Browsing by Author "Kovcin, V. (6701684004)"

Results of amsacrine studies in different solid tumors with a dose of 85 mg/m2/24 h x 1 quo 3 weeks have been, in general, disappointing. Although only a few patients with head and neck cancer have been included in broad phase II studies, several responses have been reported, but detailed data concerning responders are lacking. In the present study, amsacrine (Amsidil®, Godecke - Parke Davis) was administered at an increased dose of 85 mg/m2/24 h x 3 (total dose per cycle 255 mg/m2) quo 3 - 4 weeks. 25 patients with advanced carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx were included in the first step of this phase II study (11/25 with histological grades I/II and 14/25 with histological grades III/IV; 10/25 pretreated with radical radiotherapy and 15/25 previously untreated), and 5 patients with undifferentiated carcinoma of the nasopharyngeal type (UCNT), all previously treated. 5/30 patients achieved a complete response (CR) and 5130 a partial response (PR), the overall response rate being 10/30. Regarding the histology grade, only 1/11 patients with grade I/II carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx achieved a PR with no CR, but 5/14 with grade III/IV from the same group achieved a CR. Out of 10 pretreated patients only one achieved any response and none of the 5 patients with UCNT. Thus, in the second step of this study, high dose amsacrine was evaluated in the target group of previously untreated patients with advanced grade III/IV carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx. 20 patients were included in the second step and all were evaluable for activity. A CR was achieved for 6/20 patients and a PR for 7/20 patients (response rate 65%, 95% confidence interval 44%-86%). Hematological toxicity from both steps included grade IV granulocytopenia in 25/50 patients (50%, 95% confidence interval 36%-64%) and grade IV thrombocytopenia in 18/50 patients (36%, 95% confidence interval 23%-49%). High dose amsacrine seems to be a toxic, but very effective drug as first-line treatment for poorly differentiated carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx, and further studies seem warranted.

Results of amsacrine studies in different solid tumors with a dose of 85 mg/m2/24 h x 1 quo 3 weeks have been, in general, disappointing. Although only a few patients with head and neck cancer have been included in broad phase II studies, several responses have been reported, but detailed data concerning responders are lacking. In the present study, amsacrine (Amsidil®, Godecke - Parke Davis) was administered at an increased dose of 85 mg/m2/24 h x 3 (total dose per cycle 255 mg/m2) quo 3 - 4 weeks. 25 patients with advanced carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx were included in the first step of this phase II study (11/25 with histological grades I/II and 14/25 with histological grades III/IV; 10/25 pretreated with radical radiotherapy and 15/25 previously untreated), and 5 patients with undifferentiated carcinoma of the nasopharyngeal type (UCNT), all previously treated. 5/30 patients achieved a complete response (CR) and 5130 a partial response (PR), the overall response rate being 10/30. Regarding the histology grade, only 1/11 patients with grade I/II carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx achieved a PR with no CR, but 5/14 with grade III/IV from the same group achieved a CR. Out of 10 pretreated patients only one achieved any response and none of the 5 patients with UCNT. Thus, in the second step of this study, high dose amsacrine was evaluated in the target group of previously untreated patients with advanced grade III/IV carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx. 20 patients were included in the second step and all were evaluable for activity. A CR was achieved for 6/20 patients and a PR for 7/20 patients (response rate 65%, 95% confidence interval 44%-86%). Hematological toxicity from both steps included grade IV granulocytopenia in 25/50 patients (50%, 95% confidence interval 36%-64%) and grade IV thrombocytopenia in 18/50 patients (36%, 95% confidence interval 23%-49%). High dose amsacrine seems to be a toxic, but very effective drug as first-line treatment for poorly differentiated carcinoma of meso and hypopharynx, and further studies seem warranted.

Purpose: The incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (NHLs) in elderly people has increased in recent years because the world population is getting older. The aim of this study was to compare the biological and clinical features in patients diagnosed with NHLs younger and older than 65 years, and the possible influence of age on the choice of optimal therapeutic approach. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 193 patients with NHLs: 111 (68%) were <65 years and 82 (42%) ≥65 years. The following parameters were analysed: age, gender, clinical stage, International Prognostic Index (IPI), histological type, presence of B symptoms, disease localization, presence of bulky mass, Karnofsky performance status (PS), comorbidities, blood counts, liver and renal function and serum LDH. Results: Elderly patients had statistically more frequent indolent NHLs (p=0.036), IPI 3 and 4 (p<0.0001), presence of comorbidities (p<0.001), and less frequent presence of bulky disease (p=0.043). Response to therapy was different in the 2 age groups: 29% of patients ≥65 years achieved complete remission (CR) in contrast to 71% of patients <65 years (p<0.001). The most frequent cause of death was disease progression (PD) (86% of younger patients and 71% of elderly patients (p=0.150). Older patients died more frequently because of comorbidities compared younger ones (21 and 10%, respectively; p=0.250), and had more complications of therapy (8.1 and 4%, respectively (p=0.320). Overall survival (OS) was shorter in older patients in all lymphoma types: indolent lymphoma (36 vs. 17 months), aggressive (22 vs. 20 months) and very aggressive (14 vs. 1 months). Multivariate analysis showed that parameters for shorter survival in the elderly were Karnofsky PS <60, increased serum LDH and treatment toxicity. Conclusion: In elderly NHLs patients, treatment response and survival are significantly poorer. Since older patients mostly died of PD, they should be treated with standard regimens and best supportive measures. © 2012 Zerbinis Medical Publications.

Purpose: The incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (NHLs) in elderly people has increased in recent years because the world population is getting older. The aim of this study was to compare the biological and clinical features in patients diagnosed with NHLs younger and older than 65 years, and the possible influence of age on the choice of optimal therapeutic approach. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 193 patients with NHLs: 111 (68%) were <65 years and 82 (42%) ≥65 years. The following parameters were analysed: age, gender, clinical stage, International Prognostic Index (IPI), histological type, presence of B symptoms, disease localization, presence of bulky mass, Karnofsky performance status (PS), comorbidities, blood counts, liver and renal function and serum LDH. Results: Elderly patients had statistically more frequent indolent NHLs (p=0.036), IPI 3 and 4 (p<0.0001), presence of comorbidities (p<0.001), and less frequent presence of bulky disease (p=0.043). Response to therapy was different in the 2 age groups: 29% of patients ≥65 years achieved complete remission (CR) in contrast to 71% of patients <65 years (p<0.001). The most frequent cause of death was disease progression (PD) (86% of younger patients and 71% of elderly patients (p=0.150). Older patients died more frequently because of comorbidities compared younger ones (21 and 10%, respectively; p=0.250), and had more complications of therapy (8.1 and 4%, respectively (p=0.320). Overall survival (OS) was shorter in older patients in all lymphoma types: indolent lymphoma (36 vs. 17 months), aggressive (22 vs. 20 months) and very aggressive (14 vs. 1 months). Multivariate analysis showed that parameters for shorter survival in the elderly were Karnofsky PS <60, increased serum LDH and treatment toxicity. Conclusion: In elderly NHLs patients, treatment response and survival are significantly poorer. Since older patients mostly died of PD, they should be treated with standard regimens and best supportive measures. © 2012 Zerbinis Medical Publications.