Efficacy of gemcitabine plus platinum chemotherapy compared with other platinum containing regimens in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of survival outcomes

Prospective phase II trial of a combination of fixed dose rate infusion of gemcitabine with cisplatin and UFT as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma

PURPOSE

The standard chemotherapy for non-elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is platinum-based doublet combination therapy. Preclinical and clinical evidence indicates that infusion at the fixed dose rate (FDR) of 10mg/(m(2)min) may be more effective than a standard 30-min infusion of gemcitabine. In addition, oral uracil-tegafur (UFT) was associated with a survival advantage in the adjuvant setting. Therefore, we performed a phase II study using the combination of gemcitabine, cisplatin and UFT as first-line therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC with a performance status of 0-2 and were chemotherapy-naive. Gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2), 10mg/(m(2)min) on days 1 and 8, respectively) and cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) on day 1) were injected intravenously and UFT (400mg/day) was administered orally on days 1-14. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Primary endpoint was overall response rate and secondary endpoints were overall survival, time to progression and safety profile.

RESULT

Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. The median age was 60 years (range: 44-72 years). The performance status was 0 in 4, 1 in 30, and 2 in 3 patients. Twenty-three patients completed six cycles. Complete response was achieved in one (3%) patient, partial response in 17 (46%) patients, and stable disease in 10 (27%) patients. The overall response rate was 48.6% on an intention-to-treat basis and 54.5% of patients in whom a response evaluation was possible (n=33). The median survival time was 14.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.2-18.2), the 1-year survival rate was 54% and the median time to progression was 5.4 months (95% CI 4.3-6.4). Toxicities were moderate and mostly hematological adverse events. Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 37% of patients and four patients experienced febrile neutropenia. Grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 19% and 5% of patients, respectively. Non-hematological toxicities were mild.

CONCLUSION

The combination of gemcitabine, cisplatin and UFT is an active and well-tolerated first-line regimen in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Comparison of docetaxel- and vinca alkaloid-based chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of seven randomized clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

To compare the impact on overall survival (OS) of docetaxel-based chemotherapy versus vinca alkaloid-based regimens for first-line therapy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of all randomized, controlled trials comparing docetaxel- and vinca alkaloid-based chemotherapy was undertaken using MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, MEDSCAPE, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library, the National Institutes of Health randomized, controlled trials register, and conference proceedings, supplemented by information from clinical study reports. All published and unpublished randomized, controlled trials (in any language) were included. Analysis was based on pooling individual logarithms of the hazard ratio for OS and the odds ratio (OR) for safety.

RESULTS

From eight potentially eligible trials, seven were selected (n = 2867). Docetaxel was administered with a platinum agent (three trials), with gemcitabine (two trials), or as monotherapy (two trials). Vinca alkaloid (vinorelbine [six trials] and vindesine [one trial]) was administered with cisplatin (six trials) or alone (one trial). The pooled estimate for OS showed an 11% improvement in favor of docetaxel (hazard ratio = 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.96; p = 0.004). Sensitivity analyses considering only vinorelbine as a comparator or only the doublet regimens showed similar improvements. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and grade 3/4 serious adverse events were less frequent with docetaxel- versus vinca alkaloid-based regimens (OR = 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.38-0.89; p = 0.013 and OR = 0.68; 95% confidence interval: 0.55-0.84; p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

According to this meta-analysis, docetaxel is superior to vinca alkaloid-based regimens in terms of OS and safety for first-line therapy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Third-generation chemotherapy agents in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To estimate the efficacy of third-generation (3G) chemotherapy agents (paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, and irinotecan) on response and survival in stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed using trials identified through MEDLINE. Results on tumor response and survival were collected from randomized trials comparing 3G monotherapy versus best supportive care (BSC), 3G monotherapy versus second-generation (2G) platinum-based regimens, and 3G platinum-based regimens versus 2G platinum-based regimens.

RESULTS

Of the 2480 citations screened, 20 randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and 19 trials were used in the analyses. The data from two, three-arm trials were used in two different comparisons. Five trials (n = 1029 patients) compared 3G monotherapy with BSC. The summary risk difference (RD) for 1-year survival favored 3G agents by 7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2%, 12%). Four trials (n = 871 patients) compared treatment with 3G monotherapy versus 2G platinum-based regimens. The response RD was -6% (95% CI: -11%, 0%), and the 1-year survival rate RD was 3% (95% CI: -3%, 10%), suggesting that despite a slightly higher response rate for 2G platinum-based regimens relative to 3G monotherapy, there is equivalency in survival. Twelve trials (n = 3995) compared 3G versus 2G platinum-based regimens. The RD for response was 12% (95% CI: 10%, 15%). A RD for 1-year was not calculated, because of heterogeneity among the trials. A subset analysis of 3G versus 2G platinum-based doublets revealed a 1-year survival-rate RD of 6% (95% CI: 2%, 10%), favoring 3G platinum-based regimens without evidence of heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

3G agents have been a significant advance in the treatment of NSCLC.

Pulmonary toxicity in patients treated with gemcitabine plus vinorelbine or docetaxel for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: outcome data on a randomized phase II study

Studies with the gemcitabine/vinorelbine (GV) or the gemcitabine/docetaxel (GD) combinations have shown similar efficacy and less toxicity compared to platinum-based chemotherapies, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The present trial was designed to test the efficacy and safety of both, GV and GD, combinations. Chemotherapy-naïve patients (n=39)<or=75 years of age, KPS>or=60% and adequate hematological, renal and hepatic function were randomly assigned to receive G 1,000 mg/m2+either V 25 mg/m2 or D 35 mg/m2 (all of which were administered i.v.) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Baseline characteristics were comparable in GV (n=20) and GD (n=19) groups. Results indicated objective response of 7 (35%) vs 6 (31%) patients and median time-to-treatment failure of 120 versus 90 days in the GV and GD arms, respectively. The most common non-hematological toxicities were (GV vs GD): grade 2-4 pulmonary toxicity in 1 (5%) vs 7 (37%); grade 2-3 diarrhea 0 versus 4 (21%) and edema 1 (5%) vs 3 (16%); grade 3-4 hematological toxicities occurred in 3 (15%) vs 1 (5%) patients. Our results indicate that the combination of gemcitabine/docetaxel does not have a favorable safety profile with this schedule of administration, particularly in terms of pulmonary toxicity.

