Carla Visseren-Grul

Maintenance therapy with pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (PARAMOUNT): a double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) benefit from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with a platinum-containing, non-pemetrexed doublet. The PARAMOUNT trial investigated whether continuation maintenance with pemetrexed improved progression-free survival after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. METHODS In this double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, randomised placebo-controlled trial, patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC aged 18 years or older, with no previous systemic chemotherapy for lung cancer, with at least one measurable lesion, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 participated. Before randomisation, patients entered an induction phase which consisted of four cycles of induction pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients who did not progress after completion of four cycles of induction and who had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were stratified according to disease stage (IIIB or IV), ECOG performance status (0 or 1), and induction response (complete or partial response, or stable disease), and randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive maintenance therapy with either pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2) every 21 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care until disease progression. Randomisation was done with the Pocock and Simon minimisation method. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00789373. FINDINGS Of the 1022 patients enrolled, 939 participated in the induction phase. Of these, 539 patients were randomly assigned to receive continuation maintenance with pemetrexed plus best supportive care (n=359) or with placebo plus best supportive care (n=180). Among the 359 patients randomised to continuation maintenance with pemetrexed, there was a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression over the placebo group (HR 0·62, 95% CI 0·49-0·79; p<0·0001). The median progression-free survival, measured from randomisation, was 4·1 months (95% CI 3·2-4·6) for pemetrexed and 2·8 months (2·6-3·1) for placebo. Possibly treatment-related laboratory grade 3-4 adverse events were more common in the pemetrexed group (33 [9%] of 359 patients) than in the placebo group (one [<1%] of 180 patients; p<0·0001), as were non-laboratory grade 3-5 adverse events (32 [9%] of 359 patients in the pemetrexed group; eight [4%] of 180 patients in the placebo group; p=0·080); one possibly treatment-related death was reported in each group. The most common adverse events of grade 3-4 in the pemetrexed group were anaemia (16 [4%] of 359 patients), neutropenia (13 [4%]), and fatigue (15 [4%]). In the placebo group, these adverse events were less common: anaemia (one [<1%] of 180 patients), neutropenia (none), and fatigue (one <1%]). The most frequent serious adverse events were anaemia (eight [2%] of 359 patients in the pemetrexed group vs none in the placebo group) and febrile neutropenia (five [1%] vs none). Discontinuations due to drug-related adverse events occurred in 19 (5%) patients in the pemetrexed group and six (3%) patients in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION Continuation maintenance with pemetrexed is an effective and well tolerated treatment option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC with good performance status who have not progressed after induction therapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. FUNDING Eli Lilly and Company.

Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin or Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin for Chemonaïve Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Results of the International Expanded Access Program

Introduction: Previously published results from a randomized phase III study of pemetrexed plus cisplatin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) demonstrated a significant survival benefit and higher response rate compared with cisplatin. Although pemetrexed was under review by regulatory agencies, an International Expanded Access Program (EAP) provided more than 3000 mesothelioma patients with access to single-agent pemetrexed or pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin in 13 countries. This manuscript reports the safety and efficacy data from the nonrandomized open-label study in chemonaïve patients receiving pemetrexed plus platinum under the EAP. Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed MPM, not amenable to curative surgery, received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 in combination with either cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC 5, once every 21 days with standard premedication. Efficacy data were recorded at the end of study participation. Results: A total of 1704 chemonaïve patients received pemetrexed plus cisplatin (n = 843) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin (n = 861) and were evaluated for safety. The efficacy evaluable population consisted of 745 patients in the pemetrexed plus cisplatin group and 752 patients in the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group for whom physician-reported tumor response was available. The pemetrexed plus cisplatin group demonstrated a response rate of 26.3% compared with 21.7% for the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group, with similar 1-year survival rates (63.1% versus 64.0%) and median time to progressive disease (7 months versus 6.9 months). The most common grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia in 23.9% of the pemetrexed plus cisplatin group and 36.1% of the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group. Conclusion: This large EAP confirmed the activity of pemetrexed plus cisplatin and pemetrexed plus carboplatin in chemonaïve patients with MPM, demonstrating clinically similar time to progressive disease and 1-year survival rates.

