Paclitaxel,carboplatin, and topotecan in the treatment of patients with small cell lung cancer: a phase II trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, toxicity, and efficacy of a novel three-drug regimen containing paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan followed by oral etoposide in the first-line treatment of patients with small cell lung carcinoma. METHODS: One hundred five patients with previously untreated, limited stage or extensive stage small cell lung carcinoma were treated in this multicenter, community-based, Phase II trial. All patients received paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) by 1-hour intravenous (i.v.) infusion on Day 1, carboplatin at an area under the serum concentration-time curve of 5.0 i.v. on Day 1, and topotecan 0.75 mg/ m(2) i.v. on Days 1-3. The treatment regimen was repeated at 21-day intervals for 4 courses. Patients with limited stage disease also received radiation therapy (45 grays [Gy]; in single daily fractions of 1.8 Gy) beginning concurrently with the third course of chemotherapy. Patients who had an objective response or stable disease after 4 courses of combined paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan then received 3 courses of oral etoposide (50 mg alternating with 100 mg for 10 consecutive days) repeated at 21-day intervals. RESULTS: Treatment with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan produced response rates of 88% and 93% in patients with extensive stage disease and limited stage disease, respectively. The median survival for patients with extensive stage and limited stage disease was 8.3 months and 17.2 months, respectively. The addition of oral etoposide was feasible, but there was no suggestion that it prolonged remission. This three- drug regimen was associated with acceptable toxicity in patients with a good performance status, although it was tolerated very poorly by patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2; 5 of 12 patients (42%) had treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Although this three-drug regimen was active in the treatment of patients with small cell lung carcinoma, it was more toxic than standard platinum and etoposide regimens and provided no apparent improvement in efficacy. Further investigation of topotecan as a component of first-line therapy should focus on two-drug combination regimens in which the topotecan dose can be optimized. Routine use of three-drug regimens in patients with small cell lung carcinoma should await demonstration of superiority in randomized trials.     

Phase II trial of carboplatin, gemcitabine, and capecitabine in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site

BACKGROUND: The purposes of this study were to evaluate efficacy and toxicity of the combination of carboplatin, gemcitabine, and capecitabine in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP). METHODS: Patients with CUP received carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL a minute intravenously Day 1, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously Days 1 and 8, and capecitabine 1600 mg/m(2) orally in divided doses, Days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle for up to 8 cycles. The primary endpoint of the study was objective response rate by intent-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were treated (median age, 58 years; men:women ratio, 19:14). Most patients had a baseline performance status of 1. The objective response rate was 39.4% (95% CI, 22.9%-57.9%) in all patients, 36.4% in 22 patients with well to moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma, and 40.0% in 20 patients with liver metastases. Median progression-free survival time was 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.4%-8.0%), and median survival time was 7.6 months (95% CI, 6.3-14.1). One and 2-year survival rates were 35.6% and 14.2%, respectively. The most frequent grade > or =3 adverse events were neutropenia (67%), thrombocytopenia (48%), and anemia (33%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of carboplatin, gemcitabine, and capecitabine is active in CUP, especially in patients with liver metastases. This regimen may be a potential therapy for CUP patients with good performance status, particularly those with a suspected origin below the diaphragm.     

A phase II trial of methotrexate, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin in the treatment of invasive and metastatic urothelial carcinoma

BACKGROUND: The current treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma generates high response rates but is associated with poor overall survival. The current study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of a new combination of active drugs in the treatment of urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with muscle invasive or metastatic urothelial carcinoma were enrolled. Fifteen patients (63%) had metastatic disease whereas 9 patients had T2-T4 disease. Three patients were unevaluable for response because of significant toxicity. Patients were treated every 28 days with methotrexate, 60 mg/m(2), intravenously (i.v.) on Day 1; cisplatin, 25 mg/m(2)/day, by continuous i.v. infusion on Days 2-6; 5-flurouracil (5-FU) 800 mg/m(2)/day by continuous i.v. infusion on Days 3-6; and leucovorin, 500 mg/m(2)/day, by continuous i.v. infusion on Days 2-6. Dosage in subsequent cycles was adjusted according to toxicity. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 81 months (range, 53-97+ months). The overall response rate (complete response + partial response) for all 24 patients was 63% (95% confidence interval, 41-81%). The median survival was 65 months in the patients with muscle invasive disease and 17 months in the patients with metastatic disease. The duration of response in patients with metastatic disease was 6 months (range, 4-19 months). Toxicity was significant, with 82% of patients experiencing Common Toxicity Criteria Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and 63% experiencing Grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia. However, only three patients developed febrile neutropenia and gastrointestinal and neurologic toxicity was moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of methotrexate, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin represents an active regimen in the treatment of urothelial carcinoma with a moderate toxicity profile. As new drugs are found to treat urothelial carcinoma, further studies will be needed to evaluate the role of traditional agents such as 5-fluorouracil and methotrexate in new combination chemotherapeutic regimens.     

