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

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. 1589-1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasser Hanna ◽  
Frances A. Shepherd ◽  
Frank V. Fossella ◽  
Jose R. Pereira ◽  
Filippo De Marinis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Previously Treated

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/m2 intravenously (IV) day 1 with vitamin B12, folic acid, and dexamethasone or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV 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.

scholarly journals Five-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Phase III Trials CheckMate 017 and 057: Nivolumab Versus Docetaxel in Previously Treated Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (7) ◽  
pp. 723-733
Author(s):  
Hossein Borghaei ◽  
Scott Gettinger ◽  
Everett E. Vokes ◽  
Laura Q. M. Chow ◽  
Marco Angelo Burgio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Previously Treated

PURPOSE Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In two phase III trials (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057), nivolumab showed an improvement in overall survival (OS) and favorable safety versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated, advanced squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC, respectively. We report 5-year pooled efficacy and safety from these trials. METHODS Patients (N = 854; CheckMate 017/057 pooled) with advanced NSCLC, ECOG PS ≤ 1, and progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point for both trials was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Exploratory landmark analyses were investigated. RESULTS After the minimum follow-up of 64.2 and 64.5 months for CheckMate 017 and 057, respectively, 50 nivolumab-treated patients and nine docetaxel-treated patients were alive. Five-year pooled OS rates were 13.4% versus 2.6%, respectively; 5-year PFS rates were 8.0% versus 0%, respectively. Nivolumab-treated patients without disease progression at 2 and 3 years had an 82.0% and 93.0% chance of survival, respectively, and a 59.6% and 78.3% chance of remaining progression-free at 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 8 of 31 (25.8%) nivolumab-treated patients between 3–5 years of follow-up, seven of whom experienced new events; one (3.2%) TRAE was grade 3, and there were no grade 4 TRAEs. CONCLUSION At 5 years, nivolumab continued to demonstrate a survival benefit versus docetaxel, exhibiting a five-fold increase in OS rate, with no new safety signals. These data represent the first report of 5-year outcomes from randomized phase III trials of a programmed death-1 inhibitor in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.

Cost–effectiveness of second-line nivolumab for platinum-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (18) ◽  
pp. 1301-1309
Author(s):  
Longfeng Zhang ◽  
Xiaofang Zeng ◽  
Hongfu Cai ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Maobai Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

Aim: To analyze the economic impact of nivolumab and chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who developed disease progression after platinum-containing dual-drug chemotherapy. Materials & methods: The partitioned survival model was used to analyze the cost-utility of two NSCLC treatments by nivolumab and docetaxel. The clinical data resulted from the Phase III clinical trial. The cost parameters were derived from our previous studies, and the utility parameters were derived from the literature. Results: The quality-adjusted life-years of nivolumab and docetaxel were 0.778 and 0.336. The lifetime direct medical expenses of nivolumab and docetaxel were US$44,707.17 and US$12,826.72. The incremental cost–effectiveness ratio was $72,127.71/quality-adjusted life-year. Conclusion: The combination of chemotherapy, nivolumab is not a cost-effective choice in the second-line treatment of NSCLC.

440 Activity and safety of camrelizumab, an anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A466-A466
Author(s):  
Guo Gui Sun ◽  
Jing Hao Jia ◽  
Peng Gao ◽  
Xue Min Yao ◽  
Ming Da Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

BackgroundEffective options are limited for patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose disease progresses after first-line chemotherapy. Camrelizumab is a potent anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody and has shown promising activity in NSCLC. We assessed the activity and safety of camrelizumab for patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC patients with negative oncogenic drivers.MethodsPatients who progressed during or following platinum-based doublet chemotherapy were enrolled. All patients received camrelizumab(200 mg)every 3 weeks or in combination with chemotherapy until loss of clinical benefit. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), other endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) and safety.ResultsBetween Aug 5, 2019, and Jun 19, 2020, we enrolled 29 patients, 25 patients were available evaluated, ORR and DCR was 36% (9/25) and 92% (23/25), respectively. 25 of 29 patients were still receiving the treatment, the median PFS was not yet achieved. Compared with those without reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (RCCEP), patients with RCCEP had higher ORR (60% vs. 28.6%). Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 69.0% of patients (all Grade), and the most common were RCCEP (37.9%), pneumonitis (6.9%), and chest congestion (6.9%). Treatment-related grade 3 to 4 adverse events occurred in 10.3% of patients.ConclusionsIn patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC, camrelizumab demonstrated improved ORR and DCR, compared with historical data of the 2nd line chemotherapy, with a manageable safety profile. While patients with RCCEP derived greater benefit from camrelizumab. Further studies are needed in large sample size trials.

Pemetrexed Versus Pemetrexed and Carboplatin As Second-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of the GOIRC 02-2006 Randomized Phase II Study and Pooled Analysis With the NVALT7 Trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (36) ◽  
pp. 4501-4507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Ardizzoni ◽  
Marcello Tiseo ◽  
Luca Boni ◽  
Andrew D. Vincent ◽  
Rodolfo Passalacqua ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
The Impact

Purpose To compare efficacy of pemetrexed versus pemetrexed plus carboplatin in pretreated patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with advanced NSCLC, in progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed (arm A) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin (arm B). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A preplanned pooled analysis of the results of this study with those of the NVALT7 study was carried out to assess the impact of carboplatin added to pemetrexed in terms of overall survival (OS). Results From July 2007 to October 2009, 239 patients (arm A, n = 120; arm B, n = 119) were enrolled. Median PFS was 3.6 months for arm A versus 3.5 months for arm B (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.36; P = .706). No statistically significant differences in response rate, OS, or toxicity were observed. A total of 479 patients were included in the pooled analysis. OS was not improved by the addition of carboplatin to pemetrexed (HR, 90; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.10; P = .316; P heterogeneity = .495). In the subgroup analyses, the addition of carboplatin to pemetrexed in patients with squamous tumors led to a statistically significant improvement in OS from 5.4 to 9 months (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.91; P interaction test = .039). Conclusion Second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with pemetrexed plus carboplatin does not improve survival outcomes as compared with single-agent pemetrexed. The benefit observed with carboplatin addition in squamous tumors may warrant further investigation.

scholarly journals Immunotherapy in non-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: Can the benefits of stage IV therapy be translated into earlier stages?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 175883591877281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Griet Deslypere ◽  
Dorothée Gullentops ◽  
Els Wauters ◽  
Johan Vansteenkiste
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Anaplastic Lymphoma

Over the last decade, several steps forward in the treatment of patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NCSLC) were made. Examples are the use of pemetrexed, pemetrexed maintenance therapy, or bevacizumab for patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. A big leap forward was the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients selected on the basis of an activating oncogene, such as epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR) activating mutations or anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK) translocations. However, all of these achievements could not be translated into survival benefits when studied in randomized controlled trials in patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC. Aside from chemotherapy and targeted therapy, immunotherapy has become the third pillar in the treatment armamentarium of advanced NSCLC. Antigen-specific immunotherapy (cancer vaccination) has been disappointing in large phase III clinical trials in stages I–III NSCLC. Based on the recent breakthroughs with immune checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy in metastatic NSCLC, much hope currently rests on the use of this approach in patients with stage I–III NSCLC as well. Here we give a brief overview of how most new therapeutic approaches for advanced NSCLC failed in other stages, and then elaborate on the role of immunotherapy in patients with stage I–III NSCLC.

scholarly journals Randomized phase III study of docetaxel plus bavituximab in previously treated advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 1548-1553 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.E. Gerber ◽  
L. Horn ◽  
M. Boyer ◽  
R. Sanborn ◽  
R. Natale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Previously Treated
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document