Metastatic small cell bladder cancer treated with sequential systemic therapy including pembrolizumab and amrubicin: A case report.

Introduction: Small cell bladder cancer is a relatively rare tumor, representing <1% of all bladder tumors. Amrubicin monotherapy is used as second-line treatment for small cell lung cancer in Japan. Case presentation: A 79-year-old woman presented with gross hematuria and was diagnosed with small cell bladder cancer (T2 or higher). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with etoposide and cisplatin resulted in a partial response. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy was performed, and radical resection was achieved. As we identified metastasis in the pleura 1 year later, we administered carboplatin and etoposide, which resulted in a partial response. Although pembrolizumab was initiated as maintenance therapy, it was not effective. Amrubicin was given as third-line therapy, and stable disease was achieved without serious adverse effect for 6 months. Conclusion: Although there is no established treatment for metastatic small cell bladder cancer, the current case report suggests the effectiveness of amrubicin in this setting.

Amrubicin encapsulated PLGA NPs inhibits the PI3K/AKT signaling pathway by activating PTEN and inducing apoptosis in TMZ-resistant Glioma.

Glioblastoma (GBM) remains a challenging malignancy due to its aggressive nature and the lack of efficacious therapeutic interventions. Nanotechnology-based approaches exhibit promise in GBM treatment; however, the successful translation of these strategies from preclinical models to clinical settings is hindered by inefficient nanoparticle clearance from vital organs. Addressing this concern, we investigated the therapeutic potential of amrubicin (AMR) encapsulated within poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticles (AMR-PLGA-NPs) in combating temozolomide (TMZ) resistant GBM. The study demonstrated that AMR-PLGA-NPs exerted a pronounced inhibitory effect on the cellular viability and migratory capacity of TMZ-resistant GBM cells. Furthermore, these nanoparticles exhibited considerable efficacy in downregulating the PI3K/AKT signaling pathway, thereby inducing apoptosis specifically in TMZ-resistant glioma cells and glioma stem-like cells through the activation of PTEN. Notably,in vivoexperimentation revealed the ability of AMR-PLGA-NPs to traverse biological barriers within murine models. Collectively, these findings underscore the potential therapeutic utility of AMR-PLGA-NPs as a versatile nanoplatform for addressing the formidable challenges posed by GBM, particularly in mitigating drug resistance mechanisms. The study substantiates the stability and safety profile of AMR-PLGA-NPs, positioning them as a promising avenue for combating drug resistance in GBM therapeutics.

Safety and efficacy of amrubicin with primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim as second-line chemotherapy in patients with small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Amrubicin (AMR) regimens have shown efficacy as second-line treatment in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC); however, adverse events such as febrile neutropenia (FN) sometimes preclude their use. Further, the safety and efficacy of AMR with primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim (P-PEG) have not been sufficiently evaluated. In this study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of AMR with or without P-PEG as second-line chemotherapy for SCLC. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with SCLC who received AMR as second-line chemotherapy at Shizuoka Cancer Center, between December 2014 and November 2021. Based on presence/absence of P-PEG in their regimen, patients (n = 60) were divided into P-PEG (n = 21) and non-P-PEG groups, and their clinical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Median of AMR treatment cycles was five (range: 1-39 cycles) in P-PEG group and four (range: 1-15 cycles) in non-P-PEG group. The incidence of FN (4.8% vs. 30.8%; p = 0.02) and AMR dose reduction because of adverse events (4.8% vs. 25.6%; p = 0.08) were lower in the P-PEG group than in the non-P-PEG group. The objective response rates were 52.4% and 30.8%, and median progression-free and overall survival were 4.7 and 3.0 months, and 9.6 and 6.8 months, in the P-PEG and non-P-PEG groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AMR with P-PEG as second-line chemotherapy for SCLC reduced the incidence of FN at a maintained AMR dose intensity and was associated with favorable tumor responses and survival outcomes. P-PEG should be considered for patients treated with AMR for SCLC including refractory relapsed SCLC.

