July 2008.indd SULTAN QABOOS UNIVERSITY MEDICAL JOURNAL JULY 2008, VOLUME 8, ISSUE 2, P. 137-148 SULTAN QABOOS UNIVERSITY© SUBMITTED - 20TH JANUARY 2008 ACCEPTED - 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 Department of Medicine, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman *To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: ikramburney@hotmail.com Major Advances in the Treatment of Cancer What does a Non-Oncologist need to know? *Ikram A Burney and Mansour S Al-Moundhri R E V I E W ABSTRACT The last few years have seen major advances in the management of cancers. Since it is not possible for the non-oncolo- gist to keep abreast with the latest developments in the field of oncology, this review summarises the most significant advances in the area of treatment of various cancers over the past four years. In some areas, a paradigm shift has occurred setting new standards of care, for example, the use of targeted therapy (trastuzumab) in adjuvant treatment of breast cancer; the use of monoclonal antibodies (rituximab), with or without chemotherapy, in the treatment and maintenance of indolent lymphoma; the use of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor, imatinib, in the adjuvant setting in resected gastrointestinal stromal tumours. In other areas, new treatments have emerged, such as, the use of targeted therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma (sorafenib) and renal cell carcinoma (sunitinib, sorafenib, tem- sirolimus, bevacizumab). In some other cancers, the addition of targeted therapies has improved survival rates, for example, in colon cancer (bevacizumab, cetuximb, panitumumab), head and neck cancers (cetuximab), and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (erlotinib). In yet another group, new targeted therapies have emerged where resistance was previously observed with the existing targeted thera- pies, for example, breast cancer (lapatinib), chronic myeloid leukemia (dasatinib). Finally, the addition of chemotherapeutic agents has improved survival in some forms of cancer, for example, oxaliplatin in adjuvant treatment of colon cancer, temozolamide in glioblas- toma multiforme, and adjuvant chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. The information summarized here may provide useful for the busy physician needing an update in the field of oncology. Keywords: Medical Oncology; Trastuzumab; Rituximab; Imatinib; Sorafenib; Sunitinib; Bevacizumab. عالج السرطان في الرئيسية التطورات األورام علم في املتخصص غير معرفته يحتاج ما املندري منصور برني، إكرام األورام في مجال التطورات مواكبة آخر عدم إمكانية إلى ونظرا السرطان. أنواع مختلف عالج في كبيرة تطورات املاضية القليلة ــنوات الس ــهدت ش ــنوات األربع الس على مدى ــرطان الس أنواع مختلف عالج في أهم التطورات احلاصلة التقرير في هذا خلصنا ، العلم في ذلك املتخصصني ــل قب ــن م إال كعالج (trastuzumab) ــتهدف املس العالج ــتخدام اس املثال، ــبيل س على للرعاية، جديدة معايير وضع في حتوال حصل ااالت بعض في املاضية. عالج ومداومة معاجلة في الكيميائي بدون العالج مع أو (rituximab) ــيلة النس أحادية املضادة ــام األجس ــتخدام ــرطان الثدي، واس ــاعد لس مس ااالت وفي املستأصلة. وِيةّ ــدَ السَ املعوية املعدية األورام حتديد ــاعد في (imatinib ) كمس كيناز التيروزين مانع أنزمي ــتخدام واس املهاودة ، اللمفوما sunitinib,) و ، الكلية خاليا ــرطان (torafenib)، س ــرطان الكبد س في ــتهدفة املس ــتعمال العالجات اس مثل العالج، من أخرى أنواع ظهر األخرى البقاء، ــني معدل حتس في دور ــتهدفة املس العالجات ــرطان كان إلضافة الس أنواع بعض وفي . (sorafenib, temsirolimus, bevacizumab البنكرياس ــرطانة ، س (cetuximab) والرقبة الرأس ــرطان ، س (bevacizumab, cetuximb, panitumumab) ــرطان القولون س ذلك مثال مثال ، ــتهدفة املوجودة املس للعالجات مقاومة أن هناك عندما لوحظ أخرى ــتهدفة عالجات مس ظهرت أخرى مجموعة (erlotinib ). وفي الغدية في حسنت البقاء عالجية كيميائية عوامل أن إضافة وجد وأخيرا .(dasatinib) املزمن النخاعي الدم ــرطان س , (lapatinib) الثدي ــرطان س ذلك كال دُ األَشْ دِ تَعَ مُ يٌّ يٌّ دِبْقِ رومِ أَ وَرَمٌ (temozolamide ) في ، القولون سرطان في ــاعد مس كعالج (oxaliplatin) ذلك ، مثال ــرطان الس أنواع بعض والذين في لديهم وقت ال الذين األطباء تفيد املعلومات امللخصة قد هذه الصغيرة. اخلاليا ال يصيب الذي الرئة ــرطان س في ــاعد مس كيماوي وعالج األورام. مجال علم في اجلديد يريدون معرفة الوقت نفسه بيفاسيزوماب. سونيتينيب، سورافينيب، اميايتيناب، ، ريتوكسيماب تراستوزوماب، األورام، الكلمات: علم مفتاح THE LAST FEW YEARS HAVE SEEN MAJOR advances in the management of cancers, which have changed the way these cancers are now managed. Some of the advances can easily be regarded as having changed the paradigm of cancer management, while others represent continued in- I K R A M A B U R N E Y A N D M A N S O U R S A L - M O U N D H R I 138 cremental gains. The management of cancers includes prevention, surveillance and early detection, treatment of early and advanced disease, and the issues related to long-term survival after the cure. For the purposes of this review, only advances related to treatment of the disease, both in adjuvant and palliative settings are described. Besides obtaining information from a review of the literature over the past four years, infor- mation was obtained from the series ‘Clinical Cancer Advances’ published in the Journal of Clinical Oncol- ogy for the past three years.1-3 The cancer sites/organs are arranged in alphabetical order and the setting of treatment (adjuvant or palliative) are described where appropriate, as follows: 1. Breast cancer 2. Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) 3. Colon cancer 4. Gastric cancer 5. Gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) 6. Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) 7. Head and neck cancer 8. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) 9. Lung cancer 10. Multiple myeloma 11. Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) 12. Ovarian cancer 13. Pancreatic cancer 14. Prostate cancer 15. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) B R E A S T C A N C E R A D J U VA N T TR E ATME N T Adjuvant Trastuzumab improves survival when added to standard adjuvant chemotherapy Since the publication of the meta-analysis establish- ing the role of adjuvant chemotherapy and hormone- therapy in early stage breast cancer, several important strides have been made. The addition of either anthra- cyclines (doxorubicin or epirubicin), and/or taxanes (paclitaxel or docetaxel) to cyclophosphamide with or without 5-flurouracil has been shown to improve dis- ease free survival (DFS) and the overall survival (OS). The improvement in survival rates were of the order of 4-7% (absolute difference) at the end of 5 years.4 More recently, the addition of trastuzumab to the chemotherapy has been shown to improve further the survival in patients with breast cancer expressing the HER-2/neu oncogene (also called c-erbB2). Around 25-30% women with breast cancer have the oncogene, causing expression of the protein on the cell surface, which is detected by either immunohistochemistry (IHC) or fluorescent in-situ hybridization (FISH). The protein is associated with an increased risk of cancer recurrence and a decreased sensitivity to some forms of chemotherapy. Trastuzumab is a monoclonal antibody that blocks the protein HER-2/neu and