Paclitaxel/Carboplatin/gemcitabine versus gemcitabine/vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II/III study of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network

PURPOSE: This prospective randomized study compared overall survival (OS) in patients with previously untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) when treated with the platinum agent-based triple drug combination of paclitaxel/carboplatin/gemcitabine (PCG) versus the nonplatinum agent-based doublet drug combination of gemcitabine/vinorelbine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Advanced (stages IIIB, IV, and recurrent) chemotherapy-naive patients with NSCLC and performance status 0-2 were randomly assigned to the PCG arm (paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) on day 1, carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve of 5 on day 1, and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or to the gemcitabine/vinorelbine arm (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15, every 28 days). RESULTS: A total of 337 patients were randomly assigned to the 2 arms. The median time to progression was 6 months for PCG and 3.9 months for gemcitabine/vinorelbine with 1- and 2-year progression-free survival rates of 13% and 2% versus 14% and 4% (P = .324 log rank). Median OS for PCG was 10.3 months versus 10.7 months for gemcitabine/vinorelbine with 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates of 38%, 12%, and 2% versus 45%, 12%, and 6%, respectively (P = 0.269 log rank). Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, nausea/vomiting, myalgia/arthralgia, and neuropathy were significantly greater in the PCG arm. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in OS or progression-free survival when comparing PCG and gemcitabine/vinorelbine, and gemcitabine/vinorelbine was significantly less toxic. Gemcitabine/vinorelbine is a reasonable nonplatinum agent-based doublet therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC.     

Adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus observation in patients with completely resected stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (Adjuvant Navelbine International Trialist Association [ANITA]): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Whether adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known. We aimed to compare the effect of adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus observation on survival in patients with completely resected NSCLC. METHODS: 840 patients with stage IB-IIIA NSCLC from 101 centres in 14 countries were randomly assigned to observation (n=433) or to 30 mg/m(2) vinorelbine plus 100 mg/m(2) cisplatin (n=407). Postoperative radiotherapy was not mandatory and was undertaken according to every centre's policy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN95053737. FINDINGS: 367 patients in the chemotherapy group and 431 in the control group received their assigned treatment. 301 (36%) patients had stage IB disease, 203 (24%) had stage II disease, and 325 (39%) had stage IIIA disease. Tolerance to chemotherapy mainly included neutropenia in 335 (92%) patients and febrile neutropenia in 34 (9%); seven (2%) toxic deaths were also recorded. Compliance was greater with cisplatin than with vinorelbine (median dose intensity 89% [range 17-108] vs 59% [17-100]). After a median follow-up of 76 months (range 43-116), median survival was 65.7 months (95% CI 47.9-88.5) in the chemotherapy group and 43.7 (35.7-52.3) months in the observation group. Adjusted risk for death was significantly reduced in patients assigned chemotherapy compared with controls (hazard ratio 0.80 [95% CI 0.66-0.96]; p=0.017). Overall survival at 5 years with chemotherapy improved by 8.6%, which was maintained at 7 years (8.4%). INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin extends survival in patients with completely resected NSCLC, better defining indication of adjuvant chemotherapy.     

Gemcitabine plus vinorelbine compared with cisplatin plus vinorelbine or cisplatin plus gemcitabine for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III trial of the Italian GEMVIN Investigators and the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.

PURPOSE: Platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens are the standard treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although toxicity is common and may significantly affect the patient's quality of life (QoL). This trial aimed to assess whether a combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine had benefits in terms of QoL, without influencing negatively on survival, compared with cisplatin-containing regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB (effusion and supraclavicular nodes) or IV documented NSCLC who were younger than 70 years of age were randomly assigned gemcitabine plus vinorelbine (GemVin) or either gemcitabine plus cisplatin or vinorelbine plus cisplatin (cisplatin-based). European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scales were used for QoL analysis. RESULTS: Five hundred one patients were randomly assigned to treatment. The median age was 62 years. There were no significant differences in global QoL scores between the two arms after 2 months of treatment. However, worsening scores for appetite, vomiting, and alopecia were significantly more common in the cisplatin-based arm. Median survival was 38 v 32 weeks and median progression-free survival was 23 v 17 weeks in the cisplatin-based versus GemVin arms, respectively. For the GemVin arm the hazard ratio for death was 1.15 (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.37) and the hazard ratio for progression was 1.29 (90% CI, 1.10 to 1.52). Grade 3 or 4 myelosuppression, vomiting, alopecia, and ototoxicity were significantly more frequent with cisplatin-based treatment. CONCLUSION: Global QoL is not improved with GemVin, although advantages in some components of QoL were apparent. GemVin is less toxic than standard cisplatin-based chemotherapy. There is a nonsignificant slight survival advantage with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. GemVin could be offered to advanced NSCLC patients who express concern about toxicity.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase II trial

