1 / 71

Chemotherapy For H&N SCC Past, Present and Future

Otorhinolaryngology: Head and Neck Surgery at PENN Excellence in Patient Care, Education and Research since 1870. Chemotherapy For H&N SCC Past, Present and Future. Charles Gawthrop M.D. Faculty Discussant: Jason Newman M.D. The Past. 40,000 New cases of SCCHN each year in USA

Télécharger la présentation

Chemotherapy For H&N SCC Past, Present and Future

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.


Presentation Transcript

  1. Otorhinolaryngology: Head and Neck Surgery at PENN Excellence in Patient Care, Education and Research since 1870 Chemotherapy For H&N SCC Past, Present and Future Charles Gawthrop M.D. Faculty Discussant: Jason Newman M.D.

  2. The Past • 40,000 New cases of SCCHN each year in USA • 2/3 Present with locally advanced lesions (T3 or T4) • 5 year survival <30%

  3. The Past • Classical chemotherapy is directed at metabolic sites essential to cell replication • Tumor Cells Replicate more frequently than normal cells • However, currently available chemotherapy does not specifically recognize neoplastic cells • Highest morbidities in rapidly dividing cells: bone marrow, GI mucosa, and hair cells

  4. Methotrexate • Most widely used cytotoxic for H & N cancer prior to 19781. • Structural analog of folic acid, binds to and inhibits dihyrofolate reductase. • Decreases intracellular folate co-enzymes, which decreases production of thymidilic acid (precursor to adenine and guainine) and eventually depressed DNA/RNA synthesis and cell death.

  5. Methotrexate

  6. Methotrexate • Toxicities: • Myelosupression, mucocitis, alopecia, N/V and Diarrhea Most common • Renal Toxicity in Higher Doses

  7. 5 - Fluorouracil • Antimetabolite - Like Methotrexate deprives cells of essential precursors of DNA synthesis • Pyrimidine analog which has a stable flourine atom in place of hydrogen at position 5 of the uracil ring.

  8. 5-FU • Converted to Fluoride-deoxyuridine monophosphate (FdUMP) which competes with dUMP for thymidilate synthase, leading to a lack of thymidine, imbalanced cell growth and death.

  9. 5-FU • Side Effects • MUCOCITIS • Other side effects include bone marrow supression, N/V, alopecia and anorexia

  10. Cisplatin • Cisdiamminedichlorplatinum (CDDP) • Approved by USDA in 1978. • Binds to Guanine on DNA, forming inter and intra-strand crosslinks, inhibiting DNA synthesis.

  11. Cisplatin • Side Effects • Severe Nausea and Vomiting up to 5 days after administration • Nephrotoxicity- Usually the dose limiting toxicity • Ototoxicity – High Frequency Hearing Loss, Tinnitus • Neurotoxicity – Paresthesias, Loss of Proprioception

  12. Carboplatin • Mechanism is similar to that of Cisplatin • Less Effective • Lower Toxicity

  13. Multi Agent Chemotherapy • In Mid 1980’s a number of RCT controlled trials compared the then available combinations of chemotherapeutics. • Cisplatin as a single agent is not superior to Methotrexate in terms of response or survival1 • Multi-agent chemotherapy in general is associated with higher response rates than single agent alone • Platinum containing combination regimens have the highest response rates.

  14. Multi Agent Chemotherapy • Jacobs et al2 – 1992 Compared Cisplatin and 5 FU alone and in combination. Response rates were 32% (Cisplatin + 5FU), 17% (Cisplatin), and 13% (5FU). • Higher Toxicity in Combination • Median Survival (6months) same for all treatment arms • Clavel et al.3 – 1994 Compared Cisplatin vs Cisplatin + 5FU in 382 patients with metastatic or recurrent SCC of the H & N • Higher Response Rates and Longer time to progression in combination • Median survival 7.3 months in both arms

  15. The Taxanes • Paclitaxel (Taxol) and Docetaxel (Taxotere) • Isolated in 1960’s from the bark of the pacific Yew tree (Taxus brevifolia) and introduced in 1990’s • Binds to the B subunit of tubulin, and stabilizes microtubules, interrupting mitosis and leading to cell death.

