Yutaka Nishiwaki

Gefitinib or Carboplatin–Paclitaxel in Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND Previous, uncontrolled studies have suggested that first-line treatment with gefitinib would be efficacious in selected patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS In this phase 3, open-label study, we randomly assigned previously untreated patients in East Asia who had advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma and who were nonsmokers or former light smokers to receive gefitinib (250 mg per day) (609 patients) or carboplatin (at a dose calculated to produce an area under the curve of 5 or 6 mg per milliliter per minute) plus paclitaxel (200 mg per square meter of body-surface area) (608 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS The 12-month rates of progression-free survival were 24.9% with gefitinib and 6.7% with carboplatin-paclitaxel. The study met its primary objective of showing the noninferiority of gefitinib and also showed its superiority, as compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel, with respect to progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001). In the subgroup of 261 patients who were positive for the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received gefitinib than among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.64; P<0.001), whereas in the subgroup of 176 patients who were negative for the mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received carboplatin-paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death with gefitinib, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.05 to 3.98; P<0.001). The most common adverse events were rash or acne (in 66.2% of patients) and diarrhea (46.6%) in the gefitinib group and neurotoxic effects (69.9%), neutropenia (67.1%), and alopecia (58.4%) in the carboplatin-paclitaxel group. CONCLUSIONS Gefitinib is superior to carboplatin-paclitaxel as an initial treatment for pulmonary adenocarcinoma among nonsmokers or former light smokers in East Asia. The presence in the tumor of a mutation of the EGFR gene is a strong predictor of a better outcome with gefitinib. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00322452.)

Multi-Institutional Randomized Phase II Trial of Gefitinib for Previously Treated Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of two doses of gefitinib (Iressa [ZD1839]; AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE), a novel epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with pretreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter phase II trial. Two hundred ten patients with advanced NSCLC who were previously treated with one or two chemotherapy regimens (at least one containing platinum) were randomly assigned to receive either 250-mg or 500-mg oral doses of gefitinib once daily. RESULTS Efficacy was similar for the 250- and 500-mg/d groups. Objective tumor response rates were 18.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.5 to 27.3) and 19.0% (95% CI, 12.1 to 27.9); among evaluable patients, symptom improvement rates were 40.3% (95% CI, 28.5 to 53.0) and 37.0% (95% CI, 26.0 to 49.1); median progression-free survival times were 2.7 and 2.8 months; and median overall survival times were 7.6 and 8.0 months, respectively. Symptom improvements were recorded for 69.2% (250 mg/d) and 85.7% (500 mg/d) of patients with a tumor response. Adverse events (AEs) at both dose levels were generally mild (grade 1 or 2) and consisted mainly of skin reactions and diarrhea. Drug-related toxicities were more frequent in the higher-dose group. Withdrawal due to drug-related AEs was 1.9% and 9.4% for patients receiving gefitinib 250 and 500 mg/d, respectively. CONCLUSION Gefitinib showed clinically meaningful antitumor activity and provided symptom relief as second- and third-line treatment in these patients. At 250 mg/d, gefitinib had a favorable AE profile. Gefitinib 250 mg/d is an important, novel treatment option for patients with pretreated advanced NSCLC [corrected]

Phase III Study of Concurrent Versus Sequential Thoracic Radiotherapy in Combination With Cisplatin and Etoposide for Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study 9104

PURPOSE To evaluate the optimal timing for thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC), the Lung Cancer Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group conducted a phase III study in which patients were randomized to sequential TRT or concurrent TRT. PATIENTS AND METHODS We treated 231 patients with LS-SCLC. TRT consisted of 45 Gy over 3 weeks (1.5 Gy twice daily), and the patients were randomly assigned to receive either sequential or concurrent TRT. All patients received four cycles of cisplatin plus etoposide every 3 weeks (sequential arm) or 4 weeks (concurrent arm). TRT was begun on day 2 of the first cycle of chemotherapy in the concurrent arm and after the fourth cycle in the sequential arm. RESULTS Concurrent radiotherapy yielded better survival than sequential radiotherapy (P =.097 by log-rank test). The median survival time was 19.7 months in the sequential arm versus 27.2 months in the concurrent arm. The 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates for patients who received sequential radiotherapy were 35.1%, 20.2%, and 18.3%, respectively, as opposed to 54.4%, 29.8% and 23.7%, respectively, for the patients who received concurrent radiotherapy. Hematologic toxicity was more severe in the concurrent arm. However, severe esophagitis was infrequent in both arms, occurring in 9% of the patients in the concurrent arm and 4% in the sequential arm. CONCLUSION This study strongly suggests that cisplatin plus etoposide and concurrent radiotherapy is more effective for the treatment of LS-SCLC than cisplatin plus etoposide and sequential radiotherapy.