The purpose of this phase II study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Eligibility criteria included cytologically or histologically confirmed NSCLC (stage IIIB or IV), no previous chemotherapy, and bidimensionally measurable disease. Patients received 1000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine and 30 mg/m(2) vinorelbine on days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks up to eight courses. From December 1997 to November 1998, 70 patients (59 stage IV and 11 stage IIIB disease), with a median age of 59 years (range 38-74 years) were enrolled. The intent-to-treat response rate was 41% (95% confidence interval (CI) 30-54%) with 1 complete responder (CR) and 28 partial responders (PRs), 15 patients had stable disease (SD) and 26 progressed (PD). Median survival was 8.3 months (95% CI 6.0-9.9 months), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.8 months (95% CI 3.9-5.5 months), and 1-year survival rate was 33.5% (95% CI 24.0-46.8%). Patients received a total of 229 cycles. Haematological and non-haematological toxicities were moderate. Transient World Health Organization (WHO)-grade IV leucopenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 13 (6%) and two (1%) cycles, respectively. The predominant non-haematological toxicity was local reactions of the veins in 19 (27%) patients (WHO-grade II and III). Neurotoxicity was infrequent, non-cumulative, and reversible. The combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine has demonstrated activity in metastatic NSCLC, with response and survival rates similar to those of cisplatin-based regimens and a more favourable toxicity profile that is well tolerated in an outpatient setting.     

Chemotherapy for elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: the Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES) phase III randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Vinorelbine prolongs survival and improves quality of life in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Some studies have also suggested that gemcitabine is well tolerated and effective in such patients. We compared the effectiveness and toxicity of the combination of vinorelbine plus gemcitabine with those of each drug given alone in an open-label, randomized phase III trial in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Patients aged 70 years and older, enrolled between December 1997 and November 2000, were randomly assigned to receive intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) of body surface area), gemcitabine (1200 mg/m(2)), or vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)). All treatments were delivered on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary endpoint was survival. Survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan-Meier method and analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel test. Secondary endpoints were quality of life and toxicity. RESULTS: Of 698 patients available for intention-to-treat analysis, 233 were assigned to receive vinorelbine, 233 to gemcitabine, and 232 to vinorelbine plus gemcitabine. Compared with each single drug, the combination treatment did not improve survival. The hazard ratio of death for patients receiving the combination treatment was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.44) that of patients receiving vinorelbine and 1.06 (95% CI = 0.86 to 1.29) that of patients receiving gemcitabine. Although quality of life was similar across the three treatment arms, the combination treatment was more toxic than the two drugs given singly. CONCLUSION: The combination of vinorelbine plus gemcitabine is not more effective than single-agent vinorelbine or gemcitabine in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC.     

A multicenter randomized phase III trial of vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet versus capecitabine monotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated women with metastatic breast cancer

BackgroundThe Breast Cancer Study Group of the Hellenic Oncology Research Group conducted a phase III trial of single-agent capecitabine versus the vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of combination treatment in terms of progression-free survival (PFS).Patients and methodsWomen with MBC were randomly assigned to receive either capecitabine (Cap arm: 1250 mg/m² twice daily, on days 1–14) or vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet (VG arm: vinorelbine 25 mg/m²; gemcitabine 1000 mg/m²; both drugs on days 1 and 15).ResultsSeventy-four women were treated on each arm and median PFS was 5.4 versus 5.2 months (P = 0.736), for VG and Cap, respectively. Median overall survival was 20.4 months for the VG arm and 22.4 months for the Cap arm (P = 0.319). Overall response rate was 28.4% in the VG arm and 24.3% in the Cap arm (P = 0.576). Both regimens were generally well tolerated. Neutropenia and fatigue were more common with VG arm and hand–foot syndrome with Cap arm.ConclusionsThis trial failed to demonstrate superiority of vinorelbine/gemcitabine doublet over single-agent capecitabine in terms of PFS. Given the favorable toxicity and convenience of oral administration, single-agent capecitabine is recommended for compliant patients.     

