Sequential combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: carboplatin and gemcitabine followed by paclitaxel

A randomised phase II trial of two sequential schedules of docetaxel and cisplatin followed by gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine the activity and toxicity of two sequential chemotherapy regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Eighty-eight chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were randomised to receive either three cycles of 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin plus 75 mg/m(2) docetaxel, both administered on day 1 every 21 days, followed by three cycles of 1,200 mg/m(2) gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm A), or three cycles of 25 mg/m(2) cisplatin plus 25 mg/m(2) docetaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days, followed by three cycles of 1,200 mg/m(2) gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm B).

RESULTS

Of the evaluable patients, 61% in arm A (n = 41) and 36% (n = 44) in arm B completed treatment as per the protocol. The best tumour response rates were as follows (arm A and arm B): complete response: 2.4 and 2.3%; partial response: 39 and 20.4%; stable disease: 26.8 and 13.6%; and progressive disease: 31.8 and 45.4%. The median progression-free and overall survival were 3.9 and 12.3 months in arm A, respectively, 3.1 and 7.7 months in arm B. Grade 3-4 adverse events were more common in arm A. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was the main toxicity observed (56.1% in arm A and 11.4% in arm B).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate the feasibility of a sequential approach of cisplatin plus docetaxel followed by single-agent gemcitabine. Weekly administration of platinum-docetaxel is associated with an improved safety profile but lower efficacy than the conventional three-weekly schedule (registration ID 2004-001044-72).

Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and carboplatin +/- sequential docetaxel in non-small cell lung cancer

Sequential administration of chemotherapeutic drugs might have advantages: additive toxicity is avoided and the individual drugs can be given in full dosages. The Swedish group earlier found the combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin to be effective and with acceptable toxicity. The group therefore decided to add docetaxel in a sequential way in a randomized phase II study. Patients were randomized to either gemcitabine or carboplatin for six cycles or the same regimen for three cycles followed by weekly single agent docetaxel. The primary objective was time to progression (TTP). One hundred and twenty-three patients with performance status WHO 0-2 and with earlier un-treated non-small cell lung cancer with measurable stage IIIB disease, not amenable to curative treatment, or stage IV disease without known metastatic spread to the CNS, were enrolled. Hematological toxicity was more common in the GC group but clinically significant bleeding or leucopenic fever occurred only in a minority of patients. No complete responses were noted. Partial response (PR) was observed in 19.3% and 20.8% in the GC and GCD group, respectively. Progression-free survival was 5.6 and 4.8 months and overall survival time 10.6 and 10.1 months in the GC and GCD groups, respectively. Thus, sequential treatment with docetaxel after treatment with gemcitabine and carboplatin did not improve time to progression, response rates, or overall survival.

A randomized phase II trial assessing in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with stable disease after two courses of cisplatin-gemcitabine an early modification of chemotherapy doublet with paclitaxel-gemcitabine versus continuation of cisplatin-gemcitabine chemotherapy (GFPC 03-01 Study)

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the optimal treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and stable disease after cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The objective of the trial was to evaluate a switch to a different dual-agent chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer and stable disease after two cycles of cisplatin (P) and gemcitabine (G) (P day1 (d(1)): 75 mg/m(2), G: 1250 mg/m(2) d(1) and d(8) every 3 weeks) were randomized to receive either two further cycles of PG (arm A) or paclitaxel (100 mg/m(2) d(1), d(8), d(15)) plus gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) d(1) and d(8), every 4 weeks) (arm B).

RESULTS

Two-hundred-twenty-eight patients were enrolled between October 2003 and August 2006. After two cycles of PG, 98 patients (43%) had stable disease; 87 were randomized: 45 to arm A and 42 to arm B. The objective response rates were 15.6% (6.5-29.4) and 21.4% (10.3-36.8) in arms A and B. Overall survival after randomization was 9.6 months (7.0-13.8) in arm A and 9.3 months (7.4-13.3) in arm B. Adverse events were similar in the two arms for hematological and non hematological toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential first-line chemotherapy in these patients is feasible with no difference in response rates. These results do not warrant a phase III trial.