had been in clinical use since at least 1998 for metastatic breast cancer, where together with palliative chemotherapy, the survival was shown to be prolonged in women treated with trastuzumab. Four randomised trials involving more than 13,000 women have been reported within the past 3 years, all leading to the same conclusion.5-8 The analysis showed for the first time that adding tras- tuzumab to standard chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer that expresses HER-2 reduced the risk of recurrence in women by almost half after three years compared with chemotherapy alone. The four trials varied in design to some extent, and the details are shown in Table 1.5-8 The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trial compared 4 cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide fol- lowed by four cycles of paclitaxel followed by obser- vation or one calendar year of trastuzumab therapy. The Intergroup trial compared, in a three arm study, 4 cycles of doxorubicin and cylophosphamide followed by weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks with either observa- tion, concomitant trastuzumab with paclitaxel or se- quential trastuzumab for one year. The Breast Cancer International Research Group (BCIRG), also in a three arm study, compared 4 cycles of doxorubicin and cy- lophosphamide followed by 4 cycles of docetaxel with either observation or trastuzumab for a year. The third arm consisted of 6 cycles of docetaxel and carbopla- tin followed by one year of trastuzumab. The fourth and the largest trial, the European Herceptin Adjuvant Trial (HERA), in addition to randomising patients be- tween the observation and the trastuzumab arm af- ter completion of the chemotherapy according to the institutional guidelines, also studied the relationship between duration of trastuzumab use (one year versus two years) and breast cancer recurrence in more than 5,000 women in 39 countries. Taken together, the four trials demonstrated that addition of adjuvant trastu- zumab for one calendar year improves the DFS from 67% to 85% at 4 years. This degree of improvement 139 M A J O R A D VA N C E S I N T H E TR E AT M E N T O F C A N C E R represents the most significant gain in survival in the history of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. However, the addition of trastuzumab was not free of side effects. All trials showed an increased risk of congestive heart failure associated with the drug.8 The incidence of severe congestive heart failure or death from heart problems ranged from 2.9% and 4.1% in the women taking trastuzumab, versus up to 0.8% in the observation group group. In an attempt to reduce the cardiotoxicity, without compromising the survival gain, yet another trial called the FinHer trial, studied the possibility of using attenuated trastuzumab therapy for 9 weeks compared to the observation group.9 The trial was small including only 232 women. Women in the trastuzumab group were significantly less likely to experience a recurrence with fewer cardiac side effects. With a longer follow-up, this trial might suggest that patients would be able to safely take a shorter course of the therapy, limiting the cost of the drug and the risk of serious side effects, without reducing efficacy. However, currently, the individual and the pooled results of the four large clinical trials, represent a very significant advance in breast cancer treatment, and have already changed the standard of care for the women who express HER-2 protein. Aromatase inhibitors improve the overall survival compared to tamoxifen in an adjuvant setting Over the past 30 years, tamoxifen has been the stand- ard of care for the adjuvant hormone treatment in hormone receptor positive early breast cancer.4 In the last few years alone, three third-generation aromatase inhibitors (letrozole, anastrazole, and exemestane) have been shown to improve the DFS and the OS in the adjuvant setting. Previously these agents had been shown to be effective in metastatic breast cancer. More recently, the three agents have been investigated as ad- juvant therapy of early breast cancer employing vari- ous treatment strategies: replacement of tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy for 5 years, sequencing of tamoxifen before or after an aromatase inhibitor during the first 5 years, or following 5 years of tamoxifen. In the first adjuvant trial (arimidex, tamoxifen alone or in combi- nation [ATAC]), anastrozole was significantly superior to tamoxifen in reducing risk of disease recurrence.10 The Breast International Group (BIG) trial BIG 1-98 demonstrated the significant superiority of letrozole over tamoxifen in improving disease-free survival.11 A large trial (International Collaborative Cancer Group [ICCG] trial 96) investigated the sequencing of 2 to 3 years of exemestane after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen and found that switching to exemestane was significantly superior in disease-free survival compared with con- tinuing on tamoxifen.12 Trial MA17 evaluated extend- ed adjuvant therapy with letrozole versus a placebo following 5 years of tamoxifen. DFS was significantly improved with letrozole versus a placebo, irrespective of whether patients had lymph node-positive or node- negative tumours13. All three aromatase inhibitors are generally well tolerated. However, the long-term side effects remain to be studied. Results of these trials indicate that aromatase inhibitors provide important benefits relative to tamoxifen in each of these adjuvant treatment settings. Trial No of patients Treatment Scheme NSABP-31 1960 AC x 4 > Pac 3 weekly x 12 wks AC x 4 > Pac 3 weekly x 12 wks + Tras weekly x 52 wks Intergroup N-9831 3046 AC x 4 > Pac weekly x 12 wks AC x 4 > Pac weekly x 12 wks + Tras weekly x 52 wks AC x 4 > Pac weekly x 12 wks > Tras weekly x 52 wks BCIRG 006 3222 AC x 4 > Doc 3 weekly x 4 AC x 4 > Doc 3 weekly x 4 + Tras weekly > 3 wkly x 52 wks carboplatin + Doc 3 weekly x 6 + Tras 3 weekly x 52 wks HERA 5090 Any CT±RT > Observation Any CT±RT > Tras 3 weekly for 12 months Any CT±RT > Tras 3 weekly for 24 months NSABP = National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project; BCIRG = Breast Cancer International Research Group; HERA = Health, Empowerment, Research, and Awareness Foundation; AC = Doxorubicin + Cyclophosphamide; Pac = Paclitaxel; Doc = Docetaxel; Tras = Trastuzumab; CT = Chemotherapy; RT = Radiotherapy; Table 1: Different treatment strategies employing trastuzumab in an adjuvant setting for breast cancer I K R A M A B U R N E Y A N D M A N S O U R S A L - M O U N D H R I 140 TR E ATME N T O F ME TA STATI C D I SE A SE Patients with HER-2/neu positive disease, who fail first line treatment with anthracycline, taxane and trastuzumab are usually treated with the prodrug of 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine. Recently two trials have been reported, in which a combination of either a ty- rosine kinase inhibitor, or a chemotherapeutic agent of a novel class, epothilone, were found to be superior than capecitabine alone in terms of DFS. Lapatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of HER2/neu and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR),was