A phase II double-blind study to investigate efficacy and safety of two doses of the triple angiokinase inhibitor BIBF 1120 in patients with relapsed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy, safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of BIBF 1120 in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic relapsed NSCLC in whom first- or second-line platinum-based chemotherapy failed were randomly allocated to daily 250 mg BIBF 1120 b.i.d. or 150 mg BIBF 1120 b.i.d. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective tumour response (RECIST). Incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs) were reported. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients received BIBF 1120. Median PFS was 6.9 weeks, with no significant difference between treatment arms. Median overall survival (OS) was 21.9 weeks. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 0-1 patients (n = 56) had a median PFS of 11.6 weeks and a median OS of 37.7 weeks. Tumour stabilisation was achieved in 46% of patients (ECOG 0-1 patients: 59%), with one confirmed partial response (250 mg b.i.d.). Most commonly reported drug-related AEs were nausea (57.5%), diarrhoea (47.9%), vomiting (42.5%), anorexia (28.8%), abdominal pain (13.7%) and reversible alanine transaminase (13.7%) and aspartate aminotransferase elevations (9.6%). BIBF 1120 displayed dose-linear pharmacokinetic characteristics. CONCLUSION: Continuous treatment with BIBF 1120 was well tolerated, with no difference in efficacy between treatment arms. PFS and objective response with single-agent treatment in advanced disease warrants further exploration.

[Analysis of treatment outcomes in two patient cohorts (2004-2005 and 2007-2008) with limited and extensive disease small-cell lung cancer]. / Vergleich von Behandlungsergebnissen in zwei Patientengruppen (2004-2005 und 2007-2008) mit einem kleinzelligen Bronchialkarzinom im begrenzten und metastasierten Krankheitsstadium.

PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare patient characteristics, treatment patterns and treatment results in two groups of patients with limited disease (LD) and extensive disease (ED) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in 2004 - 2005 vs. 2007 - 2008. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included all patients with LD or ED SCLC in this retrospective analysis who were diagnosed in our department in the periods 2004 - 2005 and 2007 - 2008. We collected data on patient characteristics, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, treatment response and median survival. Statistical analyses were separately performed for patients in LD and ED SCLC. RESULTS: 109 patients had LD SCLC. The response rate on first-line therapy was 74 %. More than half of the cases had recurrent disease. Second-line treatment was given to about two thirds of these patients. Third-line therapy was administered in around 15 % of all cases. Prophylactic cranial irradiation was performed more frequently from 2007 - 2008. The median survival was 17 months. There were no statistically significant differences regarding patient characteristics and treatment results. ED SCLC was present in 188 patients. The response rate was around 68 %. All patients relapsed, second-line therapy was administered in half of these cases; third-line therapy in 10 % of all cases. No statistically significant differences were detected between the two time frames. Median survival was 10 months. CONCLUSION: Overall, no statistically significant differences were present for patients with LD and ED SCLC in 2004 - 2005 vs. 2007 - 2008. Prophylactic cranial irradiation was employed more frequently in LD SCLC from 2007.

