• Effect of anastrozole on bone mineral density: 5-year results from the anastrozole, tamoxifen, alone or in combination trial 18233230.

      Eastell, Richard; Adams, Judith E; Coleman, Robert E; Howell, Anthony; Hannon, Rosemary A; Cuzick, Jack; Mackey, John R; Beckmann, Matthias W; Clack, Glen; Academic Unit of Bone Metabolism, University of Sheffield, UK. r.eastell@sheffield.ac.uk (2008-03-01)
      PURPOSE: The Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial (median follow-up, 68 months) has shown that adjuvant anastrozole has superior efficacy and better tolerability than tamoxifen. However, anastrozole reduces circulating estrogen, and low estradiol levels are associated with decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and increased fracture risk. It is therefore important to understand the effects of long-term aromatase inhibitor therapy on BMD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective substudy of the ATAC trial assessed BMD changes in postmenopausal women with invasive primary breast cancer receiving anastrozole (1 mg/d) or tamoxifen (20 mg/d) as adjuvant therapy for 5 years. Lumbar spine and total hip BMD were assessed at baseline and after 1, 2, and 5 years. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-seven women from the monotherapy arms of the ATAC trial were recruited onto the bone substudy, and 108 were included in the primary analysis. Among anastrozole-treated patients, there was a decrease in median BMD from baseline to 5 years in lumbar spine (-6.08%) and total hip (-7.24%) compared with the tamoxifen group (lumbar spine, +2.77%; total hip, +0.74%). No patients with normal BMD at baseline became osteoporotic at 5 years. CONCLUSION: Anastrozole is associated with accelerated bone loss over the 5-year treatment period. However, although patients with pre-existing osteopenia are likely to require monitoring and bone-protection strategies, patients with normal BMD would not appear to require monitoring beyond the recommendation for healthy postmenopausal women. The effect of anastrozole on bone should be weighed against its superior efficacy and better tolerability profile versus tamoxifen in the main ATAC trial.
    • Phase III randomized comparison of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

      Cunningham, D; Chau, I; Stocken, D; Valle, Juan W; Smith, David; Steward, William P; Harper, P; Dunn, J; Tudur-Smith, C; West, J; et al. (2009-11-20)
      PURPOSE: Both gemcitabine (GEM) and fluoropyrimidines are valuable treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. This open-label study was designed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients randomly assigned to GEM alone or GEM plus capecitabine (GEM-CAP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated histologically or cytologically proven locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas with a performance status
    • Randomized phase II study of cetuximab plus cisplatin/vinorelbine compared with cisplatin/vinorelbine alone as first-line therapy in EGFR-expressing advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

      Rosell, Rafael; Robinet, G; Szczesna, A; Ramlau, R; Constenla, M; Mennecier, B C; Pfeifer, W; O'Byrne, Kenneth J; Welte, T; Kolb, R; et al. (2008-02)
      BACKGROUND: The Lung Cancer Cetuximab Study is an open-label, randomized phase II pilot study of cisplatin and vinorelbine combined with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted monoclonal antibody cetuximab versus cisplatin and vinorelbine alone, in patients with advanced EGFR-expressing, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). End points of the study are activity, safety and pharmacokinetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following randomization, for a maximum of eight cycles, patients received three-weekly cycles of cisplatin (80 mg/m(2), day 1) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8) alone or following cetuximab treatment (initial dose 400 mg/m(2), followed by 250 mg/m(2) weekly thereafter). RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were randomly allocated to the study (43 per arm). Confirmed response rates were 28% in the cisplatin/vinorelbine arm (A) and 35% in the cetuximab plus cisplatin/vinorelbine arm (B). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.6 months in arm A and 5.0 months in arm B, with PFS rates at 12 months of 0% and 15%, respectively. Median survival was 7.3 months in arm A and 8.3 months in arm B. The 24-month survival rates were 0% and 16%, respectively. The cetuximab combination was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: In the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC, the combination of cetuximab plus cisplatin/vinorelbine demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and the potential to improve activity over cisplatin/vinorelbine alone.