Nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (MyocetTM) combination (R-COMP) chemotherapy in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): results from the phase II EUR018 trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the activity and safety of nonpegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet) when substituted for doxorubicin in the R-CHOP regimen (R-COMP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) were studied. Only patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) > or =50% were allowed. R-COMP regimen was administered every 3 weeks for three cycles, followed by additional five cycles in case of complete response (CR) or partial response. RESULTS: From November 2002 to April 2005, 75 patients were registered, of which 72 were evaluated. Median age was 72 years (range 61-83); 56% of patients had high or high-intermediate International Prognostic Index score. Median LVEF at baseline was 61%. Thirty-eight patients had history of abnormal cardiovascular conditions. The overall response rate was 71%, with a CR rate of 57%. After a median follow-up of 33 months, the 3-year overall survival, failure-free survival, and progression-free survival rates were 72%, 39%, and 69%, respectively. Neutropenia (54%) was the most frequent grade 3-4 adverse event (AE); 21% of patients experienced cardiac AEs, graded as 3-4 in 4% of the cases. CONCLUSION: R-COMP is an effective regimen for the treatment of DLBCL in elderly patients, with an acceptable tolerability profile.

Long-duration, weekly treatment with gemcitabine plus vinorelbine for non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter phase II study.

In this phase II study, gemcitabine and vinorelbine were combined at suboptimal doses for weekly administration in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary objectives were to determine objective response rate (ORR) and time to progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints were safety and overall survival. Chemonaive patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC received vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) immediately followed by gemcitabine (800 mg/m2) once each week (on day 1) for 6 months without rest. From May 1998 to May 1999, 40 patients were enrolled (85% males; 70% stage IV) with a median age of 65.5. A total of 478 doses were administered, with a median of 9 per patient (range 2-72). The ORR was 27.5% (95% CI, 15.1-44.1%). The median TTP was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.4 months). At a median follow-up of 6.5 months, the median survival was 11.6 months, and survival rates at 1 and 2 year(s) were 47.5% and 15.8%, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia, in 70% of patients, with febrile neutropenia in 28%. The most common grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicity was transaminase elevation, in 22.5% of patients, which was transient and reversible. The other most prominent toxicities were, unexpectedly, pulmonary and cardiac toxicities. Based on these results, weekly, long-term administration of gemcitabine-vinorelbine appears to be an active regimen in NSCLC that warrants further investigation.

High-dose ifosfamide: circumvention of resistance to standard-dose ifosfamide in advanced soft tissue sarcomas.

PURPOSE: The study was designed to assess the toxicity and activity of high-dose ifosfamide (HDI) administered by continuous infusion at a dose of 4 g/m2/d over 3 days every 4 weeks in adult patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas (ASTS) pretreated with doxorubicin and/or a standard-dose ifosfamide (SDI)-containing regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1991 and November 1993, 40 patients with progressive ASTS were entered onto the study. Twenty-eight patients had been pretreated with a multidrug regimen that contained SDI and were classified as follows: SDI-refractory (n = 21), SDI-resistant (n = 2), and indeterminate SDI-sensitive (n = 5). Patients were treated until progression or major toxicity. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven cycles of HDI were administered. Neutropenia was dose-limiting, with 100% of patients experiencing grade 3 to 4 toxicity and 12 admissions for febrile neutropenia (30% of patients). Neurotoxicity (17% of patients) was significantly associated with acute renal failure (n = 4) (P < .001), grade 4 thrombocytopenia (P < .01) and febrile neutropenia (P = .048). Chronic renal toxicity (n = 4) was significantly associated with retroperitoneal masses and/or prior nephrectomy (P = .008). Partial responses (PRs) were observed in 12 of 36 assessable patients (33%) and eight patients (22%) experienced disease stabilization. All but one response occurred in patients pretreated with SDI, with five PRs among SDI-refractory patients. Leiomyosarcomas appear resistant to HDI. The median response duration was 8 months (range, 6 to 13+) and the median overall survival time was 12 months. CONCLUSION: The activity of HDI in these pretreated ASTS patients and the apparent circumvention of SDI resistance suggest a real dose-response relationship for ifosfamide and deserve further evaluation. Although toxic, this treatment appears feasible and manageable using routine clinical support. Since prophylaxis of ifosfamide-induced renal damage remains unknown, frequent monitoring of renal and tubular functions during therapy is highly recommended.

