This is an archive of papers published by the staff and faculty of Fox Chase Cancer Center. For questions about content, please contact Talbot Research Library
Last updated on
Bookman MA , McMeekin DS , Fracasso PM
Sequence dependence of hematologic toxicity using carboplatin and topotecan for primary therapy of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A phase I study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group
Gynecologic Oncology. 2006 Nov;103(2) :473-478
AbstractPurpose. Selection of a feasible sequence and schedule of carboplatin in combination with topotecan for evaluation in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Patients and methods. Women with stages III-IV EOC or primary peritoneal carcinoma without prior chemotherapy were assigned to consecutive cohorts evaluating a "forward" (carboplatin day 1, topotecan days 1-3), "reverse" (carboplatin day 3, topotecan days 1-3), or "extended reverse" sequence (carboplatin day 5, topotecan days 1-5). Patients received 4 cycles carboplatin-topotecan followed by 4 cycles carboplatin-paclitaxel. Feasibility was defined according to the cumulative proportion of patients with dose-limiting events (DLEs) during the first four cycles. Results. Sixty-eight patients were enrolled across 5 cohorts. The forward sequence demonstrated unacceptable hematologic DLEs at the lowest topotecan dose (0.75 mg/m(2)/day X 3 days). The reverse sequence was feasible at 1.25 mg/m(2)/day X 3 days, with only 1/15 patients experiencing a DLE within 4 cycles, and 14/15 patients were able to receive 4 subsequent cycles of carboplatin-paclitaxel. The extended reverse sequence was associated with excessive DLEs at 1.00 mg/m(2)/day X 5 days. Prophylactic hematopoietic growth factors were not required. Conclusion. Higher doses of topotecan could be safely administered with reduced toxicity over multiple cycles using the reverse sequence, which was selected for phase III evaluation. The relative efficacy of the forward and reverse sequence is unknown. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
NotesISI Document Delivery No.: 101SA Times Cited: 0 Cited Reference Count: 20 Cited References: BOOKMAN MA, 1998, J CLIN ONCOL, V16, P3345 BOWMAN A, 2001, J CLIN ONCOL, V19, P3255 CHOU TC, 1994, J NATL CANCER I, V86, P1517 CREEMERS GJ, 1996, J CLIN ONCOL, V14, P3056 DEJONGE MJA, 2000, J CLIN ONCOL, V18, P2104 DUBOIS A, 2003, J NATL CANCER I, V95, P1320 GORDON AN, 2002, GYNECOL ONCOL, V85, P129 GORDON AN, 2004, GYNECOL ONCOL, V94, P533 HOCHSTER H, 1999, J CLIN ONCOL, V17, P2553 HOSKINS P, 2000, J CLIN ONCOL, V18, P4038 HUININK TBW, 1997, J CLIN ONCOL, V125, P2183 MA JG, 1998, CANCER CHEMOTH PHARM, V41, P307 MARKMAN M, 2000, GYNECOL ONCOL, V77, P112 MCGUIRE WP, 1996, NEW ENGL J MED, V334, P1 MCGUIRE WP, 2000, J CLIN ONCOL, V18, P1062 MILLER DS, 2003, CANCER, V98, P1664 OZOLS RF, 2003, J CLIN ONCOL, V21, P3194 ROMANELLI S, 1998, CANCER CHEMOTH PHARM, V41, P385 ROWINSKY EK, 1996, J CLIN ONCOL, V14, P3074 SORENSEN M, 2000, ANN ONCOL, V11, P829