Docetaxel versus docetaxel plus cisplatin as front-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized, multicenter phase III trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) or docetaxel (D) alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-na?ve patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either DC (n = 167; docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1, cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 2, and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) 150 microg/m(2)/d on days 3 to 9) or D (n = 152; 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 without rhG-CSF) every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The overall response rates were 36.5% for DC (three complete responses and 58 partial responses) and 21.7% for D (one complete response and 32 partial responses; P =.004). The median OS was 10.5 months (range, 0.5 to 41 months) and 8.0 months (range, 0.5 to 41 months) for DC and D, respectively (P =.200). The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 44% and 19% for DC and 43% and 15% for D, respectively. Median times to tumor progression were 4.0 and 2.5 months for DC and D, respectively (P =.580). Grade 2/3 anemia was significantly higher with DC than with D (33% v 16%; P =.0001). Fifteen (9%) DC and 12 (8%) D patients developed febrile neutropenia. Grade 3/4 nausea/vomiting (P =.0001), diarrhea (P =.007), neurotoxicity (P =.017), and nephroroxicity (P =.006) were significantly more common with DC than with D. There were five treatment-related deaths in the DC group and one in the D (P =.098). CONCLUSION: DC regimen resulted in a higher response rate but without improvement in median time to tumor progression or OS compared with D. D could be a reasonable front-line chemotherapy for patients who cannot tolerate cisplatin.     

Vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus docetaxel plus gemcitabine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE To compare the activity and tolerability of docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG) and vinorelbine/cisplatin (VC) combinations in chemotherapy-naive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either DG (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) [days 1 and 8] plus docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) [day 8]) or VC (vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) [days 1 and 8] plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) [day 8]) and prophylactic recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (150 microg/m(2) subcutaneously [day 9 through 15]) every 3 weeks. Results A total of 413 randomly assigned patients were analyzed for response and toxicity (DG, n = 197; VC, n = 192). Median survival was 9.0 and 9.7 months (P = .965) for DG and VC arms, respectively; the corresponding 1-year survival rates were 34.3% and 40.8%, respectively. Overall response rate was 30% (95% CI, 23.9% to 36.3%) and 39.2% (95% CI, 32.5% to 45.9%; P = .053) for DG and VC, respectively. Toxicity was as follows (DG v VC): grade 2 to 4 anemia, 34% v 55% (P = .0001); grade 3 to 4 neutropenia, 16% v 37% (P = .0001); febrile neutropenia, 6% v 11% (P = .009); and grade 3 to 4 nausea and vomiting, 1% v 15% (P = .003). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 8% and ototoxicity in 2% of VC-treated patients. There were five and six treatment-related deaths in the DG and VC arms, respectively. Quality of life was improved in DG but not in VC patients. CONCLUSION Although the two regimens produced comparable overall survival, the DG regimen had a better toxicity profile. Therefore, DG could be used in the first-line setting of advanced NSCLC, especially for patients who cannot tolerate cisplatin.     

Randomized,multicenter, phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine plus carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: We conducted a phase II randomized study to assess the efficacy, with response as the primary endpoint, and the toxicity of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GP) and gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients were randomized to GP (gemcitabine 1200 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) day 2) or GC (gemcitabine 1200 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin AUC=5 day 2). Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were randomized to GP and 58 to GC. A total of 533 cycles were delivered (264 GP, 269 GC), with a median of four cycles/patient. The objective response rate was 41.9% (95% C.I., 29.6-54.2%) for GP and 31.0% (95% C.I., 18.2-42.8%) for GC (P=0.29). No significant differences between arms were observed in median survival (10.4 months GP, 10.8 months GC) and median time to progression (5.4 months GP, 5.1 months GC). Both regimens were very well tolerated with no statistical differences between arms in grade 3/4 toxicities. When all toxicity grades were combined, emesis, neuropathy and renal toxicity occurred more frequently on the GP arm (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS: GC arm did not provide a significant difference in response rate compared with GP arm, with better overall tolerability. Carboplatin could be a valid alternative to cisplatin in the palliative setting.     