Phase I study of paclitaxel and epirubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a preliminary report on safety.

Attempting to develop a new active, convenient regimen, we initiated a phase I study of paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) combined with epirubicin (Farmitalia Carlo Erba, Milan, Italy) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. In addition to standard eligibility criteria, patients with chemotherapy-naive metastasis and at least one measurable lesion had to have left ventricular ejection fractions of at least 50%; the metastatic relapse had to have occurred more than 6 months after adjuvant treatment. Anthracycline-pretreated patients could not have received cumulative doses of more than 300 mg/m2 doxorubicin, 450 mg/m2 epirubicin, or 70 mg/m2 mitoxantrone. An intravenous bolus dose of epirubicin was followed by a 3-hour paclitaxel infusion, with courses repeated every 3 weeks. To date, seven dose levels have been investigated and 31 patients have been treated, 19 of whom had already received anthracyclines. Grades 3 and 4 neutropenia occurred in 37% and 19% of 123 courses, respectively, with five episodes of febrile neutropenia. Grade 2 or 3 neurotoxicity has been observed in 42% of patients and cardiac toxicity in four patients (13%), all of whom had already received anthracyclines. One patient experienced transient myocardial ischemia, one had an asymptomatic decrease in ejection fraction, and two patients had clinical heart failure that required treatment. Dose-limiting toxicity was reached at dose level 5 (paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 plus epirubicin 60 mg/m2), with two of three patients experiencing febrile neutropenia. Reducing the epirubicin dose to 50 mg/m2, however, allowed the paclitaxel dose to be escalated to 250 mg/m2. At this dose level, only one of six patients experienced febrile neutropenia. At a preliminary response evaluation (dose levels 1 to 6), 11 patients (44%) had partial responses, 12 patients (48%) had stable disease, and disease progressed in two patients. We conclude that the combination paclitaxel/epirubicin is safe for patients with metastatic breast cancer and, at this early evaluation, shows promising antitumor activity. Additional patients will be treated at dose level 5 to confirm whether dose-limiting toxicity occurs at this step. Indeed, we took into consideration that dose-limiting toxicity observed at this particular dose level in two of three patients might be due to hazard, since paclitaxel dose escalation up to 250 mg/m2 was further possible in association with 50 mg/m2 epirubicin.

Phase I studies of combined paclitaxel/epirubicin and paclitaxel/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide in patients with metastatic offast cancer: the French experience.

