The place of targeted therapies in the management of non-small cell bronchial carcinoma. Molecular markers as predictors of tumor response and survival in lung cancer.

This review highlights the numerous molecular biology findings in the field of lung cancer with potential therapeutic impact in both the near and distant future. Abundant pre-clinical and clinical data indicate that BRCA1 mRNA expression is a differential modulator of chemotherapy sensitivity. Low levels predict cisplatin sensitivity and antimicrotubule drug resistance, and the opposite occurs with high levels. The main core of recent research has centered on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and gene copy numbers. For the first time, EGFR mutations have been shown to predict dramatic responses in metastatic lung adenocarcinomas, with a threefold increase in time to progression and survival in patients receiving EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Evidence has also been accumulated on the crosstalk between estrogen and EGFR receptor pathways, paving the way for clinical trials of EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors plus aromatase inhibitors. Understanding the relevance of these findings can help to change the clinical practice in oncology towards customizing chemotherapy and targeted therapies, leading to improvement both in survival and in cost-effectiveness.

Randomized study of vinorelbine and cisplatin versus vindesine and cisplatin versus vinorelbine alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a European multicenter trial including 612 patients.

PURPOSE: We designed a prospective randomized trial to compare vinorelbine and cisplatin (NVB-P) with vindesine and cisplatin (VDS-P) and to evaluate whether the best of these regimens affords a survival benefit compared with vinorelbine alone (NVB), an outpatient regimen, in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-five centers included 612 patients in this study: 206 on NVB-P, 200 on VDS-P, and 206 on NVB. Vinorelbine was administered at a dose of 30 mg/m2 weekly, cisplatin at 120 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29 and then every 6 weeks, and vindesine at 3 mg/m2 weekly for 6 weeks and then every other week. Treatment was continued until progression or toxicity. Four percent of the patients entered were ineligible and 59% had metastatic disease. RESULTS: An objective response rate was observed in 30% of patients in the NVB-P arm versus 19% in the VDS-P arm (P = .02) and 14% in the NVB arm (P < .001). The median duration of survival was 40 weeks in the NVB-P arm, compared with 32 weeks in the VDS-P arm and 31 weeks in the NVB arm. Comparison of survival among the three groups demonstrated an advantage for NVB-P compared with VDS-P (P = .04) and NVB (P = .01). Neutropenia was significantly higher in the NVB-P group (P < .001), and neurotoxicity was more frequent with VDS-P (P < .004). CONCLUSION: Since our results have demonstrated that NVB-P yields a longer survival duration and a higher response rate than VDS-P or NVB alone, with acceptable toxicity, this combination should be considered a relevant regimen in advanced NSCLC.

Phase II trial of paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Given the cisplatin-related myelotoxicity and nonhematologic toxicities, we were prompted to undertake a study of the noncisplatin combination of paclitaxel plus gemcitabine to evaluate the efficacy, tolerance, and survival of this combination in patients with locally advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received gemcitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel 150 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, for a maximum of eight cycles. RESULTS: Between December 1997 and June 1998, 89 untreated NSCLC patients were enrolled; 30 (34%) had stage IIIB disease (23 with malignant pleural effusion and seven without), and 59 (66%) had stage IV disease. Eighty-six percent of patients had a performance status of 0 or 1. The median number of cycles administered was four (range, one to eight cycles). The mean dose-intensity for both paclitaxel and gemcitabine was nearly 100%. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were mild. Thirty-eight patients received second-line chemotherapy after completion of the study. The overall intent-to-treat response rate was 32.2%, with a higher response rate for stage IIIB patients (43.3%) than for stage IV patients (26.3%). Overall median survival was 9.9 months, and 1-year survival was 38.8% (14.2 months for stage IIIB and 7.7 months for stage IV; P =.007). Median survival was 10.2 months for patients with a performance status of 0 or 1 and 4.8 months for patients with a performance status of 2 (P =.007). CONCLUSION: A biweekly paclitaxel/gemcitabine regimen was well tolerated, with an acceptable response rate and a reasonable median survival time, especially in patients with good performance status. It merits further exploration in future studies.

Paclitaxel resistance in non-small-cell lung cancer associated with beta-tubulin gene mutations.

