Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase pharmacogenetics for predicting fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity in the randomised, phase III adjuvant TOSCA trial in high-risk colon cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) catabolises ∼85% of the administered dose of fluoropyrimidines. Functional DPYD gene variants cause reduced/abrogated DPD activity. DPYD variants analysis may help for defining individual patients' risk of fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity. METHODS: The TOSCA Italian randomised trial enrolled colon cancer patients for 3 or 6 months of either FOLFOX-4 or XELOX adjuvant chemotherapy. In an ancillary pharmacogenetic study, 10 DPYD variants (*2A rs3918290 G>A, *13 rs55886062 T>G, rs67376798 A>T, *4 rs1801158 G>A, *5 rs1801159 A>G, *6 rs1801160 G>A, *9A rs1801265 T>C, rs2297595 A>G, rs17376848 T>C, and rs75017182 C>G), were retrospectively tested for associations with ⩾grade 3 fluoropyrimidine-related adverse events (FAEs). An association analysis and a time-to-toxicity (TTT) analysis were planned. To adjust for multiple testing, the Benjamini and Hochberg's False Discovery Rate (FDR) procedure was used. RESULTS: FAEs occurred in 194 out of 508 assessable patients (38.2%). In the association analysis, FAEs occurred more frequently in *6 rs1801160 A allele carriers (FDR=0.0083). At multivariate TTT analysis, significant associations were found for *6 rs1801160 A allele carriers (FDR<0.0001), *2A rs3918290 A allele carriers (FDR<0.0001), and rs2297595 GG genotype carriers (FDR=0.0014). Neutropenia was the most common FAEs (28.5%). *6 rs1801160 (FDR<0.0001), and *2A rs3918290 (FDR=0.0004) variant alleles were significantly associated with time to neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds evidence on the role of DPYD pharmacogenetics for safety of patients undergoing fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.

Advanced epithelioid pleural mesothelioma, long lasting disease stabilization and long term survival with cisplatin-pemetrexed chemotherapy re-challenge: a case report.

In this paper we report the case of a seventy-year old man affected by epithelioid malignant mesothelioma with prolonged disease control after chemotherapy with cisplatin pemetrexed, followed by single drug chemotherapy with pemetrexed.

[Troponin I and B-type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) as biomarkers for the prediction of cardiotoxicity in patients with breast cancer treated with adjuvant anthracyclines and trastuzumab]. / Troponina I e Peptide Natriuretico Cerebrale (BNP) come biomarcatori predittivi di cardiotossicità nelle pazienti affette da carcinoma della mammella in terapia adiuvante con antracicline e trastuzumab.

Adjuvant trastuzumab with chemotherapy is the treatment of choice for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor positive (HER2+) breast cancer and improves the outcome of patients with early breast cancer. However, it is potentially cardiotoxic and there are no validated methods of early detection of cardiotoxicity from trastuzumab following anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Currently, changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are assessed but this approach has limited sensitivity and specificity. Early identification of patients at risk for cardiotoxic effects is a primary goal for both cardiologists and oncologists. Plasma markers such as b-type natriuretic peptide (BNP - an index of elevated filling pressure) and troponin I (TnI - an index of cardiomyocyte damage) may be used to identify the risk of developing cardiac dysfunction during treatment. In this review, we discuss if TnI and/or BNP could be used to help the prevention or treatment of cardiac dysfunction at the earliest possible time.

Unusual endotracheal and breast metastasis from renal clear cell carcinoma: a case report.

We report a case of a woman affected by a metastatic renal clear cell carcinoma who showed unusual metastasis into the trachea and in the right breast 17 years and 21 years after nephrectomy respectively. Two endotracheal metastasis were identified during rigid bronchoscophy and were treated with endotracheal electro-surgery. Solitary metastasis in the right breast was identified by a mammography that revealed a dense mass of 1.5 cm at lower outer quadrant and she underwent to a right breast quadrantectomy. Histological examination showed a clear cell renal carcinoma metastasis as for the trachea as for the breast mass.