Bevacizumab and non-small-cell lung cancer

Although platinum-based chemotherapy remains a mainstay of non-small-cell lung cancer treatment, its efficacy has probably reached a plateau. Increased understanding of cancer biology has allowed the identification of a number of possible molecular targets, including the EGF receptor and the angiogenesis pathway. ECOG-E4599 has randomised chemonaive patients to receive paclitaxel--carboplatin with and without bevacizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody targeting the VEGF. The study is the first to show a survival advantage of adding a biological agent to chemotherapy in this setting: in particular, for the first time the survival of lung cancer patients has been extended beyond 1 year. The aim of this review is to describe the biological and clinical properties of bevacizumab and to discuss the evidence that has supported its approval for the first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer

In the last decade the treatment of advanced-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer has substantially improved. If in the early 90s there was still concern about the real efficacy of chemotherapy over best suppotive care alone in the advanced setting, constant developments in clinical research have demonstrated the survival advantage of active anti-cancer drugs not only in the first-line setting, but, lately, even in patients with recurrent disease after failure of two previous chemotherapy lines. With the premises of high throughput technologies, translational research is aiming to characterize patients and tumors on a molecular basis. With pharmacogenomics it would then be possible to accurately predict patient outcome and tailor the treatment strategy according to the geno-phenotype of single patients.

Cisplatin- versus carboplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Because the efficacy of carboplatin and cisplatin in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been proven to be equivalent, an individual patient data meta-analysis comparing the two treatments was performed.

METHODS

Randomized trials comparing carboplatin to cisplatin in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC were identified and their electronic databases obtained. A general variance-based method was used to estimate the summary hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality, objective response, and toxicity. Cochran's chi-square test (Q test) was used to test for heterogeneity among trials, and the I2 index, which expresses the proportion of variability of the results due to heterogeneity, was calculated. A random-effects model that takes into account interstudy variation was also applied. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Nine trials that included a total of 2968 patients were analyzed; overall median follow-up was 1021 days. The objective response rate was higher for patients treated with cisplatin than for patients treated with carboplatin (30% versus 24%, respectively; OR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.16 to 1.61; P<.001). Carboplatin treatment was associated with a non-statistically significant increase in the hazard of mortality relative to treatment with cisplatin (HR = 1.07; 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.15; P = .100). In patients with nonsquamous tumors and those treated with third-generation chemotherapy, carboplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with a statistically significant increase in mortality (HR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.23 and HR = 1.11; 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.21, respectively). Cisplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with more severe nausea and vomiting and nephrotoxicity; severe thrombocytopenia was more frequent during carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our individual patient data meta-analysis suggests that cisplatin-based chemotherapy is slightly superior to carboplatin-based chemotherapy in terms of response rate and, in certain subgroups, in prolonging survival without being associated with an increase in severe toxic effects. Therefore, cisplatin-based third-generation regimens should remain the standard reference for the treatment of selected patients with advanced-stage NSCLC and of those with earlier-stage disease.

Vinorelbine/carboplatin vs gemcitabine/carboplatin in advanced NSCLC shows similar efficacy, but different impact of toxicity

This randomised phase III study in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients was conducted to compare vinorelbine/carboplatin (VC) and gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) regarding efficacy, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and toxicity. Chemonaive patients with NSCLC stage IIIB/IV and WHO performance status 0–2 were eligible. No upper age limit was defined. Patients received vinorelbine 25 mg m⁻² or gemcitabine 1000 mg m⁻² on days 1 and 8 and carboplatin AUC4 on day 1 and three courses with 3-week cycles. HRQOL questionnaires were completed at baseline, before chemotherapy and every 8 weeks until 49 weeks. During 14 months, 432 patients were included (VC, n=218; GC, n=214). Median survival was 7.3 vs 6.4 months, 1-year survival 28 vs 30% and 2-year survival 7 vs 7% in the VC and GC arm, respectively (P=0.89). HRQOL, represented by global QOL, nausea/vomiting, dyspnoea and pain, showed no significant differences. More grade 3–4 anaemia (P<0.01), thrombocytopenia (P<0.01) and transfusions of blood (P<0.01) or platelets (P<0.01) were observed in the GC arm. There was more grade 3–4 leucopoenia (P<0.01) in the VC arm, but the rate of neutropenic infections was the same (P=0.87). In conclusion, overall survival and HRQOL are similar, while grade 3–4 toxicity requiring interventions are less frequent when VC is compared to GC in advanced NSCLC.

Nuclear excision repair-based personalized therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: from hypothesis to reality

The crucial 'flaw' in the existing treatment paradigm for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the 'one size fits all approach'. Consequently, adjuvant chemotherapy is given to all patients to benefit a minority and, in the metastatic setting doublet chemotherapy only provides modest improvements in response rates and survival. A personalized approach of treatment selection is therefore desperately needed. Genetic information is stored in the chemical structure of DNA. To maintain the structural integrity of DNA, an intricate network of DNA repair systems have evolved. One of these is the nucleotide excision repair (NER), a highly versatile and sophisticated DNA damage removal pathway. We show here that this DNA repair mechanism is instrumental in defining prognosis and response to treatment. ERCC1, one of the proteins in this pathway, is measured to assess its functional status of the NER pathway. In patients with early stage NSCLC, low ERCC1 predicts for relapse and selects for patients who will benefit from adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Conversely, ERCC1-positive resected patients have a better intrinsic prognosis and are not likely to benefit from platinum based chemotherapy. In a phase II trial in metastatic disease, we show that by tailoring chemotherapy using ERCC1 and RRM1 we can obtain 1-year survival of 60% (versus approximately 36% in historical controls) and response rates of 42% (versus 25% in historical controls). This approach is currently being validated in a prospective phase III trial. In the future, assessment of NER function may play a central role in NSCLC treatment decision making.

