Stein Sundstrøm

Cisplatin and Etoposide Regimen Is Superior to Cyclophosphamide, Epirubicin, and Vincristine Regimen in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial With 5 Years’ Follow-Up

PURPOSE To investigate whether chemotherapy with etoposide and cisplatin (EP) is superior to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and vincristine (CEV) in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 436 eligible patients were randomized to chemotherapy with EP (n = 218) or CEV (n = 218). Patients were stratified according to extent of disease (limited disease [LD], n = 214; extensive disease [ED], n = 222). The EP group received five courses of etoposide 100 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) IV on day 1, followed by oral etoposide 200 mg/m(2) daily on days 2 to 4. The CEV group received five courses of epirubicin 50 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 1,000 mg/m(2), and vincristine 2 mg, all IV on day 1. In addition, LD patients received thoracic radiotherapy concurrent with chemotherapy cycle 3, and those achieving complete remission during the treatment period received prophylactic cranial irradiation. RESULTS The treatment groups were well balanced with regard to age, sex, and prognostic factors such as weight loss, and performance status. The 2- and 5-year survival rates in the EP arm (14% and 5%, P =.0004) were significantly higher compared with those in the CEV arm (6% and 2%). Among LD patients, median survival time was 14.5 months versus 9.7 months in the EP and CEV arms, respectively (P =.001). The 2- and 5-year survival rates of 25% and 10% in the EP arm compared with 8% and 3% in the CEV arm (P =.0001). For ED patients, there was no significant survival difference between the treatment arms. Quality-of-life assessments revealed no major differences between the randomized groups. CONCLUSION EP is superior to CEV in LD-SCLC patients. In ED-SCLC patients, the benefits of EP and CEV chemotherapy seem equivalent, with similar survival time and quality of life.

Phase III Study by the Norwegian Lung Cancer Study Group: Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin Compared With Gemcitabine Plus Carboplatin As First-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE To compare pemetrexed/carboplatin with a standard regimen as first-line therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and performance status of 0 to 2 were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) plus carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) = 5 (Calverts formula) on day 1 or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin AUC = 5 on day 1 every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. The primary end point was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) defined as global quality of life, nausea/vomiting, dyspnea, and fatigue reported on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the lung cancer-specific module LC13 during the first 20 weeks. Secondary end points were overall survival and toxicity. Results Four hundred thirty-six eligible patients were enrolled from April 2005 to July 2006. Patients who completed the baseline questionnaire were analyzed for HRQoL (n = 427), and those who received > or = one cycle of chemotherapy were analyzed for toxicity (n = 423). Compliance of HRQoL questionnaires was 87%. There were no significant differences for the primary HRQoL end points or in overall survival between the two treatment arms (pemetrexed/carboplatin, 7.3 months; gemcitabine/carboplatin, 7.0 months; P = .63). The patients who received gemcitabine/carboplatin had more grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicity than patients who received pemetrexed/carboplatin, including leukopenia (46% v 23%, respectively; P < .001), neutropenia (51% v 40%, respectively; P = .024), and thrombocytopenia (56% v 24%, respectively; P < .001). More patients on the gemcitabine/carboplatin arm received transfusions of RBCs and platelets, whereas the frequencies of neutropenic infections and thrombocytopenic bleedings were similar on both arms. CONCLUSION Pemetrexed/carboplatin provides similar HRQoL and survival when compared with gemcitabine/carboplatin with less hematologic toxicity and less need for supportive care.