Global Lung Oncology Branch trial 3 (GLOB3): final results of a randomised multinational phase III study alternating oral and i.v. vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus docetaxel plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The study compared the efficacy of a first-line treatment with day 1 i.v. vinorelbine (NVBiv) and day 8 oral vinorelbine (NVBo) versus docetaxel (DCT) in a cisplatin-based combination in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, in terms of time to treatment failure (TTF), overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tolerance and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin 80 mg/m2 with NVBiv 30 mg/m2 on day 1 and NVBo 80 mg/m2 on day 8 every 3 weeks, after a first cycle of NVBiv 25 mg/m2 on day 1 and NVBo 60 mg/m2 on day 8 (arm A) or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 and DCT 75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks (arm B), for a maximum of six cycles in both arms. RESULTS: From 2 February 2004 to 1 January 2006, 390 patients were entered in a randomised study and 381 were treated. The patient characteristics are as follows (arms A/B): metastatic (%) 80.5/84.8; patients with three or more organs involved (%) 45.3/40.8; median age 59.4/62.1 years; male 139/146; squamous (%) 34.2/33.5; adenocarcinoma (%) 41.6/39.3; median TTF (arms A/B in months) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 3.2 (3.0-4.2), 4.1 (3.4-4.5) (P = 0.19); overall response (arms A/B) (95% CI): 27.4% (21.2% to 34.2%), 27.2% (21.0% to 34.2%); median PFS (arms A/B in months) (95% CI): 4.9 (4.4-5.9), 5.1 (4.3-6.1) (P = 0.99) and median OS (arms A/B in months) (95% CI): 9.9 (8.4-11.6), 9.8 (8.8-11.5) (P = 0.58). The median survival for squamous histology was 8.87/9.82 months and for adenocarcinoma 11.73/11.60 months for arms A and B, respectively. Main haematological toxicity was grade 3-4 neutropenia: 24.4% (arm A) and 28.8% (arm B). QoL as measured by the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale was similar in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Both arms provided similar efficacy in terms of response, time-related parameters and QoL, with an acceptable tolerance profile. In the current Global Lung Oncology Branch trial 3, NVBo was shown to be effective as a substitute for the i.v. formulation. This can relieve the burden of the i.v. injection on day 8 and can optimise the hospital's resources and improve patient convenience.

Phase III trial comparing paclitaxel poliglumex vs docetaxel in the second-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer.

Paclitaxel poliglumex (PPX), a macromolecule drug conjugate linking paclitaxel to polyglutamic acid, reduces systemic exposure to peak concentrations of free paclitaxel. Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had received one prior platinum-based chemotherapy received 175 or 210 mg m(-2) PPX or 75 mg m(-2) docetaxel. The study enrolled 849 previously treated NSCLC patients with advanced disease. Median survival (6.9 months in both arms, hazard ratio=1.09, P=0.257), 1-year survival (PPX=25%, docetaxel=29%, P=0.134), and time to progression (PPX=2 months, docetaxel=2.6 months, P=0.075) were similar between treatment arms. Paclitaxel poliglumex was associated with significantly less grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (P<0.001) and febrile neutropenia (P=0.006). Grade 3 or 4 neuropathy (P<0.001) was more common in the PPX arm. Patients receiving PPX had less alopecia and did not receive routine premedications. More patients discontinued due to adverse events in the PPX arm compared to the docetaxel arm (34 vs 16%, P<0.001). Paclitaxel poliglumex and docetaxel produced similar survival results but had different toxicity profiles. Compared with docetaxel, PPX had less febrile neutropenia and less alopecia, shorter infusion times, and elimination of routine use of medications to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. Paclitaxel poliglumex at a dose of 210 mg m(-2) resulted in increased neurotoxicity compared with docetaxel.

Combination chemotherapy with carboplatin, etoposide, and vincristine as first-line treatment in small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The antineoplastic activity of carboplatin and etoposide may be improved by the addition of vincristine (CEV) because of its low myelosuppressive potential and its activity in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). A phase II study with CEV was carried out. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-one untreated patients with SCLC (63 with limited disease [LD], 58 with extensive disease [ED]) were treated with a combination of 300 mg/m2 intravenous (IV) on day 1, etoposide 140 mg/m2 IV daily on days 1 to 3, and vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. RESULTS: A 90% rate overall response rate including 56% complete responses (CRs) was achieved in LD and an 83% overall response rate including 35% CRs was observed in ED. Median survival time was 13 months in limited disease and 9.5 months in extensive disease. The 24 and 36 months survival rates were 29% in LD and 9% in ED. Myelosuppression was the main form of toxicity. CONCLUSION: The combination of CEV is a new active and well-tolerated regimen in the treatment of SCLC. Prospective randomized studies of CEV with conventional chemotherapy are warranted.