Phase II trial of paclitaxel,estramustine, etoposide,and carboplatin in the treatment of patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Preclinical data suggest that the combination of intravenous (i.v.) paclitaxel, carboplatin, oral etoposide, and oral estramustine (TEEC) has significant activity in patients with advanced, hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. The authors conducted this clinical trial to evaluate the addition of carboplatin to the three-drug combination of paclitaxel, estramustine, and etoposide (TEE). METHODS: Twenty patients with carcinoma of the prostate that was progressing despite hormone therapy were enrolled on this Phase II trial. Patients were treated with oral estramustine, 280 mg three times daily, and oral etoposide, 50 mg/m2, once daily on Days 1-7, with i.v. paclitaxel, 135 mg/m2, over 1 hour followed by carboplatin (area under the curve, 5) on Day 2 of each 21-day treatment cycle. Patients were evaluated for response after three cycles, and three additional cycles were given to responding or stable patients. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were evaluable for response, and 12 patients had measurable disease at baseline. The measurable response rate was 58% (7 of 12 patients; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 28-85%), and all of those were partial responses. Eleven patients had decreases >50% from their baseline prostate specific antigen levels during therapy, for a response rate of 58% (95% CI, 34-80%) by this criterion. The median time to disease progression was 5.5 months, with a median survival of 14.2 months. Major toxicities included Grade (according to version 2 of the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria) 4 neutropenia in 4 patients, Grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 4 patients, and anemia > or = Grade 3 in 4 patients. One patient had a deep vein thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of TEEC was active in patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. The regimen was tolerable, with primarily hematologic toxicity. The addition of carboplatin to TEE did not appear to add to the efficacy of the three-drug combination of antimicrotubule agents.     

Phase II trial of dose-dense paclitaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin with filgrastim support in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BACKGROUND: The current study evaluated the feasibility and clinical activity of a combination of paclitaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and leucovorin administered on a biweekly schedule to patients with recurrent or unresectable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). METHODS: Patients with recurrent or unresectable HNSCC were eligible if they had received a previous regimen of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, concurrent chemoradiotherapy, or no previous systemic therapy. Patients received paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 on Day 1), cisplatin (35 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 2), leucovorin (200 mg/m2 on Day 1), and 5-FU (1000 mg/m2 per day as a 48-hour continuous intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 2) every 2 weeks. Patients received subcutaneous filgrastim (300 microg per day) on Days 3-9 of each cycle. Treatment was administered on an outpatient basis for a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients received a combined total of 194 treatment cycles. Eighteen complete responses (51%) and 12 partial responses (34%) were documented, for an overall response rate of 86% (30 of 35 patients). The median progression-free survival duration was 14 months, and the median overall survival duration was 18 months. Two toxicity-related deaths were documented (one due to neutropenic sepsis and the other due to catheter-related pulmonary embolism). Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in one patient. Other severe (Grade 3 or 4) toxic effects included mucositis (14%), anemia (6%), thrombosis (6%), thrombocytopenia (3%), and neuropathy (3%). CONCLUSIONS: The current dose-dense, four-agent, taxane-containing biweekly schedule was feasible and effective in patients with recurrent or unresectable HNSCC. However, given the single-center nature of the current study and the highly selected study population, further validation of these findings is recommended.     