Palliative chemotherapy beyond three courses conveys no survival or consistent quality-of-life benefits in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

This randomised multicentre trial was conducted to establish the optimal duration of palliative chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared a policy of three vs six courses of new-generation platinum-based combination chemotherapy with regard to effects on quality of life (QoL) and survival. Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and WHO performance status (PS) 0–2 were randomised to receive three (C3) or six (C6) courses of carboplatin (area under the curve (AUC) 4, Chateluts formula, equivalent to Calverts AUC 5) on day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg m−2 on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week cycle. Key end points were QoL at 18 weeks, measured with EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and QLQ-LC13, and overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and need of palliative radiotherapy. Two hundred and ninety-seven patients were randomised (C3 150, C6 147). Their median age was 65 years, 30% had PS 2 and 76% stage IV disease. Seventy-eight and 54% of C3 and C6 patients, respectively, completed all scheduled chemotherapy courses. Compliance with QoL questionnaires was 88%. There were no significant group differences in global QoL, pain or fatigue up to 26 weeks. The dyspnoea palliation rate was lower in the C3 arm at 18 and 26 weeks (P<0.05), but this finding was inconsistent across different methods of analysis. Median survival in the C3 group was 28 vs 32 weeks in the C6 group (P=0.75, HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82–1.31). One- and 2-year survival rates were 25 and 9% vs 25 and 5% in the C3 and C6 arm, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 16 and 21 weeks in the C3 and C6 groups, respectively (P=0.21, HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68–1.08). In conclusion, palliative chemotherapy with carboplatin and vinorelbine beyond three courses conveys no survival or consistent QoL benefits in advanced NSCLC.

Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin or Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin for Chemonaïve Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Results of the International Expanded Access Program

Introduction: Previously published results from a randomized phase III study of pemetrexed plus cisplatin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) demonstrated a significant survival benefit and higher response rate compared with cisplatin. Although pemetrexed was under review by regulatory agencies, an International Expanded Access Program (EAP) provided more than 3000 mesothelioma patients with access to single-agent pemetrexed or pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin in 13 countries. This manuscript reports the safety and efficacy data from the nonrandomized open-label study in chemonaïve patients receiving pemetrexed plus platinum under the EAP. Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed MPM, not amenable to curative surgery, received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 in combination with either cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC 5, once every 21 days with standard premedication. Efficacy data were recorded at the end of study participation. Results: A total of 1704 chemonaïve patients received pemetrexed plus cisplatin (n = 843) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin (n = 861) and were evaluated for safety. The efficacy evaluable population consisted of 745 patients in the pemetrexed plus cisplatin group and 752 patients in the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group for whom physician-reported tumor response was available. The pemetrexed plus cisplatin group demonstrated a response rate of 26.3% compared with 21.7% for the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group, with similar 1-year survival rates (63.1% versus 64.0%) and median time to progressive disease (7 months versus 6.9 months). The most common grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia in 23.9% of the pemetrexed plus cisplatin group and 36.1% of the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group. Conclusion: This large EAP confirmed the activity of pemetrexed plus cisplatin and pemetrexed plus carboplatin in chemonaïve patients with MPM, demonstrating clinically similar time to progressive disease and 1-year survival rates.

The value of prognostic factors in small cell lung cancer: results from a randomised multicenter study with minimum 5 year follow-up

Abstract We have evaluated the prognostic value of 22 pretreatment attributes in 436 small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients included in a prospective multicenter study with a minimum 5-year follow-up. Pretreatment clinical and laboratory parameters were registered. Possible prognostic factors were evaluated by univariate analysis (log rank test) and by the Cox multivariate regression model. In the univariate analysis of all patients, only age, nodal metastasis, and skin metastasis were not associated with survival. The multivariate Cox model identified gender, extent of disease, performance status (PS), weight loss, platelet count, LDH, and NSE as independent prognostic factors. In subset multivariate analyses according to extent of disease, we found haemoglobin level, PS, NSE, and total WBC as significant prognostic indicators for survival in limited-stage disease (LD-SCLC), while PS, weight loss, LDH, number of metastases, liver metastases, and brain metastases were identified as independent prognostic factors in extensive-stage disease (ED-SCLC). There was a significant correlation between serum LDH and NSE levels. In conclusion, gender, extent of disease, PS, weight loss, haemoglobin, WBC count, platelet count, LDH, and NSE were all found to be independent prognostic factors for SCLC survival. However, the prognostic value of these factors depends highly on whether all or subsets of SCLC patients are studied.

