Thoracic radiotherapy and daily vinorelbine as radiosensitizer in locally advanced non small cell lung cancer: a phase I study.

Experimental studies have shown that vinorelbine is a powerful radiosensitizer in vitro. To date, no reports on clinical activity of the single agent vinorelbine as radiosensitizer have been published. The aim of the present phase I study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of vinorelbine administered daily concurrently with thoracic radiotherapy, with or without amifostine support, in the treatment of locally advanced non small cell lung cancer. In vitro studies have shown that vinorelbine can potentiate the antitumor effects of radiation therapy. Amifostine is a sulphydril compound that has shown to protect normal tissues from chemotherapy and radiotherapy-induced toxicities. Radiotherapy lasted 6 weeks and the total dose was 55 Gy. The daily fraction was 1.8 Gy, administered 5 days a week for 5 weeks and increased to 2.0 Gy during the sixth and last week. Concurrent vinorelbine was administered daily with a planned escalation of the dose from 4, to 5 and 6 mg/m(2). Fourteen patients were enrolled in the study. The first dose of vinorelbine was 4 mg/m(2) and it showed to be feasible without dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Instead, the second dose level of 5 mg/m(2) was unfeasible because three out of six patients had DLT (grade 4 neutropenia, treatment interruption longer than 2 weeks for prolonged grade 2 neutropenia and treatment interruption longer than 2 weeks for prolonged grade 3 esophagitis together with grade 4 dyspnea). At that time, the study continued adding amifostine to vinorelbine in order to increase its MTD. Amifostine was administered by means of subcutaneous injection 15 min before each radiotherapy fraction at the fixed dose of 300 mg/m(2). However, 5 mg/m(2) of vinorelbine were considered unfeasible even with amifostine support because three out of five patients showed DLT (grade 4 neutropenia, febrile grade 4 neutropenia and grade 3 liver toxicity). Among 14 patients enrolled in the study, eight completed the planned treatment because six patients experienced DLT, which determined treatment interruption. Overall, four partial and two complete responses were observed. Two partial and one complete response were observed in those three patients who had been treated with the first dose of vinorelbine. In conclusion, our data show that the MTD of daily vinorelbine is 4 mg/m(2). Therefore, this is the recommended dose of daily vinorelbine to be administered with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy in a phase II trial. Finally, amifostine administered subcutaneously failed to increase the MTD of daily vinorelbine.

Carboplatin plus oral etoposide in elderly patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer. A phase II study.

More than 30% of lung cancers arise in patients over 70 years old. Elderly patients are not considered to tolerate chemotherapy, are generally excluded from clinical trials, and are not considered eligible for aggressive cisplatinbased chemotherapy in clinical practice. The aims of the present study were to test the activity and toxicity of a combination of carboplatin and oral etoposide in patients over 70 years old with advanced non small cell lung cancer. Carboplatin was given at a dose of 300 mg/m2, i.v., at day 1, and oral etoposide (50 mg capsules) at a total dose of 100 mg/die from day 1 to day 7, recycled every 4 weeks. Fourteen patients entered the study. Median age was 73 years (range 70-77), 42.9% of patients had at least one concomitant illness. The trial, according to the Gehan design, was terminated earlier because no objective response was observed among the first 14 patients. We reported, according to intent to treat analysis, 2 stable and 12 progressive diseases. Median time to progression was 2 months and median survival 6 months. Remarkable hematological toxicity was recorded. Finally, we do not recommend the combination of carboplatin and oral etoposide, at the doses and schedule used in the present study, in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. The combination might be reconsidered using a different etoposide schedule with chronic administration (21 days).

Single-agent gemcitabine as second-line treatment in patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Although the use of salvage chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial, pretreated symptomatic patients often need some kind of treatment to achieve symptoms relief. Gemcitabine is one of the most active new drugs in advanced NSCLC and preliminary reports suggest that it is active also in patients previously treated with platinum compounds. AIM: to evaluate activity and toxicity and the effect on quality of life of gemcitabine in platinum-pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: single-stage phase 2 trial with p0 = 5%, p1 = 20%, alfa = 5%, beta = 10%; 34 patients required and 4 objective responses expected to warrant further studies. Gemcitabine was administered at dose of 1000 mg/m2, i.v., d 18-15, every 4 weeks, for a maximum of 6 cycles. Quality of life was measured by EORTC C-30 and LC-13 questionnaires. RESULTS: from September 1996 to July 1998, 30 patients have been enrolled. There were 6 (20% exact 95% CI 8-39%) partial responses (2 responses were in pts with brain metastases and 2 in patients progressed during first-line chemotherapy). All patients (but one died because myocardial infarction, progressed; median time to progression was 10 weeks (95% CI 7-12); 28 patients died; median survival was 22 weeks (95% CI 17-29). Quality of life analysis showed no significant change but for the improvement of cough after 3 cycles of chemotherapy. There was no severe toxicity. CONCLUSION: gemcitabine is active as second line for patients with advanced NSCLC who received platinum-based first line treatment. In view of such results randomized trials comparing gemcitabine versus best supportive care are warranted.

Single agent docetaxel plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) in previously treated patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer. A phase II study and review of the literature.

The use of salvage chemotherapy in advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial. However, many patients need to be treated in order to achieve relief of their symptoms. Docetaxel (taxotere) is one of the most active drugs for the treatment of advanced NSCLC and several studies have also shown its effectiveness in pretreated patients. In the present study, 23 patients were treated in order to evaluate both the effectiveness and toxicity of the single agent docetaxel. Furthermore, granulocyte-colony stimulating (G-CSF) factor was administered in order to reduce neutropenia related to docetaxel. Docetaxel was administered intravenously at a dose of 100 mg/m2, on day 1, and it was repeated every 3 weeks. G-CSF was administered for primary prophylaxis of neutropenia at the standard dose of 30 mg/day from day 4 to day 10 of each cycle. The treatment was tolerated well and 5 (21.7%) partial responses were obtained. The median time to progression and the median survival time were 3 and 5 months, respectively. The main side effect noted was fatigue, the intensity of which was grade 2 in 43.4% of cases and grade 3 in 8.7% of patients, respectively. One patient (4.3%) had grade 4 cutaneous toxicity. No cases of grade 4 neutropenia were reported. In conclusion, docetaxel is active when used for salvage chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC whilst concurrent primary prophylactic administration of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor seems to decrease severe neutropenia.

The role of granulocyte growth factors in the treatment of non small cell lung cancer.

In the past years granulocyte growth factors have been introduced in clinical practice. Their use is intended to reduce the risk of infection related to chemotherapy and to increase the dose-intensity of chemotherapy agents. Very few randomized trials have been reported in advanced non small cell lung cancer on chemotherapy plus or minus granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. No benefit for granulocyte growth factors use was observed in terms of response rate and survival. Recently, several investigators used growth factors to support new promising drug combinations including vinorelbine, gemcitabine, taxol or taxotere. However, outside controlled clinical trials the role of granulocyte growth factors in the treatment of non small cell lung cancer should be within the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines.