Phase 1 TRANSCEND CLL 004 study of lisocabtagene maraleucel in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL or SLL.

Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) and venetoclax are currently used to treat newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). However, most patients eventually develop resistance to these therapies, underscoring the need for effective new therapies. We report results of the phase 1 dose-escalation portion of the multicenter, open-label, phase 1/2 TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) study of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), an autologous CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. Patients with standard- or high-risk features treated with ≥3 or ≥2 prior therapies, respectively, including a BTKi, received liso-cel at 1 of 2 dose levels (50 × 106 or 100 × 106 CAR+ T cells). Primary objectives included safety and determining recommended dose; antitumor activity by 2018 International Workshop on CLL guidelines was exploratory. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed in blood and marrow. Twenty-three of 25 enrolled patients received liso-cel and were evaluable for safety. Patients had a median of 4 (range, 2-11) prior therapies (100% had ibrutinib; 65% had venetoclax) and 83% had high-risk features including mutated TP53 and del(17p). Seventy-four percent of patients had cytokine release syndrome (9% grade 3) and 39% had neurological events (22% grade 3/4). Of 22 efficacy-evaluable patients, 82% and 45% achieved overall and complete responses, respectively. Of 20 MRD-evaluable patients, 75% and 65% achieved undetectable MRD in blood and marrow, respectively. Safety and efficacy were similar between dose levels. The phase 2 portion of the study is ongoing at 100 × 106 CAR+ T cells. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03331198.

Carfilzomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (ENDEAVOR): a randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib with dexamethasone is a standard treatment option for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib with dexamethasone has shown promising activity in patients in this disease setting. The aim of this study was to compare the combination of carfilzomib and dexamethasone with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre study, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had one to three previous treatments were randomly assigned (1:1) using a blocked randomisation scheme (block size of four) to receive carfilzomib with dexamethasone (carfilzomib group) or bortezomib with dexamethasone (bortezomib group). Randomisation was stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, previous lines of treatment, International Staging System stage, and planned route of bortezomib administration if randomly assigned to bortezomib with dexamethasone. Patients received treatment until progression with carfilzomib (20 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1; 56 mg/m(2) thereafter; 30 min intravenous infusion) and dexamethasone (20 mg oral or intravenous infusion) or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m(2); intravenous bolus or subcutaneous injection) and dexamethasone (20 mg oral or intravenous infusion). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. The study is ongoing but not enrolling participants; results for the interim analysis of the primary endpoint are presented. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01568866. FINDINGS: Between June 20, 2012, and June 30, 2014, 929 patients were randomly assigned (464 to the carfilzomib group; 465 to the bortezomib group). Median follow-up was 11·9 months (IQR 9·3-16·1) in the carfilzomib group and 11·1 months (8·2-14·3) in the bortezomib group. Median progression-free survival was 18·7 months (95% CI 15·6-not estimable) in the carfilzomib group versus 9·4 months (8·4-10·4) in the bortezomib group at a preplanned interim analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53 [95% CI 0·44-0·65]; p<0·0001). On-study death due to adverse events occurred in 18 (4%) of 464 patients in the carfilzomib group and in 16 (3%) of 465 patients in the bortezomib group. Serious adverse events were reported in 224 (48%) of 463 patients in the carfilzomib group and in 162 (36%) of 456 patients in the bortezomib group. The most frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events were anaemia (67 [14%] of 463 patients in the carfilzomib group vs 45 [10%] of 456 patients in the bortezomib group), hypertension (41 [9%] vs 12 [3%]), thrombocytopenia (39 [8%] vs 43 [9%]), and pneumonia (32 [7%] vs 36 [8%]). INTERPRETATION: For patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, carfilzomib with dexamethasone could be considered in cases in which bortezomib with dexamethasone is a potential treatment option. FUNDING: Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an Amgen subsidiary.