Irinotecan Plus Carboplatin Versus Oral Etoposide Plus Carboplatin in Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE A Japanese randomized trial showed superior survival for patients with extensive-disease (ED) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) receiving irinotecan plus cisplatin compared with etoposide plus cisplatin. The present trial evaluated the efficacy of irinotecan plus carboplatin (IC) compared with oral etoposide plus carboplatin (EC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with ED SCLC were randomly assigned to receive either IC, which consisted of carboplatin (area under the curve = 4; Chatelut formula) and irinotecan (175 mg/m2) intravenously both on day 1, or EC, which consisted of carboplatin as in IC and etoposide (120 mg/m(2)/d) orally on days 1 through 5. Courses were repeated every 3 weeks with four cycles planned. Doses were reduced by one third in patients with a WHO performance status (PS) of 3 to 4 and/or age older than 70 years. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were quality of life (QOL) and complete response (CR) rate. RESULTS Of 220 randomly assigned patients, 209 were eligible for analysis (IC, n = 105; EC, n = 104). Thirty-five percent were older than 70 years, and 47% had a PS of 2 to 4. The groups were well balanced with respect to prognostic factors. OS was inferior in the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.87; P = .02). Median survival time was 8.5 months for IC compared with 7.1 months for EC. One-year survival rate was 34% for IC and 24% for EC. CR was seen in 18 IC patients compared with seven EC patients (P = .02). There were no statistically significant differences in hematologic grade 3 or 4 toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea was more common in the IC group. QOL differences were small, with a trend toward prolonged palliation with the IC regimen. CONCLUSION IC prolongs survival in ED SCLC with slightly better scores for QOL.

Telomerase Peptide Vaccination in NSCLC: A Phase II Trial in Stage III Patients Vaccinated after Chemoradiotherapy and an 8-Year Update on a Phase I/II Trial

Purpose: We report two clinical trials in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients evaluating immune response, toxicity, and clinical outcome after vaccination with the telomerase peptide GV1001: a phase II trial (CTN-2006) in patients vaccinated after chemoradiotherapy and an 8-year update on a previously reported phase I/II trial (CTN-2000). Experimental Design: CTN-2006: 23 inoperable stage III patients received radiotherapy (2 Gy × 30) and weekly docetaxel (20 mg/m2), followed by GV1001 vaccination. CTN-2000: 26 patients were vaccinated with two telomerase peptides (GV1001 and I540). The immune responses were evaluated by T-cell proliferation and cytokine assays. Results: CTN-2006 trial: a GV1001-specific immune response developed in 16/20 evaluable patients. Long-term immunomonitoring showed persisting responses in 13 subjects. Serious adverse events were not observed. Immune responders recorded a median PFS of 371 days, compared with 182 days for nonresponders (P = 0.20). CTN-2000 trial update: 13/24 evaluable subjects developed a GV1001 response. The immune responders achieved increased survival compared with nonresponders (median 19 months vs. 3.5 months; P < 0.001). Follow-up of four long-time survivors showed that they all harbored durable GV1001-specific T-cell memory responses and IFNγhigh/IL-10low/IL-4low cytokine profiles. Two patients are free of disease after 108 and 93 months, respectively. Conclusions: Vaccination with GV1001 is well tolerated, immunizes the majority of NSCLC patients and establishes durable T-cell memory. The considerable immune response rate and low toxicity in the phase II trial support the concept of combining chemoradiotherapy with vaccination. The survival advantage observed for immune responders warrants a randomized trial. Clin Cancer Res; 17(21); 6847–57. ©2011 AACR.

Influence of comorbidity on survival, toxicity and health-related quality of life in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving platinum-doublet chemotherapy.

AIM OF THE STUDY To investigate whether patients with severe comorbidity receiving platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a shorter overall survival, experience more toxicity or more deterioration of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than other patients during treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients enrolled onto a phase III trial comparing pemetrexed/carboplatin with gemcitabine/carboplatin as first-line therapy of stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were analysed. Eligible patients had performance status 0-2 and adequate kidney/liver/bone-marrow function. Comorbidity was assessed from hospital medical records using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G). Toxicity was graded using the CTCAE v3.0 and the patients reported HRQoL on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30/LC13. RESULTS Data from 402 of the 436 of the patients enrolled onto the phase III trial were analysed. The patients with severe comorbidity had similar survival as other patients (6.9 versus 8.1months; p=.34), similar frequency of neutropenia (48% versus 42%; p=.16), but experienced more neutropenic fevers (12% versus 5%; p=.012) and deaths from neutropenic infections (3% versus 0%; p=.027). They had more thrombocytopenia (46% versus 36%; p=.03), but not more thrombocytopenic bleedings (3% versus 4%; p=.65). In general, the patients with severe comorbidity reported poorer HRQoL, but not significantly more deterioration of HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS The results from our study suggest that patients with advanced NSCLC who have severe co-existing disorders benefit from and tolerate platinum-doublet chemotherapy as well as other patients. They do, however, appear to have a higher risk of acquiring infections when neutropenic.

Vinorelbine/carboplatin vs gemcitabine/carboplatin in advanced NSCLC shows similar efficacy, but different impact of toxicity

This randomised phase III study in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients was conducted to compare vinorelbine/carboplatin (VC) and gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) regarding efficacy, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and toxicity. Chemonaive patients with NSCLC stage IIIB/IV and WHO performance status 0–2 were eligible. No upper age limit was defined. Patients received vinorelbine 25 mg m−2 or gemcitabine 1000 mg m−2 on days 1 and 8 and carboplatin AUC4 on day 1 and three courses with 3-week cycles. HRQOL questionnaires were completed at baseline, before chemotherapy and every 8 weeks until 49 weeks. During 14 months, 432 patients were included (VC, n=218; GC, n=214). Median survival was 7.3 vs 6.4 months, 1-year survival 28 vs 30% and 2-year survival 7 vs 7% in the VC and GC arm, respectively (P=0.89). HRQOL, represented by global QOL, nausea/vomiting, dyspnoea and pain, showed no significant differences. More grade 3–4 anaemia (P<0.01), thrombocytopenia (P<0.01) and transfusions of blood (P<0.01) or platelets (P<0.01) were observed in the GC arm. There was more grade 3–4 leucopoenia (P<0.01) in the VC arm, but the rate of neutropenic infections was the same (P=0.87). In conclusion, overall survival and HRQOL are similar, while grade 3–4 toxicity requiring interventions are less frequent when VC is compared to GC in advanced NSCLC.

Multicenter Phase II Trial of Paclitaxel, Cisplatin, and Etoposide With Concurrent Radiation for Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE To investigate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of adding paclitaxel to cisplatin/etoposide chemotherapy and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in treatment of limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received five courses of chemotherapy (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 1-hour intravenous [IV] infusion day 1; cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) IV day 1; etoposide 100 mg/m2 IV day 1; oral etoposide 100 mg bid days 2 to 5) at 3-week intervals. TRT (42 Gy administered in 15 fractions) was administered concurrent with chemotherapy cycle 3. All patients were evaluated before starting TRT and 4 weeks after termination of chemotherapy. Patients achieving complete remission (CR) were administered prophylactic cranial irradiation. RESULTS Thirty-nine patients were included, and the median age was 63 years. The median follow-up was 36 months (range, 19 to 57 months). The overall response rate was 92% (CR, 81%; partial response, 11%), and the median survival was 21 months. The 1- and 2-year disease-specific survival rates were 69% and 37%, respectively. Of 29 CR patients, 83% have relapsed. Brain metastasis was as frequent as local recurrences (42%). Hematologic toxicity included grade 3 to 4 leukopenia in 74% of patients and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 10%. One treatment-related death occurred as a result of severe neutropenia and septicemia. Hematotoxicity caused dose reductions in 31% of courses. One patient had an anaphylactic reaction during the first paclitaxel infusion. Paclitaxel-related neuropathy and myalgia were reversible. Grade 3 esophagitis was seen in five patients during and shortly after TRT. CONCLUSION This novel multimodal regimen is effective and well tolerated in patients with LD-SCLC. It compares favorably with previously published phase II studies.