PURPOSE: The mechanisms that cause chemoresistance in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients have yet to be clearly elucidated. Paclitaxel is a tubulin-disrupting agent that binds preferentially to beta-tubulin. Tubulins are guanosine triphosphate (GTP)-binding proteins. Beta-tubulin is a GTPase, whereas alpha-tubulin has no enzyme activity. We reasoned that polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and DNA sequencing of the beta-tubulin gene could reveal more information regarding the connection between beta-tubulin mutations and primary paclitaxel resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Constitutional genomic DNA and paired tumor DNA were isolated from 49 biopsies from 43 Spanish and six American stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients who had been treated with a 3-hour, 210 mg/m(2) paclitaxel infusion and a 24-hour, 200 mg/m(2) infusion, respectively. Oligonucleotides specific to beta-tubulin were designed for PCR amplification and sequencing of GTP- and paclitaxel-binding beta-tubulin domains. RESULTS: Of 49 patients with NSCLC, 16 (33%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 20.7% to 45.3%) had beta-tubulin mutations in exons 1 (one patient) or 4 (15 patients). None of the patients with beta-tubulin mutations had an objective response, whereas 13 of 33 (39.4%; 95% CI, 22.8% to 56%; P = 0.01) patients without beta-tubulin mutations had complete or partial responses. Median survival was 3 months for the 16 patients with beta-tubulin mutations and 10 months for the 33 patients without beta-tubulin mutations (P =.0001). CONCLUSION: We have identified beta-tubulin gene mutations as a strong predictor of response to the antitubulin drug paclitaxel; these mutations may represent a novel mechanism of resistance and should be examined prospectively in future trials of taxane-based therapy in NSCLC.

Randomized phase III study of gemcitabine-cisplatin versus etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted a randomized trial to compare gemcitabine-cisplatin with etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary end point of the comparison was response rate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 135 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) days 1 and 8 or etoposide 100 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 3 along with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1. Both treatments were administered in 21-day cycles. One hundred thirty-three patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis of response. RESULTS: The response rate (externally validated) for patients given gemcitabine-cisplatin was superior to that for patients given etoposide-cisplatin (40.6% v 21.9%; P = .02). This superior response rate was associated with a significant delay in time to disease progression (6.9 months v 4.3 months; P = .01) without an impairment in quality of life (QOL). There was no statistically significant difference in survival time between both arms (8.7 months for gemcitabine-cisplatin v 7.2 months for etoposide-cisplatin; P = .18). The overall toxicity profile for both combinations of drugs was similar. Nausea and vomiting were reported more frequently in the gemcitabine arm than in the etoposide arm. However, the difference was not significant. Gemcitabine-cisplatin produced less grade 3 alopecia (13% v 51%) and less grade 4 neutropenia (28% v 56% ) but more grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (56% v 13%) than did etoposide-cisplatin. However, there were no thrombocytopenia-related complications in the gemcitabine arm. CONCLUSION: Compared with etoposide-cisplatin, gemcitabine-cisplatin provides a significantly higher response rate and a delay in disease progression without impairing QOL in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus a cisplatin-based triplet versus nonplatinum sequential doublets in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a Spanish Lung Cancer Group phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the survival benefit obtained with cisplatin plus gemcitabine, a cisplatin-based triplet, and nonplatinum sequential doublets in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stage IIIB to IV NSCLC patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for six cycles (CG); cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for six cycles (CGV); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 plus vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for three cycles, followed by vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 plus ifosfamide 3 g/m2 day 1, every 3 weeks for three cycles (GV-VI). RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-seven patients were assigned to treatment (182 CG, 188 CGV, 187 GV-VI). Response rates were significantly inferior for the nonplatinum sequential doublet (CG, 42%; CGV, 41%; GV-VI, 27%; CG v GV-VI, P =.003). No differences in median survival or time to progression were observed. Toxicity was higher for the triplet: grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (GC, 32%; CGV, 57%; GV-VI, 27%; P <.05); neutropenic fever (CG, 4%; CGV, 19%; GV-VI, 5%; P <.0001); grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia (CG, 19%; CGV, 23%; GV-VI, 3%; P =.0001); and grade 3 to 4 emesis (GC, 22%; GCV, 32%; GV-VI, 6%; P <.0001). CONCLUSION: On the basis of these results, CG remains a standard regimen for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Phase II trial of oral vinorelbine in combination with cisplatin followed by consolidation therapy with oral vinorelbine in advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Among the cytotoxic agents commonly combined with cisplatin in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, vinorelbine has led to significant outcome improvements. Adding more than four cycles of the combination regimen increase toxicities. The availability of an oral form of vinorelbine appeared as a particularly convenient way to provide a consolidation treatment to patients who have achieved an objective response or stable disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multi-centre phase II open-label, non-comparative study was designed to evaluate the treatment with four cycles of the combination chemotherapy with oral vinorelbine at the dose of 60 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 8 for the first cycle and then 80 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks followed for patients with objective response or stable disease by consolidation therapy with oral vinorelbine at 80 mg/m2 weekly on patients with unresectable localised or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary endpoint was tumor response. The secondary objectives were progression free-survival, overall survival and toxicity assessment. Visual analogue scales (VAS) filled by the patients were also used to evaluate subjective changes under treatment, reflecting patients' clinical benefit. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients enrolled into the study from April 2001 to April 2002 received the combination regimen. Twenty-five patients (43.9%) also received the subsequent consolidation treatment. Partial tumor responses were obtained in 13 patients (26.5%, 95% CI 15.0-41.1) of 49 evaluable patients. Stable disease was observed in 22 (44.9%) of patients. The median duration of response was 6 months (95% CI 4.3-8.2). The median progression free-survival was 4.2 months (95% CI 2.8-6). The median overall survival time was 10 months (95% CI 7.4-14) and the 1 year survival was 42.6%. The main toxicities recorded were haematological. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia were observed in 16 patients (29.1%). Nausea, vomiting and fatigue were the major non-haematological toxicities reported. Among the symptoms recorded by the patients on VAS scales (appetite, fatigue, pain, cough, dyspnea, haemoptysis), except anorexia, all symptoms were improved during the combination therapy and in the consolidation phase. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that the efficacy of the cisplatin/oral vinorelbine combination in NSCLC is comparable to cisplatin/I.V. vinorelbine. This study also suggests that consolidation therapy with vinorelbine alone may probably prolong the efficacy of the combination regimen. The convenience offered to patients by an oral form of vinorelbine is a definite asset for consolidation therapy.

