Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where N. Panza is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by N. Panza.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1999

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

Pasquale Comella; Giuseppe Frasci; N. Panza; L. Manzione; Vito Lorusso; Gaetano Di Rienzo; R. Cioffi; Giuseppe De Cataldis; L. Maiorino; Domenico Bilancia; Gianpaolo Nicolella; Michele Di Natale; Franco Carpagnano; Carmen Pacilio; Mario De Lena; Andrea Bianco; G. Comella

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.


British Journal of Cancer | 2004

Gemcitabine with either paclitaxel or vinorelbine vs paclitaxel or gemcitabine alone for elderly or unfit advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients

Pasquale Comella; Giuseppe Frasci; P Carnicelli; B Massidda; F. Buzzi; G Filippelli; L. Maiorino; M Guida; N. Panza; S. Mancarella; R. Cioffi

The aim of this study was to assess whether a combination of gemcitabine (GEM) with either paclitaxel (PTX) or vinorelbine (VNR) could be more effective than GEM or PTX alone in elderly or unfit advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. A total of 264 NSCLC patients aged >70 years with ECOG performance status (PS)⩽2, or younger with PS=2, were randomly treated with: GEM 1200 mg m−2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days; PTX 100 mg m−2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days; GEM 1000 mg m−2 plus PTX 80 mg m−2 (GT) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days; GEM 1000 mg m−2 plus VNR 25 mg m−2 (GV) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. In all arms, an intra-patients dose escalation was applied over the first three courses, provided that no toxicity of WHO grade ⩾2 had previously occurred. At present time, 217 (82%) patients had died. The median (months) and 1-year survival probability were 5.1 and 29% for GEM, 6.4 and 25% for PTX, 9.2 and 44% for GT, and 9.7 and 32% for GV. Multivariate analysis showed that PS⩽1 (hazard ratio (HR)=0.67; 95% CI 0.51–0.90), and doublet treatments (HR=0.76; 95% CI 0.59–0.99) were significantly associated with longer survival. Doublets produced no more toxicity than single agents. GT should be considered a reference regimen for elderly NSCLC patients with PS⩽1.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1999

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

Giuseppe Frasci; N. Panza; Pasquale Comella; Gianpaolo Nicolella; Michele Di Natale; Luigi Manzione; Domenico Bilancia; R. Cioffi; L. Maiorino; Giuseppe De Cataldis; Mario Belli; Enrico Micillo; Vittorio Mascia; Bruno Massidda; Vito Lorusso; Mario De Lena; Francesco Carpagnano; Antonio Contu; Guido Pusceddu; Giuseppe Comella

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.


British Journal of Cancer | 2001

A weekly regimen of cisplatin, paclitaxel and topotecan with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support for patients with extensive disease small cell lung cancer: a phase II study

Giuseppe Frasci; G Nicolella; Pasquale Comella; I Carreca; G DeCataldis; D Muci; C Brunetti; M Natale; F Piantedosi; A Russo; Sergio Palmeri; G. Comella; N. Panza

The present study was aimed at defining the antitumour activity of the cisplatin-paclitaxel-topotecan (CPT) weekly administration with G-CSF support in chemo-naive SCLC patients with extensive disease (ED-SCLC). Chemonaive ED-SCLC patients received cisplatin 40 mg/m2, paclitaxel 85 mg/m2, and topotecan 2.25 mg/m2weekly, with G-CSF (5 μg/kg days 3–5) support, for a maximum of 12 weeks. 37 patients were treated, for a total of 348 cycles delivered. 8 complete responses (22%) and 22 partial responses (59%) were recorded, giving an 81% [95% CI = 65–92%] ORR. At a 13-month (range, 4–26) median follow-up, median progression-free and overall survival were 8 months and 12.5 months, with 1-year and 2-year projected survivals of 55% and 21%, respectively. No toxic deaths occurred. Grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 6 and 3 patients, respectively. Only one case of neutropenic sepsis was recorded, while haemorrhagic thrombocytopenia was never observed. Diarrhoea, paraesthesias and fatigue were the main nonhaematologic toxicities being severe in 6, 2 and 10 patients, respectively. The weekly CPT combination with G-CSF support represents a well tolerated therapeutic approach in chemo-naive ED-SCLC patients. The activity rate seems at least similar to that achievable with the standard front-line approaches.


complex, intelligent and software intensive systems | 2015

An Agent-Based Platform for Cloud Applications Performance Monitoring

Rocco Aversa; N. Panza; Luca Tasquier

The monitoring of the resources is one among the major challenges that the virtualization brings with it within the Cloud environments. In order to ensure scalability and dependability, the users applications are often distributed on several computational resources, such as Virtual Machines, storages and so on. For this reason, the customer is able to retrieve information about the Cloud infrastructure only by acquiring monitoring services provided by the same vendor that is offering the Cloud resources, thus being forced to trust the Cloud provider about the detected performance indexes. In this work we present a complete architecture that covers all the monitoring activities that take place within a Cloud application lifecycle: we also propose an agent-based implementation of a particular module of the designed architecture that ensures high customization of the monitoring facility and more tolerance to network and resource failures.


Lung Cancer | 1996

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

Pasquale Comella; Giuseppe Frasci; N. Panza; Giuseppe De Cataldis; R. Cioffi; Carlo Curcio; Dario Nicolella; Enrico Micillo; G.P. Ianniello; Edoardo Biondi; John Perchard; Giuseppe Comella

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.


British Journal of Cancer | 1996

Cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide + vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre randomised trial. Gruppo Oncologico Campano.

Pasquale Comella; Giuseppe Frasci; G. De Cataldis; N. Panza; R. Cioffi; Cyntia Curcio; Mario Belli; Antonio C. Bianco; G.P. Ianniello; L. Maiorino; M. Della Vittoria; J. Perchard; G. Comella


European Journal of Cancer | 1998

Carboplatin-Oral Etoposide Personalised Dosing in Elderly Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients

Giuseppe Frasci; Pasquale Comella; N. Panza; G. De Cataldis; F. Del Gaizo; C. Pozzo; A. Gravina; P. Ruffolo; R. Cioffi; P Marcatili; M. Della Vittoria; S Monfardini; G. Comella


Lung Cancer | 2000

Cisplatin-gemcitabine, vs. cisplatin-gemcitabine-vinorelbine, vs. cisplatin-gemcitabine-paclitaxel in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. First-stage analysis of a Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG) phase III trial

Pasquale Comella; Giuseppe Frasci; N. Panza; Gianpaolo Nicolella; L. Manzione; G. De Cataldis; R. Cioffi; Enrico Micillo; Vito Lorusso; Domenico Bilancia; L. Maiorino; Francovito Piantedosi; A Mangiameli; A. Gravina; Alfredo Lamberti; M De Lena; G. Comella


Lung Cancer | 2000

Gemcitabine + vinorelbine (GV) yields better survival than vinorelbine (V) alone in elderly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Final analysis of a Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG) phase III trial

Giuseppe Frasci; Vito Lorusso; N. Panza; Pasquale Comella; G. De Cataldis; Enrico Micillo; N Iannelli; Gianfranco Filippelli; D Muci; Francovito Piantedosi; Mario Belli; Gianpaolo Nicolella; Vittorio Mascia; B. Massidda; G. Comella; M De Lena

Collaboration


Dive into the N. Panza's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Pasquale Comella

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

G. Comella

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Gianpaolo Nicolella

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

R. Cioffi

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

L. Maiorino

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Domenico Bilancia

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Enrico Micillo

University of Naples Federico II

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Michele Di Natale

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

L. Manzione

Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge