Giuseppe De Cataldis

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.

Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Vinorelbine Combination Therapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase II Randomized Study of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group

PURPOSE In a previous phase I study cisplatin (CDDP), gemcitabine (GEM), and vinorelbine (VNR) combination therapy was safe and very active in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study was aimed at better defining the activity and toxicity of this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred eleven chemotherapy-naive patients, age < or = 70 years, with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a performance status of 0 or 1 (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale) were randomized to two treatment arms. Patients on arm A received CDDP 50 mg/m2, GEM 1,000 mg/m2, and VNR 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of an every-3-weeks cycle (57 patients). Patients on arm B received CDDP 80 mg/m2, epirubicin 80 mg/m2, and vindesine 3 mg/m2, all delivered on day 1 every 4 weeks, plus lonidamine orally 150 mg three times daily (54 patients). In December 1996, randomization was stopped early, and an additional 30 patients were treated with the experimental regimen to obtain a more accurate estimation of its activity rate. RESULTS Among 87 patients who received the CDDP-GEM-VNR combination, four complete responses (CRs) and 46 partial responses (PRs) were observed, for an overall response rate of 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46% to 68%). Two CRs and 18 PRs were recorded among 54 patients on arm B, giving a 37% activity rate (95% CI , 24% to 51%). After a median follow-up duration of 19 months, the median progression-free and overall survival durations were 32 and 50 weeks in arm A, and 18 and 33 weeks in arm B, respectively. World Health Organization grade 3 to 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 46% and 14% of patients in arm A and in 22% and 11% of those in arm B, respectively. Severe nonhematologic toxicity was uncommon in both arms. CONCLUSION The CDDP-GEM-VNR combination is a highly effective treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC and has a manageable toxicity. A phase III trial comparing this new combination with both CDDP-VNR and CDDP-GEM regimens is underway.

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.

Irinotecan and mitomycin C in 5-fluorouracil-refractory colorectal cancer patients. A phase I/II study of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group.

Purpose: To define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of irinotecan (CPT-11) given on days 1 and 8 with mitomycin C (MMC) given on day 1 in a monthly cycle, and to assess the toxicity and activity of this regimen in patients with previously treated colorectal carcinoma. Methods: Fifty-two patients, all pretreated with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (20 patients) and/or one (35 patients) or two (8 patients) lines of chemotherapy, were entered in this study. Escalating doses of CPT-11 (starting from 150 mg/m2) were administered on days 1 and 8, with escalating doses of MMC (starting from 8 mg/m2) given on day 1, recycling every 28 days. At least 3 patients were treated at each dose level. Escalation proceeded unless 2 out of 3 or 4 out of 6 patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) after the first cycle. Results: Twelve patients were entered in the phase I study, and 4 consecutive dose levels were tested. At the last dose level (CPT-11 200 mg/m2 plus MMC 10 mg/m2) 4 of 6 patients experienced a DLT (i.e., grade 4 neutropenia in 2 patients and grade 3 diarrhea in 2 patients). Therefore, this dose level was considered as the MTD. Forty patients were treated at the previous dose level (CPT-11, 175 mg/m2 plus MMC 10 mg/m2). One complete, 4 partial, 3 minor responses and 11 cases of stable disease were registered, giving a response rate of 12% [95% confidence interval (CI), 4–27%] and an overall control of tumor growth in 47% (95% CI, 31–64%) of patients. The median time to treatment failure was 6 months (range 1–19+). The median survival time was 14.5 months, and the 1-year and 2-year probability of survival were 56 and 43%. Neutropenia and diarrhea affected 62 and 58% of patients, grade 3 or 4 being registered in 26 and 23% of them, respectively. One episode of neutropenic fever was reported. Other acute toxicities were usually mild and manageable. Conclusions: CPT-11 175 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 associated with MMC 10 mg/m2 on day 1, every 4 weeks, is a safe and moderately active regimen in heavily pretreated patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma. The role of MMC in this combination is doubtful, and further attempts with other new agents should be made to improve the outcome in these patients.

Gemcitabine combined with either pemetrexed or paclitaxel in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer A randomized phase II SICOG trial

PURPOSE To estimate the safety, activity, and impact on quality of life of a combination of gemcitabine and pemetrexed in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the context of a randomized two-stage phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients in stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomly allocated to receive either gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on day 1, and pemetrexed (Alimta) 500 mg/m(2) followed by gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on day 8 of a 3-weekly cycle (GA arm), or paclitaxel 120 mg/m(2) followed by gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2), both given on days 1 and 8 of a 3-weekly cycle (PG arm). RESULTS 105 (GA arm, 51; PG arm, 54) eligible patients (stage IV, 32 and 30, respectively) were enrolled into this study; thereafter, accrual was stopped due to first-stage analysis. The response rate was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-33%) in the GA arm, and 32% (95% CI, 20-46%) in the PG arm. Median progression-free survival was 5.1 (95% CI, 3.7-6.5) months in the GA arm, and 8.3 (95% CI, 5.9-10.7) months in the PG arm, while median overall survival was 10.5 (95% CI 7.1-13.9), and 13.3 (95% CI 11.7-14.9) months, respectively. Severe neutropenia (36% vs 22%), and febrile neutropenia (14% vs 7%) were more common with the GA regimen, while hair loss (52% vs 16%) and any grade peripheral neuropathy (31% vs 2%) occurred more frequently with PG regimen. Other severe side effects of GA regimen were diarrhoea (10%), liver enzyme derangement (10%), and fatigue (8%). CONCLUSION The GA regimen was tolerated and moderately active in advanced or metastatic NSCLC. However, this combination did not yield any advantage in comparison with the PG regimen, and does not deserve further evaluation.