Phase I/II study of gemcitabine and exisulind as second-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of exisulind, a selective apoptotic antineoplastic drug, in combination with gemcitabine as second-line therapy in patients with progressing advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

Patients whose disease progressed more than 3 months from completion of first-line chemotherapy were eligible for this phase I/II trial. Primary end points were maximally tolerated dose and time to progression. Patients in the phase I portion of the study were treated with gemcitabine (1250 mg/m) in combination with three escalated dose levels of exisulind. Treatment involved six cycles of gemcitabine and exisulind followed by exisulind maintenance. The study was subsequently expanded to phase II.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients (15 in phase I and 24 in phase II) were treated. The regimen was well tolerated with grade 3 fatigue and grade 3 constipation being dose-limiting toxicities. The maximally tolerated dose was not reached. Dose level 3 of exisulind (250 mg twice daily) in combination with gemcitabine was used for phase II. The overall response rates were 7% (phase I), 17% (phase II), and 13% (all). Median time to progression and median and 1-year survival, respectively, were 3.7 and 9.7 months and 33% (phase I); 4.3 and 9.4 months and 41% (phase II); and 4.1 and 9.4 months and 39% (all).

CONCLUSION

Although the study met its primary end point of improving time to progression (more than 4.1 months in phase II), we did not observe a clear survival advantage and thus do not plan to further investigate this schedule of gemcitabine and exisulind.

A novel triplet regimen with paclitaxel, carboplatin and gemcitabine (PACCAGE) as induction chemotherapy for locally advanced unresectable non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Phase II study of 3 cycles of triplet induction chemotherapy (response, toxicity) followed by radiotherapy in locally advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

BACKGROUND

Patients with locally advanced inoperable non-small cell lung cancer are currently treated with concomitant or sequential chemotherapy and radiotherapy. However, the outcome of existing treatment modalities is unsatisfactory. Development of new strategies including more efficient systemic chemotherapy is warranted.

OBJECTIVE

To study the antitumour activity and toxicity of a triplet combination of paclitaxel, carboplatin and gemcitabine as induction chemotherapy before radiotherapy, in locally advanced NSCLC and to evaluate time to progression and survival.

METHODS

Three cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) by 3h infusion on day 1), carboplatin (AUC 5mg/(mlmin) by IV bolus on day 1) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) by IV bolus on day 1 and 8) were administered every 3 weeks in reasonably fit patients. Fractionated radiotherapy with curative intent was initiated 4 weeks after the last chemotherapy administration. Toxicity was assessed weekly during cycle 1 and on day 1 and 8 in cycles 2 and 3. Response evaluation was performed at the end of cycle 3.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (20 stage IIIA and 28 stage IIIB) received a total of 134 cycles of chemotherapy. Forty-two patients received the intended 3 cycles. Thirty patients obtained an objective response (1 complete and 29 partial response) or 62.5% on the intent to treat analysis (95% confidence interval: 49-76%). None of the responders became eligible for surgery. The median time to progression and survival for all patients was 10.1 and 15.7 month, respectively. A significant difference was observed in survival parameters between stage IIIA and stage IIIB patients. Haematological toxicity grade 3/4, mainly neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, was most prominent on day 15 of the treatment cycles. Haematological support by means of recombinant erythropoietin, red blood cell or platelet transfusion, filgrastim administration or a combination was needed in 21 patients. None of the patients discontinued chemotherapy because of haematotoxicity. Grade 3/4 non-haematological toxicity leading to chemotherapy withdrawal occurred early during induction (2 and 1 in cycles 1 and 2, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Three cycles of the novel triplet combination of paclitaxel, carboplatin and gemcitabine (PACCAGE) is an active and feasible induction regimen for patients with locally advanced inoperable NSCLC. Neutropenia and to a lesser extent thrombocytopenia represent the main haematological toxicity. Whether this triplet regimen can improve outcome when compared to specific cisplatin doublet regimens should be evaluated in a phase III study.

A randomized phase II trial of sequential gemcitabine plus vinorelbine followed by gemcitabine plus ifosfamide versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin in the treatment of chemo-naive patients with stages III and IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

BACKGROUND

Third-generation platinum-based combinations are established as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Non-platinum regimens could be an alternative if they show similar efficacy with better tolerability. This randomized phase II trial compared the objective tumor response rate (ORR) of sequential gemcitabine plus vinorelbine followed by gemcitabine plus ifosfamide versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin. Secondary objectives included time to disease progression (TTP), overall survival and toxicity.

METHODS

Chemo-naive patients with stages III and IV NSCLC and Karnofsky performance status >70 were assigned to receive either (a) gemcitabine 1000mg/m(2) plus vinorelbine 25mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 for 2 cycles, followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus ifosfamide 2000mg/m(2) on day 1 (GV-GI arm) for 2 cycles or (b) gemcitabine 1250mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 with cisplatin 70mg/m(2) on day 1 (GC arm) for 4 cycles.

RESULTS

Between July 2001 and January 2003, 102 patients were enrolled (50 on the GV-GI arm and 52 on the GC arm). Patient characteristics were balanced between arms (GV-GI arm: median age 59 years, 84% male, 22 stage IIIB, 24 stage IV, 4 stage IIIA; GC arm: median age 56 years, 87% male, 27 stage IIIB, 23 stage IV, 2 stage IIIA). Of the 101 patients evaluable for response, ORR was significantly higher on the GC arm than on the GV-GI arm (25% versus 6%, respectively; p=0.007). No complete responses occurred. TTP was longer on the GC arm than on the GV-GI arm (median 135 and 79 days, respectively), although this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.065). Survival was not significantly different between the arms (median 293 and 197 days, respectively; p=0.16). Although significantly more thrombocytopenia was reported on the GC arm (22% and 4%, respectively; p=0.02), it did not lead to more transfusions (15 transfusions in 5 patients versus 14 transfusions in 6 patients, respectively). There was no significant difference in other safety parameters between treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

GC appears to produce better response in advanced NSCLC than GV-GI, with a trend towards longer TTP. Except for more thrombocytopenia with GC, similar toxicity profiles were observed.