A first-in-human dose-escalation study of the oral proteasome inhibitor oprozomib in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of the tripeptide epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor oprozomib in patients with advanced refractory or recurrent solid tumors. METHODS: Patients received escalating once daily (QD) or split doses of oprozomib on days 1-5 of 14-day cycles (C). The split-dose arm was implemented and compared in fasted (C1) and fed (C2) states. Pharmacokinetic samples were collected during C1 and C2. Proteasome inhibition was evaluated in red blood cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (QD, n = 25; split dose, n = 19) were enrolled. The most common primary tumor types were non-small cell lung cancer (18%) and colorectal cancer (16%). In the 180-mg QD cohort, two patients experienced DLTs: grade 3 vomiting and dehydration; grade 3 hypophosphatemia (n = 1 each). In the split-dose group, three DLTs were observed (180-mg cohort: grade 3 hypophosphatemia; 210-mg cohort: grade 5 gastrointestinal hemorrhage and grade 3 hallucinations (n = 1 each). In the QD and split-dose groups, the MTD was 150 and 180 mg, respectively. Common adverse events (all grades) included nausea (91%), vomiting (86%), and diarrhea (61%). Peak concentrations and total exposure of oprozomib generally increased with the increasing dose. Oprozomib induced dose-dependent proteasome inhibition. Best response was stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: While generally low-grade, clinically relevant gastrointestinal toxicities occurred frequently with this oprozomib formulation. Despite dose-dependent increases in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, single-agent oprozomib had minimal antitumor activity in this patient population with advanced solid tumors.

A phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel and gemctiabine infused at a constant rate in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine and paclitaxel both have significant single agent activity in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Because both are cell cycle and phase specific in their mechanism of action, frequent exposure should optimize activity. Phase I data support that gemcitabine is maximally converted to the active metabolite when it is infused at a rate of 10 mg/(m2 min). Based on this, we designed a phase II trial to examine gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 infused over 80 min with paclitaxel 110 mg/m2 infused over 3 h both on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days as first line therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. The primary objectives were to assess the response rate, toxicity and survival of the combination in advanced NSCLC. Secondary objectives were to determine the effect of paclitaxel on the pharmacokinetic (PK) distribution of gemcitabine, the ability to achieve a concentration of 10-20 microM when gemcitabine was infused at a rate of 10 mg/(m2 min), as well as to assess the quality of life (QOL) with the functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung (FACT-L) questionnaire. METHODS: Patients with NSCLC, no prior treatment, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-1, adequate bone marrow, renal, and hepatic function were eligible for this trial. Paclitaxel 110 mg/m2 was infused over 3 h, followed by gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 infused over 80 min on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for the first 2 patients, and then amended to days 1 and 8 every 21 days after the first 2 patients required day 15 dose omissions due to myelosupression. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were treated. Nine PS = 0; 28 PS = 1; Stage IIIB = 3, Stage IV = 36; median age 62 (range: 39-77). A median of six cycles (range: 0-10) was delivered. Grade 3-4 toxicities observed in > or =10% of patients included leucopenia in 26%, neutropenia in 28%, dyspnea in 13%, febrile neutropenia in 3% (1 patient). Fourteen of 39 (35%, 95% CI: 21-53%) patients had a partial response (PR), 14 of 39 (35%, 95% CI: 21-53%) had stable disease (SD) and 5 patients (13%, 95% CI: 4-27%) had progressive (PD). Median survival was 10.4 months (95% CI: 5.3-13.6). One-and two-year survival rates were 35% (95% CI: 21-53%) and 5% (95% CI: 0.6-17%), respectively. QOL as measured by the FACT-L and the trial outcome index (TOI) did not change significantly from baseline over the course of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Paclitaxel and gemcitabine is an active and well-tolerated combination in advanced NSCLC. Patients on this trial had no significant change in their QOL as assessed by the FACT-L questionnaire.

Gemcitabine pharmacokinetics and interaction with paclitaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine administered at a fixed dose rate of 10 mg/m(2) per min has been reported to achieve plasma steady-state concentrations ranging from 10 to 20 microM in patients with acute leukemia. These concentrations have been shown to saturate the intracellular accumulation of the active triphosphate metabolite. We designed this pharmacokinetic study to assess the ability of a fixed dose rate of gemcitabine to achieve the desired steady-state concentration in the absence and presence of paclitaxel in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A group of 14 patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received paclitaxel 110 mg/m(2) over 3 h on days 1 and 8 and gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) over 80 min on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Patients received gemcitabine alone on cycle (C) 1, day (D) 1. Pharmacokinetic samples were collected at 0, 15, 30, 45, 60 and 80 min during infusion and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 h after infusion on C1D1, C1D8, C2D1, C4D1 and C6D1. RESULTS: Of 13 patients included in the pharmacokinetic analysis, 61% achieved the desired steady-state concentration (C(ss)) with gemcitabine alone (C1D1), whereas only 0 to 45% of patients achieved the desired C(ss) with paclitaxel and gemcitabine, depending on the treatment cycle. Paclitaxel significantly decreased systemic clearance (Cl(T); P=0.012) and volume of distribution (V(d); P=0.050) and significantly increased C(ss) ( P=0.009). Gemcitabine plasma pharmacokinetic parameters demonstrated great interpatient variability in the absence of paclitaxel (C(ss) 30%, Cl(T) 30%, V(d) 55%). Interpatient and intrapatient variability in gemcitabine pharmacokinetics were not observed when gemcitabine was administered in combination with paclitaxel (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine plasma pharmacokinetic parameters are significantly altered in the presence of paclitaxel.