Lower optimal dose of amrubicin for relapsed small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Amrubicin (AMR) is one of the most active agents for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, hematologic toxicity and infection at a commonly used dose (40 mg/m2) is problematic; the optimal dose remains undetermined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To evaluate the optimal dose of AMR in terms of efficacy and safety, we reviewed consecutive data on patients with relapsed SCLC who received AMR at doses of 40, 35, and 30 mg/m2 (on days 1-3) at Nippon Medical School Hospital between October 2010 and November 2021. RESULTS: We reviewed the data of 86 patients (20, 45, 27 who received AMR doses of 40, 35, 30 mg/m2, respectively) according to our study criteria. For patients ≥ 75 years, the proportion who received second-line treatment tended to be higher in the 30-35 mg/m2 group. Objective response rates were 37/46/35%, median progression-free survival (PFS) were 3.0/4.7/3.2 months, and median overall survival (OS) were 7.8/16.3/8.0 months, respectively. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 58/39/31% of patients, which was higher for the 40 mg/m2 group. The incidence of febrile neutropenia did not differ between groups. Multivariate analysis identified the AMR dose was not associated with longer PFS and OS. CONCLUSION: Treatment with AMR between 30 and 35 mg/m2 showed relatively mild hematologic toxicity compared with AMR at 40 mg/m2, without any significant difference in efficacy. Lower dose of AMR for relapsed SCLC could be a promising treatment option.

Influencing factors of efficacy and long-term use of amrubicin in patients with small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Amrubicin (AMR) has become the standard of care for post-relapse small cell lung cancer (SCLC). It has also been reported to achieve long-term disease control in patients with good treatment response. However, the optimal patient population for whom AMR is effective and the factors associated with long-term disease control are yet to be identified. The aim of the study was to identify the clinical characteristics and factors associated with long-term disease control in patients with recurrent SCLC who would benefit from AMR therapy. METHODS: The clinical records of 33 patients diagnosed with recurrent SCLC and treated with AMR were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical information was compared between patients who achieved disease control (effective group) and who developed disease progression (noneffective group) on the first efficacy assessment after AMR and between patients who continued AMR for more than seven cycles (maintenance group) and those who terminated treatment after 1-6 cycles (discontinuation group). RESULTS: The noneffective group included significantly more patients with AMR dose reductions after the second cycle (p = 0.006). AMR dose reduction was an independent risk factor for disease progression. The maintenance group had significantly lower pretreatment lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels than the discontinuation group (p = 0.046). A high LDH level was an independent risk factor for short AMR discontinuation. Overall survival was significantly longer in the effective group than in the noneffective group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In AMR therapy for patients with relapsed SCLC, continuation of AMR without dose reduction after the second cycle may contribute to disease control and prolonged survival.

Treatment outcome after sequential chemotherapy with cisplatin-etoposide, amrubicin and nogitecan in patients with treatment-related pure small-cell neuroendocrine prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of patients with histologically diagnosed treatment-related pure small-cell neuroendocrine prostate cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data for 13 patients with treatment-related neuroendocrine prostate cancer who were diagnosed between May 2015 and February 2022. Standardized systemic therapies of etoposide plus cisplatin (or carboplatin), amrubicin and nogitecan were selected as sequential treatments. Cancer-specific survival and progression-free survival were evaluated as the primary endpoint. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the relationships between treatment regimens, clinical variables, cancer-specific survival and progression-free survival. RESULTS: The median cancer-specific survival after diagnosis for all patients was 22.4 months (range 1.3-33.4 months). The median progression-free survival was 9.3 months after first-line etoposide plus cisplatin (or carboplatin) treatment (n = 13); 4.2 months after second-line amrubicin treatment (n = 4); and >15 months after third-line nogitecan treatment (n = 2). The median progression-free survival after first-line chemotherapy of the liver metastasis (-) group was 10.2 months, and that of the (+) group was 5.3 months (P = 0.015, hazard ratio = 11.6, 95% confidence interval = 1.01 - 133.7). No clinicopathological parameters were identified as significant independent predictors of cancer-specific survival in univariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Sequential chemotherapy with etoposide plus cisplatin (or carboplatin), amrubicin and nogitecan may be helpful for patients with treatment-related pure small-cell neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Early biopsy of metastases and initiation of effective therapy is essential for patients with progressive castration-resistant prostate cancer and low prostate-specific antigen.

Clinical efficacy of amrubicin in patients with small cell lung cancer relapse after first-line treatment including immune checkpoint inhibitors: A retrospective multicenter study (TOPGAN 2021-01).