A phase II study of CPT-11, a new derivative of camptothecin, for previously untreated non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE Camptothecin-11 (CPT-11) is a new semisynthetic derivative of CPT, and has been shown to inhibit DNA topoisomerase I and to have a strong antitumor activity with low toxicity in murine tumors. To evaluate the effectiveness of CPT-11 in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a phase II study was conducted between April 1989 and February 1990. PATIENTS AND METHODS Seventy-three patients were entered onto the study. All patients had had no previous therapy and had measurable disease. Their median age was 67 years (range, 34 to 75 years). Fifty-four patients had a performance status (PS) of 0 or 1 on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale, and 19 had a PS of 2. CPT-11 was given at a dose of 100 mg/m2 by intravenous 90-minute infusion once a week. The dose of CPT-11 was modified based on the WBC count obtained on the day of drug administration. RESULTS Of 72 assessable patients, 23 (31.9%) showed a partial response (95% confidence interval, 20.2% to 43.6%). Of 40 patients with a stage IV disease, 13 (32.5%) responded. Response rates for patients with PS 0 or 1 and those with PS 2 did not differ (34.0% and 26.3%, respectively). The median duration of response in patients showing a PR was 15 weeks. The median survival time for all patients was 42 weeks. The major toxicities were leukopenia and diarrhea. Grade 3 or 4 leukopenia and diarrhea occurred in 18 patients (25%) and 15 patients (21%), respectively. These toxicities were unpredictable. Other toxicities of greater than or equal to grade 3 included nausea/vomiting (22%), anemia (15%), alopecia (4%) and pneumonitis (3%). One patient died of pulmonary toxicity (interstitial pneumonitis). CONCLUSIONS CPT-11 is a very active agent for NSCLC with acceptable toxicities. Further trials in combination with other agents for this disease are warranted.

Phase III Study, V-15-32, of Gefitinib Versus Docetaxel in Previously Treated Japanese Patients With Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE This phase III study (V-15-32) compared gefitinib (250 mg/d) with docetaxel (60 mg/m(2)) in patients (N = 489) with advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had failed one or two chemotherapy regimens. METHODS The primary objective was to compare overall survival to demonstrate noninferiority for gefitinib relative to docetaxel. An unadjusted Cox regression model was used for the primary analysis. RESULTS Noninferiority in overall survival was not achieved (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; 95.24% CI, 0.89 to 1.40) according to the predefined criterion (upper CI limit for HR <or= 1.25); however, no significant difference in overall survival (P = .330) was apparent between treatments. Poststudy, 36% of gefitinib-treated patients received subsequent docetaxel, and 53% of docetaxel-treated patients received subsequent gefitinib. Gefitinib significantly improved objective response rate and quality of life versus docetaxel; progression-free survival, disease control rates, and symptom improvement were similar for the two treatments. Grades 3 to 4 adverse events occurred in 40.6% (gefitinib) and 81.6% (docetaxel) of patients. Incidence of interstitial lung disease was 5.7% (gefitinib) and 2.9% (docetaxel). Four deaths occurred due to adverse events in the gefitinib arm (three deaths as a result of interstitial lung disease, judged to be treatment related; one as a result of pneumonia, not treatment related), and none occurred in the docetaxel arm. CONCLUSION Noninferiority in overall survival between gefitinib and docetaxel was not demonstrated according to predefined criteria; however, there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival. Secondary end points showed similar or superior efficacy for gefitinib compared with docetaxel. Gefitinib remains an effective treatment option for previously treated Japanese patients with NSCLC.

Interstitial lung disease in Japanese patients with lung cancer: a cohort and nested case-control study.

RATIONALE Interstitial lung disease (ILD) occurs in Japanese patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving gefitinib. OBJECTIVES To elucidate risk factors for ILD in Japanese patients with NSCLC during treatment with gefitinib or chemotherapy. METHODS In a prospective epidemiologic cohort, 3,166 Japanese patients with advanced/recurrent NSCLC were followed for 12 weeks on 250 mg gefitinib (n = 1,872 treatment periods) or chemotherapy (n = 2,551). Patients who developed acute ILD (n = 122) and randomly selected control subjects (n = 574) entered a case-control study. Adjusted incidence rate ratios were estimated from case-control data by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using logistic regression. Crude (observed) incidence rates and risks were calculated from cohort data. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The observed (unadjusted) incidence rate over 12 weeks was 2.8 (95% CI, 2.3-3.3) per 1,000 person-weeks, 4.5 (3.5-5.4) for gefitinib versus 1.7 (1.2-2.2) for chemotherapy; the corresponding observed naive cumulative incidence rates at the end of 12-week follow-up were 4.0% (3.0-5.1%) and 2.1% (1.5-2.9%), respectively. Adjusted for imbalances in risk factors between treatments, the overall OR for gefitinib versus chemotherapy was 3.2 (1.9-5.4), elevated chiefly during the first 4 weeks (3.8 [1.9-7.7]). Other ILD risk factors in both groups included the following: older age, poor World Health Organization performance status, smoking, recent NSCLC diagnosis, reduced normal lung on computed tomography scan, preexisting chronic ILD, concurrent cardiac disease. ILD-related deaths in patients with ILD were 31.6% (gefitinib) versus 27.9% (chemotherapy); adjusted OR, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.3-3.2). CONCLUSIONS ILD was relatively common in these Japanese patients with NSCLC during therapy with gefitinib or chemotherapy, being higher in the older, smoking patient with preexisting ILD or poor performance status. The risk of developing ILD was higher with gefitinib than chemotherapy, mainly in the first 4 weeks.