Treatment options for small cell lung cancer.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) comprises 15% to 25% of all lung cancers. The leading cause of lung cancer remains smoking, and rates of smoking continue to rise in women, whereas rates in other subgroups have slowed. In this article we review recent advances in the treatment of limited-stage as well as extensive-stage small cell lung cancer. In limited-stage disease, the best survival results are observed when patients are treated with twice-daily thoracic radiotherapy given concurrently with chemotherapy. Patients who have been successful in smoking cessation during therapy for limited-stage disease may have a survival benefit over those who are unable to quit smoking during treatment. In extensive-stage disease, the most significant trial is one comparing irinotecan plus cisplatin and etoposide plus cisplatin, showing a survival advantage for the irinotecan arm. This trial may change the standard of care for patients with extensive-stage disease. A similar ongoing trial in the United States is attempting to confirm these results.

Phase I trial of induction histone deacetylase and proteasome inhibition followed by surgery in non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Despite complete surgical resection survival in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains poor. On the basis of prior preclinical evaluations, we hypothesized that combined induction proteasome and histone deacetylase inhibitor therapy, followed by tumor resection, is feasible. METHODS: A phase I clinical trial using a two-staged multiple-agent design of bortezomib and vorinostat as induction therapy followed by consolidative surgery in patients with NSCLC was performed. Standard toxicity and maximum tolerated dose were examined. Pre- and post-treatment tumor gene-expression arrays were performed and analyzed. Pre- and post-treatment fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging was used to assess tumor metabolism. Finally, serum 20S proteasome levels were analyzed with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and selected intratumoral proteins were assessed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Of the 34-four patients providing written consent to participate in the trial, 21 were enrolled. One patient withdrew early because of disease progression. The maximum tolerated dose was bortezomib 1.3 mg/m and vorinostat 300 mg twice daily. There were grade III dose-limiting toxicities of fatigue and hypophosphatemia, which were self-limited. There was no mortality. Thirty percent of patients (6 of 20) had more than 60% histologic necrosis of their tumor after treatment, with two having 90% or more tumor necrosis. Tumor metabolism, 20S proteasome activity, and specific protein expression did not demonstrate consistent results. Gene-expression arrays comparing pre- and post-therapy NSCLC specimens revealed robust intratumoral changes in specific genes. CONCLUSIONS: Induction bortezomib and vorinostat therapy followed by surgery in patients with operable NSCLC is feasible. Correlative gene-expression studies suggest new targets and cell-signaling pathways that may be important in modulating this combined therapy.

Phase I trial of intrapleural docetaxel administered through an implantable catheter in subjects with a malignant pleural effusion.

INTRODUCTION: Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a common complication in patients with advanced malignancy. This dose escalation phase I study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose of intrapleural docetaxel administered through an implantable catheter in subjects with MPE. METHODS: Subjects with MPE (n = 15) with median age of 64.6 years and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 at baseline were enrolled into four single dose levels of docetaxel administered intrapleurally after drainage of the pleural effusion and insertion of an intrapleural catheter. The study determined the pharmacokinetic properties, clinical response, and toxicity profile of intrapleural docetaxel. RESULTS: All patients tolerated the therapy well and there were no significant toxicities. The majority of patients had a complete radiographic response. All patients receiving dose 100 mg/m2 or higher had a complete radiographic response. One dose-limiting toxicity was encountered in the dose 50 mg/m2. Pharmacokinetic data demonstrated peak plasma concentration of docetaxel between 30 minutes and 6 hours after infusion. Pleural exposure to docetaxel was 1000 times higher than systemic exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose intrapleural administration of doxetaxel is well tolerated in patients with MPE with minimal toxicity. The excellent clinical responses in this study after treatment with intrapleural doxetaxel suggest that further investigation is warranted.