Phase ii comparator study of oral versus intravenous topotecan in patients with chemosensitive small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Topotecan, administered intravenously, is active in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In this study, the comparability of oral topotecan to IV topotecan was investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with SCLC that had relapsed 90 days or more after cessation of initial chemotherapy were randomized to receive either oral topotecan (Hycamtin) 2.3 mg/m(2)/d x 5 (52 patients) or IV topotecan 1.5 mg/m(2)/d x 5 (54 patients), every 21 days. RESULTS: Response rates in this phase II randomized study were 23% (12/52) in the oral topotecan arm and 15% (8/54) in the IV topotecan arm. All radiological responses were confirmed by an independent radiologist. Median survival was 32 weeks (oral) and 25 weeks (IV). Good symptom control, defined as sustained improvement or no deterioration, was evident in both treatment groups. Topotecan was generally well tolerated, with myelosuppression being the major toxicity. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 35.3% of patients on oral topotecan and in 67.3% of patients on IV topotecan, which was statistically significant (P =.001). Fever/infection more than or equal to grade 2 associated with grade 4 neutropenia, together with sepsis, occurred in only 5.1% of courses (oral) and 3.3% of courses (IV). Non-hematological toxicity consisted mainly of vomiting (oral: 36.5% of patients; IV: 31.5% of patients) and nausea (oral: 26.9% of patients; IV: 40.7% of patients). CONCLUSION: This study found oral topotecan to be similar in efficacy to IV topotecan in the treatment of patients with relapsed SCLC, sensitive to first-line chemotherapy, with less grade 4 neutropenia and greater convenience of administration.

Phase III comparative study of high-dose cisplatin versus a combination of paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: New effective chemotherapy is needed to improve the outcome of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Paclitaxel administered as a single agent or in combination with cisplatin has been shown to be a potentially new useful agent for the treatment of NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1995 and April 1996, 414 patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomized to received either a control arm of high-dose cisplatin (100 mg/m(2)) or a combination of paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2), 3-hour infusion) and cisplatin (80 mg/m(2)) every 21 days. RESULTS: Compared with the cisplatin-only arm, there was a 9% improvement (95% confidence interval, 0% to 19%) in overall response rate for the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm (17% v 26%, respectively; P=.028). Median time to progression was 2.7 and 4.1 months in the control and paclitaxel/cisplatin arm, respectively (P=.026). The study, however, failed to show a significant improvement in median survival for the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm (8.6 months in the control arm v 8.1 months in the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm, P=.862). There was more hematotoxicity, peripheral neuropathy, and arthralgia/myalgia on the paclitaxel/cisplatin arm, whereas the high-dose cisplatin arm produced more ototoxicity, nausea, vomiting, and nephrotoxicity. Quality of life (QOL) was similar overall between the two arms. CONCLUSION: This large randomized phase III trial failed to show a significant improvement in survival for the paclitaxel/cisplatin combination compared with high-dose cisplatin in patients with advanced NSCLC. However, the paclitaxel/cisplatin combination did produce a better clinical response, resulting in an increased time to progression while providing a similar QOL.

Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus cisplatin alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The Hoosier Oncology Group has previously reported the results of its phase II trial of the combination of cisplatin plus gemcitabine. In that study of 27 assessable patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the response rate was 33%, with a median survival of 8.4 months. Based on such favorable results, the Hoosier Oncology Group designed this randomized phase III study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin compared with cisplatin alone in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either cisplatin (100 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 28-day cycle) or the combination of cisplatin (100 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1) plus gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle). RESULTS: From August 1995 to February 1997, 522 assessable chemotherapy-naive patients were randomized. Toxicity was predominantly hematologic and was more pronounced in the combination arm, with grade 4 neutropenia occurring in 35.3% of patients compared with 1.2% of patients on the cisplatin monotherapy arm. The incidence of neutropenic fevers was less than 5% in both arms. Grade 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 25. 4% of patients on the combination arm compared with 0.8% of patients on the cisplatin monotherapy arm. No serious hemorrhagic events related to thrombocytopenia were reported for either arm. The combination of gemcitabine plus cisplatin demonstrated a significant improvement over single-agent cisplatin with regard to response rate (30.4% compared with 11.1%, respectively; P <.0001), median time to progressive disease (5.6 months compared with 3.7 months, respectively; P =.0013), and overall survival (9.1 months compared with 7.6 months, respectively; P =.004). CONCLUSIONS: For the first-line treatment of NSCLC, the regimen of gemcitabine plus cisplatin is superior to cisplatin alone in terms of response rate, time to disease progression, and overall survival.

