Giuseppe Comella

Gemcitabine Plus Vinorelbine Versus Vinorelbine Alone in Elderly Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate whether the addition of gemcitabine (G) to vinorelbine (V) improves survival and quality of life (QoL) among elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with NSCLC aged >/= 70 years with advanced disease were randomly allocated to receive V 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks or G 1,200 mg/m(2) + V 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. The estimated sample size was 120 patients per arm, but an interim analysis of survival was planned based on the first 60 patients per arm. RESULTS In May 1999, the survival data were analyzed of 120 eligible patients (V group = 60; G + V group = 60) who had been randomized from June 1997 to February 1999. Forty-nine patients had stage IIIB disease, and 71 had stage IV. At a median potential follow-up of 14 months (range, 3 to 22 months), 93 patients had died (G + V group = 41; V group = 52). In the G + V group, median survival time was 29 weeks and projected 1-year survival was 30%; these values were 18 weeks and 13% in the V group. According to multivariate Cox analysis, the risk of death in the G + V arm compared with the V arm was 0.48 (95% confidence interval, 0. 29 to 0.79; P <.01). Combination therapy was also associated with a clear delay in symptom and QoL deterioration. The overall response rates were 22% and 15% in the G + V and V groups, respectively. CONCLUSION In elderly patients with NSCLC, G + V treatment is associated with significantly better survival than is V alone.

Randomized Trial Comparing Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Vinorelbine With Either Cisplatin and Gemcitabine or Cisplatin and Vinorelbine in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Interim Analysis of a Phase III Trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group

PURPOSE In our previous phase II study, the cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine (PGV) regimen produced a median survival time (MST) of approximately 1 year in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present study was aimed at comparing the MST of patients treated with this triplet regimen with the MSTs of patients receiving cisplatin and vinorelbine (PV) or cisplatin and gemcitabine (PG). PATIENTS AND METHODS From April 1997, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, an age of < or = 70 years, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < or = 1 were randomized to receive one of the following regimens: cisplatin 50 mg/m(2), gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm A); cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (arm B); or cisplatin 120 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2)/wk (arm C). According to the two-stage design for phase III trials, an interim analysis was planned when the first 60 patients per arm were assessable for survival. RESULTS The survival data of 180 NSCLC patients (stage IIIB, 76 patients; stage IV, 104 patients) were analyzed in April 1999. Overall, 128 patients had died (PGV, n = 33; PG, n = 42; and PV, n = 53). The MST of patients in the PGV, PG, and PV arms was 51, 42, and 35 weeks, respectively, and the corresponding 1-year projected survival rates were 45%, 40%, and 34%, respectively. When only patients with stage IV disease were considered, an even stronger difference was seen between PGV (MST = 47 weeks) and both PG (34 weeks) and PV (27 weeks). At multivariate Cox analysis, the estimate hazard of death for patients receiving PGV compared with those receiving PV was 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.77; P <.01). The response rates were 47% in the PGV arm, 30% in the PG arm, 25% in the PV arm. Both hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were not substantially worse in patients who received the PGV regimen. CONCLUSION The PGV regimen is associated with a substantial survival gain (MST > 3 months longer) when compared with the PV combination. Because this difference in survival met one of the early stopping rules, the accrual in the PV arm has been stopped (null hypothesis rejected). Enrollment still continues in the PGV and PG arm to ascertain whether the PGV regimen can also produce a significantly longer survival than that obtained with the PG regimen.

