Matthew J. Monberg

Multicenter Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin Followed by Extrapleural Pneumonectomy and Radiation for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant pemetrexed plus cisplatin was administered, followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and hemithoracic radiation (RT), to assess the feasibility and efficacy of trimodality therapy in stage I to III malignant pleural mesothelioma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Requirements included stage T1-3 N0-2 disease, no prior surgical resection, adequate organ function (including predicted postoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 second > or = 35%), and performance status 0 to 1. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) for four cycles. Patients without disease progression underwent EPP followed by RT (54 Gy). The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. RESULTS Seventy-seven patients received chemotherapy. All four cycles were administered to 83% of patients. The radiologic response rate was 32.5% (95% CI, 22.2 to 44.1). Fifty-seven patients proceeded to EPP, which was completed in 54 patients. Three pCRs were observed (5% of EPP). Forty of 44 patients completed irradiation. Median survival in the overall population was 16.8 months (95% CI, 13.6 to 23.2 months; censorship, 33.8%). Patients completing all therapy had a median survival of 29.1 months and a 2-year survival rate of 61.2%. Radiologic response of complete or partial response was associated with a median survival of 26.0 months compared with 13.9 months for patients with stable disease or progressive disease (P = .05). CONCLUSION This multicenter trial showed that trimodality therapy with neoadjuvant pemetrexed plus cisplatin is feasible with a reasonable long-term survival rate, particularly for patients who completed all therapy. Radiologic response to chemotherapy, but not sex, histology, disease stage, or nodal status, was associated with improved survival.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine-Based Chemotherapy With In Situ RRM1 and ERCC1 Protein Levels for Response Prediction in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE We evaluated the efficacy of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a performance status (PS) of 2 and assessed if tumoral RRM1 and ERCC1 protein levels are predictive of response to therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS A randomized phase III trial was conducted in community-based oncology practices. Tumor specimens were collected a priori and shipped to a single laboratory for blinded determination of in situ RRM1 and ERCC1 protein expression levels by an automated quantitative immunofluorescent-based technology. RESULTS One hundred seventy patients were randomly assigned. Overall median survival was 5.1 months for gemcitabine and 6.7 months for gemcitabine and carboplatin (P = .24). RRM1 (range, 5.3 to 105.6; median, 34.1) and ERCC1 (range, 5.2 to 131.3; median, 34.7) values were significantly and inversely correlated with disease response (r = -0.41; P = .001 for RRM1; r = -0.39; P = .003 for ERCC1; ie, response was better for patients with low levels of expression). A model for response prediction that included RRM1, ERCC1, and treatment arm, was highly predictive of the treatment response observed (P = .0005). We did not find statistically significant associations between survival and RRM1 or ERCC1 levels. CONCLUSION Single-agent chemotherapy remains the standard of care for patients with advanced NSCLC and poor PS. Quantitative analysis of RRM1 and ERCC1 protein expression in routinely collected tumor specimens in community oncology practices is predictive of response to gemcitabine and gemcitabine and carboplatin therapy. Oncologists should consider including in situ expression analysis for these proteins into their therapeutic decisions.

Randomized phase II trial of pemetrexed combined with either cisplatin or carboplatin in untreated extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE Given the activity and tolerability of pemetrexed/platinum combinations in non-small-cell lung cancer, and the success of novel therapeutic strategies employed in recent extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) trials, a randomized phase II trial was initiated to evaluate the use of cisplatin or carboplatin plus pemetrexed in previously untreated ES-SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or pemetrexed plus carboplatin area under the concentration curve 5. Treatment was administered once every 21 days for a maximum of six cycles. All patients received folic acid, vitamin B12, and steroid prophylaxis. RESULTS Between December 19, 2002, and May 17, 2004, 78 patients were enrolled onto this multicenter trial. Median age was 63 years (range, 46 to 82 years) for cisplatin/pemetrexed and 66 years (range, 47 to 75 years) for carboplatin/pemetrexed. Median survival time (MST) for cisplatin/pemetrexed was 7.6 months, with a 1-year survivorship of 33.4% and a response rate of 35% (95% CI, 20.6% to 51.7%). The MST for carboplatin/pemetrexed was 10.4 months, with a 1-year survivorship of 39.0% and a response rate of 39.5% (95% CI, 24.0 to 56.6). Median time to progression for cisplatin/pemetrexed was 4.9 months and for carboplatin/pemetrexed was 4.5 months. Median dose-intensity (actual/planned dose) was 98.94% for cisplatin and 99.95% for pemetrexed in the cisplatin/pemetrexed group and 93.21% for carboplatin and 98.50% for pemetrexed in the carboplatin/pemetrexed group. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (15.8% v 20.0%) and thrombocytopenia (13.2% v 22.9%) in the cisplatin/pemetrexed and carboplatin/pemetrexed treatment groups, respectively. CONCLUSION Pemetrexed/platinum doublets had activity and appeared to be well-tolerated in first-line ES-SCLC.

