Irinotecan plus gemcitabine induces both radiographic and CA 19-9 tumor marker responses in patients with previously untreated advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase II, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study evaluated the efficacy and safety of irinotecan and gemcitabine as combination chemotherapy for previously untreated patients with unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received repeated 21-day cycles at starting doses of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) over 30 minutes followed immediately by irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) over 90 minutes, both given intravenously on days 1 and 8. Patients were evaluated for objective tumor response, changes in the serum tumor marker CA 19-9, time to tumor progression (TTP), survival, and safety. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were treated. Eleven patients (24%) had 50% or greater reductions in tumor area. These were confirmed one cycle later in nine patients (response rate, 20%; 95% confidence interval, 8% to 32%). Among 44 patients with baseline CA 19-9 determinations, CA 19-9 decreased during therapy in 22 patients (50%) and was reduced by 50% or more in 13 patients (30%). Median TTP was 2.8 months (range, 0.3 to 10.8 months). There were significant (P <.001) correlations between proportional changes in CA 19-9 and radiographic changes in tumor area with regard to extent of change (r =.67), timing of minimum on-study values (r =.85), and tumor progression (r =.89). Median survival was 5.7 months (range, 0.4 to 19.4+ months), and the 1-year survival rate was 27%. Severe toxicities were uncommon and primarily limited to grade 4 neutropenia (2%), grade 4 vomiting (2%), and grade 3 diarrhea (7%). CONCLUSION: Irinotecan/gemcitabine is a new combination that offers encouraging activity in terms of radiographic and CA 19-9 response and notable 1-year survival in pancreatic cancer. The regimen was well tolerated, with minimal grade 3 and 4 toxicities and excellent maintenance of planned dose-intensity.     

A phase II/III randomized study to compare the efficacy and safety of rigosertib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone in patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic cancer

BackgroundRigosertib (ON 01910.Na), a first-in-class Ras mimetic and small-molecule inhibitor of multiple signaling pathways including polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K), has shown efficacy in preclinical pancreatic cancer models. In this study, rigosertib was assessed in combination with gemcitabine in patients with treatment-naïve metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.Materials and methodsPatients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² weekly for 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle plus rigosertib 1800 mg/m² via 2-h continuous IV infusions given twice weekly for 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle (RIG + GEM) versus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² weekly for 3 weeks in a 4-week cycle (GEM).ResultsA total of 160 patients were enrolled globally and randomly assigned to RIG + GEM (106 patients) or GEM (54). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were neutropenia (8% in the RIG + GEM group versus 6% in the GEM group), hyponatremia (17% versus 4%), and anemia (8% versus 4%). The median overall survival was 6.1 months for RIG + GEM versus 6.4 months for GEM [hazard ratio (HR), 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85–1.81]. The median progression-free survival was 3.4 months for both groups (HR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.68–1.36). The partial response rate was 19% versus 13% for RIG + GEM versus GEM, respectively. Of 64 tumor samples sent for molecular analysis, 47 were adequate for multiplex genetic testing and 41 were positive for mutations. The majority of cases had KRAS gene mutations (40 cases). Other mutations detected included TP53 (13 cases) and PIK3CA (1 case). No correlation between mutational status and efficacy was detected.ConclusionsThe combination of RIG + GEM failed to demonstrate an improvement in survival or response compared with GEM in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Rigosertib showed a similar safety profile to that seen in previous trials using the IV formulation.     