Randomized Phase III Study of Surgery Alone or Surgery Plus Preoperative Cisplatin and Gemcitabine in Stages IB to IIIA Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE This study aimed to determine whether three preoperative cycles of gemcitabine plus cisplatin followed by radical surgery provides a reduction in the risk of progression compared with surgery alone in patients with stages IB to IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with chemotherapy-naive NSCLC (stages IB, II, or IIIA) were randomly assigned to receive either three cycles of gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1 every 3 weeks followed by surgery, or surgery alone. Randomization was stratified by center and disease stage (IB/IIA v IIB/IIIA). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results The study was prematurely closed after the random assignment of 270 patients: 129 to chemotherapy plus surgery and 141 to surgery alone. Median age was 61.8 years and 83.3% were male. Slightly more patients in the surgery alone arm had disease stage IB/IIA (55.3% v 48.8%). The chemotherapy response rate was 35.4%. The hazard ratios for PFS and overall survival were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.50 to 0.97; P = .003) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.92; P = .02), respectively, both in favor of chemotherapy plus surgery. A statistically significant impact of preoperative chemotherapy on outcomes was observed in the stage IIB/IIIA subgroup (3-year PFS rate: 36.1% v 55.4%; P = .002). The most common grade 3 or 4 chemotherapy-related adverse events were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. No treatment-by-histology interaction effect was apparent. CONCLUSION Although the study was terminated early, preoperative gemcitabine plus cisplatin followed by radical surgery improved survival in patients with clinical stage IIB/IIIA NSCLC.

Phase II study of gemcitabine in ovarian cancer

This phase II study evaluated the response rate and toxicity of single-agent gemcitabine in 40 women with epithelial ovarian cancer, previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients had stage III or IV disease and progressive disease 1-12 months after the last treatment. Gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28-day cycle as a 30-minute infusion. The overall response rate to gemcitabine was 22% (95% confidence intervals: 10-39%). Responses to gemcitabine were observed in patients with platinum-refractory disease, which suggests no cross resistance to platinum. Gemcitabine was well tolerated and no grade 4 toxicity was seen. This study confirms that gemcitabine is active and well tolerated in pre-treated women with ovarian cancer.

Phase III Study of Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin Compared With Etoposide Plus Carboplatin in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE Following a phase II trial in which pemetrexed-platinum demonstrated similar activity to that of historical etoposide-platinum controls, a phase III study was conducted to compare pemetrexed-carboplatin with etoposide-carboplatin for the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Chemotherapy-naive patients with ES-SCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of zero to 2 were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed-carboplatin (pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1; carboplatin at area under the serum concentration-time curve [AUC] 5 on day 1) or etoposide-carboplatin (etoposide 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 3; carboplatin AUC 5 on day 1) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary objective of the study was noninferiority of pemetrexed-carboplatin overall survival with a 15% margin. RESULTS Accrual was terminated with 908 of 1,820 patients enrolled after results of a planned interim analysis. In the final analysis, pemetrexed-carboplatin was inferior to etoposide-carboplatin for overall survival (median, 8.1 v 10.6 months; hazard ratio [HR],1.56; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.92; log-rank P < .01) and progression-free survival (median, 3.8 v 5.4 months; HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.58 to 2.17; log-rank P < .01). Objective response rates were also significantly lower for pemetrexed-carboplatin (31% v 52%; P < .001). Pemetrexed-carboplatin had lower grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and leukopenia than etoposide-carboplatin; grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia was comparable between arms and anemia was higher in the pemetrexed-carboplatin arm. CONCLUSION Pemetrexed-carboplatin is inferior for the treatment of ES-SCLC. Planned translational research and pharmacogenomic analyses of tumor and blood samples may help explain the study results and provide insight into new treatment strategies.