Docetaxel versus docetaxel/cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: preliminary analysis of a multicenter, randomized phase III study

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of docetaxel versus the combination of docetaxel/cisplatin as frontline treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a multicenter, randomized, prospective phase III trial. Patients with unresectable stage IIIB or metastatic stage IV NSCLC who had previously undergone no chemotherapy were allocated to receive either docetaxel (100 mg/m2 in a 1-hour intravenous infusion; group A) or the combination of docetaxel (100 mg/m2 day 1) and cisplatin (80 mg/m2 day 2) after adequate hydration (group B). Appropriate premedication was given before docetaxel infusion. All patients in group B received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (150 microg/m2 subcutaneously) support from days 3 to 9 after treatment. Response and toxicity were assessed by World Health Organization criteria. From March 1999 to November 2001, 302 patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel (group A, n = 146) or docetaxel/cisplatin (group B, n = 156). The overall response rate was significantly higher in the combination arm (18% vs. 36%; P < 0.001). However, the 2 groups did not differ in median duration of response, time to progression (TTP), median overall survival (OS), or 1-year survival rate. Drug combination was associated with higher toxicity than single-agent therapy. Both regimens had comparable activity in terms of TTP and OS in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC; however, single-agent therapy had a more favorable toxicity profile.     

Results of a phase II multicenter trial of weekly docetaxel and gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE: Standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consists of platinum based combination chemotherapy but efficacy is limited and treatment can be toxic. This trial evaluated a weekly regimen of docetaxel and gemcitabine for advanced NSCLC. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Other endpoints were 1-year survival, median survival, median duration of response, median disease-free progression, safety, and quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with advanced NSCLC were treated. Patients received docetaxel (1 per week, 36 mg/m(2)) weeks 1-6 and gemcitabine (1 per week, 900 mg/m(2)) weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5. Each 8-week cycle was repeated for a total of three cycles. Patients completed quality of life surveys (FACT-L) before each cycle. RESULTS: The median age was 68.5 years; 74% were >60 years old. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis of response, 10 patients had a partial response (20%) and five patients had stable disease (10%). The 1-year survival was 32%; median survival for all patients was 6.9 months (range, <1-26.2) and the median progression-free survival was 5.1 months (range, <1-25.5). Toxicities (> grade 3) included neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, GI disorders (nausea, vomiting, dehydration, diarrhea, stomach pain), and asthenia; 10 patients experienced hematological toxicities that were > grade 3. Quality of life decreased during the study. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the nonplatinum doublet (docetaxel + gemcitabine) given on a weekly schedule for advanced NSCLC had efficacy similar to that reported with other regimens and was well tolerated. Therefore, this non-platinum based regimen appears promising and warrants further evaluation.     

Paclitaxel plus carboplatin versus gemcitabine plus paclitaxel in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE: We conducted this randomized study comparing the activity and toxicity of paclitaxel and gemcitabine (PG) and paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) combinations for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients were randomized to paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus either carboplatin at an area under the concentration-time curve of 6 on day 1 (group A) or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 (group B) every 3 weeks. A retrospective cost analysis was conducted using Student's t test to compare independent samples between groups. RESULTS: A total of 509 patients (group A, 252 patients; group B, 257 patients) were enrolled; all characteristics were well balanced. The median survival time was 10.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8 to 12 months) for group A and 9.8 months (95% CI, 8.0 to 11.7 months) for group B (P =.32). Respective 1-year survival rates were 41.7% and 41.4%. The response rate for group A was 28.0% (2% complete response [CR], 26% partial response [PR] [95% CI, 22% to 34%]), and the response rate for group B was 35.0% (5% CR, 30% PR) [95% CI, 29% to 41%]) (P =.12). Toxicity was mild. Grades 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia for groups A and B were seen in 15% and 15%, 2% and 1%, and 5% and 2%, respectively. The mean total cost (outpatient clinic visits plus chemotherapy drug fee) for group A (euro; 7,612.64) versus group B (euro; 7,484.77) was not statistically significant (P <.66). CONCLUSION: The PG combination is as equally active and well tolerated as the PC combination in patients with advanced NSCLC.     