Phase II trial of gemcitabine/irinotecan in refractory or relapsed small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine and irinotecan have shown a broad range of activity in solid tumors, including small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), with a synergistic effect on SCLC cell lines. The objective of this phase II trial was to evaluate the activity of gemcitabine/irinotecan in patients with relapsed SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients (15 with refractory disease and 20 with sensitive disease) who had experienced treatment failure with 1 previous chemotherapy regimen were recruited. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) and irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for a maximum of 6 cycles. Eligibility criteria included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, adequate organ function, and signed informed consent. RESULTS: All 35 patients were assessable for response, survival, and toxicity. Best objective responses exhibited were as follows: complete response in 2 patients (6%), partial response in 4 (11%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21%-61%), stable disease in 7 (20%; 95% CI, 9%-45%), and progressive disease in 22 (63%; 95% CI, 17%-57%). Median time to disease progression was 3.4 months and median survival was 5.8 months. The 1-year survival rate was 34%. Toxicity was mainly hematologic. Grade 3/4 nausea and vomiting occurred in 9% of patients, neuropathy occurred in 2.8%, and diarrhea occurred in 14.3%. Survival was not significantly different for patients with refractory versus sensitive disease. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine/irinotecan was shown to be active as second-line chemotherapy, especially in patients with refractory disease.     

Outpatient chemotherapy with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with biliary tract cancer

This phase II study was conducted to determine the efficacy and toxicity of a gemcitabine (GEM) and oxaliplatin (OX) chemotherapy protocol in patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer (BTC). Patients were treated with GEM 1000 mg m-2 (30 min infusion) on days 1, 8, 15, and OX 100 mg m-2 (2 h infusion) on days 1 and 15 (gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX-3 protocol), repeated every 28 days. The data were collected according to the Simon 2-stage design for a single centre phase II study (alpha=0.05; beta=0.2). Primary end point was response rate; secondary end points were time-to-progression (TTP), median survival, and safety profile. Thirty-one patients were enrolled in the study between July 2002 and April 2005. Therapeutic responses were as follows: partial response in eight patients (26%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 14-44), stable disease in 14 patients (45%, 95%CI 29-62), resulting in a disease control rate of 71%. Nine patients (29%, 95%CI 16-47) had progressive disease. Median TTP was 6.5 months. Median overall survival was 11 months. Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) Grade 3-4 toxicities were transient thrombocytopenia (23%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (19%), leucopenia (16%), and anaemia (10%). In conclusion the GEMOX-3 protocol is active and well tolerated in patients with advanced BTC. It can be applied in an outpatient setting with three visits per month only.     

Cisplatin and gemcitabine first-line chemotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine or best supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase III trial

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this randomized phase III study was to show significant difference in median time to progression (TTP) in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with single-agent gemcitabine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care following gemcitabine plus cisplatin initial first-line therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8) plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1) every 21 days. Patients achieving objective response or disease stabilization following initial gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy were randomized (2:1 fashion) to receive maintenance gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days) plus best supportive care (GEM arm), or best supportive care only (BSC arm). RESULTS: Between November 1999 and November 2002, we enrolled 352 patients (median age: 57 years; stage IV disease: 74%; Karnofsky performance status (KPS) >80: 41%). Following initial therapy, 206 patients were randomized and treated with gemcitabine (138) or best supportive care (68). TTP throughout the study period was 6.6 and 5 months for GEM and BSC arms, respectively, while values for the maintenance period were 3.6 and 2.0 months (for p < 0.001 for both). Median overall survival (OS) throughout study was 13.0 months for GEM and 11.0 months for BSC arms (p = 0.195). The toxicity profile was mild, with neutropenia being most common grade 3/4 toxicities. CONCLUSION: Maintenance therapy with gemcitabine, following initial therapy with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, was feasible, and produced significantly longer TTP compared to best supportive care alone. Further studies are warranted to establish the place of maintenance chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.     