Pemetrexed alone or in combination with cisplatin in previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma: outcomes from a phase IIIB expanded access program.

Background: In a randomized phase III trial, pemetrexed plus cisplatin was associated with improved survival compared with cisplatin alone for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, there are limited data available on the efficacy of these and other chemotherapy regimens in patients who have received previous systemic chemotherapy. To gather additional efficacy and safety data of pemetrexed/cisplatin and pemetrexed alone in previously treated patients, we examined patients treated on the Eli Lilly and Company expanded access program (EAP). Patients and Methods: Patients with malignant mesothelioma were enrolled in this trial. Of 1056 patients receiving at least one dose of the study drug, 187 (17.7%) were previously treated patients with MPM. Patients were treated every 21 days with pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 alone (n = 91) or in combination with cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (n = 96) for a maximum of six cycles. All patients received folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation and steroid prophylaxis. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported by investigators and compiled in a pharmaco-vigilance database for all patients enrolled in the EAP. Results: Median age of the previously treated pleural mesothelioma subset was 66 years (range, 27–87 years). Based on 153 evaluable patients (a subset of the larger intent-to-treat population of 187), the overall response rate was 32.5% for pemetrexed and cisplatin and 5.5% for pemetrexed alone. The disease control rate (response rate + stable disease) was 68.7% for pemetrexed and cisplatin and 46.6% for pemetrexed alone. Median survival was 7.6 months for pemetrexed plus cisplatin (67% censored) and 4.1 months for pemetrexed alone (55% censored). The most commonly reported serious adverse events in the overall EAP irrespective of causality were dehydration (7.2%), nausea (5.2%), vomiting (4.9%), dyspnea (3.8%), and pulmonary embolism (2.4%). Conclusions: The data from this EAP study suggest that patients with previously treated MPM can benefit from treatment with pemetrexed alone or in combination with cisplatin. The treatment is associated with acceptable toxicity.

A retrospective analysis of outcomes by age in a three-arm phase III trial of gemcitabine in combination with carboplatin or paclitaxel vs. paclitaxel plus carboplatin for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE Sufficient data are currently unavailable to assist in defining suitable regimens for patients ≥ 70 years with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS Chemonaïve patients with a performance status (PS) of 0 or 1 and stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomized to gemcitabine 1000mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5.5 on day 1; the same schedule of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel 200mg/m(2) on day 1; or paclitaxel 225mg/m(2) on day 1 plus carboplatin AUC 6.0 on day 1. Cycles were every 21 days up to 6. Efficacy and toxicity results were compared by age groups. RESULTS Overall survival (OS) between patients <70 years (8.6 months, 95% CI: 7.9, 9.5) and ≥ 70 years (7.9 months, 95% CI: 7.1, 9.5) was similar. OS was 8.8 months (95% CI: 7.5, 10.3) among patients 70-74 years, 6.5 months (95% CI: 5.6, 9.3) among patients 75-79 years, and 7.9 months (95% CI: 6.3, 10.3) among patients ≥ 80 years. OS was lower among patients 75-79 years compared with patients 70-74 years (P=0.04). Compared with patients <70 years, patients ≥ 70 years experienced similar rates of myelosuppresion, but younger patients experienced more vomiting and nausea. There was no clear pattern with respect to differences in efficacy by treatments across age groups. CONCLUSIONS Based on the similarity of patient outcomes across age groups, doublet chemotherapy is feasible among carefully selected elderly patients with good PS.

