Carboplatin combined with amifostine, a bone marrow protectant, in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised phase II study.

Amifostine (WR-2721), a thiol compound, has been shown to protect normal tissue from alkylating agents and cisplatin-induced toxicity without loss of anti-tumour effects. To confirm this result, we conducted a phase II randomised trial to determine if the addition of amifostine reduces the toxicity of carboplatin without loss of anti-tumour activity in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). After the first course of carboplatin (600 mg m-2 i.v. infusion), 21 patients were randomised to receive three cycles of carboplatin alone (C arm) or three infusions of amifostine at 910 mg m-2 (CA arm) at 28 day intervals. The amifostine was given 20 min before and at 2 and 4 h after carboplatin. Since the 910 mg m-2 amifostine infusion led to hypotension in six patients, the dosage was reduced by 25%, to 683 mg m-2 t.i.d., in the other four patients. Amifostine was well tolerated at this dose level. Five patients in the CA arm and three in the C arm had their planned treatment discontinued owing to progressive disease (n = 3), amifostine side-effects (hypotension, sneezing and sickness, n = 4), and carboplatin-induced thrombocytopenia (n = 1). Bone marrow and renal function at study entry and after the first course of carboplatin before randomisation were similar in both treatment arms. Twenty courses of carboplatin+amifostine have been compared with 25 courses of carboplatin alone. Although there was no statistically significant difference with respect to haematological values comparing both arms, the median time to platelet recovery (> 100 x 10(9) l-1) (13.5 days vs 21 days; P = 0.04) and the need for hospitalisation for i.v. antibiotic and other supportive treatment tended to be reduced in the CA arm (0/20 vs 6/25 patient courses; P = 0.06). Response rates and median survival (14 vs 9 months) were no different, excluding tumour protection activity by amifostine. These results with a small number of patients suggest that amifostine given with carboplatin may reduce the duration of thrombocytopenia and hospitalisation.     

Five year follow-up and dose delivery analysis of cisplatin, iproplatin or carboplatin in combination with cyclophosphamide in advanced ovarian carcinoma

Eighty eight patients with FIGO stage IIb/c (postoperative residual) or III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer were randomised to receive cycles of cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) with either iproplatin (240 mg/m2), cisplatin (100 mg/m2) or carboplatin (300 mg/m2). A total of six cycles were given at monthly intervals. Patients were well-balanced for major prognostic factors. There was no significant difference in overall response rate (iproplatin arm, 64.3%, cisplatin arm 72.7% and carboplatin arm 66.7%). There were more complete remissions on the carboplatin arm, 45.8% compared with 21.4% on iproplatin and 22.7% on cisplatin but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.11). With a median follow up of 50 months the median survival for the iproplatin arm is 18 months, for the cisplatin arm 19 months and for the carboplatin arm 24 months (p = 0.15). Toxicity was greatest with cisplatin and least with carboplatin. Myelotoxicity limited the dose delivery of iproplatin as measured by total dose, dose intensity and dose intensity product. Carboplatin is at least as effective and less toxic than cisplatin when used in conjunction with cyclophosphamide for the treatment of ovarian carcinoma, and this analogue has been selected for dose intensification studies in this tumour at the Christie Hospital.     