Phase III study in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with two courses of cisplatin/gemcitabine followed by a randomization to three additional courses of the same combination or gemcitabine alone

BACKGROUND

This randomised phase III study investigated if in responsive and stable disease (SD) stage IV patients after two courses of cisplatin and gemcitabine, single-agent gemcitabine (experimental arm) was not inferior in terms of overall survival (OS) to cisplatin-gemcitabine (standard arm).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Noninferiority was defined as an increase in the hazard of death (HR) < or = 1.33 in the experimental arm. From January 2001 to February 2004, 340 patients were registered and 250 were randomised. Cisplatin was administered on day 1 at 75 mg/m2 and Gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 at 1250 mg/m2 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Response rate after two courses was 29%. The 1-year progression-free survival was 13% in both arms. One-year survival was 52% in the standard and 42% in the experimental arm for an HR of 1.21 [90% confidence interval (CI) 0.97-1.51]. Postprogression survival was in favour of the standard arm (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.99-1.70, P = 0.051). Grades 3-4 toxicity favoured in the experimental arm.

CONCLUSION

In responsive and SD patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer it was not possible to demonstrate that three courses of gemcitabine alone are not inferior, in terms of OS, to the standard approach of three courses of cisplatin-gemcitabine.

Randomized phase II three-arm trial with three platinum-based doublets in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. An Italian Trials in Medical Oncology study

BACKGROUND

Many patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) do not tolerate cisplatin-based regimens because of its nonhemathological toxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated the response rate safety of new platinum analogue regimens, randomizing 147 patients with nonoperable IIIB/IV NSCLC to (i) carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 mg min/ml) on day 1 plus gemcitabine (GEM) (1000 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 for six cycles; (ii) same regimen for three cycles followed by docetaxel (Taxotere) (40 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 plus GEM (1250 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 for three cycles; (iii) oxaliplatin (130 mg/m(2)) on day 1 plus GEM (1250 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 for six cycles.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat objective response rates were 25%, 25% and 30.6% in arms A, B and C, respectively. Median survival was 11.9, 9.2 and 11.3 months in arms A, B and C, respectively. Grade 3/4 neutropenia/anemia occurred in 29%/12.5%, 10%/16.5% and 8%/6% of arms A, B and C, respectively; grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in 20.5%, 16.5% and 6%; grade 1/2 neurological toxicity in 43% of arm C.

CONCLUSIONS

Oxaliplatin/GEM (arm C) had similar activity to carboplatin/GEM (arm A), but milder hematological toxicity and may be worth testing in a phase III study against carboplatin/GEM in patients not suitable for cisplatin. The sequential regimen gave no additional benefit.

Single-Agent Pemetrexed or Sequential Pemetrexed/Gemcitabine as Front-Line Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Elderly Patients or Patients Ineligible for Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: A Multicenter, Randomized, Phase II Trial

INTRODUCTION

This randomized phase II trial evaluated single-agent pemetrexed or sequential pemetrexed/gemcitabine in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were elderly (> or = 70 years) or younger than 70 years and ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 received either 500 mg/m2 of pemetrexed (day 1, every 3 weeks) for eight cycles, or the same dosage of pemetrexed for cycles 1 and 2 and then 1200 mg/m2 of gemcitabine (days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks) for cycles 3 and 4 (repeated once for a total of eight cycles). All patients were given vitamin B12 and folic acid supplementation.

RESULTS

From July 2003 to July 2004, 87 patients (44 pemetrexed; 43 pemetrexed/gemcitabine) received treatment. The median time to progression was 4.5 (95% confidence interval: 3.0-9.3) and 4.1 months (95% confidence interval: 1.7-5.8) for the pemetrexed and pemetrexed/gemcitabine arms, respectively, and the median progression-free survival time was 3.3 months for both arms. Tumor response rates for the pemetrexed and pemetrexed/gemcitabine arms were 4.5% and 11.6%, respectively. The median overall survival time was 4.7 months for the pemetrexed arm and 5.4 months for the pemetrexed/gemcitabine arm, with respective 1-year survival rates of 28.5% and 28.1%. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity consisted of neutropenia (4.5% pemetrexed; 2.3% pemetrexed/gemcitabine), febrile neutropenia (4.5% pemetrexed; 4.7% pemetrexed/gemcitabine), thrombocytopenia (4.5% pemetrexed; 7.0% pemetrexed/gemcitabine), and anemia (6.8% pemetrexed; 4.7% pemetrexed/gemcitabine). No grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities exceeded 4.7% in either arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-agent pemetrexed and sequential pemetrexed/gemcitabine have shown moderate activity and are well tolerated as first-line treatments for advanced NSCLC in elderly patients or patients unsuitable for platinum-based combination chemotherapy.

Prognostic significance of RASSF1A promoter methylation on survival of non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with gemcitabine

The epigenetic inactivation of genes plays an important role in lung cancer. We have investigated the methylation status of the promoter region of seven genes (APC1A, DAPK, FHIT, p14(ARF), p16(INK4a), RARbeta, RASSF1A) in serum DNA of NSCLC patients. The objective of our study was to reveal the influence of such alterations on overall survival. Blood samples were drawn pretherapeutically. Genomic DNA was purified from serum, treated with sodium bisulfite and hypermethylation was detected by a nested methylation-specific PCR in a group of 92 patients with histologically confirmed stage IIIB and IV NSCLC. All patients received gemcitabine first-line alone or in combination with other drugs. The vast majority (n=87) showed at least one epigenetic alteration. The methylation frequencies of individual genes varied between 25.9 and 47.3%. The hypermethylation status of none of the genes had a significant influence on median overall survival of the total population. In contrast, patients with a methylated RASSF1A gene who showed a partial response survived significantly longer (33.6+/-10.4 month) compared to those with a wild-type allele (12.9+/-4.7 month, P=0.0045). This effect became even more pronounced in combination with p14(ARF) (P=0.0004). This difference was not seen in patients with stable or progressive disease. A multivariate analysis confirmed that RASSF1A methylation was an independent prognostic factor. Our results show that the hypermethylation frequency of single genes and the accumulation of epigenetic alterations in individual samples of NSCLC patients may vary considerably. Molecular parameters such as hypermethylation of RASSF1A or p14(ARF) may be useful prognostic markers in subpopulations.

Gemcitabine and radiation therapy in non-small cell lung cancer: state of the art

Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment is evolving. There are several choices available regarding which chemotherapy to use and how to optimally combine them with radiotherapy. Gemcitabine (Gemzar, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, USA) is a chemotherapeutic agent with activity in NSCLC, and preclinical studies have shown that gemcitabine is a potent radiosensitizer. These two characteristics make gemcitabine a potential option when treating patients with stage III NSCLC. This review article describes the efficacy and tolerance of gemcitabine when combined with radiation in those patients. Gemcitabine used concurrently with radiation, as an induction regimen before radiation, and as a consolidation regimen after radiation is reviewed.