Baseline cholesterol absorption and the response to ezetimibe/simvastatin therapy: a post-hoc analysis of the ENHANCE trial.

Subjects with increased cholesterol absorption might benefit more from statin therapy combined with a cholesterol absorption inhibitor. We assessed whether baseline cholesterol absorption markers were associated with response to ezetimibe/simvastatin therapy, in terms of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering and cholesterol absorption inhibition, in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). In a posthoc analysis of the two-year ENHANCE trial, we assessed baseline cholesterol-adjusted campesterol (campesterol/TC) and sitosterol/TC ratios in 591 FH patients. Associations with LDL-C changes and changes in cholesterol absorption markers were evaluated by multiple regression analysis. No association was observed between baseline markers of cholesterol absorption and the extent of LDL-C response to ezetimibe/simvastatin therapy (beta = 0.020, P = 0.587 for campesterol/TC and beta<0.001, P = 0.992 for sitosterol/TC). Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment reduced campesterol levels by 68% and sitosterol levels by 62%; reductions were most pronounced in subjects with the highest cholesterol absorption markers at baseline, the so-called high absorbers (P < 0.001). Baseline cholesterol absorption status does not determine LDL-C lowering response to ezetimibe/simvastatin therapy in FH, despite more pronounced cholesterol absorption inhibition in high absorbers. Hence, these data do not support the use of baseline absorption markers as a tool to determine optimal cholesterol lowering strategy in FH patients. However, due to the exploratory nature of any posthoc analysis, these results warrant further prospective evaluation in different populations.

Safety and efficacy of ezetimibe monotherapy in 1624 primary hypercholesterolaemic patients for up to 2 years.

AIMS: This report examined the safety and efficacy of treatment for up to 2 years with the cholesterol absorption inhibitor, ezetimibe (EZE). METHODS: Two identical, randomised, double-blind trials (starting with 827 and 892 patients), evaluated the efficacy and safety of EZE 10 mg/day vs. placebo for 12 weeks in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia [low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) 3.3-5.1 mmol/l]. Upon completion of these base studies, patients were offered a 2-year, open-label extension study. Adverse event (AE) reports for EZE monotherapy-treated patients were summarised for 3-month intervals to allow for comparison with the placebo group of the 3-month base studies. The primary end-point for this analysis was the evaluation of the long-term safety and tolerability of EZE 10 mg monotherapy dosed daily for up to 24 months. RESULTS: The incidences of new AEs, treatment-related (TR) AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), TRSAEs and discontinuations as a result of AEs during any 3-month interval were comparable with the respective observations in the placebo group of the base studies. The incidences of AEs, TRAEs, SAEs, TRSAEs and discontinuations as a result of AEs decreased in almost every interval compared with earlier intervals throughout the 2-year study. In addition, the incidences of > or = 3-fold consecutive elevations of liver transaminases (0.7%) or > or = 10-fold increases in creatine phosphokinase (0.4%) for the entire 2-year treatment period were comparable with those of the placebo group (0.7% and 0.2% respectively). LDL-C reductions of approximately 18% were maintained throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, treatment with EZE for up to 2 years in 1624 patients showed no evidence of increased incidence of AEs with increased treatment duration, while showing sustained effects on LDL-C reduction.

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe coadministered with statins: randomised, placebo-controlled, blinded experience in 2382 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

We assessed pooled safety and lipid-regulating efficacy data from four similarly designed trials of ezetimibe coadministered with statins in 2382 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Patients were randomised to one of the following double-blind treatments for 12 weeks: placebo; ezetimibe 10 mg; statin; or statin + ezetimibe. Statin doses tested were 10, 20, 40 mg/day (atorvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin or lovastatin) or 80 mg/day (atorvastatin, simvastatin). Treatment with ezetimibe + statin led to significantly greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), apolipoprotein B and increases in HDL-C, compared to statin alone. At each statin dose, treatment with ezetimibe + statin led to a greater LDL-C reduction compared to the next highest statin monotherapy dose. Ezetimibe + statin had a safety profile similar to statin monotherapy. Coadministration of ezetimibe + statin offers a well-tolerated, highly efficacious new treatment strategy for patients with hypercholesterolemia.