GN方案与NP方案一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌56例

 目的　比较分析并探讨长春瑞滨（NVB）联合吉西他滨（GEM）的GN方案与NVB联合顺铂（DDP）的NP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的疗效及患者不良反应。方法　回顾性分析经组织学证实的56例晚期NSCLC患者，GN组27例：NVB＋GEM，每3周 1个周期×2～6个周期，NP组29例：NVB＋DDP，每3周1个周期×2～6个周期。结果　GN组总有效率37.0 %，肿瘤控制率59.3 ％，中位疾病进展期5.1个月，1年生存率40.7 %，其疗效与NP组接近，差异无统计学意义（P >0.05），但GN组在血红蛋白下降、Ⅱ度以上恶心、呕吐及体力下降三项不良反应方面发生率明显低于NP组，两组之间不良反应统计差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论　非铂类GN方案疗效高、毒性低、耐受性好，作为晚期NSCLC患者的一线替代方案值得进一步研究。     

Flexible chemotherapy regimen with gemcitabine and vinorelbine for metastatic nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: a phase II multicenter trial

BACKGROUND: This Phase II study evaluated a flexible 3- or 4-week dosing schedule of gemcitabine and vinorelbine to determine its effect on response rate and survival of patients with metastatic nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). METHODS: Thirty-four response-evaluable patients, 24 with performance status (PS) 0-1 and 10 with a PS of 2, 30 with Stage IV, and 4 with Stage IIIB NSCLC were treated with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) intravenously (first 15 patients) or 30 mg/m(2) intravenously (next 19 patients) on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 4-week cycle, if on Day 15 neutrophils were > or = 1500/uL and platelets > or = 100,000/uL. If chemotherapy could not be administered on Day 15, then Day 22 became Day 1 of the next cycle. RESULTS: When vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) was given with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2), 11 patients received 4-week cycles, 3 patients 3-week cycles, and 1 patient both 3- and 4-week cycles. With vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2), 7 patients received 4-week cycles, 2 patients 3-week cycles, and 10 patients both 3- and 4-week cycles. The partial response rate for 34 patients was 53% (18 patients). Median survival (MS) was 11.1 months, and 1-year survival 50% (17 patients). Patients with PS 0+1 had a MS of 17.5 months compared with patients with PS 2, who had MS of 3.3 months. Patients < 70 years of age had a MS of 18 months, and those >/= 70 years had a MS of 5.5 months. CONCLUSION: This flexible schedule with gemcitabine and vinorelbine enabled optimal dose delivery and suggested excellent efficacy but less toxicity than treatment with platinum regimens.     

Gemcitabine versus cisplatin, epirubicin, fluorouracil, and gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised controlled multicentre phase III trial

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma have a poor response, progression-free survival, and overall survival with standard treatment. We aimed to assess whether a four-drug regimen could improve 4 month progression-free survival compared with gemcitabine alone. METHODS: In a randomised multicentre phase III trial, 52 patients were randomly assigned to 40 mg/m2 cisplatin and 40 mg/m2 epirubicin both given on day 1, 600 mg/m2 gemcitabine given intravenously over 1 h on days 1 and 8, and 200 mg/m2 fluorouracil a day given by continuous infusion on days 1-28 of a 4-week cycle (PEFG regimen), and 47 were assigned to 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine given intravenously over 30 min once a week for 7 of 8 consecutive weeks in cycle 1 and for 3 of 4 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint was 4-month progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response, safety, and quality of life. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: 51 patients assigned PEFG and 46 assigned gemcitabine alone had disease progression. 49 patients in the PEFG group and 46 in the gemcitabine group died from progressive disease. More patients allocated PEFG than gemcitabine alone were alive without progressive disease at 4 months (60% [95% CI 46-72] vs 28% [17-42]; hazard ratio [HR] 0.46 [0.26-0.79]). 1-year overall survival in the PEFG group was 38.5% (25.3-51.7) and in the gemcitabine group was 21.3% (9.6-33.0; HR 0.68 [0.42-1.09]). More patients assigned PEFG showed disease response than did those assigned gemcitabine (38.5% [25.3-51.7] vs 8.5% [0.5-16.5]; odds ratio 6.60 [2.11-20.60], p=0.0008). More patients in the PEFG group had grade 3-4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia than in the gemcitabine group (p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION: The PEFG regimen could be considered for treatment of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.     