Randomised trial of sequential versus concurrent chemo-radiotherapy in patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (EORTC 08972-22973)

A randomised phase III study was performed comparing sequential (S) and concurrent (C) chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-eight patients were randomised to receive two courses of Gemcitabine (1250mg/m(2) days 1, 8) and Cisplatin (75mg/m(2) day 2) prior to, or daily low-dose Cisplatin (6mg/m(2)) concurrent with radiotherapy, consisting of 24 fractions of 2.75Gy in 32 days, with a total dose of 66Gy.

RESULTS

Acute haematological toxicity grade 3/4 was more pronounced in the sequential (S) (30% versus 6%), oesophagitis grade 3/4 more frequent in the concurrent (C) arm (5% versus 14%). Late oesophagitis grade 3 was 4% (S and C), pneumonitis grade 3/4 14% (S) and 18% (C). Because of the poor power of the study no significant differences in median survival (MS), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) could be detected. MS was 16.2 (S) and 16.5 (C) months, 2-year OS was 34% (S) and 39% (C), 3-year OS was 22% (S) and 34% (C).

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy 66Gy given concurrently with daily low-dose Cisplatin or after two courses of Gemcitabine/Cisplatin was well tolerated. Due to early closure no conclusions can be reached on the relative merits; both arms showed good OS.

Gemcitabine/Carboplatin in a Modified 21-Day Administration Schedule for Advanced-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine/carboplatin is active for advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. Although it has a better toxicity profile than gemcitabine/cisplatin, severe thrombocytopenia can be a problem. We conducted a phase II study of gemcitabine/carboplatin on a 21-day schedule with administration of carboplatin delayed until day 8, intending to decrease the severity of thrombocytopenia and evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of this schedule.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-one patients with stage IIIB or stage IV non-small cell lung cancer received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and carboplatin at an area under the curve of 5 mg capital ZE, Cyrillic minute/mL on day 8, every 21 days.

RESULTS

The response rate was 22.6%, including 1 complete response. The median time to progression was 161 days, and the median survival was 454 days. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 3.0, was observed in 2 patients (6.5%) in the first 2 cycles. Nonhematologic toxicity included rash, depression, fever, nausea/vomiting and increased hepatic transaminase. The median courses of delivery were 3, and 13 patients (42%) received the first 3 courses without treatment delay. Dose intensity for each drug was 638 mg/m(2) per week for gemcitabine and 1.56 mg capital ZE, Cyrillic minute/mL per week for carboplatin area under the curve, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that gemcitabine/carboplatin with a day-8 administration of carboplatin in a 21-day schedule reduces the severity of thrombocytopenia without having a detrimental effect on efficacy.

Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Phase II Study of Gemcitabine plus Single-Dose Versus Split-Dose Carboplatin in the Treatment of Patients with Advanced-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine/carboplatin is a convenient and effective treatment for advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but modification of the schedule to diminish thrombocytopenia is worthwhile.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred fifty-eight chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were randomized from 15 centers in Germany to receive gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the curve 5 on day 1 (arm A) or carboplatin area under the curve 2.5 on days 1 and 8 (arm B), every 21 days for 4 cycles.

RESULTS

The 2 arms (A vs. B) were well balanced with regard to patient baseline characteristics: stage IV 72.5% versus 69%, median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1 versus 1. The incidence of grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was as follows (percentage of patients in arm A vs. B): leukopenia 37.5% versus 27% (P = 0.075), granulocytopenia 36% versus 36%, and thrombocytopenia 51% versus 35% (P = 0.017). Nonhematologic toxicity was modest and comparable with both schedules. The overall response rate was 46% versus 36% (P = 0.12), and 24% versus 42% had stable disease. Median progression-free survival (5.8 months vs. 6.1 months) and overall survival (11.7 months vs. 10.7 months) were not significantly different between arms A and B.

CONCLUSION

Splitting the dose of carboplatin between days 1 and 8 on the same days as gemcitabine results in a significantly decreased incidence of severe thrombocytopenia, without compromising the activity of the combination.

Gemcitabine, ifosfamide, and cisplatin combination (GIP) in treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer: results of a phase II study

OBJECTIVES

We have carried out a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and the toxicity associated with the combination of gemcitabine, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (GIP) in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Each cycle consisted of treatment with ifosfamide (3000 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1500 mg/m2) on day 1, followed by cisplatin (100 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1500 mg/m2) on day 15. Each treatment cycle was repeated every 28 days. A maximum of 6 cycles were administered.

RESULTS

Sixty NSCLC patients (23 stage III and 37 stage IV) were entered in this study. The median survival for all patients is 9 months (stage III: 12.3 months; stage IV: 7.5 months). The overall survival at 1 and 2 years is 38% and 17%, respectively (52% and 30% for stage III; 30% and 8% for stage IV). The median time to progression is 6.3 months (stage III: 8.8 months; stage IV: 3.6 months). Progression free survival at 1 and 2 years for all patients is 22% and 8%. The response rate is 56% for patients with stage III disease and 27% for patients with stage IV disease. Among the grade 3/4 toxicities, hematological toxicity was the most frequent (59% of patients) followed by gastrointestinal toxicity (nausea/vomiting) in 21% of patients.

CONCLUSION

The GIP combination yields an efficacy, in terms of response and survival, comparable to that reported with other triplet combination treatments for local advanced or metastatic NSCLC, with an acceptable toxicity profile.

