BACKGROUND: A previous Southwest Oncology Group study demonstrated a 30% response rate with the combination of cisplatin and mitotane in the treatment of patients with metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma. Several case reports suggested that the combination of etoposide and cisplatin may be an active regimen in this disease. Because of these reports of potential activity, the authors conducted a Phase II trial evaluating the combination of etoposide and cisplatin. Due to the lack of data regarding the objective response rates to mitotane, the authors planned to evaluate the response rate to mitotane after disease progression on etoposide and cisplatin in patients with no prior mitotane therapy. METHODS: Patients with advanced, unresectable, or metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma with objectively measurable disease or biochemical abnormalities received cisplatin, 50 mg/m(2), intravenously on Days 1 and 2, and etoposide, 100 mg/m(2), on Days 1, 2, and 3. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. At the time of disease progression, patients who had not previously received mitotane received 1000 mg orally 4 times a day along with cortisone acetate and fludrocortisone acetate. RESULTS: Of the 47 patients entered onto the study, 45 were eligible. Nine patients had received mitotane previously and 36 had not. Objective responses were noted in 11% of patients (5 of 45 patients) (95% confidence interval, 3.7-24%). The median survival was 10 months. The most common toxic effects were hematologic, gastrointestinal, and neurologic. Only 16 patients with no prior mitotane therapy went on to receive mitotane at the time of disease progression. An objective response was noted in 13% of patients (2 of 16 patients). The most common toxic effects were edema and gastrointestinal effects. CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrates that the combination of cisplatin and etoposide has minimal activity in advanced and metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma and other treatment strategies are warranted. Copyright 2000 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: A previous Southwest Oncology Group study demonstrated a 30% response rate with the combination of cisplatin and mitotane in the treatment of patients with metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma. Several case reports suggested that the combination of etoposide and cisplatin may be an active regimen in this disease. Because of these reports of potential activity, the authors conducted a Phase II trial evaluating the combination of etoposide and cisplatin. Due to the lack of data regarding the objective response rates to mitotane, the authors planned to evaluate the response rate to mitotane after disease progression on etoposide and cisplatin in patients with no prior mitotane therapy. METHODS:Patients with advanced, unresectable, or metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma with objectively measurable disease or biochemical abnormalities received cisplatin, 50 mg/m(2), intravenously on Days 1 and 2, and etoposide, 100 mg/m(2), on Days 1, 2, and 3. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. At the time of disease progression, patients who had not previously received mitotane received 1000 mg orally 4 times a day along with cortisone acetate and fludrocortisone acetate. RESULTS: Of the 47 patients entered onto the study, 45 were eligible. Nine patients had received mitotane previously and 36 had not. Objective responses were noted in 11% of patients (5 of 45 patients) (95% confidence interval, 3.7-24%). The median survival was 10 months. The most common toxic effects were hematologic, gastrointestinal, and neurologic. Only 16 patients with no prior mitotane therapy went on to receive mitotane at the time of disease progression. An objective response was noted in 13% of patients (2 of 16 patients). The most common toxic effects were edema and gastrointestinal effects. CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrates that the combination of cisplatin and etoposide has minimal activity in advanced and metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma and other treatment strategies are warranted. Copyright 2000 American Cancer Society.
Authors: E Baudin; S Leboulleux; A Al Ghuzlan; C Chougnet; J Young; D Deandreis; F Dumont; F Dechamps; C Caramella; P Chanson; E Lanoy; I Borget; M Schlumberger Journal: Horm Cancer Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.869
Authors: A Stigliano; I Chiodini; R Giordano; A Faggiano; L Canu; S Della Casa; P Loli; M Luconi; F Mantero; M Terzolo Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: André P Fay; Aymen Elfiky; Gabriela H Teló; Rana R McKay; Marina Kaymakcalan; Paul L Nguyen; Anand Vaidya; Daniel T Ruan; Joaquim Bellmunt; Toni K Choueiri Journal: Crit Rev Oncol Hematol Date: 2014-06-04 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Tobias Else; Alex C Kim; Aaron Sabolch; Victoria M Raymond; Asha Kandathil; Elaine M Caoili; Shruti Jolly; Barbra S Miller; Thomas J Giordano; Gary D Hammer Journal: Endocr Rev Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 19.871
Authors: Lauren M Postlewait; Cecilia G Ethun; Thuy B Tran; Jason D Prescott; Timothy M Pawlik; Tracy S Wang; Jason Glenn; Ioannis Hatzaras; Rivfka Shenoy; John E Phay; Kara Keplinger; Ryan C Fields; Linda X Jin; Sharon M Weber; Ahmed Salem; Jason K Sicklick; Shady Gad; Adam C Yopp; John C Mansour; Quan-Yang Duh; Natalie Seiser; Carmen C Solorzano; Colleen M Kiernan; Konstantinos I Votanopoulos; Edward A Levine; Charles A Staley; George A Poultsides; Shishir K Maithel Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 6.113