Predictive impact of RRM1 protein expression on vinorelbine efficacy in NSCLC patients randomly assigned in a chemotherapy phase III trial

BackgroundPlatinum-based doublets (PBDs) remain the cornerstone of treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and may include gemcitabine. A biomarker predicting sensitivity to this antimetabolite would represent a major step forward. Accordingly, we explored the predictive role of ribonucleotide reductase subunit M (RRM1) in advanced NSCLC.Patients and methodsA total of 443 patients were randomly assigned to regimen A [paclitaxel (Taxol) and cisplatin with gemcitabine] or regimen B (cisplatin and vinorelbine). Immunohistochemical evaluation of RRM1 was correlated to clinical end-points.ResultsA total of 261 (58.9%) patients had representative tissue samples for RRM1 evaluation. Disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were substantially improved in patients with RRM-negative (neg) tumors receiving regimen B when compared with patients with RRM-positive (pos) tumors (68.8% versus 31.2%, P = 0.046, 6.90 months versus 3.93 months, P = 0.000 and 11.57 months versus 7.4 months, P = 0.002, respectively). Interaction analysis between RRM1-neg status and adenocarcinomas yielded a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.36 for death (P = 0.000).ConclusionsRRM1 protein expression was without any predictive impact in patients treated with cisplatin, paclitaxel and gemcitabine. Surprisingly, the predictive power was demonstrated in the cisplatin and vinorelbine arm and may suggest that RRM1 is involved in vinorelbine sensitivity warranting further research.     

吉西他滨联合长春瑞滨二线治疗转移性鼻咽癌的临床疗效

目的 观察吉西他滨联合长春瑞滨(GV)二线治疗含铂类药物方案化疗失败转移性鼻咽癌(nasopharyngeal carcinoma,NPC)患者的疗效,并分析影响预后的因素。方法 回顾性分析2010年1月至2016年3月于广西医科大学附属肿瘤医院经含铂类药物方案一线化疗失败后予GV方案治疗的41例转移性NPC患者的临床病理资料,采用Cox比例风险回归分析影响其预后的因素。结果 41例转移性NPC患者共完成146个周期化疗,中位周期数为4个周期,总有效率为42.9%,疾病控制率为85.8%。中位无进展生存期为6.0个月(95%CI:4.4~7.6),中位生存期为16.4个月(95%CI:8.8~24.0)。骨髓抑制是主要的不良反应,患者可耐受。多因素分析结果显示,二线化疗周期数是影响患者预后的独立因素(HR=2.660, 95%CI:1.044~6.781,P=0.040)。结论 GV方案二线治疗含铂类药物方案一线化疗失败的转移性NPC患者安全有效,且化疗周期数≥4的患者预后可能更佳。     