used in combi- nation with capecitabine in a Phase III international multicentre trial in patients expressing HER-2/neu protein.14 Time to progression was almost twice as long in the lapatinib/capecitabine group: (36.9 weeks) com- pared with the capecitabine only group (19.7 weeks). The combination was well tolerated. In another Phase III trial, ixabepilone and capecitabine prolonged pro- gression-free survival (PFS) (5.8 months) relative to capecitabine (4.2 months).15 For the first time the PFS has been shown to be prolonged in this difficult-to- treat group of patients. C H R O N I C M Y E L O I D L E U K E M I A Since the approval of imatinib by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) has been revolutionised so that very few patients now receive the toxic treatment of allogeneic bone marrow transplant. Imatinib is an inhibitor of the tyrosine kinase produced by a muta- tion in the BCR-ABL gene. However, some patients de- velop additional mutations in this gene, causing their cancers to become resistant to the drug. Dasatinib targets these secondary mutations. In a Phase I clini- cal trial to determine the optimal dose of dasatinib for those who could not tolerate or had become resistant to imatinib, 92.5% of the patients had no evidence of disease after receiving dasatinib.16 Additionally, 70% of patients in the accelerated phase experienced a signifi- cant decrease in the number of blast cells after receiv- ing dasatinib. The duration of benefit was dependent on the phase of the disease when the patient was treat- ed. Dasatinib represents a significant improvement in the overall treatment of CML in general, and imatinib resistant cases in particular. C O L O N C A N C E R A D J U VA N T TR E ATME N T Over the years, modulated 5-FU has remained the standard of care for fully resected Stage II and III colon cancer in the adjuvant setting. Several different regi- mens incorporating leucovorin with 5-FU given for 6 months, had been shown to reduce the recurrence rates by 40% in Stage III colon cancer, and a lesser de- gree in Stage II disease. More recently, one large study (the MOSAIC trial) found that adding oxaliplatin to standard chemotherapy after surgery for early-stage colorectal cancer reduced the risk of recurrence by 24%.17 A separate study from the National Surgical Ad- juvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) showed that adding oxaliplatin to standard chemotherapy reduced the risk of recurrence by 21% in early-stage colorectal cancer patients.18 Coupled with similar data from other smaller studies, these findings have changed the treat- ment approach for patients with early-stage colorectal cancer who need chemotherapy after surgery. TR E ATME N T O F ME TA STATI C D I SE A SE Three signal transduction inhibitors, bevacizumab, ce- tuximab, and pannitumab have been approved in the past three years for treatment of metastatic colorectal cancers in the first and the second line. Bevacizumab is a recombinant, humanised monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) that is used to inhibit VEGF function in vascular en- dothelial cells and thereby inhibit tumour angiogen- esis. The addition of bevacizumab to 5-FU, with or without irinotecan or oxaliplatin, in both the first- and second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, has been shown to significantly increase PFS in several randomised trials. The overall survival advantage at- tributable to bevacizumab is 4.7 months with first-line therapy and 2.1 months with second-line therapy.19 Bevacizumab has acceptable tolerability, with the ma- jority of adverse events being generally mild and clini- cally manageable; however, cost effectiveness remains a concern in this setting. Another monoclonal antibody cetuximab, an in- hibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been shown, together with chemotherapy, to im- prove survival in metastatic colon cancer. A Phase III clinical trial involving patients with advanced colorec- tal cancer showed that the addition of cetuximab to a standard first-line chemotherapy combination called FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5-FU, and irinotecan) reduced 141 M A J O R A D VA N C E S I N T H E TR E AT M E N T O F C A N C E R the risk of progression by 15%.20 Significantly more patients were able to undergo surgeryfor the com- plete removal of their tumours. In addition, more than twice as many patients with liver metastases were able to have their tumours completely removed in the ce- tuximab plus FOLFIRI group. The study was the first to evaluate this combination, providing a new treat- ment option and enabling more patients to have their tumours surgically removed. G A S T R I C C A N C E R N E O -A D J U VA N T A N D A D J U VA N T TR E ATME N T Stomach cancer is conventionally regarded as a dif- ficult tumour to treat and most of the patients diag- nosed with it die of the cancer despite adequate sur- gery. Over the past 7 years, two significant advances have occurred, which have set new standards in the management of completely resected gastric cancer. A large U.S. Intergroup study (INT-0116) demonstrated that combined chemoradiation following complete gastric resection improves median time to relapse (30 versus 19 months, p <.0001) and overall survival (35 months versus 28 months, p =.01).21 Subsequently, the results of the Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) Trial, conducted in the UK, provided another significant ad- vance. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, employing three cycles of a combination of epirubicin, cisplatin and 5-FU (ECF), was not only able to downsize several tu- mours, rendering them resectable , but was also as- sociated with improvement in OS.22 Three further cy- cles of the same regimen were administered after the resection in an adjuvant setting. The updated results of the MAGIC Trial showed that 36% of patients who received chemotherapy were still alive five years after diagnosis, compared with 23% of those who received surgery alone. Taken together, the results of the two trials have changed the standard of care of gastric can- cer. G A S T R O I N T E S T I N A L S T R O M A L T U M O U R Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are charac- terised by the presence of c-kit receptor, which in turn can be blocked by imatinib. Imatinib has been in clini- cal use for the treatment of metastatic GIST for sev- eral years, and has response rates of up to 70%. Imat- inib has also been used to downsize the large tumours, and make them amenable to surgery. More, recently, imatinib has been found to have improved the recur- rence free survival (RFS) in patient with resected GIST when used in the adjuvant setting. A National Cancer Institute sponsored study randomised patients to re- ceive either 1 year of imatinib, or a placebo after com- pletely resecting the GIST.23 At the end of the first year of treatment, 97% of patients in the imatinib group had not experienced a recurrence, compared with 83% in the placebo group. The differences were most notable in patients with tumours larger than 10 cm. No dif- ferences in the overall survival rates