 117018, on beta-EP content in the hypothalamus, hippocampus, anterior and neuro-intermediate pituitary lobe, and in the plasma of fertile and ovariectomized (ovx) rats. The effect of LY 117018 in ovx rats was compared to that of 17 beta-estradiol. beta-EP contents were measured by a specific radioimmunoassay. While ovariectomy determined a significant decrease in beta-EP levels in the anterior and neurointermediate pituitary lobe and plasma (p < 0.01), no changes of beta-EP content in the hypothalamus and hippocampus were found. The administration of 17 beta-estradiol or LY 117018 in ovx rats significantly increased beta-EP concentration in the anterior and neurointermediate pituitary lobe, in the hypothalamus and plasma (p < 0.01), though they did not significantly modify hippocampal beta-EP content. When LY 117018 was administered together with 17 beta-estradiol in ovx animals, a clear anti-estrogenic effect in all organs and in plasma was observed, resulting in significantly lower beta-EP content with respect to the group treated with 17 beta-estradiol alone (p < 0.01). The chronic administration of LY 117018 in fertile rats significantly decreased beta-EP content in the anterior pituitary, hippocampus and plasma (p < 0.01), while it increased beta-EP hypothalamic content and did not change beta-EP content in the neurointermediate lobe. In conclusion, raloxifene analog LY 117018 has an estrogen-like action on neuroendocrine opiatergic pathways when administered alone in ovx rats, while it exerts an anti-estrogen effect in fertile or in ovx rats treated with 17 beta-estradiol.

The evolving role of specific estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs)

Estrogens are the most effective therapy for women with postmenopausal problems. However, relatively few women use estrogen and then often for a limited time because of the fear of its carcinogenic effects on the uterus and breast; in addition, estrogen is not advised for women who have had breast cancer. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are agents with antagonist action on the uterus and breast and agonist action on the bones, cardiovascular system, and brain. Unlike estrogens, however, existing SERMs do not help alleviate the vasomotor and urogenital problems associated with menopause. A comprehensive review of the literature published from January 1995 to June 1999 was conducted. Reports were identified using Medline and Cancer Lit. The effect of menopausal problems on the health of women and the socioeconomic effects of menopause are discussed. All currently available and investigational SERMs are reviewed and discussed, including their mechanism of action, metabolism, dose scheduling, antitumor activity, and potential role in maintaining the health of menopausal women and in preventing breast cancer.

Fatigue in cancer patients

The interest in fatigue seems to be growing. A Medline search combining the key words fatigue and cancer yielded 248 entries compared with 72 entries 10 years previously. The studies published are mainly descriptive, augmenting the knowledge about the extent of fatigue associated with cancer, as well as during and after the various treatments used to fight it. New measurement instruments integrating the multidimensional concept of fatigue are being proposed. In 1998, the first study describing fatigue in children and adolescents with cancer was published. The knowledge of the causes of fatigue related to cancer remains extremely limited. In only a few studies are interventions and treatment possibilities for fatigue discussed. Hopefully, the refined knowledge about the characteristics of fatigue and its epidemiology will provide new etiologic understanding, resulting in effective treatment. This article provides a survey on the literature published in 1998.

Menopause and the central nervous system: intervention options

The central nervous system is an important target for sex steroid hormones. During the climateric period the rapid decline of gonadal steroids causes neuroendocrine changes in different areas of the brain. The failure of gonadal hormone production brings specific symptoms due to the central nervous system derangement. At the hypotalamic level estrogen withdrawal gives rise to vasomotor symptoms, eating behavior disorders and altered blood pressure control. Psychological disturbances such as depression, anxiety, irritability and mood fluctuation are related to estrogen-induced changes in the lymbic system. The hypothesis of specific neuroanatomical and neurophysiological effects of estrogen on the brain may also explain the correlation between estrogen deficiency and cognitive disturbances such as Alzheimer's type dementia (AD). The increasing interest in the influence of sex steroids on brain function has focused attention on hormonal replacement therapy. Clinical and epidemiological studies have demonstrated that estrogen therapy exerts a positive effect on vasomotor instability and improves psychological disturbances. The positive effects of estrogen on mood are probably related to its stimulatory action on adrenergic and serotoninergic tone. Estrogen may influence the cognitive function through different biological actions. Estrogen administration increases total cerebral and cerebellar blood flow, cerebral glucose administration and improves cholinergic tone, a key neurotransmitter in learning and memory. The evidence suggests that hormone replacement therapy may reduce the relative risk of developing AD. Progestagens and androgen may also have a role in the control of mood disorders. At present, few data are available regarding the influence that selective estrogen receptor modulators, a new class of compounds, can exert on the brain.

Toremifene. A review of its pharmacological properties and clinical efficacy in the management of advanced breast cancer

The triphenylethylene antiestrogen toremifene is a chlorinated derivative of the antiestrogen tamoxifen, an agent which has been widely and successfully used in the treatment of breast cancer. Clinical trials investigating the efficacy of toremifene as first-line endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer (estrogen receptor status positive or unknown) have shown this drug to have similar antitumour activity to that of tamoxifen. In multicentre comparative trials, objective responses (complete and partial) occurred in 20 to 29% of patients treated with toremifene (60 to 240 mg/day) and in 19 to 37.5% of tamoxifen (20 or 40 mg/day) recipients. The duration of response, time to disease progression and median overall survival time were generally similar in both treatment groups. Toremifene is well tolerated. Most drug-related adverse effects are mild or moderate in severity and rarely necessitate discontinuation of therapy. The tolerability profile of toremifene is similar to that reported for tamoxifen, the most common adverse effects being hot flushes, sweating, nausea and/or vomiting, dizziness, oedema, and vaginal discharge and/or bleeding. Thus, toremifene provides an equally effective and well tolerated alternative to tamoxifen for the first-line endocrine therapy of postmenopausal advanced breast cancer. Preclinical studies showing toremifene to have a lower carcinogenic potential than tamoxifen indicate that toremifene may be a preferable agent for long term treatment regimens; however, these findings require confirmation in the clinical setting.

Comparison of toremifene and tamoxifen in post-menopausal patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized double-blind, the 'nordic' phase III study

The study was planned to compare, in a prospective double-blind randomized trial, the efficacy and safety of toremifene (TOR) and tamoxifen (TAM) in post-menopausal patients with advanced breast cancer who have not had prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. Four hundred and fifteen post-menopausal patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive or ER-unknown advanced breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive daily either 60 mg TOR or 40 mg TAM. The patients were stratified to measurable and non-measurable but evaluable groups. They were assessed for response to therapy, time to progression (TTP), time to treatment failure (TTF), response duration, overall survival and drug toxicity. Two hundred and fourteen patients were randomized into TOR and 201 into TAM treatment. The response rate (complete + partial) was 31.3% for TOR and 37.3% for TAM (P = 0.215). The 95% confidence interval (CI) for the 6% difference was -15.1% to 3.1%. The median TTP was 7.3 months for TOR and 10.2 months for TAM (P = 0.047). The 95% CI for the hazard ratio of 0.80 was 0.64-1.00. A percentage of the TOR patients (9.8%) and the TAM patients (18.9%) discontinued the treatment prematurely (P = 0.011) for various reasons. Consequently, the median TTF of 6.3 vs 8.5 months did not differ significantly (P = 0.271). The hazard ratio was 0.89 and the subsequent 95% CI 0.73-1.09. The median overall survival was 33.0 months for TOR and 38.7 months for TAM (P = 0.645). The hazard ratio was 0.94 with 95% CI of 0.73-1.22. The transient difference in TTP may be related to an imbalance in ER content of the tumours. When only patients with ER-positive tumours were considered (n = 238), no difference between two treatments was seen (P = 0.578). TAM was associated with an overall slightly higher frequency of adverse drug reactions than TOR (44.3 vs 39.3%) and a higher discontinuation rate due to these events (3.5% vs 0.9%). Treatment-emerged moderate dizziness (P = 0.026) and cataracts (P = 0.026) were more frequent among TAM than among TOR patients. In conclusion, TOR (60 mg day(-1)) and TAM (40 mg day(-1)) are equally effective and safe in the treatment of advanced post-menopausal ER-positive or ER-unknown breast cancer.

