Allan Solomon Zimet

Phase II study of docetaxel and cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE Docetaxel (Taxotere, Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Antony, France) and cisplatin are two of the most active single agents used in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A recently reported phase I study of the combination of docetaxel and cisplatin recommended a dose of 75 mg/m2 of both drugs every 3 weeks for subsequent phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients were aged 18 to 75 years with a World Health Organization (WHO) performance status < or = 2 and life expectancy > or = 12 weeks, with metastatic and/or locally advanced NSCLC proven histologically or cytologically. Patients were not permitted to have received prior chemotherapy, extensive radiotherapy, or any radiotherapy to the target lesion and must have had measurable disease. Concurrent treatment with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) or prophylactic antibiotics was not permitted. Docetaxel (75 mg/m2) in 250 mL 5% dextrose was given intravenously (i.v.) over 1 hour immediately before cisplatin (75 mg/m2) in 500 mL normal saline given i.v. over 1 hour in 3-week cycles. Premedication included ondansetron, dexamethasone, promethazine, and standard hyperhydration with magnesium supplementation. RESULTS A total of 47 patients, two thirds of whom had metastatic disease, were entered onto this phase II study. The majority of patients were male (72%) and of good (WHO 0 to 1) performance status (85%). All 47 patients were assessable for toxicity and 36 were for response. Three patients were ineligible and eight (17%) discontinued treatment because of significant toxicity. In assessable patients, the overall objective response rate was 38.9% (95% confidence limits [CL], 23.1% to 56.5%), 36.1% had stable disease, and 25% progressive disease. On an intention-to-treat analysis, the objective response rate was 29.8%. Median survival was 9.6 months and estimated 1-year survival was 33%. Significant (grade 3/4) toxicities included nausea (26%), hypotension (15%), diarrhea (13%), and dyspnea mainly related to chest infection (13%). One patient experienced National Cancer Institute (NCI) grade 3 neurosensory toxicity after eight cycles. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was common and occurred in 87% of patients, but thrombocytopenia > or = grade 3 was rare (one patient). Significant (grade 3/4) abnormalities of magnesium levels were common (24%). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 13% of patients and neutropenic infection in 11%, contributing to two treatment-related deaths. No neutropenic enterocolitis or severe fluid retention was reported. CONCLUSION Compared with other active regimens used in this setting, the combination of docetaxel and cisplatin in advanced NSCLC is an active regimen with a similar toxicity profile to other combination regimens.

Phase I trial of docetaxel and cisplatin in previously untreated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE To determine the maximum-tolerated doses (MTDs), principal toxicities, and pharmacokinetics of the combination of docetaxel and cisplatin administered every 3 weeks to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have not received prior chemotherapy and to recommend a dose for phase II studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced NSCLC and performance status 0 to 2 who had not received prior chemotherapy received docetaxel over 1 hour followed by cisplatin over 1 hour with hydration. Dose levels studied were (docetaxel/cisplatin) 50/75, 75/75, 75/100, and 100/75 mg/m2 repeated every 3 weeks. Colony-stimulating factor (CSF) support was not used. Pharmacokinetics of docetaxel and cisplatin were studied in the first cycle of therapy. Most patients (79%) had metastatic disease or intrathoracic recurrence after prior radiation and/or surgery. RESULTS Of 24 patients entered, all were assessable for toxicity and 18 for response. The MTD schedules were docetaxel 75 mg/m2 with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 (dose-limiting toxicities [DLTs] in five of six patients), and docetaxel 100 mg/m2 with cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (DLTs in two of two patients, including one fatal toxicity). Limiting toxicities were febrile neutropenia and nonhematologic, principally diarrhea and renal. Two patients had neutropenic enterocolitis. Pharmacokinetics of both drugs were consistent with results from single-agent studies, which suggests no major pharmacokinetic interaction. Neutropenia was related to docetaxel area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve (AUC). An alternative schedule was investigated, with cisplatin being administered over 3 hours commencing 3 hours after docetaxel, but toxicity did not appear to be less. Independently reviewed responses occurred in eight of 18 patients (44%; 95% confidence interval, 22% to 69%), most following 75 mg/m2 of both drugs. CONCLUSION Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 over 1 hour followed by cisplatin 75 mg/m2 over 1 hour is recommended for phase II studies. The responses seen in this phase I study suggest a high degree of activity of this combination in previously untreated advanced NSCLC.

Lean body mass, body surface area and epirubicin kinetics.

For a number of cytotoxics, a relationship between efficacy and plasma concentrations has recently been demonstrated. Lean body mass has been demonstrated to be a useful parameter for predicting drug clearance for a number of non-cytotoxic drugs. However, the role of lean body mass in predicting drug clearance for any cytotoxic drug has not been previously reported. Our purpose was to investigate lean body mass as a predictor of epirubicin clearance. Pharmacokinetic studies were performed in 10 patients receiving single agent epirubicin. Although preliminary, this study suggests that lean body should be further evaluated and tested in dose optimization studies.