were noted with this short follow-up. Based on the findings, the study was stopped early and the patients on the placebo arm were allowed to cross over to use imatinib. This study would have major implications in the management of this rather rare tumour. G L I O B L A S T O M A M U L T I F O R M E Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is one of the com- monest brain tumours in adults and is associated with poor survival rates. The conventional treatment has been resection followed by radiotherapy. Recently, two studies have shown for the first time that additional use of temozolamide, an alkylating agent, together with radiotherapy and subsequently for another 6 months after resection of GBM, can prolong the OS. The first study showed that patients with previously untreated GBM who received temozolamide with radiotherapy had a median survival of 14.6 months compared to 12.1 months for patients who received radiotherapy alone.24 The difference was more apparent after two years, when more than twice as many patients in the temozolamide group were still alive. A separate study of these patients found that those who benefited from temozolamide were more likely to have a particular genetic marker in their tumour cells. Patients with this marker (an alteration of the MGMT gene) who re- ceived temozolamide plus radiation lived 21.7 months, compared with 15.3 months among those who re- ceived radiation alone25 H E A D A N D N E C K C A N C E R Until recently, the standard of care for the squamous cell cancers of the head and neck region has been ei- ther curative resection, or radiotherapy, or resection followed by adjuvant radiotherapy; however, most of the patients still relapse loco-regionally. The addi- tion of chemotherapy has little or no benefit. More recently, the addition of cetuximab to radiotherapy I K R A M A B U R N E Y A N D M A N S O U R S A L - M O U N D H R I 142 was shown to improve OS for patients with head and neck cancers. Cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the EGFR in cancer cells, had previously been approved for use in colorectal cancers. The PFS was significantly longer in the cetuximab group: 24.4 ver- sus 14.9 months.26 The OS in the cetuximab group was also significantly longer: 49 versus 29.3 months. Also, patients with locally advanced hypopharyngeal or la- ryngeal cancer who received cetuximab with radiation therapy were more likely to have their larynxes pre- served compared with patients who received radiation therapy alone.27 The addition of cetuximab produced relatively mild side effects, including an acne-like rash and local reactions to the drug infusion Also recently, data demonstrated that adding ce- tuximab to standard chemotherapy for head and neck cancers increases survival. Data from four clinical tri- als confirmed that cetuximab also may prolong OS in patients with recurrent head and neck cancers; the difference was statistically significant: the OS was 5.9 months for those who received cetuximab compared with 3.4 months for patients who did not.28 Follow- ing publication of these studies, the FDA this year ap- proved the drug for use in combination with radiation therapy to treat squamous cell cancer of the head and neck, making it the first drug to be approved for this disease in 45 years. H E P A T O C E L L U L A R C A R C I N O M A Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is the third lead- ing cause of cancer death globally, often resulting in death within a year of diagnosis, and is one of the most difficult cancers to treat. More than 90% of the patients present at a stage where curative treatment with either resection or transplantation is not feasi- ble. For the past 30 years and more, several agents, including chemotherapeutic agents, have been tried, tested, and found to be ineffective. At the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meeting in 2008, results of a Phase III trial were presented. Patients who were treated with a multi-kinase inhibitor, sorafenib, had a median survival of 10.7 months, compared to 7.9 months for those who received a placebo.29 Time to cancer progression was also significantly longer in the treatment group: 5.5 versus 2.8 months. Sorafenib is also approved for treating advanced kidney cancer. The study was terminated early due to the positive re- sults, and represents a one of a kind study where a sur- vival benefit led to rapid approval by the FDA. L U N G C A N C E R Chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival in a select group of patients with non-small cell lung can- cer (NSCLC), and is currently considered the standard of care for patients with Stage IIIB and IV disease with a good performance status; however, until now, ques- tions persisted about the benefit of adjuvant chemo- therapy. The National Cancer Institute of Canada Clini- Study No of patients Treatment ORR PFS p-value Motzer 375 IFN-α 6% 5 375 Sunitinib 31% 11 <0.001 Escudier* 451 Placebo 37% 2.8 452 Sorafenib 62%** 5.5 <0.001 Hudes 207 IFN-α 4.8% 3.1 209 Temsiroimus 8.6% 5.5 <0.008 210 IFN+Temsirolimus 8.1% 4.7 Escudier 324 IFN-α 12.4% 5.4 325 Bevacizumab+IFN-α 10.2 10.2 <0.0001 ORR = Overall reponse rates; TTP = Time to progression; IFN-α = Interferon –α. * Second line treatment, ** Disease control rate (complete response + partial response + stable disease) Table 3: Randomised trials in metastatic renal cell carcinoma 143 M A J O R A D VA N C E S I N T H E TR E AT M E N T O F C A N C E R cal Trials Group and the U.S. National Cancer Institute Intergroup Trial found that OS among those patients with early-stage NSCLC who received adjuvant chem- otherapy with vinorelbine and cisplatin after surgery was 94 months, compared to 73 months for patients who did not.30 Five-year survival was also higher in the chemotherapy group (69% versus 54%), and the risk of recurrence was 40% lower in the chemotherapy group. These findings, together with those reported recently by the Adjuvant Navelbine International Trialist Asso- ciation (ANITA) and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB), confirm that adjuvant chemotherapy has a significant role in the treatment of patients with op- erable NSCLC.31, 32 These studies resolve a long-stand- ing debate about the benefit of adjuvant chemothera- py, definitively demonstrating that such treatment has a beneficial role in the care of patients with operable NSCLC. M U L T I P L E M Y E L O M A Multiple myeloma (MM) was considered to be an in- curable B-cell neoplasm. For the first time in several years, use of two new classes of drugs, immunomodu- latory (thalidomide and lenalidomide) and proteo- some inhibitors (bortezomib) have been considered as major therapeutic advances in the treatment of MM. Previously, thalidomide had been shown to improve the response rate and survival when used in combi- nation with melphalan and prednisolone, and had become an integral part in the management of MM; however, the drug is not free of side-effects. More recently, the effectiveness of lenalidomide has been demonstrated in Phase III clinical trials.33, 34 Patients with relapsed/refractory MM were randomised to lenalidomide plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone. Patients