  16. The Taxanes • Side Effects • NEUTROPENIA – Usually Dose Limiting • Hypersensitivity – (dyspnea, urticaria, hypotension) • Peripheral Neuropathy, Alopecia, Bradycardia

  17. The Taxanes • Several Studies of Taxane + Cisplatin with response rates of 27% - 53% • Gibson et al.4 2005 – 218 Patients. Compared Cisplatin and 5FU vs. Cisplatin and Taxol. • Response rates and Median Survival were virtually identical with higher number of high grade toxicities in Cisplatin + 5 FU Group • Triple Agent Protocols including Docetaxol, Cisplatin, and 5FU (TPF) have shown response rates approaching 60%, with median survival of 6 – 9 months.1 However no improvement in 1 year survival and increased toxicity. To date, no controlled trials

  18. Chemotherapy for Curable Disease • Induction or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy • Concomitant Chemotherapy • Post Treatment or Adjuvant Chemotherapy

  19. Concomitant Chemotherapy

  20. Concomitant Chemotherapy • Theoretical Benefits of Chemo-XRT • Inhibiting repair of lethal and sublethal damage induced by radiotherapy • Radiosensitizing hypoxic cells • Reducing tumor burden, leading to an improved blood supply • Redistributing tumor cells to a more radiosensitive cell cycle phase • Inducing apoptosis

  21. Concomitant Chemotherapy • Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy on Head and Neck Cancer (Pignon et al.) 20005 • Meta-analysis of >10,000 patients in 63 clinical trials • Chemo-XRT vs. XRT alone associated with absolute survival benefit of 8% at 5 years • Intergroup RTOG 91-11 (Forastiere et al.) 20036 • 547 Patients with stage III or IV resectable laryngeal cancer. Randomized to Induction Chemo + XRT vs. Chemo-XRT vs. XRT alone • 43% absolute reduction in laryngectomy rate with Chemo-XRT • 8% vs. 16% rate of distant metastasis • No change in overall survival

  22. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

  23. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy • Theoretically should reduce possibility of distant metastasis, and decrease tumor burden while patient is healthy, thus leading to improved disease free survival. • However – Numerous studies over 2 decades showed no benefit in survival when compared with local treatment. Though some reported a decrease in distant metastases

  24. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy • GSSTC (Paccagnella et al.) 19948. 237 Patients with stage III and IV SCC of the head and neck. Cisplatin, 5FU followed by local tx vs. local tx alone. • Increase in 10 year survival • GETTEC (Domenge et al.) 20009. 318 patients with curable disease of oropharynx randomized to chemo followed by local treatment vs. local treatment alone. • Overall Median Survival 5.1 years vs. 3.3 years with Chemo • No change in locoregional control or distant metastases

  25. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy • Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy on Head and Neck Cancer5 • In the initial study, induction chemotherapy was associated with only a 2% survival benefit at 5 years - not statistically significant • However – in a subset analysis including only cisplatin-5FU induction regimens there was a significant 5% absolute survival benefit.

  26. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy • TAX 323 (Vermorken et al. 2004)10 – 358 patients with locally advanced and unresectable HNSCC. Induction chemo with cisplatin 5FU (PF) or cisplatin/5FU/docetaxel (TPF) All patients received post chemo XRT • Overall response rate with TPF was significantly improved 68% vs. 54% • Both progression free and overall survival times were longer with TPF

  27. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy • So why give induction chemotherapy another chance?11,12 • Previous studies included suboptimal chemotherapy regimens • Newer triple agent chemotherapy with Taxane • Chemotherapy followed by Chemo-XRT

  28. Adjuvant Chemotherapy

  29. Adjuvant Chemotherapy • Post operative XRT has been the standard approach for high risk H&N SCC since first pioneered by Fletcher and Evers in the early 1970’s. • However, the few randomized studies of post operative chemotherapy in the 1990’s yielded disappointing results.

  30. Adjuvant Chemotherapy • Intergroup Study #0034 –(Al-Sarraf et al 1997)13. 447 patients, complete resection with post op XRT alone vs. resection + XRT + Chemo. • No difference in overall survival • However, subgroup of patients at higher risk (malignant cells in 2 or more lymph nodes, extracapsular spread, microscopic involvement of margins), were more likely to benefit both in terms of tumor control and survival • Bachaud et al.14,15 1996 – 83 patients. Surgery followed by XRT or Chemoradiation. • Chemoradiation group had lower locoregional failure

  31. Adjuvant Chemotherapy • EORTC Study (Bernier et al. 2004)16 334 patients with high risk head and neck tumors randomly assigned to post op XRT vs. post op Chemo-XRT • High Risk = Vascular invasion, Perineural invasion, Stage III/IV disease, Microscopically + Margins, extracapsular spread • Progression free survival of 55 vs. 23 months • Locoregional recurrence of 31% vs. 18% • No Significant change in toxicity • RTOG Trial (Cooper et al. 2004)17 459 patients with High risk SCC randomized to post op XRT vs. post op Chemo-XRT • High Risk = two or more positive lymph nodes, extracapsular spread, microscopic involvement of margins • Increased disease free survival, increased locoregional control • Overall Survival not significantly significant • Substantial increase of severe side effects.