Phase III randomised trial comparing paclitaxel/carboplatin with paclitaxel/cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a cooperative multinational trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of paclitaxel with cisplatin or carboplatin has significant activity in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase III study of chemotherapy-na?ve advanced NSCLC patients was designed to assess whether response rate in patients receiving a paclitaxel/carboplatin combination was similar to that in patients receiving a paclitaxel/cisplatin combination. Paclitaxel was given at a dose of 200 mg/m(2) (3-h intravenous infusion) followed by either carboplatin at an AUC of 6 or cisplatin at a dose of 80 mg/m(2), all repeated every 3 weeks. Survival, toxicity and quality of life were also compared. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive one of the two combinations, stratified according to centre, performance status, disease stage and histology. The primary analyses of response rate and survival were carried out on response-evaluable patients. Survival was also analysed for all randomised patients. Toxicity analyses were carried out on all treated patients. RESULTS: A total of 618 patients were randomised. The two treatment arms were well balanced with regard to gender (83% male), age (median 58 years), performance status (83% ECOG 0-1), stage (68% IV, 32% IIIB) and histology (38% squamous cell carcinoma). In the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm, 306 patients received a total of 1311 courses (median four courses, range 1-10 courses) while in the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm, 302 patients received a total of 1321 courses (median four courses, range 1-10 courses). In only 76% of courses, carboplatin was administered as planned at an AUC of 6, while in 96% of courses, cisplatin was given at the planned dose of 80 mg/m(2). The response rate was 25% (70 of 279) in the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm and 28% (80 of 284) in the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm (P = 0.45). Responses were reviewed by an independent radiological committee. For all randomised patients, median survival was 8.5 months in the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm and 9.8 months in the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm [hazard ratio 1.20, 90% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.40]; the 1-year survival rates were 33% and 38%, respectively. On the same dataset, a survival update after 22 months of additional follow-up yielded a median survival of 8.2 months in the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm and 9.8 months in the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm (hazard ratio 1.22, 90% CI 1.06-1.40; P = 0.019); the 2-year survival rates were 9% and 15%, respectively. Excluding neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, which were more frequent in the paclitaxel/carboplatin arm, and nausea/vomiting and nephrotoxicity, which were more frequent in the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm, the rate of severe toxicities was generally low and comparable between the two arms. Overall quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC-13) was also similar between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first trial comparing carboplatin and cisplatin in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Although paclitaxel/carboplatin yielded a similar response rate, the significantly longer median survival obtained with paclitaxel/cisplatin indicates that cisplatin-based chemotherapy should be the first treatment option.     

Sequential dose-intensive paclitaxel, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide salvage therapy for germ cell tumor patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of sequential, dose-intensified chemotherapy with paclitaxel/ifosfamide and carboplatin/etoposide administered plus peripheral blood-derived stem-cell (PBSC) support for patients with germ cell tumors (GCT) who have unfavorable prognostic features in response to conventional-dose salvage programs. Carboplatin was dose escalated by target area under the curve (AUC; in [milligrams per milliliter] x minutes) among patient cohorts, and pharmacokinetic studies were performed for comparison. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven previously treated patients who had cisplatin-resistant GCT and unfavorable prognostic features for response to conventional-dose salvage therapy were treated. Two cycles of paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) plus ifosfamide 6 g/m(2) were given 2 weeks apart with leukapheresis, followed by three cycles of carboplatin plus etoposide given 14 to 21 days apart with reinfusion of PBSCs. The dose of etoposide was 1, 200 mg/m(2), and the carboplatin target AUC ranged among cohorts from 12 to 32 (mg/mL) x min. Pharmacokinetic studies of carboplatin were performed for comparison of target to measured AUC. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (57%) achieved a complete response and an additional two patients (5%) achieved a partial response with normal tumor markers; therefore, 23 (62%) achieved a favorable response. Eight patients relapsed, and 15 (41%) of the favorable responses remained durable at a median follow-up of 30 months. Myelosuppression was the major toxicity; 58% of carboplatin/etoposide cycles were associated with hospitalization for nadir fever. The AUC of carboplatin measured in serum was lower than the target AUC; this may be related to underestimation of the glomerular filtration rate used in the dosing formula. CONCLUSION: Dose-intense therapy with sequential, accelerated chemotherapy of paclitaxel/ifosfamide and carboplatin/etoposide administered with PBSC support was relatively well tolerated. The durable complete response proportion was substantial in patients with unfavorable prognostic features for achieving durable complete response to conventional-dose salvage programs. Optimal dosing of carboplatin in the high-dose setting warrants further investigation.     