Phase I/II trial of paclitaxel by 1-hour infusion, carboplatin, and gemcitabine in the treatment of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma

BACKGROUND: The combination of paclitaxel and carboplatin is widely used in the treatment of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. In this Phase I/II study the authors evaluated the feasibility, toxicity, and efficacy of adding a third active antineoplastic agent, gemcitabine, to the paclitaxel/carboplatin combination for the treatment of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with advanced (AJCC Stage IIIB or IV) nonsmall cell lung carcinoma previously untreated with chemotherapy were eligible for this trial. The maximum tolerated doses, determined in the Phase I trial and subsequently used in the Phase II trial, were: paclitaxel, 200 mg/m2, as a 1-hour infusion on Day 1; carboplatin, at area under the curve dose of 5.0 intravenously (i.v.), on Day 1; and gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2 i.v., on Days 1 and 8. Treatment courses were repeated every 21 days. The Phase II study was conducted in 13 community-based practices in the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network; 77 patients were treated between December 1996 and September 1997. RESULTS: Thirty-four of 77 patients (44%) in the Phase II trial had major responses (partial responses, 32 patients and complete responses, 2 patients). An additional 25 patients (33%) had stable disease or minor response; only 23% of patients progressed or were removed from study at or prior to first reevaluation. The median survival was 9.4 months, with a 45% actuarial 1-year survival rate. Myelosuppression was the most common toxicity, with Grade 3/4 NCI Common Toxicity Criteria leukopenia and thrombocytopenia in 49% and 45% of patients, respectively. However, only 11 patients (14%) required hospitalization for neutropenia/ fever, and none had bleeding complications. Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included fatigue (41%), arthralgias/myalgias (26%), peripheral neuropathy (8%), nausea/emesis (6%), and hypersensitivity reactions (4%). There was one treatment-related death due to sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: This three-drug regimen is active and has acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. Myelosuppression, particularly thrombocytopenia, is increased in comparison to the paclitaxel/carboplatin regimen. Fatigue also may be increased, but other nonhematologic toxicities are not altered substantially by adding gemcitabine. Although the response rate and median survival are improved modestly compared with our previous experience with paclitaxel/carboplatin, definitive conclusions regarding the efficacy of this regimen await the completion of randomized trials.     

Phase II study of preoperative paclitaxel/cisplatin with radiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer

PURPOSE: Preoperative paclitaxel-based chemoradiotherapy may improve the response rates and survival in patients with localized esophageal cancer. We evaluated paclitaxel-based induction chemoradiotherapy in patients with localized esophageal cancer to determine its feasibility, clinical response, pathologic response, and overall survival. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1995 and 1998, 50 patients were enrolled in this study. At study entry, patients were categorized as either resectable or unresectable according to evaluation by an experienced thoracic surgeon. All patients were treated with paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on Day 1, 29 with radiotherapy to 3,000 cGy in 15 fractions. Resectable patients underwent esophagectomy 4 weeks later. Postoperatively, patients received two cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on Day 1 and 5-fluorouracil 350 mg/m2 and leucovorin 300 mg on Days 1-3, given every 28 days. Patients who were deemed unsuitable for resection from the outset continued radiotherapy to a total dose of 6,000 cGy. RESULTS: Of the 50 patients, all began neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 40 patients underwent surgery, and 25 patients completed postoperative chemotherapy. A pathologic complete response was seen in 7 patients (17.5%). Patients with a pathologic response had a median survival of 32.4 months vs. 14.4 months for nonresponders (p < 0.001). Patients with a clinical response had a median survival of 25.2 months compared with 15.6 months for nonresponders (p = 0.002). At a median follow up of 19.8 months (range 2.4-100.8), the median survival was 20.4 months and the 3-year overall survival rate was 23.2%. CONCLUSION: Although preoperative cisplatin/paclitaxel with 3,000 cGy was tolerable, this multimodality regimen did not appear to be superior to standard cisplatin/5-fluorouracil-containing regimens and its use is not recommended.     

A phase II evaluation of a 3-hour infusion of paclitaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: Southwest Oncology Group study 0007

BACKGROUND: Previous data from an institutional pilot study in patients with advanced or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) who received treated a combined chemotherapy regimen of paclitaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil indicated an overall response rate of 60% and a median survival of 6 months. To validate these results and to determine the feasibility of this combination, a Phase II study was conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG S0007). METHODS: Patients with advanced or recurrent SCCHN were eligible if they had received 1 previous regimen of induction/adjuvant chemotherapy or no prior systemic therapy. Patients received treatment with paclitaxel (135 mg/m(2) on Day 1), followed by cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) on Day 1), and 5-fluorouracil (1000 mg/m(2)per day as a 96-hour continuous infusion on Days 1-4) every 21 days. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients received a combined total of 286 cycles of chemotherapy. Sixty-nine patients were evaluable for response. There were 5 complete responses (7%) and 23 partial responses (33%) partial responses, for an overall response rate of 41%. The median progression-free survival was 4 months, and the median overall survival was 10 months. Six treatment-related deaths were documented, including deaths in 2 patients who had a Zubrod PS of 2. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]) was observed in 47% of patients. Other Grade 3 or 4 adverse events included mucositis (34% of patients), nausea (20% of patients), anemia (9% of patients), and neuropathy (8% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of paclitaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil had efficacy similar to that of standard treatment regimens in patients with advanced or recurrent SCCHN but with increased toxicity.     