Prognostic implications of fibrotic focus (scar) in small peripheral lung cancers.

ABSTRACT Peripheral lung cancers frequently possess a fibrotic focus or scar in their center or beneath the pleura. We reexamined 58 cases of peripheral lung cancer of less than 3 cm in diameter (48 adenocarcinomas, two large cell carcinomas and eight squamous cell carcinomas) which were removed surgically between June 1962 and July 1973. Analyses of the cases revealed that in adenocarcinoma with increased collagenization or hyalinization in the fibrotic focus, the degree of pleural invasion and incidence of lymph node metastasis and blood vessel invasion were greater and thus the prognosis of the patient was poorer than in cases with no or slight collagenization. The results also indicate that the characteristics of the central fibrotic focus are probably more important than the size of the tumor for estimating the prognosis of patients with peripheral adenocarcinoma of less than 3 cm in diameter. The same might be said of peripheral large-cell carcinoma. However, the prognostic importance of the fibrotic focus was not confirmed in cases of peripheral squamous-cell carcinoma. Although the central or sub-pleural scar has long been the basis of the scar cancer concept, alternate explanations were considered, namely, that scar formation occurred along with tumor development, rather than before, in the case of adenocarcinomas.

Prognostic significance of the size of central fibrosis in peripheral adenocarcinoma of the lung

BACKGROUND The prognostic significance of the characteristics of central fibrosis in peripheral adenocarcinoma of the lung has been reported. However, the prognostic significance of the size of central fibrosis has never been evaluated. METHODS A total of 100 consecutive surgically resected peripheral adenocarcinomas of the lung measuring 3.0 cm or less in maximum dimension were reviewed histologically, and the maximum dimension of central fibrosis was measured on conventional hematoxylin and eosin stain. RESULTS Median follow-up for patients alive was 54 months. The overall 5-year survival rate was 75%. Twenty-one patients with adenocarcinoma having central fibrosis 5 mm or smaller in maximum dimension had a 5-year survival rate of 100%, whereas the other 79 patients had a 5-year survival less than 70%. Multivariate analysis showed the size of central fibrosis to be an independent prognostic factor as significant as vascular invasion and locoregional lymph node metastasis (p = 0.010, 0.024, and 0.024, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The size of central fibrosis is an independent prognostic factor in peripheral lung adenocarcinoma, as significant as the well-established prognostic factors vascular invasion and lymph node metastasis.

Predominant infiltration of macrophages and CD8(+) T Cells in cancer nests is a significant predictor of survival in stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether tumor‐infiltrating immune cells in biopsy specimens can be used to predict the clinical outcome of stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Phase III Randomized Trial of Docetaxel Plus Cisplatin Versus Vindesine Plus Cisplatin in Patients With Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The Japanese Taxotere Lung Cancer Study Group

PURPOSE Few randomized trials have demonstrated survival benefit of combination chemotherapy involving new agents plus cisplatin compared with classic combination chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary aim of this study was to test whether docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) improves survival compared with vindesine plus cisplatin (VdsC) in patients with previously untreated stage IV NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible, stage IV, chemotherapy-naive patients (n = 311) were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 60 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 3- or 4-week cycle, or vindesine 3 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 4-week cycle. Cross-over administration of docetaxel and vindesine was prohibited for both treatment groups. RESULTS Overall, 302 patients were eligible for evaluation. The DC arm demonstrated significant improvements compared with the VdsC arm in overall response rates (37% v 21%, respectively; P <.01) and median survival times (11.3 v 9.6 months, respectively; P =.014). Two-year survival rates were 24% for the DC arm compared with 12% for the VdsC arm. The physical domain of the Quality of Life for Cancer Patients Treated with Anticancer Drugs measure was significantly better in the DC arm than in the VdsC arm (P =.020). Toxicity was predominantly hematologic and was more severe in the VdsC arm. CONCLUSION As first-line treatment for stage IV NSCLC, DC resulted in greater clinical benefit in terms of response rate (with marked improvements in overall and 2-year survival rates) and quality of life than did treatment with VdsC.