Administration of pemetrexed immediately following gemcitabine as front-line therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase II trial

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed and gemcitabine have demonstrated independent anti-tumor activity in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The combination of these two therapies may produce synergistic anti-tumor effects. Previous studies of this combination have included a 90-min separation between the two drugs. More recent preclinical studies have suggested that this delay in administration might be unnecessary. This phase II study was designed to determine the objective tumor response rate and toxicity when pemetrexed was administered immediately after gemcitabine on day 1. METHODS: Chemona?ve patients stage IIIB with pleural effusion or stage IV NSCLC were enrolled. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 (30-min intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 (10-min i.v. infusion, immediately following gemcitabine, on day 1) every 21 days. All patients received folic acid, vitamin B12, and steroid prophylaxis. RESULTS: The 53 enrolled patients completed a total of 199 cycles (median=4.0, mean=3.8). Best tumor response consisted of 1 complete response (2.0%), 15 partial responses (30.6%), 17 with stable disease (34.7%), and 16 with progressive disease (32.7%). Median time to disease progression was 3.3 months and median survival was 10.3 months. Grades 3/4 hematologic toxicities (% patients) consisted of: neutropenia (43.4), anemia (9.4), febrile neutropenia (7.5%) and thrombocytopenia (1.9). The most common grades 3 or 4 non-hematologic events were: dyspnea (15.1), fatigue (11.3), and pyrexia (9.4). One patient (1.9%) experienced grade 2 alopecia. CONCLUSION: This schedule of pemetrexed plus gemcitabine is tolerable and offered the advantage of not requiring a 90-min delay between the two drugs. Response rate, survival, time to disease progression, and toxicity were acceptable and similar to other NSCLC regimens.     

NP与GP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌68例疗效分析

为了评价NP和GP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和不良反应。将1999年12月2日～2004年5月2日收治的68例非小细胞肺癌（non—small cell lung cancer，NSCLC）患者随机分为两组，分别应用NP和GP方案治疗。NP方案：长春瑞滨（NVB）25mg／m^2，d1、d8；顺铂（DDP）50mg，d3～d5。GP方案：健择（Gemcitabine）1000mg／m^2，d1、d8；DDP50mg，d3～d5，两种方案均21d为1个周期，至少治疗2个周期。结果为NP组35例，无CR，PR17例（48．6％），SD13例（37．1％），PD5例（14．3％），总有效率为48．6％（17／35），临床受益率85．7％（30／35）。GP组33例，CR1例（3．0％），PR14例（42．4％），SD13例（39．4％），PD5例（15．2％），总有效率为45．5％（15／33），临床受益率84．8％（28／33）。NP组和GP组中住进展时间分别为3．2和3．3个月，初治优于复治（NP组60％vs 33％，GP组52．6％ vs 35．7％）。荆量限制性毒性主要为骨髓抑制，NP组和GP组白细胞及血小板下降的发生率分别为80％、22．9％和51．5％、51．5％。NP组静脉炎及胃肠道反应较GP组重（31．4％ vs6．1％和57．1％vs45．5％）。初步研究结果提示，NP和GP方案治疗晚期NSCLC均安全有效，疗效相当，不良反应均可耐受。     

NP与GP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌68例疗效分析

为了评价NP和GP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和不良反应。将1999年12月2日～2004年5月2日收治的68例非小细胞肺癌(nonsmallcelllungcancer,NSCLC)患者随机分为两组,分别应用NP和GP方案治疗。NP方案:长春瑞滨(NVB)25mg/m2,d1、d8;顺铂(DDP)50mg,d3～d5。GP方案:健择(Gemcitabine)1000mg/m2,d1、d8;DDP50mg,d3～d5,两种方案均21d为1个周期,至少治疗2个周期。结果为NP组35例,无CR,PR17例(48.6%),SD13例(37.1%),PD5例(14.3%),总有效率为48.6%(17/35),临床受益率85.7%(30/35)。GP组33例,CR1例(3.0%),PR14例(42.4%),SD13例(39.4%),PD5例(15.2%),总有效率为45.5%(15/33),临床受益率84.8%(28/33)。NP组和GP组中位进展时间分别为3.2和3.3个月,初治优于复治(NP组60%vs33%,GP组52.6%vs35.7%)。剂量限制性毒性主要为骨髓抑制,NP组和GP组白细胞及血小板下降的发生率分别为80%、22.9%和51.5%、51.5%。NP组静脉炎及胃肠道反应较GP组重(31.4%vs6.1%和57.1%vs45.5%)。初步研究结果提示,NP和GP方案治疗晚期NSCLC均安全有效,疗效相当,不良反应均可耐受。     