Phase III study of gemcitabine in combination with fluorouracil versus gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial E2297.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine is generally considered to constitute first-line therapy for pancreatic cancer. To determine whether the addition of fluorouracil (5-FU) improves on the results from single-agent gemcitabine, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) compared gemcitabine plus bolus 5-FU with gemcitabine alone for patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This trial involved patients with biopsy-proven, advanced carcinoma of the pancreas not amenable to surgical resection. Patients were randomized to receive either gemcitabine alone (1,000 mg/m(2)/wk) weekly for 3 weeks of every 4 or to receive gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)/wk) followed by 5-FU (600 mg/m(2)/wk) weekly on the same schedule. The primary end point of the trial was survival, with secondary end points of time to progression and response rate. RESULTS: Of 327 patients enrolled over 18 months, 322 were eligible. Overall, the median survival was 5.4 months for gemcitabine alone and 6.7 months for gemcitabine plus 5-FU (P =.09). Progression-free survival for gemcitabine alone was 2.2 months, compared with 3.4 months for gemcitabine plus 5-FU (P =.022). Objective responses were uncommon and were observed in only 5.6% of patients treated with gemcitabine and 6.9% of patients treated with gemcitabine plus 5-FU. Most toxicities were hematologic or gastrointestinal; no significant differences were noted between the two treatment arms. CONCLUSION: 5-FU, administered in conjunction with gemcitabine, did not improve the median survival of patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma compared with single-agent gemcitabine. Further studies with other combinations of gemcitabine and 5-FU are not compelling, and clinical trial resources should address other combinations and novel agents.     

Phase II trial of irinotecan/gemcitabine as second-line therapy for relapsed and refractory small-cell lung cancer: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study 39902.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the irinotecan/gemcitabine combination in patients with relapsed/refractory small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable tumor who had received one previous chemotherapy or chemotherapy/radiation regimen were eligible. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) was administered i.v. over 30 min followed immediately by irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) i.v. over 90 min, both on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Patients were stratified based on response to initial treatment [i.e. primary sensitive disease with progression >or=3 months (group A), or refractory disease (group B)]. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were enrolled but one never received treatment and one ineligible patient did not have SCLC. Median patient ages of the remaining patients were 61 and 63 years in groups A (n = 35) and B (n = 36), respectively, with performance status of 0 or 1 in 85% of 71 patients. Primary grade 3/4 toxic effects in groups A versus B were neutropenia (36% versus 43%), thrombocytopenia (36% versus 26%), nausea (12% versus 11%), vomiting (0 versus 11%), diarrhea (12% versus 9%), and pulmonary (12% versus 12%). Two patients had fatal events including pneumonitis (n = 1) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (n = 1). Responses occurred in 11 group A [two complete responses and nine partial responses (PRs)] and four group B (all PRs) patients, for response rates of 31% [95% confidence interval (CI) 17%, 49%) and 11% (95% CI 3%, 26%), respectively. Median survival and progression-free survival times were 7.1 (95% CI 6, 10.5) versus 3.5 (95% CI 3.1, 5.7) months, and 3.1 (95% CI 1.6, 5.3) versus 1.6 (95% CI 1.4, 2.8) months for group A versus B. CONCLUSION: The irinotecan/gemcitabine combination is active and well tolerated as second-line therapy in SCLC patients. Additional studies are warranted as second-line therapy in patients who progressed 90 days or more after first-line therapy. However, the observed efficacy results in refractory SCLC patients indicate that this regimen should not be further explored in this population.     

A multicenter phase III trial comparing irinotecan-gemcitabine (IG) with gemcitabine (G) monotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer

Our purpose was to determine the response rate and median and overall survival of gemcitabine as monotherapy versus gemcitabine plus irinotecan in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma who were chemotherapy and radiotherapy naive were enrolled. Patients were centrally randomised at a one-to-one ratio to receive either gemcitabine monotherapy (900 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks (arm G), or gemcitabine (days 1 and 8) plus irinotecan (300 mg m(-2) on day 8) (arm IG), repeated every 3 weeks. The total number of cycles administered was 255 in the IG arm and 245 in the G arm; the median number of cycles was 3. In all, 145 patients (71 in arm IG and 74 in arm G) were enrolled; 60 and 70 patients from arms IG and G, respectively, were evaluable. A complete clinical response was achieved in three (4.3%) arm G patients; nine (15%) patients in arm IG and four (5.7%) in arm G achieved a partial response. The overall response rate was: arm IG 15% and arm G 10% (95% CI 5.96-24.04 and 95% CI 2.97-17.03, respectively; P=0.387). The median time to tumour progression was 2.8 months and 2.9 months and median survival time was 6.4 and 6.5 months for the IG and G arms, respectively. One-year survival was 24.3% for the IG arm and 21.8% for the G arm. No statistically significant difference was observed comparing gemcitabine monotherapy versus gemcitabine plus irinotecan in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer, with respect to overall and 1-year survival.     