Chemotherapy for advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a common, often fatal malignancy, and is most frequently diagnosed in the advanced stage. Systemic chemotherapy for advanced (Stage IIIB and IV), inoperable NSCLC has evolved over the course of the last few decades. Survival advantage was first noted with platinum chemotherapy, with ultimate development of platinum-containing doublet combinations, which have now become standard of care in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Over the course of the last few years, multiple nonplatinum combinations have also been demonstrated to be efficacious, and the addition of bevacizumab to existing doublet regimens has improved outcomes in this population of patients. Maintenance regimens for advanced stage NSCLC are currently under extensive investigation. Clinical trials have also recently demonstrated increased efficacy for agents such as docetaxel and pemetrexed in the second line setting for refractory disease.

Phase III study of immediate compared with delayed docetaxel after front-line therapy with gemcitabine plus carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) is active as front-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For patients without progression, timing of second-line chemotherapy for optimum clinical benefit remains uncertain. This phase III, randomized trial assessed the efficacy and safety of docetaxel administered either immediately after GC or at disease progression.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The chemotherapy-naïve patients enrolled had either stage IIIB NSCLC with pleural effusion or stage IV NSCLC. Gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) was administered on days 1 and 8 followed by carboplatin (area under the curve = 5) on day 1. After four 21-day cycles, patients who did not have progression were randomly assigned either to an immediate docetaxel group (docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 21 days, with maximum of six cycles) or to a delayed docetaxel group. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) measured from random assignment. Additional analyses included tumor response, toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

Enrollment totaled 566 patients; 398 patients completed GC; 309 patients were randomly assigned equally to the two docetaxel treatment groups. Toxicity profiles were generally comparable for the docetaxel groups. Median PFS for immediate docetaxel (5.7 months) was significantly greater (P = .0001) than for delayed docetaxel (2.7 months). Median OS for immediate docetaxel (12.3 months) was greater than for delayed docetaxel (9.7 months), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .0853). QOL results were not statistically different (P = .76) between docetaxel groups.

CONCLUSION

We observed a statistically significant improvement in PFS and a nonstatistically significant increase in OS when docetaxel was administered immediately after front-line GC, without increasing toxicity or decreasing QOL.

Cross-talk between myeloid-derived suppressor cells and macrophages subverts tumor immunity toward a type 2 response

Although the immune system has the potential to protect against malignancies, many individuals with cancer are immunosuppressed. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) are elevated in many patients and animals with tumors, and contribute to immune suppression by blocking CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cell activation. Using the spontaneously metastatic 4T1 mouse mammary carcinoma, we now demonstrate that cross-talk between MDSC and macrophages further subverts tumor immunity by increasing MDSC production of IL-10, and by decreasing macrophage production of IL-12. Cross-talk between MDSC and macrophages requires cell-cell contact, and the IL-12 decrease is dependent on MDSC production of IL-10. Treatment with the chemotherapeutic drug gemcitabine, which reduces MDSC, promotes rejection of established metastatic disease in IL-4Ralpha(-/-) mice that produce M1 macrophages by allowing T cell activation, by maintaining macrophage production of IL-12, and by preventing increased production of IL-10. Therefore, MDSC impair tumor immunity by suppressing T cell activation and by interacting with macrophages to increase IL-10 and decrease IL-12 production, thereby promoting a tumor-promoting type 2 response, a process that can be partially reversed by gemcitabine.

Sequential Chemotherapy with Combination Irinotecan and Cisplatin Followed by Docetaxel for Treatment-Naïve Patients with Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Sequential administration of platinum-based doublet therapy and then a taxane may reduce the risk of drug resistance and, therefore, improve treatment outcome. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sequential administration of irinotecan and cisplatin and then docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Eligible patients received irinotecan in 60-mg/m2 infusions for 30 to 60 minutes on days 1, 8, and 15, and cisplatin in 75-mg/m2 infusions for 60 minutes on day 1 every 28 days for four cycles (IC). Regardless of the response, patients received up to four cycles of sequential docetaxel in 75-mg/m2 infusions for 60 minutes.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients with histologically confirmed chemotherapy-naïve stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were enrolled, of whom 42 were evaluable. The response rate at completion of chemotherapy with IC was 45.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 30.2%-60.3%). Five patients had improvement of disease status during sequential docetaxel, and seven patients had disease progression. Progression-free survival was 8.0 months (95% CI: 5.4-9.9 months), and the overall median survival was 14.6 months (95% CI: 9.8-17.9 months). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 54.3%, 22.6%, and 12.1%, respectively. The incidence of severe (> or =CTC V2 grade 3) neutropenia during IC was 23.9% compared with 95.7% for sequential docetaxel (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Sequential administration of IC and then docetaxel is feasible and is associated with a prolonged progression-free survival, but the current data do not confirm an improvement in treatment outcome by the sequential approach.

