• Set Yourself Up For Success Webinar

    October 6, 2021 at 2 PM Eastern/11 AM Pacific
    SDN and Osmosis are teaming up to help you get set up for success this school year! We'll be covering study tips, healthy habits, and meeting mentors.

    Register Now!

  • Site Updates Coming Soon

    Site updates are coming next week on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Click the button below to learn more!

    LEARN MORE

Cis vs MMC in Anal Cancer - The Right way, the wrong way, and the MDA way

evilbooyaa

Full Member
Staff member
Volunteer Staff
7+ Year Member
Oct 10, 2011
7,262
7,837
326
  1. Attending Physician
That was always so unusual to me. Being dogmatic about cis vs mmc in the face of data showing it's worse. Just a bizarre hill to die on.

Eh. MMC is more toxic ( "although more patients had grade 3 haematological toxic effects in the mitomycin group than in the cisplatin group (26% vs 16%; p<0·001)." ).

Cis in ACT-II when not futzing about with induction (which was the main issue IMO of 9811 and ACCORD-03, not the fact that it's Cis) seems reasonable. ACT-II liked MMC b/c it wasn't a non-inferiority trial, but it's a one-time thing that didn't require hydration resources of cis, which UK-based NHS loves (less having to be done for patients).

I have zero problems with an institutional policy being "Cis for all" in anal SCC.

If you'd like to discuss further, let me know and I'll turn it into it's own thread to avoid de-railing further.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
About the Ads

RickyScott

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Oct 4, 2017
2,561
4,439
126
  1. Attending Physician
Eh. MMC is more toxic ( "although more patients had grade 3 haematological toxic effects in the mitomycin group than in the cisplatin group (26% vs 16%; p<0·001)." ).

Cis in ACT-II when not futzing about with induction (which was the main issue IMO of 9811 and ACCORD-03, not the fact that it's Cis) seems reasonable. ACT-II liked MMC b/c it wasn't a non-inferiority trial, but it's a one-time thing that didn't require hydration resources of cis, which UK-based NHS loves (less having to be done for patients).

I have zero problems with an institutional policy being "Cis for all" in anal SCC.

If you'd like to discuss further, let me know and I'll turn it into it's own thread to avoid de-railing further.
Spoke to Chris crane about this a number of years ago and came away convinced that cis was very reasonable.
 
Upvote 0

Mandelin Rain

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Apr 21, 2011
2,220
4,858
276
I don't think much is unreasonable. Cis in anal cancer is not one of those things. I don't care. It just always seemed strange to me to keep fighting and fighting that battle. Like altered fractionation in H/N in chemo era or pelvic nodes for prostate cancer. It's reasonable to do a lot of stuff. No need to rehash it again and again.

On orals CC was my GI examiner (probably one of my favorite examiners. He was teaching me new stuff while examining me, like you can't help but learn while you're around him), and I answered MMC for anal ca knowing he may object and obviously in a bad spot to defend myself vs him. No sigh. No groan. No raised eyebrow. We just moved on.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

Neuronix

Total nerd
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Mar 14, 2002
14,209
5,828
626
the beach
  1. Attending Physician
If you look at ACT-II, cis and MMC were equivalent Mitomycin or Cisplatin Chemoradiation With or Without Maintenance Chemotherapy for Treatment of Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Anus (ACT II): A Randomised, Phase 3, Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial Trial - PubMed

The conclusion of the abstract states " The results of our trial—the largest in anal cancer to date—show that fluorouracil and mitomycin with 50·4 Gy radiotherapy in 28 daily fractions should remain standard practice in the UK."

But why? If cisplatin is equivalent, why insist on MMC especially when there's more heme toxicity? Shrug.
 
Upvote 0

Mandelin Rain

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Apr 21, 2011
2,220
4,858
276
Best reason is... ACT II was published after I took Orals but 9811 was widely available and known.

EDIT: Additionally, I think ACT II was not designed as a non-inferiority or equivalence trial, though I could be wrong.

