scholarly journals Randomized Phase II Study of Pulse Erlotinib Before or After Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in Current or Former Smokers With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 264-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory J. Riely ◽  
Naiyer A. Rizvi ◽  
Mark G. Kris ◽  
Daniel T. Milton ◽  
David B. Solit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Improve Response Rate ◽  
Grade 3

PurposeA prior study demonstrated that addition of continuous daily erlotinib fails to improve response rate or survival in non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with carboplatin and paclitaxel. However, preclinical data support the hypothesis that intermittent administration of erlotinib before or after chemotherapy may improve efficacy. We tested this hypothesis in patients with advanced NSCLC.Patients and MethodsEligible patients were former or current smokers with chemotherapy-naive stage IIIB or IV NSCLC. All patients received up to six cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 6) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2), with random assignment to one of the following three erlotinib treatments: erlotinib 150 mg on days 1 and 2 with chemotherapy on day 3 (150 PRE); erlotinib 1,500 mg on days 1 and 2 with chemotherapy on day 3 (1,500 PRE); or chemotherapy on day 1 with erlotinib 1,500 mg on days 2 and 3 (1,500 POST). The primary end point was response rate.ResultsEighty-six patients received treatment. The response rates for the 150 PRE, 1,500 PRE, and 1,500 POST arms were 18% (five of 28 patients), 34% (10 of 29 patients), and 28% (eight of 29 patients), respectively. The median overall survival times were 10, 15, and 10 months for the 150 PRE, 1,500 PRE, and 1,500 POST arms, respectively. The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities were neutropenia (39%), fatigue (15%), and anemia (12%). Grade 3 and 4 rash and diarrhea were uncommon.ConclusionPatients treated on the 1,500 PRE arm had the highest response rate and longest survival, with ranges similar to those reported for carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab in a more restricted population. Further evaluation of this strategy in a phase III trial is proposed.

Randomized Phase III Study of Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Versus Etoposide-Cisplatin in the Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felipe Cardenal ◽  
M. Paz López-Cabrerizo ◽  
Antonio Antón ◽  
Vicente Alberola ◽  
Bartomeu Massuti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE: We conducted a randomized trial to compare gemcitabine-cisplatin with etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary end point of the comparison was response rate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 135 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) days 1 and 8 or etoposide 100 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 3 along with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1. Both treatments were administered in 21-day cycles. One hundred thirty-three patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis of response. RESULTS: The response rate (externally validated) for patients given gemcitabine-cisplatin was superior to that for patients given etoposide-cisplatin (40.6% v 21.9%; P = .02). This superior response rate was associated with a significant delay in time to disease progression (6.9 months v 4.3 months; P = .01) without an impairment in quality of life (QOL). There was no statistically significant difference in survival time between both arms (8.7 months for gemcitabine-cisplatin v 7.2 months for etoposide-cisplatin; P = .18). The overall toxicity profile for both combinations of drugs was similar. Nausea and vomiting were reported more frequently in the gemcitabine arm than in the etoposide arm. However, the difference was not significant. Gemcitabine-cisplatin produced less grade 3 alopecia (13% v 51%) and less grade 4 neutropenia (28% v 56% ) but more grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (56% v 13%) than did etoposide-cisplatin. However, there were no thrombocytopenia-related complications in the gemcitabine arm. CONCLUSION: Compared with etoposide-cisplatin, gemcitabine-cisplatin provides a significantly higher response rate and a delay in disease progression without impairing QOL in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Combination of irinotecan and etoposide for treatment of refractory or relapsed small-cell lung cancer.

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 3329-3334 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Masuda ◽  
K Matsui ◽  
S Negoro ◽  
N Takifuji ◽  
K Takeda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Topoisomerase I ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Median Response ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE To determine the response rate, survival, and toxicity of irinotecan (CPT-11), a topoisomerase I inhibitor, combined with etoposide, a topoisomerase II inhibitor, in refractory or relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Twenty-five patients with refractory or relapsed SCLC were entered onto the trial. All 25 patients had been pretreated with some form of cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy and had also received previous etoposide- or anthracyclinecontaining chemotherapy. The median time off chemotherapy was 6.7 months (range, 0.9 to 23.5). Patients were treated at 4-week intervals using CPT-11 (a starting dose of 70 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15) plus etoposide (80 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 to 3), with a subsequent dose based on toxicity. In addition, recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF; 2 microg/kg/d) was given from day 4 to day 21, except on the days of CPT-11 administration. RESULTS All patients were assessable for toxicity and survival. Twenty-four patients were assessable for response. There were 14 partial responses (PRs) and three complete responses (CRs), for an overall response rate of 71% (95% confidence interval, 53% to 89%). The median response duration was 4.6 months. Median survival was 271 days. Major toxicities were myelosuppression (predominantly leukopenia) and diarrhea. Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 56% and 20% of patients, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 diarrhea was observed in 4%. There was one treatment-related death due to severe myelosuppression. CONCLUSION A combination of CPT-11 and etoposide with rhG-CSF support is an active therapy against refractory or relapsed SCLC and deserves to be studied more extensively in a phase III trial.

