Enhancement of the clinical activity of melphalan by the hypoxic cell sensitizer misonidazole.

One hundred patients with non-small cell lung cancer were entered by members of the Northern California Oncology Group into a randomized Phase II trial of i.v. melphalan versus i.v. melphalan with concomitant oral misonidazole. The patients had not received prior chemotherapy. Eighty-five patients were evaluable for assessment of response and 89 were evaluable for toxicity analysis. The melphalan/misonidazole group had a superior response rate (two complete and four partial responses among 42 patients or 14%) compared to the melphalan group in which there were no responses among 43 patients (p = 0.024, two-sided Fisher exact test). Since hematological toxicity was equivalent in the two groups, there was an improvement in therapeutic index. Data from 12 patients undergoing pharmacological studies demonstrated that the plasma concentration of melphalan was 25% higher in the misonidazole group, a difference that is not statistically significant. Although the mechanism of interaction has not been fully established, this randomized trial demonstrates that a chemosensitizer can enhance the clinical antitumor activity of an alkylating agent and suggests that chemosensitizers in combination with alkylating agents should be investigated in further clinical trials.

Consolidation hemibody radiotherapy following induction combination chemotherapy in high-tumor-burden multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: Curative therapy for multiple myeloma continues to be an elusive goal. This report discusses the Northern California Oncology Group (NCOG) phase I and II trial in high-tumor-burden disease that used a strategy that consisted of induction chemotherapy (vincristine, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone [VMCP]) for eight cycles followed by sequential hemibody radiation therapy (RT) and subsequent chemotherapy for an additional eight cycles. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-two previously untreated stage III myeloma patients were entered onto the study. Sixty-nine received induction chemotherapy, 40 received induction chemotherapy and hemibody RT, and 23 received induction chemotherapy, hemibody RT, and consolidative chemotherapy. RESULTS: Twenty-two complete responses (CRs) were obtained by induction chemotherapy, with four additional CRs after RT and consolidative chemotherapy. Nineteen patients developed grade 4 hematologic toxicity primarily after upper hemibody RT. Eight of these developed long-standing neutropenia or thrombocytopenia. Median survival of the group was 134 weeks, which was not significantly different from other approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Hemibody RT can be combined with chemotherapy as induction therapy and can be safely administered in a community setting. However, as administered here no survival advantage was demonstrated.