Carboplatin and gemcitabine in metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium: Effective treatment of patients with poor prognostic features

Purpose:To evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine andcarboplatin in consecutive patients presenting with locally advanced ormetastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium (TCC). Patients and methods:Seventeen consecutive patients referred toa single institution with locally advanced or metastatic TCC were treated withcarboplatin AUC 5 on day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on day 1 and8 of a 21-day cycle. All patients were assessable for response and toxicity.Minimal eligibility criteria were used to minimize patient selection. Results:Seventeen patients with measurable stage IV TCC of theurothelium were treated. The median age was 69 years (range 54–78), themedian creatinine clearance was 56 ml/min (range 34–90) and 30%of patients had an ECOG performance score of two. Nine patients (53%)had visceral metastases and the majority of patients had multiple sites ofmetastases. There were three complete responses, seven partial responses, foran overall response rate of 58.8%. Responses were seen at all sitesincluding the liver. One patient had a response within a previously irradiatedfield and three patients with prior chemotherapy had responses. Median overallsurvival was 10.5 months and median time to progression was 4.6 months.Toxicity was primarily haematologic with six patients having grade 3neutropenia and six patients with grade 4 neutropenia. There were five casesof grade 3 and three cases of grade 4 thrombocytopenia. There were no episodesof febrile neutropenia and only one patient required admission for managementof toxicity. Thirteen patients required dose reduction or delay due toneutropenia or thrombocytopenia. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusion:The combination of carboplatin and gemcitabine isactive in metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium withmanageable toxicity in a relatively elderly group of patients with some poorprognostic features.     

Phase II trial of bimonthly leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil and gemcitabine for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (FOLFUGEM)

Background:Gemcitabine alone or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) according to several schedules are used for palliation of metastatic and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic adenocarcinoma. This study was designed to test the efficacy of the leucovorin–5-FU and gemcitabine combination. Patients and methods:This phase II trial combined a simplified bimonthly LV5FU2 with gemcitabine: leucovorin 400 mg/m² in a two-hour infusion, followed by 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m² bolus and 2 or 3 g/m² continuous infusion over 46 hours; gemcitabine 1 g/m² was infused over 30 min on day 3 after 5-FU. Treatment was repeated every two weeks. Gemcitabine dose could be increased (250 mg/m² every two cycles up to 1500 mg/m²) in the absence of NCI-CTC toxicity >2. Results:Among the 62 patients included in this study, 22 had LA and 40 had metastatic disease. Objective response rate for the 54 patients with measurable disease was 25.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14%–37.8%) and 22.6% (95% CI: 12%–33.2%) in the intent-to-treat population; the clinical benefit rate for the 59 assessable patients was 49.2%. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 4.8 and 9 months, respectively, with 32.3% of patients alive at 1 year. The most frequent toxicity (grade 3–4) was neutropenia (56.5%) usually asymptomatic (1.1% febrile neutropenia), but requiring decreases of 5-FU and gemcitabine doses. Unexpected complete alopecia occurred in 97% of patients. Conclusions:Palliative effects, response rate and survival observed in this multicenter study seem to be superior to those obtained with gemcitabine or 5-FU alone, despite a limiting hematological toxicity.     

Phase II trial of cisplatin and gemcitabine in advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck

Background: To evaluate the toxicity profile and efficacy of cisplatin combined with gemcitabine in patients with irresectable locally recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.Patients and methods: Gemcitabine was given at a dose of 800 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15, plus cisplatin at a dose of 50 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8; every four weeks.Results: Twenty-four patients with a median age of 59 years (range 42–74) were included. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 22 patients were assessable for response. Eleven cases had advanced recurrent locoregional disease while 13 patients had metastatic disease. One CR (4.7%) and four PR (18%) were observed, for an overall response rate of 22.7% (95% CI: 8%–42%). The main toxicity was hematological: neutropenia grade 3–4 in 28% of the cycles and thrombocytopenia grade 3–4 in 16%. The most significant non-hematological toxicity was asthenia grade 2–3 in 24% of the cycles.Conclusions: This cisplatin plus gemcitabine combination schedule has a favourable toxicity profile with a discrete activity in patients with locally recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck.     

The combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine is an active regimen as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated with taxanes and/or anthracyclines: a phase I-II study

Purpose. To evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine and vinorelbine (GemVin), in patients with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with anthracyclines alone or with taxanes. Patients and methods. Nine patients were entered into the phase I and 50 patients were entered into the phase II study. Gemcitabine was administered beginning with the dose of 800 mg/m² and vinorelbine was given at the fixed dose of 25 mg/m², both on days 1 and 8, every 21 days. Escalated dose levels of gemcitabine were planned by increments of 200 mg/m² per level. The median age of the 50 assessable patients for the phase II study was 56.5 years (range 30–70) and median performance status (PS, ECOG score), 1 (range 0–2). The dominant sites of metastases were viscera in 40, bone in five and soft tissue in five patients. First-line chemotherapy for metastatic disease with taxanes and anthracyclines or with anthracyclines alone was administered in 36 and 14 patients, respectively. Results. The optimal schedule for the combination was gemcitabine 800 mg/m² and vinorelbine 25 mg/m². The maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine was 1000 mg/m², with grade 4 neutropenia occurring in two cases at this dose level. Overall, 267 cycles were given to the 50 patients enrolled into the phase II (mean 5.3; range 3–9). The schedule was well tolerated: three patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia and another four patients experienced grade 3 anemia. Non-hematological toxicities were moderate. A major objective response was observed in 42% of patients (95% confidence interval (CI), 28–57%), with complete remission in four (8%) and partial response in 17 (34%) patients. The median time to progression was 6 months. Activity as well as toxicity were similar in the subgroups of the patients pretreated either with combinations of taxanes and anthracyclines or anthracyclines alone. Conclusions. The optimal GemVin schedule is an effective and well tolerated second-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer pre-treated with anthracycline – based schedules or with combinations of anthracyclines and taxanes.     

Paclitaxel and gemcitabine combination in a biweekly schedule in patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer: a phase i study

Purpose: This phase I study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) of the paclitaxel–gemcitabine combination in a biweekly schedule in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Treatment was administered on an outpatient basis every 2 weeks: paclitaxel over a 1-h IV infusion and gemcitabine as a 30-min IV infusion immediately following paclitaxel. Results: Twenty-nine patients were treated at six different dose levels, ranging from paclitaxel 135–175 mg/m² and gemcitabine 1,500–3,000 mg/m². A total of 198 cycles were administered (median 7, range 1–13). DLTs in the first two cycles were grade 4 neutropenia and myocardial ischemia at the dose level paclitaxel/gemcitabine 150/2,000 mg/m², febrile neutropenia and grade 4 neutropenia at the dose level paclitaxel/gemcitabine 175/2,500 mg/m², fatal pneumonitis, sudden death and grade 3 neutropenia at the dose level paclitaxel/gemcitabine 175/3,000 mg/m². The MTD was paclitaxel 175 mg/m² and gemcitabine 2,500 mg/m². The average dose intensity at this dose level was 98%. The overall intent-to-treat response rate was 35.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.97% - 53.47%). Overall median survival was 36 weeks (95% CI, 24-48). Conclusion: Paclitaxel and gemcitabine can be safely administered at a high dose intensity on an every-other-week schedule. The recommended phase II dose is paclitaxel 175 mg/m² and gemcitabine 2,500 mg/m².     