Gemcitabine plus vinorelbine yields better survival outcome than vinorelbine alone in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. A Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG) phase III trial

OBJECTIVE This phase III study was aimed at evaluating whether the addition of gemcitabine (G) to vinorelbine (V) could improve the survival and quality of life (QoL) of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced NSCLC, aged >or=70 years, were randomly allocated to receive V 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks or G 1200 mg/m(2) plus V 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Survival was the main end point of the study. The estimated sample size was 120 patients per arm, but an interim analysis of survival was planned on the first 60 patients per arm. RESULTS In May 1999, an interim analysis was performed with the survival data of the first 120 eligible patients (V(arm)=60, G+V(arm)=60). Forty-nine patients had stage IIIB disease and 71 patients stage IV disease, median potential follow-up of 14 months (range; 3-22), 93 patients had died (G+V(arm)=41, V(arm)=52). Median survival time (MST) was 29 weeks and projected 1-year survival was 30% in the G+V(arm); these values were 18 weeks and 13% in the V(arm). At multivariate Cox analysis, the risk of death in the G+V(arm) compared with V(arm) was 0.48 (95% C1=0.29-0.79; P<0.01). Combination therapy was also associated with a clear delay in symptom and QoL deterioration. The ORR was 22 and 15% in the G+V and V(arms), respectively. Toxicity was not irrelevant in both arms. CONCLUSIONS G+V treatment is associated with a significantly better survival than V alone in elderly NSCLC patients. The magnitude of the difference justifies the early closure of the study. The G+V regimen is now the SICOG reference regimen in this type of patients.

Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Paclitaxel in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase I-II Study

PURPOSE Because both cisplatin-paclitaxel and cisplatin-gemcitabine combinations are generally considered to be among the most active regimens in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, this study aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of paclitaxel when combined with fixed doses of cisplatin and gemcitabine in advanced NSCLC patients and aimed to define the therapeutic activity of this new regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS From October 1996 to September 1998, 75 patients with stage IIIB-IV NSCLC, who were either chemotherapy-naive (65 patients) or who had been pretreated (10 patients), received fixed doses of cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)) and gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) and escalating doses of paclitaxel in a 1-hour infusion, all on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. RESULTS Five different paclitaxel doses were tested, for a total of 275 cycles delivered. The escalation was stopped at the paclitaxel dose of 75 mg/m(2) in pretreated patients, whereas it continued to 150 mg/m(2) in chemotherapy-naive patients. A total of 65 chemotherapy-naive patients were treated. A paclitaxel dose of 125 mg/m(2) was recommended for phase II, and a total of 39 patients were treated at this level, for a total of 158 cycles delivered. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Five patients were hospitalized because of sepsis, and packed RBC transfusion was required in 13 patients. Grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 23 (31%) and eight (11%) patients, respectively. Overall, 74 of the 75 patients were assessable for response. Four complete (CR) and 38 partial (PR) responses were recorded, for an overall response rate (ORR) of 57%. Three of the ten pretreated patients achieved a PR, compared with four CRs and 35 PRs in the 64 chemotherapy-naive patients (ORR, 61%). Thirty-eight of 39 patients included in phase II were assessable for response and quality of life (QOL) (one patients disease was not measurable). Two CRs and 24 PRs were recorded in this group, for an ORR of 68% (95% confidence interval, 51% to 82%). The QOL score improved in 27 of 38 (71%) patients. The median survival time was 15 months in the 65 chemotherapy-naive patients, but it had not yet been reached in the 39 patients included in phase II, for whom the 1-year projected survival was 70%. CONCLUSION The cisplatin-gemcitabine-paclitaxel combination is a feasible and well-tolerated approach in advanced NSCLC patients. Both a major response and a QOL improvement can be obtained in a high proportion of patients, with a median survival time exceeding 1 year. A phase III trial comparing this combination with other effective regimens is under way.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine with either vinorelbine or paclitaxel in the treatment of carcinomas of unknown primary site : Results of an Italian multicenter, randomized, phase II study

To date, the standard treatment for patients who have carcinoma of unknown primary site has not been established.

Cisplatin-topotecan-paclitaxel weekly administration with G-CSF support for ovarian and small-cell lung cancer patients: A dose-finding study

PURPOSE Paclitaxel (PTX) and topotecan (TPT) have shown promising antitumor activity in both ovarian cancer (OC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients. This phase I study was aimed at determining the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of TPT given weekly over 30 min in combination with fixed doses of cisplatin (CDDP) and (PTX), and with G-CSF support. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-four patients with OC (19) or SCLC (25), either chemo-naïve (20) or pretreated (24) received CDDP 40 mg/m2, PTX 85 mg/m2 (one-hour infusion) and escalating TPT doses (starting from 0.75 mg/m2) in a 30-min infusion in weekly administration. Filgrastim 5 mg/kg was administered on days 3 to 5 of each week. RESULTS Eight different dose levels were tested for a total of 295 delivered cycles. The dose escalation was interrupted at the TPT dose of 2.50 mg/m2. No toxic deaths occurred in this study. Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia occurred in 15 patients (36 cycles), seven patients (15 cycles), and four patients (five cycles), respectively. Severe vomiting and diarrhoea occurred in seven and four patients. Peripheral neuropathy was recorded in 11 patients (42 cycles), but it was never severe. An overall 11 of 19 (58%) OC and 11 of 25 (44%) SCLC patients obtained objective responses. Eight patients showed complete responses (three OC and three SCLC). Among the 20 chemo-naïve patients, 9 of 11 (82%) OC and seven of nine (78%) SCLC responded. CONCLUSIONS The CDDP/TPT/PTX weekly administration with filgrastim support represents a well-tolerated and active therapeutic approach in both chemo-naïve and pretreated OC and SCLC patients. A weekly dose of TPT of 2.25 mg/m2 is recommended for the phase II study.

Randomized trial on adjuvant treatment with FOLFIRI followed by docetaxel and cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid for radically resected gastric cancer

BACKGROUND Some trial have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant fluoropirimidine with or without platinum compounds compared with surgery alone. ITACA-S study was designed to evaluate whether a sequential treatment of FOLFIRI [irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/LV)] followed by docetaxel plus cisplatin improves disease-free survival in comparison with 5-FU/LV in patients with radically resected gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) day 1, LV 100 mg/m(2) as 2 h infusion and 5-FU 400 mg/m(2) as bolus, days 1 and 2 followed by 600 mg/m(2)/day as 22 h continuous infusion, q14 for four cycles) followed by docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) day 1, cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1, q21 for three cycles (sequential arm) or De Gramont regimen (5-FU/LV arm). RESULTS From February 2005 to August 2009, 1106 patients were enrolled, and 1100 included in the analysis: 562 in the sequential arm and 538 in the 5-FU/LV arm. With a median follow-up of 57.4 months, 581 patients recurred or died (297 sequential arm and 284 5-FU/LV arm), and 483 died (243 and 240, respectively). No statistically significant difference was detected for both disease-free [hazard ratio (HR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85-1.17; P = 0.974] and overall survival (OS) (HR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82-1.18; P = 0.865). Five-year disease-free and OS rates were 44.6% and 44.6%, 51.0% and 50.6% in the sequential and 5-FU/LV arm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS A more intensive regimen failed to show any benefit in disease-free and OS versus monotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01640782.BACKGROUND Some trial have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant fluoropirimidine with or without platinum compounds compared with surgery alone. ITACA-S study was designed to evaluate whether a sequential treatment of FOLFIRI [irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/LV)] followed by docetaxel plus cisplatin improves disease-free survival in comparison with 5-FU/LV in patients with radically resected gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction were randomly assigned to either FOLFIRI (irinotecan 180mg/m2 day 1, LV 100mg/m2 as 2h infusion and 5-FU 400mg/m2 as bolus, days 1 and 2 followed by 600mg/m2/day as 22h continuous infusion, q14 for four cycles) followed by docetaxel 75mg/m2 day 1, cisplatin 75mg/m2 day 1, q21 for three cycles (sequential arm) or De Gramont regimen (5-FU/LV arm). RESULTS From February 2005 to August 2009, 1106 patients were enrolled, and 1100 included in the analysis: 562 in the sequential arm and 538 in the 5-FU/LV arm. With a median follow-up of 57.4 months, 581 patients recurred or died (297 sequential arm and 284 5-FU/LV arm), and 483 died (243 and 240, respectively). No statistically significant difference was detected for both disease-free [hazard ratio (HR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85-1.17; P = 0.974] and overall survival (OS) (HR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82-1.18; P = 0.865). Five-year disease-free and OS rates were 44.6% and 44.6%, 51.0% and 50.6% in the sequential and 5-FU/LV arm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS A more intensive regimen failed to show any benefit in disease-free and OS versus monotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01640782.