Treatment of pancreatic cancer with a combination of irinotecan (CPT-11) and gemcitabine: a multicenter phase II study by the Greek Cooperative Group for Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine (GEM) and irinotecan (CPT-11) is evaluated in previously untreated patients with inoperable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1999 to July 2001, 60 patients with pancreatic cancer (85% stage IV) were enrolled in a two-step extended phase II trial. Patients were treated with gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) and CPT-11 (300 mg/m2 on day 8) in cycles of 3 weeks. No prophylactic use of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) was initially planned. RESULTS: In an intention-to-treat analysis one (1.7%) complete and 14 (23.3%) partial responses were achieved [objective response rate (ORR) 24.7%; 95% confidence interval 14.04% to 35.96%]. Twenty-two (36.7%) and 23 (38.3%) patients had stable and progressive disease, respectively. The median duration of response was 5 months, the median time to tumor progression (TTP) was 7 months and the median overall survival 7 months. One-year survival was 22.5%. Pain improvement and asthenia during treatment were observed in 45% and 43% of patients, respectively; weight gain occurred in 19.5% of patients. Grade 3 anemia occurred in three (5%) patients who required transfusion of six packed red blood cell (RBC) units. Ten (16.7%) additional patients with grade 2 anemia were treated with recombinant erythropoietin. Grade 3 thrombocytopenia occurred in seven (11.7%) patients and grades 3 and 4 neutropenia in 27 (45%). Ten patients developed febrile neutropenia, two of whom died due to sepsis. Prophylactic use of rhG-CSF was eventually required in 93 (28.3%) of 329 administered cycles. Other toxicities were mild. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and irinotecan is an active chemotherapy regimen against pancreatic cancer with a 25% ORR. Toxicity was acceptable for the great majority of patients but with a high percentage of hematopoietic growth factor administration.     

PS-341 and gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: PS-341 is a proteasome inhibitor with preclinical activity in pancreatic cancer tumor models and synergistic activity with gemcitabine. This randomized phase II study determined the tumor response rate (RR) for PS-341 alone and the 6-month survival and RR for the combination of gemcitabine and PS-341 in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive 3-week cycles of either arm A: PS-341 1.5 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus (over 3--5 s) on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 or arm B: PS-341 1.0 mg/m(2) (same as arm A otherwise) plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 and 8. Patients progressing on arm A were allowed to receive arm B treatment. RESULTS: Arm A: 42 evaluable patients were enrolled with a confirmed RR of 0% (95% CI 0% to 8%), median survival of 2.5 months (95% CI 2.0-3.3), and median time to progression (TTP) of 1.2 months (95% CI 1.1--1.3). Twelve of 43 evaluable patients (28%) experienced at least one grade 4+ AE. Arm B: 39 evaluable patients yielded a 6-month survival rate of 41% (16/39, 95% CI 29.8% to 67.0%), median survival of 4.8 months (95% CI 2.4--7.4), median TTP of 2.4 months (95% CI 1.5--3.1), and confirmed RR of 10% (4 partial responses/0 complete responses, 95% CI 3% to 24%). Eleven of 43 evaluable patients (26%) experienced at least one grade 4+ AE. One patient had grade 5 hypotension. CONCLUSION: The use of PS-341 alone or in combination with gemcitabine did not result in an overall survival and RR better than that expected for gemcitabine alone. Based on the lack of efficacy and the toxicity seen in our trial, there does not appear to be a role for PS-341 in pancreatic adenocarcinoma with either of the schedules used in this trial.     

Randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine plus irinotecan or docetaxel in stage IIIB or stage IV NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the activity and tolerability of gemcitabine plus irinotecan or docetaxel as first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with chemotherapy-na?ve stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomized to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, plus either irinotecan 100 mg/m2 or docetaxel 40 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8. Treatment was administered every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 80 enrolled patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, 78 were evaluable for activity and safety. Overall response rates, consisting of partial responses, were 12.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 4% to 35%] for gemcitabine-irinotecan and 23.1% (95% CI 10% to 42%) for gemcitabine-docetaxel. Median overall survival was 7.95 months (95% CI 5.2-10.2) and 12.8 months (95% CI 7.9-17.1) for gemcitabine-irinotecan and gemcitabine-docetaxel, respectively. The corresponding estimated 1-year survivals were 23% and 51%, respectively. The 2-year survival rate in arm A (gemcitabine-irinotecan) is not currently estimable. The 2-year survival rate for arm B (gemcitabine-docetaxel) is 22% (95% CI 6% to 37%). Both combinations were well tolerated; the most common hematological toxicity was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% of patients in each treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that gemcitabine plus docetaxel or irinotecan is well tolerated in patients with chemotherapy-na?ve advanced NSCLC. The survival data with the combination gemcitabine-docetaxel are promising. Gemcitabine-docetaxel combination therapy may be particularly useful for patients who have experienced toxicities with a platinum regimen or in patients who may be more susceptible to platinum-related toxicity.     

Cationic liposomal paclitaxel plus gemcitabine or gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomized controlled phase II trial

BackgroundPaclitaxel embedded in cationic liposomes (EndoTAG™-1; ET) is an innovative agent targeting tumor endothelial cells. This randomized controlled phase II trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of ET in combination with gemcitabine (GEM) in advanced pancreatic cancer (PDAC).Patients and methodsChemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease were randomly assigned to receive weekly GEM 1000 mg/m² or GEM plus twice-weekly ET 11, 22 or 44 mg/m² for 7 weeks. After a safety run-in of 100 patients, a second cohort continued treatment. End points included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), tumor response and safety.ResultsTwo hundred and twelve patients were randomly allocated to the study and 200 were treated (80% metastatic, 20% locally advanced). Adverse events were manageable and reversible. Transient thrombocytopenia and infusion reactions with chills and pyrexia mostly grade 1 or 2 occurred in the ET groups. Disease control rate after the first treatment cycle was 43% with GEM and 60%, 65% and 52% in the GEM + ET cohorts. Median PFS reached 2.7 compared with 4.1, 4.6 and 4.4 months, respectively. Median OS was 6.8 compared with 8.1, 8.7 and 9.3 months, respectively.ConclusionsTreatment of advanced PDAC with GEM + ET was generally well tolerated. GEM + ET showed beneficial survival and efficacy. A randomized phase III trial should confirm this positive trend.     

Long-duration, weekly treatment with gemcitabine plus vinorelbine for non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter phase II study

In this phase II study, gemcitabine and vinorelbine were combined at suboptimal doses for weekly administration in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary objectives were to determine objective response rate (ORR) and time to progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints were safety and overall survival. Chemonaive patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC received vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) immediately followed by gemcitabine (800 mg/m2) once each week (on day 1) for 6 months without rest. From May 1998 to May 1999, 40 patients were enrolled (85% males; 70% stage IV) with a median age of 65.5. A total of 478 doses were administered, with a median of 9 per patient (range 2-72). The ORR was 27.5% (95% CI, 15.1-44.1%). The median TTP was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.4 months). At a median follow-up of 6.5 months, the median survival was 11.6 months, and survival rates at 1 and 2 year(s) were 47.5% and 15.8%, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia, in 70% of patients, with febrile neutropenia in 28%. The most common grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicity was transaminase elevation, in 22.5% of patients, which was transient and reversible. The other most prominent toxicities were, unexpectedly, pulmonary and cardiac toxicities. Based on these results, weekly, long-term administration of gemcitabine-vinorelbine appears to be an active regimen in NSCLC that warrants further investigation.     