Rational drug sequencing of paclitaxel, gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with untreated stage IV and select stage IIIB non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

To conduct a phase II study evaluating the efficacy of rationally sequenced paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and carboplatin in patients with stage IV or select stage IIIB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Patients with select stages IIIB (pleural effusion) and IV NSCLC with an ECOG performance status of 0-1 and no prior chemotherapy for their disease were eligible to participate. Treatment was delivered as follows: paclitaxel at 70 mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine at 300 mg/m2 on day 1, with carboplatin (AUC 5) on day 2 of a 28-day cycle. Response was assessed after every two cycles of therapy. The primary endpoint of this trial was response rate, with secondary endpoints of time to progression and 1 year overall survival.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled on protocol, one of whom never received chemotherapy. The median number of cycles delivered was 3 (range 0-8). A partial response rate of 42% (8/19; 95% CI: 20-67%) and a stable disease rate of 11% (2/19; 95% CI: 1-33%) were observed. The median overall survival time was 9.6 months (95% CI: 4.6-16.6), with a 1 year overall survival rate of 42.1% (95% CI: 24.9-71.3%). Eight patients (42%) stopped treatment due to toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Paclitaxel followed by gemcitabine and then carboplatin is an active, albeit complex, regimen in the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with insufficient advantage to justify continuation of this regimen.

Multicenter randomized trial for stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer using every-3-week versus weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin

PURPOSE

The combination of paclitaxel with carboplatin is effective in advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase III study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a weekly versus an every-3-week schedule in the first-line treatment of advanced-stage NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients were randomized to receive paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 and carboplatin at an area under the curve of 2 once weekly for 6-8 weeks (arm A) or paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin at an area under the curve of 6 on day 1 every 21 days (arm B).

RESULTS

A total of 883 patients received >or= 1 chemotherapy cycle and were included in the results. The objective response rates observed (complete response plus partial response) were 38% for arm A and 33% for arm B. Median times to progression and median survival times were 6.1 months and 8.9 months in arm A and 7.2 months and 9.5 months in arm B, respectively. There were no significant differences between treatment arms. The chemotherapy was well tolerated in both schedules. However, grade 3/4 sensory neuropathy occurred more frequently with the every-3-week schedule (9.1% vs. 4.4%), whereas grade 3/4 diarrhea occurred more frequently with the weekly schedule (4.2% vs. 1.1%).

CONCLUSION

In terms of response and survival, paclitaxel/carboplatin administered once weekly is comparable with the every-3-week schedule. Toxicity differences should be considered when choosing the appropriate schedule for the individual.

Cost-minimization analysis for Portugal of five doublet chemotherapy regimens from two phase III trials in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Economic evaluations of chemotherapy regimens for stage IIIB or IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been conducted for many European countries, but not for Portugal. This study evaluates the total health care costs of five commonly used doublet regimens with similar efficacy results.

METHODS

Using the methodology reported by Schiller [Schiller JH, Tilden D, Aristides M, Lees M, Kielhorn A, Maniadakis N, et al. Restropective cost analysis of gemcitabine in combination with cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer compared to other combination therapies in Europe. Lung Cancer 2004;43:101-12], we conducted a cost-minimization analysis to compare vinorelbine-cisplatin (Vin/Cis), gemcitabine-cisplatin (Gem/Cis), paclitaxel-carboplatin (Pac/Carb), docetaxel-cisplatin (Doc/Cis), and paclitaxel-cisplatin (Pac/Cis). The perspective was that of the Portuguese National Health Service and included only direct medical costs (reimbursed costs plus co-payments): chemotherapy acquisition, chemotherapy administration, hospitalizations due to adverse events, and other medical resources. Unit costs were drawn from official sources (Diagnosis Related Groups and retail/hospital costs) (2003 value [Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) published at Diário da República; 2003]). Resource use was estimated from two multicenter randomized phase III trials [Comella P, Frasci G, Panza N, Manzione L, De Cataldis G, Cioffi R, et al. Randomized trial comparing cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine with either cisplatin and gemcitabine or cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: interim analysis of a phase III trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1451-7; Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP, Langer C, Sandler A, Krook J, et al. Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;346:92-8]. A time horizon of a full course of therapy was adopted. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The least and the most costly chemotherapy regimens were Gem/Cis and Pac/Carb, respectively. Total mean cost per patient was estimated at euro7083 for Gem/Cis and euro10,008 for Pac/Carb, a mean cost savings of euro2925 per patient for Gem/Cis. The differences were mainly due to the higher chemotherapy acquisition costs of Pac/Carb than for Gem/Cis. Gem/Cis was less costly in all sensitivity analyses except when 100% inpatient chemotherapy administration was assumed.

CONCLUSION

Gem/Cis should be considered as a cost-saving alternative to the other four regimens in treating NSCLC patients in Portugal.

A randomized phase II trial evaluating standard (50mg/min) versus low (10mg/min) infusion duration of gemcitabine as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients who are not eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine is one of the most active drugs against non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Preclinical data suggested that gemcitabine efficacy could be improved by increasing the dose or by increasing the infusion duration. This study has been designed in order to explore two different approaches of gemcitabine dose intensification in patients with advanced NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 121 chemonaive patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC not suitable for a platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly allocated to chemotherapy with gemcitabine 1500 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks by standard 30 min intravenous infusion (arm A), or gemcitabine 10 mg/m2/min for 150 min on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks by intravenous infusion at fixed dose rate (arm B).

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen patients were fully analyzed. No difference in response rate (16.1% versus 9.9%, p=0.28), median time to disease progression (4 months versus 4.5 months, p=0.34) median survival (9.8 months in both arms), and 1-year survival (42.6% versus 39.0% p=0.98) was detected in arms A and B, respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Main hematological toxicities were grade 3-4 neutropenia observed in 17.9% of patients in group A and in 49.2% of individuals in group B (p=0.0002). The incidence of febrile neutropenia was 3.3% in arm A and 0% in arm B (p=0.17). Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was more frequently observed in arm B patients (9.9% versus 1.8%, p=0.057). Non-hematological toxicity was similar in both arms, and consisted in grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicity observed in 48.2% of patients in arm A and 41.0% in arm B.