in the lenalidomide group had superior response rates and duration of response. Lenalidomide is an analogue of thalidomide, and works by inhibiting angiogenesis and immune modulation, and increasing apoptosis. Lenalidomide is generally better tolerated than thalidomide. The proteosome inhibitor borte- zomib is another recent addition to the MM treatment armamentarium. The target of bortezomib is the 26S proteasome. The benefit of bortezomib was shown in the Phase III APEX trial. Patients with relapsed/re- fractory MM were randomised to receive bortezomib or dexamethasone35. The response rate, median time to progression, and 1-year survival were significantly increased in the bortezomib group. In addition, clini- cal trials have further established the role of stem cell transplantation and the benefits of post-transplant maintenance therapy. These advances have resulted not only in expanded treatment options, but seem to have changed the natural history of MM which was once considered to be an incurable neoplasm. N O N - H O D G K I N ’ S L Y M P H O M A Follicular lymphoma (FL) is an indolent form of non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), the outcomes of which had not improved over the past 3 decades.36 In the last 3 years, four large scale randomized trials have shown that adding the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, ritux- imab, to conventional combination chemotherapies improves the PFS and the OS.37-40 Rituximab added to a combination of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, pred- nisolone (CVP); cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vin- cristine, prednisolone (CHOP); mitoxantrone, cyclo- phosphamide, prednisolone (MCP) or chlorambucil, vincristine, prednisolone with interferon maintenance (CHVP-IFN-α), brought clear survival advantage (see Table 2 for details). A combination of rituximab and chemotherapy has now become the standard of care in the treatment of the commonest form of indolent lymphoma, the FL.41, 42 Furthermore, another series of studies have es- tablished the successful role of rituximab for mainte- nance after completion of chemotherapy.43-45 Used in this way, PFS and OS rates are prolonged. For exam- ple, in one study, 56% of patients who received main- tenance rituximab showed no progression, compared with 33% of patients who were observed following chemotherapy. Moreover, 88% of the rituximab group was still alive after 4 years, compared with 72% of the observation group In a different setting, radioactivity conjugated with the anti-CD antibody has shown to induce higher re- mission rate, prolong the PFS and the OS. Two agents, 90Y and 131I have been extensively studied and the re- sults have been reported. Increasingly, the radioim- muno-labelled antibodies are being incorporated in the management of indolent lymphomas not only after relapsed FL, but also in first line therapy.46, 47 As a result of recent developments, not only rituxi- mab and radiolabelled antibodies have become the standard of care in the management of FL, but also, for the first time in the last three decades, the natural history of the disease seems to be changing, with the hope of a cure. I K R A M A B U R N E Y A N D M A N S O U R S A L - M O U N D H R I 144 O V A R I A N C A N C E R The vast majority of patients with epithelial ovar- ian cancer present with advanced stage disease, and the standard of care is debulking surgery followed by adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Despite the treat- ment, more than 80-90% of the patients relapse and die of their disease within few years of diagnosis. Con- tinued attempts to improve the survival rates have been unsuccessful in the past 10 years, since adjuvant chemotherapy with a combination of platinum with paclitaxel emerged as the standard of care.48 However, recently, the results of a Phase III trial including 415 patients with advanced ovarian cancer revealed that intra-peritoneal administration of chemotherapy ex- tended the median survival by more than 1 year (49.7 months versus 65.6 months) compared with intrave- nous chemotherapy.49 Patients with Stage III ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to either intravenous paclitaxel plus cisplatin or intravenous paclitaxel plus intra-peritoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel. However, patients who received intra-peritoneal therapy experienced more toxic side effects, and were more likely to report poorer quality of life, compared with women who received intravenous therapy. Only 42% of women in the intra-peritoneal chemotherapy group were able to complete all six cycles of therapy, compared with 83% of those who received intravenous chemotherapy.50 Such toxicity has limited the wide- spread use of intra-peritoneal therapy. P A N C R E A T I C C A N C E R Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer have a poor prognosis and the standard of care for the past 12 years has been the use of single agent gemcitabine. Several attempts to use combinations, such as with cisplatin, oxaliplatin, capecitabine and 5-FU have not yielded encouraging results. Pancreatic cancers are known to over-express EGFR and recently a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of the EGFR, erlotinib, was used in combina- tion with gemcitabine in patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic pancreatic cancer.51 A total of 569 patients were randomly assigned to receive either gemcitabine plus erlotinib (100 or 150 mg/d orally) or gemcitabine plus a placebo in a dou- ble-blind, international Phase III trial. One-year sur- vival was also greater with erlotinib plus gemcitabine (23% versus 17%). PFS was significantly longer with erlotinib plus gemcitabine. For the first time, a com- bination has been found to be superior than the single agent chemotherapy; however, given the modest gain in survival, pending complementary studies, the addi- tion of erlotinib can not still be considered the stand- ard of care. Nonetheless, this study paves the way for further trials employing signal transduction inhibitors in the management of unresectable pancreatic cancer. P R O S T A T E C A N C E R Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in men in the western world. Effective screening using digital rectal examination (DRE), and serum estima- Table 2: Randomised trials comparing standard chemotherapy with standard chemotherapy and rituximab for non-Hodgkins lymphoma Study No. of patients Treatment TTP p-value OS p-value Solal-Celingy 159 CVP 14 81%* 162 R-CVP 34 <0.0001 89% =0.053 Hiddeman 205 CHOP 29 90%** 223 R-CHOP NR <0.001 95% =0.016 Herold 96 MCP 25 74% 105 R-MCP 54 <0.0001 88% =0.014 Salles 175 CHVP-IFN 62%*** n/a 184 R-CHVP-IFN 78% <0.03 n/a TTP = Time to progression; OS = Overall survival; CVP = cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisolone; R-CVP = rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisolone, CHOP = cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone; R-CHOP = rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone; MCP = mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide, prednisolone; R- MCP = rituximab, mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide, prednisolone; CHVP-IFN = chlorambucil, vincristine, prednisolone, interferon α; R- CHVP-IFN = rituximab, chlorambucil, vincristine, prednisolone, .interferon α; *3 year survival; **2 year survival; ***Event-free survival 145 M A J O R A D VA N C E S I N T H E TR E AT M E N T O F C A N C E R tion of the prostate specific antigen (PSA) means that more patients are being diagnosed at an early stage. However, since the majority of patients is diagnosed at an old age and has a higher chance of dying because of the cancer-unrelated causes, an expectant approach or ‘watchful waiting’ has been employed as a method of early treatment. As yet there is no clear understanding as to which patients require aggressive treatment. A total of 695 men with early prostate cancer were ran- domly assigned to radical prostatectomy (347 men) or ‘watchful waiting’ (348 men).52 During a median of 8.2 years of follow-up, 83 men in the surgery group and 106 men in the watchful-waiting group died. Radical prostatectomy was found to have reduced the disease- specific mortality, overall mortality, and the risks of metastasis and local progression. The absolute reduc- tion in the risk of death after 10 years was small, but the reductions in the risks of metastasis and local tumour progression were substantial. When analysed by age, the benefits of surgery were greatest among younger men: among men under age 65, 19.2% in the ‘watch- ful waiting’ group had died after 10 years compared with 8.5% of those who had surgery, while among men age 65 and older, 11.5% in the ‘watchful waiting’ group died versus 8.5% of those in the surgery group. Based on these data, men under age 65 who have early-stage prostate cancer should undergo surgery to remove the prostate, while older men may choose ‘watchful wait- ing’. R E N A L C E L L C A R C I N O M A Nearly one-half of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have metastatic disease at the time of initial presentation. The tumour is not sensitive to chemo- therapy, and the options included treatment with in- terferon-α (IFN-α) or interleukin-2 (IL-2) or surgical resection of metastases. However, response rates to the cytokine treatment do not exceed 10-20%, and the long-term prognosis remains dismal. High-dose IL-2, approved for treatment of advanced RCC, has significant limitations. The treatment must usually be administered in an intensive care unit, is associated with significant toxicity, and has not demonstrated a survival benefit. Over the past two years, four differ- ent agents have been proved to be effective in inducing responses, with the possibility of some longer remis- sions. Sunitinib, sorafenib, temsirolimus, and bevaci- zumab have demonstrated significant efficacy in clini- cal trials and have been approved by the FDA for the treatment of advanced RCC [Table 3].53-56 Ever since the recognition that the tumour-sup- pressor von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene is mutated in most clear-cell carcinomas, resulting in angiogenesis and cell growth, a number of targeted therapies that block the downstream effects of the mutated gene have been developed. Sunitinib and sorafenib, for example, inhibit multiple receptor tyrosine kinases. Temsirolimus inhibits mTOR, which functions as an intermediary in a variety of cell signalling events to regulate cell growth and proliferation as well as angio- genesis and cell survival. Bevacizumab binds to VEGF and inhibits angiogenesis. In the first study, a total of 750 patients with a good performance status and good- and intermediate-risk clear cell RCC were randomized to receive either su- nitinib or IFN α. The median PFS was 11 months for Study No of patients Treatment ORR PFS p-value Motzer 375 IFN-α 6% 5 375 Sunitinib 31% 11 <0.001 Escudier* 451 Placebo 37% 2.8 452 Sorafenib 62%** 5.5 <0.001 Hudes 207 IFN-α 4.8% 3.1 209 Temsiroimus 8.6% 5.5 <0.008 210 IFN+Temsirolimus 8.1% 4.7 Escudier 324 IFN-α 12.4% 5.4 325 Bevacizumab+IFN-α 10.2 10.2 <0.0001 ORR = Overall reponse rates; TTP = Time to progression; IFN-α = Interferon –α. * Second line treatment, ** Disease control rate (complete response + partial response + stable disease) Table 3: Randomised trials in metastatic renal cell carcinoma I K R A M A B U R N E Y A N D M A N S O U R S A L - M O U N D H R I 146 the sunitinib arm and 5 months for the IFN α arm (p < 0.000001).53 In an another study, 905 patients who had failed one prior systemic therapy in the last 8 months and had measurable disease, clear cell histol- ogy, a good or intermediate prognosis, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 to 1 were randomised to receive either sor- afenib or placebo. Sorafenib significantly prolonged median PFS compared with placebo (24 vs 12 weeks, p < 0.000001).54 In a different study, 626 patients with several poor-risk features were randomised to receive either IFN α, temsirolimus or a combination of tem- sirolimus plus IFN α. The median survival of patients was superior in the temsirolimus-alone arm compared with IFN α (10.9 versus 7.3 months, p < 0.007), while the combination arm was not superior to IFN α (8.4 months, p = 0.69). The median PFS was statistically superior for both temsirolimus arms (3.7 months) compared with IFN α (1.9 months).55 In the fourth study, patients with metastatic kidney cancer who had undergone nephrectomy were randomly assigned to receive either bevacizumab or a placebo in addition to interferon. Adding bevacizumab nearly doubled PFS, from 5.4 months to 10.2 months. The tumour response rate was 31% for the bevacizumab group versus 13% for the placebo group.56 Over the past 2 years, the use of these agents has essentially replaced the standard cytokine treatment, which had been the standard of care for more than two decades. C O N C L U S I O N Oncology treatment has begun to progress by quan- tum leaps. A glance at this review would suggest that whereas, in some areas, a paradigm of management has shifted, for example, the use of targeted therapy in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer, and the use of monoclonal antibody together with chemotherapy in indolent lymphoma, resulting in the cure of many more patients than were seen in the very recent past, in other areas, new treatments have emerged, in hard- to-treat cancers, such as, HCC and RCC, offering hope of a meaningful prolongation of life to thousands of patients annually. The improved survival seen with the addition of targeted therapies as well as chemothera- peutic agents in cancers of the colon, head and neck, NSCLC, and the pancreas represents the continual im- provement seen using the Phase III randomised trials. R E F E R E N C E S 1. Herbst RS, Bajorin DF, Bleiberg H, Blum D, Hao D, Johnson BE, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncol- ogy. Clinical Cancer Advances 2005: major research ad- vances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screening - a report from the American Society of Clinical Oncol- ogy. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:190-205. 