A multicentre phase II study of cisplatin and gemcitabine for malignant mesothelioma

Our previous phase II study of cisplatin and gemcitabine in malignant mesothelioma showed a 47.6% (95% CI 26.2-69.0%) response rate with symptom improvement in responding patients. Here we confirm these findings in a multicentre setting, and assess the effect of this treatment on quality of life and pulmonary function. Fifty-three patients with pleural malignant mesothelioma received cisplatin 100 mg m(-2) i.v. day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) i.v. days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28 day cycle for a maximum of six cycles. Quality of life and pulmonary function were assessed at each cycle. The best response achieved in 52 assessable patients was: partial response, 17 (33%, 95% CI 20-46%); stable disease, 31 (60%); and progressive disease, four (8%). The median time to disease progression was 6.4 months, median survival from start of treatment 11.2 months, and median survival from diagnosis 17.3 months. Vital capacity and global quality of life remained stable in all patients and improved significantly in responding patients. Major toxicities were haematological, limiting the mean relative dose intensity of gemcitabine to 75%. This schedule of cisplatin and gemcitabine is active in malignant mesothelioma in a multicentre setting. Investigation of alternative scheduling is needed to decrease haematological toxicity and increase the relative dose intensity of gemcitabine whilst maintaining response rate and quality of life.     

Gemcitabine and cisplatin in unresectable malignant mesothelioma of the pleura: a phase II study of the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG 9810)

PURPOSE: The purpose of this open-label phase II SWOG study was to evaluate the activity of gemcitabine (Gemzar; Eli Lilly, Indiana, USA) and cisplatin combination therapy, in patients with unresectable malignant mesothelioma of the pleura. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty eligible chemotherapy na?ve patients with histologically proven malignant mesothelioma of the pleura, and a SWOG performance status 0-2 were enrolled between February 1999 and August 2000. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1000mg/m(2) and cisplatin 30mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, until progression of disease or two cycles beyond complete response. RESULTS: Using SWOG response criteria, one patient had a confirmed complete response and five patients had a confirmed partial response, for a total response rate of 12% (95% CI 5-24%). All the responses were seen in patients with epithelioid or unspecified histology. Stable disease was seen in 25 patients (50%). The median overall survival was 10 months (95% CI 7-15 months), with a median progression-free survival of 6 months. Sixteen patients experienced Grade 4 toxicity. Twelve of these Grade 4 toxicities were hematologic. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Cisplatin-gemcitabine combination chemotherapy has modest activity with an acceptable toxicity profile, as first line treatment for patients with malignant mesothelioma.     

A multicenter phase II study of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin for malignant pleural mesothelioma

We conducted a phase II multicenter trial to evaluate the activity of combined gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in malignant pleural mesothelioma. Twenty-five patients were recruited between May 1999 and December 2001 and received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 intravenously over 30 minutes and oxaliplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously over 3 hours 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 and no prior chemotherapy. Best objective responses achieved were as follows: partial response, 10 patients (40%, 95% CI, 21%-61%); stable disease, 6 patients (24%, 95% CI, 9%-45%); and progressive disease, 9 patients (36%, 95% CI, 18%-57%). Median time to disease progression was 7 months, and median survival was 13 months. One-year survival was 60% (95% CI, 31%-72%). There were 2 deaths from disease progression. Toxicity was mainly hematologic. Grade 3/4 nausea and vomiting occurred in 8% of patients, neuropathy occurred in 8% of patients, and diarrhea occurred in 4% of patients. The combination of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin was shown to be active in malignant pleural mesothelioma and to exhibit tolerable toxicity in an outpatient setting.     

Phase II study of regimen of gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Many novel drugs, including gemcitabine, navelbine, paclitaxel and docetaxel have been used in combination with cisplatin. Of these drugs, gemcitabine is reported to have a high response rate and acceptable toxicity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with NSCLC, who met the selection criteria from June 1998 to January 1999, were enrolled. All of them were confirmed by histology and were in an advanced stage, i.e. stage IIIB with pleural effusion or stage IV. Cisplatin at a dose of 80 mg/m2 was given monthly on day 15, in combination with gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of the 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Of the 32 assessable patients, two showed complete remission and 11 achieved partial remission. The overall response was 40.6% (95% CI, 24.8-56.4%). The median time to disease progression was 7.2 months (95% CI, 4.87-9.53 months). The major hematological toxicity was neutropenia. Seven patients (22.9%) developed grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, but none developed febrile neutropenia. One patient (3.1%) had grade 3 thrombocytopenia. One patient (3.1%) developed grade 3 anemia. Nausea and vomiting were seen in 12 patients (37.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The regimen of combined gemcitabine with cisplatin is safe and effective. With this combination, a lower dose of cisplatin seems to have an efficacy similar to that in previous reports.     

Divided dose of cisplatin combined with gemcitabine in malignant mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare but notoriously chemoresistant tumor. An impressive activity of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in malignant mesothelioma has been shown. However, the hematological toxicity and nephrotoxicity related to this regimen affect the patient's life negatively. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of divided dose of cisplatin combined with gemcitabine in chemo-na?ve patients with malignant mesothelioma. Twenty-six eligible patients with malignant mesothelioma were enrolled onto the study. Cisplatin 35 mg/m(2) and gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) were administered on days 1 and 8 as intravenous infusion in a 3-week cycle, up to maximum 6 cycles. Response and toxicity evaluations were performed in 26 patients. Male-female ratio was 11/15 with a mean age of 50.5 years (37-70). Locations of tumor were pleura in 16 patients, and peritoneum in 10 patients. All patients had epitheloid subtype of malignant mesothelioma. The partial response and stable disease were observed in 6 patients (23.1%) and in 13 patients (50%), respectively, with an overall tumor control rate of 73.1%. Seven patients (26.9%) had progressive disease. Median time to disease progression and survival were 4 and 19.5 months, respectively. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting were observed in one patient (3.8%), grade 4 neutropenia developed in one patient (3.8%) and grades 3-4 thrombocytopenia and nephrotoxicity did not develop. There was no treatment related death. Divided dose of cisplatin combined with gemcitabine, at the current dosage and schedule, appears to be an active regimen in chemotherapy-na?ve patients with malignant mesothelioma, and well-tolerated.     

Phase II trial of cisplatin, gemcitabine and treosulfan in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma

Gemcitabine plus treosulfan (GeT) is under investigation in metastatic uveal melanoma. In this phase II trial, cisplatin was added to a GeT regimen to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of two alkylating agents in combination with gemcitabine. Patients received 30 or 40 mg/m of cisplatin, 1000 mg/m of gemcitabine and 3000 mg/m of treosulfan on days 1 and 8. Therapy was repeated on day 29. A maximum of six cycles was administered. Nineteen patients were included in the trial, of whom 17 were evaluable for response. No objective response was observed; seven patients (41%) had stable disease and 10 (59%) progressed. The median progression-free survival of all 19 patients was 3.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.8-3.1]; the median overall survival was 7.7 months (95% CI, 1.9-13.8). Grade 3 and 4 thrombopenia and leucopenia occurred in eight and nine of the 19 patients, respectively. The addition of cisplatin to the GeT regimen results in excessive haematological toxicity without improvement in efficacy.     

Cisplatin and gemcitabine in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a phase II study