Effects of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor and dose intensification of V-ICE chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer: a prospective randomized study of 300 patients.

PURPOSE: To assess whether granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) reduces the toxicity of chemotherapy and alters delivered dose-intensity. To assess the feasibility of dose-intensification of chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and determine whether it has an impact on outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with good- or intermediate-prognosis SCLC entered a prospective multicenter study that involved a 2 x 2 factorial design with randomization to six cycles of chemotherapy with ifosfamide 5 g/m2, carboplatin 300 mg/m2, etoposide 120 mg/m2 intravenously (I.V.) on days 1 and 2 and 240 mg/m2 orally on day 3, and vincristine 0.5 mg/m2 I.V. on day 15 (V-ICE) every 3 weeks (intensified arm) or every 4 weeks (standard arm). A second double-blind randomization to subcutaneous GM-CSF (250 microg/m2/d) or placebo for 14 days between chemotherapy cycles was made. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were entered. Myelosuppression was the main toxicity, with no significant difference in the incidence or grade between treatment groups. The incidence of febrile neutropenia and bacteriologically confirmed sepsis was unaffected by chemotherapy schedule or use of GM-CSF. Twenty-six percent greater dose-intensity was delivered in the intensified arm, with a trend for greater dose-intensity for those who received GM-CSF. Eighty-three percent of patients achieved a response (51% complete response [CR] rate), with no significant difference in response rates between treatment groups. Survival was significantly increased in the intensified compared with the standard arm (P = .0014); median survival rates were 443 versus 351 days and 2-year survival rates were 33% versus 18%, respectively. CONCLUSION: GM-CSF does not reduce the incidence of complications from myelosuppression of aggressive chemotherapy. Dose intensification of V-ICE to a 3-week schedule in SCLC is not associated with increased toxicity, but appears to improve survival significantly. Future studies should aim to deliver chemotherapy in maximal-tolerated dose-intensities.

Adenovirus-mediated wild-type p53 gene transfer in patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a multicenter phase II study.

PURPOSE: To study the additional benefit from adenoviral p53 gene therapy in patients undergoing first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with nonresectable NSCLC were enrolled in an open-label, multicenter phase II study of three cycles of regimen A, carboplatin (area under the curve, 6; day 1) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2), day 1), or regimen B, cisplatin (100 mg/m(2), day 1) plus vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, 15, and 22) in combination with intratumoral injection of 7.5 x 10(12) particles of SCH 58500 (rAd/p53, day 1). Responses of individual tumor lesions were assessed after each cycle, and gene transfer was examined in posttreatment tumor biopsies using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: There was no difference between the response rate of lesions treated with p53 gene therapy in addition to chemotherapy (52% objective responses) and lesions treated with chemotherapy alone (48% objective responses). Subgroup analysis according to the chemotherapy regimens revealed evidence for increased mean local tumor regressions in response to additional p53 gene therapy in patients receiving regimen B, but not in patients receiving regimen A. There was no survival difference between the two chemotherapy regimens, and the median survival of the cohort was 10.5 months (1-year survival, 44%). Transgene expression was confirmed in tumor samples from 68% of patients, and toxicities attributable to gene therapy were mild to moderate. CONCLUSION: Intratumoral adenoviral p53 gene therapy appears to provide no additional benefit in patients receiving an effective first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC.

Tirapazamine plus cisplatin versus cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A report of the international CATAPULT I study group. Cisplatin and Tirapazamine in Subjects with Advanced Previously Untreated Non-Small-Cell Lung Tumors.