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic efficacy of cytotoxic anticancer drugs has been reported to be enhanced after immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in non-small cell lung cancer; however, it is unclear whether the same is applicable for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We evaluated the efficacy of second-line amrubicin (AMR) following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and ICI combination therapy (chemo-ICI) in SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled consecutive patients with SCLC treated with AMR as a second-line following chemo-ICI as first-line between July 2019 and April 2021 from 16 institutions throughout Japan. We investigated the therapeutic effectiveness, safety, and efficacy-enhancing variables of AMR. RESULTS: Overall, 89 patients treated with AMR after first-line chemo-ICI were analyzed. The overall response rate (ORR) was 29.2% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 20.1-39.8) and median PFS (m PFS) was 2.99 months (95% CI, 2.27-3.65). Patients who relapsed more than 90 days after receiving first-line platinum combination therapy (sensitive relapse) exhibited greater ORR (58.3% vs. 24.7%, p = 0.035) and m PFS (5.03 vs. 2.56 months, p = 0.019) than patients who relapsed in <90 days (refractory relapse). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were mainly hematological toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggested that the therapeutic effect of AMR was not enhanced after ICI on SCLC. However, AMR may be effective in cases of sensitive relapse after chemo-ICI. There was no increase in severe toxicity associated with AMR after ICI.

Clinical impact of amrubicin monotherapy in patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.

Background: Topoisomerase is an essential enzyme for deoxyribonucleic acid replication, and its inhibitors suppress tumor progression. Amrubicin, a topoisomerase II inhibitor, is mainly used in the second-line treatment of patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, the impact of different types of topoisomerase inhibitors for first-line chemotherapy on the efficacy of amrubicin remains unclear. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of second-line amrubicin in patients with relapsed SCLC who were previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, including topoisomerase I and II inhibitors. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed patients with ES-SCLC who experienced recurrence and were treated with amrubicin at 22 institutions in Japan between April 2015 and November 2020. The progression-free survival of amrubicin monotherapy was investigated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 320 patients were enrolled in this study, with 59 (18%) receiving platinum plus topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan and 261 (82%) receiving platinum plus topoisomerase II inhibitor etoposide as first-line treatment. The progression-free survival of amrubicin was significantly longer in the irinotecan group than in the etoposide group (3.2 vs. 2.5 months; P=0.034). Conclusions: These results showed that different types of topoisomerase inhibitors could affect the efficacy of amrubicin monotherapy in the second-line treatment of patients with relapsed ES-SCLC.

Efficacy and safety of amrubicin therapy after chemoimmunotherapy in small cell lung cancer patients.

Background: Although the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) to platinum-doublet chemotherapy has improved the efficacy of first-line therapy in extensive-disease small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients, the best treatment option for patients with recurrent SCLC has not yet been determined. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of amrubicin (AMR) therapy after treatment with ICIs. Methods: We retrospectively assessed patients with recurrent SCLC who received AMR after chemoimmunotherapy at the Niigata Lung Cancer Treatment Group from August 2019 to February 2021. Results: This analysis included 30 patients. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.8 (95% CI: 2.7-4.2) and 10 (95% CI: 7.4-14.8) months, respectively. The median PFS and OS did not significantly differ between the sensitive and refractory groups [PFS; 3.1 (95% CI: 1.1-4.0) vs. 4.2 (95% CI: 2.3-4.8) months, P=0.1142, OS; 10.0 (95% CI: 5.2-14.8) vs. 10.4 (95% CI: 3.8-NE) months, P=0.5525]. The most common adverse event was grade ≥3 neutropenia, which occurred in 22 of 30 patients (73%), and 2 patients (7%) discontinued AMR due to adverse events. Conclusions: AMR after chemoimmunotherapy shows good clinical efficacy and safety in patients with recurrent SCLC.

Efficacy and Safety of Amrubicin in Small Cell Carcinoma Previously Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Chemotherapy.

Adding an immune checkpoint inhibitor to chemotherapy to treat extensive-stage small cell lung cancer is effective. However, there are no reports of an effective second-line treatment in patients previously treated with chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors as a first-line treatment. Here, we assessed the efficacy and safety of amrubicin as a second-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer after chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy. The study enrolled 150 patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer. The efficacy and the incidence of adverse events were compared between patients previously treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and patients without previous immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. One hundred and twenty-three patients were eligible. There was no difference in objective response rate, time-to-treatment failure, progression-free survival, and overall survival between both groups. The incidence of adverse events was similar in both treatment groups. Pretreatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors was not associated with an increase in amrubicin-related adverse events. This study shows that the efficacy of amrubicin in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer remains unchanged irrespective of previous treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Amrubicin-related adverse events did not increase in patients previously treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Phase I study of amrubicin plus cisplatin and concurrent accelerated hyperfractionated thoracic radiotherapy for limited-disease small cell lung cancer: protocol of ACIST study.

