Nicole H. Gower

Phase II Study of Vinorelbine in Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

PURPOSE To evaluate the response rate and impact on quality of life of vinorelbine given as cycles of 30 mg/m(2) weekly for 6 weeks to patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Twenty-nine patients with histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma were enrolled (26 male patients and three female patients; median age, 58 years [range, 29 to 77 years]). Seventeen patients had epithelioid tumors, two had sarcomatoid tumors, and 10 had biphasic tumors. The International Mesothelioma Interest Group staging system was used: one patient had stage Ib disease, 10 had stage II disease, eight had stage III disease, and 10 had stage IV disease. Patients were treated with weekly injections of vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2). A cycle consisted of six weekly injections. The new guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors were used. Responses were measured by spiral computed tomography scan. RESULTS All twenty-nine patients had measurable disease and were assessed for response. There were seven partial responses (24% [95% confidence interval, 10% to 44%]), 16 patients had stable disease (55%), and six patients had disease progression on therapy (21%). The median number of vinorelbine injections was 12 (range, 2 to 30). Quality-of-life analyses showed a benefit for vinorelbine therapy. CONCLUSION Vinorelbine shows promise in the palliation of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. The relatively low toxicity of the drug suggests that trials of vinorelbine in combination with other agents should be feasible.

Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life

Background: In 1995 a meta-analysis of randomised trials investigating the value of adding chemotherapy to primary treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) suggested a small survival benefit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy in each of the primary treatment settings. However, the meta-analysis included many small trials and trials with differing eligibility criteria and chemotherapy regimens. Methods: The aim of the Big Lung Trial was to confirm the survival benefits seen in the meta-analysis and to assess quality of life and cost in the supportive care setting. A total of 725 patients were randomised to receive supportive care alone (n = 361) or supportive care plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 364). Results: 65% of patients allocated chemotherapy (C) received all three cycles of treatment and a further 27% received one or two cycles. 74% of patients allocated no chemotherapy (NoC) received thoracic radiotherapy compared with 47% of the C group. Patients allocated C had a significantly better survival than those allocated NoC: HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89, p = 0.0006), median survival 8.0 months for the C group v 5.7 months for the NoC group, a difference of 9 weeks. There were 19 (5%) treatment related deaths in the C group. There was no evidence that any subgroup benefited more or less from chemotherapy. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the pre-defined primary and secondary quality of life end points, although large negative effects of chemotherapy were ruled out. The regimens used proved to be cost effective, the extra cost of chemotherapy being offset by longer survival. Conclusions: The survival benefit seen in this trial was entirely consistent with the NSCLC meta-analysis and subsequent similarly designed large trials. The information on quality of life and cost should enable patients and their clinicians to make more informed treatment choices.

Gemcitabine Plus Carboplatin Versus Mitomycin, Ifosfamide, and Cisplatin in Patients With Stage IIIB or IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase III Randomized Study of the London Lung Cancer Group

PURPOSE This phase III randomized trial compared two chemotherapy regimens, gemcitabine plus carboplatin and mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin, in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The regimens were compared with regard to effects on survival, response rates, toxicity, and quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had previously untreated stage IIIB or IV NSCLC suitable for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Randomly assigned patients were to receive four cycles, each at 3-week intervals, of carboplatin area under the curve of 5 on day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,200 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (GCa) or mitomycin 6 mg/m(2), ifosfamide 3g/m(2), and cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1 (MIC). RESULTS Between February 1999 and August 2001, 422 patients (GCa, n = 212; MIC, n = 210) were randomly assigned in the United Kingdom. The majority of patients received the intended four cycles (GCa, 64%; MIC, 61%). There was a significant survival advantage for GCa compared with MIC (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0. 93; P = .008). Median survival was 10 months with GCa and 7.6 months with MIC (difference, 2.4 months; 95% CI, 1.0 to 4.0), and 1-year survival was 40% with GCa and 30% with MIC (difference, 10%; 95% CI, 3% to 18%). Overall response rates were similar (42% for GCa v 41% for MIC; P = .84). More thrombocytopenia occurred with GCa (P = .03), but this was not associated with increased hospital admission or fatality. GCa caused less nausea, vomiting, constipation, and alopecia and was associated with fewer admissions for administration and better quality of life. CONCLUSION In patients with advanced NSCLC, GCa chemotherapy was shown to be a better-tolerated treatment that conferred a survival advantage over MIC.