Cisplatin, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase I study

PURPOSE The objective of this study was to determine the maximally tolerable doses (MTDs) of vinorelbine (VNR) and gemcitabine (GEM) when combined with a fixed dose of cisplatin (CDDP). PATIENTS AND METHODS Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB-IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received a fixed dose of CDDP (50 mg/m2) and escalating doses of VNR (starting from 20 mg/m2) and GEM (starting from 800 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8, every three weeks. The single escalation of GEM alone, by 200 mg/m2 at each step, was initially planned up to a dose of 1,200 mg/m2, to be followed by increments of the VNR dose of 5 mg/m2 at each step. RESULTS Thirty-one patients were enrolled at five different dose levels. The escalation was stopped at level 4 (GEM 1,200 mg/m2 and VNR 25 mg/m2) since two of six patients of this cohort showed dose-limiting neutropenia at treatment cycle 1. Two different dose levels, GEM 1,200 mg/m2 + VNR 20 mg/m2, and GEM 1,000 mg/m2 + VNR 25 mg/m2 were fairly well tolerated. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Neutropenia was the main toxic effect, occurring in 76% of the total of 116 cycles delivered, and in 24% of them was of grades 3 or 4. A total of eight patients (26%) experienced grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than seven days; in five of them it occurred in the first course. Neutropenic fever was observed in four cases. Grade 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in only two patients. Non-hematologic toxicity was a minor problem in all patients but was never dose-limiting. No complete responses were obtained, but sixteen out of 31 (52%) patients achieved partial responses. The median duration of response was 20 (range 6-56+) weeks, while at a nine-month median follow-up, the median survival time has not yet been reached. To date, 18 patients are still alive. The one-year projected survival for all patients was 51%. CONCLUSIONS Our results show that CDDP, VNR and GEM can be safely given together without substantial reductions in their individual dose intensities. In our opinion, the dose level of GEM 1,000 mg/m2 + VNR 25 mg/m2 given in combination with CDDP 50 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a three-week cycle can be recommended for phase II trials, since it provides a better balance in dose intensity of GEM and VNR. A phase II randomised study is underway to establish the activity of this new regimen (at the above-cited dose level) in chemo-naive NSCLC patients.

Weekly paclitaxel and cisplatin with concurrent radiotherapy in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase I study.