Weekly gemcitabine and cisplatin combination therapy in patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium: A phase II clinical trial

Purpose: To determine the efficacy of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination therapy in patients with advanced and/or metastatic transitional cell urothelial carcinoma.Patients and methods: Forty-two chemonaïve patients with Karnofsky performance status (KPS) 70 were treated with cisplatin 35 mg/m² followed by gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (30 min i.v. infusion) on days 1, 8, and 15 every twenty-eight days.Results: Thirty-eight patients were evaluable for efficacy. Half had visceral disease. There were seven complete (18%) and nine partial responses (24%), for a response rate of 42% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 26%–59%). Responses were independently reviewed. Median response duration was 13.5 months (95% CI: 8.5–18.1 months), median time to progressive disease 7.2 months (95% CI: 4.0–9.1 months) and median survival 12.5 months (95% CI: 8.1–18.7 months); one-year survival was 52%. Laboratory toxicities included leucopenia (44% grade 3; 17% grade 4), neutropenia (25% grade 3; 33% grade 4) and thrombocytopenia (29% grade 3; 49% grade 4). Four patients had grade 4 symptomatic toxicity (three nausea and vomiting, one diarrhoea). There were no grade 4 infections and no toxic deaths.Conclusions: The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin is active in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The weekly schedule of cisplatin is considered inappropriate.     

Phase II trial of gemcitabine in patients with previously untreated metastatic cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction

Background:There were approximately 12,500 cases of esophageal carcinoma diagnosed in the US in 1992 and 12,200 deaths. The impact of chemotherapy on patients with metastatic disease is marginal with a median survival of only five months. Gemcitabine (LY188011,2,2,–difluorodeoxycytidine: dFdC), an analog of cytosine arabinoside (ara-C), is a pyrimidine antimetabolite. Gemcitabine has shown interesting clinical activity in initial phase II clinical trials in a variety of malignancies, including the aerodigestive malignancies, squamous-cell carcinoma of the head/neck and both non-small-cell and small-cell lung cancer. Patients and methods:A total of 21 patients with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic esophageal carcinoma were entered. Nineteen patients were evaluable for toxicity and seventeen patients were evaluable for response. Gemcitabine was administered intravenously at 1250 mg/m² over 30–60 minutes on days 1, 8, and 15 followed by 1 week of rest. This four-week schedule defined a cycle of treatment. Patients may have received a maximum of six cycles. Results:Gemcitabine was well tolerated with minimal non-hematologic toxicity and grade 3–4 anemia, granulocytopenia, and thrombocytopenia occurring in 10.5%, 21%, and 0% of patients, respectively. No responses were seen in the seventeen evaluable patients. Conclusions:At the dose and schedule studied it would appear that gemcitabine has no activity in patients with chemotherapy-naïve esophageal carcinoma.     

Phase II trial of two-weekly gemcitabine in patients with advanced biliary?tract cancer

Background:Patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma facea dismal prognosis as no effective palliative therapy has been defined. Theaim of the present phase II investigation was to evaluate the therapeuticefficacy and tolerance of a two-weekly high-dose gemcitabine regimen in thispatient population. Patients and methods:Thirty-two consecutive patients with locallyunresectable or metastatic biliary tract cancer were enrolled in thismulticenter phase II trial. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 2200mg/m² given as a 30-min intravenous infusion every two weeks fora duration of six months unless there was prior evidence of progressivedisease. Results:After a median number of 12 treatment courses, 7 of32 (22%) patients had a partial response that lasted for a medianduration of 6.0 months (range 3.5–10.0). Fourteen additional patients(44%) had stable disease, whereas eleven patients (34%)progressed despite therapy. The median time to progression was 5.6 months(range 1.8–13.0); median survival time was 11.5 months (range3.0–24.0), and the probability of surviving beyond 12 months was44%. The tolerance of treatment was remarkable with only two patientseach experiencing grade 3 leukocytopenia, granulocytopenia and/orthrombocytopenia, and one patient had grade 3 anaemia. Similarly,nonhaematologic side effects were infrequent, and generally mild tomoderate. Conclusions:Two-weekly high-dose gemcitabine seems to representa potentially effective, safe and well-tolerated regimen for the palliativetreatment of patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.     

Paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and cisplatin in non-resectable non-small-cell lung cancer

Background: Paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and cisplatin are each active in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and with different modes of action. Hence, a phase II study combining these drugs were conducted.Patients and methods: Treatment was paclitaxel 110 mg/m² and cisplatin 60 mg/m² day 1 and 15, with gemcitabine 800 mg/m² day 1, 8, and 15, every four weeks. Patients had previously untreated NSCLC, measurable disease, age 18–70 years, performance status 2, and no brain metastases.Results: Among 49 patients, 6 (group 1) received chemotherapy as described above, while 43 patients (group 2) did not receive gemcitabine day 8. In group 1, all experienced grade 4 neutropenia and four achieved a partial response (67%). In group 2, neutropenia grade 4 occured in 58%, with one episode of febrile neutropenia and no toxic death. No other grade 4 toxicities occured, while grade 3 toxicity occured with respect to thrombocytopenia (9%), nausea/vomiting (12%), neurotoxicity (12%), and nephrotoxicity (7%). There were 3 complete and 20 partial responses (response rate 54%, 95% confidence limits 38%–69%), median response duration 29 weeks (range 10–66+), median time to progression 28 weeks (range 4–66+), median survival 46 weeks (4–89+) and one-year survival rate 42%.Conclusion: This regimen of paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and cisplatin has neutropenia as dose limiting toxicity, but septicemic episodes were rare and toxic death did not occur. Other grade 4 toxicities than neutropenia did not occur. The regimen appears safe and with a noteworthy activity both in terms of response rate, time to progression, and survival.     

Second-line chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer with monthly docetaxel and weekly gemcitabine: A phase II trial

Background:Docetaxel and gemcitabine are active againstchemotherapy-pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The purpose ofthis phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of monthlydocetaxel combined with weekly gemcitabine in NSCLC patients failing one priorregimen. Patients and methods:Forty patients were enrolled. Priorchemotherapy was a platinum-based combination in 36 patients, usingvinorelbine in 26 patients and etoposide in 10 patients. The other fourpatients had prior single agents. Tumors were refractory or resistant tofront-line therapy in 80% of patients. Treatment was gemcitabine 800mg/m² days 1, 8, 15 and docetaxel 100 mg/m² day 1, withcycles repeated every four weeks. Results:Thirteen patients responded (32.5%; 95%confidence interval (CI): 19%–49%), including one completeand 12 partial responses. Responses were observed at all metastatic sites,with similar response frequencies in platinum-sensitive andplatinum-resistant/refractory tumors. The median time to progression forresponders was nine months, with two responses lasting longer than a year.Median survival was 8.1 months. Hematologic toxicities included grade 4neutropenia in 23 patients, with 4 episodes of febrile neutropenia, grade3–4 thrombocytopenia in 9 patients, and anemia requiring red celltransfusions in 9 patients. With the exception of asthenia, severenon-hematologic toxicities were infrequent. Conclusions:Monthly docetaxel, combined with weekly gemcitabine,is an active and safe second-line therapy for NSCLC patients.     

Treatment of pancreatic cancer with a combination of docetaxel, gemcitabine and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: A phase II study of the Greek Cooperative Group for Pancreatic Cancer

Purpose:To evaluate the tolerance and efficacy of front-linedocetaxel plus gemcitabine treatment in patients with inoperable pancreaticcancer. Patients and methods:Fifty-four patients with locally advancedor metastatic pancreatic cancer were enrolled. Gemcitabine (1000mg/m²) was administered on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel (100mg/m²) on day 8, every three weeks; rh-G-CSF (150ìg/m² s.c.) was given prophylactically on days9–15. Results: Seven (13%) patients achieved partial response and18 (33%) stable disease (intent-to-treat). The median duration ofresponse was 24 weeks, time to tumour progression 32 weeks, and overallsurvival 26 weeks. Performance status was improved in 33% of patients,pain in 43%, asthenia in 16%, weight gain in 28% andappetite in 27%. Grade 3–4 neutropenia occurred in 17(31%)patients and grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia in four (4%). Six(11%) patients developed febrile neutropenia and one of them died fromsepsis. Conclusions:This combination is a relatively well-toleratedout-patient regimen for patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer.     

