Treatment patterns of adjuvant interferon-α2b for high-risk melanoma: a retrospective study of the Grupo Español Multidisciplinar de Melanoma - Prima study

Adjuvant interferon-α2b (IFN-α2b) has been studied extensively in clinical trials, but there have been few studies of real-world use. The aim of this study is to describe the IFN-α2b real-world patterns in patients with high-risk melanoma in Spain. This was a retrospective and multicentre chart review study of an unselected cohort of patients with melanoma at high risk for relapse (stage IIB/IIC/III) treated with IFN-α2b. Patterns were assessed in terms of dose and compliance to planned treatment. A survival analysis was carried out for the full population and according to Kirkwood scheme compliance and the presence of ulceration. Of 327 patients treated with IFN-α2b, 318 received a high-dose regimen following the standard Kirkwood scheme; thus, patterns are described for this regimen. A total of 121 (38%) and 88 (28%) patients had at least one dose reduction during the induction and maintenance phases, respectively. Dose delay was required in fewer than 10% of patients. A total of 78, 40 and 38% of the patients completed the induction phase, maintenance phase and completed treatment, respectively. The median progression-free and overall survival for the full population were 3.2 and 10.5 years, respectively. There were no differences in progression-free survival and overall survival according to Kirkwood scheme compliance and the presence of ulceration. The most frequent adverse events were neutropenia (31%) and fatigue (30%). High-dose IFN-α2b is the most frequently used regimen in Spain as an adjuvant systemic treatment for high-risk melanoma. Despite poor compliance, in this retrospective study, IFN-α2b treatment provided a benefit consistent with that described previously.

Clinical practice guidelines on antiemetics in oncology

The tolerability of chemotherapy has been significantly improved by the advent of effective drugs and protocols for the amelioration of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Variables such as the timing of nausea and vomiting (acute, delayed or anticipatory) and the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy must be taken into account in developing guidelines for antiemetic prophylaxis and treatment. Although there are a number of 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonists available, the clinical differences between them are small. The use of drugs with a different mechanism of action, such as the recently introduced neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant, may be a useful adjunct to 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists or steroid prophylaxis. The addition of aprepitant to standard antiemetic regimens increases the proportion of complete responses to antiemetic therapy. For the use of highly emetogenic chemotherapy in oncology a combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone and aprepitant is recommended in the acute phase, and dexamethasone plus aprepitant during the subsequent days (many patients do not have their symptoms controlled by 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and steroid alone). In either case, lorazepam can be added as required. For moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, a regimen of 5-hydroxytryptamine, dexamethasone and aprepitant is recommended in the acute phase, followed by aprepitant alone in the delayed phase. Alternatively, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone can be used in the acute phase, followed by dexamethasone for prophylaxis in the delayed phase. For chemotherapy with a low emetogenicity, either dexamethasone, metoclopramide, prochlorperazine or triethyperazine alone is recommended. No prophylaxis is generally required during the delayed phase and indeed may not be necessary during the acute phase either.

Phase II and tumor pharmacodynamic study of gefitinib in patients with advanced breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the antitumor activity and pharmacodynamic/biologic effect of gefitinib 500 mg/day monotherapy in patients with previously treated, advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

In this phase II multicenter trial, the primary objective was assessment of the tumor response rate with gefitinib; secondary objectives included analysis of the pharmacodynamic and biologic profiles in healthy and tumor tissue.

RESULTS

while phosphorylation of mitogen-activated protein kinase was inhibited in both tissues, gefitinib treatment induced p27 and a decrease in Ki67 in skin but not in tumors. Furthermore, gefitinib did not inhibit the activated form of Akt in the tumors.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a good correlation between the degree of inhibition of EGFR in skin and in breast tumors. The lack of significant clinical activity of gefitinib in our study population is not due to lack of receptor inhibition in these tumors but rather to lack of EGFR dependence in the tested population.