Robert S. Kerbel
Sunnybrook Research Institute, University of Toronto,
Email ID: robert.kerbel@sri.utoronto.ca
The original mechanism hypothesized or shown to explain the mechanism of chronically administering chemotherapy in a continuous or frequent low-dose (’metronomic’) fashion with no extended breaks was via antiangiogenesis. There are at least four ways this can occur: 1) by inducing apoptosis in ‘activated’ endothelial cells of the tumor's angiogenic neovasculature; 2) inhibiting the mobilization and tumor homing of proangiogenic bone marrow-derived cells (BMDCs), e.g. endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), and by suppression of the HIF-1α transcription factor. However, from the start (in 2000), another possible mechanism is stimulation of the immune system by suppression of T regulatory cells when using certain drugs such as cyclophosphamide; 3) a third mechanism is by direct inhibitory effects on the proliferation and survival of tumor cells, and a fourth, is through an anti-vascular effect that is independent of inhibiting tumor angiogenesis. Experimental findings will be discussed which will focus on the third and fourth mechanisms, utilizing various models of metastatic disease in mice, and which involve results that are not necessarily consistent with an antiangiogenic mechanism, but rather direct tumor cell targeting effect, and possibly an effect on co-opted (’hijacked’) established vessels in tumors growing in sites such as the lungs or liver.
The above brief summaries include a total of thirty studies containing data on 1390 patients with various malignancies (544 with head neck cancer, 153 with ovarian cancer, 260 with breast cancer, 118 with lung cancer, 147 with leukemia and lymphoma, 129 with sarcoma, 19 with genitourinary cancer, and 20 with central nervous system cancers).
The 12 abstracts in head neck cancer document the combined experience in a total of 544 patients. If we exclude the 15 patients treated with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin, it still is a collective data on 516 cases. The most common metronomic therapy combination used was methotrexate and celecoxib, drugs that are easily available and inexpensive.[1] One study of 13 patients included the addition of erlotinib as the third drug. We would like to comment on two specific studies. Abstract No. 3 by Agarwala et al. involving sixty patients clearly shows that conventional standard systemic therapy (paclitaxel plus cetuximab) is significantly better than oral metronomic therapy (OMT). These data indicate that OMT should not be used if the patient is able to receive standard of care.[2] Abstract No. 8 by Chandrakanth et al. compared quality of life (QoL) in patients receiving OMT versus weekly cisplatin. These results clearly show that QoL is same in both the arms.[3] What is most interesting is the data of 110 patients reported by Patil et al. This impressive prospective randomized study showed that both overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was better with OMT as compared to weekly paclitaxel, with a P = 0.02. Moreover, this was achieved with fewer adverse events as well. Such comparison has also been made between OMT and weekly cisplatin.[4,5] This is the most impressive data that we have seen in favor of OMT so far.
The three abstracts on ovarian cancer used etoposide, cyclophosphamide, tamoxifen, erlotinib, and/or celecoxib as agents for OMT. These data need cautious interpretation. Clearly in the neoadjuvant setting, the standard therapy of paclitaxel and platinum gave a response rate of almost 100% (34/35 cases) and better median PFS as reported by Pandey et al. In heavily pretreated patients, the value of OMT is in providing an OS of 7 months as shown by Kalaichelvi et al. Gupta et al. have shown that use of etoposide, cyclophosphamide, and tamoxifen is not without significant adverse events, with more than half the patients requiring dose reduction.[6] The value of this strategy, however, was in obtaining an overall response rate (ORR) of 76%.
The data on 260 women with breast cancer from rural India by Khatwani et al. show that there is a lot of scope for improvement. If an ORR of 25% can be obtained in metastatic triple negative breast cancer for the subset who had failed previous therapy with standard therapy, use of oral cyclophosphamide and methotrexate could be a valuable option, especially in the low- and medium-resource setting.[7]
In fact, the most interesting adjuvant trials are the ABCDE trial (NCT00925652) where two of the four arms receive metronomic cyclophosphamide with bevacizumab (plus diet intervention ± exercise), the SYSUCC-001 trial (NCT01112826) in TNBC patients where the intervention group receive 1 year of metronomic capecitabine, and the IBCSG 22-00 trial (NCT00022516) using cyclophosphamide-methotrexate maintenance after standard adjuvant therapy in hormone receptor negative patients.[8,9]
The data on 139 patients with acute myeloid leukemia by Singh et al. indicate that there could be potential benefit from maintenance therapy, especially if it can contribute to achieving an OS of 69% at 5.7 years.[10,11]
Among patients with sarcoma, the drugs used as OMT included tamoxifen, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, propranolol, vinblastine, and methotrexate. An ORR of 59% in the study by Kumar et al. in the setting of refractory, relapsed and metastatic sarcoma shows the potential of this approach.