Long-term safety and tolerability profile of ezetimibe and atorvastatin coadministration therapy in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia.

Long-term safety and tolerability of ezetimibe plus atorvastatin (EZE + ATV) coadministration therapy were compared to those of ATV monotherapy in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia. Upon completion of a 12 week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing EZE 10 mg; ATV 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg; EZE + ATV 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg or placebo, 246 patients were enrolled in a 12-month extension, with reassignment to double-blind EZE 10 mg (n = 201) or matching placebo (n = 45) coadministered daily with open-label ATV 10 mg. At intervals of 6 weeks, patients not at National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel II LDL-C goals were titrated to the next higher ATV dose. Safety evaluations included adverse event (AE) reports and laboratory test results. EZE + ATV and ATV monotherapy groups were similar with regard to incidence of all AEs (71 vs. 67%), treatment-related AEs (22 vs. 27%) and discontinuations due to AEs (9 vs. 7%) or treatment-related AEs (6 vs. 7%), respectively. Neither clinically significant elevations in hepatic transaminases or creatine kinase nor any cases of myopathy or rhabdomyolysis were observed in either group during the extension study. After 6 weeks, EZE + ATV 10mg produced greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; -53 vs. -37%), total cholesterol (TC; -38.8 vs. -26.0%) and triglycerides (TG; -28 vs. -12%) and similar increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (4.6 vs. 4.5%) compared to ATV 10 mg, respectively, and these changes were maintained and significant at 1 year (p < 0.01 for LDL-C, TC and TG). More EZE + ATV patients achieved LDL-C goal than ATV patients at study endpoint (91 vs. 78%, respectively; p = 0.02). Thus, the coadministration of EZE + ATV for 12 months was well tolerated and more efficacious than ATV monotherapy.

Supportive care in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

The present study describes supportive care (SC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), evaluating whether it is affected by concomitant chemotherapy, patient's performance status (PS) and age. Data of patients enrolled in three randomised trials of first-line chemotherapy, conducted between 1996 and 2001, were pooled. The analysis was limited to the first three cycles of treatment. Supportive care data were available for 1185 out of 1312 (90%) enrolled patients. Gastrointestinal drugs (45.7%), corticosteroids (33.4%) and analgesics (23.8%) were the most frequently observed categories. The mean number of drugs per patient was 2.43; 538 patients (45.4%) assumed three or more supportive drugs. Vinorelbine does not produce substantial variations in the SC pattern, while cisplatin-based treatment requires an overall higher number of supportive drugs, with higher use of antiemetics (41 vs 27%) and antianaemics (10 vs 4%). Patients with worse PS are more exposed to corticosteroids (42 vs 30%). Elderly patients require drugs against concomitant diseases significantly more than adults (20 vs 7%) and are less frequently exposed to antiemetics (12 vs 27%). In conclusion, polypharmacotherapy is a relevant issue in patients with advanced NSCLC. Chemotherapy does not remarkably affect the pattern of SC, except for some drugs against side effects. Elderly patients assume more drugs for concomitant diseases and receive less antiemetics than adults.

Evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ezetimibe in primary hypercholesterolaemia: a pooled analysis from two controlled phase III clinical studies.