A phase III randomised trial comparing sequential chemotherapy using cisplatin-based regimen and paclitaxel to cisplatin-based chemotherapy alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to determine whether in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the sequential administration of cisplatin-based chemotherapy and paclitaxel (Taxol) is superior to a cisplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by paclitaxel as salvage treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 485 chemotherapy naive patients with advanced NSCLC were treated with three courses of GIP (gemcitibine + ifosfamide + cisplatin), consisting of cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1, ifosfamide 3 g/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1 g/m(2) on days 1 and 8. Patients with nonprogressive disease were then randomised to further similar courses of GIP or courses of paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2) over 3 h every 3 weeks).

RESULTS

Objective response or nonprogression after induction GIP occurred in 174 and 115 patients, respectively. After randomisation, there were 140 patients in the GIP arm and 141 in the paclitaxel arm. In terms of postrandomisation survival, there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.17) between the two arms. Median times were 9.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.8-11.6] and 11.9 (95% CI 9.4-14.3) months for paclitaxel and GIP, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex and haemoglobin were independent prognostic factors. After adjustment for these factors, the observed hazard ratio was 0.81 (95% CI 0.63-1.04) in favour of GIP (P = 0.10). Toxicity was tolerable; there was a significantly higher rate of grades III/IV thrombocytopenia with GIP and more alopecia with paclitaxel.

CONCLUSION

Sequential chemotherapy using cisplatin-based regimen followed by paclitaxel does not result in better outcome than cisplatin-based chemotherapy using taxane as salvage treatment.

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.

Sequential, Alternating, and Maintenance/Consolidation Chemotherapy in Advanced Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Review of the Literature

A platinum-based doublet with a third-generation agent (paclitaxel, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, docetaxel) represents the standard first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with good performance status (PS). Traditional chemotherapy provides response rates of 20%-40% and a median survival of 8-10 months. In an attempt to improve its outcome, alternative schedules have been proposed, namely sequential, alternating, and maintenance/consolidation therapy. Sequential chemotherapy with a platinum-based doublet followed by a single agent is feasible in patients with good PS; preliminary results from randomized phase III trials with combination chemotherapy as a comparator are promising, suggesting similar efficacy and a better toxicity profile for the sequential arm. The use of sequential single agents is an option for elderly and frail patients unsuitable for a platinum-based combination. Based on trials published so far, it is unlikely that an alternating chemotherapy strategy will be proven superior to standard chemotherapy in patients with good PS. However, sufficient evidence exists that it could be appropriate in the elderly or in unfit individuals. Consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy may provide additional benefit for patients achieving disease control after standard first-line chemotherapy. Better results are seen when maintenance consists of an agent that has proven active in the induction phase. Further evaluation of this strategy, as well as of consolidation/maintenance therapy with targeted agents, is warranted. In conclusion, these approaches may improve the outcome in selected patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, but further results from randomized trials are needed. In the meantime, sequential, alternating, and maintenance/consolidation therapy should still be considered investigational.

Sequential chemotherapy in nonsmall-cell lung cancer: cisplatin and gemcitabine followed by docetaxel

BACKGROUND

Improving results in nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will require the development of new drugs and strategies to combine available agents. On the basis of data indicating the activity of docetaxel as second-line therapy, a Phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the sequential combination of chemotherapy consisting of cisplatin (P) and gemcitabine (G) followed by docetaxel (DOC) in patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

Patients with 1997 TNM stage IIIB (pleural effusion)/stage IV NSCLC, performance status (PS) of 0-1, and normal organ function were eligible. Therapy consisted of P at 75 mg/m(2) on Day 1 and G 1200 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for 3 cycles followed, in nonprogressive patients, by DOC 30 mg/m(2) every week for 6 consecutive weeks every 8 weeks for 2 cycles.

RESULTS

Fifty-two eligible patients were enrolled (M/F, 39/13; stage IIIB/IV, 8/44; PS 0, 73%, PS 1, 27%; median age, 58 years; range, 36-73). The overall response rate was 36.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23-49). The median overall survival was 11 months (95% CI: 9-13); the median progression-free survival was 6 months (95% CI: 5-7); and the 1- and 2-year survivals were 48% and 25%, respectively. One- and 2-year progression-free survivals were 12% and 8%, respectively. Both phases of the treatment protocol were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

P/G followed by weekly DOC is well tolerated and active as first-line therapy for NSCLC patients and provides a feasible chemotherapeutic option in this clinical setting.