伊立替康联合顺铂与吉西他滨联合顺铂一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的随机对照研究

目的　探讨伊立替康（ＣＰＴ １１）联合顺铂（ＤＤＰ）方案（ＩＰ方案）与吉西他滨（ＧＥＭ）联合ＤＤＰ方案（ＧＰ方案）一线治疗非小细胞肺癌（ＮＳＣＬＣ）的近期疗效和毒副反应。方法　采用前瞻性、开放性、随机对照的临床研究设计,纳入经组织学或细胞学确诊的初治晚期ＮＳＣＬＣ患者８８例,按２∶１比例随机分入ＩＰ方案组和ＧＰ方案组,ＩＰ方案组６０例,ＧＰ方案组２８例。ＩＰ方案组：ＣＰＴ-11 １００ｍｇ／ｍ２,ｄ１、ｄ８;ＤＤＰ２５ｍｇ／ｍ２,ｄ１ ～ｄ３;２１天为１周期。ＧＰ方案组：ＧＥＭ １０００ｍｇ／ｍ２,ｄ１、ｄ８;ＤＤＰ２５ｍｇ／ｍ２,ｄ１～ｄ３;２１天为１周期。２个周期评价疗效和不良反应。结果　ＩＰ方案组获ＰＲ２７例,ＳＤ１６例,ＰＤ１２例,死亡１例,有效率按意向性治疗分析（ＩＴＴ）为４５.０％,按符合方案分析（ＰＰ）为４８.２％,中位生存时间为１１.２个月,１年生存率为４６.４％;ＧＰ方案组获ＰＲ１０例,ＳＤ９例,ＰＤ７例,有效率按ＩＴＴ为３５.７１％,按ＰＰ为３８.５％,中位生存时间为１１.８个月,１年生存率为４６.２％。两组主要不良反应为血液学毒性、消化道反应、疲乏和脱发,ＩＰ方案组腹泻、疲乏、脱发的发生率高于ＧＰ方案组,血小板减少发生率低于ＧＰ方案组（Ｐ＜０.０５）。结论　ＩＰ方案和ＧＰ方案治疗晚期ＮＳＣＬＣ的疗效确切且无显著差异,毒副反应均可耐受。     

多西他赛或表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床观察

目的 观察多西他赛或表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors,EGFR-TKIs）二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）的临床疗效及安全性。 方法 回顾性分析2009年1月至2013年6月接受多西他赛或EGFR-TKIs二线治疗晚期NSCLC患者的临床资料,对符合入组标准的100例进行观察和分析,其中52例接受EGFR-TKIs治疗（TKIs组）,48例接受多西他赛治疗（DOC组）。采用Kaplan-Meier方法计算两组患者的中位无疾病进展生存时间（mPFS） 、中位总生存时间（mOS）,并行Log-rank检验。结果 TKIs组、DOC组患者二线治疗后mPFS分别为6个月、3个月（P=0.021）;mOS分别为16个月、10个月（P=0.068）;客观有效率（ORR）分别为23.1％、6.3％（P=0.038）。DOC组Ⅲ~Ⅳ级白细胞减少、中性粒细胞减少及其引起发热的发生率明显高于TKIs组（P均＜0.001）。结论 临床上对具有EGFR敏感突变潜在临床特征的晚期NSCLC患者进行二线治疗时,EGFR-TKIs比多西他赛治疗能显著延长患者中位无疾病进展生存时间,毒副反应较少,具有更高的安全性。     