Ezetimibe is a novel cholesterol absorption inhibitor that blocks intestinal absorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol. Data from 1719 patients who participated in two multicentre, double-blind studies of ezetimibe were pooled to evaluate the drug's efficacy and safety in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia. Following dietary stabilisation, a two- to 12-week washout period, and a four-week, single-blind, placebo lead-in period, patients were randomised to ezetimibe 10 mg or placebo once daily in the morning for 12 consecutive weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent reduction in plasma low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol from baseline at endpoint. Ezetimibe reduced LDL-cholesterol by a mean of 18.2% compared with an increase of 0.9% with placebo (p<0.01) and resulted in favourable, statistically significant changes in HDL-cholesterol, triglycerides and apo B. The response to ezetimibe was consistent across all subgroups analysed. Ezetimibe was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to placebo.

Effects of ezetimibe, a new cholesterol absorption inhibitor, on plasma lipids in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

AIMS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study evaluated the safety and efficacy of ezetimibe 10 mg/day in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: Following dietary stabilization, a 2-12-week washout period, and a 4-week, single-blind, placebo lead-in period, 827 patients with baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) > or =3.36 mmol/l (130 mg/dl) to < or =6.47 mmol/l (250 mg/dl) and triglycerides < or =3.95 mmol/l (350 mg/dl) were randomized 3:1 to receive ezetimibe 10 mg or placebo orally once daily in the morning for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage reduction in direct plasma LDL-C. Ezetimibe reduced direct LDL-C by a mean of 17.7% from baseline to endpoint, compared with an increase of 0.8% with placebo (P<0.01). Response to ezetimibe was generally consistent across all subgroups analyzed. Ezetimibe also significantly improved levels of plasma total cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, high-density lipoprotein(2)-cholesterol and lipoprotein(a), and elicited a trend toward lower triglyceride levels. Ezetimibe did not alter the serum concentrations of lipid-soluble vitamins or significantly affect baseline or stimulated cortisol production. Ezetimibe was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Ezetimibe, which significantly reduces LDL-C and favorably affects other lipid variables, may provide a well tolerated and effective new option for lipid management in the future.

Effectiveness and tolerability of ezetimibe in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: pooled analysis of two phase II studies.

BACKGROUND: Ezetimibe (SCH 58235) is a novel cholesterol absorption inhibitor that selectively and potently blocks intestinal absorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol. OBJECTIVE: Data from 2 multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, 12-week studies of ezetimibe were pooled to evaluate the drug's effect on lipid parameters in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: After dietary stabilization (National Cholesterol Education Program Step I diet or a stricter diet), washout of lipid-altering drugs, and a 6-week placebo lead-in period, patients with baseline plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels > or = 130 and < or = 250 mg/dL and plasma triglyceride (TG) levels < or = 300 mg/dL were randomized to receive either ezetimibe 0.25, 1, 5, or 10 mg, or placebo administered once daily before the morning meal in study A (dose-response study) or ezetimibe 5 or 10 mg or placebo administered once daily before the morning meal or at bedtime in study B (dose-regimen study). RESULTS: A total of 432 patients were included in this pooled analysis, 243 in study A and 189 in study B. The 5- and 10-mg doses of ezetimibe significantly reduced LDL-C levels by 15.7% and 18.5%, respectively (P < 0.01 vs placebo) and significantly increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (hDL-C) levels by 2.9% and 3.5%, respectively (P < 0.05 vs placebo). A reduction in plasma TG levels was observed (P = NS). With the 10-mg dose of ezetimibe, 67.8% of patients achieved > or = 15% reduction in plasma LDL-C levels, and 22.0% achieved > or = 25% reduction. With the 5-mg dose, 54.0% of patients achieved > or = 15% reduction in plasma LDL-C levels, and 15.3% achieved > or = 25% reduction. The decrease in plasma LDL-C levels was significantly greater with ezetimibe 10 mg compared with ezetimibe 5 mg (P < 0.05). Ezetimibe was well tolerated, with an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In these two 12-week studies, ezetimibe significantly decreased plasma LDL-C levels and increased plasma HDL-C levels, with a tolerability profile similar to that of placebo.

