Randomized phase II cross-over sequential chemotherapy trial of irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) vs. gemcitabine/vinorelbine (GV) in chemo-naïve patients with stage IIIb/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

7134 Background: To compare the efficacy and toxicity of IP vs. non-platinum-based GV in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, we conducted a randomized phase II trial with planned cross-over to the other regimen upon disease progression (PD) after the first-line therapy. Methods: Eligibility required stage IIIb/IV NSCLC, no prior chemotherapy, measurable disease, ECOG PS 0–2, adequate organ functions, and informed consent. After stratification by gender, stage (IIIB or IV) and performance status (PS: 0–1 or 2), eligible pts were randomized to receive either IP (I 65 mg/m2 & P30 mg/m2 on D1 & 8 q 3 weeks) first then GV (G 900 mg/m2 &V25 mg/m2 on D1 & 8 q 3 weeks) upon PD (Arm A) or GV first then IP upon PD (Arm B). Results: Between 12/2003 and 06/2005, 146 pts were enrolled in either Arm A (n = 75) or Arm B (n = 71). There was no difference in gender (male: 77.3% vs. 81.7%), age (median: 58 vs. 60 yrs), PS (PS 2: 10.7% vs. 8.5%), histology (adenocarcinoma: 72.0% vs. 76.6%) and stage (IV: 88.0% vs. 87.3%). IP tended to generate more responses than GN (42.0% vs. 29.0% as first-line, 30.2% vs. 14.3% as second-line), but there was no difference in total response rate by the treatment arm (Arm A: 45.6%, B: 43.5%). During the first-line therapy, IP caused more G3+ anemia (20.0% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.048), G2/3 nausea/vomiting (41.4% vs. 12.9%, p < 0.001), G2 alopecia (35.7% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.001) than GN while pneumonitis was noted only with GN (11.4%). Toxicity profile was similar after the second-line therapy. Both arms resulted in excellent survival outcome with no significant difference between the Arm A and B (median: 16.5 mo vs. 15.1 mo, p = 0.595). Conclusions: Platinum-based IP regimen seemed to be more effective in terms of response rate. Given the overall survival data and the mild toxicity profile of GV regimen, however, either treatment sequence seems to be acceptable for the treatment of advanced metastatic NSCLC. (Supported in part by NCC grants 0210140 and 0510140). No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Download Full-text

Randomized phase II study on gemcitabine with or without ramucirumab as second-line treatment for advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): Results of Italian Rames Study.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.9004 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. 9004-9004

Author(s):

Maria Pagano ◽

Giovanni Luca Ceresoli ◽

Paolo Andrea Zucali ◽

Giulia Pasello ◽

Marina Chiara Garassino ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Phase Ii ◽

Asbestos Exposure ◽

Rank Test ◽

Line Treatment ◽

Second Line ◽

First Line ◽

Double Blind ◽

First Line Therapy ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Randomized Phase Ii