A Phase I/II Study of the Intralesional Injection of Ricin-Monoclonal Antibody Conjugates in Patients with Hepatic Metastases

A phase I/II study of the intralesional administration of ricin-labelled monoclonal antibodies was conducted in patients with hepatic metastases of gastrointestinal origin. The anti-carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) antibody I-1 was conjugated to blocked ricin via a disulphide bridge. After a test dose of antibody, patients were injected with ricin-antibody conjugates under computed tomography (CT) guidance on two occasions 1 week apart. Patients with stable or responding disease would receive a third course. The dose of ricin relative to surface area was increased in a predefined manner in cohorts of 3 patients. A total of 27 patients with hepatic metastases were entered into this study. All patients had metastatic colorectal cancer (26 patients) or adenocarcinoma of unknown primary with elevated CEA levels (1 patient). The presence of malignancy was documented cytologically in 9 of 11 patients tested. Minor responses were seen in 7 patients. However, no major objective responses or changes in the growth rate of injected lesions were observed. Toxicity was generally mild, the most common being hepatic capsular pain 24-48 h after each injection. 6 patients experienced rigors. One patient had anaphylaxis. Human anti-mouse and anti-ricin antibody responses were observed. Although substantial amounts of ricin conjugated to monoclonal antibodies were delivered into single lesions, this therapeutic approach was unsuccessful. Future studies of ricin-labelled antibodies should incorporate the systemic administration of immunoconjugates.

Flare responses in small cell carcinoma of the lung.

Two cases of small cell carcinoma of the lung in which flare responses were demonstrated are discussed. Although the primary tumor and extraskeletal metastases responded to first-line chemotherapy, bone scintigraphs performed 3 months after the start of treatment suggested tumor progression. However, following repeat bone imaging and subsequent clinical evaluation, the interim scintigraphs appeared to represent an unusual flare response, in which the activity of pre-existing hot spots increased and new lesions developed.

Comparison of toxicity and outcomes of concurrent radiotherapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel or cisplatin/etoposide in stage III non-small cell lung cancer.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) has become the standard of care for patients with unresectable stage III non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The comparative merits of two widely used regimens: carboplatin/paclitaxel (PC) and cisplatin/etoposide (PE), each with concurrent radiotherapy, remain largely undefined. Records for consecutive patients with stage III NSCLC treated with PC or PE and ≥60 Gy chest radiotherapy between 2000 and 2011 were reviewed for outcomes and toxicity. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox modeling with the Wald test. Comparison across groups was done using the students t and chi‐squared tests. Seventy‐five (PC: 44, PE: 31) patients were analyzed. PC patients were older (median 71 vs. 63 years; P = 0.0006). Other characteristics were comparable between groups. With PE, there was significantly increased grade ≥3 neutropenia (39% vs. 14%, P = 0.024) and thrombocytopenia (10% vs. 0%, P = 0.039). Radiation pneumonitis was more common with PC (66% vs. 38%, P = 0.033). Five treatment‐related deaths occurred (PC: 3 vs. PE: 2, P = 1.000). With a median follow‐up of 51.6 months, there were no significant differences in relapse‐free survival (median PC 12.0 vs. PE 11.5 months, P = 0.700) or overall survival (median PC 20.7 vs. PE 13.7 months; P = 0.989). In multivariate analyses, no factors predicted for improved survival for either regimen. PC was more likely to be used in elderly patients. Despite this, PC resulted in significantly less hematological toxicity but achieved similar survival outcomes as PE. PC is an acceptable CCRT regimen, especially in older patients with multiple comorbidities.

Use of [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in monitoring response of recurrent neurotropic desmoplastic melanoma to radiotherapy

A 35-year-old man originally sought treatment in 1985 for an ulcerating lesion on the lower lip. When the lesion was resected, histology showed an amelanotic neurotropic variant of desmoplastic melanoma invading deep into the muscle of the lip around small nerves and blood vessels; staining was positive for S-100 protein. Repeat excisions were performed twice during the next 2 months, before histologically complete removal was attained.

Multicenter randomized, open‐label phase II trial of sequential erlotinib and gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy as first‐line therapy in elderly or ECOG PS two patients with advanced NSCLC

The potential beneficial interaction between erlotinib and chemotherapy may require sequencing or pharmacodynamic separation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of sequential erlotinib and gemcitabine versus gemcitabine monotherapy as first‐line therapy in elderly or ECOG PS‐2 patients with advanced non‐small cell lung carcinoma.

Novel quality indicators for metastatic colorectal cancer management identify significant variations in these measures across treatment centers in Australia

Defining multidisciplinary quality of care indicators (QCIs) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) could improve understanding of variations in routine practice care. This may identify areas of below‐average performance, which could then be addressed by clinicians to improve the quality of care delivered. This study aimed to define a panel of QCIs in mCRC and, based on these QCIs, to evaluate quality of care across multiple Australian sites.

Chemotherapy and biologic use in the routine management of metastatic colorectal cancer in Australia: is clinical practice following the evidence?: Treatment choices in mCRC

Emerging evidence on the optimal use of chemotherapy and biologics in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer should impact management in routine care. Recent studies have demonstrated benefits for initial triplet chemotherapy (5‐fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan, FOLFOXIRI) and for initial treatment with an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRi) in patients with a RAS wild‐type tumour and a left‐sided primary tumour.