Sequential versus alternating administration of cisplatin/etoposide and topotecan as first-line treatment in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: preliminary results of a Phase III Trial of the Hellenic Oncology Research Group.

BACKGROUND: This trial was designed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of sequential versus alternating administration of cisplatin/etoposide and topotecan in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred eighty-four chemotherapy-naive patients were randomized between the sequential therapy arm (n=142; 4 cycles of cisplatin 75 mg/m2 intravenously [I.V.] on day 1 with etoposide 100 mg/m2 per day I.V. on days 1-3 followed by 4 cycles of topotecan 1.5 mg/m2 per day I.V. on days 1-5) and the alternating arm (n=142; same doses of cisplatin/etoposide on cycles 1, 3, 5, and 7 and topotecan on cycles 2, 4, 6, and 8). Treatment cycles for both regimens were administered every 3 weeks. RESULTS: At this preliminary analysis, no statistically significant difference in the overall response rate, duration of response, time to disease progression, or median survival was observed between the 2 arms. A total of 756 cycles of the sequential therapy and 830 cycles of the alternating therapy were administered, with a median numbers of 6 and 7 cycles per patient, respectively. Topotecan was administered in 85 patients on the sequential arm and 132 patients on the alternating arm. Dose reductions for toxicity were similar in both arms. Grade 3/4 toxicities in the sequential and alternating arms, respectively, included neutropenia (51% and 52%; P=NS), anemia (12% and 11%; P=NS), febrile neutropenia (7% and 9%; P=NS), thrombocytopenia (19% and 20%; P=NS), and asthenia (8% and 2%; P=0.02). There were 4 toxicity-related deaths in the sequential arm versus 3 in the alternating arm. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary conclusion is that the sequential and alternating regimens resulted in comparable activity and tolerability in previously untreated patients with extensive-stage SCLC.

A multicenter phase II study of the combination of irinotecan and gemcitabine in previously treated patients with small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and toxicity of the combination of irinotecan and gemcitabine in pretreated patients having small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients (median age 60 years, performance status 0-1 in 87% and 2 in 13% of the patients) with limited or extensive-stage disease, refractory or relapsing after at least one prior chemotherapy regimen, received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and irinotecan 300 mg/m(2) on day 8, every 21 days. Sixteen (52%) patients had sensitive and 15 (48%) refractory disease. Fifteen patients (48%) had received > or =2 prior regimens. RESULTS: All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 26 for response analysis. A median of three (range 1-6) cycles per patient was administered. Three partial responses were documented for an overall response rate of 10% (95% CI 0.73-20.09), and disease stabilization was obtained in 7 patients (22%; intention-to-treat analysis). Two of the responders had refractory, and 1 had sensitive disease. The median time to progression was 4.5 months, the median duration of responses was 2.5 months, and the median survival time was 6 months. Grade 3-4 (WHO) neutropenia was observed in 9 patients (29%), grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in 4 (13%), and grade 3-4 diahrrea in 3 patients (10%). Three patients experienced febrile neutropenia. No toxic deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The combination showed modest activity in this patient group with a poor prognosis. Thus we believe it merits further investigation in the treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer who have failed one prior chemotherapy regimen.

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.