SCOTROC 2A: carboplatin followed by docetaxel or docetaxel-gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

The feasibility of sequential carboplatin followed by docetaxel-based therapy for untreated ovarian cancer was determined. Patients received four q3w cycles of carboplatin AUC 7, then four q3w cycles of either docetaxel 100 mg m(-2) (day 1) (arm A); docetaxel 75 mg m(-2) (day 8) and gemcitabine 1250 mg m(-2) (days 1,8) (arm B) or docetaxel 25 mg m(-2) and gemcitabine 800 mg m(-2) (both given weekly (days 1,8,15)) (arm C). A total of 44 patients were randomised to each treatment arm. None of the arms demonstrated an eight cycle completion rate (70.5/72.7/45.5% in arms A/B/C, respectively), which was statistically greater than 60% (P=0.102, P=0.056, P=0.982) which was our formal feasibility criteria, although only the completion rate in arm C was clearly worse than this level. The overall response rate (ORR) after carboplatin was 65.7% in 70 evaluable patients. In evaluable patients, ORRs after docetaxel-based cycles were: arm A 84.0% (21 out of 25); arm B 77.3% (17 out of 22); arm C 69.6% (16 out of 23). At follow-up (median 30 months), median progression-free survival times were: arm A 15.5 months (95% CI: 10.5-20.6); arm B 18.1 months (95% CI: 15.9-20.3); arm C, 13.7 months (95% CI: 12.8-14.6). Neutropenia was the predominant grade 3-4 haematological toxicity: 77.8/85.7/54.4% in arms A/B/C, respectively. Dyspnoea was markedly increased in both gemcitabine-containing arms (P=0.001) but was worse in arm C. Although just failing to rule out eight cycle completion rates less than 60%, within the statistical limitations of these small cohorts, the overall results for arms A and B are encouraging. Larger phase III studies are required to test these combinations.     

Paclitaxel and carboplatin vs gemcitabine and vinorelbine in patients with adeno- or undifferentiated carcinoma of unknown primary: a randomised prospective phase II trial

Platinum/taxane combinations are widely used in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP), yielding response rates of 30% and median overall survival of 9–11 months in selected patients. Yet these combinations have not been subject to a randomised trial to overcome selection bias, a major problem in CUP. We randomised 92 patients to either paclitaxel/carboplatin (arm A) or the non-platinum non-taxane regimen gemcitabine/vinorelbine (arm B). The primary endpoint was rate of practicability as defined: application of ⩾2 cycles of therapy (1) with a maximal delay of 1 week (2) and survival of ⩾8 months (3). Practicability was shown in 52.4% (95% CI 36–68%) in arm A and in 42.2% (95% CI 28–58%) in arm B, respectively. The median overall survival, 1-year survival -rate and response rate of patients treated in arm A was 11.0 months, 38, and 23.8%, arm B 7.0 months, 29, and 20%. In conclusion, the paclitaxel/carboplatin regimen showed clinically meaningful activity in this randomised trial (Clinical trial registration number 219, ‘Deutsches KrebsStudienRegister'', German Cancer Society.)     

A phase I study of high-dose ifosfamide and escalating doses of carboplatin with autologous bone marrow support.

The dose-limiting toxicity in two separate phase I trials of the high-dose single agents ifosfamide and carboplatin was renal insufficiency at 18 g/m2 and hepatic and ototoxicity at 2,400 mg/m2, respectively. In this phase I study, 16 adults were treated with ifosfamide at 75% of the single-agent maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) (12 g/m2) and escalating doses of carboplatin (400 to 1,600 mg/m2) to determine the nonhematologic dose-limiting toxicity and the maximum-tolerated dose of the combination. Both drugs as well as mesna for uroprotection were given by continuous infusion over 4 days with an additional day of mesna (total dose per course, 15 g/m2). Autologous bone marrow support was stipulated for subsequent dose levels once granulocytes remained less than 500/microL for more than 14 days in two of three to five patients entered at a given dose level. Autologous bone marrow support was used at doses above the 400 mg/m2 carboplatin dose level. At the maximum-tolerated dose level of 1,600 mg/m2 of carboplatin, renal toxicity precluded further dose escalation. Of the five patients entered at this dose level, reversible creatinine elevation greater than 2 mg/dL (median peak, 2.6 mg/dL) was observed in three patients, and irreversible renal failure occurred in an additional patient (peak creatinine, 6.9 mg/dL. Transient gross hematuria appeared more common with the combination than with ifosfamide alone. Two patients developed severe somnolence and confusion associated with a rising creatinine. There were two complete (CRs) and four partial responses (PRs) in 14 heavily pretreated assessable patients (including four partial or complete responses in eight assessable patients with advanced refractory sarcoma, and one CR in two patients with germ cell carcinoma). Carboplatin and ifosfamide appear to have overlapping renal toxicity. Nevertheless, carboplatin and ifosfamide can be combined at 80% and 75% of the single-agent maximum-tolerated doses, respectively, with acceptable nonhematologic toxicity. Ifosfamide and carboplatin are an attractive core combination for further studies in the treatment of sarcoma, germ cell, ovarian, and lung carcinomas.     