Single-agent paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: links between p53 and K-ras gene status and chemosensitivity.

Currently available cytotoxic drugs are only moderately active in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and prolong survival only slightly. In two published trials, single-agent paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) was reported to have significant activity in NSCLC, with response rates of 21% and 24%. Treatment-limiting hypersensitivity reactions, however, were noted in a phase I trial of paclitaxel given as a 3-hour infusion at doses > or = 190 mg/m2. We report the results of a phase II trial of paclitaxel given by 3-hour intravenous infusion at 210 mg/m2 every 3 weeks in an outpatient setting. The study was conducted simultaneously at three centers and included chemotherapy-naive patients with unresectable locoregional or metastatic NSCLC. The study objectives were to evaluate response rate, the potential link between p53 and K-ras gene mutations and increased paclitaxel resistance, and toxicity. Sixty-two patients were eligible for this study. All patients were premedicated with dexamethasone 20 mg given orally or intravenously 12 and 6 hours before paclitaxel infusion and cimetidine 300 mg and diphenhydramine 50 mg, both given 60 minutes prior to initiation of paclitaxel infusion. Of the 62 patients who were initially enrolled, 50 (44 men and six women) were evaluable for toxicity at interim analysis; 47 of these patients were evaluable for response. Twenty-four had squamous cell carcinoma, 20 had adenocarcinoma, and six had undifferentiated large cell carcinoma. The median age was 61 years (age range, 36 to 75 years). The median Zubrod performance status was 1 (range, 0 to 2). Seventeen (36%) patients achieved either partial or complete response. Among 24 patients with squamous cell carcinoma, eight (33%; 95% confidence interval, 15% to 61%) had a partial response. Seven (41%; 95% confidence interval, 18% to 64%) of 17 patients with adenocarcinoma had a partial or complete response. Tissue blocks were obtained for analysis of K-ras and p53 gene mutations by means of polymerase chain reaction followed by single-strand conformation polymorphism assay. Our findings indicate that mutations are associated with a poor clinical course and may be prognostic of paclitaxel resistance. Paclitaxel was well tolerated. None of the patients experienced allergic reactions. Granulocytopenia was generally mild. Therapy was interrupted in only two patients because of the development of grade 3 neuropathy. In our experience, paclitaxel is one of the most active cytotoxic drugs targeting NSCLC.