Taxol plus gemcitabine and vinorelbine given every other week in advanced chemo-naïve non-small cell lung cancer patients.

Accessible online at: www.karger.com/ocl Dear Sir, Despite the recent achievements in the field of cancer chemotherapy, the prognosis of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients still remains very poor [1, 2]. In the last few years, the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group has been testing the hypothesis that more aggressive regimens, combining at least two new agents with cisplatin, could substantially modify the prognosis of patients with advanced disease, provided that they had a good performance status [3, 4]. Since, there has been an increasing concern about the use of cisplatin in patients with advanced disease, we have recently tested a triplet combination not including cisplatin (Taxol + gemcitabine + vinorelbine) in a phase I study. The doses of gemcitabine and vinorelbine were 1,000 and 25 mg/m2, respectively, while the dose of Taxol was escalated from 40 to 70 mg/m2, and all drugs were given on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks [5]. The present phase I study was set up in order to verify whether the adoption of a different schedule could result in a substantial increase in the Taxol and gemcitabine dose intensity. The treatment consisted of Taxol (starting from 75 mg/m2) plus gemcitabine (starting from 1,000 mg/ m2) and vinorelbine at 25 mg/m2 (increased up to 40 mg/m2 in the last 3 cohorts), given on day 1 every 2 weeks. Fifty patients have been enrolled with stage IIIB/IV in 18/32 patients. Twenty-one patients showed an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 at the beginning of the treatment. Table 1 summarizes the dose escalation data. The patients were accrued through 9 different dose levels, for a total of 233 cycles delivered. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) after the first cycle was observed in a total of 9 patients. At the sixth dose level (gemcitabine = 1,500 mg/m2, Taxol = 150 mg/m2), just 1 patient showed grade 3 neutropenia persisting on day 15. Since we thought that these dosages of gemcitabine and Taxol were satisfactory, an escalation of the vinorelbine dose of 30 mg/m2 was performed. Six patients were enrolled at this next level, and DLT never occurred. Six patients were treated at the vinorelbine dose of 35 mg/m2 and only 1 case of a lack of haematological recovery on day 15 was observed. The dose of vinorelbine was raised to 40 mg/m2. Three patients were recruited: 1 patient had febrile neutropenia and another patient complained of severe fatigue, which caused a 1-week delay in recycling. All the 50 patients were assessed for toxicity. Overall, 7 patients had to discontinue

Partial substitution of cisplatin with carboplatin in combination with etoposide in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a multicentric randomised Phase II trial

Seventy previously untreated patients with advanced NSCLC were randomised, after stratification for stage (IIIB vs. IV) and Performance Status (0-1 vs. 2), to receive either treatment A: CDDP 40 mg/m2 + VP16 100 mg/m2 day 1-3 (37 patients); or treatment B: CBDCA 250 mg/m2 day 1 + CDDP 30 mg/m2 day 2, 3 + VP16 100 mg/m2 day 1-3 (33 patients). Therapy was recycled on day 29 in both arms. The two arms were well balanced for the main pretreatment characteristics. Sixty-six patients (32 with Stage IIIB and 34 with Stage IV disease) were evaluable for toxicity and response (arm A = 34, arm B = 32), while four ineligible patients were excluded from analysis. Acute toxicity was assessed at recycling. Non-hematologic toxicity was higher in arm A. However, the reduction of nephrotoxicity (9% vs. 23%) in arm B was lower than expected. Leukopenia (15 vs. 5 patients) or thrombocytopenia (7 vs. 0 patients) of any grade affected more patients of arm B. Moreover, Grade 3-4 leukopenia (six patients) or thrombocytopenia (four patients) was observed only in arm B. Seventeen patients responded: 11/34 (32%; 95% C.I. = 17-50%) in arm A, and 6/32 (19%; 95% C.I. = 7-36%) in arm B. Median survival times of 40 and 34 weeks, respectively, were reported in arm A and B. Stage IIIB and squamous cell histology were associated with a higher probability of response. In conclusion, the partial replacement of CDDP with CBDCA in combination with VP16 slightly improves the tolerance of the treatment in terms of nephro- and neurotoxicity; however, it induces a significant increase in hematologic toxicity. In view of this unfavourable toxicologic profile and of the discouraging response rate observed, this regimen cannot be recommended as standard treatment in advanced NSCLC.