Efficacy of the combination of cisplatin with either gemcitabine and vinorelbine or gemcitabine and paclitaxel in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomised trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group (SICOG 0101).

BACKGROUND: Triplet regimens were occasionally reported to produce a higher response rate (RR) than doublets in locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was conducted to assess (i) whether the addition of cisplatin (CDDP) to either gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) or GEM and paclitaxel (PTX) significantly prolongs overall survival (OS) and (ii) to compare the toxicity of PTX-containing and VNR-containing combinations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stage III or IV NSCLC patients were randomly assigned to (i) GEM 1000 mg/m(2) and VNR 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (GV arm); (ii) GEM 1000 mg/m(2) and PTX 125 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (GT arm); (iii) GV plus CDDP 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (PGV arm); and (iv) GT plus CDDP 50 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (PGT arm). Treatments were repeated every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: A total of 433 (stage III, 160; stage IV, 273) patients were randomly allocated to the study. RR was 48% [95% confidence interval (CI), 42% to 54%] for triplets and 35% (95% CI, 32% to 38%) for doublets (P = 0.004). Median progression-free survival (6.1 versus 5.5 months, P = 0.706) and median OS (10.7 versus 10.5 months, P = 0.379) were similar. CDDP significantly increased the occurrence of severe neutropenia (35% versus 13%), thrombocytopenia (14% versus 4%), anaemia (9% versus 3%), vomiting (6% versus 0.5%), and diarrhoea (6% versus 2%). Conversely, frequency of severe neutropenia (30% versus 17%) and thrombocytopenia (11% versus 6%) was significantly higher with VNR-containing regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Adding CDDP to GV or GT significantly increased RR, but did not prolong the OS of patients. Among doublets, the GT regimen should be preferred in view of its better safety profile.     

Cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine combination therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II randomized study of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: In a previous phase I study cisplatin (CDDP), gemcitabine (GEM), and vinorelbine (VNR) combination therapy was safe and very active in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study was aimed at better defining the activity and toxicity of this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred eleven chemotherapy-naive patients, age < or = 70 years, with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a performance status of 0 or 1 (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale) were randomized to two treatment arms. Patients on arm A received CDDP 50 mg/m2, GEM 1,000 mg/m2, and VNR 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of an every-3-weeks cycle (57 patients). Patients on arm B received CDDP 80 mg/m2, epirubicin 80 mg/m2, and vindesine 3 mg/m2, all delivered on day 1 every 4 weeks, plus lonidamine orally 150 mg three times daily (54 patients). In December 1996, randomization was stopped early, and an additional 30 patients were treated with the experimental regimen to obtain a more accurate estimation of its activity rate. RESULTS: Among 87 patients who received the CDDP-GEM-VNR combination, four complete responses (CRs) and 46 partial responses (PRs) were observed, for an overall response rate of 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46% to 68%). Two CRs and 18 PRs were recorded among 54 patients on arm B, giving a 37% activity rate (95% CI , 24% to 51%). After a median follow-up duration of 19 months, the median progression-free and overall survival durations were 32 and 50 weeks in arm A, and 18 and 33 weeks in arm B, respectively. World Health Organization grade 3 to 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 46% and 14% of patients in arm A and in 22% and 11% of those in arm B, respectively. Severe nonhematologic toxicity was uncommon in both arms. CONCLUSION: The CDDP-GEM-VNR combination is a highly effective treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC and has a manageable toxicity. A phase III trial comparing this new combination with both CDDP-VNR and CDDP-GEM regimens is underway.     

Bi-weekly administration of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: multicenter phase II trial

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) have demonstrated activity as a first-line treatment in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We conducted a multicenter phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bi-weekly administration of GEM plus VNR in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six chemotherapy-naive elderly (age: >or=70 years) NSCLC patients were enrolled. Patients were eligible if they had histologically or cytologically confirmed unresectable NSCLC with measurable and/or assessable disease. Patients received GEM (1000 mg/m2) and VNR (25 mg/m2) every 2 weeks. RESULTS: The objective response rate of this treatment was 22.7% (95% confidence interval (CI), 10.3-35.1%), median survival time was 310 days, and median time to progression was 133 days. The one-year survival rate was 40.9% (95% CI, 26.3-55.4%), and most adverse events were mild. Only three (6.8%) patients needed to omit GEM because of grade 4 neutropenia or due to physician judgment. No patients suffered treatment-related death. CONCLUSIONS: Bi-weekly administration of GEM plus VNR in elderly patients was an effective, feasible and well-tolerated treatment schedule.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine followed by docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multi-institutional phase II trial of nonplatinum sequential triplet combination chemotherapy (JMTO LC00-02)