EDIT 2: It was a superiority trial for Cis (not sure why, but that was the design). Cis failed to show superiority, so it lost. In America, despite losing, it would become the standard arm of the follow up trial (cough *RTOG 0129* cough), but in the MRC, I guess that doesn't fly.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

evilbooyaa

Full Member
Staff member
Volunteer Staff
7+ Year Member
Oct 10, 2011
7,262
7,837
326
  1. Attending Physician
If you look at ACT-II, cis and MMC were equivalent Mitomycin or Cisplatin Chemoradiation With or Without Maintenance Chemotherapy for Treatment of Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Anus (ACT II): A Randomised, Phase 3, Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial Trial - PubMed

The conclusion of the abstract states " The results of our trial—the largest in anal cancer to date—show that fluorouracil and mitomycin with 50·4 Gy radiotherapy in 28 daily fractions should remain standard practice in the UK."

But why? If cisplatin is equivalent, why insist on MMC especially when there's more heme toxicity? Shrug.

Was a superiority trial, not non-inferiority. Authors are obliged to conclude that if a regimen is not superior than the control arm remain SOC.

Similar to CONVERT trial, where 66/33 was supposed to be superior to Turrisi. It wasn't, so conclusion (appropriately) says Turrisi is 'SOC'.

Anyways, going to pull this into it's own thread given the discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Reaganite

Member
15+ Year Member
Apr 6, 2006
639
625
316
  1. Resident [Any Field]
Spoke to Chris crane about this a number of years ago and came away convinced that cis was very reasonable.

That man's mednet write ups alone should be required reading for every rad onc resident. Bar none my favorite academic out there. If he's pushing for cis, I gotta reevaluate lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0

elementaryschooleconomics

The Salvador Dalí of Dose Painting
Nov 2, 2019
1,363
5,664
76
  1. Attending Physician
That man's mednet write ups alone should be required reading for every rad onc resident. Bar none my favorite academic out there. If he's pushing for cis, I gotta reevaluate lol.

Strongly agree. Can we get him on this new Virtual Visiting Professor thing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

radmonckey

SDN Gold Donor
7+ Year Member
Aug 6, 2013
339
441
216
  1. Attending Physician
If you look at ACT-II, cis and MMC were equivalent Mitomycin or Cisplatin Chemoradiation With or Without Maintenance Chemotherapy for Treatment of Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Anus (ACT II): A Randomised, Phase 3, Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial Trial - PubMed

The conclusion of the abstract states " The results of our trial—the largest in anal cancer to date—show that fluorouracil and mitomycin with 50·4 Gy radiotherapy in 28 daily fractions should remain standard practice in the UK."

But why? If cisplatin is equivalent, why insist on MMC especially when there's more heme toxicity? Shrug.

The real answer I'm told, and this is not a dig, is socialized medicine. This study was done in the UK. The decreased resource utilization of mmc with a quick infusion outweighs the decreased toxicity of cis and it's prolonged infusion.
 
Upvote 0

evilbooyaa

Full Member
Staff member
Volunteer Staff
7+ Year Member
Oct 10, 2011
7,262
7,837
326
  1. Attending Physician
That man's mednet write ups alone should be required reading for every rad onc resident. Bar none my favorite academic out there. If he's pushing for cis, I gotta reevaluate lol.
Agreed. Don't agree with 100% of his writings but darn near most of them.

My favorite line of his - Time to generate some data.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

ramsesthenice

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Dec 2, 2011
1,057
1,685
226
  1. Attending Physician
The real answer I'm told, and this is not a dig, is socialized medicine. This study was done in the UK. The decreased resource utilization of mmc with a quick infusion outweighs the decreased toxicity of cis and it's prolonged infusion.

Bingo. They spell it out right in the discussion section of the paper. "Although grade 3–4 haematological toxic effects were less common with fluorouracil plus cisplatin (26% vs 16%) patients, these were almost entirely related to white blood cells but were not sufficient to increase neutropenic sepsis. This marginal benefit is likely to be outweighed by the extra resources needed to administer cisplatin—two courses of either all day or overnight intravenous treatment with hydration, compared with only a single dose of mitomycin delivered over 10 min."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
About the Ads
This thread is more than 1 year old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.