A three-arm trial of vinorelbine (Navelbine) plus cisplatin, vindesine plus cisplatin, and single-agent vinorelbine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: an expanded analysis.

Phase II studies have demonstrated that vinorelbine (Navelbine; Burroughs Wellcome Co, Research Triangle Park, NC; Pierre Fabre Médicament, Paris, France) alone or in combination with cisplatin has promising activity against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). On the basis of these preliminary trials, a phase III study was designed to compare intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m2 weekly) plus cisplatin (120 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 29 and then every 6 weeks) with vindesine (3 mg/m2 weekly for 6 weeks and then every 2 weeks) plus cisplatin, and to evaluate whether the best of these regimens afforded a survival benefit compared with intravenous vinorelbine alone, an outpatient regimen. This report presents an expanded analysis of data from this previously published study. Six hundred twelve patients were enrolled in this trial: 206 in the vinorelbine plus cisplatin arm, 200 in the vindesine plus cisplatin group, and 206 in the single-agent vinorelbine arm. The vinorelbine plus cisplatin regimen was superior to the other two arms of the study in objective response rate (30% v 19% for vindesine plus cisplatin [P = .02] and 14% for vinorelbine alone [P = .001]), median survival duration (40 weeks v 32 weeks for vindesine plus cisplatin and 31 weeks for vinorelbine alone), and 1-year survival rate (35% v 27% for vindesine plus cisplatin and 30% for vinorelbine alone). An adjusted log-rank test provided a significant advantage for vinorelbine plus cisplatin when compared with vindesine plus cisplatin (P = .04) and with vinorelbine alone (P = .02). The major difference in survival between the two cisplatin-containing regimens occurred in patients with metastatic (stage IV) NSCLC. The incidence of granulocytopenia was significantly higher in the vinorelbine plus cisplatin arm compared with the other two treatment groups, but neurotoxicity was significantly more frequent in the vindesine plus cisplatin group. The results of this study indicate that the combination of vinorelbine plus cisplatin is a viable treatment option for patients with NSCLC and may provide advantages compared with other commonly used regimens.

Economic evaluation in a randomized phase III clinical trial comparing gemcitabine/cisplatin and etoposide/cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Information on the relative cost-effectiveness of treatments for cancer is being increasingly sought as pressure on health care resources increases. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) versus cisplatin/etoposide (CE) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), using resource utilization data collected in conjunction with the first randomized clinical trial comparing both combinations. METHODS: Efficacy and medical care resource utilization data were collected prospectively in an open-label, multicenter, randomized, comparative, phase III trial conducted in Spain which compared gemcitabine/cisplatin and cisplatin/etoposide in 135 chemonaive patients with Stage IIIB or IV NSCLC. There were no differences between both regimens when survival was used as primary end-point, so a cost-minimization analysis was used to compare them. In addition, cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted when percentage of responses and time to progression were used as secondary end-points. RESULTS: There were no differences between both regimens when survival was selected as the efficacy end-point. Despite the higher chemotherapy cost of GC when compared to CE, there were no differences in total direct costs (584523 pts for GC and 589630 pts for CE; P=NS) between both regimens. Potential savings with GC were mainly associated with a decrease in hospitalization rate. There were differences in favor of GC when response rate (40.6% for GC and 21.9% for CE; P<0.05) and time to disease progression (8.7 months for GC and 7.2 months for CE; P<0. 05) were used as clinical end-points. GC presented a favorable cost-effectiveness profile when compared to CE. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective economic evaluation conducted alongside a clinical trial offers valuable preliminary information on the potential efficiency of the combination gemcitabine-cisplatin in NSCLC. Future assessments based on larger clinical trials focused on survival and naturalistic economic studies conducted in real clinical practice settings are necessary to confirm these findings.