To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the sequential nonplatinum combination chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) followed by docetaxel (DOC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we conducted the multiinstitutional phase II study. A total of 44 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC were treated with GEM 1000 mg m(-2) and VNR 25 mg m(-2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for three cycles. DOC 60 mg m(-2) was then administrated intravenously at 3-week intervals for three cycles. Patients were evaluated for response and toxicity with each cycle of the treatment. The major objective response rate was 47.7% (95% confidence interval (CI), 33.8-62.1%). Median survival time (MST) was 15.7 months and 1-year survival rate was 59%. In the GEM/VNR cycle, grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 36.3%, grade 3/4 anaemia in two patients (4.5%) and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in one patient (2.3%). Grade 3 pneumonitis occurred in two patients (4.5%) in GEM/VNR cycles. In the DOC cycles, grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 39.4% but no patient experienced grade 3/4 anaemia or thrombocytopenia. Of the 44 eligible patients, 33 patients completed three cycles of GEM/VNR and 22 patients completed six cycles of planned chemotherapy (three cycles of GEM/VNR followed by three cycles of DOC). The sequential triplet nonplatinum chemotherapy consisted of GEM/VNR followed by DOC, and was very active and well tolerated. This study forms the basis for an ongoing phase III trial that compares this nonplatinum triplet and standard platinum doublet combination (carboplatin/paclitaxel).     

Gemcitabine with either paclitaxel or vinorelbine vs paclitaxel or gemcitabine alone for elderly or unfit advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients

The aim of this study was to assess whether a combination of gemcitabine (GEM) with either paclitaxel (PTX) or vinorelbine (VNR) could be more effective than GEM or PTX alone in elderly or unfit advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. A total of 264 NSCLC patients aged >70 years with ECOG performance status (PS)< or =2, or younger with PS=2, were randomly treated with: GEM 1200 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days; PTX 100 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days; GEM 1000 mg m(-2) plus PTX 80 mg m(-2) (GT) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days; GEM 1000 mg m(-2) plus VNR 25 mg m(-2) (GV) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. In all arms, an intra-patients dose escalation was applied over the first three courses, provided that no toxicity of WHO grade > or =2 had previously occurred. At present time, 217 (82%) patients had died. The median (months) and 1-year survival probability were 5.1 and 29% for GEM, 6.4 and 25% for PTX, 9.2 and 44% for GT, and 9.7 and 32% for GV. Multivariate analysis showed that PS< or =1 (hazard ratio (HR)=0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.90), and doublet treatments (HR=0.76; 95% CI 0.59-0.99) were significantly associated with longer survival. Doublets produced no more toxicity than single agents. GT should be considered a reference regimen for elderly NSCLC patients with PS< or =1.     

Cisplatin and vinorelbine as second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) resistant to taxol plus gemcitabine

The aim of the study was to evaluate the activity of cisplatin (CDDP) plus vinorelbine (VNR) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing after paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. Treatment consisted of CDDP 80 mg/m(2) administered on day 1 and VNR 25 mg/m(2) administered on day 1 and 8, repeated every 3 weeks. Nine patients who relapsed after partial response and eight patients refractory to prior CT received a minimum of two treatment cycles: three patients achieved a PR (18%; 95% CI: 4-43%), four had stable disease and 10 had disease progression. All responses were observed among the nine patients responsive to prior treatment. Median survival was 35 weeks. No patients required dose-reduction, treatment discontinuation or delay because of toxicity. Our results indicate a reasonable antitumor efficacy and no relevant toxicity of a second-line CDDP-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. We recommend the use of this regimen for patients not refractory to primary treatment.     