Paclitaxel, carboplatin, and gemcitabine in the treatment of patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of combination chemotherapy with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and gemcitabine in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with metastatic or locally unresectable transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium who had received either no or one previous systemic chemotherapy regimen were eligible. All patients received chemotherapy with intravenous paclitaxel at a dose of 200 mg/m(2) on Day 1, intravenous carboplatin at an area under the serum concentration-time curve of 5.0 on Day 1, and intravenous gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8. Treatment courses were repeated every 21 days. Patients were evaluated for response after they completed two treatment courses; patients who achieved an objective response and stable disease continued treatment for a total of six courses or until tumor progression. RESULTS: Sixty patients were treated between January 2000 and September 2003. Thirty-five patients (58%) had > or = 1 visceral sites of metastases, and only 4 patients (7%) had received any previous systemic chemotherapy. Twenty-six patients (43%) had achieved objective responses to treatment (12% complete responses). The median actuarial survival was 11 months, and the actuarial 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 46% and 27%, respectively. Myelosuppression was the most frequent toxicity, and Grade 3-4 neutropenia (using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]) occurred in 72% of patients (46% of courses). Ten patients were hospitalized for the treatment of neutropenia and fever, and 1 patient died of treatment-related causes. Nonhematologic toxicities were relatively uncommon. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and gemcitabine was an active and tolerable regimen for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. However, the regimen was more toxic and showed no obvious incremental increase in efficacy compared retrospectively with various two-drug regimens.     

Results of a phase II study of weekly paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced carcinoma of unknown primary origin: a reasonable regimen for the community-based clinic?

Optimal treatment for cancer of unknown primary (CUP) can challenge clinicians. This study sought to determine the efficacy and toxicity of weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin in CUP. Forty-two subjects enrolled. Treatment was intravenous paclitaxel (80 mg/m²) plus carboplatin (AUC = 2) on Days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days. Seven (18 percent) responded (complete = 2, partial = 5); median survival was 8.5 months; estimated survival (12 and 24-month) was 33 and 17 percent, respectively. Median time to progression was 3.7 months, and estimated progression-free survival (12 and 24 months) was 14 and 7 percent, respectively. Median duration of response was 17.3 months. This combination produced modest antitumor activity in advanced CUP.     

Triplet combination of gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and carboplatin followed by maintenance 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid in patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma

BACKGROUND.: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a disease that is highly responsive to various chemotherapeutic agents. In the metastatic setting, 2-drug combination chemotherapy generally provides a response rate of 55% to 75%, and median survival of 10 to 12 months. The objective of the current study was to assess the efficacy of a 3-drug combination followed by maintenance treatment in patients with metastatic NPC. METHODS.: Patients with metastatic NPC were treated with a combination of gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2), paclitaxel at a dose of 70 mg/m(2), and carboplatin at an area under the concentration-time-curve (AUC) of 2.5 on Days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Patients who achieved partial or complete response continued to receive weekly 5-fluorouracil at a dose of 450 mg/m(2) and leucovorin at a dose of 30 mg/m(2) for 48 weeks. RESULTS.: Twenty-eight patients were recruited. Twenty-two (79%) patients had >/=2 sites of disease. Toxicities were mainly from bone marrow suppression, with 79% grade 3/4 neutropenia, 32% grade 3/4 anemia, and 29% grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria). The overall response rate to the 3-drug regimen was 86%, with a complete response rate of 11%. The median duration of response was 8 months and the median overall survival was 22 months. CONCLUSIONS.: This regimen of a 3-drug combination followed by maintenance is feasible and has demonstrated an encouraging response rate and overall survival. Cancer 2008. (c) 2008 American Cancer Society.     