9004 Background. The RAMES Study (EudraCT Number 2016-001132-36) is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase II trial exploring the efficacy and the safety of the addition of ramucirumab to gemcitabine as the second-line treatment in MPM patients (pts) after platinum/pemetrexed regimens. Methods. The pts were assigned (1:1) to receive Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 i v on days 1 and 8 every 21 days with Placebo (Arm A) or Ramucirumab 10 mg/kg i v on day 1, of a 21-day cycle (Arm B), until tolerability or progressive disease. Pts was stratified by ECOG/PS (0-1 vs 2), age (≤ 70 vs > 70 yrs), histology (epithelioid vs non-epithelioid) and time to progression (TTP) after first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Assuming a proportion of OS equal to 40% at 1 year in arm A, a 12% absolute improvement in OS at 1 yrs was expected in Arm B (hazard ratio = 0.70).114 events (156 subjects) are required for a one-sided log-rank test with α = 0.15 to have 80% power. Results. From December 2016 to July 2018, 164 pts were randomized, 81 pts in Arm A and 80 Arm B; 3 pts were randomized but not treated. Characteristics of pts were: median age 69 yrs (44-81), males 119 (73.9%), females 42 (26.1%); ECOG/PS0 96 (59.6%) ECOG/PS1-2 65 (40.4%); histotype epithelioid 132 (81.9%), non-epithelioid 29 (18.1%); stage III 98 (60.7%), stage IV 60 (37.3%), 3 (2.0%) missing; asbestos exposure assessed 80 (49.7%). Median of courses was 3.50 in Arm A and 7.50 in Arm B. OS was significantly longer in Arm B with median 13.8 mths (70% CI 12.7-14.4) vs Arm A with 7.5 mths (70% CI 6.9-8.9), HR 0.71 (70% CI 0.59-0.85, p = 0.057). OS at 6 and 12 mths was in Arm A 63.9% and 33.9%, and in Arm B 74.7% and 56.5%, respectively. In Arm B OS was not correlated to TTP at first-line therapy (13.6 mths in TTP ≤6 mths and 13.9 mths in TTP > 6 mths) and histotypes (13.8 months in the epithelioid and 13.0 months in non-epithelioid). No significant differences in thromboembolism G3-4 events were observed in Arm A vs Arm B (p= 0.64). None hypertension G3-4 was reported in Arm A vs 5 pts (6.3%) in Arm B (p= 0.022). No significant differences in G3-4 haematological toxicities between the two arms were reported. Conclusion: In the RAMES Study the addition of Ramucirumab to Gemcitabine significantly improved OS regardless of age of pts, tumor histotype and TTP at the first-line treatment. Gemcitabine plus Ramucirumab can be considered a manageable regimen in second-line treatment of advanced MPM pts. Clinical trial information: NTC03560973.

Download Full-text

1338. Analysis of Prescription Guideline Adherence in Pediatric Outpatient Pneumonia Treatment

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1520 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S680-S681

Author(s):

Carly Heck ◽

Judith Martin ◽

Marcia Kurs-Lasky

Keyword(s):

Drug Allergy ◽

Health Concern ◽

Second Line ◽

First Line ◽

Second Line Therapy ◽

First Line Therapy ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Comparison Results ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Recommended Therapy

Abstract Background Background: Antibiotic resistance is a major public health concern. A modifiable intervention is outpatient antibiotic stewardship. The goal of this study was to review the electronic health records (EHR) of children diagnosed with community acquired pneumonia (CAP) to compare patients who received non-guideline concordant therapy with those prescribed recommended therapy. Methods Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of 300 children (6 months to 6 years old) with an outpatient diagnosis of CAP between July 2017 and June 2019. 45 Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh (CHP) and UPMC Children’s Community Pediatrics (CCP) practices were included. CHP practices are academic-based with trainees involved in visits, while CCP practices do not include trainees. First-line recommended therapy was defined as amoxicillin, second-line therapy as azithromycin or amoxicillin-clavulanate, and all other prescriptions were defined as other. Patients prescribed first-line therapy were compared to patients with second-line therapy or other. If first-line therapy was not prescribed, the EHR was manually reviewed for justification. If drug allergy was listed, the medication allergy and type of reaction were recorded. Results Results: In this study the minority of children (43%) were prescribed first-line therapy. This group was younger (57 vs. 63 months of age), more likely to be Non-white (80%), and seen at the CHP locations than those prescribed non-guideline concordant therapy. The average symptom duration was shorter, heart rate and respiratory rate were higher and the presence of fever was more common in the first-line therapy group. Justification for non-guideline therapy was most often reported as to provide coverage for atypical organisms. The most common drug allergy recorded was amoxicillin, and urticaria with unknown timing was the most common type of reaction. Demographics Comparison Results Justification for Second-line / Other Therapy and Drug Allergy Results Conclusion This project observed a high proportion of children being prescribed non-guideline concordant therapy for a diagnosis of CAP. Age, race, practice location, and severity of illness measures showed a statistically significant difference between groups. This study highlights the importance of education which reviews the current guidelines and the most likely pathogens for children with CAP. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Download Full-text