Prospective randomised study of split-course radiotherapy versus cisplatin plus split-course radiotherapy in inoperable squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus

Between 1983 and 1989, 211 patients with inoperable squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus were randomised in a study comparing split-course irradiation (two courses of 20 Gy in five fractions of 4 Gy, separated by a rest of 2 weeks) (arm A) and the same split-course irradiation in combination with cisplatin (CDDP) (3-4 days before each of the two courses of radiotherapy, repeated every 3-4 weeks, for a total of six cycles) (arm B). The Cox's regression model with retrospective stratification was used to compare the two arms to correct for the imbalance at randomisation of the T classification. The median overall survival was 7.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.3-9.4) months in arm A and 9.6 (95% CI 8-13.5) months in arm B. The difference in overall survival was only borderline significant (P=0.048) with a reduction of the instantaneous rate of death of 24%. The 1 and 2 year overall survival rate were respectively 29% (95% CI 21-37%) and 15% (95% CI 8-22%) in arm A and 45% (95% CI 36-54%) and 20% (95% CI 13-27%) in arm B; thereafter, the survival curves became similar. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 5.0 (95% CI 4.6-5.7) versus 6.9 (95% CI 5.3-8.7) months (P=0.028) and the median time to local progression was 6.2 (95% CI 5.1-7.6) months versus 10.9 (95% CI 8.1-15.5) months (P=0.018), respectively, in arms A and B. Haematological toxicities were slightly more commonly observed in the combined group (1% versus 6%). This study shows that split-course irradiation in combination with CDDP is very well tolerated and should be preferred to radiotherapy alone.     

Standard thoracic radiotherapy with or without concurrent daily low-dose carboplatin in elderly patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase III trial of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG9812)

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether radiotherapy with carboplatin would result in longer survival than radiotherapy alone in elderly patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Eligible patients were 71 years of age or older with unresectable stage III NSCLC. Patients were randomly assigned to the radiotherapy alone (RT) arm, irradiation with 60 Gy; or the chemoradiotherapy (CRT) arm, the same radiotherapy and additional concurrent use of carboplatin 30 mg/m(2) per fraction up to the first 20 fractions. RESULTS: This study was terminated early when 46 patients were registered from November 1999 to February 2001. Four patients (one in the RT arm, three in the CRT arm) were considered to have died due to treatment-related causes. The JCOG Radiotherapy Committee assessed these treatment-related deaths (TRDs) and the compliance with radiotherapy in this trial. They found that 60% of the cases corresponded to protocol deviation and 7% were protocol violation in dose constraint to the normal lung, two of whom died due to radiation pneumonitis. As to the effectiveness for the 46 patients enrolled, the median survival time was 428 days [95% confidence interval (CI) = 212-680 days] in the RT arm versus 554 days (95% CI = 331 to not estimable) in the CRT arm. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the early termination of this study, the effectiveness of concurrent use of carboplatin remains unclear. We re-planned and started a study with an active quality control program which was developed by the JCOG Radiotherapy Committee.     

Vinorelbine and alternating cisplatin and ifosfamide in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

In order to explore the activity of a combination of vinorelbine (VNL) and alternating cisplatin (CDDP) and ifosfamide (IFX) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a phase II study was performed. Seventy chemoradiotherapy naive patients with NSCLC, stage IIIA, IIIB and IV disease, PS (ECOG) 相似文献   

Triplet chemotherapy with cisplatin, gemcitabine and vinorelbine for malignant pleural mesothelioma

BACKGROUND: The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is expected to increase due to delayed control of occupational exposure to asbestos in Japan. We investigated the use of triplet combination chemotherapy with cisplatin (CDDP), gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) for the treatment of Japanese patients with MPM. METHODS: From December 2000 to August 2003, 12 patients received the following regimen: CDDP 40 mg/m(2), GEM 800 mg/m(2) and VNR 20 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks. Among the 12 patients, six selected patients underwent an extrapleural pneumonectomy (EP) after a median of three cycles of triplet chemotherapy. RESULTS: The overall response rate for all patients and the response rate for chemotherapy-naive cases were 58 and 67%, respectively. The median survival time and survival rate at 2 years for all patients were 11 months and 50%, respectively. The 2-year survival rates for the patients with and without EP were 83.3 and 16.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Triplet chemotherapy with CDDP, GEM and VNR was thus found to be highly effective for patients with MPM and its toxicity was manageable. A multi-institutional phase II trial is now being planned to establish the effectiveness of this new regimen in chemotherapy-naive patients with MPM.     