CONCLUSION

Intensification of standard doses or prolonged infusion schedule did not result in efficacy improvement. Gemcitabine infusion duration does not warrant further investigation in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Development of gemcitabine in non-small cell lung cancer: the Italian contribution

Gemcitabine, a pyrimidine nucleoside antimetabolite, is one of the most promising new cytotoxic agents. The drug has shown activity in a variety of solid tumors, but appears to be most active in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. In this disease, several Italian investigators have evaluated gemcitabine in phase II and III clinical trials. Due to preclinical synergism with cisplatin, the Italian Lung Cancer Project played an important role to assess the efficacy and activity of the gemcitabine-cisplatin combination along with the best doses and schedule to adopt, thus leading to gemcitabine approval for first line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Several Italian studies have also investigated gemcitabine non-platinum based combinations, gemcitabine in third generation platinum-based triplets and gemcitabine as second line therapy, but all these studies led to conflicting and inconclusive results. The low toxicity profile makes the drug a valid option for unfit and elderly patients. The Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study was a phase III randomized trial conducted in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer that showed that single agent gemcitabine is at least as effective as either single agent vinorelbine or the combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine. In the neoadjuvant treatment of stage III disease, a number of phase II studies with third generation platinum-based doublets or triplets have been conducted by Italian investigators with encouraging results. Current clinical trials are addressing the role of gemcitabine in combination with new targeted therapies. Future studies should be designed in order to identify subgroups of patients who are more likely to benefit from gemcitabine chemotherapy.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine first-line chemotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine or best supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A phase III trial

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this randomized phase III study was to show significant difference in median time to progression (TTP) in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with single-agent gemcitabine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care following gemcitabine plus cisplatin initial first-line therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8) plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1) every 21 days. Patients achieving objective response or disease stabilization following initial gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy were randomized (2:1 fashion) to receive maintenance gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days) plus best supportive care (GEM arm), or best supportive care only (BSC arm).

RESULTS

Between November 1999 and November 2002, we enrolled 352 patients (median age: 57 years; stage IV disease: 74%; Karnofsky performance status (KPS) >80: 41%). Following initial therapy, 206 patients were randomized and treated with gemcitabine (138) or best supportive care (68). TTP throughout the study period was 6.6 and 5 months for GEM and BSC arms, respectively, while values for the maintenance period were 3.6 and 2.0 months (for p < 0.001 for both). Median overall survival (OS) throughout study was 13.0 months for GEM and 11.0 months for BSC arms (p = 0.195). The toxicity profile was mild, with neutropenia being most common grade 3/4 toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Maintenance therapy with gemcitabine, following initial therapy with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, was feasible, and produced significantly longer TTP compared to best supportive care alone. Further studies are warranted to establish the place of maintenance chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Phase II trial of a 2-h infusion of gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of using gemcitabine as a rate infusion of 10 mg/m(2) per min with carboplatin in front-line chemonaive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-four chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC have been included, 44 males and 10 females, with a median age 63 years (range 19-75). Thirty-two (59%) patients had adenocarcinoma, 13 (24%) squamous cell, 1 (2%) large cell carcinoma and 8 (15%) others. Eight (15%) had stage IIIB and 46 (85%) stage IV. Treatment was consisted of 1,200 mg/m(2) gemcitabine given as a 2-h continuous infusion (10 mg/m(2) per min) on days 1 and 8 of each cycle an AUC 5 carboplatin as on day 1, repeating each cycle for every 21 days. A total of 223 chemotherapy cycles were administered, with a median of four cycles per patient (range 1-6), and 15 (28%) patients received all six cycles.

RESULTS

Of the 54 patients enrolled, all were evaluated for toxicity and 51 assessed for response. The overall response rate was 41% (95% confidence interval, 28-57%) with complete and partial responses of 4 and 37%, respectively. The median time to disease progression was 5.0 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.3 months), and median overall survival time was 11.5 months (95% CI, 9.9-13.1 months). One-year survival was 42%. The main grade 3-4 toxicity (according to the WHO scale) consisted of neutropenia (56%) and thrombocytopenia (57%). Patients were required platelet transfusion in 27 cycles (12%) and hematopoietic growth factors support care in 56 (25%) cycles. No bleeding episodes were recorded. Grade 3 nausea/vomiting occurred in 6% and grade 1-2 skin rash occurred in 43%.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged gemcitabine infusion combined with carboplatin is manageable and tolerated, and its efficacy is similar to that of other chemotherapeutic schemes used for NSCLC treatment.

Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus etoposide plus cisplatin for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: Korean Cancer Study Group experience

BACKGROUND

Several randomized trials have demonstrated superior response rates and survivals for new agent platinum doublets than for older platinum doublets in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), however, few trials have been performed in Asian populations. Thus, we conducted a randomized study to compare gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) with etoposide-cisplatin (EP) in Korean patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

Patients with histologically confirmed, locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, or etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1-3 plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1. Treatment was repeated every 21 days in both groups. The primary endpoint was response rate.

RESULTS

Between May 2000 and December 2001, 83 patients at 9 Korean centers were enrolled in this study. The GP arm showed a significantly higher response rate (52.6% versus 19.4%; P = 0.002), a longer time to progression (4.3 months in both arms; P = 0.018) and a marginally significant prolongation of overall survival (18.3 months versus 10.9 months; P = 0.059) than the EP arm. Grades 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (18% versus 0%) was more common in the GP arm whereas grades 3 and 4 neutropenia was more common in EP arm (48.7% versus 71.8%). Other toxicities were comparable in both arms.

CONCLUSION

GP provided a significantly higher response rate and a longer time to progression than EP and should be considered a standard treatment in advanced NSCLC in Korean population.

Safety profile of platinum-based chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in elderly patients

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may be considered typical of advanced age. More than 50% of NSCLC patients are diagnosed at > 65 years of age and approximately one-third of all patients are > 70 years of age. Elderly patients tolerate chemotherapy poorly compared with their younger counterpart because of the progressive reduction of organ function and comorbidities related to age. For this reason, these patients are often not considered eligible for aggressive platinum-based chemotherapy, the standard medical treatment for advanced NSCLC. In clinical practice, single-agent chemotherapy should remain the standard treatment. Feasibility of platinum-based chemotherapy remains an open issue and has to be proven prospectively. Moreover, a multidimensional geriatric assessment for individualised treatment choice in NSCLC elderly patients is mandatory. This review focuses on the currently-available evidences for the treatment of elderly patients affected by advanced NSCLC with regards to the role and safety of platinum-based chemotherapy.

Gemcitabine and carboplatin: is this the best combination for non-small cell lung cancer?