Phase II trial of pemetrexed and gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive malignant pleural mesothelioma.

PURPOSE Pemetrexed and gemcitabine have single-agent activity in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The combination of pemetrexed/gemcitabine has not previously been studied in MPM to our knowledge. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with histologic or cytologic diagnosis of MPM were included. Cohort 1 received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 8, and cohort 2 received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 21 days; all patients were supplemented with folic acid and vitamin B(12) and received dexamethasone. RESULTS One hundred eight patients (cohort 1, n = 56; cohort 2, n = 52) with pleural mesothelioma were enrolled. Among assessable patients, response rate was 26.0% in cohort 1 and 17.1% in cohort 2. Median time to disease progression was 4.34 months for cohort 1 and 7.43 months for cohort 2. Median survival was 8.08 months for cohort 1 (1-year survival = 31.14%) and 10.12 months for cohort 2 (1-year survival = 45.80%). In cohorts 1 and 2, incidence of grade 4 neutropenia was 25.0% and 29.4%, grade 4 thrombocytopenia was 14.3% and 3.9%, grade 3 or 4 anemia was 5.4% and 5.9%, and grade 3 or 4 fatigue was 23.2% and 15.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION The combination of pemetrexed and gemcitabine resulted in moderate clinical activity in MPM. However, the median survival times are similar to those with single-agent pemetrexed and inferior to outcomes observed with cisplatin in combination with an antifolate.

Comparison of pemetrexed plus cisplatin with other first-line doublets in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A combined analysis of three phase 3 trials

INTRODUCTION In a first-line study of advanced NSCLC, pemetrexed-cisplatin was more effective among patients with adenocarcinoma and large-cell carcinoma compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin (median survival of 11.8 versus 10.4 months, P=.005), while survival with pemetrexed-cisplatin was shorter than with gemcitabine-cisplatin in patients with squamous cell carcinoma. The comparability of pemetrexed-cisplatin to other commonly used regimens within histology subgroups needs to be explored. METHODS This retrospective analysis combined the patient-level data from three phase 3 randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of different third generation platinum- and non-platinum based doublets. Unadjusted median survival times and Cox covariate-adjusted treatment hazard ratio (HR) estimates were calculated. Overall results and subgroups by histological type were reported. RESULTS This combined analysis consisted of 3467 patients. In the overall analysis, adjusted HRs favored pemetrexed (HR <1.0) to each of the other 5 regimens, though none of these HRs were statistically significant. Among patients with non-squamous histology, pemetrexed-cisplatin produced favorable HRs to each of the other regimens, achieving statistical significance when compared with vinorelbine-cisplatin (HR=0.67; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.50, 0.91) and gemcitabine-cisplatin (HR=0.85; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.97). Among patients with squamous histology, 4 of the 5 comparison regimens produced favorable HRs (HR >1.0) when compared with pemetrexed-cisplatin, with only the comparison with gemcitabine-cisplatin achieving statistical significance (HR=1.23; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.51). CONCLUSION In the absence of randomized clinical trial data comparing pemetrexed-cisplatin to commonly used doublets in advanced NSCLC other than gemcitabine-cisplatin, this combined analysis of multiple trials provides estimates for such comparisons.

Impact of Preoperative Chemotherapy on Pulmonary Function Tests in Resectable Early-Stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND Several chemotherapy agents, including gemcitabine and paclitaxel, have been reported to cause interstitial pneumonitis. The incidence of pulmonary toxicity from the combination of gemcitabine and paclitaxel is reported to be approximately 5%. In this report, pulmonary function test (PFT) results were analyzed from two similar randomized phase 2 trials that tested platinum and nonplatinum regimens preoperatively in patients with stage I or II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS The regimens included gemcitabine plus carboplatin, paclitaxel, or cisplatin. PFT and dyspnea scores were obtained at baseline and postchemotherapy, and were compared to one of several secondary end points, including ability to undergo surgical resection. RESULTS Baseline PFT scores varied with smoking status. Mean levels of diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (Dlco) adjusted for hemoglobin declined 8% from pre- to postinduction (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p < 0.0001). Changes in FVC, FEV(1), and total lung capacity were not statistically significant after chemotherapy. Although 27% of patients in the study had some reduction in PFT results, only 2 of the 85 eligible patients did not undergo surgery due to PFT reduction following chemotherapy. One patient in the study experienced a clinically significant respiratory toxicity (grade 3 dyspnea). Pulmonary toxicity was only statistically associated with male gender. CONCLUSION In the preoperative setting, gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was well tolerated. The most commonly affected PFT parameter postchemotherapy was the Dlco. Although 15% of patients had a significant reduction in the Dlco postchemotherapy, it did not correlate with clinical symptoms or affect the ability to undergo surgical resection.