Front-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with docetaxel and gemcitabine: a multicenter phase II trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the tolerance and efficacy of the combination of docetaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-one chemotherapy-naive patients with NSCLC were treated with gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel 100 mg/m2 intravenously on day 8 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (150 microg/m2, subcutaneously) support from day 9 to day 15. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The patients' median age was 64 years. The World Health Organization performance status was 0 to 1 in 39 patients and 2 in 12 patients. Fifteen patients (29%) had stage IIIB disease, and 36 (71%) had stage IV; histology was mainly squamous cell carcinoma (59%). A partial response was achieved in 19 patients (37.5%; 95% confidence interval, 24% to 50%); stable disease and progressive disease were each observed in 16 patients (31.4%). The median duration of response and the time to tumor progression were 5 and 6 months, respectively. The median survival was 13 months, and the actuarial 1-year survival was 50.7%. Grade 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia were rare (2%). Four patients (8%) developed grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, and all were complicated with fever; there was no treatment-related death. Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea occurred in three patients (6%), grade 2 or 3 neurotoxicity in four patients (8%), grade 2 or 3 asthenia in 10 patients (20%), and grade 2 or 3 edema in 10 patients (20%). CONCLUSION: The combination of docetaxel/gemcitabine is well tolerated, can be used for outpatients, and is active for the treatment of advanced NSCLC. This treatment merits further comparison with other cisplatin- or carboplatin-based combinations.     

Docetaxel in combination with gemcitabine plus rhG-CSF support as second-line treatment in non-small cell lung cancer. A multicenter phase II study

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel in combination with gemcitabine is an active front-line chemotherapy regimen against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with acceptable toxicity. A multicenter phase II study was conducted in order to determine the toxicity and efficacy of this combination, as salvage treatment in patients progressing after a cisplatin-based front line regimens. PATIENTS and METHODS: Thirty-two patients with histologically confirmed, bidimensionally measurable NSCLC, who failed prior cisplatin-based chemotherapy were enrolled. The patients' median age was 62.5 years, 29 (91%) were male, 23 (72%) had disease stage IV, and 22 (69%) had a performance status (WHO) 0-1. Gemcitabine (900 mg/m(2)) was administered on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)) on day 8, after appropriate premedication. rhG-CSF (150 microg/m(2)) was given prophylactically from day 9 to 15. Treatment was repeated on an outpatient basis every three weeks. RESULTS: A total of 127 chemotherapy cycles were administered. In an intention-to-treat analysis five patients (15.6%; 95% CI: 3.04-28.21%) achieved a partial response, 11 (34.4%) stable disease, and 16 (50%) progressive disease. The median duration of response was 9 months, the median TTP 7 months, and the overall median survival 6.5 months; the overall 1-year survival probability was 27.6%. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in five (15.6%) patients and in two of them associated with fever. Grade 3 anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred in three (9%) and two (6.5%) patients, respectively. Non-hematologic toxicity was very mild with only one episode of grade 4 diarrhea and mucositis, respectively; two (6%) patients complained for grade 3 asthenia. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel with prophylactic use of rhG-CSF is a safe and well-tolerated regimen for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC, who failed front-line treatment with cisplatin-based regimens.     

Randomized phase III trial comparing docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine as first-line treatment in women with advanced breast cancer

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine combinations as front-line treatment in women with advanced breast cancer (ABC).Patients and MethodsPreviously untreated patients with ABC were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 75 mg/m² plus epirubicin 75 mg/m² (DE) on day 1 or docetaxel 75 mg/m² on day 1 plus capecitabine 950 mg/m² orally twice daily on days 1–14 (DC) in 21-day cycles. Previous anthracycline-based (neo)-adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed if completed >1 year before enrollment. The primary objective of the study was to compare time to disease progression (TTP).ResultsOne hundred and thirty-six women were treated on each arm and median TTP was 10.6 versus 11.0 months (P = 0.7), for DE and DC, respectively. According to RECIST criteria we observed 15 (11%) versus 11 (8%) complete responses and 55 (40%) versus 61 (45%) partial responses (P = 0.8), with DE and DC, respectively. Severe toxicity included grade 3–4 neutropenia (57% versus 46%; P = 0.07), febrile neutropenia (11% versus 8%; P = 0.4), hand–foot syndrome (0% versus 4%; P = 0.02), grade 2–3 anemia (20% versus 7%; P = 0.001) and asthenia (12% versus 6%; P = 0.09) with DE and DC, respectively.ConclusionsThe DE and DC regimens have similar efficacy but different toxicity. Either regimen can be used as front-line treatment of ABC.     