长春瑞滨联合顺铂治疗蒽环类和（或）紫杉类耐药转移性乳腺癌的临床分析

目的探讨长春瑞滨联合顺铂治疗蒽环类和（或）紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌的疗效与安全性。方法 43例蒽环类和（或）紫杉类耐药的转移性乳腺癌患者接受长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案化疗：长春瑞滨（法国P ierre Fabre公司产品）25 mg/m2,第1天和第8天,静脉滴注;顺铂75~80 mg/m2,静脉滴注,分割为2~5 d。3周为一周期,每2周期治疗结束后两周评价疗效。结果 43例患者共化疗156个周期,中位化疗周期数为4周期。完全缓解2例（4.7%）,部分缓解26例（60.5%）,客观有效率为65.1%。41例患者的中位无进展生存期（PFS）9个月,中位生存时间（OS）15个月,其中治疗有效的患者中位无进展生存期为12个月。1年生存率为59.0%。单因素分析显示,肿瘤大小和近期疗效是PFS的影响因素,孕激素受体（PR）状况、三阴性、转移灶数目是OS的影响因素。COX模型多因素回归分析显示,PFS和OS的独立预后因素分别是近期疗效和转移灶数目。主要不良反应是骨髓抑制和胃肠道反应。结论长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案是治疗蒽环类和（或）紫杉类耐药转移性乳腺癌安全有效的解救方案。     

Randomized phase 2 study of irinotecan plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine plus vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy with second-line crossover in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to compare the nonplatinum-based combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine (GV) with the combination of irinotecan and cisplatin (IP) as first-line chemotherapy with second-line crossover in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to received either irinotecan at a dose of 65 mg/m(2) plus cisplatin at a dose of 30 mg/m(2) (Arm A) or gemcitabine at a dose of 900 mg/m(2) plus vinorelbine at a dose of 25 mg/m(2) (Arm B), each of which was administered on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks as the first-line therapy followed by crossover at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were enrolled (75 patients in Arm A and 71 patients in Arm B); 138 patients were evaluable for tumor response and toxicity. During first-line therapy, IP was found to result in more grade 2+ nausea and vomiting (toxicity was graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]) (41% vs 12%; P = .0001) and alopecia (36% vs 10%; P = .0003). Pneumonitis was noted only with GV therapy (7% vs 0%; P = .058). During second-line therapy, IP was found to result in more grade 3 diarrhea (17% vs 2%; P = .039) and GV featured more cases of grade 3+ neutropenia (78% vs 40%; P = .0003). IP tended to generate more tumor responses (38% vs 26% as first-line therapy, and 30% vs 13% as second-line therapy) compared with GV. IP also demonstrated a favorable trend in median progression-free survival (4.6 months vs 3.8 months as first-line therapy and 4.5 months vs 2.6 months as second-line therapy) and overall survival (15.9 months vs 13.1 months; P = .3), but this difference was not statistically significant. The majority of patients who were refractory to IP also failed to respond to GV in the second-line setting. CONCLUSIONS: The platinum-based IP regimen appeared to be superior to the GV combination in terms of response rate. However, given the similar survival and better tolerability of the nonplatinum GV regimen, either treatment sequence would appear to be acceptable for the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as second-line therapy for non-small cell lung cancer after treatment with paclitaxel plus platinum

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the activity and feasibility of combination therapy of gemcitabine and vinorelbine for patients with advanced NSCLC after the failure of initial treatment with paclitaxel plus platinum. METHODS: From March 2000 to August 2002, 38 evaluable patients (median age 55 years) with NSCLC, who had failed to recover after treatment with paclitaxel plus platinum, received vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) i.v.) followed by gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) i.v.), both being administered on days 1 and 8 and recycled every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Objective responses were as follows: partial response, 8/38 [21%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 8-23%]; and stable disease, 21/38 (55%). Median time to progression was 3.9 months and the median overall survival was 8.1 months. Grades III and IV neutropenia were seen in 17 and 11% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: This combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and vinorelbine is active and highly tolerable as a second-line therapy for NSCLC.     

Interim analysis of a phase III trial comparing cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine vs. either cisplatin and gemcitabine or cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced non small-cell lung cancer. A Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group Study

In a previous phase II randomized study, a cisplatin/gemcitabine/vinorelbine (PGV) regimen produced a 50-week median survival time (MST) in advanced non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present trial was planned to randomly compare the outcome of patients treated with this new triplet regimen with those of patients receiving either cisplatin plus vinorelbine (PV) or cisplatin plus gemcitabine (PG) doublet combinations. One hundred eighty patients with stage IIIB (76) or IV (104) disease, aged 相似文献   