Preoperative high-dose cisplatin versus moderate-dose cisplatin combined with ifosfamide and mitomycin in stage IIIA (N2) non small-cell lung cancer: results of a randomized multicenter trial.

Preoperative chemotherapy has become an accepted treatment for stage IIIA (N2) non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The majority of induction regimens employ cisplatin, although the importance of cis-platin dose in combination is unclear. A randomized trial was conducted to address whether higher pre-operative cisplatin doses result in improved survival and increased pathologic complete response in NSCLC. Patients with stage IIIA clinically enlarged and biopsy-proven N2 lesions were randomly assigned to receive either high-dose cisplatin (HDCP) (100 mg/m2) or moderate-dose cisplatin (MDCP) (50 mg/ m2) in combination with ifosfamide (3 g/m2) and mitomycin (6 mg/m2). Disease was restaged after 3 cycles, and those patients with response or stable disease underwent thoracotomy. From March 1993 to February 1997, 83 patients were randomized: 46 received HDCP, and 37 received MDCP. Clinical characteristics were well matched. Radiographic response rate was 59% for HDCP patients and 30% for MDCP patients (P = 0.01). Thoracotomy was performed in 71 patients (86%), 58 of whom had resectable disease. Complete resection rate was 61% in the HDCP group, and 51% in the MDCP group (P = 0.5). Postoperative mortality was 11%. Pathologic complete response was observed in one patient who received MDCP. Median survival in the HDCP and MDCP groups was 13 and 11 months, respectively (P = 0.3). In conclusion, higher radiographic response rate is observed in patients who receive HDCP, but this study fails to show any significant improvement in either overall survival or pathologic complete response in this group of patients.

Epidermal growth factor in human breast cancer, endometrial carcinoma and lung cancer. Its relationship to epidermal growth factor receptor, estradiol receptor and tumor TNM.

Epidermal growth factor (EGF) and its receptor (EGFR) were measured in 60 breast cancers (BC), 6 benign mammary tumors (BM), 8 samples of normal breast (NB), 6 endometrial carcinomas (EC) and 30 lung cancers (LC). EGF was measured in plasma, saliva and urine from 20 patients with BC, before and after tumor excision, and in 8 patients with metastatic disease. The median EGF in BM and BC was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than in NB. No significant correlation between EGF and EGFR was found in BC. Neither tumor excision nor the spreading of the disease significantly modified the EGF concentrations in biological fluids. In LC there was an inverse relationship between EGF and EGFR (rs = -0.36; P = 0.09), which disappeared in normal lung. It is concluded that EGF may play a role in malignant transformation; however, the weak correlation between EGF and EGFR lessens the importance of EGF in either autocrine or paracrine stimulation of tumor growth.

Novel approaches in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer.

A wealth of data indicates that certain genetic abnormalities can target specific cytotoxic drugs and intervene at an early step as a mechanism of resistance in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Therefore prescribing certain combinations of cytotoxic anticancer agents to a vast majority of these patients is futile. Genetic abnormalities have been found to be useful surrogate markers for response, particularly in colorectal cancer: thymidylate synthase mRNA and ERCC1 mRNA levels. In addition, beta-tubulin mutations may also confer paclitaxel resistance in patients. An important target to be explored for gemcitabine resistance is the assessment of a particular region in chromosome 11p15.5 wherein lies the ribonucleotide reductase gene that could affect gemcitabine metabolism. Shedding light on this genetic framework, several proposed customized chemotherapy studies could help validate the relevance of these markers.

Weekly paclitaxel for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients not suitable for platinum-based therapy.

Platinum-based combinations are efficacious in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but their toxicity makes them unsuitable for elderly and for patients with co-morbidities. We assessed the efficacy and toxicity of low-dose of paclitaxel in patients who were elderly or who had contraindications against cisplatin therapy. Seventy-one patients (median age 68; range 42-82 years) with unresectable NSCLC were treated with weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) infusion (1 h) for several cycles without intervening rest periods. Thirty-seven patients had PS 1 and 34 had PS 2 status. A total of 614 courses were administered (median 9, range 2-20). There were no episodes of grade 4 toxicities and only 1 patient had grade 3 thrombopenia. Grade 3 anemia or neutropenia were not observed and severe non-hematological toxicity was uncommon: grade 1-2 fatigue in 52%; grade 1-2 motor neuropathy in 42% and grade 3 in 5.5%; grade 1-2 sensory neuropathy in 46.3% of patients. Twenty-seven of the 67 evaluable patients (40.3%) had an objective response, whereas 26 patients (38.8%) had stable disease. The median overall survival for the entire group was 8.4 months (95% CI = 5.6 to 11.2) and the 1-year and 2-year survival was 37.4% and 12.1%, respectively. The median time-to-progression was 5.4 months (95% CI = 3.3 to 7.4). Our data show that low-dose weekly paclitaxel is active and well tolerated in this group of patients with NSCLC and poor prognosis and, as such, is useful for patients in whom platinum-based combinations are not suitable.