Comparison of outcomes for elderly patients treated with weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus the standard 3-weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin for advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes between elderly (aged > or = 70 years) patients treated with paclitaxel on a weekly basis and with carboplatin (every 4 weeks) versus the standard 3-weekly regimen of carboplatin and paclitaxel for first-line therapy of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. METHODS: Of the 444 patients enrolled, 136 (31%) were aged > or = 70 years. Seventy-two patients were randomized to the weekly schedule (paclitaxel, 100 mg/m(2) weekly for 3 of 4 weeks; carboplatin, area under the curve [AUC] = 6 mg/mL.min on Day 1 every 4 weeks), and 64 patients were randomized to the standard schedule (paclitaxel, 225 mg/m(2); carboplatin, AUC = 6 mg/mL.min on Day 1 every 21 days). Patients with stable disease or objective response after 4 cycles of therapy were eligible for maintenance therapy with weekly paclitaxel (70 mg/m(2), 3 of 4 weeks). RESULTS: The response rate for elderly patients was 26% on the weekly regimen and 19% on the standard schedule. The median survival duration for the weekly and the standard schedules was 37 weeks and 31 weeks, respectively. The 1-year survival rates were similar at 31% and 33%. Grade 3 to 4 anemia was more common on the weekly schedule (16% vs 6%), whereas grade 3 neuropathy was less common (5.5% vs 9.5%). Nausea and emesis were also less frequent on the weekly schedule. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy was similar between the weekly regimen and the standard regimen of carboplatin and paclitaxel for elderly patients with advanced NSCLC and may be advantageous based on its favorable tolerability profile.     

A phase II study of weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

We conducted this phase II study to explore the efficacy and safety of weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Elderly patients (> or = 70 years old) of stage IIIB, IV, or recurrent NSCLC with PS 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients received paclitaxel at a dose of 70 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, 15, and carboplatin at the target dose of the area under the curve (AUC) of six on Day 1 every 28 days for at least two cycles. Forty-two patients were enrolled and 40 patients were treated with a median of three cycles (range, 1-5). The overall response rate (ORR) was 45% (95% confidence interval, 30-60%). The median survival time (MST) was 14 months and the 1-year survival rate was 62%. Twenty-eight patients (70%) had grade 3/4 neutropenia and two patients (5%) experienced grade 3 febrile neutropenia. Non-hematological toxicities were generally mild to moderate and grade 3 peripheral neuropathy was seen in one patient (3%). There was one treatment-related death by infection due to neutropenia. Weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin combination chemotherapy was an effective and safe regimen in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. A randomized trial comparing this treatment with the conventional tri-weekly regimen of paclitaxel and carboplatin is warranted.     

A phase I study of UFT/leucovorin, carboplatin, and paclitaxel in combination with external beam radiation therapy for advanced esophageal carcinoma

PURPOSE: Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy (RT) are used to treat patients with esophageal cancer. The optimal combination of chemotherapeutic agents with RT is not well established. We evaluated the safety and preliminary efficacy of a combination of UFT/leucovorin, carboplatin, and paclitaxel with RT in a Phase I study of patients with advanced esophageal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the esophagus initially received UFT/leucovorin, carboplatin, and paclitaxel with RT (1.8 Gy daily to 45 Gy). After completion, the disease was restaged and patients were evaluated for surgery. Primary end points included determination of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and a recommended Phase II dose. Secondary objectives included determination of non-DLTs, as well as preliminary radiographic and pathologic response rates. RESULTS: Twelve patients were enrolled (11 men, 1 woman). All were assessable for toxicity and efficacy. One of 6 patients at Dose Level 1 (UFT/leucovorin, 200/30 mg twice daily on RT days; carboplatin, area under the curve [AUC] 5, Weeks 1 and 4; paclitaxel, 175 mg/m2 Weeks 1 and 4) had a DLT (febrile neutropenia). Of these 6 patients, 4 underwent esophagectomy and none achieved a pathologic complete response. Six patients were then enrolled at Dose Level 2 (UFT/leucovorin, 300/30 mg in the morning and 200/30 mg in the evening on RT days; carboplatin, AUC 5, Weeks 1 and 4; paclitaxel, 175 mg/m2 Weeks 1 and 4). Two of 6 patients at Dose Level 2 developed DLTs (febrile neutropenia in both). Esophagectomy was performed in 3 patients, with 2 achieving a pathologic complete response. CONCLUSIONS: Maximum tolerated doses in this study were UFT/leucovorin, 200/30 mg twice daily on RT days; carboplatin, AUC 5, Weeks 1 and 4; and paclitaxel, 175 mg/m2 Weeks 1 and 4 when delivered with external RT. In this small study, this regimen appears active, but toxic.     