Biweekly low-dose sequential gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and cisplatin (GFP): a highly active novel therapy for metastatic adenocarcinoma of the exocrine pancreas

Phase II studies have suggested an improved response rate and acceptable toxicity profile associated with gemcitabine combinations compared to gemcitabine alone for treatment of metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. The GFP regimen (gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and cisplatin) is based on laboratory evidence of disease-specific chemotherapy interaction.[8] This retrospective analysis examined the outcome of 49 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated between July 1998 and September 2000. Day 1 treatment consisted of gemcitabine 500 mg/m² over 30 minutes and then leucovorin 300 mg bolus, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m² bolus, followed by infusional 5-FU 600 mg/m² over 8 hours. Day 2 consisted of leucovorin 300 mg bolus, 5-FU 400 mg/m² bolus, followed by cisplatin 50-75 mg/m² over 30 minutes and then infusional 5-FU 600 mg/m² over 8 hours. Treatment was administered every 2 weeks. Median patient age was 61.5 years, 74% were men, and 20 patients had refractory disease (11 patients had disease progression upon gemcitabine-based therapy). Grade 3-4 toxic effects (% patients) consisted of neutropenia (30%), thrombocytopenia (14%), anemia (8%), and neutropenic fever (2%). Grade 3-4 nonhematological toxicities (% patients) consisted of neuropathy (14%), ototoxicity (8%), nephrotoxicity (6%), nausea/vomiting (14%), and mucositis (10%). The majority of dose reductions were made for neuropathy or cytopenias. Filgrastim and erythropoietin were given as needed to promote dose intensity. Eight patients attained a partial response (PR) by RECIST criteria. Fourteen had stable disease (SD). Two patients attaining PR and two attaining SD had progressive disease with prior gemcitabine-based therapy. The median time to disease progression (TTP) from GFP start was 9 weeks. For all 49 patients, the median overall survival (OS) from GFP start was 10.6 months, 12-month survival was 46%, and 24-month survival was 30%. Notably, upon disease progression, 31 patients continued to receive the GFP regimen with irinotecan 80 mg/m² inserted on day 1 following gemcitabine, the G-FLIP regimen (gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and cisplatin). Measured from G-FLIP initiation, the TTP for the 31 patients treated sequentially was 10 weeks, and for the 14 patients attaining SD or PR the TTP was 25 weeks. The median overall survival measured from GFP initiation was 11.8 months. The response rate, non-cross resistance, TTP, OS, and tolerability warrant prospective development of this novel combination. This experience also demonstrates that adding a single new drug such as irinotecan to the same first-line chemotherapy combination upon disease progression may be an important alternative for the treatment of relapsed/resistant cancer.     

A phase II trial of gemcitabine plus capecitabine for patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Purpose While gemcitabine (GEM) is widely accepted for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer, capecitabine (CAP) has shown single agent activity and promising efficacy in combination with GEM. This phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of GEM combined with dose escalated 14-day CAP as first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, we also analyzed the correlation between CA19-9 response and clinical outcomes. Methods Patients had advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, no prior systemic chemotherapy other than that given concurrently with radiation therapy, at lease one measurable disease, and adequate organ functions. The patients were treated with GEM 1,000 mg/m² IV on days 1, 8 and CAP 1,000 mg/m² twice a day PO on days 1–14, in 21-day cycles. Results The objective RR among 45 patients was 40.0% (95% CI; 25.1–54.9), including 1CR (2.2%). The median TTP and OS were 5.4 months (95% CI; 1.8–9.0) and 10.4 months (95% CI; 6.2–14.5), respectively. Patients with ≥25% decline of serum CA19-9 had significantly better outcomes in terms of TTP and OS than those who did not (P < 0.03). The most frequent, grade 3–4, non-hematologic toxicity was hand–foot syndrome (6.7%). Conclusions The combination of GEM with dose escalated 14-day CAP is well tolerated and offers encouraging activity in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, CA19-9 response correlates well with clinical outcomes in this population.     

