Ulrich Gatzemeier

Phase III Study Comparing Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine With Cisplatin Plus Pemetrexed in Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Advanced-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE Cisplatin plus gemcitabine is a standard regimen for first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Phase II studies of pemetrexed plus platinum compounds have also shown activity in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS This noninferiority, phase III, randomized study compared the overall survival between treatment arms using a fixed margin method (hazard ratio [HR] < 1.176) in 1,725 chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1. Patients received cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (n = 863) or cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 862) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. RESULTS Overall survival for cisplatin/pemetrexed was noninferior to cisplatin/gemcitabine (median survival, 10.3 v 10.3 months, respectively; HR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.05). Overall survival was statistically superior for cisplatin/pemetrexed versus cisplatin/gemcitabine in patients with adenocarcinoma (n = 847; 12.6 v 10.9 months, respectively) and large-cell carcinoma histology (n = 153; 10.4 v 6.7 months, respectively). In contrast, in patients with squamous cell histology, there was a significant improvement in survival with cisplatin/gemcitabine versus cisplatin/pemetrexed (n = 473; 10.8 v 9.4 months, respectively). For cisplatin/pemetrexed, rates of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia (P <or= .001); febrile neutropenia (P = .002); and alopecia (P < .001) were significantly lower, whereas grade 3 or 4 nausea (P = .004) was more common. CONCLUSION In advanced NSCLC, cisplatin/pemetrexed provides similar efficacy with better tolerability and more convenient administration than cisplatin/gemcitabine. This is the first prospective phase III study in NSCLC to show survival differences based on histologic type.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Previously Treated With Chemotherapy

PURPOSE To compare the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had a performance status 0 to 2, previous treatment with one prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced NSCLC, and adequate organ function. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) day 1 with vitamin B(12), folic acid, and dexamethasone or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1 with dexamethasone every 21 days. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS Five hundred seventy-one patients were randomly assigned. Overall response rates were 9.1% and 8.8% (analysis of variance P =.105) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months for each arm, and median survival time was 8.3 versus 7.9 months (P = not significant) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. The 1-year survival rate for each arm was 29.7%. Patients receiving docetaxel were more likely to have grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.2% v 5.3%; P <.001), febrile neutropenia (12.7% v 1.9%; P <.001), neutropenia with infections (3.3% v 0.0%; P =.004), hospitalizations for neutropenic fever (13.4% v 1.5%; P <.001), hospitalizations due to other drug related adverse events (10.5% v 6.4%; P =.092), use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (19.2% v 2.6%, P <.001) and all grade alopecia (37.7% v 6.4%; P <.001) compared with patients receiving pemetrexed. CONCLUSION Treatment with pemetrexed resulted in clinically equivalent efficacy outcomes, but with significantly fewer side effects compared with docetaxel in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC and should be considered a standard treatment option for second-line NSCLC when available.

Phase III Study of Pemetrexed in Combination With Cisplatin Versus Cisplatin Alone in Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

PURPOSE Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, a rapidly progressing malignancy with a median survival time of 6 to 9 months, have previously responded poorly to chemotherapy. We conducted a phase III trial to determine whether treatment with pemetrexed and cisplatin results in survival time superior to that achieved with cisplatin alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS Chemotherapy-naive patients who were not eligible for curative surgery were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1. Both regimens were given intravenously every 21 days. RESULTS A total of 456 patients were assigned: 226 received pemetrexed and cisplatin, 222 received cisplatin alone, and eight never received therapy. Median survival time in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm was 12.1 months versus 9.3 months in the control arm (P =.020, two-sided log-rank test). The hazard ratio for death of patients in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm versus those in the control arm was 0.77. Median time to progression was significantly longer in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm: 5.7 months versus 3.9 months (P =.001). Response rates were 41.3% in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm versus 16.7% in the control arm (P <.0001). After 117 patients had enrolled, folic acid and vitamin B12 were added to reduce toxicity, resulting in a significant reduction in toxicities in the pemetrexed/cisplatin arm. CONCLUSION Treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin and vitamin supplementation resulted in superior survival time, time to progression, and response rates compared with treatment with cisplatin alone in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Addition of folic acid and vitamin B12 significantly reduced toxicity without adversely affecting survival time.