Phase II study with high doses of epirubicin in patients with advanced rectal cancer.

We tested the possible role of epirubicin, 100 to 130 mg/m2 administered i.v. every 3 weeks, in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the rectum untreated with chemotherapy. Sixteen of 17 entered cases were evaluable. No complete or partial responses were observed. The median time to progression was 6 weeks, and the median survival was 36 weeks. Reversible leukopenia was the major toxic side effect. The median epirubicin cumulative dose was 330 mg/m2; no patient had clinical cardiac toxicity. With no responses recorded in 16 evaluable patients, the activity of epirubicin in rectal cancer ranged between 0 and 18%, with 95% probability. Further studies with epirubicin in this tumor are not indicated.

[Results of a randomized study comparing combination of navelbine-cisplatin to combination of vindesine-cisplatin and to navelbine alone in 612 patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer]. / Résultats d'une étude randomisée comparant l'association Navelbine-cisplatinum à l'association vindésine-cisplatinum et à la Navelbine seule chez 612 malades porteurs d'un carcinome bronchique non à petites cellules inopérable.

The combination of vindesine and cisplatin is considered a reference regimen in advanced NSCLC which has yielded a significant improvement in the duration of survival. A phase II study of a new semi-synthetic vinca alkaloid, Navelbine, reported an unusually high 29% response rate in stage III-IV NSCLC and a phase I-II study established the feasibility of the combination of Navelbine and cisplatin. We, therefore, designed a prospective randomized trial to compare Navelbine and cisplatin (NVB-P) to vindesine and cisplatin (VDS-P) and to evaluate whether the best of these regimens affords a survival benefit compared to Navelbine alone (NVB), an outpatient regimen. Forty-five centers included 612 patients in this study: 206 in NVB-P, 200 in VDS-P and 206 in NVB. Navelbine was given at a dose of 30 mg/m2 weekly, cisplatin at 120 mg/m2 on day 1, day 29 and then every 6 weeks and vindesine at 3 mg/m2 weekly for 6 weeks and then every other week. Treatment was continued until progression or toxicity. Patients' characteristics were similar in the three groups with 59% of patients presenting with metastatic disease. An objective response rate was observed in 30% of patients in NVB-P versus 19% in VDS-P (P = .02) and 14% in NVB (P < .001). The median duration of survival was 40 weeks in NVB-P compared to 32 weeks in VDS-P and 31 weeks in NVB. The comparison of survival between the three groups demonstrated an advantage for NVB-P compared to VDS-P (P = .04) and NVB (P = .02). Neutropenia was significantly higher in the NVB-P group (P < .001) and neurotoxicity more frequent with VDS-P (P < .004). Since our results have demonstrated that NVB-P yields a longer survival duration and a higher response rate than VDS-P or NVB alone, with acceptable toxicity, this combination should be considered a reference regimen in advanced NSCLC.

[Bullous dermatomyositis]. / Dermatomiositis ampollosa.

The authors present a case of bullous dermatitis with clinical and biological polymyositis. The cause of the blisters can be found in an intense oedema of the superficial and middle dermis and is favoured by liquefaction of the basal layer and fibrinoid degeneration of the superficial dermis. It is diagnosed as dermatomyositis with malignancy even though it has been impossible to confirm the nature of the tumor. The diagnosis is being argued with other diseases that occasionally are vesiculobullous.

Iron deficiency in patients with solid tumours: prevalence and management in clinical practice.