Chemotherapy dose--response relationships in non-small cell lung cancer and implied resistance mechanisms

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized excess resistance factor ("active resistance") gives a dose--response curve (DRC) shoulder, deficiency of a factor required for drug sensitivity ("saturable passive resistance") gives a DRC terminal plateau, and alteration of a factor gives decreased DRC slope.

METHOD

We used response rates from published non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) clinical studies to estimate mean percent tumor cell kill in each study (assuming cell kill is proportional to tumor volume change) and performed regression and meta-regression analyses of percent cell survival and patient survival vs planned dose-intensity.

RESULTS

As single agents, cell kill approached that of combinations only at highest doses. While DRC shape varied between single agents, DRCs for all combinations tested flattened at higher doses. Patient median survival times also failed to vary significantly with dose for any combination.

CONCLUSIONS

DRC flattening at higher doses suggests therapy efficacy is limited by deficiency/saturation of factors required for cell killing. Based on this and other clinical observations, we hypothesize: (1) active resistance may modulate cell killing at lower doses, but ability to overcome this by increasing doses is limited by saturable passive resistance (e.g. by non-cycling cells). (2) Cells surviving initial chemotherapy may upregulate active resistance mechanisms (permitting growth despite therapy). (3) If active resistance mechanisms are insufficient for growth/survival, cells may survive until therapy cessation by downregulating metabolism/cycling, becoming temporarily quiescent. This could help explain broad cross-resistance between agents and would imply that improved targeting of non-cycling cells will be required for major improvement in therapy efficacy.

Docetaxel/gemcitabine or cisplatin/gemcitabine followed by docetaxel in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): results of a multicentre randomized phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Most patients (pts) with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive either single agents or chemotherapy doublets. Recent studies have demonstrated that triple-agent therapies may improve the response rate, but are associated with significant toxicity, and frequently do not prolong survival. A sequential triple-agent schedule may combine acceptable tolerability and good efficacy. We therefore conducted a multicentre, prospectively randomized study that evaluates a sequential three-drug schedule and a platinum-free doublet regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The pts with union international contre le cancer (UICC) stage IV NSCLC were randomized to one of two schedules: in arm Doc-Gem, they received gemcitabine (900 mg/m(2), 30 min infusion) on days 1 and 8, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2), 1 h infusion) on day 1, repeated every 3 weeks up to six cycles. In arm Cis-Gem-->Doc, gemcitabine (900 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (70 mg/m(2), 1 h infusion, day 1) were given for three cycles, followed by three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2), day 1, repeated every 3 weeks).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirteen pts were randomized to arms Doc-Gem (55 pts) and Cis-Gem-->Doc (58 pts). With Doc-Gem, 20.4% of pts responded to the treatment whereas 31.0% responded in arm Cis-Gem-->Doc (overall response, intent-to-treat, difference not significant). The median time to progression was 3.6 months in arm Doc-Gem [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4, 5.9] and 5.2 months in arm Cis-Gem-->Doc (95% CI 3.1, 7.3). The median survival was 8.7 months with treatment Doc-Gem (95% CI 5.7, 11.6) and 9.4 months with treatment Cis-Gem-->Doc (95% CI 7.8, 11.0). The 1-year survival rates were 34 and 35%, respectively. Mild to moderate leukopenia was frequently seen with both schedules. Other common adverse events (AE) were nausea/vomiting, thrombocytopenia, anaemia, diarrhoea, and infections. No significant differences in AEs were observed between the schedules except for nausea/vomiting, which occurred more frequently with Cis-Gem-->Doc.

CONCLUSION

The sequential therapy comprising cisplatin, gemcitabine, and docetaxel demonstrated promising tumour control whereas the platinum-free combination (docetaxel/gemcitabine) was very well tolerated. However, the schedules resulted in comparable survival to recent large trials in pts with advanced NSCLC. The present results do not justify further phase III investigation.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine followed by weekly docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II trial of sequential chemotherapy