PURPOSE Both cisplatin (CDDP) and paclitaxel have shown good antitumor activity in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients and are able to potentiate the antitumor effects of radiation therapy (RT). This study aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated doses (MTDs) of CDDP and paclitaxel (escalated alternately) when given concurrently with RT and to define the nature of the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced NSCLC received six weekly administrations of a CDDP-paclitaxel combination with concurrent local RT. The starting doses of CDDP and paclitaxel were 30 mg/m2/wk and 35 mg/m2/wk, respectively. RT was initially given at the dose of 1.2 Gy twice daily for 5 days per week for 5 weeks (total dose, 60 Gy) and at a single daily dose of 2 Gy for 5 days per week for 6 weeks in the last two cohorts of patients. The drug doses were escalated alternately until DLT occurred in more than one third of the patients in a given cohort. RESULTS Overall, 25 patients were recruited through five different cohorts. All were assessable for toxicity. Esophagitis was the main toxicity and occurred in 16 of 25 patients (64%) and was grade 3 or 4 in five of them. At step 3 (CDDP 35 mg/m2/wk and paclitaxel 45 mg/m2/wk), two of five patients had to discontinue treatment because of severe esophagitis and one of these died of complications related to grade 4 esophagitis. However, keeping the same doses of chemotherapy and replacing hyperfractionation with a standard single-day fraction, weekly doses of CDDP and paclitaxel of 35 mg/m2 and 45 mg/m2 could be safely administered. Neutropenia was by far the most relevant hematologic toxicity and occurred in 33 of 141 weekly delivered courses, but it was of grade 4 in only four courses. Substantial pulmonary or neurologic toxicity was not observed in this study. Two complete responses (CRs) and 13 partial responses (PRs) were observed, for a 60% overall response rate (95% confidence interval [CI], 39% to 79%). The median survival time was 16 months, with a 66% 1-year survival probability. CONCLUSION CDDP 35 mg/m2/wk and paclitaxel 45 mg/m2/wk can be safely administered with concurrent standard RT. The use of hyperfractionation is associated with a more frequent occurrence of severe esophagitis and requires a reduction of the CDDP dose to 30 mg/m2/ wk. Only future randomized trials will elucidate which of these two approaches (standard or hyperfractionated RT) is the better option to improve the outcome of patients with locally advanced NSCLC.

Cisplatin–epirubicin–paclitaxel weekly administration with G-CSF support in advanced breast cancer. A Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology group (SICOG) phase II study

AbstractPurpose.It has been shown in vitro that both cisplatin and epirubicin increase the antitumor activity of paclitaxel. Weekly administration could give a substantial improvement in the therapeutic index of cisplatin and paclitaxel. This study was aimed at defining the antitumor activity of a weekly cisplatin–epirubicin–paclitaxel (PET) administration in locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer patients. Patients and methods.Sixty-eight breast cancer patients with advanced disease, who had not received prior chemotherapy (except adjuvant), received weekly cisplatin 30 mg/sqm, paclitaxel 120 mg/sqm and epirubicin 50 mg/sqm plus G-CSF (day 3–5), for a maximum of 12 cycles. Thirty-five patients had stage IIIB and 33 stage IV disease (14 with visceral metastases). Results.All patients were evaluable for response on an intent to treat basis. Overall, 21 complete and 38 partial responses have been recorded for an 87% ORR (95% CI = 76–94%). Fourteen CRs and 19 PRs have been registered in the 35 patients with locally advanced disease for a 94% ORR (95% CI = 81–99%) while 7 CRs and 19 PRs were observed in the 33 patients with metastatic disease for a 79% ORR (95% CI–61–91%). Surgery was performed in 33/35 women with locally advanced disease. Four of these patients (11%) showed no invasive cancer on pathologic examination, and in an additional 8 patients tumor < 1 cm was found in the breast. Only 4/33 patients who underwent surgery relapsed. The projected one-year RFS was greater than 80%. At an 11-month median follow-up (range, 3–19), 11 patients had progressed and 5 had died among the 33 patients with metastatic disease, the median progression-free survival in this group being 14 months. Severe hematologic toxicity was uncommon, grade 3–4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurring in 32% and 4% of patients, respectively. Only 2 episodes of neutropenic sepsis were registered. Packed red blood cell transfusions were required in 7 patients. Vomiting, diarrhoea, mucositis and skin toxicity were severe in 6%, 9%, 10%, and 9% of patients, respectively. Peripheral neuropathy was observed in 47% of patients. Conclusions.The weekly PET administration is a well tolerated and very effective approach in advanced breast cancer patients. It can produce a 40% clinical complete response rate, with a more than 10% pCR rate in patients with T4 disease, and an about 80% ORR in those with distant metastases. A phase III trial comparing PET with a standard every 3 weeks epirubicin—taxol administration is underway.