Combination of low-dose cisplatin and gemcitabine for treatment of elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility, toxicity and efficacy of the combination of low-dose cisplatin (CDDP) and gemcitabine (GEM) in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II trial included 46 patients aged 70 years or older with previously untreated advanced NSCLC. All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Treatment consisted of CDDP 50 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus GEM 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8. The regimen was repeated every 21 days. Patients received a minimum of three courses unless progressive disease was detected. RESULTS: A total of 190 GEM-CDDP courses were administered (median 4.1 courses per patient). The chemotherapy regimen was well tolerated. No patients developed grade 4 toxicity. Grade 3 toxicities were as follows: neutropenia in six patients (13%), and anemia, thrombopenia and nausea/vomiting in one (2%) each. Two patients (4%) had mild nephrotoxicity. Of the 46 patients, 16 had a partial response (35%, 95% confidence interval, CI, 28-52%), 17 (37%) remained stable and 13 (28%) had disease progression. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status improved in 17 patients (37%), whereas 25 (54%, 95% CI 44-74%) showed a clinical benefit. Median time to progression was 20 weeks. Overall median survival was 44 weeks, with a 1-year actuarial survival rate of 35%. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of low-dose CDDP and GEM for elderly patients with advanced NSCLC is an effective and well-tolerated chemotherapeutic approach.     

Docetaxel-based induction therapy prior to radiotherapy with or without docetaxel for non-small-cell lung cancer

This trial aimed to assess the feasibility and tumour control of concurrent chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy alone after docetaxel-based induction chemotherapy in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with stage IIIA/IIIB NSCLC received two 21-day cycles of induction chemotherapy with docetaxel (85 mg m(-2), day 1) plus cisplatin (40 mg m(-2), days 1 and 2). Patients without disease progression on day 43 were randomised to radiotherapy (2 Gy for 5 days week(-1); total 60 Gy) alone or with docetaxel 20 mg m(-2) once weekly every 6 weeks. Of 108 patients who received induction chemotherapy, 104 were evaluable for response. After induction chemotherapy, the overall response rate (ORR) was 44%; 91 (88%) patients had no disease progression and 89 were subsequently randomised to local treatment. After randomised therapy, the ORR was 53% (chemoradiotherapy 58%; radiotherapy 48%). Median survival and time to progression were 14.9 and 7.8 months, respectively, for chemoradiotherapy and 14.0 and 7.5 months, respectively, for radiotherapy. The most common toxicities during induction chemotherapy and randomised therapy were grades 3-4 neutropenia and grade 3 lymphocytopenia, respectively. Docetaxel-cisplatin induction therapy followed by concurrent docetaxel and thoracic radiotherapy is a feasible treatment option, showing good clinical activity and tolerability, for locally advanced NSCLC.     

Induction chemotherapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel followed by surgery or standard radiotherapy and concurrent daily low-dose cisplatin for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Five-year survival in patients with unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is less than 10%. In the present phase II study, 43 patients with locally advanced stage IIIA or selected IIIB NSCLC were given four courses of carboplatin AUC = 6 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 (3-hour infusion), every 3 weeks. Responsive patients, when possible, underwent surgery followed by standard radiotherapy (50 Gy) or radiotherapy (60 Gy), with concurrent cisplatin as intravenous continuous infusion of 4 mg/m2/d. Sixteen of the 42 evaluable patients achieved partial response (38%) and 3 complete response (CR) (7%) for an overall response rate of 45% (95% CI 30.1-60.2). R0 resectability rate was 29%, with 21% of pathologic CRs. Three more CRs were achieved with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in responsive but unresected patients. Grade III/IV hematologic toxicity was 9%, while one perioperative death occurred. The median duration of response was 14 months (range: 3-44+); median survival was 15 months (range: 9-47+). One-year and 2-year survival rates were 51% and 22%, respectively. The median survival in the responsive resected patients was 26 months, with 2-year survival of 57%. Carboplatin/paclitaxel represents an effective and well-tolerated induction therapy, suggesting its possible role in combination with radiotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced NSCLC in alternative to cisplatin-based regimens.     