Aims of this study were to evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Patients with histologically proven MPM, < 75 years of age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) < or = 2, and measurable MPM were eligible. Patients received gemcitabine 1250 mg/m intravenously on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 75 mg/m on day 2, every 21 days, for a maximum of 6 cycles. From May 1999 to May 2001, 35 chemonaive patients (median age, 61 years) were enrolled. A total of 177 cycles were administered (median 5 cycles; range 1 to 6). One patient was not evaluable for response and toxicity. Nine (26%) patients had partial responses, 11 (32%) patients had progressive disease, and 14 (41%) stable disease. Median survival for all patients was 13 months. Median progression-free survival was 8 months. Grade 3 (World Health Organization) nausea and vomiting occurred in 35% of patients. Grade 3/4 anemia, grade 3/4 thrombocythemia, and grade 3/4 neutropenia were assessed in 24%, 52%, and 61% of patients, respectively. All other side effects were mild. In conclusion, gemcitabine-cisplatin combination seems to be moderately active in MPM. Furthermore, at this dose and schedule, the toxicity profile could be acceptable.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed-cisplatin chemotherapy is the standard of care in the first-line treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Second-line cytotoxic therapy is considered for a growing group of patients, but the optimal treatment has not been defined to date. Gemcitabine and vinorelbine have shown activity in the first-line setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of the gemcitabine-vinorelbine combination in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM. METHODS: From January 2004 to September 2006, 30 consecutive patients who were pretreated with pemetrexed with or without a platinum-derivative were enrolled. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) were administered intravenously on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Treatment was repeated for a maximum of 6 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: A partial response was observed in 3 patients (10%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-26.5%), and 10 patients (33.3%; 95% CI, 17.3-52.8%) had stable disease after treatment. Overall, 13 patients (43.3%; 95% CI, 25.5-62.6%) achieved disease control. The median time to progression was 2.8 months (range, 0.6-12.1 months), and the median survival was 10.9 months (range, 0.8-25.3 months). Hematologic toxicity was acceptable, with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurring in 11% of patients and thrombocytopenia occurring in 4% of patients; no case of febrile neutropenia was observed. Nonhematologic toxicity generally was mild. CONCLUSIONS: The gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination was moderately active and had an acceptable toxicity profile in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM. The role of second-line treatment in MPM needs to be evaluated in prospective trials in large series of patients who are stratified according to previous treatment and prognostic factors.     

A phase 2 study of gemcitabine and epirubicin for the treatment of pleural mesothelioma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Study, N0021

BACKGROUND: The North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) conducted a phase 2 study to evaluate the antitumor activity of the combination of gemcitabine and epirubicin in patients with pleural mesothelioma who received no more than 1 prior chemotherapy regimen. METHODS: A total of 23 patients were accrued between August 2001 and April 2002 and received gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously over 30 minutes weekly every 2 weeks and epirubicin at a dose of 90 mg/m(2) intravenously on Day 1 on an every-21-days cycle (high-dose patient group). Between August 2002 and April 2004, an additional 45 patients were treated at a reduced dose of gemcitabine of 750 mg/m(2) and epirubicin at a dose of 70 mg/m(2) with the same schedule (low-dose patient group). RESULTS: In the high-dose patient group, the confirmed response rate was 13% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3-34%). The median survival was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.4-10.7 months) and the median time to disease progression was 6.3 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.6 months). In the low-dose patient group, the confirmed response rate was 7% (95% CI, 0-28%). The median survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.7-8.7 months) and the median time to disease progression was 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.7-5.6 months). Toxicity was moderate to severe. In the high-dose and low-dose groups, 87% and 60% of patients, respectively, experienced at least 1 adverse event of grade 4 or higher (according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]). The quality of life remained similar from baseline to the end of the 2 cycles of treatment in the high-dose group but worsened in the low-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, the combination regimen of gemcitabine and epirubicin was found to demonstrate minimal antitumor activity against pleural mesothelioma.     

Phase II study of a short course of weekly high-dose cisplatin combined with long-term oral etoposide in pleural mesothelioma

BACKGROUND: In a previous phase II study with a dose-intensive weekly cisplatinschedule for six cycles, we observed a partial response in 5of 14 patients with pleural mesothelioma. However, responseduration was short (median 6 months). Since oral etoposide maytheoretically be synergis-tic to cisplatin, we performed a phaseII study with the combination of both drugs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five chemo-naive patients with pleural mesothelioma weretreated with cisplatin 70 mg/m² days 1–8–15 anddays 29–36–43 in combination with oral etoposide50 mg days 1–15 and days 29–43. Patients with stabledisease, or better, continued treatment with oral etoposide50 mg/m²/day days 1–21 every 28 days. RESULTS: All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Completeresponse was observed in one patient and partial responses in5 patients (RR% 24%; 95% Cl: 10%–45%) for a median durationof 30 weeks. Twelve patients had stable disease. The responsestatus never improved during maintenance treatment with oraletoposide. Most patients tolerated the regimen very well. Toxicitywas mainly haema-tologic with leukocytopenia causing treatmentdelays in 8 patients. Ototoxicity grade 1 or 2 was observedin 8 patients, neurotoxicity grade 1 in 9 patients and nephrotoxicitygrade 1 in 1 patient. CONCLUSION: Frequently administered cisplatin in combination with oral etoposidehas a moderate but definite activity in pleural mesothelioma pleural mesothelioma, cisplatin, oral etoposide, dose-intensity     

