Bulletin du cancer
-
As a single agent, irinotecan has demonstrated efficacy in metastatic 5FU resistant colorectal metastatic cancer. Chemotherapy with fluorouracil (5FU) plus leucovorin remains a standard in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. It seemed logical to test the combination of this reference treatment and the new agent. ⋯ The combinations of irinotecan and mitomycin C or oxaliplatin have given very good results with high objective response rates and good tolerance. Irinotecan plays now an important part in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This part becomes larger due to the results of the combination trials already presented which have shown strong efficacy and good tolerance.
-
Irinotecan or CPT11 is a topoisomerase 1 inhibitor. The European and American regimens of irinotecan in monotherapy are different: respectively 350 mg/m2 i.v. every 3 weeks and 125 mg/m2 i.v. weekly (4 weeks out of 6). In a large phase 2 programme an important activity has been shown in metastatic colorectal cancer. ⋯ This interesting activity was the basis for the phase 3 studies that have positioned irinotecan as the standard treatment in 5FU resistant colorectal cancer. The response rate in first line treatment of colorectal cancer varies between 18% and 32%. The main side effects are neutropenia and delayed diarrhea.
-
Irinotecan is a new topoisomerase I inhibitor. It has demonstrated antitumor activity in solid tumors, independently of the histologic type, and in squamous cervical carcinoma. Its original mechanism of action offers the possibility to combine it with other drugs. ⋯ The limiting toxicity of combination schedules in neutropenia. The best results were obtained with the association cisplatin-irinotecan in lung cancer. For the combination etoposide-irinotecan the best schedule of administration remains to be determined.
-
Review Practice Guideline Guideline
[Standards, options and recommendations (SOR) for clinical care of rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) and other soft tissue sarcoma in children. Federation of the French Cancer Centers. French Society of Pediatric Oncology].
The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the Federation of the French Cancer Centres (FNCLCC), the 20 French Cancer Centres and specialists from French Public Universities, General Hospitals and Private Clinics. For pediatric issues, this project is a collaboration between the FNCLCC and the French Society of Pediatric Oncology (SFOP). The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and outcomes for cancer patients. The methodology is based on literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. ⋯ The main recommendations for rhabdomyosarcoma management are: 1/ diagnosis is based on appropriate clinical and radiological findings; 2/ pathological and immunohistochemical studies are essential to confirm the diagnosis; 3/ surgery must be performed by an experienced surgeon. Surgery and radiotherapy must be as conservative as possible; 4/ therapeutic strategies for rhabdomyosarcoma depend on location and extends and are based on chemotherapy, surgery and radiotherapy. Inclusion of patients in SFOP, SIOP and IRS clinical trials is recommended; 5/ treatment of metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma is based on intensive chemotherapy, and surgery with or without radiotherapy; 6/ the management of non-rhabdomyosarcoma is based on the likelihood of sensitivity to chemotherapy; 7/ at the present time, there are no clear data on which to base guidelines for timing and duration of follow-up studies in these conditions.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
[Granisetron (per os) compared with ondansetron (per os) in the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by mildly emetogenic chemotherapies. Groupe de Recherches en Cancerologie du Nord].
It is a randomised cross-over multicenter study comparing the efficacy and the tolerance of granisetron (Gra) 1 mg and ondansetron (Ond) 8 mg, oral, given during two consecutive cycles to 188 naive patients scheduled to receive a moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. The antiemetic treatment is given one day per course, 1 hour before chemotherapy and the second administration from 8 to 12 hours after the beginning, during each of the two cycles; alternatively according to the randomisation. Five criteria are assessed; nausea (ordinal and visual analogic scales), emeric episodes (vomiting orland retching), complete response (minor or no nausea, no emetic episode and no rescue treatment), patient preference and tolerance. ⋯ There is no significant patients preference in favour of Gra or Ond. In conclusion, Gra was more efficient in preventing nausea and obtaining complete response on the first day of treatment, significantly at the second cycle. Both Gra and Ond had a good antiemetic activity for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy with complete response rates always over 50% on day 1; delayed emesis remain less weli controlled.