BACKGROUND: Etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) combined with concurrent accelerated hyperfractionated thoracic radiotherapy (AHTRT) is the standard treatment strategy for unresectable limited-disease (LD) small cell lung cancer (SCLC), which has remained unchanged for over two decades. Based on a previous study that confirmed the non-inferiority of amrubicin (AMR) plus cisplatin (AP) when compared with EP for extensive-disease (ED) SCLC, we have previously conducted a phase I study assessing AP with concurrent TRT (2 Gy/time, once daily, 50 Gy in total) for LD-SCLC therapy. Our findings revealed that AP with concurrent TRT could prolong overall survival to 39.5 months with manageable toxicities. Therefore, we plan to conduct a phase I study to investigate and determine the effect of AP combined with AHTRT, recommended dose (RD), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of AP in patients with LD-SCLC. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with LD-SCLC, age between 20 and 75 years, who had a performance status of 0 or 1 and adequate organ functions will be enrolled. For chemotherapy, cisplatin 60 mg/m2 /day (day 1) and AMR (day 1 to 3) will be administered with AHTRT (1.5 Gy/time, twice daily, 45 Gy in total). The initial AMR dose is set to 25 mg/m2 /day. RD and MTD will be determined by evaluating toxicities. DISCUSSION: Based on our previous study, the initial dose of AMR 25 mg/m2 is expected to be tolerated and acceptable. Here, we aim to determine whether treatment with AP and concurrent AHTRT would be an optimal choice with manageable toxicities for LD-SCLC.

Efficacy and safety of amrubicin monotherapy after atezolizumab plus carboplatin and etoposide in patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer.

This study examined the activity and safety of amrubicin monotherapy among relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients who had previously been treated with atezolizumab plus carboplatin and etoposide (AteCE). This retrospective study evaluated patients with relapsed SCLC who were treated with previously AteCE combination therapy followed by amrubicin monotherapy between August 2019 and May 2021. Clinical efficacy and toxicity were analyzed. Overall, 40 patients were included: 12 and 28 patients had sensitive and refractory relapse, respectively. The response rate was 32.5% (25.0% in the sensitive group and 35.7% in the refractory group). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the first amrubicin treatment was 3.4 months (95% CI: 1.9-4.9 months) and 9.9 months (95% CI: 4.5-11.5 months), respectively. There was no significant between-group difference in median PFS (3.6 months vs. 3.2 months, p = 0.42) or median OS (11.2 months vs. 7.3 months, p = 0.78). Grade ≥ 3 hematological adverse events occurred as follows: decreased white blood cells in 52.5% of patients; decreased neutrophil count in 57.5%; and febrile neutropenia in 10.0%. Grade 3 pneumonitis was observed in one patient. There were no treatment-related deaths. Amrubicin is feasible and effective for relapsed SCLC patients previously treated with AteCE therapy. Although immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment (ICI) does not improve the effect of amrubicin, the toxicity is not increased, suggesting that amrubicin remains effective even after ICI administration. Thus, amrubicin after AteCE could be the preferred standard chemotherapeutic choice in patients with relapsed SCLC.

Evaluation of topotecan monotherapy for relapsed small-cell lung cancer after amrubicin monotherapy failure.

Objective: The utility of topotecan monotherapy for relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) after failure of amrubicin monotherapy has not been evaluated. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of topotecan monotherapy in patients with relapsed SCLC after amrubicin monotherapy. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 16 patients with relapsed SCLC who were treated with topotecan monotherapy after amrubicin monotherapy at our hospital. Results: The response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 0%, 32.5 days (95% confidence interval [CI] = 18-51), and 112 days (95% CI = 55-267), respectively. The most common adverse events (grade ≥3) were leukopenia (31.3%) and thrombocytopenia (31.3%), followed by anemia, anorexia, edema, and lung infections. Conclusion: The efficacy of topotecan monotherapy for relapsed SCLC after amrubicin monotherapy is inconclusive. Therefore, further studies are warranted.