Phase II study of Taxol combined With ifosfamide and carboplatin in the treatment of stage IIIb-IV non-small-cell lung cancer

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the activity and the toxicity of an original combination of paclitaxel (Taxol), ifosfamide, and carboplatin in patients with stage IIIB-IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Sixty-one patients with previously untreated stage IIIB-IV NSCLC were enrolled by five institutions. Paclitaxel was given at the dose of 200 mg/m iv in 3 hours, ifosfamide (with mesna) at the dose of 3 g/m and carboplatin at an area under the curve 5, on day 1, every 21 days for a total of six cycles in responding or stabilized patients. Among the 59 patients evaluable for response, 2 complete remissions and 25 partial remissions were achieved for an overall response rate of 45.7% (95% CI = 32.7-59.2). According to an intention-to-treat analysis, the response rate was 44.2%. Thirteen patients had a stable disease, whereas 19 progressed. The median time to progression was 7.7 months (range: 1-18), whereas the median overall survival was 10 months (range: 1-30+). The 1-year survival rate was 43%. Hematologic toxicity was exceptionally mild, and peripheral neurologic toxicity of grade III was experienced by only three patients. There was one toxic death. This original triplet regimen based on paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and carboplatin has proved active, safe, and easy to deliver on an outpatient basis for patients with advanced NSCLC. Randomized studies both versus carboplatin-paclitaxel and other triplets are clearly warranted.     

Phase I/II investigation of paclitaxel, ifosfamide and carboplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility and tolerability of the three-drug combination of paclitaxel, ifosfamide and carboplatin (TIC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. The specific objectives of the study were: (i) to define the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum-tolerated dose of ifosfamide administered as part of the combination; and (ii) to determine the overall response rate and overall survival of patients treated with this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated, stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled in one of three cohorts. Patients received paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) as a 1-h infusion on day 1 with carboplatin at an area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of 6 mg.min/ml on day 2. For dose level I, ifosfamide was administered at a dose of 2 g/m(2) on days 1 and 2. For dose levels II and III, the dose of ifosfamide was decreased to 1.5 g/m(2) on days 1 and 2 and the dose of carboplatin was decreased to AUC 5 mg.ml/min. Therapy for dose levels I and III included filgrastim support (5 micro g/kg/day), which was initiated on day 3 and continued until after day 11 or until an absolute neutrophil count >10 000/ micro l. Treatment cycles were repeated every 21 days. Once the phase II dose was established, a full cohort of patients received therapy at this dose level to examine further the regimen's activity and tolerability. RESULTS: Neutropenia was the DLT encountered for dose levels I and II. No DLT was encountered in the initial six patients treated at dose level III, and therefore this dose level was declared the recommended phase II dose. A total of 49 patients were treated at the recommended phase II dose. The predominant non-hematological toxicity encountered with this triplet regimen was cumulative peripheral neuropathy. Of the 65 eligible patients enrolled in this study, 17 (26%) responded. There were 15 patients with partial responses (23%), two with regression, and 26 with stabilization of disease (40%). Median progression-free and overall survival were 4.8 and 9.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination TIC is well-tolerated. This triplet regimen produced response and survival rates in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer similar to those of other current combination chemotherapy regimens.     