2. Ozols RF, Herbst RS, Colson YL, Gralow J, Bonner J, Curran WJ Jr, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncol- ogy. Clinical cancer advances 2006: major research ad- vances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screening - a report from the American Society of Clinical Oncol- ogy. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:146-162. 3. Gralow J, Ozols RF, Bajorin DF, Cheson BD, Sandler HM, Winer EP, et al. American Society of Clinical On- cology. Clinical cancer advances 2007: major research advances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screen- ing - a report from the American Society of Clinical On- cology. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:313-325. 4. Clark M. Meta-analyses of adjuvant therapies for wom- en with early breast cancer: the Early Breast Cancer Tri- alists’ Collaborative Group overview. Ann Oncol 2006; S10:59-62. 5. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, Suman VJ, Geyer CE Jr, Davidson NE, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast can- cer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1673-1684. 6. Robert N, Leyland-Jones B, Asmar L, Belt R, Ilegbodu D, Loesch D, et al. Randomized phase III study of tras- tuzumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin compared with trastuzumab and paclitaxel in women with HER-2 over- expressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:2786-2792. 7. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, Gol- dhirsch A, Untch M, Smith I, et al Herceptin Adjuvant (HERA) Trial Study Team. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1659-1672. 8. Viani GA, Afonso SL, Stefano EJ, De Fendi LI, Soares FV. Adjuvant trastuzumab in the treatment of her-2- positive early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of pub- lished randomized trials. BMC Cancer 2007; 7:153. 9. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P, Bono P, Alanko T, Kataja V, Asola R, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorel- bine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:809-820. 10. Forbes JF, Cuzick J, Buzdar A, Howell A, Tobias JS, Baum M. Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combina- tion (ATAC) Trialists’ Group. Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 100-month analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol 2008; 9:45-53. 11. Thürlimann B, Keshaviah A, Coates AS, Mouridsen H, Mauriac L, Forbes JF, et al. Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 Collaborative Group. A comparison of letro- zole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005 29; 353:2747- 2757. 147 M A J O R A D VA N C E S I N T H E TR E AT M E N T O F C A N C E R 12. Coombes RC, Hall E, Gibson LJ, Paridaens R, Jassem J, Delozier T et al. A randomized trial of exemestane after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy in post- menopausal women with primary breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1081-1092. 13. Efficacy of letrozole extended adjuvant therapy accord- ing to estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status of the primary tumor: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group MA.17. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:2006-2011. 14. Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, Chan S, Romieu CG, Pienkowski T, et al. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355:2733-2743. 15. Thomas ES, Gomez HL, Li RK, Chung HC, Fein LE, Chan VF, et al. Ixabepilone plus capecitabine for meta- static breast cancer progressing after anthracycline and taxane treatment. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:5210-5217. 16. Talpaz M, Shah NP, Kantarjian H, Donato N, Nicoll J, Paquette R, et al. Dasatinib in imatinib-resistant Phila- delphia chromosome-positive leukemias. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:2531-2541. 17. Anmdre T, Boni C, Mounedji-Boudiaf L, Navarro M, Tabernero J, Hickish T, et al. Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil and leucovorin as adjuvant treatment of colon cancer. N Eng J Med 2004; 350:2343-2351. 18. Kuebler JP, Wieand HS, O’Connell MJ, Smith RE, Col- angelo LH, Yothers G et al. Oxaliplatin combined with weekly bolus fluorouracil and leucovorin as surgical ad- juvant chemotherapy for stage II and III colon cancer: results from NSABP C-07. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:2198- 2204. 19. Golfinopoulos V, Salanti G, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP. Survival and disease progression benefits with treat- ment regimens for advanced colorectal cancer: a meta- analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8:898-911. 20. Tol J, Koopman M, Rodenburg CJ, Cats A, Creemers GJ, Schrama JG, et al. A randomized phase III standy of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumaab with or without cetuximab in first-line advanced colorectal can- cer, the CAIRO 2 study of the Dutch colorectal cancer study group (DCCG). An interim analysis of the toxic- ity. Ann Oncol 2008; 19:734-738. 21. Macdonald JS. Treatment of localized gastric cancer. Semin Oncol 2004; 31:566-573. 22. Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Weeden S. for the NCRI Upper GI Cancer Clinical Studies Group. Perioperative chemotherapy in operable gastric and lower oesophageal cancer: Final results of a randomised, controlled trial (the MAGIC trial, ISRCTN 93793971). J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:4001. 23. DeMatteo R, Owzar K, Maki R,Pisters M, Blackstein C, Antonescu C, et al. Adjuvant imatinib mesylate increas- es recurrence free survival in patients with completely resected localized primary GI stromal tumor: North American Intergroup Phase III trial ACOSOG Z9001. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:abs 10079. 24. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:987-996. 25. Hegi ME, Diserens AC, Gorlia T, Hamou MF, de Tribo- let N, Weller M, et al. MGMT gene silencing and ben- efit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:997-1003. 26. Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J. Radiotherapy plus ce- tuximab for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:567-578. 27. Vermorken J, Bourhis J, Trigo J, Kies X, Leon M, Mueser N, et al. Cetuximab (Erbitux) in recurrent/metastatic (R&M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) refractory to first-line platinum-based thera- pies. J Clin Oncol 2005 ASCO Annual Meeting Pro- ceedings 2005; 23:5505. 28. Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J, Baselga D, Shin R, Co- hen J, et al. Improved preservation of larynx with the addition of cetuximab to radiation for cancers of the lar- ynx and hypopharynx. J Clin Oncol 2005 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings 2005; 23:5533. 29. Llovet J, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V, Hilgard J, Raoul S, Zeuzem M, et al. Sorafenib improves survival in ad- vanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): Results of a phase III randomized placebo-controlled trial (SHARP trial). J Clin Oncol 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Pro- ceedings 2007; 25:LBA1. 30. Winton T, Livingston R, Johnson D, Rigas J, Johnston M, Butts C, et al. Vinorelbine plus cisplatin vs. obser- vation in resected non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:2589-2597. 