Anti-cancer drugs
-
The efficacy of combination therapy with irinotecan and capecitabine has been demonstrated for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination in MCRC as second-line treatment after failure of 24-h infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU24h) and folinic acid (FA). Patients pre-treated with 5-FU24h/FA were recruited at two institutions to receive 6 x weekly irinotecan 70 mg/m2 and capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 b.i.d. days 1-14 and 22-35). ⋯ Overall survival was 15.7 months calculated from the start of study treatment. Second-line therapy with irinotecan and capecitabine yielded a tumor control in 61% of patients with MCRC. Efficacy and toxicity data are comparable to 5-FU/irinotecan combinations, although the likelihood of severe diarrhea appears to be higher with capecitabine/irinotecan.
-
Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Acute effects of tamoxifen and third-generation aromatase inhibitors on menopausal symptoms of breast cancer patients.
Endocrine treatments of breast cancer patients antagonize estrogen and may lead to consequences of estrogen deprivation including menopausal symptoms. We analyzed the changes in frequency and severity of menopausal symptoms in patients receiving tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors and identified factors influencing these symptoms. One hundred and eighty-one consecutive postmenopausal breast cancer patients scheduled to start endocrine treatment were included in this prospective study. ⋯ Younger age was associated with more hot flashes and vaginal dryness at baseline, and after 1 and 3 months of therapy (all p<0.02). We conclude that there are significant differences between the early effects of tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors on menopausal symptoms of breast cancer patients. Our results underscore the need for safe and effective non-hormonal interventions to alleviate vasomotor and musculoskeletal symptoms which were the most prevalent and severe symptoms.
-
Based on observations of a discrepancy between 'hypersensitivity' reactions to docetaxel (DT) and the clinical features of allergic reactions, we explored the hypothesis that DT-induced acute hypersensitivity reactions (AHRs) have a non-allergic origin. Forty cancer patients receiving DT and 16 patients receiving other potentially allergenic chemotherapeutic agents were included in the study. All DT patients received standard pre- and post-medication. ⋯ We conclude that 'hypersensitivity' reactions to DT seem not to be histamine or tryptase mediated; thus, their allergenic nature should be questioned. The underlying mechanism may be related to other biological processes such as the release of vasoactive molecules or non-histamine/tryptase-mediated allergy. If the former is demonstrated by further study, the safety of DT administration will be confirmed, and the pre- and post-medication practice might be revisited.
-
Busulfan systemic exposure correlates with regimen-related toxicity, engraftment and relapse in select patients receiving high-dose oral busulfan (HD-BU) (1 mg/kg dose or 40 mg/m dose every 6 h for 16 doses) as part of a preparative regimen for bone marrow transplantation. Therapeutic drug monitoring is frequently conducted after the first HD-BU dose in order to determine necessary dose adjustments. Limitations with this method include the need for rapid determination of busulfan plasma concentration and difficulties with estimating apparent oral clearance in patients who exhibit delayed absorption of HD-BU. ⋯ Six of the 29 patients receiving HD-BU dose based on weight (1 mg/kg) would have achieved a steady-state AUC of 3600-5400 ng x h/ml, a frequently used target AUC, as compared to eight and 13 patients if their dose was based on the apparent oral clearance following the test dose and first dose HD-BU, respectively. Monitoring busulfan concentrations after a test dose or a first dose provides a better estimate of the dose needed to achieve the target steady-state AUC as compared to traditional weight-based dosing. However, significant intraindividual variability exists in the apparent oral clearance of busulfan and follow-up therapeutic drug monitoring is recommended particularly if the desired target AUC range is narrow.
-
The fluoropyrimidine anticancer agent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is active in a wide range of solid tumors, particularly gastric, colorectal, and head and neck cancers. Whilst infusional 5-FU is associated with higher response rates and a favorable safety profile as compared to the classical i.v. bolus administration, prolonged infusions can be inconvenient for the patients and catheter-related problems are common complications. An oral 5-FU formulation would allow for sustained 5-FU plasma concentrations, mimicking the pharmacokinetics (PK) of a continuous infusion with the addition of convenience of administration. ⋯ Furthermore, the combination of S-1 with cisplatin (CDDP), irinotecan or docetaxel for the treatment of gastric cancer and with CDDP for non-small cell and pancreatic cancer is feasible and active. The activity observed with S-1 in the phase II studies is at least equivalent, if not better, than continuous i.v. and bolus 5-FU and the other oral fluoropyrimidines. Thus, we may finally be seeing the realization of oral treatments for the management of various solid tumors and could be on the brink of a new approach to treatment strategies.