Pembrolizumab Plus Amrubicin in Patients With Relapsed SCLC: Multi-Institutional, Single-Arm Phase 2 Study.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with relapsed SCLC, amrubicin (AMR) is the current standard treatment in Japan. Nevertheless, its efficacy is not satisfactory and prognosis is poor. Preclinical study suggested that anthracycline agent might induce immunogenic cell death and work synergistically with immune checkpoint inhibitors. METHODS: Patients with relapsed SCLC who relapsed after completion of platinum-containing regimen were registered. Patients were treated with pembrolizumab (200 mg, flat dose on d 1, every 3 wk for 2 y) plus AMR (40 mg/m2 on d 1-3, every 3 wk until progression). Primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary end points consisted of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. On the basis of the hypothesis that this treatment will improve ORR from 20% to 40% (0.1 of one-sided α and power of 0.8), 25 patients are required (trial identifier: NCT03253068). RESULTS: Between November 2017 and October 2019, a total of 25 patients were enrolled. Most participants (88%) relapsed within 90 days after platinum-containing therapy and all patients were immune checkpoint inhibitor-naive. ORR, the primary end point, was 52.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 31.3%-72.2%). Median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI: 2.8-7.0 mo), and PFS rate at 1 year was 14.4%. Median overall survival was 10.6 months (95% CI: 7.3-21.3 mo). Common adverse events greater than or equal to grade 3 were neutropenia (64%), leukopenia (40%), and febrile neutropenia (16%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with relapsed SCLC, pembrolizumab plus AMR was effective and tolerable.

Real-World Incidence of Febrile Neutropenia among Patients Treated with Single-Agent Amrubicin: Necessity of the Primary Prophylactic Administration of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor.

BACKGROUND: Single-agent amrubicin chemotherapy is a key regimen, especially for small cell lung cancer (SCLC); however, it can cause severe myelosuppression. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the real-world incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) among patients treated with single-agent amrubicin chemotherapy for thoracic malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of consecutive patients with thoracic malignancies, including SCLC and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who were treated with single-agent amrubicin chemotherapy in cycle 1 between January 2010 and March 2020, were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-six patients from four institutions were enrolled. Their characteristics were as follows: median age (range): 68 (32-86); male/female: 126/30; performance status (0/1/2): 9/108/39; SCLC/NSCLC/others: 111/30/15; and prior treatment (0/1/2/3-): 1/96/31/28. One hundred and thirty-four (86%) and 97 (62%) patients experienced grade 3/4 and grade 4 neutropenia, respectively. One hundred and twelve patients (72%) required therapeutic G-CSF treatment, and 47 (30%) developed FN. Prophylactic PEG-G-CSF was not used in cycle 1 in any case. The median overall survival of the patients with FN was significantly shorter than that of the patients without FN (7.2 vs. 10.0 months, p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: The real-world incidence rate of FN among patients with thoracic malignancies that were treated with single-agent amrubicin chemotherapy was 30%. It is suggested that prophylactic G-CSF should be administered during the practical use of single-agent amrubicin chemotherapy for patients who have already received chemotherapy.

Randomized phase 2 study comparing irinotecan versus amrubicin as maintenance therapy after first-line induction therapy for extensive disease small cell lung cancer (HOT1401/NJLCG1401).

BACKGROUND: A cisplatin plus irinotecan (CPT-11) regimen is used for patients with extensive disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). Amrubicin (AMR) is primarily used for relapsed SCLC. The HOT1401/NJLCG1401 trial, an open-label randomized phase II trial, was designed to assess the benefit of maintenance therapy in patients with ED-SCLC who responded to induction therapy. METHODS: Patients with histologically- or cytologically-confirmed ED-SCLC were included and were treated with an induction therapy of four cycles of cisplatin (60 mg/m2 on day 1) plus CPT-11 (60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15) every four weeks. After induction therapy, patients who had nonprogressive disease were randomized to receive either maintenance CPT-11 (60 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) every three weeks, or AMR (35 mg/m2 on days 1-3) every three weeks. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients were enrolled; 20 patients had progressive disease or received incomplete induction chemotherapy. Finally, 14 patients were randomly assigned to receive CPT-11 (n = 7) or AMR (n = 7). This study was terminated prematurely because of low patient accrual. The overall objective response rate was 73%, the median PFS was 5.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6-11.8), and the median overall survival was 20.1 months (95% CI: 13.7-not reached). No statistically significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) were noted between patients treated with CPT-11 and those treated with AMR. There were no treatment-related deaths in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance therapy with CPT-11 or AMR after induction therapy might be effective in some patients.