PURPOSE: The objective of the present study was to describe the prevalence and management of anaemia and iron deficiency (ID) in treatment-naïve patients with solid tumours in Spain and the incidence of anaemia over 4 months of cancer treatment in clinical practice. METHODS: Multicentre, prospective and observational study in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Data on anaemia and iron parameters and its management were collected prior to the initiation of chemotherapy, at each cycle of chemotherapy and after 4 months of treatment. The main outcomes of the study were the prevalence of anaemia at baseline, its incidence during cancer treatment and the prevalence of absolute ID (AID) and functional ID (FID) prior to chemotherapy initiation. RESULTS: A total of 295 patients were included in the study. Anaemia was present at diagnosis in 38.6 % of patients and was treated only in 32.5 % of those. A total of 106 patients (60.2 %) without anaemia at baseline developed anaemia during cancer treatment. Serum ferritin and transferrin saturation data were available for 151 of the patients (51.2 %) included in the study. The overall prevalence of ID was 59 %: 48 patients (31.8 %) presented with AID and 41 patients (27.2 %) presented with FID before starting anti-cancer therapy. Thirty-three of 44 non-anaemic iron-deficient patients did not receive any type of iron supplementation before initiating cancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Iron parameters are not commonly measured in newly diagnosed cancer patients. A correct evaluation and early management of ID could reduce the incidence of treatment-related anaemia in cancer patients.

Prospective assessment of XRCC3, XPD and Aurora kinase A single-nucleotide polymorphisms in advanced lung cancer.

PURPOSE: New therapeutic approaches are being developed based on findings that several genetic abnormalities underlying non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) can influence chemosensitivity. The identification of molecular markers, useful for therapeutic decisions in lung cancer, is thus crucial for disease management. The present study evaluated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in XRCC3, XPD and Aurora kinase A in NSCLC patients in order to assess whether these biomarkers were able to predict the outcomes of the patients. METHODS: The Spanish Lung Cancer Group prospectively assessed this clinical study. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed stage IV or IIIB (with malignant pleural effusion) NSCLC, which had not previously been treated with chemotherapy, and a World Health Organization performance status (PS) of 0-1. Patients received intravenous doses of vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, every 21 days for a maximum of 6 cycles. Venous blood was collected from each, and genomic DNA was isolated. SNPs in XRCC3 T241M, XPD K751Q, XPD D312N, AURORA 91, AURORA 169 were assessed. RESULTS: The study included 180 patients. Median age was 62 years; 87 % were male; 34 % had PS 0; and 83 % had stage IV disease. The median number of cycles was 4. Time to progression was 5.1 months (95 % CI, 4.2-5.9). Overall median survival was 8.6 months (95 % CI, 7.1-10.1). There was no significant association between SNPs in XRCC3 T241M, XPD K751Q, XPD D312N, AURORA 91, AURORA 169 in outcome or toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that SNPs in XRCC3, XPD or Aurora kinase A cannot predict outcomes in advanced NSCLC patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.

[Experience with sunitinib in hormone-resistant metastatic prostate cancer that is unresponsive to docetaxel]. / Experiencia con sunitinib en cáncer de próstata metastásico hormonorresistente sin respuesta a docetaxel.

INTRODUCTION: systemic treatment options for patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) that progress despite the use of Docetaxel are very limited. One of the options of compassionate use currently available is the use of Sunitinib. We present a joint preliminary experience with the use of Sunitinib in this clinical case. PATIENTS AND METHODS: a series of eight cases is presented, which sets forth a prospective multicentre experience with Sunitinib in patients with hormone-refractory metastatic and progressive prostate cancer, previously treated with at least a regime of Docetaxel-based chemotherapy. Other alternative chemotherapy regimes had already been tried in some patients. The primary objective of our study was the PSA response rate and our secondary objective was the progression-free period. We administered a dosage of 50mg/day for four-week cycles, followed by a two-week rest per cycle, until we reached a total of eight cycles or up to clinical progression or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: in four cases, the PSA dropped to below 50% of the baseline level at the beginning of the treatment, and five patients presented some decrease in PSA. The progression-free time was 16.4 weeks. Toxicity arising from the treatment was moderate and manageable. CONCLUSIONS: despite the limits of this experience, we can say that Sunitinib appears to be an active and safe option in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer that is resistant to chemotherapy with Docetaxel.