31. Douillard J, Rosell R, Delena M,Carpagnano F, Ramlau R, Gonzales-Larriba JL, et al. Adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus observation in patients with completely resected stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (Ad- juvant Navelbine International Trialist Association [ANITA]): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2006; 7:719-27. 32. Strauss GM, Herndon J, Maddaus MS, Johnstone DW, Johnson EA, Watson DM, et al. Randomized clinical trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel and car- boplatin following resection in Stage IB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Report of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) protocol 9633. J Clin Oncol 2004 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings 2004; 22:7019. 33. Dimopoulos M, Spencer A, Attal M, Prince HM, Ha- rousseau JL, Dmoszynska A, et al. Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for relapsed or refractory multiple my- eloma. N Eng J Med 2007; 357:2123-2132. 34. Weber DM, Chen C, Niesvizky R, Wang M, Belch A, Stadtmauer EA, et al. Lenalidomide plus dexametha- sone for relapsed multiple myeloma in North America. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2133-2142. 35. Richardson PG, Sonneveld P, Schuster MW, Irwin D, Stadtmauer EA, Facon T, et al. Bortezomib or high-dose dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. N Engl I K R A M A B U R N E Y A N D M A N S O U R S A L - M O U N D H R I 148 J Med 2005; 352:2487-2498. 36. Liu Q, Fayad L, Cabanillas F, Hagemeister FB, Ayers GD, Hess M, et al. Improvement of overall and failure-free survival in stage IV follicular lymphoma: 25 years of treatment experience at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:1582- 1589. 37. Marcus R, Imrie K, Belch A, Cunningham D, Flores E, Catalano J, et al. CVP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CVP as first-line treatment for advanced follicular lymphoma. Blood 2005; 105:417-423. 38. Hiddemann W, Kneba M, Dreyling M, Schmitz N, Lengfelder E, Schmits R, et al. Frontline therapy with rituximab added to the combination of cyclophospha- mide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) significantly improves the outcome for patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma compared with therapy with CHOP alone: results of a prospective ran- domized study of the German. Low-Grade Lymphoma Study Group. Blood 2005; 106:3725-3732. 39. Forstpointner R, Unterhalt M, Dreyling M, Böck HP, Repp R, Wandt H, et al. German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG). Maintenance therapy with rituxi- mab leads to a significant prolongation of response duration after salvage therapy with a combination of rituximab, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and mitox- antrone (R-FCM) in patients with recurring and refrac- tory follicular and mantle cell lymphomas: Results of a prospective randomized study of the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG). Blood 2006; 108:4003-4008. 40. Herold M, Haas A, Srock S, Neser S, Al-Ali KH, Neu- bauer A, et al. East German Study Group Hematology and Oncology Study. Rituximab added to first-line mi- toxantrone, chlorambucil, and prednisolone chemo- therapy followed by interferon maintenance prolongs survival in patients with advanced follicular lymphoma: an East German Study Group Hematology and Oncol- ogy Study. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:1986-1992. 41. Marcus R. Use of Rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma. Clin Oncol 2007; 19:38-49. 42. Fisher RI, LeBlanc M, Press OW, Maloney DG, Unger JM, Miller TP. New treatment options have changed the survival of patients with follicular lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23:8447-8452. 43. Forstpointner R, Unterhalt M, Dreyling M, Bock HP, Repp R, Wandt H, et al. Maintenance therapy with rituximab leads to a significant prolongation of re- sponse duration after salvage therapy with a combina- tion of rituximab, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and mitoxantrone (R-FCM) in patients with recurring and refractory follicular and mantle cell lymphomas: Results of a prospective randomized study of the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG). Blood 2006; 108:4003-4008. 44. van Oers MH, Klasa R, Marcus RE, Wolf M, Kimby E, Gascoyne RD, et al. Rituximab maintenance improves clinical outcome of relapsed/resistant follicular non- Hodgkin lymphoma in patients both with and with- out rituximab during induction: results of a prospec- tive randomized phase 3 intergroup trial. Blood 2006; 108:3295-3301. 45. van Oers MH. Rituximab maintenance therapy: a step forward in follicular lymphoma. Haematologica 2007; 92:826-833. 46. Kaminski MS, Tuck M, Estes J, Kolstad A, Ross CW, Zasadny K, et al. 131I-tositumomab therapy as initial treatment for follicular lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:441-449. 47. Zinzani PL, d’Amore F, Bombardieri E, Brammer C, Codina JG, Illidge T, et al. Consensus conference: Im- plementing treatment recommendations on yttrium-90 immunotherapy in clinical practice - Report of a Euro- pean workshop. Eur J Cancer 2008; 44:366-373. 48. McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, Brady MF, Kucera PR, Par- tridge EE, Look KY, et al. Cyclophosphamide and cis- platin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 1996; 334:1-6. 49. Armstrong DK, Bundy B, Wenzel L, Huang HQ, Baer- gen R, Lele S, et al. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy and paclitaxel in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:34- 43. 50. Swart AMC, Burdett S, Ledermann J, Mook P, Parmar MKB. Why i.p. therapy cannot yet be considered as a standard of care for the first-line treatment of ovarian cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol 2008; 19:688- 695. 51. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Ham J, Figer A, Hecht JR, Gall- inger S, et al. Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared to gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A phase III trial of the National Cancer Insti- tute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 2007; 20:1960-1966. 52. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Haggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:1977-1984. 53. Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P, Michaelson MD, Bukowski RM, Rixe O, et al. Sunitinib versus interferon alfa in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:115-124. 54. Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler WM, Szczylik C, Oudard S, Siebels M, et al. TARGET Study Group. Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:125-134. 55. Hudes G, Carducci M, Tomczak P, Dutcher J, Figlin R, Kapoor A, et al. Temsirolimus, interferon alpha, or both for advanced renal cell carcinoma. N Eng J Med 2007; 356:2271-2281. 56. Escudier B, Pluzanska A, Koralewski P, Ravaud A, Brac- arda S, Szczylik C, et al. AVOREN Trial investigators. Bevacizumab plus interferon alfa-2a for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, double- blind phase III trial. Lancet 2007; 370:2103-2111.