Gefitinib and chemotherapy combination studies in five novel human non small cell lung cancer xenografts. Evidence linking EGFR signaling to gefitinib antitumor response

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling pathway is often activated in NSCLC, and thus represents a promising therapeutic target. We studied the antitumor activity of gefitinib (Iressa), an orally active EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, alone and in combination with standard chemotherapy in 5 recently established human NSCLC xenografts with wild-type EGFR. Mice were treated with 2 protocols of chemotherapy based on cisplatin (CDDP) combined with either gemcitabine (GEM) or vinorelbine (VNR). Gefitinib alone significantly inhibited tumor growth (TGI) in 4 of the 5 tumor xenografts (mean TGI of 58%, range: 25-70%). CDDP+VNR alone failed to achieve any significant responses, while CDDP+GEM achieved significant responses in 2 xenografts (TGI of 93 and 47%). Addition of gefitinib to CDDP+GEM potentialized chemotherapy in the 3 CDDP+GEM-resistant xenografts, but did not potentialize the CDDP+VNR combination. The effect of gefitinib treatment on the activity of extra cellular-regulated kinase (Erk), Akt, JNK and p38 kinases was assessed in IC9LC11 and IC1LC131, two NSCLC xenografts selected for their sensitivity and resistance to gefitinib, respectively. In IC9LC11, gefitinib strongly inhibited Erk, Akt and Jnk phosphorylation, but P38 remained active. Inversely, in IC1LC131, Erk and Akt pathways remained active, while Jnk and P38 pathways were inhibited by gefitinib. The data indicate that the antitumor activity of gefitinib in NSCLC, alone or in combination with chemotherapy, is tumor-dependent and is influenced by downstream signaling events independent of EGFR status.     

Irinotecan plus gemcitabine results in no survival advantage compared with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer despite increased tumor response rate.

PURPOSE: This phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study compared the overall survival associated with irinotecan plus gemcitabine (IRINOGEM) versus gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM) in patients with chemotherapy-naive, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IRINOGEM patients received starting doses of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 given weekly for 2 weeks every 3-week cycle. GEM patients received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 of 8 weeks (induction) and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. The primary end point of the trial was survival. Secondary end points included tumor response, time to tumor progression (TTP), changes in CA 19-9, and safety. RESULTS: In each arm, 180 randomly assigned patients comprised the intent-to-treat population evaluated for efficacy; 173 IRINOGEM and 169 GEM patients were treated. Median survival times were 6.3 months for IRINOGEM (95% CI, 4.7 to 7.5 months) and 6.6 months for GEM (95% CI, 5.2 to 7.8 months; log-rank P =.789). Tumor response rates were 16.1% (95% CI, 11.1% to 22.3%) for IRINOGEM and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.9% to 8.6%) for GEM (chi2 P <.001). Median TTP was 3.5 months for IRINOGEM versus 3.0 months for GEM (log-rank P =.352). However, subset analyses in patients with locally advanced disease suggested a TTP advantage with IRINOGEM versus GEM (median, 7.7 v 3.9 months). CA 19-9 progression was positively correlated with tumor progression. The incidence of grade 3 diarrhea was higher in the IRINOGEM group but grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities and quality-of-life outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION: IRINOGEM safely improved the tumor response rate compared with GEM but did not alter overall survival.     

Continuously infused carboplatin used as radiosensitizer in locally unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicenter phase III study.

PURPOSE: To determine the radiosensitizing effect of prolonged exposure of carboplatin in patients with locally unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically proven NSCLC, performance score <2, weight loss <10%, and normal organ functions were randomized between carboplatin 840 mg/m2 administered continuously during 6 weeks of radiotherapy or thoracic radiotherapy alone (both 60 Gy). Toxicity was evaluated with National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI CTC) and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. Quality of life was measured with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30/LC13 questionnaires. RESULTS: One-hundred and sixty patients were included. Pathologically confirmed persistent tumor was present in 53% of patients in the combination arm versus 58% in the radiotherapy alone arm (P=0.5). Median survival in the combination arm was 11.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.3-14.2] months and in the radiotherapy alone arm 11.7 (95% CI 8.1-15.5) months; progression-free survival was not different between arms [6.8 and 7.5 months, respectively (P=0.28)]. Acute toxicity was mild, late toxicity was radiation-induced cardiomyopathy (three patients) and pulmonary fibrosis (five patients). Quality of life was not different between arms, but in all measured patients cough and dyspnea improved, pain became less, and slight paresthesia developed 3 months after treatment. CONCLUSION: Addition of continuously administered carboplatin as radiosensitizer for locally unresectable NSCLC does not improve local tumor control or overall survival.     