Gefitinib in Combination With Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase III Trial—INTACT 1

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to determine whether the addition of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib (Iressa, ZD1839; AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE) to standard first-line gemcitabine and cisplatin provides clinical benefit over gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Gefitinib has demonstrated encouraging efficacy in advanced NSCLC in phase II trials in pretreated patients, and a phase I trial of gefitinib in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin showed favorable tolerability. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial in chemotherapy-naive patients with unresectable stage III or IV NSCLC. All patients received up to six cycles of chemotherapy (cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of the 3-week cycle) plus either gefitinib 500 mg/d, gefitinib 250 mg/d, or placebo. Daily gefitinib or placebo was continued until disease progression. End points included overall survival (primary), time to progression, response rates, and safety evaluation. RESULTS A total of 1,093 patients were enrolled. There was no difference in efficacy end points between the treatment groups: for the gefitinib 500 mg/d, gefitinib 250 mg/d, and placebo groups, respectively, median survival times were 9.9, 9.9, and 10.9 months (global ordered log-rank [GOLrank] P =.4560), median times to progression were 5.5, 5.8, and 6.0 months (GOLrank; P =.7633), and response rates were 49.7%, 50.3%, and 44.8%. No significant unexpected adverse events were seen. CONCLUSION Gefitinib in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC did not have improved efficacy over gemcitabine and cisplatin alone. The reasons for this remain obscure and require further preclinical testing.

Cetuximab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (FLEX): an open-label randomised phase III trial

BACKGROUND Use of cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), has the potential to increase survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We therefore compared chemotherapy plus cetuximab with chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced EGFR-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS In a multinational, multicentre, open-label, phase III trial, chemotherapy-naive patients (>or=18 years) with advanced EGFR-expressing histologically or cytologically proven stage wet IIIB or stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to chemotherapy plus cetuximab or just chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion on day 1, and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8 of every 3-week cycle) for up to six cycles. Cetuximab-at a starting dose of 400 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion over 2 h on day 1, and from day 8 onwards at 250 mg/m(2) over 1 h per week-was continued after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity had occurred. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00148798. FINDINGS Between October, 2004, and January, 2006, 1125 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus cetuximab (n=557) or chemotherapy alone (n=568). Patients given chemotherapy plus cetuximab survived longer than those in the chemotherapy-alone group (median 11.3 months vs 10.1 months; hazard ratio for death 0.871 [95% CI 0.762-0.996]; p=0.044). The main cetuximab-related adverse event was acne-like rash (57 [10%] of 548, grade 3). INTERPRETATION Addition of cetuximab to platinum-based chemotherapy represents a new treatment option for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING Merck KGaA.

Phase III Study of Erlotinib in Combination With Cisplatin and Gemcitabine in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The Tarceva Lung Cancer Investigation Trial

PURPOSE Erlotinib is a potent inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, with single-agent antitumor activity. Preclinically, erlotinib enhanced the cytotoxicity of chemotherapy. This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of erlotinib in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received erlotinib (150 mg/d) or placebo, combined with up to six 21-day cycles of chemotherapy (gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to disease progression (TTP), response rate (RR), duration of response, and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS A total of 1,172 patients were enrolled. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were well balanced. There were no differences in OS (hazard ratio, 1.06; median, 43 v 44.1 weeks for erlotinib and placebo groups, respectively), TTP, RR, or QoL between treatment arms. In a small group of patients who had never smoked, OS and progression-free survival were increased in the erlotinib group; no other subgroups were found more likely to benefit. Erlotinib with chemotherapy was generally well tolerated; incidence of adverse events was similar between arms, except for an increase in rash and diarrhea with erlotinib (generally mild). CONCLUSION Erlotinib with concurrent cisplatin and gemcitabine showed no survival benefit compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced NSCLC.

Activity of gemcitabine in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: A multicentre, extended phase II study

Gemcitabine is a novel nucleoside analogue with activity in solid tumours. This study assessed the objective response rate to gemcitabine given weekly intravenously at a dose of 1250 mg/m2 for 3 weeks followed by 1 week of rest (one cycle) in chemonaive patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 161 patients with NSCLC were recruited from 10 sites in nine countries. Most patients had stage IIIb (31.3%) or IV (64.6%) disease, and 93.8% had a performance status of 0 or 1 according to the WHO scale. Of 151 evaluable patients, there were 3 complete responses and 30 partial responses lasting at least 4 weeks for an objective response rate of 21.8% (95% CI 15.5-29.3%). All responses were validated by an extramural Oncology Review Board. The mean duration of response was 8.8 months. The mean survival for all patients (16.1% of patients still alive 26 months after last patient started treatment) was 11.5 months. Improvements were also observed in secondary efficacy parameters such as performance status, weight, analgesic requirement, pain, and other disease-related symptoms including cough, dyspnoea, haemoptysis, anorexia, somnolence and hoarseness. Haematological and non-haematological toxicity was mild given the biological activity of gemcitabine. This study confirms gemcitabine as one of the most active agents in NSCLC with the added benefit of a modest toxicity profile and ease of administration on an out-patient basis. Gemcitabine is a suitable candidate for combination chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC.