Irinotecan plus carboplatin versus etoposide plus carboplatin in extensive disease small cell lung cancer: Results of the German randomized phase III trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8029-8029
Author(s):  
A. H. Schmittel ◽  
M. Sebastian ◽  
L. Fischer von Weikersthal ◽  
T. Gauler ◽  
P. Hortig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Extensive Disease ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Grade 3

8029 Background: Superiority of irinotecan over etoposide in combination with cis- or carboplatin was demonstrated in a Japanese and a Scandinavian phase III trial. However, both cisplatin-based North American phase III studies could not detect any difference in efficacy. We report the final results of the German randomized phase III trial comparing etoposide/carboplatin (PE) to irinotecan/carboplatin (IP) in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) extensive disease. Methods: Chemotherapy-naïve extensive disease SCLC patients were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin AUC 5 mg × min/mL either in combination with 50 mg/m2 of irinotecan on days 1, 8 and 15 (IP, Arm A) or with etoposide 140mg/m2 days 1–3 (EP). IP treatment was repeated every 4 weeks, EP every 3 weeks. Response assessment was performed after cycles 2, 4 and 6 and every 3 months thereafter. Toxicity was assessed once weekly. Primary endpoint was detection of progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate, and toxicity. Results: A total of 216 patients from 8 centres were randomized. No significant differences in survival or response rate could be detected. Median PFS was 6 months in both arms. Median OS was 10 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.3 -11.7) in the IP arm and 9 months (95% CI 7.6 -10.4) in the EP arm. 1 year survival was 37% (95% CI 25.6 - 47.6) and 28% (95% CI 18.2 - 37.4) in the IP and EP arm. 62% of patients in the IP and 63% in the EP arm had a confirmed complete or partial remission according to RECIST criteria. Significant differences in grade 3 and 4 toxicity were observed for thrombopenia (22% IP vs 47% EP) and neutropenia (23% IP vs 61% PE) without differences in the rate of febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 and 4 diarrhea was manageable and as expected significantly more frequent with IP (15%) than with EP (6%). Conclusions: Our phase III trial shows equivalent efficacy of irinotecan when compared to etoposide in combination with carboplatin. [Table: see text]

Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Mitomycin, Ifosfamide, and Cisplatin in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Phase III Study of the Italian Lung Cancer Project

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 3522-3530 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Crinò ◽  
G. V. Scagliotti ◽  
S. Ricci ◽  
F. De Marinis ◽  
M. Rinaldi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Gemcitabine And Cisplatin

PURPOSE: To compare gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) with mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (MIC) chemotherapy in patients with stage IIIB (limited to T4 for pleural effusion and N3 for supraclavicular lymph nodes) or stage IV non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The end points were the evaluation of quality of life (QoL), response rates, survival, and toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred seven patients were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 2, every 28 days, or mitomycin 6 mg/m2, ifosfamide 3,000 mg/m2, and mesna on day 1 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 2, every 28 days. The whole-blood cell count was repeated on day 1 in both arms and weekly in the GC arm before each gemcitabine administration. RESULTS: No major differences in changes in QoL were observed between the two treatment arms. The objective response rate was 38% in the GC arm compared with 26% in the MIC arm (P = .029). The median survival time was 8.6 months in the GC arm and 9.6 months in the MIC arm (P = .877, log-rank test). Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was significantly worse in the GC arm (64% v 28%, P < .001), whereas grade 3 and 4 alopecia was reported more commonly in the MIC arm (39% v 12%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: We report an increased response rate without changes in QoL and a similar overall survival, time to progression, and time to treatment failure for the GC when compared with the MIC regimen in the treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Phase II Study of Pemetrexed and Carboplatin Plus Bevacizumab With Maintenance Pemetrexed and Bevacizumab As First-Line Therapy for Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (20) ◽  
pp. 3284-3289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jyoti D. Patel ◽  
Thomas A. Hensing ◽  
Alfred Rademaker ◽  
Eric M. Hart ◽  
Matthew G. Blum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Time Curve ◽  
Grade 3