多西他赛联合替吉奥对比多西他赛单药二线冶疗晚期非小细胞肺癌临床观察

目的 探讨多西他赛联合替吉奥对比多西他赛单药二线冶疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效.方法 收集经一线治疗后进展的晚期非小细胞肺癌患者100例,参照抽签法将患者随机分为试验组和对照组,每组各50例.试验组患者行多西他赛(60 mg/m2,静滴1 h,第1天)联合替吉奥(40 mg/m2,早晚饭后各服1次,连服14 d,每3周重复)治疗;对照组患者行多西他赛单药治疗(75 mg/m2,静滴1 h,第1天,每3周重复),所有患者随访至疾病进展或死亡.对比两组患者的临床疗效、生存情况及不良反应发生情况.结果 试验组患者的疾病控制率(72.00%)高于对照组患者(56.00%)(P﹤0.05);两组患者的客观缓解率比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05);试验组患者的中位无进展生存期为4.6个月(95%CI:3.994~5.206)长于对照组患者的3.1个月(95%CI:2.494~3.706)(P﹤0.05);试验组患者的中位生存期为9.2个月(95%CI:8.871~10.529)长于对照组患者的7.9个月(95%CI:5.575~10.225)(P﹤0.05);两组患者各种不良反应发生率及总不良反应发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P﹥0.05).结论 多西他赛联合替吉奥二线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效优于多西他赛单药治疗.     

GP和TP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的随机对照临床研究

背景与目的 目前铂类药物为基础的化疗被认为是治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCI．C）的标准方案。本研究的目的是比较紫杉醇联合顺铂（TP方案）与吉西他滨联合顺铂（GP方案）治疗晚期NSCLC的近期疗效和毒性作用。方法 77例初治晚期NSCLC患者随机分为TP组和GP组，TP组39例，GP组38例。TP组：紫杉醇135mg／m^2，第1天；顺铂30mg／m^2，第1～3天。GP组：吉西他滨1000mg／m^2，第1、8天；顺铂30mg／m^2，第1～3天。化疗2～3周期后对两组的临床疗效和毒性反应进行评价。结果 TP组有效率为46．2％，GP组为42．1％，两组间比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。GP组不良反应以血小板降低为主，TP组以白细胞降低为主，均可耐受。结论 吉西他滨或紫杉醇联合顺铂治疗晚期NSCLC具有较好的耐受性和临床疗效，不良反应有所不同，但都可以耐受。     

A randomized,phase III multicenter trial of gemcitabine in combination with carboplatin or paclitaxel versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

BackgroundPaclitaxel–carboplatin is used as the standard regimen for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was designed to compare gemcitabine + carboplatin or gemcitabine + paclitaxel to the standard regimen.Patients and methodsA total of 1135 chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomly allocated to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) 5.5 on day 1 (GC), gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m² on day 1 (GP), or paclitaxel 225 mg/m² plus carboplatin AUC 6.0 on day 1 (PC). Stratification was based on disease stage, baseline weight loss, and presence or absence of brain metastases. Cycles were repeated every 21 days for up to six cycles or disease progression.ResultsMedian survival (months) with GC was 7.9 compared with 8.5 for GP and 8.7 for PC. Response rates (RRs) were as follows: GC, 25.3%; GP, 32.1%; and PC, 29.8%. The GC arm was associated with a greater incidence of grade 3 or 4 hematologic events but a lower rate of neurotoxicity and alopecia when compared with GP and PC.ConclusionsNon-platinum and non-paclitaxel gemcitabine-containing doublets demonstrate similar overall survival and RR compared with the standard PC regimen. However, the treatment arms had distinct toxicity profiles.     

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

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