A randomized phase III trial comparing standard and high-dose pemetrexed as second-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND This phase III randomized trial compared pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) (P500) with pemetrexed 900 mg/m(2) (P900) to determine whether higher dosing benefits non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients as second-line therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, were randomly assigned to receive i.v. P500 or P900 every 3 week. RESULTS Accrual was terminated with 588/600 patients enrolled because an interim analysis indicated a low probability of improved survival and numerically greater toxicity on the P900 arm. P900 patients were permitted to continue treatment at P500. No statistical difference was observed between the treatment arms (P500 versus P900) for median survival {6.7 versus 6.9 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.0132 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.837-1.226]}, progression-free survival [2.6 versus 2.8 months, HR = 0.9681 (95% CI 0.817-1.147)], or best overall tumor response [7.1% versus 4.3% (P = 0.1616)]. The incidence of drug-related grade 3/4 toxicity was typically <5% on both treatment arms, but was numerically higher on the P900 arm for most toxicity categories. CONCLUSIONS P900 did not improve any efficacy measure over P500. P500 i.v. every 3 week remains the standard pemetrexed dose for second-line treatment of platinum-pretreated advanced NSCLC.

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma—Results from the International Expanded Access Program using pemetrexed alone or in combination with a platinum agent

AIM Peritoneal mesothelioma (PM) has rarely been studied. The Expanded Access Program (EAP) provided access to 109 patients with PM. METHODS This was a nonrandomized, open-label study conducted in chemo-naïve or previously treated patients with PM not amenable to curative surgery. Patients received pemetrexed (PEM) 500 mg/m2 alone or with cisplatin (CIS) 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin (CARBO) AUC 5 every 21 days, supplemented with standard vitamin B(12), folate, and dexamethasone. RESULTS Response rates (95% CI) for PEM, PEM/CIS, and PEM/CARBO were 12.5% (3.5, 29.0), 20.0% (7.7, 38.6), and 24.1% (10.3, 43.5), respectively. Median survival for PEM was 10.3 months. One-year survival rates for PEM/CIS and PEM were 57.4% (95% CI: 10.3, 100) and 41.5% (95% CI: 4.6, 78.4), respectively, and were not available for PEM/CARBO. Anemia was the most common serious adverse event (6.4%). Neutropenia (34.6%) was the most frequent CTC grade 3 or 4 toxicity reported. CONCLUDING STATEMENT PEM with or without a platinum agent was both active and well tolerated in patients with peritoneal mesothelioma.

Oral Administration of Gemcitabine in Patients with Refractory Tumors : A Clinical and Pharmacologic Study

Purpose: To determine the toxicity, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary antitumor activity of oral gemcitabine (2′,2′-difluorodeoxycytidine; dFdC) in patients with cancer. Experimental Design: Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer refractory to standard therapy were eligible. Gemcitabine was administered p.o. starting at 1 mg once daily using dose escalation with three patients per dose level. Patients received one of two dosing schemes: (a) once daily dosing for 14 days of a 21-day cycle or (b) every other day dosing for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Pharmacokinetics were assessed by measuring concentrations of dFdC and 2′,2′-difluorodeoxyuridine (dFdU) in plasma and gemcitabine triphosphate in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and pharmacodynamics by measuring the effect on T-cell proliferation. Results: Thirty patients entered the study. Oral gemcitabine was generally well-tolerated. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Mainly moderate gastrointestinal toxicities occurred except for one patient who died after experiencing grade 4 hepatic failure during cycle two. One patient with a leiomyosarcoma had stable disease during 2 years and 7 months. Systemic exposure to dFdC was low with an estimated bioavailability of 10%. dFdC was highly converted to dFdU, probably via first pass metabolism and dFdU had a long terminal half-life (∼89 h). Concentrations of dFdCTP in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were low, but high levels of gemcitabine triphosphate, the phosphorylated metabolite of dFdU, were detected. Conclusions: Systemic exposure to oral gemcitabine was low due to extensive first-pass metabolism to dFdU. Moderate toxicity combined with hints of activity warrant further investigation of the concept of prolonged exposure to gemcitabine.