In an attempt to develop new, active, and convenient outpatient combination-chemotherapy regimens for patients with metastatic breast cancer, we performed two phase I studies combining paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) plus anthracycline for the first-line treatment of metastatic disease, without the use of hematopoietic growth factors. Study I was designed to test the tolerability and antitumor activity of a 3-hour infusion of paclitaxel in combination with an epirubicin intravenous bolus. Study 2 explored a three-drug chemotherapy regimen: a 3-hour paclitaxel infusion with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide. Courses were repeated every 3 weeks. If any dose-limiting events occurred in two or more of six patients in the first course of a given dose level, that dose level was defined as the maximum tolerated dose. Dose-limiting criteria included the following: neutrophils less than 0.25 x 10(9)/L lasting for > or = 5 days, any febrile neutropenia, World Health Organization grade 4 thrombocytopenia, World Health Organization grade > or = 3 nonhematologic toxicity or grade > or = 3 mucositis for more than 5 days, and absence of hematologic recovery at day 35. In both studies, paclitaxel doses were escalated in subsequent groups of three to six patients. For study I, the initial dose level consisted of paclitaxel (110 mg/m2)/epirubicin (50 mg/m2). To date 40 patients have entered the study at eight dose levels. Of the 181 cycles evaluated, grade 3 or 4 neutropenic episodes were observed in 63% of courses, with only five episodes of febrile neutropenia. Grade 2 or 3 neurotoxicity was observed in 43% of patients. Two patients experienced clinical heart failure. The dose-limiting toxicity has not been reached so far. At dose level 7 (paclitaxel [250 mg/m2]/epirubicin [50 mg/m2]), only one patient of six experienced febrile neutropenia. We are currently testing paclitaxel (200 mg/m2)/epirubicin (75 mg/m2). Preliminary evaluation of response documents two complete and 16 partial responses in 37 evaluable patients (48% overall response rate). In study 2, the initial dose level consisted of paclitaxel (150 mg/m2)/epirubicin (50 mg/m2)/cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2). To date, three dose levels have been investigated in 16 evaluable patients (82 cycles). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenic episodes were observed in 80% of courses, and five episodes were associated with neutropenic fever. Grade 2 neurotoxicity was observed in 28% of patients. The dose-limiting toxicity has not been reached, and we are currently investigating dose level 4 (paclitaxel 225 mg/m2). These trials confirm the tolerability of combined paclitaxel/epirubicin and paclitaxel/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide. The antitumor activity is encouraging.

Gemcitabine and protracted 5-FU for advanced pancreatic cancer. A phase II study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Although chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer procures dismal results, both 5-fluorouracil and gemcitabine have shown a modest activity. We report a phase II study of gemcitabine combined with protracted 5-fluorouracil. METHODOLOGY: Gemcitabine was given at 1000 mg/m2/week intravenously, in combination with concomitant 5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2/day as a protracted venous infusion, both 3 out of 4 weeks in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Twenty-nine patients were enrolled, among whom 27 were metastatic. Response rate, overall and progression-free survival were endpoints, as well as tolerance and clinical benefit. RESULTS: We observed 3 (10%) partial responses, and 12 (42%) stabilizations within which the median disease control was 5.6 months. The median progression-free and overall survivals were 2.8 and 4 months, respectively. A clinical benefit was observed in 39% of patients. Myelosuppression was the main toxicity, but no grade 4 was observed. Other toxicities were mild. CONCLUSIONS: This combination chemotherapy was well tolerated in advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

[Soft tissue sarcomas: general review]. / Sarcomes des tissus mous: revue générale.

Soft tissues sarcomas are an heterogeneous group of neoplasms. Their epidemiology is still poorly known. Great strides have been made in the genetic study over the last few years. Histologic grade, tumor size and deep location are the main independent prognostic factors in multivariate analysis using the Cox model. Overall 5-year survival is approximately 50% in most of the studies. Surgical conservative treatment associated with radiotherapy is actually preferred to radical surgery, because no survival difference is found between the two treatments. Radiation therapy modalities are discussed: preoperative, postoperative irradiation, interstitial brachytherapy. Doxorubicin, ifosfamide and DTIC are the most efficient drugs. However, response rates obtained with polychemotherapy are still less than 50%. High-dose chemotherapy is an encouraging concept. Edatrexate and Taxotere show interesting response rates in phase II clinical trials. Adjuvant chemotherapy efficiency is probably low: a meta-analysis shows a 5-year survival increase of 9%. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy allows a high rate of conservative treatment.

[Compassionate use of gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: a French multicentric study]. / Utilisation compassionelle de la gemtacitabine dans les cancers du pancréas localement avancés ou métastatiques: une étude multicentrique française.

Advanced-stage surgically unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas is highly lethal. Attempts to improve this survival with chemotherapy were dismal, until gemcitabin was shown to be clinically beneficial and to modestly improve survival. We started an open multicentric compassionate study of gemcitabine in advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas to assess those benefits. Of 74 patients who were enrolled, 46 were assessable for tumoral response (2 partial response, 18 stable disease, 24 progressing disease). A clinical benefit was obtained in 48% of assessable patients. Myelotoxicity, nausea and vomiting were the major side effect. The median event-free and overall survivals from study inclusion were 2. 5 and 5 months respectively. This study confirms that gemcitabine can be effective even in patients with pretreated advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.