Multicenter, phase II trial of sunitinib in previously treated, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Aberrant vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) signaling have been shown to play a role in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) pathogenesis and are associated with decreased survival. We evaluated the clinical activity and tolerability of sunitinib malate (SU11248), an oral, multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks the activity of receptors for VEGF and PDGF, as well as related tyrosine kinases in patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC for whom platinum-based chemotherapy had failed received 50 mg/d of sunitinib for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks of no treatment in 6-week treatment cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Of the 63 patients treated with sunitinib, seven patients had confirmed partial responses, yielding an ORR of 11.1% (95% CI, 4.6% to 21.6%). An additional 18 patients (28.6%) experienced stable disease of at least 8 weeks in duration. Median progression-free survival was 12.0 weeks (95% CI, 10.0 to 16.1 weeks), and median overall survival was 23.4 weeks (95% CI, 17.0 to 28.3 weeks). Therapy was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Sunitinib has promising single-agent activity in patients with recurrent NSCLC, with an ORR similar to that of currently approved agents and an acceptable safety profile. Further evaluation in combination with other targeted agents and chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC is warranted.

Adjuvant paclitaxel plus carboplatin compared with observation in stage IB non-small-cell lung cancer: CALGB 9633 with the Cancer and Leukemia Group B, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, and North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study Groups.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is now accepted on the basis of several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that demonstrated improved survival. Although there is strong evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy is effective in stages II and IIIA NSCLC, its utility in stage IB disease is unclear. This report provides a mature analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9633, the only RCT designed specifically for stage IB NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within 4 to 8 weeks of resection, patients were randomly assigned to adjuvant chemotherapy or observation. Eligible patients had pathologically confirmed T2N0 NSCLC and had undergone lobectomy or pneumonectomy. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) intravenously over 3 hours and carboplatin at an area under the curve dose of 6 mg/mL per minute intravenously over 45 to 60 minutes every 3 weeks for four cycles. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Three hundred-forty-four patients were randomly assigned. Median follow-up was 74 months. Groups were well-balanced with regard to demographics, histology, and extent of surgery. Grades 3 to 4 neutropenia were the predominant toxicity; there were no treatment-related deaths. Survival was not significantly different (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; CI, 0.64 to 1.08; P = .12). However, exploratory analysis demonstrated a significant survival difference in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients who had tumors > or = 4 cm in diameter (HR, 0.69; CI, 0.48 to 0.99; P = .043). CONCLUSION: Because a significant survival advantage was not observed across the entire cohort, adjuvant chemotherapy should not be considered standard care in stage IB NSCLC. Given the magnitude of observed survival differences, CALGB 9633 was underpowered to detect small but clinically meaningful improvements. A statistically significant survival advantage for patients who had tumors > or = 4 cm supports consideration of adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin for stage IB patients who have large tumors.

Second-line treatment of small-cell lung cancer.

Approximately 45,000 new cases of small-cell lung cancer were diagnosed in 2005 in the United States. Although response to first-time therapy is up to 90%, the majority of patients will ultimately relapse. Therefore, active second-line therapy is needed for this patient population. The only second-line treatment for small-cell lung cancer approved by the US Food and Drug Administration is topotecan. Other agents have been investigated and have shown modest efficacy. These include vinorelbine, irinotecan, etoposide, paclitaxel, and gemcitabine. Novel "targeted therapies" have shown disappointing results in this disease. Much of the recent work has focused on investigating alternative dosing and scheduling of topotecan. Combination therapies have also been investigated, and some have been shown to increase activity over single agents, but toxicity and quality of life variables are imperative in the treatment of this patient population.

Phase II study of BBR 3464 as treatment in patients with sensitive or refractory small cell lung cancer.

BBR 3464 is a novel triplatinum compound that has exhibited anti-tumor activity in both cisplatin-sensitive and cisplatin-resistant, as well as in p53 mutant tumor models. In phase I testing, the dose-limiting toxicities have included myelosuppression and diarrhea. Both an intermittent (day 1 every 21-28 days) and a continuous (dailyx5 days) schedule have been studied, and the intermittent schedule has been chosen for further development. The primary objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of BBR 3464 administered at a dose of 0.9 mg/m i.v. over 1 h every 21 days in patients with small cell lung cancer who have progressed after first-line therapy. Pharmacokinetic analysis was also performed and will be reported. Patients were stratified based on prior response into resistant and sensitive (response duration 3 months or longer) subgroups. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled onto this multicenter study. The median number of cycles delivered was 2 in the resistant subgroup (range 1-12) and 3 in the sensitive subgroup (range 1-8). Most common grade 3/4 hematological toxicities included neutropenia (62%), febrile neutropenia (16%), anemia (10%), fatigue (5%) and hypokalemia (5%). Although no objective responses were seen in 34 evaluable patients, 11 patients (32%) had disease stabilization (four resistant/seven sensitive) with 23 patients (68%) experiencing continued disease progression (12 resistant/11 sensitive). Median time to progression was 53 days in the resistant subgroup [95% confidence interval (CI) 37-63] and 66 days in the sensitive subgroup (95% CI 51-136). The median and 1-year survival rate based on subgroup was 78 (resistant) (95% CI 56-165) versus 209 days (sensitive) (95% CI 83-296) and 6 (resistant) (95% CI 0-17) versus 20% (95% CI 2-38%), respectively. We conclude that the toxicity profile of BBR 3464 in this phase II trial is consistent with the phase I experience. The lack of activity in either patient subgroup, however, does not support further evaluation of this drug as a single agent in this disease.