Quality of life in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer given maintenance treatment with pemetrexed versus placebo (H3E-MC-JMEN): results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND Pemetrexed maintenance therapy significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared with placebo, and had a good safety profile in a phase 3 placebo-controlled study in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results for quality of life, symptom palliation, and tolerability are presented here. METHODS After four cycles of platinum-based induction therapy, 663 patients with stage IIIB or stage IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) from March 15, 2005, to July 20, 2007, using the Pocock and Simon minimisation method to receive pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2) every 21 days; n=441) or placebo (n=222) plus best supportive care until disease progression. The primary efficacy data have been reported previously. Patients completed the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) at baseline, after each cycle, and post-discontinuation. Worsening of symptoms was defined as an increase of 15 mm or more from baseline on a 100 mm scale for each LCSS item. The primary outcome for these quality-of-life analyses was time to worsening of symptoms, analysed for all randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00102804. FINDINGS Baseline characteristics, including LCSS scores, were well balanced between groups. Baseline LCSS scores were low, indicating low symptom burden for patients without disease progression after completion of first-line treatment. Longer time to worsening was recorded for pain (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·59-0·99; p=0·041) and haemoptysis (HR 0·58, 95% CI 0·34-0·97; p=0·038) with pemetrexed than with placebo; no other significant differences in analyses of time to worsening were noted. Additional longitudinal analyses showed a greater increase in loss of appetite in the pemetrexed group than in the placebo group (4·3 mm vs 0·2 mm; p=0·028). Rates of resource use were statistically higher for pemetrexed than for placebo: admissions to hospital for drug-related adverse events (19 [4%] vs none; p=0·001), transfusions (42 [10%] vs seven [3%]; p=0·003), and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (26 [6%] vs four [2%]; p=0·017). INTERPRETATION Quality of life during maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is similar to placebo, except for a small increase in loss of appetite, and significantly delayed worsening of pain and haemoptysis. In view of the improvements in overall and progression-free survival noted with pemetrexed maintenance therapy, such treatment is an option for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC who have not progressed after platinum-based induction therapy. FUNDING Eli Lilly.

Phase I Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Study of the Oral Protein Kinase C β-Inhibitor Enzastaurin in Combination with Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced Cancer

Purpose: Enzastaurin targets the protein kinase C and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT pathways to reduce tumor angiogenesis and cell proliferation and to induce cell death. A phase I trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of combining enzastaurin with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Experimental Design: Patients with advanced cancer received a 14-day lead-in treatment with oral enzastaurin followed by subsequent 21-day cycles of daily enzastaurin, gemcitabine on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin on day 1. Enzastaurin doses were escalated between 350 mg once daily to 500 mg twice daily, whereas gemcitabine doses were either 1,000 or 1,250 mg/m2 and cisplatin doses were either 60 or 75 mg/m2. Circulating endothelial cell numbers and CD146 and CD133 mRNA expression were evaluated as pharmacodynamic markers. Results: Thirty-three patients (median age, 58 years) were enrolled in seven dose levels. The maximum tolerated dose was not identified. Two dose-limiting toxicities (grade 2 QT interval corrected for heart rate prolongation and grade 3 fatigue) were reported. Other toxicities included grade 3/4 neutropenia (3 of 6 patients), thrombocytopenia (1 of 6 patients), grade 3 leukopenia (2 patients), and fatigue (5 patients). Enzastaurin twice daily (≥250 mg) resulted in more discontinuations and low-grade toxicities. In the combination, enzastaurin exposures decreased slightly but remained above the target of 1,400 nmol/L, whereas gemcitabine/cisplatin exposures were unaltered. Three patients (9.1%) had partial responses and 13 (39.4%) had stable disease. Measurement of circulating endothelial cell numbers and CD146 and CD133 mRNA expression did not contribute to decision-making on dose escalation. Conclusions: Recommended phase II dose is 500 mg enzastaurin once daily, 1,250 mg/m2 gemcitabine, and 75 mg/m2 cisplatin. This regimen is well tolerated with no significant alterations in the pharmacokinetic variables of any drug.