Phase II study of weekly chemotherapy with paclitaxel and gemcitabine as second-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer after treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy

Purpose We evaluated the tolerability and activity of the combination of weekly paclitaxel (PTX) and gemcitabine (GEM) in second-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients and methods PTX (100 mg/m²) and GEM (1,000 mg/m²) were administered to patients with previous treated NSCLC on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Results A total of 40 patients (performance status 0/1/2, 7/27/6 pts) were enrolled. The response rate was 32.5% (95% confidence interval: 18.0–47.0%). The median survival time was 41.7 weeks (95% confidence interval: 28.5–54.7 weeks). The median time to disease progression was 19 weeks. Hematological toxicities (grade 3 or 4) observed included neutropenia in 60%, anemia in 15%, and thrombocytopenia in 12.5% of patients. Non-hematological toxicities were mild, with the exception of grade 3 diarrhea, pneumonitis, and rash in one patient each. There were no deaths due to toxicity. Conclusion The combination of weekly PTX and GEM is a feasible, well-tolerated, and active means of second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.     

Phase I-II study of gemcitabine and fluorouracil as a continuous infusion in patients with pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities, and efficacy of gemcitabine combined with fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients with pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable, locally advanced, nonresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer were candidates for the study. 5-FU was given via protracted venous infusion (PVI) at a fixed dosage of 200 mg/m2/d, and gemcitabine was administered weekly for 3 consecutive weeks every 4 weeks. The initial dose of gemcitabine was 700 mg/m2 and was escalated in increments of 100 mg/m2/wk until the appearance of severe toxicity. Measurements of efficacy included the following: response rate; clinical benefit response, which is a composite measurement of pain, performance status, and weight loss; time to disease progression; and survival. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients received a total of 109 courses. Dose-limiting toxicity, which consisted of grade 4 neutropenia with fever (one patient) and grade 4 thrombocytopenia (one patient), was observed in two of three patients treated with 1,100 mg/m2/wk of gemcitabine. On the basis of these results, the MTD of gemcitabine with 5-FU via PVI on this schedule was 1,000 mg/m2. Sixteen patients developed grade 3-4 neutropenia, and three patients developed grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia. Grade 3-4 nonhematologic toxicity consisted of diarrhea (two patients) and cutaneous toxicity, asthenia, edema, mucositis, and nausea and vomiting (one patient each). The delivered dose-intensity of gemcitabine was similar at the 1,000 mg/m2 dose level (599 mg/m2/wk) as at the 900 mg/m2 (601 mg/m2/wk) dose level. For this reason, the recommended dose of gemcitabine for phase II evaluation on this schedule was 900 mg/m2. Five patients had objective responses (one complete response and four partial responses; response rate, 19.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5 to 39.3), and 10 patients had improvement of disease-related symptoms (45%; 95% CI, 24 to 67). After a median follow-up of 17.7 months (range, 7.8 to 24.8 months), the median progression-free survival and overall survival times were 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.3 to 11.4) and 10.3 months (95% CI, 8.1 to 12.5), respectively. CONCLUSION: The MTD of gemcitabine when combined with 5-FU via PVI on this schedule was 1,000 mg/m2/ wk; however, on the basis of administered dose-intensity, the recommended dose for additional investigation is 900 mg/m2. This combination chemotherapy regimen was well tolerated and showed promising antitumor activity in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.     

Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus tipifarnib compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine whether addition of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor tipifarnib (Zarnestra, R115777; Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, Beerse, Belgium) to standard gemcitabine therapy improves overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared gemcitabine + tipifarnib versus gemcitabine + placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma previously untreated with systemic therapy. Tipifarnib was given at 200 mg bid orally continuously; gemcitabine was given at 1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously weekly x 7 for 8 weeks, then weekly x 3 every 4 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points included 6-month and 1-year survival rates, progression-free survival, response rate, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. No statistically significant differences in survival parameters were observed. The median overall survival for the experimental arm was 193 v 182 days for the control arm (P =.75); 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 53% and 27% v 49% and 24% for the control arm, respectively; median progression-free survival was 112 v 109 days for the control arm. Ten drug-related deaths were reported for the experimental arm and seven for the control arm. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia grade > or = 3 were observed in 40% and 15% in the experimental arm versus 30% and 12% in the control arm. Incidences of nonhematologic adverse events were similar in two groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine and tipifarnib has an acceptable toxicity profile but does not prolong overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer compared with single-agent gemcitabine.     

A phase 2 trial of gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, and radiation therapy in locally advanced nonmetastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma : cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80003

BACKGROUND:

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of 5‐fluorouracil (5FU) and gemcitabine administered concurrently with radiation in patients with locally advanced, nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS:

Eligible patients had histologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma deemed locally unresectable without evidence of metastatic disease. In addition, all patients underwent laparoscopy or laparotomy before study entry to rule out peritoneal carcinomatosis. Patients received radiation therapy (50.4 Gy) with concurrent infusional 5FU (200 mg/m² 5 days/week) and weekly gemcitabine (200 mg/m²). After a 3‐week break, patients received weekly gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m² for 3 of 4 weeks, for 4 cycles. The primary endpoint of the trial was the proportion of patients surviving 9 months from study entry. Secondary endpoints included objective tumor response, CA19‐9 response, overall survival (OS) time to progression (TTP), and toxicity.

RESULTS:

Between November 2001 and October 2004, 81 patients were enrolled, 78 of whom were eligible for analysis. With a median follow‐up of 55.2 months, the median OS was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.9‐14.9) and the median TTP was 10 months (95% CI, 6.4‐12.0). An objective tumor response was seen in 19 patients (25%), and among 56 patients with an elevated CA19‐9 at baseline, 29 (52%) had a sustained CA19‐9 response. Overall, 41% of patients had grade 3 or greater treatment‐related gastrointestinal adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS:

The combination of 5FU, gemcitabine, and radiation is well tolerated. Survival is comparable with the best results of other recent studies of 5FU and radiation or gemcitabine and radiation. Cancer 2011;. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Radiological tumor size decrease at week 6 is a potent predictor of outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab (BOND trial)

BackgroundEarly radiological tumor shrinkage may be associated with better long-term outcome in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (cmCRC) treated with cetuximab. We aimed at validating this in a large and independent series.Patients and methodsOf the 329 patients, 289 had a measurement both at baseline and week 6. Tumor shrinkage was expressed as a relative decrease compared with baseline and categorized according to a previously reported cut-off value (∼10%) or used as a continuous variable.ResultsMedian time to progression (TTP) was 6.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.1–7.2] versus 1.5 months (95% CI 1.4–1.7) in patients with [99 patients (34.3%)] or without [190 patients (65.7%)] tumor shrinkage, respectively, at week 6 [hazard ratio (HR) 0.23 (95% CI 0.17–0.32)]. The median overall survival (OS) was 13.7 (CI NA) versus 6.9 months (95% CI 6.1–7.7) [HR 0.21 (95% CI 0.14–0.32)], respectively. In a multivariate model, early tumor decrease outperformed skin toxicity as a predictor of long-term outcome.ConclusionsTumor shrinkage at 6 weeks is a strong predictor of TTP and OS in cmCRC patients treated with cetuximab with or without irinotecan. This suggests early tumor shrinkage is the hallmark of efficacy of cetuximab and reliably identifies the subpopulation that is sensitive to the drug. Early tumor shrinkage can be used as a marker of efficacy in clinical practice, as such or in combination.