The plasma concentration and LDL-C relationship in patients receiving ezetimibe.

Ezetimibe is a novel selective inhibitor of intestinal cholesterol absorption, which has been shown to significantly decrease low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). In this article, the relationship between plasma ezetimibe concentrations and lowering of LDL-C is determined using Emax and regression models. Data from two phase II double-blind placebo-controlled studies (n = 232 and 177) were used in which daily doses of ezetimibe ranging from 0.25 to 10 mg were administered for 12 weeks. Ezetimibe concentrations correlated significantly with percentage change in LDL-C from baseline (%LDL-C). Reductions in %LDL-C of 10%, 15%, and 20% were achieved with concentrations in the ranges 0 to 2, 2 to 15, and > 15 ng/ml, respectively, as compared with placebo. To achieve > 15% reduction in LDL-C, patients need to maintain trough concentrations > 15 ng/ml, taking plasma concentrations as a surrogate for concentrations at the enterocyte. Based on the doses administered, the 10 mg dose had the highest likelihood of sustaining such concentrations, confirming that a daily 10 mg dose of ezetimibe is an optimal therapeutic dose in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia.

Carboplatin plus paclitaxel in extensive small cell lung cancer: a multicentre phase 2 study.

A multicentre phase 2 trial (single-stage design) was undertaken to test the efficacy and toxicity of carboplatin (AUC 6 according to Calvert) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)3-h infusion) every 4 weeks in the first line treatment of patients affected by extensive small cell lung cancer. The primary end-point of the trial was the objective response rate. 31 objective responses among 50 patients were considered necessary to proceed to a phase 3 trial. 48 patients were enrolled (median age 59 years). Treatment was very well tolerated. 3 patients (6.2%) had a complete response and 23 (47.9%) a partial response, for an overall response rate of 54.2% (95% CI: 39.2-68.6). Median time to progression was 5.7 months (95% CI: 5.2-6.2). Median survival was 9.6 months (95% CI: 7.2-14.6), with a median follow-up time of alive patients of 12 months. At 1 year, the probability of being progression-free or alive was 0.16 and 0.43, respectively. In conclusion, carboplatin plus paclitaxel as given in the present study is very well tolerated but not sufficiently active to warrant phase 3 comparison with standard chemotherapy regimens.

Carboplatin + epirubicin +VP-16 + lenograstim followed by radiotherapy + carboplatin as radiosensitizer in limited small cell lung cancer. A multicenter phase II study.

UNLABELLED: A phase II trial was undertaken to test the activity and toxicity of carboplatin (300 mg/m2, i.v. day 1) + epirubicin (75 mg/m2, i.v. day 1) + VP-16 (100 mg/m2, i.v. days 1 to 3) + lenograstim (5 mcg/kg, s.c. days 6 to 15) administered every 3 weeks for 4 cycles and subsequent chest irradiation (50 Gy) + daily carboplatin (25 mg/m2) in the first-line treatment of adults affected by limited small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-stage phase II design was used; the complete response (CR) rate after chest radiotherapy was the primary end-point. Twenty-three CRs were required out of 38 patients to consider the treatment worthy of further study. Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) was planned in case of CR. Patients aged < or = 70 were eligible if they had limited SCLC, a performance status not worse than 2 by the ECOG scale and no prior chemotherapy or radiotherapy. RESULTS: From January 1995 to April 1999, 33 patients were enrolled; the median age was 60 years. All the patients started chemotherapy; 23 patients received chest irradiation and concurrent daily carboplatin; 11 patients also received PCI. Toxicity was generally mild. Sixteen CRs (48.5%, 95% CI: 30.8-66.5) were recorded; the objective response rate was 72.7% (95% CI: 54.5-86.7). The median time-to-progression was 7.9 months (95% CI: 6.5-10.4). The median-survival was 10.7 months (95% CI: 9.2-16.1). CONCLUSION: Induction chemotherapy with carboplatin + epirubicin + VP-16 followed by chest irradiation plus concurrent daily carboplatin is well-tolerated but not sufficiently active to warrant further study in the treatment of patients with limited SCLC.