Mechanisms of action of endocrine treatment in breast cancer

Endocrine treatment plays an important role in the therapy of breast cancer. While the basic mechanisms are understood, additional mechanisms may be of importance to their action and they may also contribute to the mechanism(s) of acquired resistance. Currently, several novel drugs are entering into clinical trials. Observations of the absence or presence of cross resistance to novel 'pure' steroidal antiestrogens and the non-steroidal tamoxifen may add important information to our understanding of the mechanisms of action of both classes of drugs. Similarly, exploration of different aromatase inhibitors in sequence or concert, as well as the combining of different endocrine treatment options may be warranted. Additionally, alterations in different biochemical parameters such as growth factors should not only be carefully explored in relation to treatment options but should also be followed during the course of treatment to asess alterations over time and in relation to the development of drug resistance.

High dose toremifene for estrogen and progesterone receptor negative metastatic breast cancer: a phase II trial of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)

In pre-clinical and limited clinical studies, high doses ( > or = 200 mg/day) of the triphenylethylene derivative toremifene showed activity in estrogen receptor (ER) negative and ER-unknown metastatic breast cancer after progression on tamoxifen, and a mechanism of action independent of hormone receptor binding was speculated. The CALGB conducted a Phase II trial (CALGB 8945) to test the efficacy of high dose toremifene in a population of patients who had hormone receptor-negative, metastatic breast cancer with limited prior chemotherapy exposure, good performance status, and measurable disease. Twenty eligible patients received toremifene at a dose of 400 mg/day orally for 8 weeks. Toxicity was minimal. Nausea was reported by 20% of the patients, lightheadedness by 20%, weight loss by 20%, and hot flashes by 15%. There was no grade 3-4 toxicity. No objective responses were observed, and 5 of 6 patients with stable disease at 8 weeks developed progressive disease at 11 to 33 weeks. High dose toremifene (400 mg/day) is well-tolerated but imparts no detectable activity in hormone receptor-negative, metastatic breast cancer.

High dose toremifene in advanced breast cancer resistant to or relapsed during tamoxifen treatment

Fifty patients with advanced breast cancer refractory to prior tamoxifen therapy were assigned to investigational treatment with high-dose toremifene administered 120 mg orally twice a day. Treatment was generally well tolerated. The majority (80%) of the patients had no side effects, and among the remaining 10 patients reported side effects were mostly mild and/or transient. Two objective tumor responses were observed: one complete response (CR), duration 6.2 months, and one partial response (PR), duration 8 months. The response rate was thus 4% (95% CI: 0.5 to 14%). In addition 3 patients experienced a mixed response, some metastatic sites responding, while at other sites disease progressed; 22 patients had disease stabilization for > 2 months. A subset analysis disclosed that a small subgroup of patients, including 7 patients in this study, who had achieved CR at some of the sites during preceding tamoxifen therapy, experienced a long progression-free time during high dose toremifene treatment. The median time to progression in this subgroup of patients was 9.4 months (95% CI: 3.8 to 9.4) as opposed to 2.1 months (95% CI: 2.0 to 2.8) for all the remaining 43 patients, which is a significant decrease in disease progression (p < 0.03). Such results reveal that although this kind of second-line hormonal treatment with high dose toremifene cannot be recommended for all tamoxifen failures, there might be a subset of patients, i.e. those who achieve CR in some lesion during tamoxifen therapy, who benefit from this type of treatment.

Toremifene and tamoxifen in advanced breast cancer--a double-blind cross-over trial

Toremifene (TOR) is a triphenylethylene derivative related to tamoxifen (TAM). TOR has antitumor activity, not dependent on estrogen receptors, and responses with TOR have been observed in patients with progressive disease during TAM-treatment. To elucidate possible cross-resistance between these two antiestrogens, we compared their anti-tumor activity in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. 66 postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor positive or unknown breast cancer and a median age of 63 years (range 38-82) were included. Patients were randomized to TAM 40 mg/day or TOR 240 mg/day. Treatment continued until progressive disease, when cross-over to the alternative treatment was done. The response rate with first line TOR was 29% (95% confidence limits 10-41%) and with TAM 42% (95% confidence limits 25-61%). Response rates and response durations, survival and toxicity were not significantly different between the two treatments. 44 patients progressing on first line TAM or TOR were evaluable for second line TOR or TAM treatment. As no responses were observed, the possibility of over-looking a response rate of 20% or more is less than 1%. In conclusion, this study strongly indicates that TOR and TAM are clinically cross-resistant in patients with advanced breast cancer.