Outcomes Associated with Brain Metastases in a Three-Arm Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine-Containing Regimens Versus Paclitaxel Plus Carboplatin for Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Brain metastases (BMs) are a common complication of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Because of historical data indicating a poor prognosis for patients with BM, few randomized phase III studies of advanced NSCLC have included patients with BM at presentation. Because the potential benefits of systemic therapy in patients with BM are uncertain, we analyzed data from a recent phase III study. Methods: One thousand one hundred thirty-five chemonaïve patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were randomized to receive gemcitabine/carboplatin, gemcitabine/paclitaxel, or paclitaxel/carboplatin. Stratification was based on presence or absence of BM, stage, and baseline weight loss. Patients with BM were required to be clinically stable after treatment with radiotherapy or surgery before entry. Results were retrospectively analyzed by presence or absence of BM at study entry. Results: Rate of BM was 17.1% overall. The response rate was 28.9% for patients with BM (n = 194) versus 29.1% without BM (n = 941). Time to progression was 4.3 months with BM and 4.6 months without BM (p = 0.03). Median survival was 7.7 months (95% confidence interval: 6.7–9.3) among patients with BM (n = 194) and 8.6 months (95% confidence interval: 7.9–9.5) for patients without BM (n = 941), p = 0.09. Rates of hematologic adverse events were not different among patients with and without BM. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in response, survival, or hematologic toxicity for patients with or without BM; however, patients with BM had a small but significantly shorter time to progression. Nonprogressing patients with treated BM are appropriate candidates for systemic therapy and entry into clinical trials.

A Randomized Phase II Trial Using Two Different Treatment Schedules of Gemcitabine and Carboplatin in Patients with Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Gemcitabine and carboplatin combination therapy is an active and tolerable regimen in the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Twenty-eight– and 21-day regimens without day-15 administration of gemcitabine are common; however, it remains unclear which offers the optimal therapeutic index. Methods: This trial evaluated two schedules of the combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin: gemcitabine (1100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) plus carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 on day 8) every 28 days, or gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) plus carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 on day 1) every 21 days. Eligible patients in this trial had stage IIIB (with malignant pleural effusion) or stage IV NSCLC with no prior chemotherapy. The primary objective was to evaluate progression-free survival, with secondary objectives of overall survival, response rate, and toxicity. Results: One hundred patients were randomized and enrolled from October of 2000 to January of 2002 into this multi-institutional study (48 for the 28-day regimen and 52 for the 21-day regimen). Baseline demographics were well matched, and a majority of patients (85%) enrolled with stage IV disease. Median progression-free survival and response rates were 3.8 months and 22.9%, respectively, with the 28-day regimen, and 4.9 months and 40.4%, respectively, with the 21-day regimen. Median survival was 8.7 months with the 28-day regimen and 8.0 months for the 21-day regimen. One- and 2-year survival rates were 34.7% and 8.7%, respectively, with the 28-day regimen, and 36.5% and 16.8%, respectively, with the 21-day regimen. Differences in progression-free survival (log-rank statistic, p = 0.5786), response rate (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.0859) and overall survival (log-rank statistic, p = 0.3568) were not statistically significant. Grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities occurred with a greater frequency in the 21-day regimen. No grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicity (except nausea/vomiting with the 28-day regimen) was observed in more than 10% of patients in either treatment arm. Conclusion: Gemcitabine plus carboplatin is active and well tolerated in advanced NSCLC. Both regimens may be considered for further study. Although the 21-day regimen appeared to be associated with preferable outcomes, differences between treatment groups were not statistically significant.