A phase I trial defining the maximum tolerated systemic exposure of topotecan in combination with Carboplatin and Etoposide in extensive stage small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Topotecan is active in relapsed small cell lung cancer; thus, its addition to the standard carboplatin-etoposide regimen may improve outcomes in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients. Significant interpatient variability in the topotecan systemic exposure results when it is dosed based on body surface area (mg/m2). The purpose of this Phase I trial was to determine the maximally tolerated systemic exposure (MTSE) of topotecan in combination with carboplatin and etoposide. METHODS: Thirty-four chemotherapy-naïve ES-SCLC patients received topotecan in combination with carboplatin AUC 5 mg/mL*min and oral etoposide 100 mg/m2/day. Topotecan was administered as a 30-minute infusion either on Days 1-5 or Days 1-3 and the dosage was individualized to attain a topotecan lactone AUC range (ng/mL*hr) in successive patient cohorts from 7 to 23; 24 to 36; 37 to 53; 54 to 66. RESULTS: The majority (67 percent) of the measured topotecan AUCs were within target range. Overall, 8 of 34 patients experienced Cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), either neutropenia or thrombocytopenia. Carboplatin administration prior to topotecan resulted in 2 of 6 patients having Cycle 1 DLT. When the administration sequence was changed (topotecan, carboplatin, etoposide), Cycle 1 hematologic toxicity decreased; however, the maximum topotecan lactone AUC of 24-36 ng/mL*hr (median dose 0.82 mg/m2) had significant cumulative hematologic toxicity. The number of topotecan doses were reduced from 5 to 3, which resulted in a maximum topotecan lactone AUC of 37 to 53 ng/mL*hr with only 1 of 6 patients having Cycle 1 DLT. Overall response rate was 71 percent with median survival of 10.8 months. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to target topotecan lactone AUC in adult ES-SCLC patients. However, this triplet regimen resulted in considerable hematologic toxicity and has a median survival comparable to carboplatin-etoposide. Alternative, less toxic regimens should be investigated for improving survival in ES-SCLC.

Phase II trial of irinotecan, paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with previously untreated Stage IIIB/IV nonsmall cell lung carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This Phase II multicenter, open-label, single-arm study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a three-drug combination of irinotecan (CPT-11), paclitaxel, and carboplatin in advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received repeated 21-day cycles at starting doses of paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) administered over 3 hours, followed by carboplatin AUC of 5 over 30 minutes and CPT-11 at a starting dose level of 100 mg/m(2) over 90 minutes, all given on the first day of each cycle. Patients were evaluated for objective tumor response, time to tumor progression (TTP), survival, and safety. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. Baseline patient characteristics included: median age 58 years (range, 32-79); 23 males and 17 females; performance status of 0 (21 patients), 1 (18 patients), or 2 (1 patient); and Stage IIIB (10 patients) and Stage IV (30 patients) disease. A median of six cycles (range, one to eight) were administered. Grade 3-4 toxicities observed in >/= 10% of the patients included neutropenia (78%), asthenia (20%), diarrhea (20%), nausea (18%), vomiting (13%), anemia (10%), and dyspnea (10%). Febrile neutropenia occurred in eight patients (20%), with one death due to neutropenic sepsis. Twelve of 38 evaluable patients had confirmed tumor responses (32%), while 21 (55%) had stable disease (including 12 patients [32%] with minor responses). Only 13% had disease progression at their initial tumor assessment. The median TTP and survival were 5.3 months (range, 0.03-6.2 months) and 12.5 months (range 0.3-28.6+ months), respectively. The one and two year survival probabilities were 0.50 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.73) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0.0-0.67), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of CPT-11, paclitaxel, and carboplatin can be safely administered and is active in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Based on the favorable survival outcome, this regimen is undergoing evaluation in prospective randomized trials.