Alternating weekly administration of paclitaxel and gemcitabine: a phase II study in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Background We sought to evaluate toxicity and efficacy of an alternating week schedule of paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods Patients (n=27, mean age 56 years, range 27–73 years) received paclitaxel (100 mg/m² i.v. infusion over 1 h) on days 1 and 15 alternating with gemcitabine (1000 mg/m²) on days 8 and 22 of a 36-day cycle. Responses were evaluated after three cycles, and after the proposed six cycles.Results In total, 116 cycles were administered (mean 4.25 cycles per patient). Haematological toxicity was slight: febrile neutropenia (n=1) and neutropenia grade III–IV (n=5). Non-haematological toxicities included arthromyalgia grade II (n=6) and neurotoxicity grade III (n=1). Objective response was 29%, stable disease 25% and disease progression 46%. Median duration of response was 8 months (95% CI 5–11 months), median progression-free survival was 7 months (95% CI 4–11 months), median overall survival was 13 months (95% CI 7–17 months) and survival at 1 year was 52%.Conclusions A regimen of alternating weekly paclitaxel and gemcitabine is feasible in patients with advanced NSCLC, showing a lower toxicity profile compared with other platinum-based combinations, which makes this novel scheme attractive for these patients.     

Phase II study of vinorelbine and gemcitabine for inoperable stage IIIB-IV non-small-cell lung cancer.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the combination of vinorelbine and gemcitabine as a non-platinum chemotherapy regimen in patients with inoperable locally-advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Efficacy was assessed primarily in terms of response rate, and secondarily in terms of toxicity, time to progression and survival.Patients and methods: Patients with cytologically- or histologically-proven stage IIIB–IV NSCLC, bi-dimensionally measurable lesions, adequate haematological, hepatic and renal function, WHO performance status 2 and no previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy were eligible. The first 12 patients were entered in a pilot study and received vinorelbine (VNR) 30 mg/m² on days 1, 8, 15 and 22, and gemcitabine (GEM) 1000 mg/m² on days 1, 8 and 15, of a 28-day cycle. Subsequently, patients were entered in a phase II trial of VNR 35 mg/m² and GEM 1200 mg/m² on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Treatment consisted of three cycles of the chemotherapy, with a further three cycles for those patients who achieved stable disease or a complete or partial response (CR/PR) to the first three cycles. Patients who had achieved CR or PR after six cycles continued with the treatment until relapse.Results: The dosage and scheduling of VNR and GEM in the pilot study resulted in neutropenia necessitating reductions or delays in treatment, and consequently low dose intensity. The schedule was thus modified to VNR 35 mg/m² and GEM 1200 mg/m² on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for the phase II trial. Thirty-three patients were enrolled in the phase II trial, and 28 were evaluable for response. The overall intent-to-treat response rate of all 45 patients was 40% (18 of 45), comprising 4 CR (9%) and 14 PR (31%). For the 28 evaluable patients who received the fortnightly chemotherapy the response rate was 46% (13 of 28), CR 11% (3 of 28) and PR 36% (10 of 28). Seven patients (25%) had stable disease. The one-year cumulative survival rate for the 33 patients receiving the fortnightly chemotherapy was 24% and median time-to-progression 4 months (range 1–16 months). Median survival for these patients was eight months. Nine out of twelve patients in the pilot study (75%) suffered grade 3–4 neutropenia. There was one toxic death, attributed to neutropenic fever and sepsis, and two cases of pulmonary embolism. One patient suffered Grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Only eight patients (24%) on the fortnightly schedule suffered grade 3–4 neutropenia, resulting in dose reductions or delays for three of them (9%). None of the patients on the fortnightly schedule suffered thrombocytopenia or anaemia.Conclusions: The fortnightly schedule of gemcitabine and vinorelbine was a well-tolerated out-patient regimen, producing response and survival rates comparable to those of cisplatin combination regimens, but with a more favourable toxicity profile. Gemcitabine and vinorelbine should now be tested in a triplet combination with a taxane as the third drug, or against a platinum-containing regimen in a phase III study.     

