The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of a tirapazamine (TPZ)/cisplatin drug combination in patients with stage IV or recurrent cervical cancer. The chemotherapy was administered for a maximum of eight cycles every 21 days. TPZ was administered intravenously at 330 mg/m(2) over a 2-h infusion, followed 1 h later by cisplatin intravenously at 75 mg/m(2) over 1 h on day 1. All patients received antiemetics including dexamethasone, ondansetron, and lorazepam. Subsequent doses were unchanged, reduced, or omitted according to observed toxicity and protocol guidelines. Response evaluation was performed every two cycles. Thirty-six patients with stage IV or recurrent cervical cancer were treated. Ninety-four percent of patients had prior radiotherapy. Two patients had prior chemotherapy. There were two complete responses and eight partial responses (27.8%). An additional 11 patients (30.6%) had stable disease as their best response. Response rate was greater in tumors outside of the previously radiated field (44.4% vs 11.1%). The median time to progression was 32.7 weeks. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and fatigue, which occurred in 30.6%, 25%, and 22% of subjects, respectively. Anemia was the most frequent grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity at 8.3%. We conclude that the combination of cisplatin and TPZ was reasonably well tolerated in patients with recurrent or advanced cervical cancer. Further evaluation of this drug combination may be warranted.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of a tirapazamine (TPZ)/cisplatin drug combination in patients with stage IV or recurrent cervical cancer. The chemotherapy was administered for a maximum of eight cycles every 21 days. TPZ was administered intravenously at 330 mg/m 2 over a 2-h infusion, followed 1 h later by cisplatin intravenously at 75 mg/m 2 over 1 h on day 1. All patients received antiemetics including dexamethasone, ondansetron, and lorazepam. Subsequent doses were unchanged, reduced, or omitted according to observed toxicity and protocol guidelines. Response evaluation was performed every two cycles. Thirty-six patients with stage IV or recurrent cervical cancer were treated. Ninety-four percent of patients had prior radiotherapy. Two patients had prior chemotherapy. There were two complete responses and eight partial responses (27.8%). An additional 11 patients (30.6%) had stable disease as their best response. Response rate was greater in tumors outside of the previously radiated field (44.4% vs 11.1%). The median time to progression was 32.7 weeks. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and fatigue, which occurred in 30.6%, 25%, and 22% of subjects, respectively. Anemia was the most frequent grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity at 8.3%. We conclude that the combination of cisplatin and TPZ was reasonably well tolerated in patients with recurrent or advanced cervical cancer. Further evaluation of this drug combination may be warranted.
Introduction Overexpression of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) found in common subtypes of endometrial cancer has been associated with advanced stage disease and a poor prognosis. The purpose of this phase 2 study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cetuximab in patients with recurrent endometrial cancer. Methods The study was an open-label phase 2 clinical trial conducted at two institutions. Patients with recurrent or progressive endometrial cancer of any histologic type with the exception of uterine sarcoma received cetuximab at an initial dose of 400 mg/m 2 IV followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m 2 . One cycle was considered 4 weeks of treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical benefit response, defined as a complete or partial response or prolonged stable disease (>8 weeks) by RECIST 1.0 criteria. Results A total of 30 patients were enrolled with a median age of 64 years (range 42–83). Of the 20 evaluable patients, three (15%) had clinical benefit response (one complete response, two stable disease). The patient with a clinical benefit response received a total of 27 cycles and the two patients with stable disease were taken off the study due to progression after four and six cycles, respectively. Of the 10 inevaluable patients, nine received ≤1 cycle due to clinical deterioration and one had an anaphylactic reaction. One patient had a grade 3 rash which resolved after a delay in treatment. No dose reduction was reported. Conclusions In this cohort, single agent therapy with cetuximab was well tolerated and had a 15% clinical benefit response. Further studies are required to better identify patients who may respond to this treatment.