Single-agent gemcitabine: an active and better tolerated alternative to standard cisplatin-based chemotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

This randomized study was designed to determine the response rates, survival and toxicities of single-agent gemcitabine (GEMZAR) and a combination of cisplatin/etoposide in chemonaive patients with non-resectable, locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 was given as a 30-min intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, and etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1 (following cisplatin), 2 and 3. Major eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed non-small cell lung cancer, measurable disease, Zubrod performance status 0-2, no prior chemotherapy, no prior radiation of the measured lesion, and no CNS metastases. One hundred and forty-seven patients were enrolled, 72 in the gemcitabine and 75 in the cisplatin/etoposide arm. Patient characteristics were well-matched across both arms. Sixty-seven gemcitabine and 72 cisplatin/etoposide patients were qualified for efficacy analysis. There were no complete responses, but 12 partial responses in the gemcitabine arm and 11 in the cisplatin/etoposide arm, for protocol-qualified response but 12 partial responses in the gemcitabine arm and 11 in the cisplatin/etoposide arm, for protocol-qualified response rates of 17.9% (95%, CI: 9.6-29.2%,) and 15.3% (95% CI: 7.9-25.7%,), respectively. Median survival times were 6.6 months (95% CI: 4.9-7.3 months) for gemcitabine and 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.4-9.3 months) for cisplatin/etoposide. The 1-year survival probability estimate was 26% for gemcitabine and 24% for cisplatin/etoposide. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in time-to-event measures, but patients in the gemcitabine arm had a greater probability of achieving a tumour response after 2 months (probability estimate: 8 vs. 0%,) and of the response lasting at least 6 months (73 vs. 45%,). Clinical and haematologic toxicity was more pronounced in the cisplatin/etoposide arm. Quality-of-life measures indicated a significant worsening of symptomatology in the cisplatin/etoposide arm for hair loss, nausea and vomiting, and appetite loss. This randomized study provides further evidence that single-agent gemcitabine is an active and effective therapy for patients with non-resectable. locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and good performance status, and that it is better tolerated than the combination cisplatin/ etoposide.     

Phase II trial assessing the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

BACKGROUND: There is need for more active and better tolerated combinations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The Spanish Lung Cancer Group (SLCG) therefore conducted this phase II study to define the efficacy and toxicity profile of the combination of higher doses than usual of gemcitabine along with cisplatin in patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with pathologically documented advanced NSCLC were included in this trial (34 men, six women; aged 34-74 years; mean 64 years). Twenty-two patients had unresectable stage IIIB disease and 18 had stage IV disease. Karnofsky performance status was > or =70%. In five patients, surgery had previously been performed and four patients had received radiotherapy. Gemcitabine at a dose of 1200 mg/m2 was administered weekly (days 1, 8 and 15) and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 15 of each 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Responses were scored according to standard World Health Organization criteria. Of 40 assessable patients, 19 had a partial response for an overall response rate of 47.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 32-64%). To date, median survival for the whole group is 10.4 months (95% CI 6.2-11.7 months), with a 1-year survival rate of 35%. Toxicity was mainly haematological. Seven patients (18%) had grade 4 neutropenia (one episode of febrile neutropenia). Thrombocytopenia (12.8% grade 3 and 2.6% grade 4) was not associated with clinical bleeding. One patient had a grade 4 transient rise in transaminase. There was no grade 3 or 4 renal toxicity. There was no grade 4 symptomatic toxicity. The most common grade 3 toxicities were nausea and vomiting (28.2%) and alopecia (10.3%) both related to cisplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine can be safely administered at a dose of 1200 mg/m2 in combination with cisplatin. Thrombocytopenia seems to be less than in schedules with cisplatin given on day 1. The results of this studyshow promising activity (47.5% response rate) with modest toxicity. As this combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin deserves further evaluation in prospective randomized trials, the SLCG is comparing gemcitabine-cisplatin with etoposide-cisplatin in a phase III randomized study.     