Docetaxel and cisplatin in locally advanced or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A phase II study of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG)

Background:Docetaxel is one of the most promising new drugsagainst squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN), while cisplatinis one of the most active single agents. A phase I study has shown thefeasibility of the combination of the two drugs, and activity in SCCHN hasbeen seen. Patients and methods:Patients with locally advanced, inoperable,or metastatic SCCHN, never pretreated with radiotherapy or chemotherapy,received three courses of docetaxel 75 mg/m² and cisplatin 100mg/m², every three weeks. Thereafter, responsive metastaticpatients received additional chemotherapy, while patients with locallyadvanced disease underwent radiation therapy. Results:Forty-six patients (forty-five with locally advanced, onewith metastatic disease) were entered into the study. Ten patients did notcomplete three courses of chemotherapy because of early death; one patientdiscontinued treatment after one course. Twenty-one objective responses wereobserved (46%, 95% confidence interval (CI):31%–60%), including five complete responses (11%)and sixteen partial responses (35%). Following induction chemotherapyplus radiation therapy, 9 of 21 evaluable patients were rendered disease free,while 8 additional patients had a partial response. After a median follow-upof 18 months, the median duration of response was 12 months, (range3–25+), and the median overall survival was 11 months. Six early deathswere considered possibly treatment-related (sepsis following grade 4neutropenia in two cases, hypovolemic shock following severe diarrhea in fourcases). Neutropenia was the most severe toxicity (grade 3–4 in 28patients, median duration 4 days); diarrhea and vomiting were the mosttroublesome non-haematologic toxicities (grade 4 in 4 and 3 patients,respectively). Conclusions:The combination of docetaxel and cisplatin is activein SCCHN, but toxicity is substantial. This schedule does not appear to offerany advantage compared with conventional regimens.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing after first-line taxane-based chemotherapy: A phase II study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group

Background:Gemcitabine and vinorelbine have shown activity inbreast cancer. A phase II trial was initiated in order to evaluate theresponse rate (RR) and time to progression (TTP) of the combination of the twodrugs in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing after first-linetaxane-based chemotherapy. Patients and methods:Thirty-one patients were treated with thecombination of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² days 1 + 8 and vinorelbine30 mg/m² days 1 + 8. The cycles were repeated every three weeks. Results:Of 27 evaluable patients 1 (4%, 95%confidence interval (95% CI): 0.1%–19%) achievedcomplete remission (CR), five (18%; 95% CI:6%–38%) partial remission (PR), eleven (40%;95% CI: 22%–61%) stable disease and ten patientsprogressed. The median duration of response was six months (range 4–10+)and the median duration of disease stabilization was five months (range2–22+). With a median follow-up of 16 months (range 0.4–22+) themedian TTP was 3.5 months (range 0.4–22+) and the median survival was9.5 months (range 0.4–22+). Grade 3–4 toxicities weregranulocytopenia 15 patients (48%), rash 3 patients (10%),neuropathy 1 patient (3%) and thrombocytopenia 1 patient (3%).In conclusion the combination of gemcitabine/vinorelbine in the dosesadministered in this group of patients had a response rate of 22% andneeds to be further evaluated in metastatic breast cancer.     