Objective. We conducted this phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the sequential nonplatinum combination chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) followed by weekly docetaxel (DOC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

stage IV NSCLC, Performance status =/< 2, adequate renal, hepatic and bone marrow function. Treatment consisted on: VNR 25 mg/m(2) plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle, followed by docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) weekly until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results. 21 stage IV patients were enrolled. All patients are evaluable for treatment response and toxicity profile. The mean age of the patients was 63 years (range: 51 to 72) with 18 (86%) males and 3 (14%) females. Histology types were: adenocarcinoma in 8 patients (38%), large cell carcinoma in 1 patients (5%) and squamous cell carcinoma in 12 patients (57%). The majority of the patients had and ECOG PS of 1. Eight patients (38%) did not complete six cycles of gemcitabine-navelbine. The median number of cycles of gemcitabine-navelbine was 4 (range 2-6) Of the 13 patients (61%) who completed six cycles of gemcitabine-navelbine, all of them went on to receive weekly docetaxel and received at least 3 cycles, with a median number of 8 cycles (range 3- 16). The overall response rate was 33%. Respect survival, the minimum follow-up was 6 months (range, 6-25 months). The median survival time (MST) was 7.9 months, and the 1-year survival was 30%, and the median progression-free survival was 4.7 months. Toxicity was mild, well tolerated and mostly hematologic. In the GEM/VNR cycle, grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 14%, two patients with febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 anaemia in 1 patients (5%) and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 1 patient (5%). Nonhematologic toxicity was also mild: 1 patient with Grade 3 skin toxicity with docetaxel, 1 patient with grade 3 infection, 2 patients with grade 3 astenia and 1 patient with a mild allergic reaction postchemotherapy treatment with docetaxel. Conclusion. The sequential triplet nonplatinum chemotherapy consisted of GEM/VNR followed by weekly DOC is active and can be administered safely in advanced NSCLC. Our results are similar with other sequential regimens and did not represent a significant improvement in the treatment of this disease.

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.

Role of gemcitabine in cancer therapy

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, and has been approved for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer, pancreatic, bladder, and breast cancer. Recent data showed that gemcitabine is also active against ovarian cancer. Gemcitabine has a good toxicity profile, with myelosuppression being the most common side effect, while non-hematological events are relatively uncommon. The low toxicity profile makes the drug a valid option for unfit and elderly patients. Due to the synergistic activity with other chemotherapeutic compounds, mainly cisplatinum, several trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of gemcitabine in combination with other cytotoxic agents. Current clinical trials are evaluating the role of gemcitabine in combination with new targeted therapies.

A multicenter phase II study of sequential vinorelbine and cisplatin followed by docetaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the activity and toxicity of the sequential administration of vinorelbine/cisplatin (VC regimen) followed by the docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG regimen) combination in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND TREATMENT

Fifty-nine previously untreated patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC received three cycles of cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1), and vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; VC regimen), followed by six cycles of docetaxel (65 mg/m(2), day 1) and gemcitabine (1,500 mg/m(2), day 1), (DG regimen) every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

One (1.7%) complete and 26 (44.1%) partial responses were achieved for an overall response rate of 45.8% (95% CI 33.05-58.48%); 12 (20.3%) patients had stable disease and 20 (33.9%) progressive disease. The median time to progression was 5.3 months, the median survival time 12.5 months and the 1-year survival rate 51%. The main toxicity was grade III/IV neutropenia occurring in 25.5% of patients; all other hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities were relatively infrequent.

CONCLUSIONS

The sequential administration of VC and DG regimens was well tolerated and active against advanced NSCLC and merits to be further evaluated against a single doublet.

Epidemiology of treatment-associated mucosal injury after treatment with newer regimens for lymphoma, breast, lung, or colorectal cancer

GOALS OF WORK

Oral and gastrointestinal (GI) mucositis are frequent complications of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer, contributing to not only the morbidity of treatment but its cost as well. The risk associated with specific chemotherapeutic agents, alone and in combination, has been characterized previously. In the current study, we sought to estimate the risk associated with newer regimens for the treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and common solid tumors.

METHODS

We reviewed published studies reporting phase II and III clinical trials of dose-dense regimens for breast cancer and NHL, TAC (docetaxel, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy for breast cancer, and infusional 5-fluorouracil-based regimens for colorectal cancer. Platinum-, gemcitabine-, and taxane-based regimens for lung cancer, either alone or in combination with radiotherapy, were also considered. Using modified meta-analysis methods, we calculated quality-adjusted estimates of the risk for oral and GI mucositis by tumor type and regimen. Case reports are used to emphasize the relevance of the findings for patient care.