奥沙利铂加长春瑞滨与顺铂加长春瑞滨治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的随机对照研究

目的探索奥沙利铂＋长春瑞滨（NL方案）与顺铂＋长春瑞滨（NP方案）治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的疗效、不良反应及患者的生活质量。方法可评价疗效的NSCLC患者以2：1比例随机分入治疗组与对照组。治疗组70例,化疗方案为长春瑞滨25mg／m^2静脉冲入,第1。8天;奥沙利铂130mg／m^2静脉滴注,第2天;21d为1个周期。对照组32例,化疗方案为顺铂80mg／m^2静脉滴注,分2—3d给予;长春瑞滨用法同治疗组。结果治疗组与对照组的有效率分别为35．7％和43．8％（P=0．4）,中位肿瘤进展时间分别为4．7个月和5．5个月（P=0．6）,1年生存率分别为38．5％和58．6％（P=0．07）。治疗组Ⅰ-Ⅱ度感觉异常发生率为68．4％,显著高于对照组的36．4％（P：0．0017）;而治疗组I一Ⅱ度粒细胞减少率为49．4％,显著低于对照组的70．6％（P：0．037）。两组患者各项生活质量评分差异无统计学意义。结论奥沙利铂＋长春瑞滨治疗晚期NSCLC疗效确切,患者耐受性良好,为晚期NSCLC的治疗提供了一种新的选择。     

Phase II study of induction chemotherapy with gemcitabine and vinorelbine followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy with oral etoposide and cisplatin in patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE: For locoregionally advanced inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), concurrent chemoradiotherapy has become a standard therapy. We conducted a Phase II trial to examine the efficacy and toxicity of adding gemcitabine and vinorelbine induction chemotherapy to concurrent chemoradiotherapy with oral etoposide and cisplatin. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligibility included inoperable clinical Stage III NSCLC without pleural effusion, ECOG performance status 0-1, and weight loss < or =5%. Induction chemotherapy consisted of three cycles of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2, each given i.v. on Days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. During once-daily thoracic radiotherapy (1.8 Gy/day, total 63 Gy), two cycles of oral etoposide (100 mg on Days 1-5 and 8-12) plus cisplatin (50 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8) were given concurrently 4 weeks apart. RESULTS: Between April 2002 and November 2003, 42 patients were enrolled and 40 were included in response and toxicity evaluation. The median age was 59 years and 13 patients had IIIA and 27 had IIIB; 24 had squamous ca, 12 had adenocarcinoma, and 4 had others. Objective tumor responses were obtained in 29 patients (72.5%), including 18 (45.0%) after induction chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 23.8 months, the median survival time and progression-free survival was 23.2 months and 10.9 months, respectively, with 2-year survival rate of 43.9%. For the patients with supraclavicular nodal involvement, the median survival time was 11.8 months with 2-year survival rate of 16.7%, whereas the corresponding figures were 27.8 months and 52.0%, respectively, for those without supraclavicular nodal involvement. Toxicity of induction chemotherapy was mild and well tolerated. However, concurrent chemoradiotherapy was associated with G3/4 hematologic toxicity in 75.7%, G3 esophagitis in 24.2%, and two treatment-related deaths. There were nonlife-threatening late toxicities in additional 6 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Induction chemotherapy with gemcitabine and vinorelbine followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy with etoposide and cisplatin showed very promising survival in patients with Stage III NSCLC, especially in those without supraclavicular nodal involvement, which warrants further evaluation.     

Phase III study of intravenous vinorelbine in combination with epirubicin versus epirubicin alone in patients with advanced breast cancer: a Scandinavian Breast Group Trial (SBG9403).