[CA 15-3 and breast cancer]. / CA 15-3 et cancers du sein.

The precise clinical value of CA 15-3 antigen has yet to be determined. With no role in screening for early breast cancer and, even if CA 15-3 seems to be correlated with bulky initial tumor burden, it appears to have no independent prognostic value. The clinical interest of CA 15-3 remains the early detection of the first recurrence. In this regard, more than 75% of first recurrences (all sites included) are associated with a significant rise in CA 15-3 levels, with a particular sensitivity for bone, liver, and lung metastases but which appears lower for locoregional recurrences. More sensitive and specific than CEA, and this whatever the site of recurrence, the rise of CA 15-3 may precede the clinically or radiologically diagnostic of recurrence by a mean lead time from 6 to 9 months. Furthermore CA 15-3 is a reliable marker for clinical course and seems to be of potential interest in monitoring disease follow-up during therapy. In the situation of a clinically isolated elevation of CA 15-3, which investigations, if any, have to be done?, and if negative must do we initiate a treatment for a "biological recurrence"? All these questions remain still opened, and today on consensual attitude can be recommended. In this issue, only results of well-designed prospective trials could help us to determine more rationally, an optimal diagnostic and therapeutic strategy.

Preclinical relevance of dosing time for the therapeutic index of gemcitabine-cisplatin.

The relevance of gemcitabine timing for chronotherapeutic optimisation was investigated. Healthy mice received multiple doses of gemcitabine (120, 160 or 200 mg kg(-1) injection (inj)(-1)) at one of six circadian times (3, 7, 11, 15, 19 or 23 h after light onset--HALO) on days 1, 4, 7 and 10 or a single dose of gemcitabine (400 mg kg(-1)) at 11 or 23 HALO+/-cisplatin (5 mg kg(-1) at 1 min, 4 or 8 h later). Mice bearing Glasgow osteosarcoma received multiple doses of gemcitabine (200 mg kg(-1) inj(-1)) at 11 or 23 HALO+/-cisplatin (5 mg kg(-1) inj(-1) at 1 min or 4 h later) on days of 10, 13, 16 and 19 following tumour inoculation. A circadian rhythm in body weight loss was statistically validated, with 1030 HALO corresponding to the least toxic time (95% CL, 0800 to 1300). Gemcitabine dosing produced least body weight loss and least neutropenia after injection at 11 vs 23 HALO, whether the drug was given alone or with cisplatin (P=0.001). Gemcitabine-cisplatin tolerability was improved by dosing gemcitabine at 11 HALO and CDDP at 15 HALO (P<0.001). The administration of this schedule to tumour-bearing mice increased median survival three-fold as compared to treatments where both drugs were given simultaneously at 11 or 23 HALO (P=0.02). The optimal schedule would correspond to the delivery of gemcitabine upon awakening and cisplatin near mid-activity in cancer patients.

Phase II study of a combination of elliptinium and vinblastine in metastatic breast cancer.

Thirty nine patients with metastatic breast cancer, all previously treated with chemotherapy including anthracycline, were given Elliptinium acetate (80 mg/m2/day) and a continuous infusion of Vinblastine (2 mg/m2/day) for 3 consecutive days every 4 weeks. Twenty nine patients had measurable metastatic disease. Nine (31%) achieved a partial response. No complete response was observed. Median duration of response was 6 months. The response rate was dependent on the number of metastatic sites and independent of the number of previous chemotherapy regimes. Side effects were dry mouth (27 patients), vomiting (9), neutropenia (3 patients with grade IV, 2 with grade III), muscle cramps (5) and thrombosis (3). Xerostomia and vomiting contributed to weight loss and fatigue (8 patients). We conclude that Elliptinium-Vinblastine combination has moderate activity as second line treatment in metastatic breast cancer. This combination causes xerostomia and fatigue with moderate myelosuppression.

