Phase I/II study of vinorelbine and exisulind as first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in patients at least 70 years old: a wisconsin oncology network study.

INTRODUCTION: Exisulind is an apoptotic agent with preclinical activity in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Vinorelbine is safe and effective in older patients with advanced NSCLC. We assessed these agents together as palliative treatment for older patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients >/=70-years-old with stage IIIB-IV NSCLC and a performance status (PS) /=3 neutropenia occurred in 14/30 patients. Two patients experienced neutropenic fever. There were no complete responses, one partial response and 12 patients with stable disease as their best response. The objective response rate was 4.0% (95% CI: 0.1-20.4%). Phase II median time-to-progression was 4.7 months (95% CI: 3.1-9.3 months) and median OS was 9.6 months (95% CI: 6.6-19.1 months). CONCLUSIONS: This combination is safe, seems to have activity in the elderly with advanced NSCLC and a PS

Phase II study of uracil-tegafur with leucovorin in elderly (> or = 75 years old) patients with colorectal cancer: ECOG 1299.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the tolerability and effectiveness of uracil-tegafur (UFT) with leucovorin (LV) in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients > or = 75 years of age with previously untreated colorectal cancer were eligible for this phase II, single-arm, open-label, multicenter cooperative group clinical trial. UFT 100 mg/m2 plus LV 30 mg orally every 8 hours for 28 days every 35 days was administered until progression. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled between June 2000 and July 2001, and 55 were treated. The median age of treated patients was 81 years (range, 75 to 90 years), 26 patients were (47%) women, and 80% had good performance status (0 to 1). The observed overall response rate was 22% (95% CI, 11.8% to 35.0%). The estimated median overall survival time was 13.0 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 17.4 months), and median progression-free survival time was 4.6 months (95% CI, 2.6 to 6.7 months). Among the 56 treated patients (including one ineligible patient), 31 (55%) experienced grade 3 to 4 toxicities, most commonly diarrhea (25%) and GI toxicity (36%), with patients older than 85 years of age at highest risk. CONCLUSION: The results of this trial support the efficacy of oral UFT/LV in elderly patients with colorectal cancer. The regimen is tolerated moderately well overall, particularly as compared with other fluoropyrimidine regimens, although there is increased GI toxicity in the most elderly. These results suggest that studies using newer oral fluoropyrimidine analogs should be investigated in this patient population.

Phase II study of second-line gemcitabine in sensitive or refractory small cell lung cancer.

UNLABELLED: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is highly sensitive to chemotherapy. Despite a dramatic initial response, however, most patients relapse. Given the activity of gemcitabine in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and early clinical trials suggesting activity of gemcitabine in chemo-naive SCLC patients, we conducted a phase II study to determine the efficacy and toxicities of gemcitabine in SCLC patients who have failed first-line chemotherapy. Gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) was given intravenously on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Eligibility criteria included prior treatment with only one chemotherapy regimen and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2. Patients with brain metastases were eligible. RESULTS: Between April 1998 and October 2001, 27 patients were enrolled: 15 patients with sensitive (S) disease (recurred>3 months after first-line chemotherapy) and 12 patients with refractory (R) disease (failed<3 months after first-line chemotherapy). Median age was 61 (range 45-74). All patients had received prior platinum-based therapy involving etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin. There were one early death and two early withdrawals because of toxicity. No responses were observed. Of 24 patients who received at least two cycles of gemcitabine, only three achieved stable disease after six cycles while 21 progressed. The median time to progression (TTP) was 6 weeks in S group, 5.6 weeks in R group, and 6 weeks overall. After a minimum potential follow-up of almost 1 year for all patients, the median survival was 8.8 months in S group, 4.2 months in R group, and 6.4 months for the whole group. One-year survival rate was 33.3% in S group, 16.7% in R group, and 25.4% for all patients. Myelosuppression was the most commonly observed adverse effect, with grade 3/4 neutropenia in 30%, and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 30%. One patient (3.7%) developed neutropenic fever. Respiratory failure and death, possibly related to pulmonary toxicity, was observed in one patient (3.7%). CONCLUSION: monotherapy gemcitabine as second-line agent has limited activity in previously treated SCLC.

A phase II trial of daily perillyl alcohol in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E2E96.

OBJECTIVE: This was a phase II study of perillyl alcohol in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the 6-month progression-free rate of perillyl alcohol as compared with historic controls. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the objective response rate, time to progression and survival, dropout rate, and number of cycles administered; define the qualitative nature of acute and chronic toxicities; and evaluate the effect of perillyl alcohol on triglycerides and total, HDL, and LDL cholesterol levels. Methods. Women who had received prior platinum-based therapy and had residual or recurrent disease were eligible. Perillyl alcohol was administered orally, four times daily, at a dose of 1200 mg/m(2). This was repeated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity was experienced. RESULTS: The 6-month progression-free rate was 17%. None of the patients achieved a complete or partial response. The median progression-free survival was 1.7 months. The median overall survival was 9.1 months. Compliance was greater than 90% but gastrointestinal toxicity (grade 1-2 nausea, satiety, eructation in 70%) and fatigue (grade 1-2 in 40%) were common and limited the ability to escalate the dose from 1200 to 1500 mg/m(2). CONCLUSION: Perillyl alcohol administered at this dose and formulation did not exhibit signs of extending the time-to-progression in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma.

Evaluation of Legs For Life National Screening and Awareness Program for Peripheral Vascular Disease: results of a follow-up survey of screening participants.

PURPOSE: The Legs For Life(R) National Screening and Awareness Program for Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) was launched in 1999. A critical component of the screening program was an independent evaluation to provide additional information about the results of the program. This evaluation considers the health education impacts of the screening program; participants' knowledge about appropriate providers; and some of the outcomes associated with the program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The evaluation is based on a representative sample of 700 individuals who participated in the screening program and responded to a six-page closed-ended mail questionnaire 6 months after the screening. The sample was drawn in a two-stage cluster. A sample of 1,000 individuals was drawn using random selection of low-risk participants and oversampling of all high- and medium-risk participants from 22 sites. RESULTS: More than 80% of the respondents remembered the name of the test (ankle-brachial index) given during the screening program. More than half the respondents reported being informed during the screening that leg pain when walking was a symptom of PVD, and 40% reported being told that numbness in the leg was a symptom. The majority of respondents were able to identify ways to prevent or slow the progression of PVD, whereas just under 50% were able to identify those individuals that would be at higher risk for PVD. Respondents most frequently identified vascular surgeons (42%), family or primary care physicians (22%), and cardiologists (19%) as the type of doctor to see for PVD treatment, whereas only 4.8% of screening participants recognized interventional radiologists as specialists appropriate to dealing with PVD. CONCLUSION: Evidence from participants in the Legs For Life(R) National Screening Program suggests that the program has met its initial goals of education, identification, and treatment for those identified with PVD. While many specialties manage this condition, the evaluation indicates there is much to be done in increasing the awareness of interventional radiologists and their role in the diagnosis and treatment of PVD.