Original article: Five year follow-up and dose delivery analysis of cisplatin, iproplatin or carboplatin in combination with cyclophosphamide in advanced ovarian carcinoma

Eighty eight patients with FIGO stage Ilb/c (postoperative residual)or III/TV epithelial ovarian cancer were randomised to receivecycles of cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m²) with either iproplatin(240 mg/m²), cisplatin (100 mg/m²) or carboplatin (300 mg/m²).A total of six cycles were given at monthly intervals. Patientswere well-balanced for major prognostic factors. There was nosignificant difference in overall response rate (iproplatinarm, 64.3%, cisplatin arm 72.7% and carboplatin arm 66.7%).There were more complete remissions on the carboplatin arm,45.8% compared with 21.4% on iproplatin and 22.7% on cisplatinbut the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.11).With a median follow up of 50 months the median survival forthe iproplatin arm is 18 months, for the cisplatin arm 19 monthsand for the carboplatin arm 24 months (p=0.15). Toxicity wasgreatest with cisplatin and least with carboplatin. Myelotoxicitylimited the dose delivery of iproplatin as measured by totaldose, dose intensity and dose intensity product. Carboplatinis at least as effective and less toxic than cisplatin whenused in conjunction with cyclophosphamide for the treatmentof ovarian carcinoma, and this analogue has been selected fordose intensification studies in this tumour at the ChristieHospital. ovarian carcinoma, cisplatin, carboplatin, CHIP     

Ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide: a highly effective cytoreduction and peripheral-blood progenitor-cell mobilization regimen for transplant-eligible patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a chemotherapy regimen that consisted of ifosfamide administered as an infusion with bolus carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE) supported by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for cytoreduction and stem-cell mobilization in transplant-eligible patients with primary refractory or relapsed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-three transplant-eligible patients with relapsed or primary refractory NHL were treated from October 1993 to December 1997 with ICE chemotherapy at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Administration of three cycles of ICE chemotherapy was planned at 2-week intervals. Peripheral-blood progenitor cells were collected after cycle 3, and all patients who achieved a partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) to ICE chemotherapy were eligible to proceed to transplantation. Event-free and overall survival, ICE-related toxicity, and the number of CD34(+) cells collected after treatment with ICE and G-CSF were evaluated. RESULTS: All 163 patients were assessable for response, and there was no treatment-related mortality. A major response (CR/PR) was evident in 108 patients (66.3%); 89% of the responding patients underwent successful transplantation. Patient who underwent transplantation and achieved a CR to ICE had a superior overall survival to that of patients who achieved a PR (65% v 30%; P =.003). The median number of CD34(+) cells/kg collected was 8.4 x 10(6). The dose-limiting toxicity of ICE was hematologic, with 29.4% of patients developing grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia. There were minimal nonhematologic side effects. CONCLUSION: ICE chemotherapy, with ifosfamide administered as a 24-hour infusion to decrease CNS side effects, and the substitution of carboplatin for cisplatin to minimize nephrotoxicity, is a very effective cytoreduction and mobilization regimen in patients with NHL. Furthermore, the quality of the clinical response to ICE predicts for posttransplant outcome.     

Ifosfamide, carboplatin and etoposide in children with poor-risk relapsed Wilms' tumor: a Children's Cancer Group report.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of children with relapsed Wilms' tumor is poor, especially with poor-risk factors such as unfavorable histology, early recurrence, previous three-drug therapy, relapse not confined to lungs and abdominal relapse following abdominal radiotherapy. We report the overall response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival of 11 children with relapsed and poor-risk Wilms' tumor following ifosfamide/carboplatin/etoposide (ICE) chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ICE therapy consisted of ifosfamide 1800 mg/m2/day (on day 0-4), carboplatin 400 mg/m2/day (on day 0-1) and etoposide 100 mg/m2/day (on day 0-4). The median age at diagnosis was 39 months (range from 13 months to 16 years) and the median time to relapse after initial diagnosis was 9 months (range 4-72 months). All but one patient had at least one poor prognostic feature, with eight patients showing three or four. RESULTS: After ICE chemotherapy the number of patients showing a complete response (CR) was three (27%) and a partial response (PR) was six (55%). The overall response rate (CR+PR) was 82%. Five of the six patients with a PR subsequently achieved a CR with further therapy. The 3-year event-free survival and overall survival were 63.6 +/- 14.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate in children with relapsed and poor-risk Wilms' tumor is >80% with ICE re-induction chemotherapy followed by post-ICE therapy. The optimal approach for post-ICE consolidation therapy has yet to be determined.     