Mortality in the Survival With ORal D-sotalol (SWORD) trial: why did patients die?

The Survival With ORal D-sotalol (SWORD) trial tested the hypothesis that the prophylactic administration of oral d-sotalol would reduce total mortality in patients surviving myocardial infarction (MI) with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of < or = 40%. Two index MI groups were included: recent (6 to 42 days) and remote (> 42 days) with clinical heart failure (n = 915 and 2,206, respectively). The trial was discontinued when the statistical boundary for harm was crossed (RR = 1.65; p = 0.006). All baseline variables known to be associated with mortality risk (e.g., LVEF, heart failure class, age) as well as variables related to torsades de pointes (e.g., time from beginning of therapy, QTc, gender, potassium, renal function, dose of d-sotalol) were assessed for interaction of each variable with treatment assignment, computing RR and 95% confidence interval (CI) from Cox regression models. The d-sotalol-associated mortality was greatest in the group with remote MI and LVEFs of 31% to 40% (RR = 7.9; 95% CI 2.4 to 26.2). Most variables known to be associated with torsades de pointes were not differentially predictive of d-sotalol-associated risk, except female gender (RR = 4.7; 95% CI 1.4 to 16.5). These findings suggest that (1) most of the d-sotalol-associated risk was in patients remote from MI with a LVEF of 31% to 40%; comparable placebo patients had a very low mortality (0.5%); and (2) very little objective data supports torsades de pointes or any specific proarrhythmic mechanism as an explanation for d-sotalol-associated mortality risk.

Carboplatin plus vinorelbine, a new well-tolerated and active regimen for the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study. Gruppo Oncologico Centro-Sud-Isole.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the activity and toxicity of the combination carboplatin plus vinorelbine in extensive small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A two-stage optimal Simon design was applied. To proceed after the first stage, responses from 8 of 11 treated patients were needed. Overall, 31 responses of 43 treated patients were required to comply with the design parameters. Inclusion criteria were cytohistologically proven SCLC; extensive disease; age of 70 years or less; Eastern Cooperative Oncology group performance status (ps ECOG) of 2 or less; normal cardiac, hepatic, renal, and bone marrow functions; and no previous chemotherapy. Patients were staged by physical examination; biochemistry; chest radiograph; brain, thoracic; and abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scans, and bone scan. All patients received carboplatin 300 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks up to six cycles. Of 43 enrolled patients, 36 were men and 7 women, with a median age of 63 years (range, 46 to 70 years). RESULTS: All patients were assessable for response and toxicity. We observed 32 (74%) objective responses, with 23% complete responses. Median time to progression was 25 weeks, and median survival was 37 weeks. The treatment was well tolerated. The reported main toxicities were leukopenia grade 3 in 21% of patients and grade 4 in 5% of patients, anemia grade 2 in 11% of patients and grade 3 in 2% of patients, and thrombocytopenia grade 3 in 7% of patients. CONCLUSION: These data show that carboplatin plus vinorelbine is an active and well-tolerated regimen in extensive SCLC. In view of the activity, low toxicity, and ease of administration, it may be a reasonable alternative to more toxic cisplatin-containing regimens.

Phase I study of chemotherapy with carboplatin, epirubicin, and escalating dose of VP-16 with G-CSF support in extensive small cell lung cancer.