Gemcitabine combined with cisplatin as first-line treatment in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a phase II study.

OBJECTIVE: This phase II study was performed to evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: Chemonaive patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed FIGO stage III or IV epithelial ovarian carcinoma were enrolled. Patients received cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on Day 1 and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on Days 1 (after cisplatin) and 8 of a 21-day cycle. RESULTS: Of the 42 female patients (median age 60 years) enrolled, 81% had a Zubrod performance status of 0 or 1. Among the 37 response-evaluable patients, there were 5 (13.5%) pathological complete responses (CRs), 16 (43.2%) pathological partial responses (PRs), and 3 (8.1%) clinical PRs, for an overall response rate of 64.9% (95% CI: 47.4-79.8%) and a pathological response rate of 56.8%. Per an intent-to-treat analysis, the overall response rate was 57.1% (95% CI: 41.0-72.3%). After a median follow-up time of 15.8 months, the median survival was 24.0 months and median progression-free survival was 13.4 months. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 69.0 and 33.3% of patients, respectively, with no febrile neutropenia or hemorrhage. Grade 3/4 nausea and vomiting occurred in 35.7% and grade 3 alopecia in 21.4% of the patients. One patient died due to a toxicity-related death (dyspnea). CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin is active and feasible as first-line treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Further clinical trials adding gemcitabine to first-line treatment seem warranted.

A phase II study of gemcitabine in platinum pre-treated patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced ovarian cancer will relapse following platinum-based combination chemotherapy and be considered for second-line treatment. Gemcitabine, a nucleoside analogue, is active against a range of solid tumors. This phase II study investigated the activity of single-agent gemcitabine in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with FIGO stage III (34%) or IV (64%) ovarian cancer who were previously treated with platinum-containing regimens were enrolled. Patients received 1200 mg/m2 gemcitabine on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Patients completed an average of 3.6 cycles. Two complete and three partial responses were seen in 36 evaluable patients, for an overall response rate of 13.9% (95% CI: 4.7%-29.5%). The median survival time was 6.7 months. Toxicities were generally mild. The most common were grade 3-4 neutropenia and grade 3 leukopenia reported in 23.7% and 10.5% of patients, respectively. One patient had grade 4 pulmonary toxicity. CONCLUSION: Single-agent gemcitabine is active and well tolerated in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Single-agent gemcitabine is active in previously treated metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with an anthracycline- or anthracenedione-containing regimen as first-line therapy for metastatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients with MBC were enrolled in five French centers. Patients were eligible if they had received one prior chemotherapy regimen with an anthracycline or anthracenedione for metastatic disease, if they had responded to that prior regimen, and if they had relapsed at least 6 months after the first response. Fifteen patients received more than one prior anthracycline regimen; thus, gemcitabine was third-line therapy for 30% of patients. Gemcitabine 1,200 mg/m(2) was administered as a 30-min intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle for a maximum of eight cycles after the best response was obtained. RESULTS: Objective responses were seen in 12 of 41 assessable patients (4 complete responses and 8 partial responses), for an objective response rate of 29% (95% confidence interval, 16-46%). The median response duration was 8.1 months (range: 2.5-27.4 months). Serious hematological toxicity was minimal, with grade 4 neutropenia in 2% of the patients (no neutropenic fever), grade 3 neutropenia in 28% of the patients, and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 6% of the patients. Among the nonhematological toxicities, asthenia was the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine given at this dose and schedule is a well-tolerated treatment with definitive antitumor activity in pretreated MBC patients. This result warrants future exploration of the use of gemcitabine as a single agent and in combination in patients with MBC.