PURPOSE: A phase III trial, Cisplatin and Tirapazamine in Subjects with Advanced Previously Untreated Non-Small-Cell Lung Tumors (CATAPULT I), was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of tirapazamine plus cisplatin for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated NSCLC were randomized to receive either tirapazamine (390 mg/m(2) infused over 2 hours) followed 1 hour later by cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) over 1 hour) or 75 mg/m(2) of cisplatin alone, every 3 weeks for a maximum of eight cycles. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients with NSCLC (17% with stage IIIB disease and pleural effusions; 83% with stage IV disease) were entered onto the study. Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was >/= 60 for all patients (for 10%, KPS = 60; for 90%, KPS = 70 to 100). Sixty patients (14%) had clinically stable brain metastases. The median survival was significantly longer (34.6 v 27. 7 weeks; P =.0078) and the response rate was significantly greater (27.5% v 13.7%; P <.001) for patients who received tirapazamine plus cisplatin (n = 218) than for those who received cisplatin alone (n = 219). The tirapazamine-plus-cisplatin regimen was associated with mild to moderate adverse events, including acute, reversible hearing loss, reversible, intermittent muscle cramping, diarrhea, skin rash, nausea, and vomiting. There were no incremental increases in myelosuppression, peripheral neuropathy, or renal, hepatic, or cardiac toxicity and no deaths related to tirapazamine. CONCLUSION: The CATAPULT I study shows that tirapazamine enhances the activity of cisplatin in patients with advanced NSCLC and confirms that hypoxia is an exploitable therapeutic target in human malignancies.

Randomized study of vinorelbine--gemcitabine versus vinorelbine--carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The objective of this trial was to compare two vinorelbine-based doublets with carboplatin (CBDCA-VC) or with gemcitabine (VG) in patients with stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 316 patients with advanced NSCLC previously untreated were randomized to either vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) D1,8 with carboplatin AUC 5 D1 (VC) or vinorelbine 25mg/m(2) with gemcitabine (VG) 1000 mg/m(2) both given D1,8 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was response rate with secondary parameters being survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), tolerance and clinical benefit. RESULTS: The median number of cycles was four in each arm with a total of 1268 cycles. The objective response (OR) on intent-to-treat was 20.8% in VC and 28% in VG (p=0.15). Median PFS was 3.9 months in VC and 4.4 months (mo) in VG (p=0.18). Median survival was significantly longer (p=0.01) for VG with 11.5 mo compared to 8.6 mo in VC with 1 year survival at 48.9 and 34.4%, respectively. Tolerance was better in the VG arm as compared to the VC patients. Four toxic deaths were recorded in the VC group. Clinical benefit response rate was 32.4% compared to 40.9% in 111 and 110 evaluable patients in VC and VG, respectively. CONCLUSION: VG compared to VC resulted in a similar overall response rate, favourable median survival and a better toxicity profile. For non-cisplatin-based chemotherapy, VG is a useful alternative.

Recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor reduces the infectious complications of cytotoxic chemotherapy.

The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor (r-metHuG-CSF) following conventional chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer. 130 previously untreated patients were randomised to receive either r-metHuG-CSF (230 micrograms/m2) or placebo on days 4-17 following CDE (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and etoposide) chemotherapy. Over all cycles, 53% of 64 patients on placebo and only 26% of 65 patients on r-metHuG-CSF had at least one experience of neutropenia with fever defined as a neutrophil count less than 1.0 x 10(9)/l and a temperature > or = 38.2 degrees C (P < 0.002). It resulted in a reduction in the requirement for parenteral antibiotics from 58% in placebo patients compared with 37% in the r-metHuG-CSF group (P < 0.02), and a significant reduction in the incidence of infection-related hospitalisation. Chemotherapy doses were reduced by 15% or more at least once in 61% of the placebo group compared with 29% in the r-metHuG-CSF group (P < 0.001). 47% of the patients treated with placebo and 29% of the patients treated with r-metHuG-CSF experienced at least one cycle with a delay of 2 days or more in the administration of chemotherapy (P < 0.04). r-metHuG-CSF was well tolerated. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of response or survival.

Activity of gemcitabine in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a multicentre, extended phase II study.