Carboplatin and pemetrexed in the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a realistic treatment option?

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer. Chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed can improve overall survival but has a toxic profile. Substitution of cisplatin with carboplatin may avoid some potential side-effects. Therefore, we undertook a retrospective review to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of carboplatin and pemetrexed in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma in clinical practice. METHODS: Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who had been treated with carboplatin and pemetrexed were retrospectively identified from pharmacy databases. The endpoints were disease control rate, time to treatment failure, clinical improvement rate and overall survival. We also evaluated any significant haematological and non-haematological toxicities. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were identified. Of 45 evaluable cases, the disease control rate was achieved in 34 patients (69%, 95% CI 55-82, intention to treat analysis). The clinical response rate was achieved in 34 out of 49 patients (69%, 95% CI 55-82). The median time to treatment failure was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.4-5.8) and median overall survival was 14 months (95% CI 9.5-18.5). Grade 3/4 haematological toxicities were observed in 7 patients (14.3%). Grade 3/4 non-haematological toxicities were seen in 12 patients (24.5%). No toxic deaths were recorded. CONCLUSION: The combination of carboplatin and pemetrexed may be a viable option in the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma.     

Randomized multicentric phase II study of carboplatin/gemcitabine and cisplatin/vinorelbine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer GFPC 99-01 study (Groupe français de pneumo-cancérologie)

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and carboplatin in the treatment of previously untreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A randomized phase II study was conducted by the Groupe Fran?ais de Pneumo-Cancérologie (GFPC) in 15 centers. The patients were randomized in either arm A (GC): gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8+carboplatin AUC 6 mg/(mLmin) on day 1; or in arm B (VP): vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 weekly+cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1. Treatment cycles were repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were randomized with stage IV or stage III NSCLC with malignant pleural effusion: 51 patients in arm A and 49 patients in arm B. A total of 190 cycles were administered in the GC arm and 172 cycles in the VP arm, with a median of four cycles per patient in each arm. The dose intensity was 84.9% for gemcitabine, 99.8% for carboplatin, 97.7% for cisplatin and 67.7% for vinorelbine. The objective response rates were 19.6% (95% CI, 9.8-33.1) for GC and 29.2% (95% CI, 17.0-44.1) for VP in an ITT analysis. The response duration was 169 days in arm A and 226 days in arm B. The TTP was similar with 140 days (GC) and 148 days (VP), respectively. Overall survival rates were 334 days in the GC combination and 304 days in the VP combination. Overall, the treatment was safe and toxicities observed were different in each arm: neutropenia was the most common toxicity in the VP treatment, whereas thrombocytopenia was more frequent in the GC combination. Anemia was similar in both arms. Non-haematologic toxicity was mild. One toxic death in arm A and three toxic deaths in arm B were observed. CONCLUSION: In terms of response rate, the gemcitabine-carboplatin combination was not efficient enough to allow further phase III study. Survival data are in the same range as the standard arm. This chemotherapy is feasible and may represent an alternative to a standard cisplatin-based regimen, allowing treatment in an outpatient setting.     