PURPOSE: To determine whether the addition of intravenous (IV) vinorelbine to epirubicin increased the progression-free survival in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 387 patients were randomly assigned to receive IV epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) on day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, or epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) IV on day 1. Both regimens were given every 3 weeks for a maximum of 1 year but discontinued prematurely in the event of progressive disease or severe toxicity. In addition, epirubicin was discontinued at a cumulative dose of 1000 mg/m(2) (950 mg/m(2) from June 1999). Prior anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy and prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer was not allowed. Reported results were all based on intent-to-treat analyses. RESULTS: Overall response rates to vinorelbine and epirubicin, and epirubicin alone, were 50% and 42%, respectively (P =.15). The complete response rate was significantly superior in the combination arm (17% v 10%; P =.048) as was median duration of progression-free survival (10.1 months v 8.2 months; P =.019). Median survival was similar in the two arms (19.1 months v 18.0 months; P =.50). Leukopenia related complications, stomatitis, and peripheral neuropathy were more common in the combination arm. The incidences of cardiotoxicity and constipation were similar in both arms. CONCLUSION: Addition of vinorelbine to epirubicin conferred a significant advantage in terms of complete response rate and progression-free survival, but not in terms of survival.     

吉西他滨联合长春瑞滨治疗转移性乳腺癌34例的疗效和毒副作用

背景与目的:化疗是治疗转移性乳腺癌的主要方法之一,蒽环类和紫杉类药物是乳腺癌化疗最有效的药物.但是很多患者在辅助治疗或者一线救援方案中已经用过这两类药物.长春瑞滨和吉西他滨也是乳腺癌化疗的有效药物之一.本研究目的是观察吉西他滨联合长春瑞滨治疗转移性乳腺癌的疗效与毒副作用.方法:34例接受过蒽环和/或紫杉类治疗的转移性乳腺癌患者,接受吉西他滨联合长春瑞滨方案治疗,吉西他滨1000 mg/m2静脉滴注30 min,d1、d8,长春瑞滨25 mg/m2静脉推注,d1、d8,每21天重复一次.结果:全组34例共完成109个周期的治疗,中位数3周期,范围1～6周期;均可评价疗效.没有完全缓解的病例,部分缓解9例,病情稳定19例,病情进展6例,客观有效率(完全缓解 部分缓解)26.47%;中位疾病进展时间5.4个月,中位生存期17.8个月;1年生存率68%(95%可信区间为50%～86%),2年生存率46%(95%可信区间为26%～66%).不良反应主要为Ⅰ～Ⅱ度骨髓抑制、末梢神经毒性及胃肠道反应,部分患者出现轻度的皮疹及肝功能损害.结论:吉西他滨联合长春瑞滨方案治疗转移性乳腺癌患者,初步观察有一定的疗效,其毒副作用患者可以耐受.     

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine in recurrent advanced non-small cell lung cancer: sequence does matter

Summary Purpose Gemcitabine and vinorelbine have demonstrated clinical efficacy both as single agents and in combination in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase II trial evaluated biweekly gemcitabine and vinorelbine in NSCLC patients who have had one prior chemotherapeutic regimen and have had disease progression. Methods Gemcitabine (1,200 mg/m² IV over 30 min) was followed by vinorelbine (30 mg/m² IV over 6–10 min) on days 1 and 15 of each 28 day cycle. Chemotherapy was given for six cycles unless disease progression or unacceptable toxicity was seen. Results From 11/1998 to 10/2000, 15 of 20 patients enrolled (6 males, 9 females) were evaluable for response and survival. Two patients had grade 4 neutropenia, and one patient had grade 4 thrombocytopenia. The only non-hematologic grade 3 toxicities were fatigue, phlebitis, and arthralgias. No objective responses were observed, but 11 patients had stable disease for a mean of 6 months. The median survival time was 9.4 months (95% CI = 4.2, 14.8), with a median time to progression of 4.2 months (95% CI = 1.9, 5.6). The 1 year survival was 47%. Conclusions While this schedule of gemcitabine and vinorelbine was well tolerated, it was felt to be inactive. In vitro and pharmacokinetic studies published after the completion of our trial, suggest gemcitabine followed by vinorelbine may have antagonistic effects leading to lower dose delivery of both drugs. Our study was the only study of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in second-line NSCLC in the literature without an objective response. Our study was the only second-line study that administered gemcitabine prior to vinorelbine. First-line studies in the literature that administered vinorelbine prior to gemcitabine had, on average, a 1.7 month higher median survival (10.0 vs. 8.3 mos; P value <0.001). Because of the lack of response, further studies using this drug sequence, dose, and schedule for gemcitabine and vinorelbine are not recommended.