A phase I study of sequential administration of escalating doses of intravenous paclitaxel, oral topotecan, and fixed-dose oral etoposide in patients with solid tumors

BACKGROUND: Based on preclinical findings and on the clinical antitumor efficacy of sequential paclitaxel/topotecan and topotecan/etoposide, the authors sought to define the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) associated with a sequential combination of paclitaxel, topotecan, and etoposide in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: The MTDs were determined through standard dose escalation in cohorts of three patients. Patients with refractory solid tumors and performance status < or = 2 were treated with intravenous paclitaxel 50-110 mg/m(2) (Day 1), oral topotecan 0.5-2.0 mg/m(2) (Days 2-4), and oral etoposide 160 mg/m(2) (Days 5-7) during every 21-day cycle. For dose-limiting neutropenia, granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was administered on Day 8 in subsequent cohorts. Blood samples were obtained before treatment during Cycle 1 (Days 1, 2, and 5) for topoisomerase I assessment. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients received a combined total of 129 cycles. The MTDs were paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2), topotecan 1.5 mg/m(2), and etoposide 160 mg/m(2) without G-CSF. In minimally pretreated patients, G-CSF allowed paclitaxel dose escalation to 110 mg/m(2). Three patients (11%) had radiologic partial responses, and 4 patients (14%) had stable disease. Day 2 topoisomerase I levels increased by 2-15 times relative to baseline levels in 7 of 14 patients analyzed (50%). CONCLUSIONS: The novel sequential combination that was evaluated generally was well tolerated and active in patients with refractory solid tumors. Based on hematologic DLTs, the authors recommend further evaluation of paclitaxel 110 mg/m(2), topotecan 1.5 mg/m(2), and etoposide 160 mg/m(2) with G-CSF support in minimally pretreated patients.     

紫杉醇联合卡铂与氟尿嘧啶联合卡铂治疗艾滋病并发晚期阴茎癌的临床对比分析

目的比较紫杉醇联合卡铂与5-氟尿嘧啶（5-Fu）联合卡铂治疗艾滋病并发晚期阴茎癌患者临床疗效、不良反应及预后。方法选择经病理或细胞学以及血清学证实的58例艾滋病并发晚期阴茎癌患者,其中30例接受紫杉醇联合卡铂方案化疗（TC组）,28例接受5-Fu联合卡铂方案化疗（FC组）,按实体瘤的疗效评价标准(RECIST)1.0版评价近期疗效,按美国癌症研究所常见毒性判定标准（NCI-CTC）3.0版评价不良反应。结果58例均可评估疗效,TC组和FC组的客观总有效率分别为56.7%和17.9%（χ²=9.265,P=0.002）,中位疾病进展时间分别为11.15月和7.22月（χ²=6.737,P=0.009）,中位生存时间分别为17.36月和9.11月（χ²=10.646,P=0.001）。两组主要不良反应均为骨髓抑制及恶心呕吐,Ⅲ～Ⅳ度白细胞减少发生率分别为46.4%和40.0%（χ²=0.222,P=0.637）,Ⅲ～Ⅳ度恶心呕吐的发生率分别为36.0%和34.78%（χ²=0.008,P=0.930）。结论紫杉醇联合卡铂化疗方案治疗艾滋病并发晚期阴茎癌是安全和有效的。     

Paclitaxel, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin (TFL) in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer

To assess the activity of paclitaxel in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin in breast cancer, a phase II trial was conducted in women with metastatic disease. Toxicity, response rate, median survival, median duration of response, and median time to disease progression were measured. Between January 1994 and May 1996, 47 patients with metastatic breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) < or = 2 who had previously been treated with chemotherapy received 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel over 3 hours on day 1. After paclitaxel administration, 300 mg intravenous (i.v.) leucovorin over 30 minutes was administered followed by 350 mg/m2 i.v. push 5-FU. Both 5-FU and leucovorin were given on days 1-3. Treatment was repeated every 28 days for a minimum of 6 cycles per patient. Two (4%) patients had a complete response and 21 (45%) patients had a partial response for an overall response rate of 49% (95% confidence interval: 35%-63%). The median survival was 17.7 months, median duration of response was 8.6 months, and median time to disease progression was 6.3 months. There was no statistical difference in survival or time to progression between anthracycline-naive, anthracycline-sensitive, and anthracycline-resistant patients. Nine (19%) patients had grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, and no patient required blood or platelet transfusion. The most frequently observed nonhematologic toxicities were arthralgia and myalgia. Pharmacokinetic data were obtained on 19 patients. Responders had higher peak plasma concentrations of paclitaxel than nonresponders (4.46 vs. 2.9 micrograms/mL; P = 0.02). Paclitaxel/5-fluorouracil/leucovorin is an active, well-tolerated regimen for patients with metastatic breast cancer.     