Prolonged gemcitabine infusion in advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma: a randomized phase II study of two different schedules in combination with cisplatin

BACKGROUND: Preclinical and clinical evidence suggests that a fixed infusion rate of 10 mg/m2 per minute may be more effective than the standard 30-minute infusion of gemcitabine. To investigate the activity and toxicity of the cisplatin plus gemcitabine combination with gemcitabine at a fixed infusion rate in patients with advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), the authors conducted a randomized Phase II trial of cisplatin plus gemcitabine at the 30-minute standard infusion (calibration arm) or cisplatin plus gemcitabine at a fixed infusion rate (experimental arm). METHODS: A total of 112 chemonaive patients with advanced NSCLC entered the study: 57 patients in Arm A and 55 patients in Arm B. The patients were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15 over 30 minutes (Arm A) or at a rate of 10 mg/m2 per minute (Arm B). In both treatment arms, cisplatin at a dose of 80 mg/m2 was administered on Day 15 every 28 days. RESULTS: The overall response rates in Arms A and B were 26% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 10-42%) and 34% (95% CI, 17-52%) (intent-to-treat-analysis), respectively. The median time to disease progression was 6 months (range, 1-26 months) and 8 months (range, 2-21 months), respectively, for Arms A and B and the median overall survival was 13 months (range, 2-26 months) for each arm. It is interesting to note that a high response rate (67%) of brain metastases was noted in the experimental arm. Toxicity was tolerable and comparable in the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this randomized Phase II trial demonstrated that cisplatin plus gemcitabine with gemcitabine at fixed infusion rate (10 mg/m2 per minute) is active and well tolerated in patients with advanced NSCLC.     

Cisplatin in combination with irinotecan in the treatment of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: a pilot phase II clinical trial and pharmacokinetic profile.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of a combination of cisplatin and irinotecan (CPT-11) in the treatment of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma and to characterize the pharmacokinetic profiles of CPT-11 and its active metabolite, 7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (SN-38). METHODS: Fifteen previously untreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma were treated with cisplatin (60 mg/m2 on Day 1) and CPT-11 (60 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15) administered intravenously and followed by a 1-week rest period. The course of treatment was repeated every 28 days. After intravenous administration, the levels of CPT-11 and SN-38 in the plasma and pleural fluid were determined for each histologic subtype of mesothelioma. RESULTS: All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Four partial responses (response rate of 26.7%) with a median response duration of 25.9 weeks and 2 regressions of evaluable disease (overall response rate of 40%) were observed. The median survival time after chemotherapy was 28.3 weeks, and the median time to treatment failure was 22.1 weeks. The 1-year survival rate for all patients was 38.5%. Toxicity was well tolerated, and there were no treatment-related deaths. World Health Organization Grade 3 leukopenia occurred in 3 patients (20%), and Grade 1 or 2 diarrhea occurred in 3 patients (20%). There was no excess toxicity in patients with large pleural effusions compared with those with no pleural effusions. CPT-11 and SN-38 were detected in the pleural fluid 1 hour after intravenous administration. The maximum concentrations of CPT-11 and SN-38 in the pleural fluid were 36.5% and 75.8%, respectively, of the corresponding plasma values. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cisplatin and CPT-11 had definite activity against malignant pleural mesothelioma and was well tolerated. The intravenous administration of CPT-11 produced adequate distribution of CPT-11 and its active metabolite SN-38 into the pleural fluid and allowed a higher concentration of the more active SN-38 to make contact with mesothelioma cells in the thoracic cavity. These results warrant further clinical evaluation of this combination chemotherapy for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma in a confirmatory Phase II trial.     