Pemetrexed disodium in recurrent locally advanced or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

This phase II study determined response rate of patients with locally advanced or metastatic head and neck cancer treated with pemetrexed disodium, a new multitargeted antifolate that inhibits thymidylate synthase, dihydrofolate reductase and glycinamide ribonucleotide formyl transferase. 35 patients with local or metastatic relapse of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (31 male, 4 female; median age 53 years) were treated with pemetrexed 500 mg m(2)administered as a 10-minute infusion on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients received 1 to 8 cycles of therapy. 9 patients (26.5%) had an objective response, with a median response duration of 5.6 months (range 2.9-20 months). 15 (44.1%) had stable disease, and 8 (23.5%) had progressive disease. 2 patients were not assessable for response. Median overall survival was 6.4 months (range 0.7-28.1 months; 95% CI: 3.9-7.7 months). 24 patients (68.6%) experienced grade 3/4 neutropenia, with febrile neutropenia in 4 (11.4%). Grade 3/4 anaemia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 11 (34.3%) and 6 (17.1%) patients, respectively. The most frequent non-haematological toxicity was grade 3/4 mucositis (17.1%; 6 patients). In conclusion, pemetrexed is active in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Although substantial haematological toxicities were experienced by patients, subsequent studies have shown that these toxicities can be proactively managed by folic acid and vitamin B(12)supplementation.

Phase II study of pemetrexed in breast cancer patients pretreated with anthracyclines.

BACKGROUND: To assess antitumor activity and toxicity of pemetrexed in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients previously treated with anthracyclines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-seven MBC patients from 12 European institutions were entered into the study. Seventy-two patients were considered evaluable for response and toxicity. Forty-two patients were classified as anthracycline-failure (relapse >30 days after completion of a prior anthracycline regimen) and 30 as anthracycline-refractory (progression within 30 days after anthracycline therapy). Pemetrexed 600 mg/m(2) was administered intravenously every 3 weeks until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: There were three complete and 12 partial responders [response rate 21% (95% confidence interval 12%)]. Response rates in the anthracycline-failure and anthracycline-refractory groups were 24% and 17%, respectively. A subset of 31 patients pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes had a response rate of 26%. Median duration of response and median survival were 5.5 and 10.7 months, respectively (13 months in the failure group and 5.7 months for refractory). Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in 56% and 19% of patients, respectively. Nine patients (12%) experienced neutropenic fever. Grade 3/4 non-hematological toxicities included skin rash (10%), nausea (12%), fatigue (10%) and stomatitis (5%). CONCLUSION: Our trial demonstrates pemetrexed to be active in breast cancer, with manageable toxicity. Activity of pemetrexed did not appear to be adversely affected by prior taxane, 5-fluorouracil or endocrine treatments.

Phase I-II and pharmacokinetic study of gemcitabine combined with oxaliplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and ovarian carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the toxicity profile, the recommended dose (RD) and the pharmacokinetic parameters, and to evaluate the antitumor activity of gemcitabine combined with oxaliplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and ovarian carcinoma (OC). METHODS: Gemcitabine was administered as a 30-min infusion followed by a 2-h infusion of oxaliplatin, repeated every 2 weeks. Doses of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin ranged from 800 to 1500 and 70 to 100 mg/m(2), respectively. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (26 males, 18 females; median age 55 years) including 35 NSCLC (five platinum pretreated) and nine OC patients (all platinum pretreated) received a total of 355 cycles. All patients were evaluable for toxicity. No dose-limiting toxicity at any dose level occurred during the first two cycles; therefore, the highest dose-level of gemcitabine (1500 mg/m(2)) and oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2)) was considered as the RD. Hematological toxicity was moderate amongst the 22 patients treated (167 cycles) at that dose level. Thirteen cycles were associated with grade 3-4 non-febrile neutropenia in six patients, and eight cycles with grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in two patients. Other toxicities were mild to moderate, consisting of asthenia and peripheral neurotoxicity. Four of the 35 patients treated with oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) experienced grade 3 neurotoxicity requiring treatment discontinuation at cycle 10. In the range of the doses used, gemcitabine and its main metabolite 2',2'-difluorodeoxyuridine appeared not to be affected by oxaliplatin 70-100 mg/m(2). Of the 44 patients evaluable for activity, 12 NSCLC patients experienced objective responses (one complete and 11 partial responses) and three OC patients showed tumor stabilization lasting for 6 months with a 50% decrease of CA 125 level. Two partial responses (NSCLC) and one tumor stabilization (OC) occurred in platinum-resistant patients. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin could be safely administered on an out-patient schedule in patients with advanced NSCLC and OC. The RD was gemcitabine 1500 mg/m(2) and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks. Promising antitumor activity was reported in patients with NSCLC and platinum-pretreated OC, and thus, deserves further evaluation.

Randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial comparing two doses of arzoxifene (LY353381) in hormone-sensitive advanced or metastatic breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-blind, phase II study assessed two doses of the selective estrogen receptor modulator arzoxifene in women with advanced breast cancer. The primary end point was to choose the best of two doses of arzoxifene based on the response rate or the clinical benefit rate (CBR). Pharmacokinetics and toxicities were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-two patients with advanced breast cancer received arzoxifene 20 or 50 mg/day. Tumor response was assessed using World Health Organization criteria. Toxicities were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) system. Pharmacokinetic data were analyzed using the NONMEM software program (GloboMax, Hanover, MD, USA). RESULTS: Response rates in the 20 mg arm were numerically higher than the 50-mg arm according to the investigator (40.5% versus 36.4%) and the independent review panel (42.9% versus 27.3%). CBR was higher in the 20 mg arm according to the investigator (64.3% versus 61.4%) and the independent review panel (59.5% versus 47.7%). Arzoxifene was well tolerated. There were no study drug-related deaths. Mean observed steady-state plasma concentrations of arzoxifene were 3.62 and 7.48 ng/ml for the 20 and 50 mg doses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in efficacy or safety between 20 and 50 mg of arzoxifene. Accordingly, arzoxifene 20 mg/day was selected for further study in patients with breast cancer.

A dose-finding study of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in advanced previously treated malignancies.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine and vinorelbine are active drugs with broad spectrum of activity and manageable toxicity in clinical trials. The aims of this study were to describe the toxicity, to determine the dose-limiting toxicity, and to define the doses of gemcitabine and vinorelbine to be recommended for phase II studies in patients with advanced cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Drugs were given as 30-min infusions on day 1 and 8 (vinorelbine before gemcitabine) every 3 weeks. Thirty-six patients (male:female ratio 25:11; mean age 54, PS > 60) were treated including 1 retroperitoneal sarcoma, 7 head and neck, 10 lung, 4 thyroid, 6 pancreatic, 1 bladder, 2 ovary, 2 gastric, 1 rectum, 1 unknown primary, and 1 renal cell carcinoma. Doses of gemcitabine/vinorelbine ranged from 800/20 mg/m2 to 1500/30 mg/m2. RESULTS: The dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia. A transient grade 2-3 elevation of transaminases was frequently observed at several dose-levels, although this toxicity did not appear to be dose dependant and was reversible at day 21 before the next cycle. Other toxicities were mild and easily manageable, consisting of fatigue and flu-like syndromes. Since the MTD was not reach at the higher dose-level, the recommended dose level of the gemcitabine-vinorelbine combination was 1500/30 mg/m2. One toxic death due to hematologic toxicity was reported in a heavily pretreated patient who underwent prior chemotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy. A total of 12 patients were treated at the recommended dose level which was associated with grade 3-4 neutropenia in 3 of 12 patients and in 22.9% of cycles. CONCLUSIONS: This study estimates that the recommended dose for phase II studies of gemcitabine-vinorelbine is 1500/30 mg/m2 at day 1 and 8 every three weeks. A careful monitoring of the hematologic toxicity is recommended in heavily pretreated patients and in patients who received pelvic radiotherapy. Partial responses observed in a patient with an advanced cisplatin-5-fluorouracil-resistant pancreatic adenocarcinoma and in a patient with mesothelioma support further evaluation of this combination in patients with tumors refractory to classical antitumor agents.