Phase II Study of Pemetrexed With and Without Folic Acid and Vitamin B12 as Front-Line Therapy in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

PURPOSE This phase II clinical study evaluated the efficacy of pemetrexed for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with a histologically proven diagnosis of MPM, chemotherapy-naive measurable lesions, and adequate organ function received pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) intravenously over 10 minutes every 3 weeks. After a protocol change, most patients also received folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation to improve safety. RESULTS A total of 64 patients were enrolled. Nine (14.1%) of the 64 patients had a partial response. The Kaplan-Meier estimate for median overall survival was 10.7 months. Forty-three patients received vitamin supplementation for all courses of therapy, and 21 patients did not. Seven of the nine responders were vitamin supplemented. The median overall survival was 13.0 months for supplemented patients and 8.0 months for nonsupplemented patients. Vitamin-supplemented patients completed more cycles of therapy than nonsupplemented patients (median, six v two cycles, respectively). Grade 3/4 neutropenia (23.4%) and grade 3/4 leukopenia (18.8%) were the most common laboratory toxicities. Fatigue and febrile neutropenia were the most commonly reported nonlaboratory events (grade 3, 6.3%; grade 4, 0.0% each). The incidence of these toxicities was generally lower in the supplemented patients. CONCLUSION Single-agent pemetrexed for MPM resulted in a moderate response rate (14.1%) and median overall survival of 10.7 months. Patients supplemented with folic acid and vitamin B12 tolerated treatment better (less toxicity and more cycles of treatment) and had a 5-month greater median overall survival than nonsupplemented patients. These results indicate that patients with MPM could benefit from single-agent pemetrexed treatment combined with vitamin supplementation.

Tirapazamine Plus Cisplatin Versus Cisplatin in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Report of the International CATAPULT I Study Group

PURPOSE A phase III trial, Cisplatin and Tirapazamine in Subjects with Advanced Previously Untreated Non-Small-Cell Lung Tumors (CATAPULT I), was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of tirapazamine plus cisplatin for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with previously untreated NSCLC were randomized to receive either tirapazamine (390 mg/m(2) infused over 2 hours) followed 1 hour later by cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) over 1 hour) or 75 mg/m(2) of cisplatin alone, every 3 weeks for a maximum of eight cycles. RESULTS A total of 446 patients with NSCLC (17% with stage IIIB disease and pleural effusions; 83% with stage IV disease) were entered onto the study. Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was >/= 60 for all patients (for 10%, KPS = 60; for 90%, KPS = 70 to 100). Sixty patients (14%) had clinically stable brain metastases. The median survival was significantly longer (34.6 v 27. 7 weeks; P =.0078) and the response rate was significantly greater (27.5% v 13.7%; P <.001) for patients who received tirapazamine plus cisplatin (n = 218) than for those who received cisplatin alone (n = 219). The tirapazamine-plus-cisplatin regimen was associated with mild to moderate adverse events, including acute, reversible hearing loss, reversible, intermittent muscle cramping, diarrhea, skin rash, nausea, and vomiting. There were no incremental increases in myelosuppression, peripheral neuropathy, or renal, hepatic, or cardiac toxicity and no deaths related to tirapazamine. CONCLUSION The CATAPULT I study shows that tirapazamine enhances the activity of cisplatin in patients with advanced NSCLC and confirms that hypoxia is an exploitable therapeutic target in human malignancies.

Phase II Comparator Study of Oral Versus Intravenous Topotecan in Patients With Chemosensitive Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE Topotecan, administered intravenously, is active in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In this study, the comparability of oral topotecan to IV topotecan was investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with SCLC that had relapsed 90 days or more after cessation of initial chemotherapy were randomized to receive either oral topotecan (Hycamtin) 2.3 mg/m(2)/d x 5 (52 patients) or IV topotecan 1.5 mg/m(2)/d x 5 (54 patients), every 21 days. RESULTS Response rates in this phase II randomized study were 23% (12/52) in the oral topotecan arm and 15% (8/54) in the IV topotecan arm. All radiological responses were confirmed by an independent radiologist. Median survival was 32 weeks (oral) and 25 weeks (IV). Good symptom control, defined as sustained improvement or no deterioration, was evident in both treatment groups. Topotecan was generally well tolerated, with myelosuppression being the major toxicity. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 35.3% of patients on oral topotecan and in 67.3% of patients on IV topotecan, which was statistically significant (P =.001). Fever/infection more than or equal to grade 2 associated with grade 4 neutropenia, together with sepsis, occurred in only 5.1% of courses (oral) and 3.3% of courses (IV). Non-hematological toxicity consisted mainly of vomiting (oral: 36.5% of patients; IV: 31.5% of patients) and nausea (oral: 26.9% of patients; IV: 40.7% of patients). CONCLUSION This study found oral topotecan to be similar in efficacy to IV topotecan in the treatment of patients with relapsed SCLC, sensitive to first-line chemotherapy, with less grade 4 neutropenia and greater convenience of administration.