In attempt to develop a new chemotherapeutic regimen including carboplatin (CBDCA), epirubicin (EPI), and VP-16 in extensive small cell lung cancer, with a higher dose intensity compared with previous experience of our group, we determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of VP-16 when administered in association with CBDCA (300 mg/ m2, i.v., day 1) and EPI (75 mg/m2, i.v., day 1), recycling chemotherapy every 3 weeks, with the support of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). A total of 15 patients received three dose levels of VP-16 (mg/m2, i.v., daily on days 1-3): 100 (three patients), 120 (six), and 140 (six). G-CSF was administered subcutaneously at the dose of 5 micrograms/kg/day on days 6-15 of each chemotherapy course. The MTD was established at 140 mg/m2 and myelotoxicity, grade 4 neutropenia with death for sepsis in one case and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in three cases, was dose limiting. The recommended dose of VP-16 for a phase II study is 140 mg/m2.

Mitomycin C plus vindesine plus etoposide (MEV) versus mitomycin C plus vindesine plus cisplatin (MVP) in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase III multicentre randomised trial. The "Gruppo Oncologico Centro-Sud-Isole' (G.O.C.S.I.).

PURPOSE: To compare mitomycin C plus vindesine plus etoposide (MEV) vs. mitomycin C plus vindesine plus cisplatin (MVP) in the treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 204 patients were entered in a phase III multicentre randomised trial from June 1990 to December 1994 and stratified according to the ECOG performance status (0-1 vs. 2). MVP was given in the following dosages: mitomycin C 8 mg/m2+vindesine 3 mg/m2+cisplatin 100 mg/m2 i.v. day 1 and vindesine 3 mg/m2 i.v. day 8 with cycles repeated every 4 weeks. MEV was given in the following dosages: mitomycin C 8 mg/m2+vindesine 3 mg/ m2 i.v. day 1 and etoposide 100 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 to 3 with cycles repeated every 3 weeks. For both treatments a maximum of 6 cycles was planned. Response and toxicity were evaluated according to WHO. Subjective responses were assessed by numerical scales. Analyses were made on the basis of intent to treat. RESULTS: The objective response rate was 21.4% (1 CR + 21 PR among 103 patients) in the MEV and 28.7% (1 CR + 28 PR among 101 patients) in the MVP arm (P = 0.48). Symptoms were similar in the two arms. 196 patients progressed and 182 died. The median times to progression were 10 weeks (95% CI 9-12) and 12 weeks (95% CI 10-15) and median survivals were 29 weeks (95% CI 25-36) and 28 weeks (95% CI 25-35) in the MEV and MVP arms, respectively. The relative risks of progressing and of dying were 0.89 (95% CL 0.66-1.20) and 0.96 (95% CL 0.71-1.30), respectively, for patients receiving MVP as compared with those receiving MEV at multivariate analysis adjusted by sex, age, histologic type, number of metastatic sites, performance status at entry, and centre. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, no significant differences were observed in response rate, survival or palliation of symptoms between the MEV and MVP regimens, while toxicity was significantly more frequent and severe with MVP. Thus, MEV should be considered a reasonable alternative to the MVP regimen in the treatment of stage IV NSCLC.

Effect of d-sotalol on mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after recent and remote myocardial infarction. The SWORD Investigators. Survival With Oral d-Sotalol.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction is associated with an increased risk of death. Other studies have suggested that a potassium-channel blocker might reduce this risk with minimal adverse effects. We investigated whether d-sotalol, a pure potassium-channel blocker with no clinically significant beta-blocking activity, could reduce all-cause mortality in these high-risk patients. METHODS: Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less and either a recent (6-42 days) myocardial infarction or symptomatic heart failure with a remote (> 42 days) myocardial infarction were randomly assigned d-sotalol (100 mg increased to 200 mg twice daily, if tolerated) or matching placebo twice daily. FINDINGS: After 3121 of the planned 6400 patients had been recruited, the trial was stopped. Among 1549 patients assigned d-sotalol, there were 78 deaths (5.0%) compared with 48 deaths (3.1%) among the 1572 patients assigned placebo (relative risk 1.65 [95% CI 1.15-2.36], p = 0.006). Presumed arrhythmic deaths (relative risk 1.77 [1.15-2.74], p = 0.008) accounted for the increased mortality. The effect was greater in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 31-40% than in those with lower (