Early Compared With Late Radiotherapy in Combined Modality Treatment for Limited Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A London Lung Cancer Group Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE To replicate an earlier National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) trial that examined the effect on survival of the timing of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in patients with limited disease small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received three cycles of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and vincristine alternating with three cycles of etoposide and cisplatin. Three hundred twenty five chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-naïve patients were randomly assigned to either early TRT administered concurrently in the second cycle or late TRT administered concurrently with the sixth cycle; the dose was 40 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks. RESULTS TRT was received by 92% and 82% of patients in the early and late arms, respectively (P = .01). Sixty-nine percent of patients in the early arm received all six courses of chemotherapy compared with 80% in the late arm (P = .003). There was no evidence of a survival difference; median overall survival time was 13.7 and 15.1 months in the early and late arms, respectively (P = .23). In a meta-analysis of all eight trials that compared early and late TRT, there were three in which the proportion of patients who completed their planned chemotherapy was similar between the TRT arms (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.86) and five in which proportionally fewer patients in the early TRT arm completed their chemotherapy (HR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.17). CONCLUSION This study failed to show a survival advantage for early TRT with chemotherapy in limited-stage SCLC, unlike the NCIC trial. However, the results of a meta-analysis suggest that it is essential to ensure that the delivery of chemotherapy is optimal when administered with early TRT.

Statistical Validation of the EORTC Prognostic Model for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Based on Three Consecutive Phase II Trials

PURPOSE Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) carries a poor prognosis due to chemoresistance. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) prognostic model was reported to predict survival in MPM. Our retrospective analysis set out to test the validity of the model as a prognostic tool in patients treated in three phase II trials at St Bartholomews Hospital (London, United Kingdom) between 1999 and 2003. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 145 patients were treated in three phase II trials; vinorelbine (VIN; 70 patients), vinorelbine/oxaliplatin (VO; 26 patients), and irinotecan/cisplatin/mitomycin C (IPM; 49 patients). Two subgroups, high-risk and low-risk, were defined by EORTC prognostic score (EPS). EPS was determined by a five-parameter model incorporating age, sex, histology, probability of diagnosis, and leukocyte count. An EPS cutoff of less than 1.27 (low risk) or more than 1.27 (high risk) was used to stratify Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Each of the EPS variables exhibited either trends or significant stratification of overall survival (OS). RESULTS Multivariate analysis confirmed leukocyte count, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and sarcomatous histology as independent prognostic variables. EPS stratified OS in both individual and pooled trial datasets. No association between objective tumor response and EPS classification was identified by multinomial logistic regression. EPS stratified progression-free survival for the VO and IPM cohorts, but not for VIN. CONCLUSION This study validates the EPS system as a robust tool for stratifying small trials into low- and high-risk subgroups. EPS should facilitate patient selection and analysis in randomized clinical trials.

Assessment of quality of life in the supportive care setting of the big lung trial in non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE The Big Lung Trial (BLT) was a large, pragmatic trial to evaluate the addition of chemotherapy to primary treatment (ie, surgery, radical radiotherapy, or supportive care) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the supportive care group, there was a small but significant survival benefit in patients treated with chemotherapy compared with supportive care alone (no chemotherapy). A substudy was undertaken to evaluate the quality of life (QoL) implications of the treatment options. QoL was assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaires C30 (QLQ-C30) and LC17, and daily diary cards. PATIENTS AND METHODS EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC17 were collected at 0, 6 to 8, 12, 18, and 24 weeks. Diary cards were completed during the first 12 weeks of the study. The primary end point was global QoL at 12 weeks. RESULTS A total of 273 patients were randomly assigned: 138 to no chemotherapy and 135 to chemotherapy. There was no evidence of a large detrimental effect on QoL of chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in global QoL or physical/emotional functioning, fatigue and dyspnea, and pain were detected at 12 weeks. Higher rates of palliative radiotherapy in the no chemotherapy arm may have lessened differences in QoL. Global QoL, role functioning, fatigue, appetite loss, and constipation were prognostic indicators of survival at 12 weeks. CONCLUSION There were no important adverse effects of chemotherapy on QoL.

Randomized trial comparing weekly versus 3-week chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer: a Cancer Research Campaign trial.

PURPOSE A randomized trial of chemotherapy, given on either a 1-week or a 3-week schedule, was performed in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients. The aim was to determine if weekly scheduling produced survival superior to conventional treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS Four hundred thirty-eight patients with SCLC with either limited disease (LD; 276 patients) or good-prognosis extensive disease (ED; 162 patients) were randomized. Weekly chemotherapy was 12 alternating cycles of ifosfamide/doxorubicin and cis-platin/etoposide (PE), while 3-week treatment was six alternating cycles of cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine (CAV) and PE. Thoracic irradiation was administered 3 weeks after completion of chemotherapy to LD patients who attained a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). Patients were well matched for clinical characteristics and prognostic factors. RESULTS Overall response was the same in both arms: 82.3% (39.4% CR) with weekly and 81.1% (36.9% CR) with 3-week treatment. The median survival (MS) durations were 10.8 and 10.6 months for weekly and 3-week chemotherapy, respectively. The 2-year survival rates were 11.8% and 11.7% in the weekly and 3-week arms, respectively. Received dose-intensity (DI) was 73.9% of projected for weekly treatment and 92.7% for 3-week treatment. Hematologic toxicity was the major dose-limiting toxicity for the weekly treatment. CONCLUSION This trial excludes at 90% power a benefit of greater than 10% for 2-year survival for weekly treatment. The received DI was reduced to a greater extent with weekly treatment, mainly due to hematologic toxicity.

Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Thalidomide in Combination With Gemcitabine and Carboplatin in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE Cancers rely on angiogenesis for their growth and dissemination. We hypothesized that thalidomide, an oral antiangiogenic agent, when combined with chemotherapy, and as maintenance treatment, would improve survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Seven hundred twenty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or thalidomide capsules 100 to 200 mg daily for up to 2 years. All patients received gemcitabine and carboplatin every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. End points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, grade 3/4 toxicity, and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS The median OS rates were 8.9 months (placebo) and 8.5 months (thalidomide). The hazard ratio (HR) was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.32; P = .12). The 2-year survival rate was 16% and 12% in the placebo and thalidomide arms, respectively. The PFS results were consistent with those for OS. The risk of having a thrombotic event was increased by 74% in the thalidomide group: HR of 1.74 (95% CI, 1.20 to 2.52; P = .003). There were no differences in hematologic toxicities, but a slight excess of rash and neuropathy in the thalidomide group. QoL scores were similar but thalidomide was associated with less insomnia, and more constipation and peripheral neuropathy. In a retrospective analysis, patients with nonsquamous histology in the thalidomide group had a poorer survival: 2-year risk difference of 10% (95% CI, 4% to 16%; P < .001). CONCLUSION In this large trial of patients with NSCLC, thalidomide in combination with chemotherapy did not improve survival overall, but increased the risk of thrombotic events. Unexpectedly, survival was significantly worse in patients with nonsquamous histology.

Comparison of gemcitabine and carboplatin versus cisplatin and etoposide for patients with poor-prognosis small cell lung cancer

Background: The combination of cisplatin and etoposide (PE) has been a standard treatment for patients with poor-prognosis small cell lung cancer (SCLC). This non-inferiority design trial aimed to determine whether the combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) results in similar survival but is less toxic with better quality of life. Methods: Previously untreated patients with SCLC with extensive disease or limited stage with poor prognostic factors were randomly assigned to six 3-weekly cycles of GC or PE. Results: 241 patients (121 GC, 120 PE) were recruited, of which 216 (90%) had died. There was no difference in overall survival (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.32). Median survival with GC and PE was 8.0 and 8.1 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 months with GC and 6.3 months with PE. Grade 3 or 4 myelosuppressions were more frequent with GC (anaemia: 14% GC vs 2% PE; leucopenia: 32% GC vs 13% PE; thrombocytopenia: 22% GC vs 4% PE), but these were not associated with increased hospital admissions, infections or fatalities. Grade 2–3 alopecia (68% PE vs 17% GC) and nausea (43% PE vs 26% GC) were more frequent with PE. Patients given GC received more chemotherapy as outpatients (89% GC vs 66% PE of treatment cycles). In QoL questionnaires, more patients receiving PE reported being upset by hair loss (p = 0.004) and impaired cognitive functioning (p = 0.04). Conclusions: GC is as effective as PE in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival and has a toxicity profile more acceptable to patients. Trial registration number: ISRCTN 39679215

Recruitment of patients with lung cancer into a randomised clinical trial: experience at two centres. On behalf of the Big Lung Trial Steering Committee.

BACKGROUND The entry of patients into randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in lung cancer is low. A study was undertaken to assess the reasons why patients with non-small cell lung cancer did not enter a trial involving randomisation to receive or not receive three courses of cisplatin based chemotherapy in addition to primary treatment by surgery, radiotherapy, or best supportive care. METHODS The study was carried out in two large London institutions with a special interest in recruiting patients to lung cancer trials. Patients recently diagnosed as having non-small cell lung cancer were prospectively identified and followed to see whether they entered the RCT and, if not, to identify the main reasons why. RESULTS Six hundred and eighty eight patients newly diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer were identified between November 1995 and July 1998; 274 (39.8%) were deemed ineligible for the RCT for clinical reasons, most frequently their general condition rendering them unfit for chemotherapy. Another 161 (23.4%) were ineligible for logistical reasons—for example, they were discharged to centres not participating in the RCT or they were not considered for the trial at an appropriate time in their management. Of 253 potentially eligible patients, only 63 (24.9% of those eligible) agreed to enter the RCT and four entered another study. Of those who did not enter, 77 (41.4%) declined without stating a reason, 61 (32.8%) did not want chemotherapy, and only eight (4.3%) expressed a wish to have chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS Despite considerable time and effort, the proportion of patients recruited was small (9.2%). Many seen were ineligible but, of 253 potentially eligible patients, 186 (73.5%) refused to enter the RCT.