Monthly docetaxel and weekly gemcitabine in metastatic breast cancer: A?phase II trial

Background:Docetaxel and gemcitabine are active againstbreast cancer. The purpose of this phase II study was to evaluate theefficacy and safety of monthly docetaxel combined with weeklygemcitabine in patients with chemotherapy-pretreated metastatic breastcancer. Patients and methods:Thirty-nine patients were enrolled, ofwhom thirty had received prior chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting,seven for metastatic disease, and two for both, including prioranthracycline in 33 patients. Treatment was gemcitabine 800mg/m² days 1, 8, 15 and docetaxel 100 mg/m² on day1, with cycles repeated every four weeks. Results:Response rate was 79% (95% confidenceinterval (CI): 63%–91%), with 2 complete and 29partial responses. Twenty-five of the responders remainedprogression-free for more than six months. Median survival was 24.5months. Delivered dose intensity of gemcitabine was lower than expected(63% of planned). The predominant hematologic toxicity was grade4 neutropenia in 36 patients, complicated by fever in three patients.With the exception of asthenia, severe non-hematological toxicities wereinfrequent. Conclusions:Monthly docetaxel, combined with weeklygemcitabine, has significant but manageable hematologic toxicity.Despite frequent dose adjustments, this doublet is very active inmetastatic breast cancer, producing a high proportion of durableresponses associated with favorable survival.     

Single-agent gemcitabine versus cisplatin-etoposide: Early results of a randomised phase II study in locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

Background: This randomised study was designed to determine the responserate, survival and toxicity of single-agent gemcitabine andcisplatin–etoposide in chemo-naïve patients with locally advancedor metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.Patients and methods: Gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m² was given asa 30 min intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle, cisplatin100 mg/m² on day 1, and etoposide 100 mg/m²on days 1 (following cisplatin), 2 and 3. Major eligibility criteria includedhistologically confirmed non-small-cell lung cancer, measurable disease,Zubrod PS 0–2; no prior chemotherapy, no prior radiation of the measuredlesion, and no CNS metastases.Results: 146 patients were enrolled, 71 patients on gemcitabine and 75patients on cisplatin–etoposide. Patient characteristics were wellmatched across both arms. Sixty-six gemcitabine patients and 72cisplatin–etoposidepatients were evaluable. Partial responses were seen in 12 gemcitabinepatients (18.2%; 95% CI: 9.8–30) and 11cisplatin–etoposide patients (15.3%; 95% CI:7.9–25.7).Early indications show no statistical differences between the two treatmentswith respect to time to disease progression or survival. Haematological andlaboratory toxicity were moderate and manageable. However, hospitalisationbecause of neutropenic fever was required for 6 (8%)cisplatin–etoposide patients but not for any gemcitabine patients.Non-haematological toxicity was more pronounced with significant differencesin nausea and vomiting (grade 3 and 4: 11% gemcitabine vs. 29%cisplatin–etoposide; despite the allowance for 5-HT^-3antiemetics during the first cycle of cisplatin–etoposide), and alopecia(grade 3 and 4: 3% gemcitabine vs. 62%cisplatin–etoposide).Conclusions: In this randomised study, single-agent gemcitabine was atleast as active but better tolerated than the combinationcisplatin–etoposide.     

Paclitaxel and gemcitabine in advanced non-nasopharyngeal head and neck cancer: A phase II study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group