A phase II study of the combination of carboplatin and ifosfamide in previously untreated metastatic small cell lung carcinoma.

This Phase II study evaluated the combination of two active agents in small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC): carboplatin and ifosfamide. Thirty previously untreated patients (27 men and 3 women) with a median age of 59 years were included in this study. Twelve patients had one metastatic site and 18 had two or more metastatic sites. The median performance status was 80%. The chemotherapy (CT) regimen administered during the course of this study consisted of carboplatin (300 mg/m2) and ifosfamide (4 g/m2) plus mesna every 4 weeks. All 30 patients were evaluable: 1 achieved a complete remission (CR) and 18 achieved a partial remission (PR) (objective response rate, 63%). The median response time was 3 months and the median survival time was 8 months (range, 1 to 25+ months). Bone marrow toxicity was Grade III in three patients and Grade IV in four patients. The carboplatin and ifosfamide combination was well tolerated. No cross-resistance with the doxorubicin and etoposide regimen was established because 4 of 11 patients responded to this combination (+/- cisplatin) after failing to respond to the ifosfamide and carboplatin regimen. The ifosfamide and carboplatin combination may be considered for inclusion in non-cross-resistant alternating CT schedules.     

A Phase II study of paclitaxel and ifosfamide for patients with advanced refractory carcinoma of the urothelium.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy for patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urothelium has limitations, and new therapies need to be evaluated. METHODS: Ifosfamide 1.0 gm/m2 on Days 1-4 and paclitaxel 135 mg/m2 by 24-hour infusion on Day 4 were administered to 26 patients with locally unresectable or metastatic TCC. Cycles were repeated every 21 days for a maximum of 6 cycles; dose escalation was dependent on whether Grade 3 or 4 toxicities occurred. RESULTS: There were 24 males and 2 females, with a median age of 66 years and a median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0. The median number of cycles administered was 3. Twelve patients had Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities, including 1 patient who died of a gastrointestinal hemorrhage while pancytopenic. There were no episodes of neutropenic fever. Two patients each had a complete response (CR) that lasted 5 and 28 months, respectively (response rate: 15%; 95% CI: 2-45%), among the 13 patients who had received prior chemotherapy. Of the 13 patients without prior chemotherapy, there were 3 with complete responses and 1 with a partial response ranging from 8 to 25+ months (RR: 30.7%; 95% CI: 9-61%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ifosfamide and paclitaxel is well tolerated and can produce objective responses in patients who are chemona?ve or have had prior therapy. For previously untreated patients, the addition of ifosfamide does not appear to result in a better response rate than single agent paclitaxel; and for previously treated patients, the addition of paclitaxel does not appear to result in a better response rate than single agent ifosfamide.     

Vinorelbine/carboplatin vs gemcitabine/carboplatin in advanced NSCLC shows similar efficacy, but different impact of toxicity

This randomised phase III study in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients was conducted to compare vinorelbine/carboplatin (VC) and gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) regarding efficacy, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and toxicity. Chemonaive patients with NSCLC stage IIIB/IV and WHO performance status 0-2 were eligible. No upper age limit was defined. Patients received vinorelbine 25 mg m(-2) or gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) on days 1 and 8 and carboplatin AUC4 on day 1 and three courses with 3-week cycles. HRQOL questionnaires were completed at baseline, before chemotherapy and every 8 weeks until 49 weeks. During 14 months, 432 patients were included (VC, n=218; GC, n=214). Median survival was 7.3 vs 6.4 months, 1-year survival 28 vs 30% and 2-year survival 7 vs 7% in the VC and GC arm, respectively (P=0.89). HRQOL, represented by global QOL, nausea/vomiting, dyspnoea and pain, showed no significant differences. More grade 3-4 anaemia (P<0.01), thrombocytopenia (P<0.01) and transfusions of blood (P<0.01) or platelets (P<0.01) were observed in the GC arm. There was more grade 3-4 leucopoenia (P<0.01) in the VC arm, but the rate of neutropenic infections was the same (P=0.87). In conclusion, overall survival and HRQOL are similar, while grade 3-4 toxicity requiring interventions are less frequent when VC is compared to GC in advanced NSCLC.     