Weekly paclitaxel, estramustine phosphate, and oral etoposide in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma: results of a Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network phase II trial

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of weekly paclitaxel, oral etoposide, and estramustine phosphate in the treatment of patients with advanced, hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma who had received no more than one previous chemotherapy regimen were eligible for this trial. Forty-two patients were treated between February 1998 and March 2000. Toxicity was excessive in the first 3 patients treated (Grade 3-4 leukopenia, 3 patients; death due to sepsis, 1 patient); the remaining 39 patients received lower doses of etoposide and estramustine phosphate (paclitaxel 50 mg/m(2) as a 1-hour, intravenous infusion on Days 1, 8, 15; etoposide 50 mg orally twice daily on Days 1-10; and estramustine phosphate 280 mg orally 3 times daily on Days 1-10). Courses were repeated every 28 days. Patients were evaluated for objective and/or serologic response after two courses of treatment; responding patients continued treatment for six courses. RESULTS: Fourteen of 40 evaluable patients (35%) had either an objective response or a serologic response to treatment. The median survival for the entire group was 9.5 months, with 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year survival rates of 38%, 12%, and 10%, respectively. Neutropenia was the most common Grade 3-4 toxicity and occurred in 38% of patients (11% of courses). Thirteen patients (33%) had severe fatigue, and 2 patients had treatment-related deaths due to sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Although the three-drug combination had activity in patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma, the results did not appear any better than the results achieved with less toxic taxane/estramustine phosphate combinations. Further development of this three-drug regimen is not recommended.     

Paclitaxel, carboplatin, and gemcitabine in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a Phase II trial using a triplet combination

BACKGROUND: Patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are treated primarily with radiotherapy. In the disseminated state, platinum-based, 2-drug combination regimens yielded response rates of 55-75%, achieving a median survival of 10-12 months. With the proven efficacy of second-generation cytotoxics like paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with metastatic NPC, the authors hypothesized that a triplet combination incorporating these newer cytotoxics may improve treatment results. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with metastatic NPC were treated with combination chemotherapy that included paclitaxel 70 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8, carboplatin dosed to area under curve of 5 on Day 1, and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8 every 21 days for a maximum of 8 cycles. RESULTS: Two patients achieved a complete response, and 23 patients achieved a partial response, for an overall response rate of 78%. The main toxicities were hematologic, with 41% of patients experiencing Grade 3 or 4 anemia, 41% of patients experiencing Grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, and 78% of patients experiencing Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia. The median time to disease progression was 8.1 months, and the median overall survival was 18.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and gemcitabine showed promising efficacy against metastatic NPC but at the expense of considerable toxicity.     

Carboplatin/etoposide/paclitaxel in the treatment of patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer

The purpose of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of carboplatin/etoposide/paclitaxel in patients with untreated stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and extensive small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Carboplatin was administered intravenously (i.v.) at an area under the curve (AUC) of 6 with etoposide at either 80 or 100 mg/m2 i.v. days 1-3 and paclitaxel at 175 or 200 mg/m2 i.v. over 3 hours along with 5 g/kg of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor subcutaneously on days 4-18, repeated every 3 weeks for 6 courses. Thirty-one patients (five NSCLC and 26 SCLC) entered into this phase I study. The median age was 63 (range, 42 to 74 years), with 24 males and seven females. The recommended dose level for phase II testing was carboplatin AUC = 6, etoposide 80 mg/m2 days 1-3, and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 over 3 hours. With seven patients at this level, 14% had grade 4 neutropenia, 14% had grade 4 thrombocytopenia, none had grade 2/3 neurotoxicity, and no toxic deaths occurred. One of five (20%) patients with NSCLC responded, and 19 of 22 (86%) evaluable SCLC patients experienced a response to therapy. SCLC patients had a median survival of 10 months. The combination of carboplatin/etoposide/paclitaxel has significant activity with acceptable toxicity in patients with extensive SCLC.