Background: Paclitaxel as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs has demonstrated significant activity in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region (SCCHN). Preclinical studies have shown gemcitabine to be highly active in SCCHN cell lines.Purpose of the study: To evaluate the activity and toxicity of the combination of paclitaxel by three-hour infusion and gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer (HNC).Patients and methods: From September 1996 until May 1998, 44 patients with non-nasopharyngeal recurrent and/or metastatic HNC entered the study. There were 37 men and seven women with a median age of 61 years (range 35–79) and a median performance status of 1 (range 0–2). The location of the primary tumor in the majority of them was either the larynx or the oral cavity. Treatment consisted of six cycles of gemcitabine 1100 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1 and 8 immediately followed on day 1 by paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 by three-hour infusion. The treatment was repeated every three weeks.Results: Twenty-four (55%) patients completed all six cycles of treatment. A total of 205 cycles were administered, 165 (81%) of them at full dose. The median relative dose intensity (DI) of gemcitabine was 0.93 and of paclitaxel 0.95. Except for alopecia, which was universal, grade 3–4 toxicities included neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (5%), anemia (5%), infection (5%), flu-like syndrome (5%) and peripheral neuropathy (2%). Five (11%) patients achieved complete and 13 (30%) partial responses, for an overall response rate of 41%. After a median follow-up of 13 months, the median time to progression was four months and median survival nine months.Conclusions: The combination of paclitaxel and gemcitabine is active and well tolerated in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic HNC – randomized studies comparing this combination with other regimens are warranted.     

Activity of paclitaxel by three-hour infusion in Asian patients with metastatic undifferentiated nasopharyngeal cancer

Background: Despite its moderate anti-tumour activity in head and neck cancers there have been no reports on the activity of paclitaxel in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer, a highly chemosensitive tumour. A phase II study was thus initiated to determine the objective response rate and toxicity of paclitaxel in patients with previously untreated metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer.Patients and methods: Twenty-four patients with previously untreated measurable metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma were accrued, one of them ineligible because of concomitant beta-blocker usage. Male : female ratio was 19 : 5, with a median age of 46 years. All had previously received radiotherapy but were chemotherapy-naïve. The great majority (20 of 24) had undifferentiated carcinoma. Paclitaxel (Anzatax, Faulding Pharmaceuticals) 175 mg/m² was given intravenously over three hours every 21 days after premedication with oral dexamethasone and intravenous diphenhydramine and cimetidine.Results: There were five (21.7%) partial responses while eight patients remained stable. Median response duration was 7.5 months and median survival was 12 months. The main toxicity was haematological, with grade 1–2 neutropenia in 19% and grade 3–4 neutropenia in 4.5% of cycles. Three cycles were complicated by grade 3–4 anaemia and one patient required a blood transfusion. No thrombocytopenia was seen. Peripheral neuropathy was frequent (20 of 23 patients) but mild. Alopecia was complete in 14 patients. There were no cardiac toxicity or hypersensitivity reactions.Conclusions: Paclitaxel is well tolerated even in previously irradiated patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer. Single-agent activity was 22% and its inclusion into combination chemotherapy regimens should be studied.     

Salvage treatment with paclitaxel and gemcitabine for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer after cisplatin- or docetaxel-based chemotherapy: A multicenter phase II study

Background: To evaluate the tolerance and efficacy of the combination of paclitaxel and gemcitabine as salvage treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and methods: Forty-nine patients with measurable NSCLC (PS 0–1: 80%; stage IV: 84%) who progressed or failed first-line chemotherapy were enrolled. Prior chemotherapy was cisplatin-based with (n = 20) or without (n = 22) docetaxel and docetaxel–vinorelbine (n = 7). Patients received gemcitabine (900 mg/m2 i.v.; days 1 and 8) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2; day 8) every three weeks; G-CSF (150 µg/m2/day s.c.; days 9–15) was given prophylactically to all patients.Results: One (2%) complete and eight (16%) partial responses were achieved (overall response 18%; 95% CI: 4%–24%); 14 patients (29%) had stable disease and 26 (53%) progressive disease. Six responses were observed in 17 patients who responded to first-line chemotherapy. The median duration of response was seven months, the median TTP eight months and the median survival 11 months. The one-year survival rate was 37%. Grade 3–4 neutropenia occured in six (12%) patients, grade 2–3 neurotoxicity in 16 (32%) and grade 2–3 asthenia in 25 (51%). Other toxicities were mild.Conclusions: The paclitaxel-gemcitabine combination is a well-tolerated and relatively active salvage regimen in patients with NSCLC and it merits further investigation.