Gemcitabine is a novel nucleoside analogue with activity in solid tumours. This study assessed the objective response rate to gemcitabine given weekly intravenously at a dose of 1250 mg/m2 for 3 weeks followed by 1 week of rest (one cycle) in chemonaive patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 161 patients with NSCLC were recruited from 10 sites in nine countries. Most patients had stage IIIb (31.3%) or IV (64.6%) disease, and 93.8% had a performance status of 0 or 1 according to the WHO scale. Of 151 evaluable patients, there were 3 complete responses and 30 partial responses lasting at least 4 weeks for an objective response rate of 21.8% (95% CI 15.5-29.3%). All responses were validated by an extramural Oncology Review Board. The mean duration of response was 8.8 months. The mean survival for all patients (16.1% of patients still alive 26 months after last patient started treatment) was 11.5 months. Improvements were also observed in secondary efficacy parameters such as performance status, weight, analgesic requirement, pain, and other disease-related symptoms including cough, dyspnoea, haemoptysis, anorexia, somnolence and hoarseness. Haematological and non-haematological toxicity was mild given the biological activity of gemcitabine. This study confirms gemcitabine as one of the most active agents in NSCLC with the added benefit of a modest toxicity profile and ease of administration on an out-patient basis. Gemcitabine is a suitable candidate for combination chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC.

Paclitaxel, carboplatin, and oral etoposide: a phase II trial in limited-stage small cell lung cancer.

Carboplatin/etoposide is an active regimen in the treatment of small cell lung cancer. This phase II trial evaluated whether adding paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) to this two-drug combination might increase its efficacy. Since April 1996, 55 patients were entered into the ongoing protocol. To date, 35 patients are evaluable for efficacy and toxicity. Most of the evaluable patients are male (28). The patients' median age is 60 years (range, 36 to 74 years); 32 patients have Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ratings of 1, and the balance are Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0. All patients had limited-stage disease. Patients received paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 via 1-hour intravenous infusion on day 1, carboplatin dosed to an area under the concentration-time curve of 5, also on day 1, and oral etoposide 100 mg on days 2 through 8. Overall, 31 patients responded to paclitaxel/carboplatin/etoposide therapy, including complete response in 13 patients (37.1%) and partial response in 18 patients (51.4%). Disease was stable in three patients (8.6%) and disease progressed in one (2.0%). Hematologic toxicity included neutropenia (World Health Organization grade 3 in 24.1% of patients, grade 4 in 31.3%), anemia (4% grade 3, no grade 4), and thrombocytopenia (3.2% grade 3, 2.1% grade 4). Nonhematologic adverse events included minor nausea/vomiting (1.5% grade 3, 9.2% grade 2), polyneuropathy (2.3% grade 2, 17.5% grade 1), and myalgia/arthralgia (8.2% grade 2, 16.4% grade 1). Paclitaxel/carboplatin/etoposide is active in small cell lung cancer with moderate toxicity and good subjective tolerance. There were no life-threatening hematologic or nonhematologic complications in this phase II trial.

An update on European randomized studies in non-small cell lung cancer.

Less than 25% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients present with surgically resectable stage I and II disease, and the majority of patients will eventually die of disseminated disease. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy has been shown to prolong survival and improve quality of life in patients with stage III and IV disease. In recent years, new chemotherapeutic agents (eg, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, docetaxel, vinorelbine, and irinotecan) have shown definite activity in advanced NSCLC. The activity of these agents has led to phase II studies combining them with cisplatin, producing response rates that are generally in excess of 35%. Randomized trials suggest that survival is improved when combinations of gemcitabine/cisplatin, vinorelbine/cisplatin, and paclitaxel/cisplatin are compared with cisplatin alone or cisplatin/etoposide. The following report reviews the ongoing trials in NSCLC.

Etoposide/vincristine-based chemotherapy with or without carboplatin in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a prospective randomized phase III trial.