PurposeThis study evaluated the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed, carboplatin, and bevacizumab followed by maintenance pemetrexed and bevacizumab in patients with chemotherapy-naive stage IIIB (effusion) or stage IV nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and MethodsPatients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2, carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve of 6, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for six cycles. For patients with response or stable disease, pemetrexed and bevacizumab were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.ResultsFifty patients were enrolled and received treatment. The median follow-up was 13.0 months, and the median number of treatment cycles was seven (range, one to 51). Thirty patients (60%) completed ≥ six treatment cycles, and nine (18%) completed ≥ 18 treatment cycles. Among the 49 patients assessable for response, the objective response rate was 55% (95% CI, 41% to 69%). Median progression-free and overall survival rates were 7.8 months (95% CI, 5.2 to 11.5 months) and 14.1 months (95% CI, 10.8 to 19.6 months), respectively. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was modest—anemia (6%; 0), neutropenia (4%; 0), and thrombocytopenia (0; 8%). Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were proteinuria (2%; 0), venous thrombosis (4%; 2%), arterial thrombosis (2%; 0), fatigue (8%; 0), infection (8%; 2%), nephrotoxicity (2%; 0), and diverticulitis (6%; 2%). There were no grade 3 or greater hemorrhagic events or hypertension cases.ConclusionThis regimen, involving a maintenance component, was associated with acceptable toxicity and relatively long survival in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. These results justify a phase III comparison against the standard-of-care in this patient population.

Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in the Treatment of Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Resistant to Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Etoposide: A Non–Cross-Resistant Schedule

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 927-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry J.M. Groen ◽  
Eelco Fokkema ◽  
Bonne Biesma ◽  
Bibi Kwa ◽  
John W.G. van Putten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients resistant to cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (CDE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a phase II study with PC in SCLC patients who relapsed within 3 months after first-line treatment with CDE. Paclitaxel administration (175 mg/m2 by a 3-hour intravenous infusion) was followed by a 30-minute infusion of carboplatin (area under the curve 7; Chatelut formula) once every 3 weeks for five cycles. Dexamethasone, clemastine, and ranitidine were standard premedication before every cycle. RESULTS: Included were 35 patients (median age, 59 years; 16 with limited disease and 19 with extensive disease; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of ≤ 1; median time off treatment 6 weeks) who were previously treated with CDE (n = 33), oral etoposide (n = 2), and reinduction CDE (n = 15); only one patient had received three CDE treatments of five cycles. The CDE regimen was followed by local thoracic radiotherapy in seven patients. Hematologic toxicity of grade 3 or 4, for leukopenia was 27% and 6%, for thrombocytopenia 21% and 13%, and for anemia 17% and 0%, respectively, for a total of 132 cycles. Two patients had neutropenic fever; no toxic death occurred. Nonhematologic toxicity was paresthesia CTC grade 3, diarrhea grade 4, and myalgia grade 3 in one patient each. Reversible paresthesia (CTC grade 1 and 2) in toes and fingers was reported in 69% of patients. Thirty-four patients were assessable for response: complete response in two patients, partial response in 23 patients, stable disease in eight patients, and progressive disease in one patient (response rate, 73.5%; 95% confidence interval, 59% to 88%). One patient was found to have atypical carcinoid at pathologic review and was excluded. Median time to progression was 21 weeks (range, 3 to 40 weeks). Median survival was 31 weeks (range, 6 to 112 weeks). One-year survival was 9%. CONCLUSION: Second-line PC in CDE-resistant SCLC patients yields a high response rate and seems non–cross-resistant to CDE. Toxicity was mild in these poor-prognosis patients.

Phase III Study of Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitor Prinomastat in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 842-849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Bissett ◽  
Ken J. O’Byrne ◽  
J. von Pawel ◽  
Ulrich Gatzemeier ◽  
Allan Price ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Extracellular Proteins ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Study Results

Purpose Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) degrade extracellular proteins and facilitate tumor growth, invasion, metastasis, and angiogenesis. This trial was undertaken to determine the effect of prinomastat, an inhibitor of selected MMPs, on the survival of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), when given in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients were randomly assigned to receive prinomastat 15 mg or placebo twice daily orally continuously, in combination with gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 1, every 21 days for up to six cycles. The planned sample size was 420 patients. Results Study results at an interim analysis and lack of efficacy in another phase III trial prompted early closure of this study. There were 362 patients randomized (181 on prinomastat and 181 on placebo). One hundred thirty-four patients had stage IIIB disease with T4 primary tumor, 193 had stage IV disease, and 34 had recurrent disease (one enrolled patient was ineligible with stage IIIA disease). Overall response rates for the two treatment arms were similar (27% for prinomastat v 26% for placebo; P = .81). There was no difference in overall survival or time to progression; for prinomastat versus placebo patients, the median overall survival times were 11.5 versus 10.8 months (P = .82), 1-year survival rates were 43% v 38% (P = .45), and progression-free survival times were 6.1 v 5.5 months (P = .11), respectively. The toxicities of prinomastat were arthralgia, stiffness, and joint swelling. Treatment interruption was required in 38% of prinomastat patients and 12% of placebo patients. Conclusion Prinomastat does not improve the outcome of chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC.