Carboplatin/ifosfamide window therapy for osteosarcoma: results of the St Jude Children's Research Hospital OS-91 trial.

PURPOSE: To determine the activity of carboplatin/ifosfamide in patients with previously untreated osteosarcoma and to estimate patient outcomes after a multiagent chemotherapy protocol that eliminated cisplatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-nine patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated osteosarcoma received three cycles of carboplatin (560 mg/m(2) x 1) and ifosfamide (2.65 g/m(2)/d x 3). Assessment of response was evaluated after two (week 6) and three (week 9) chemotherapy cycles. At week 9, histologic response was assessed. Adjuvant therapy comprised two additional carboplatin/ifosfamide cycles, doxorubicin, and high-dose methotrexate. Patients were stratified at enrollment: stratum A, resectable primary tumor without metastases; stratum B, unresectable primary tumor; and stratum C, metastatic disease at diagnosis. Week 6 response was compared with that of a historic group that received only ifosfamide during the initial window evaluation. RESULTS: The clinical and radiographic response rate to three cycles of carboplatin/ifosfamide was 67.7% (95% confidence interval, 55.0% to 78.8%). Compared with the historic population who received only ifosfamide, the combination of carboplatin and ifosfamide reduced the progressive disease rate at week 6 (31.9% v 9%, P: = .003). For patients in stratum A, the 3-year event-free survival and survival were 72.3% +/- 6.7% and 76.4% +/- 6.4%, respectively. Patients who received carboplatin-based therapy had less long-term renal toxicity and ototoxicity. CONCLUSION: This pilot trial suggests that carboplatin/ifosfamide combination chemotherapy has substantial antitumor activity. In the context of a multiagent chemotherapy protocol comprising high-dose methotrexate and doxorubicin, we found that the addition of carboplatin/ifosfamide resulted in patient outcomes comparable to trials using cisplatin-based therapy with less long-term toxicity.     

Phase II study of continuous-infusion high-dose ifosfamide in advanced and/or metastatic pretreated soft tissue sarcomas

Background: Ifosfamide has important activity in pretreated soft tissue sarcomas (STS), and recent data support a clinically significant dose-response relationship for this agent. Administration by continuous infusion and hematopoietic support have rendered dose intensification regimens possible by reducing both hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities. The optimal dose and schedule of ifosfamide when given at high doses remain to be defined. In a previous phase I study, we demonstrated the feasibility of a continuous infusion (c.i.) high-dose ifosfamide (HDI) regimen in the ambulatory setting for patients with advanced solid tumors. The objective of the present phase II study was to assess the antitumor activity and toxicity of such a schedule in patients with advanced pretreated STS.Patients and methods: Thirty-eight patients with advanced and/or metastatic STS, all pretreated with an anthracycline with or without standard-dose ifosfamide, were treated. Ifosfamide was given by c.i. at a dose of 3.5 g/m²/day over four consecutive days, with equidose mesna uroprotection over five days. G-CSF was added at a dose of 200 µg/m²/day subcutaneously from day 6 to day 12. Cycles were repeated every three weeks in the outpatient setting.Results: A total of 159 cycles of therapy were given (median 4 per patient, range 3–6). Treatment compliance was generally satisfactory. The major toxicity was hematologic, with six febrile neutropenic episodes requiring hospitalisation and parenteral antibiotics. Acute renal failure occurred in one patient after three cycles of therapy; central nervous system toxicity was mild. An overall response rate of 39% was observed (95% confidence interval, 26% to 55%), with one complete and 14 partial remissions. All but one of the responder patients had previously received standard-dose ifosfamide. The median response duration was nine months (range 5–21+ months), and the overall median survival ranged from 6–30+ months (median 13 months).Conclusions: High-dose ifosfamide is an active regimen in anthracycline- pretreated STS. Future clinical trials should be aimed at evaluating the impact of different administration schedules on clinical response and outcome. The potential role of HDI as front-line chemotherapy as well as in the adjuvant treatment of STS needs to be investigated in randomized trials.     