  32. Adjuvant Chemotherapy18 • Adding chemotherapy to post op XRT for high risk H & N SCC leads to a significant increase in local control and disease specific survival • The impact of post op Chemo-XRT is greatest in tumors with extracapsular spread and/or microscopically involved margins • Other risk factors include perineural invasion, vascular invasion, stage III/IV disease, and or level IV-V lymph nodes from tumors in the oral cavity or oropharynx. • No change in incidence of distant metastases

  33. Otorhinolaryngology: Head and Neck Surgery at PENN Excellence in Patient Care, Education and Research since 1870 The Present “Drug therapies are replacing a lot of medicines as we used to know it” -George W. Bush

  34. The Present • Recent advances in molecular biology, including the human genome project have allowed for the introduction of targeted therapies for cancer.

  35. Trastuzumab (Herceptin)19 • The type one receptor tyrosine kinases (ErbB receptors) • Composed of an extracellular ligand binding domain,a transmembrane segment and an intracellular protein tyrosine kinase domain. • Tyrosine Kinase receptor, that when activated, stimulates many intracellular signaling pathways, mainly mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) and the phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase (PI3K)-Akt pathway. • Through these pathways the EGF receptor sitmulates cell growth, division, differentiation, migration, adhesion and angiogenic activity • HER2 (erbB2) overexpressed in 20-25% of invasive breast cancer, and is associated with an increased risk of chemotherapy resistance, metastases, relapse and death in these patients.

  36. http://www.biooncology.com/bioonc/index.m

  37. Trastuzumab (Herceptin)20 • Trastuzumab- A recombinant humanized anti-erbB2 monoclonal antibody which binds to the extracellular domain of the receptor and blocks intracellular signalling. • Approved by FDA in 1998 • Blocks dimerization of the receptor and therefore intracellular phosphorylation. • Anti-Body Mediated Cytotoxicity

  38. Trastuzumab (Herceptin) • Several International RCT of Trastuzumab with total enrollment >13,000 patients were initiated in 2000-2001, and initial results became available in 200520 • Significantly Lower (46%) risk of metastases, longer disease free survival and a trend towards longer overall survival • Low incidence of adverse effects- in particular – none of the toxic effects typically produced by chemotherapy: nausea, vomiting, hair loss or myelosupression • Cardiac Dysfunction – When used with an anthracycline – erbB-2 has an anti apoptotic role in normal myocytes, interruption of which leads to increased stress related cardiac damage

  39. Imatinib (Gleevec)20 • ABL1 Protoncogene – A tyrosine kinase found in both the nucleus and the cytoplasm that when activated, interacts with a number of signal transduction pathways including Ras, MAP, STAT, PI3K and Myc involved I gene transcription, apoptosis, cytoskeletal organization… • BCR-ABL –Results from a reciprocal translocation between chromosomes 9 and 22 • This gene re-arrangement is present in nearly 100% of cases of CML • The gene product is found exclusively in the cytoplasm, and is constitutively active leading to a proliferative advantage and decreased apoptosis in affected cells

  40. Imatinib (Gleevec) • Imatinib – Orally bioavailable inhibitor of the ABL protein • Approved by FDA in May 2001 • Also blocks other kinases including PDGF, and c-Kit

  41. Imatinib (Gleevec) • Prior to Imatinib, CML typically followed an inexorable course that resulted in the death of the patient • Only allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplant has been shown conclusively to provide long term disease eradication • Chronic Phase-> Intermediate Phase -> Blast Phase • Traditional Chemotherapy with cytarabine and alpha-interferon was associated with significant toxicity and 5 year survival of less than 60%

  42. Imatinib (Gleevec) • Phase 2 studies of IM in patients with accelerated phase CML showed hematologic response in 82% of patients. Complete in 17% • Large randomized trial of IM vs. IFN Alpha in patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase CML, showed a major response in 87% of patients as compared to 35% and an 95% freedom from progression at 30 months. • Minimal side effects – most common being myalgias and diarrhea

  43. Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Head and Neck Cancer • EGFR = ErbB125 • EGFR mRNA is upregulated in 92% of HNSCC22 • EGFR levels increase in in advanced stage tumors and in poorly differentiated tumors. • Increased EGFR correlates with poorer clinical outcome22

  44. Cetuximab (Erbitux) • Recombinant monoclonal antibody which binds to the extracellular domain of the EGF receptor with high affinity • Block activation of receptor tyrosine kinase by EGF or TGF Alpha • Induces antibody-mediated homodimerization and destruction25

  45. Cetuximab (Erbitux) • ECOG trial (Burtness et al.) 2005 – 117 patients randomized to Cisplatin vs. Cisplatin/Cetuximab.24 • Objective response improved in combined arm (26% vs. 10%) • However, Primary end point of Disease free survival did not meet statistical significance (4.2 vs. 2.7 months) • Cutaneous toxicity correlates with efficacy • Trigo et al. 2004 – 103 patients who had progressed on platinum containing regimens.24 • Overall response rate of 13% with 5 complete responses • Harari et al. 2004 – 424 patients with LR advanced H & N Cancer randomized to XRT vs. XRT + Cetuximab24 • 3 year survival rate of 57% vs. 44% • Locoregional Control Rate of 56% vs. 48%

More Related