Approximately 30-40% of non-small cell lung cancer patients will present with metastatic disease, and its associated poor prognosis. Chemotherapy has an established palliative role within late-stage disease, but is also being used increasingly in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Platinum-based chemotherapy has been shown to produce definite improvements in efficacy and quality of life in non-small cell lung cancer patients, and is now the standard of care. Carboplatin has similar biochemical properties to those of cisplatin. However, carboplatin has much less renal, otologic, neurologic and upper gastrointestinal toxicities than cisplatin, and treatment can be conveniently delivered in an out-patient setting. Furthermore, platinum combinations with third-generation cytotoxics have shown additional gains in survival rates. Gemcitabine and carboplatin is a well-tolerated regime. Recent meta- and cost analyses have discovered that gemcitabine-based regimes may have an advantage over other third-generation agent platinum combinations. This article reviews the evidence demonstrating that gemcitabine-carboplatin is effective, convenient and cost effective.

cN-II expression predicts survival in patients receiving gemcitabine for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Resistance to gemcitabine is likely to be multifactorial and could involve a number of mechanisms involved in drug penetration, metabolism and targeting. In vitro studies of resistant human cell lines have confirmed that human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (hENT1)-deficient cells display resistance to gemcitabine. Overexpression of certain nucleotidases, such as cN-II, has also been frequently shown in gemcitabine-resistant models. In this study, we applied immunohistochemical methods to assess the protein abundance of cN-II, hENT1, human concentrative nucleoside transporter 3 (hCNT3) and deoxycitidine kinase (dCK) in malignant cells in from 43 patients with treatment-naïve locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). All patients subsequently received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. Response to chemotherapy, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were correlated with abundance of these proteins. Among the 43 samples, only 7 (16%) expressed detectable hENT1, with a low percentage of positive cells, 18 expressed hCNT3 (42%), 36 (86%) expressed cN-II and 28 (66%) expressed dCK. In univariate analysis, only cN-II expression levels were correlated with overall survival. None of the parameters were correlated with freedom from progression survival nor with response. Patients with low levels of expression of cN-II (less than 40% positively stained cells) had worse overall survival than patients with higher levels of cN-II expression (6 months and 11 months, respectively). In a multivariate analysis taking into account age, sex, weight loss, stage and immunohistochemical results, cN-II was the only predictive factor associated with overall survival. This study suggests that cN-II nucleotidase expression levels identify subgroups of NSCLC patients with different outcomes under gemcitabine-based therapy. Larger prospective studies are warranted to confirm the predictive value of cN-II in these patients.

Adding Gemcitabine to Paclitaxel/Carboplatin Combination Increases Survival in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of a Phase II-III Study

Purpose

Paclitaxel/carboplatin (PC) is one of the reference combinations in the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). No triplet novel agent combination has until now shown superiority over a two-drug combination for advanced NSCLC. We therefore conducted a clinical trial to test if paclitaxel/carboplatin/gemcitabine (PCG) increases overall survival (OS) and response rate (RR) over PC.

Methods

Stage IIIB patients not suitable for radical radiation treatment and stage IV chemotherapy-naive patients with measurable disease and performance status of 0 to 2 were randomly assigned to PC arm (paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve 6 day 1/q21 days) or the PCG arm (paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve 6 day 1, and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 every 21 days).

Results

A total of 324 patients were randomly assigned to the two arms. The RR for PC arm and PCG arm were 20.2% and 46% (P < .0001). The median time to the progression was 5.1 months in the PC group and 7.6 months in the PCG group (P = .012; hazard ratio [HR] 1.34; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.72). Median OS was 8.3 months and 10.8 months (P = .032; HR 1.309; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.67) in favor of the PCG arm. One-year survival was 34% (PC arm) and 45% (PCG arm; P = .032). Only hematologic toxicity (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia) was significantly increased in the PCG arm and the experimental arm required more platelet and red blood cell transfusions, and more granulocyte colony-stimulating factor usage. No toxic/early deaths were observed.

Conclusion

The PCG regimen offers a significant survival advantage over PC in advanced NSCLC, making PCG a treatment option for advanced NSCLC patients.

A ten-year review of progress in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer with gemcitabine

During the past two decades, clinical research has focused on developing chemotherapeutic regimens that effectively prolong survival and provide palliation for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the mid-to late-1990s, several new agents emerged from clinical development and demonstrated activity against this disease, including the novel antimetabolite gemcitabine. Gemcitabine is one of the most active agents for the treatment of NSCLC. When combined with a platinum analog, gemcitabine produces the best progression-free survival outcome of any platinum-based regimen in first-line advanced NSCLC treatment setting. On the basis of its excellent antitumor activity and favorable toxicity profile, gemcitabine has been approved for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

Randomized multicentric phase II study of carboplatin/gemcitabine and cisplatin/vinorelbine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and carboplatin in the treatment of previously untreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

A randomized phase II study was conducted by the Groupe Français de Pneumo-Cancérologie (GFPC) in 15 centers. The patients were randomized in either arm A (GC): gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8+carboplatin AUC 6 mg/(mLmin) on day 1; or in arm B (VP): vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 weekly+cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1. Treatment cycles were repeated every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were randomized with stage IV or stage III NSCLC with malignant pleural effusion: 51 patients in arm A and 49 patients in arm B. A total of 190 cycles were administered in the GC arm and 172 cycles in the VP arm, with a median of four cycles per patient in each arm. The dose intensity was 84.9% for gemcitabine, 99.8% for carboplatin, 97.7% for cisplatin and 67.7% for vinorelbine. The objective response rates were 19.6% (95% CI, 9.8-33.1) for GC and 29.2% (95% CI, 17.0-44.1) for VP in an ITT analysis. The response duration was 169 days in arm A and 226 days in arm B. The TTP was similar with 140 days (GC) and 148 days (VP), respectively. Overall survival rates were 334 days in the GC combination and 304 days in the VP combination. Overall, the treatment was safe and toxicities observed were different in each arm: neutropenia was the most common toxicity in the VP treatment, whereas thrombocytopenia was more frequent in the GC combination. Anemia was similar in both arms. Non-haematologic toxicity was mild. One toxic death in arm A and three toxic deaths in arm B were observed.

CONCLUSION

In terms of response rate, the gemcitabine-carboplatin combination was not efficient enough to allow further phase III study. Survival data are in the same range as the standard arm. This chemotherapy is feasible and may represent an alternative to a standard cisplatin-based regimen, allowing treatment in an outpatient setting.