Therapeutic results of alternating chemoradiotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer using cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil: its usefulness and controversial points

BACKGROUND: The present study was conducted to evaluate the therapeutic results of alternating chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). METHODS: The subjects consisted of six patients with stage III nasopharyngeal cancer and 26 patients with stage IV nasopharyngeal cancer. Using 6 MV photons, radiotherapy was performed at an exposure of 1.8-2.0 Gy five times per week. That is, a total absorbed dose of 36-40 Gy was irradiated between the base of the skull and supraclavicular fossa. After decreasing the irradiation field, an absorbed dose of 26-30 Gy was additionally given thereafter. One course of chemotherapy consisted of the administration of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) at a dose of 700 mg/m2/24 h for 5 days (days 1-5) and cisplatin (CDDP) at a dose of 50 mg/m2/24 h for 2 days (days 6-7) and a total of 2-3 courses of chemotherapy were performed. During the alternating chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy was performed initially and 3-5 days after completing the chemotherapy, radiotherapy was performed for 3-4 weeks. Thereafter, chemotherapy and radiotherapy were performed alternately. RESULTS: The scheduled courses of alternating chemoradiotherapy were completed in 30 (94%) of 32 patients. Although one patient developed shock induced by metal allergy to CDDP, no severe adverse effects were noted in any other patients. In these 32 patients, the overall 5-year survival rate was 75% (95% confidence interval: 60-90%) and the progression-free survival rate was 63% (95% CI: 46-89%). CONCLUSIONS: This method of alternating chemoradiotherapy yielded higher or at least similar survival rates and lower toxicities than concurrent chemoradiotherapy and is worth trying in a multi-institutional study.     

Concurrent versus sequential chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin and vinorelbine in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized study

PURPOSE: The superiority of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) over radiation alone in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been proven, but the relative merits of a concurrent schedule versus their sequential administration are less clear. This study compared the safety and efficacy of concurrent and sequential CRT, with chemotherapy (CT) consisting of a cisplatin and vinorelbine regimen, in patients with locally advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and two previously untreated patients (aged 42-75 years) with locally advanced, stage IIIA (n = 15) or stage IIIB (n = 87) NSCLC were entered into the study. The CT schedule consisted of up to four cycles of cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1, and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) at the first and fourth cycles (12.5 mg/m(2) during the 2nd/3rd cycles) on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle. Radiotherapy (RT) was prescribed at a dose of 60 Gy/30 fractions, given as five fractions per week for 6 weeks. In the concurrent arm (arm A), RT was started on day 4 of cycle 2; whilst in the sequential arm (arm B), RT started within 2 weeks after completion of CT. Fifty-two patients were randomized to concurrent treatment and 50 to the sequential schedule. RESULTS: Overall survival was significantly longer in arm A (median survival 16.6 months) versus arm B (median survival 12.9 months) (P = 0.023 by means of log-rank test; hazard ratio HR = 0.61, 95% CI of HR (0.39-0.93)), and time to progression (TTP) was also significantly longer in arm A (median time to progression 11.9 months) versus arm B (median time to progression 8.5 months) (P = 0.024 by means of log-rank test; HR = 0.62, 95% CI of HR (0.38-0.93)). Ninety-eight patients were evaluable for response and 101 for toxicity. The overall response rate was significantly higher in arm A, 80% (with 21% complete response (CR)) compared with 47% (with 17% CR) in arm B (P = 0.001 by means of chi(2)-test). WHO grade 3 or 4 toxicity was more frequent in arm A than in arm B, with a significantly greater incidence of leucopenia (53% versus 19%, P = 0.009 by means of chi(2) test) and nausea/vomiting (39% versus 15%, P = 0.044 by means of chi(2) test). There were no treatment related deaths. CONCLUSION: In this study population, concurrent CRT demonstrated significant benefit in terms of response rate, overall survival and time to progression over sequential CRT. The concurrent CRT schedule was associated with higher toxicity; however, the adverse event profile was acceptable in both arms.     

