探究培美曲塞与多西他赛在晚期非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗失败后挽救化疗中的临床疗效

目的 研究培美曲塞与多西他赛在晚期非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗失败后挽救化疗中的应用效果。方法 筛选2018 年1 月～2020 年1 月本院的60 例晚期非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗失败后挽救化疗的患者作为研究对象，依据患者选择的药物种类分为观察组和对照组，每组各30 例，对照组采用多西他赛治疗，观察组予以培美曲塞治疗，对比分析两组的近期治疗效果、生存质量评分和毒副反应发生情况。结果 观察组病症控制率为66.67%，对照组病症控制率为36.67%，观察组病症控制效果更好；观察组生存质量评分为（65.2±3.4）分，对照组生存质量评分为（51.7±4.6）分，两组比较差异有统计学意义（t=12.926，P=0.000）；观察组各项毒副反应发生率均低于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 在晚期非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗失败后进行挽救化疗中选用培美曲塞有更好的治疗效果，可以较好的进行临床治疗，改善患者的生活质量，且产生的毒副反应较少，在实际临床中的应用价值较高。     

Analysis of patient-reported outcomes from the LUME-Lung 1 trial: A randomised,double-blind,placebo-controlled,Phase III study of second-line nintedanib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

IntroductionThe LUME-Lung 1 trial (NCT00805194; Study 1199.13) demonstrated a significant overall survival (OS) advantage for nintedanib plus docetaxel compared with placebo plus docetaxel as second-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and adenocarcinoma histology. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for symptoms and health-related quality of life (QoL) are reported here.MethodsPROs were assessed at screening, on Day 1 of each 21-day treatment cycle, at the end of active treatment, and at the first follow-up visit. PRO instruments were the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and Lung Cancer-13 supplement, and the EuroQol disease-generic questionnaire (EQ-5D and EQ-VAS). Analyses of PRO items for lung cancer-specific symptoms of cough, dyspnoea and pain were prespecified.ResultsRates of questionnaire completion were high. There was no significant difference in time to deterioration of global health status/QoL, or symptoms of cough, dyspnoea or pain, between the treatment groups for both the overall study population and the adenocarcinoma population. Time to deterioration of some gastrointestinal events was shorter with nintedanib versus placebo. Longitudinal analysis for the adenocarcinoma population showed comparable changes between the groups in symptom scores over time, with numerical differences in favour of nintedanib for cough and pain scales, and significant reductions in some pain items with nintedanib versus placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in EQ-5D or EQ-VAS between the groups.ConclusionThe significant OS benefit observed with the addition of nintedanib to docetaxel therapy was achieved with no detrimental effect on patient self-reported QoL.     

A dose-escalation study of bi-daily once weekly oral docetaxel either as ModraDoc001 or ModraDoc006 combined with ritonavir

IntroductionTwo solid dispersions of docetaxel (denoted ModraDoc001 capsule and ModraDoc006 tablet (both 10 mg)) were co-administered with 100 mg ritonavir (/r) and investigated in a bi-daily once weekly (BIDW) schedule. Safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary activity were explored.MethodsAdult patients with metastatic solid tumours were included in two dose-escalation arms. PK sampling was performed during the first week and the second or third week. Safety was evaluated using US National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) version 3.0. Antitumour activity was assessed every 6 weeks according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.0.ResultsModraDoc001 capsule/r and ModraDoc006 tablet/r were administered to 17 and 28 patients, respectively. The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue, mostly of grade 1–2 severity. Grade 3/4 neutropenia/neutropenic fever was observed in 2 patients (4%). The MTD was determined as 20/20 mg ModraDoc001/r and 30/20 mg ModraDoc006/r (morning/afternoon dose) once weekly. The mean area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC_0–48) ± standard deviation at the MTD for ModraDoc001/r and ModraDoc006/r were 686 ± 388 ng/ml*h and 1126 ± 382 ng/ml*h, respectively. Five partial responses were reported as best response to treatment.ConclusionOral administration of BIDW ModraDoc001/r or ModraDoc006/r is feasible. The once weekly 30/20 mg ModraDoc006 tablet/r dose-level was selected for future clinical development. Antitumour activity is promising.     

Docetaxel-Ifosfamide Combination in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer Failing Prior Anthracycline- Based Regimens: Results of a Phase I-II Study

Abstract

The established clinical activity of docetaxel and ifosfamide as single agents in anthracycline pre-treated breast cancer, led us to conduct a phase I-II study to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and clinical activity of the docetaxel+ifosfamide combination in this setting. Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic breast cancer, after failure on prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy, were treated at successive dose levels (DLs) in cohorts of 3-6 with escalated doses of docetaxel 70-100 mg/m² over 1 h on day 1 followed by ifosfamide 5-6 g/m² divided over days 1+2 (2.5-3.0 g/m²/day over 1 h), every 21 days. G-CSF was added once dose-limiting neutropenia was encountered at a certain DL and planned to be incorporated prophylactically in subsequent higher DLs. Between March 1997 and December 2002, 65 patients with a median age of 57 years (range, 32-72) and performance status (WHO) of 1 (range, 0-2) were treated at 5 DLs as follows; 21 in phase I DLs (DL1: 3, DL2: 6, DL3: 3, DL4: 6, and DL5: 3) and the remaining 44 were treated at DL4 (total of 50 patients at DL4), which was defined as the level for phase II testing. All patients were assessable for toxicity and 62 for response. DLT (with the addition of G-CSF after DL2) was reached at DL5 with 2/3 initial patients developing febrile neutropenia. Clinical response rates (RRs), on an intention-to-treat basis, in phase II were: 56%; (95% CI, 42.2- 69.7%); 4 CRs, 24 PRs, 10 SD and 12 PD. The median response duration was 7 mo (3-24 mo), median TTP 6.5 mo (0.1-26 mo), and median OS 13 mo (0.1-33 mo). Grade 3/4 toxicities included: neutropenia in 72% of patients, with 60% developing grade 4 neutropenia (≤7 days) and in 10% of these febrile neutropenia, while no grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was observed. Other toxicities included peripheral neuropathy grade 2 only in 10%, grade 1/2 reversible CNS toxicity in 16%, no renal toxicity, grade 2 myalgias in 8%, grade 3 diarrhea in 8%, skin/nail toxicity in 14%, and grade 2 fluid retention in 2% of patients. One patient in the study treated at phase II died as a result of acute liver failure after the first cycle.

The present phase I-II study has determined the feasibility, defined the MTD and demonstrated the encouraging activity of the docetaxel-ifosfamide combination in the phase II part of the study. Therefore, future randomized phase III studies versus single-agent docetaxel or combinations of the latter with other active agents are warranted.     

DP、EP化疗方案治疗非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效及其对血清血管内皮生长因子的影响

目的对比DP、EP化疗方案治疗非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的临床疗效及其对血清血管内皮生长因子（VEGF）的影响。方法102例晚期NSCLC患者随机分为DP组（n=58）和EP组（n=44）。DP组静脉注射多西紫杉醇75mg／m2，dl；静脉滴注顺铂75mg／m2，d1～4；EP组静脉滴注依托泊苷0．1g／d，d1～5；顺铂用法同上。两组28d为1个周期，治疗3个周期，化疗前后常规给予止呕类药物及对症治疗。检测两组临床疗效和血清VEGF水平。结果DP组、EP组，总有效率分别为74．14％和29．55％，DP组总有效率明显高于EP组。与治疗前比较，两组治疗后血清VEGF水平均明显降低。DP组治疗后血清VEGF水平明显低于EP组治疗后。结论DP治疗中晚期NSCLC临床疗效确切，有效率、生存率均较高。