Randomised phase II study comparing topotecan/carboplatin administration for 5 versus 3 days in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Topotecan is an active drug in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In our previous study, a combination of topotecan with cisplatin was associated with a median overall survival of 7.6 or 8.7 months, depending on the duration of treatment. We have replaced cisplatin by carboplatin in this trial, with the objective of creating a more convenient schedule for our patients. Furthermore, we have also compared the standard 5-day schedule with an experimental 3-day schedule. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 100 patients with metastatic disease were included. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either topotecan 0.75 mg/m2, days 1-5, and carboplatin AUC 5, day 5 (arm A) or topotecan 1.25 mg/m2, days 1-3, and carboplatin AUC 5, day 3 (arm B). Six cycles were given at a 3-week interval. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were assessable for response. The response during therapy was 86.9% in arm A and 80.0% in arm B. Median survival in arm A was 11.8 months and in arm B 11.6 months (P=0.37). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of topotecan and carboplatin is active in extensive-disease SCLC. Toxicity and median survival were comparable in both arms. Three days of treatment seems to be similar to the 5-day regimen.     

A randomised study comparing standard dose carboplatin with chlorambucil and carboplatin in advanced ovarian cancer.

A total of 161 previously untreated patients with FIGO stage III or IV epithelial ovarian cancer were randomised after surgery to receive six courses of either carboplatin 400 mg m-2 alone (Arm A) or carboplatin 300 mg m-2 with chlorambucil 10 mg day-1 for 7 days (Arm B). The median progression free survival (PFS) was similar: arm A: 45 weeks; arm B: 61 weeks (P = 0.830). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that the extent of residual disease and performance status were the most important prognostic factors for PFS. Fifty-two per cent of patients received dose escalations based on nadir blood counts, and 89% of all dose adjustments were made according to protocol. Failure to achieve a significant degree of leucopenia was associated with worse progression free survival (P less than 0.001). A total of 29.4% of patients fall into this category. The median survival was similar in both arms, i.e. 75 weeks. It is unlikely that there is any major clinical advantage to adding chlorambucil to single agent carboplatin for the management of advanced ovarian cancer, but whether used in combination or a single agent, the dose of carboplatin should be sufficient to cause at least grade I leucopenia. This may best be achieved by determining the initial dose based on renal function, and then adjusting subsequent doses according to nadir blood counts.     

Randomised phase II study of cisplatin-etoposide versus infusional carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and mesothelioma.

Background:A randomised phase II study was performed to comparestandard combination chemotherapy containing cisplatin and etoposide withinfusional carboplatin. Patients and methods:One hundred twenty patients with locallyadvanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer or mesothelioma were enrolled.All were chemotherapy-naïve and had a Karnofsky performance status of50. Patients were randomised to either four cycles of bolus therapy ofcisplatin 80 mg/m² day 1, etoposide 120 mg/m² day1–3, or continuous infusion of carboplatin 100/mg/m²/week forsix weeks. Results:No patients on infusional therapy incurred grade3–4 toxicity while in the bolus arm, grade 3 and grade 4 leucopeniaoccurred in 17% and 35% of patients, respectively. Grade 4thrombocytopenia occurred in 8% of patients and there were twoinstances of grade 3 renal toxicity. No responses occurred in the pump arm.Eight of forty-six patients with non-small-cell lung cancer responded totreatment (response rate 17.3%) with two complete responses and sixpartial responses. Only one patient with mesothelioma responded to bolustherapy. There was no difference in survival for the subset of NSCLC patients.Survival for mesothelioma patients in the pump arm was superior but this waslikely to be a result of early deaths in the bolus arm. Conclusions:The pump arm was well-tolerated but not active,whilst combination platinum-based therapy demonstrated activity butsignificantly more toxicity than the pump arm. Further studies of infusionalcarboplatin with this schedule are not warranted.