Multicentre randomised phase III study comparing the same dose and schedule of cisplatin plus the same schedule of vinorelbine or gemcitabine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

This study compares two cytotoxic regimens comprising the same dose and schedule of cisplatin (CP) plus vinorelbine (VNR) or gemcitabine (GEM) administered under the same schedule to patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). From April 1998 to February 2003, 285 patients were randomised to receive either VNR 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 as an intravenous (i.v.) bolus plus CP 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (regimen A) or GEM 1200 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 as an i.v. 30-min infusion plus CP 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (regimen B). Both treatments were recycled every 21 days. If no progression had occurred after six cycles, the patients continued to receive VNR or GEM monochemotherapy weekly. Cross-over of the two single agents was considered if disease progression occurred. Objective response (OR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. 272 patients were ultimately eligible (137 on A and 135 on B). Their main characteristics were: male/female ratio 214/58; median age 63 (range 32-77) years; median Karnofsky Performance Status (PS) 80 (range 70-100); stage IIIB 34%, stage IV 61%, recurrent disease 5%; histology - epidermoid 29%, adenocarcinoma 53%, other NSCLC 18%. The characteristics of the patients in the two arms were well matched. The following response rates were observed in regimens A and B, respectively: complete response (CR) 0.7% and 3.7%, partial response (PR) 31.9% and 22.2% (P = 0.321). Median CR+PR duration was 8 months in both arms. Clinical benefit represented by an improvement in symptoms was evident in 25.7% and 28.1%, respectively. Median TTP was 5 months in both arms and median OS 11 months in both arms. Grade III-IV neutropenia occurred in 30.7% and 17.7% of the patients in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.017); thrombocytopenia occurred in 0% and 9.3% (P = 0.004), respectively. No difference in the incidence of anaemia was observed. Non-haematological toxicity was generally mild: a higher incidence of grade 1-2 peripheral neurotoxicity and grade 1-2 local toxicity with regimen A and grade 1-2 liver toxicity with regimen B was reported. A pharmaco-economic comparison showed a difference between the two doublets, principally due to the different costs of VNR and GEM. Under the study conditions the combination of VNR or GEM with the same dose and schedule of CP produced similar OR, clinical benefits, TTP and OS in advanced NSCLC, and only mild toxicological differences were observed. Pharmaco-economic evaluation favoured the CP + VNR doublet.     

Cisplatin, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase I study

Purpose: The objective of this study was to determine the maximally tolerable doses (MTDs) of vinorelbine (VNR) and gemcitabine (GEM) when combined with a fixed dose of cisplatin (CDDP).Patients and methods: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with stage IIIB–IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received a fixed dose of CDDP (50 mg/m²) and escalating doses of VNR (starting from 20 mg/m²) and GEM (starting from 800 mg/m²) on days 1 and 8, every three weeks. The single escalation of GEM alone, by 200 mg/m² at each step, was initially planned up to a dose of 1,200 mg/m², to be followed by increments of the VNR dose of 5 mg/m² at each step.Results: Thirty-one patients were enrolled at five different dose levels. The escalation was stopped at level 4 (GEM 1,200 mg/m² and VNR 25 mg/m²) since two of six patients of this cohort showed dose-limiting neutropenia at treatment cycle 1. Two different dose levels, GEM 1,200 mg/m² + VNR 20 mg/m², and GEM 1,000 mg/m² + VNR 25 mg/m², were fairly well tolerated. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Neutropenia was the main toxic effect, occurring in 76% of the total of 116 cycles delivered, and in 24% of them was of grades 3 or 4. A total of eight patients (26%) experienced grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than seven days; in five of them it occurred in the first course. Neutropenic fever was observed in four cases. Grade 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in only two patients. Non-hematologic toxicity was a minor problem in all patients but was never dose-limiting. No complete responses were obtained, but sixteen out of 31 (52%) patients achieved partial responses. The median duration of response was 20 (range 6–56+) weeks, while at a nine-month median follow-up, the median survival time has not yet been reached. To date, 18 patients are still alive. The one-year projected survival for all patients was 51%.Conclusions: Our results show that CDDP, VNR and GEM can be safely given together without substantial reductions in their individual dose intensities. In our opinion, the dose level of GEM 1,000 mg/m² + VNR 25 mg/m² given in combination with CDDP 50 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 of a three-week cycle can be recommended for phase II trials, since it provides a better balance in dose intensity of GEM and VNR. A phase II randomised study is underway to establish the activity of this new regimen (at the above-cited dose level) in chemo-naïve NSCLC patients.