Phase III Study Comparing Amrubicin Plus Cisplatin With Irinotecan Plus Cisplatin in the Treatment of Extensive-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: JCOG 0509

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (12) ◽  
pp. 1262-1268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miyako Satouchi ◽  
Yoshikazu Kotani ◽  
Taro Shibata ◽  
Masahiko Ando ◽  
Kazuhiko Nakagawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Extensive Disease ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose This randomized phase III trial was conducted to confirm noninferiority of amrubicin plus cisplatin (AP) compared with irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) in terms of overall survival (OS) in chemotherapy-naive patients with extensive-disease (ED) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients with ED-SCLC were randomly assigned to receive IP, composed of irinotecan 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 and cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 1 every 4 weeks, or AP, composed of amrubicin 40 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, and 3 and cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks. Results A total of 284 patients were randomly assigned to IP (n = 142) and AP (n = 142) arms. The point estimate of OS hazard ratio (HR) for AP to IP in the second interim analysis exceeded the noninferior margin (HR, 1.31), resulting in early publication because of futility. In updated analysis, median survival time was 17.7 (IP) versus 15.0 months (AP; HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.85), median progression-free survival was 5.6 (IP) versus 5.1 months (AP; HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.73), and response rate was 72.3% (IP) versus 77.9% (AP; P = .33). Adverse events observed in IP and AP arms were grade 4 neutropenia (22.5% v 79.3%), grade 3 to 4 febrile neutropenia (10.6% v 32.1%), and grade 3 to 4 diarrhea (7.7% v 1.4%). Conclusion AP proved inferior to IP in this trial, perhaps because the efficacy of amrubicin as a salvage therapy was differentially beneficial to IP. IP remains the standard treatment for extensive-stage SCLC in Japan.

Phase III randomized trial comparing cisplatin and carboplatin with or without ifosfamide in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. European Lung Cancer Working Party.

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 1388-1396 ◽  
Author(s):  
J P Sculier ◽  
M Paesmans ◽  
J Thiriaux ◽  
J Lecomte ◽  
G Bureau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Moderate Dose

PURPOSE A phase III randomized trial in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was performed to determine if the addition of ifosfamide to moderate-dose cisplatin and carboplatin improved response rate (primary end point) and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 529 patients were randomized to receive a combination of moderate-dose carboplatin (200 mg/m2 intravenously [i.v.] on day 1) and cisplatin (30 mg/m2 i.v. on days 2 and 3) with (CCI arm) or without (CC arm) ifosfamide (1.5 g/m2 i.v. on days 1 to 3). There were 248 eligible patients on the CC arm and 257 on the CCI arm, with 220 and 238 patients assessable for response, respectively. All but 23 had stage IV disease with pleural effusion. RESULTS There was a 16% objective response (OR) rate to CC and a 31% OR rate to CCI. That observed difference was highly statistically significant (P < 0.001). Duration of response and survival were not statistically different between arms. The CCI regimen was associated with significantly more acute toxicities: emesis, alopecia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia. The frequency of chronic renal, auditive, and peripheral neurologic toxicity was low in both arms (4.6% and 6.6%, respectively, after six courses of chemotherapy). The relative dose-intensity (RDI) of the CCI arm was significantly lower than that of the CC arm. CONCLUSION The addition of ifosfamide to moderate-dose cisplatin and carboplatin significantly improves the antitumoral response rate, but has no apparent effect an survival in advanced NSCLC.

Cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study.

1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 297-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Crinò ◽  
G Scagliotti ◽  
M Marangolo ◽  
F Figoli ◽  
M Clerici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage Iiib ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
One Stage

PURPOSE The nucleoside analog, gemcitabine, has shown activity as a single agent in the treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Its combination with cisplatin in preclinical models suggested synergy between the two drugs. The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and toxicity of the cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-eight consecutive previously untreated NSCLC patients entered the trial from January to June 1994. The median age was 60 years (range, 37 to 70) and performance status (PS) was 0 or 1; 22 patients had unresectable stage III disease (21 stage IIIB and one stage IIIA) and 26 had stage IV disease. Gemcitabine 1 g/m2 was administered weekly (days 1, 8, and 15) followed by a 1-week rest and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 2 of each 28-day cycle. Survival and response were determined in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle in all enrolled patients. RESULTS Of 48 assessable patients, one (stage IV) had a complete response (CR) and 25 achieved a partial response (PR). The overall response rate was 54% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40% to 68%). Thrombocytopenia was the main side effect, with 52% of patients experiencing grade III to IV toxicity, which was usually short-lived and responsible for the omission of gemcitabine administration on day 15 in 50% of chemotherapy courses. The median survival time was 61.5 weeks (95% CI, 40 to 71). CONCLUSION The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin induced a high response rate in both stage IIIB and IV NSCLC, with modest side effects. The regimen deserves further careful evaluation in a phase III prospective randomized trial.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document