In the treatment of small cell lung cancer, carboplatin/etoposide/vincristine (CEV) is one of the most active regimens. In contrast, the etoposide/vincristine (EV) combination also has produced acceptable results in patients with extensive disease. To evaluate the efficacy and survival of patients treated with EV in comparison to those treated with more intensive CEV chemotherapy, a prospective, randomized, phase III trial was performed. The protocol for the treatment groups was as follows: treatment A (156 patients): carboplatin 300 mg/m2 day I, etoposide 140 mg/m2 days 1 through 3, and vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15; and treatment B (161 patients): etoposide 200 mg/m2 days 1 through 3 and vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 days 1 and 8. Chemotherapy cycles in each treatment arm were repeated every 4 weeks. Doses were reduced by 20% when hematologic or nonhematologic toxicity (grade 4) occurred. In all, 317 evaluable patients were treated. The overall response rate for patients treated with CEV was 79.8% compared with 59.8% for those treated with EV (P < .001). The median length of survival was 10 months for CEV-treated patients compared with 9 months for EV-treated patients (P = .19). Based on long-term survival rates, there was an advantage for the CEV-treated patients if they had good performance status, were younger than 60 years, had no distant metastases, and achieved a complete response to first-line therapy. We conclude that patients with poor prognostic factors (ie, poor performance status, multiple distant metastases, and less than partial response to the first cycle of chemotherapy) should appropriately be treated with the less aggressive two-drug combination chemotherapy. On the other hand, patients with good prognostic factors should be treated as aggressively as possible, and they will benefit from the more aggressive induction chemotherapy.

Phase II and III studies with carboplatin in small cell lung cancer.

Carboplatin is one of the most active agents in untreated small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (11% complete response [CR], 59% CR plus partial response [PR]). Combination carboplatin/etoposide/vincristine (CEV) (phase II trial) led to an overall remission rate of 84% in patients with limited disease (LD), with 52% CRs. The median survival time with this combination was 14 months in patients with LD and 9.5 months in those with extensive disease (ED). The 30-month survival rates are 30% in LD and 10% in ED, which represents a plateau of the survival curve. This regimen is highly effective and exhibits low toxicity in SCLC. To evaluate the role of carboplatin in combination chemotherapy in patients with extensive SCLC, a phase III trial was performed. In this ongoing trial comparing CEV and etoposide/vincristine in ED patients, CR and overall response rates to date are higher in the CEV arm (CR, 20% versus 15%; CR plus PR, 83% versus 65%), but as yet the differences are not statistically significant. In summary, chemotherapy regimens containing platinum compounds are among the most active in the treatment of SCLC. The use of the new compound carboplatin instead of cisplatin has led to similar or increased remission rates and is preferable because it has fewer side effects. Preliminary results from this ongoing, prospective, randomized phase III trial are presented.

Gemcitabine in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Gemcitabine is active against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with single-agent response rates of 20% or more in previously untreated patients. Its mild toxicity profile suggests that it should be well tolerated by older patients. To assess the impact of age on the efficacy and tolerance of gemcitabine, the results of four phase II trials of single-agent gemcitabine for the treatment of NSCLC were analyzed retrospectively. Starting doses for gemcitabine ranged from 800 to 1,250 mg/m2/wk, and in all studies gemcitabine was administered weekly for 3 weeks followed by a 1-week rest period. Response rates, toxicity, and dose delivery were compared for two age groups, less than 65 years (255 patients) or > or = 65 years (105 patients). The pretreatment characteristics for both patient groups were well balanced. Overall response rates were 16% and 24% for the younger and older patients, respectively (P = .072). Median survival and 1-year survival rates were 8.1 months and 27% and 9.1 months and 36%, respectively, for patients aged less than 65 years and > or = 65 years. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were similar for both age groups. The number of cycles associated with dose reductions or dose omissions and the mean number of treatment cycles administered were also similar. In summary, gemcitabine is active and well tolerated in elderly patients with NSCLC, and is a promising new alternative for the treatment of this patient population.

Gemcitabine and etoposide in small cell lung cancer: phase I and II trials.

Gemcitabine and etoposide have both shown single-agent activity against multiple tumor types in clinical trials, including small cell lung cancer, but have not been previously used together. Forty-four patients with small cell and non-small cell lung cancer or other tumor types were enrolled in a phase I dose-finding trial using this drug combination. Gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 was given intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, and etoposide (dose escalated from 20 to 80 mg/m2) was given on days 8, 9, and 10. Leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia were the major toxicities noted. Objective responses were observed in five of 44 patients. The maximum tolerated dose of etoposide was determined to be 80 mg/m2. On the basis of these results, a phase II trial of gemcitabine and etoposide in patients with small cell lung cancer has been initiated. Twelve patients have been enrolled in this ongoing trial, and toxicity to date has been manageable.