Phase II trial of low-dose gemcitabine in prolonged infusion and cisplatin for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of gemcitabine at a low dose of 250 mg/m(2) in 6h prolonged infusion with cisplatin in chemonaive patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were included, 39 males and 19 females, with a median age 61 years (range 28-73). Thirty-four (58.6%) patients had adenocarcinoma, 18 (31.0%) squamous cell, and 6 (10.4%) others. Seventeen (29.3%) had stage IIIB and 41 (70.7%) stage IV. Treatment consisted of 250 mg/m(2) gemcitabine in a 6h infusion on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) on day 2 of a 3-week cycle. A total of 219 chemotherapy cycles were administered, with a median of 4 cycles per patient (range 1-6). RESULTS: Of the 58 patients enrolled, all were evaluated for toxicity and 56 assessed for response. The overall response rate was 39.3% (95% confidence interval, 26.5-52.1%) with complete and partial responses of 3.6 and 35.7%, respectively. The median time to disease progression was 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.3-6.7 months), and median overall survival time was 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.5-12.5 months). One-year survival rate was 41.4%. Hematologic toxicity was fairly mild, and grades 3-4 hematologic toxicities consisted of neutropenia in 18.9% of patients, thrombocytopenia in 10.3%, and anemia in 6.9%. No patients required platelet transfusions, no bleeding episodes were recorded, and three patients received packed red blood cells (RBC) transfusions. The main nonhematologic toxicities included grade 3 nausea/vomiting in 27.6% of patients, grade 1-2 alopecia in 63.8%, and grade 1-2 skin rash in 17.3 %. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose gemcitabine in 6h prolonged infusion plus cisplatin is effective in NSCLC treatment. Toxicity, especially myelosuppression, is remarkably mild.     

Activity of doxorubicin and cisplatin combination chemotherapy in patients with diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma. An Italian Lung Cancer Task Force (FONICAP) Phase II study

Twenty-six symptomatic patients with diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma (DMPM) were enrolled in a Phase II Italian Lung Cancer Task Force (FONICAP) study to assess the activity and toxicity of doxorubicin and cisplatin combination chemotherapy. The drug schedule was as follows; 60 mg/m2 of doxorubicin and 60 mg/m2 of cisplatin both given intravenously (IV) on day 1 every 3 to 4 weeks. Of the 24 evaluable patients, 6 objective partial responses (25%; 95% confidence limits, 9.77% to 46.71%) were observed. Twelve of 24 patients (50%), including 6 with no radiologic evidence of response, had a clinical improvement as demonstrated by an objective reduction of symptom or performance status scores along treatment. The overall median survival time was 10 months. Toxicity was mild and dose reductions or suspensions were not required. The combination of doxorubicin and cisplatin is effective and well tolerated. It might be considered for palliation of symptomatic patients with DMPM.     

Phase II study of gemcitabine, UFT and leucovorin in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

The combination of gemcitabine with protracted 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer has shown activity with tolerable toxicity. The administration of UFT may simulate the effects of a protracted infusion of 5-FU. Patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable measurable pancreatic adenocarcinoma received gemcitabine (800 mg/m2 i.v., administered as an 80-min infusion on days 1, 8 and 15), UFT (200 mg/m2/day, on days 1 to 21), and oral leucovorin (90 mg/day, on days 1 to 21). Thirty patients were enrolled in this study. Five patients had partial responses, with an overall response rate of 17% (5/30), using the intent-to-treat principle (95% confidence interval (CI), 3-30%). Nine out of 25 (36%) patients experienced clinical benefit responses (95% CI; 17-55%). The median time to progression was 3.0 months, and the median overall survival was 7.2 months. The principal adverse event was neutropenia. The combination of gemcitabine, UFT, plus oral leucovorin shows significant antitumor activity and a beneficial clinical effect with an acceptable level of toxicity.     

Phase II Study of Gemcitabine, UFT and Leucovorin in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

The combination of gemcitabine with protracted 5-fluorouracil(5-FU) in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer has shown activity with tolerable toxicity. The administration of UFT may simulate the effects of a protracted infusion of 5-FU. Patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable measurable pancreatic adenocarcinoma received gemcitabine (800 mg/m2 i.v., administered as an 80-min infusion on days 1, 8 and 15), UFT (200 mg/m2/day, on days 1 to 21), and oral leucovorin (90 mg/day, on days 1 to 21). Thirty patients were enrolled in this study. Five patients had partial responses, with an overall response rate of 17% (5/30), using the intent-to-treat principle (95% confidence interval (CI), 3-30%). Nine out of 25 (36%) patients experienced clinical benefit responses (95% CI; 17-55%). The median time to progression was 3.0 months, and the median overall survival was 7.2 months. The principal adverse event was neutropenia. The combination of gemcitabine, UFT, plus oral leucovorin shows significant antitumor activity and a beneficial clinical effect with an acceptable level of toxicity.