More than a decade ago, Kerbel and Kamen independently published about the antiangiogenic effects of low-dose chemotherapy a strategy that was subsequently made popular as metronomic chemotherapy.[12,13]
Kerbel and Kamen also show that OMT is likely to have more than the usually recognized antiangiogenic effect. This includes, but is not limited to, targeting endothelial cells of the tumor neovasculature; inhibiting mobilization or directly targeting proangiogenic bone marrow-derived cells; suppressing hypoxia-inducible factor1-apha; direct action against cancer stem cells and indirect action via stimulating the immune system.[13]
Medline search “metronomic chemotherapy India” yielded 31 references, 17 of which are involving the Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/). Hence, it is not surprising that the international community awarded the first Barton Kamen-MGHI Prize to Prof. Shripad Banavali in 2014. This prize was given by the wife of the late Dr. Barton Kamen, a pediatric oncologist, who pioneered low-dose chemotherapy and was an untiring advocate of metronomic chemotherapy.[9]
While it has been showcased as a therapeutic strategy for patients living in low- and middle-income countries, it's obvious benefit of repurposing old drugs at miniscule cost and significantly lower toxicity, makes it applicable globally even among the wealthy nations.[14,15]
By bringing out an issue of the Indian Journal of Cancer on metronomic therapy in 2013, India led the initiative instead of simply copy-pasting so-called standard-of-care from the western world.[8] Moreover, by hosting the international metronomic conference in Mumbai, India, this year (which is the next logical step), India is cementing its leadership role in this field.
It is now time for various thought leaders, think tanks, governments, pharmaceuticals companies, and international NGOs to join hands to initiate a global strategy and program to systematically study, document, define, and embed the exact place of metronomic chemotherapy in the armamentarium against cancer. Incorporating strategies to design metronomic chemotherapy trial, with biomarkers and reliable surrogate markers of clinical benefit, will enable oncologists to optimize its value in the current era of personalized medicine.[16,17,18]
References
-
1.Patil V, Noronha V, Krishna V, Joshi A, Prabhash K. Oral metronomic chemotherapy in recurrent, metastatic and locally advanced head and neck cancers. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2013;25:388. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2013.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
2.Patil V, Karpe A, Noronha V, Joshi A, Muddu V, Bhattacharjee A, et al. Efficacy of second-line erlotinib in patients postprogression of first-line chemotherapy in head and neck cancers. Indian J Cancer. 2015;52:629–31. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.178374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
3.Noronha V, Joshi A, Marfatia S, Patil V, Juvekar S, Arya S, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic, relapsed, or inoperable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in India. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24:1595–602. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2937-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
4.Patil VM, Noronha V, Joshi A, Muddu VK, Dhumal S, Bhosale B, et al. A prospective randomized phase II study comparing metronomic chemotherapy with chemotherapy (single agent cisplatin), in patients with metastatic, relapsed or inoperable squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck. Oral Oncol. 2015;51:279–86. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2014.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
5.Pai PS, Vaidya AD, Prabhash K, Banavali SD. Oral metronomic scheduling of anticancer therapy-based treatment compared to existing standard of care in locally advanced oral squamous cell cancers: A matched-pair analysis. Indian J Cancer. 2013;50:135–41. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.117024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
6.Majumder D, Mukherjee A. Mathematical modelling of toxicity-related trade-offs in metronomic chemotherapy. IET Syst Biol. 2007;1:298–305. doi: 10.1049/iet-syb:20060085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
7.Noronha V, Tsomo U, Jamshed A, Hai M, Wattegama S, Baral R, et al. A fresh look at oncology facts on south central Asia and SAARC countries. South Asian J Cancer. 2012;1:1–4. doi: 10.4103/2278-330X.96489. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
8.André N, Pasquier E. Metronomics in low and middle income countries: India showing the way! Indian J Cancer. 2013;50:112–4. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.117026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
9.Bouche G, André N, Banavali S, Berthold F, Berruti A, Bocci G, et al. Lessons from the fourth metronomic and anti-angiogenic therapy meeting, 24-25 June 2014, Milan. Ecancermedicalscience. 2014;8:463. doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2014.463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
10.Tandon N, Banavali S, Menon H, Gujral S, Kadam PA, Bakshi A. Is there a role for metronomic induction (and maintenance) therapy in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. A literature review? Indian J Cancer. 2013;50:154–8. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.117033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
11.Malik PS, Raina V, André N. Metronomics as maintenance treatment in oncology: Time for chemo-switch. Front Oncol. 2014;4:76. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2014.00076. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
12.Browder T, Butterfield CE, Kräling BM, Shi B, Marshall B, O’Reilly MS, et al. Antiangiogenic scheduling of chemotherapy improves efficacy against experimental drug-resistant cancer. Cancer Res. 2000;60:1878–86. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
13.Kerbel RS, Kamen BA. The anti-angiogenic basis of metronomic chemotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:423–36. doi: 10.1038/nrc1369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
14.Noronha V, Krishna MV, Patil V, Joshi A, Banavali SD, Prabhash K. Metronomic therapy: Chemotherapy revisited. Indian J Cancer. 2013;50:142–8. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.117027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
15.Bahl A, Bakhshi S. Metronomic chemotherapy in progressive pediatric malignancies: Old drugs in new package. Indian J Pediatr. 2012;79:1617–22. doi: 10.1007/s12098-012-0759-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
16.Agrawal A, Purandare N, Shah S, Puranik A, Banavali S, Rangarajan V. Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? Indian J Nucl Med. 2014;29:74–80. doi: 10.4103/0972-3919.130285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
17.Sondhi V, Arun Kurkure P, Jalali R, Rangarajan V, Sridhar E, Medhi S, et al. Complete remission and long-term survival in a child with relapsed medulloblastoma with extensive osteosclerotic bony metastasis with a novel metronomic chemobiological approach. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2012;34:e195–8. doi: 10.1097/MPH.0b013e3182373e6a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
18.Parikh PM, Prabhash K, Bhattacharyya GS, Sirohi B, Rajappa S, Verma A, et al. Ignore molecular oncology at your peril. Indian J Cancer. 2014;51:150–3. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.138258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]