Premature phase II study of amrubicin as palliative chemotherapy for previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) are limited. Anthracyclines are considered key drugs for treating MPM. However, their use is limited by severe cardiac toxicities. Amrubicin (AMR) is a next-generation anthracycline that is commonly used to treat lung cancer. Here, we conducted a phase II trial of this drug in patients with previously treated MPM. METHODS: Eligible patients with MPM having adequate organ function and a performance status of 0-2 were enrolled after disease progression following pemetrexed/platinum therapy. Patients received 35 mg/m2 AMR on days 1-3 every three weeks until tumor progression or the appearance of unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. Median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), number of treatment cycles, and adverse events were evaluated as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: This trial was discontinued because of low accrual. From September 2013 to July 2018, five patients with MPM were enrolled. Stable disease (SD) was observed in three patients (60%), and progressive disease was noted in two patients (40%). The median PFS was 2.4 (range, 1.2-11.2) months, and the median OS was 9.1 (range, 6.2-22.0) months. The median number of treatment cycles was three (range, 2-11). Grade 1/2 toxicities were observed in all patients. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in four patients (80%), but there were no cases of febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the absence of the responders, the observation of SD in three patients suggests that AMR could have potential for treating MPM.

Primary Prophylaxis of Febrile Neutropenia With Pegfilgrastim in Small-cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Amrubicin as Second-line Therapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We evaluated the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim (PEG) for febrile neutropenia (FN) in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients receiving amrubicin (AMR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients with SCLC receiving AMR as second-line therapy. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients were treated with AMR (no PEG group), while 13 patients were treated with AMR plus prophylactic administration of PEG (PEG group). The severity of neutropenia was significantly reduced in the PEG group compared to the no PEG group (p=0.02). The incidence of FN in the no PEG and PEG groups was 27.3% and 7.7%, respectively. The time to development of FN tended to be longer in the PEG group compared to the no PEG group (p=0.132). CONCLUSION: Primary prophylaxis with PEG may be beneficial in reducing the risk of FN in patients with SCLC receiving AMR.

Phase II study of amrubicin plus erlotinib in previously treated, advanced non-small cell lung cancer with wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor (TORG1320).

Background Amrubicin (AMR) is a completely synthetic 9-aminoanthracycline and clinically active against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We conducted a phase I study of AMR and erlotinib (ERL) combination therapy in previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC and have already reported the safety and effectiveness. Methods We conducted a multi-center, single-arm phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy of AMR and ERL combination therapy in patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC harboring wild-type EGFR, PS 0-1 and < 75 years of age. Patients were treated at 3-week intervals with AMR plus ERL. The primary endpoint was the PFS, and the secondary endpoints were the response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The trough ERL concentration (Ctrough) was measured as an exploratory study to analyze the relationship between the efficacy/safety and pharmacokinetics. Results From June 2013 to July 2016, 25 patients were enrolled in this trial. The PFS according to the central test was 3.6 months (95% confidence interval 2.1-5.1). The RR and DCR were 24.0% and 64.0%, respectively. We had no treatment-related deaths in this study. Conclusions The PFS of AMR and ERL combination therapy was superior to that of AMR monotherapy in the historical setting, but the primary endpoint was not met in this trial. In our study, the pharmacokinetic analysis showed that the Ctrough of ERL was elevated with combination therapy. This combination therapy might be a viable treatment for previously treated NSCLC patients without a driver oncogene mutation. Clinical trial information UMIN 000010582.

Post-progression survival is strongly linked to overall survival in refractory small-cell lung cancer patients who received amrubicin.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of second-line chemotherapy on the overall survival (OS) of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients might be confounded by subsequent therapies. In this study, we aimed to determine the influence of progression-free survival (PFS) and postprogression survival (PPS) on OS after second-line chemotherapy in patients with refractory SCLC treated with amrubicin monotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the data of 35 patients with refractory SCLC who were treated with amrubicin monotherapy as second-line chemotherapy between July 2005 and December 2015. The correlations of PFS and PPS with OS were statistically analyzed at the individual level using Spearman's rank correlation and linear regression analyses. RESULTS: The correlation between PPS and OS was strong (r = 0.88, P < 0.05, R2 = 0.87), while that between PFS and OS was weak (r = 0.60, P < 0.05, R2 = 0.15). The number of regimens administered after disease progression postsecond-line chemotherapy was significantly associated with PPS (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: OS is more strongly linked to PPS than to PFS in refractory SCLC patients who undergo amrubicin monotherapy as a second-line treatment. These results suggest that treatments administered after second-line chemotherapy affect the OS of refractory SCLC patients treated with amrubicin monotherapy.