MAIN RESULTS

Our findings demonstrate that mucosal toxicity remains an important complication of cancer treatment. Moreover, innovations in drug combinations, scheduling, or mode of administration significantly modulate the risk for both oral and GI mucositis.

CONCLUSIONS

Ongoing review of the clinical trial experience will remain important as newer, targeted agents enter standard clinical practice.

First-line chemotherapy for advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: focus on docetaxel

Systemic chemotherapy results in modest improvements in survival and quality of life for patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Administration of a platinum compound in combination with a taxane (paclitaxel or docetaxel), gemcitabine, vinorelbine, or irinotecan is considered optimal first-line therapy for patients with advanced-stage NSCLC who have a good performance status. Studies that have compared various platinum agent-based doublet regimens have demonstrated comparable efficacy between these regimens. In addition, non-platinum agent-based regimens have also demonstrated response rates and survival similar to the platinum agent-based combinations. These developments have allowed for tailoring of chemotherapy to individual patients based on factors such as toxicity profile, treatment schedule, and cost. Docetaxel is approved for first-line therapy and salvage treatment of advanced-stage NSCLC. Multiple randomized clinical trials have established the efficacy of platinum-agent/docetaxel regimens for first-line treatment of advanced-stage NSCLC. Improvements in various lung cancer-related symptoms and global quality of life indices have been noted with docetaxel-based regimens. Combination chemotherapy appears to be beneficial even for elderly patients. The current generation of clinical trials is evaluating the incorporation of molecularly targeted agents into existing 2-drug chemotherapy regimens. This article will discuss the role of docetaxel as first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced-stage NSCLC.

Phase II study of first-line sequential chemotherapy with gemcitabine-carboplatin followed by docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

RATIONALE

Despite the use of novel chemotherapeutic agents, patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continue to show a poor survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of a novel sequential and putatively non-cross-resistant chemotherapy regimen.

METHODS

Eligibility included: stages IV and IIIB (malignant pleural effusion), performance status 0-1, and adequate renal, hepatic and bone marrow function. Patients with previously treated and controlled brain metastases were not excluded. Responses were determined according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine, 1,000 mg/m2, on days 1 and 8, and carboplatin, AUC = 5, on day 1 every 4 weeks (2-4 cycles) followed by docetaxel, 75 mg/m2, on day 1 every 3 weeks (4 cycles). Docetaxel was given after four cycles of gemcitabine-carboplatin or if progression of disease occurred, after the first two cycles.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled. All patients received at least one cycle of gemcitabine-carboplatin. Due to PD, 15 patients received fewer than four cycles and only 1 received docetaxel subsequently. Of the 25 patients who completed four cycles of gemcitabine-carboplatin, 23 received docetaxel. In total, 24 patients received at least one cycle of docetaxel, and 12 patients completed four cycles of both regimens. The overall response rate was 23.6% (9/38 patients, 95% confidence interval, CI, 11-40%), with 15.8% (6/38 patients, 95% CI, 6-31%) and 12.5% (3/24 patients, 95% CI, 3-32%) response rates to gemcitabine-carboplatin and docetaxel, respectively. No patient with PD on gemcitabine-carboplatin responded to docetaxel. Toxicities were tolerable and mostly hematologic. Median survival time and progression-free survival were 6.7 and 4.9 months, respectively, with a 1-year survival of 37.5%.

CONCLUSION

Sequential gemcitabine-carboplatin and docetaxel can be safely administered in advanced NSCLC. Our results are comparable to those achieved with other similar regimens and do not represent a significant improvement in the treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Sequential chemotherapy of cisplatin and vinorelbine followed by paclitaxel and gemcitabine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

To determine the activity and safety of a sequential regimen of cisplatin and vinorelbine followed by paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment was two cycles of cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks followed by two cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients with inoperable NSCLC, performance status 2 or less were enrolled, including 19 patients with brain lesions. There were 23 partial responses (42%; 95% confidence interval 29-55). The median time to progression and overall survival were 5.8 and 10.3 months, respectively (6.5 and 12.8 in the patient subset without brain metastases). One-year survival rate was 47.5%. Grade III/IV neutropenia was the major side effect; it occurred in 56% of patients and was mainly limited to the first two chemotherapy cycles with cisplatin and vinorelbine.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential combination of cisplatin and vinorelbine followed by paclitaxel and gemcitabine is a manageable and active regimen for patients with NSCLC. It deserves to be tested against a standard two-drug scheme in a phase III trial.

Sequential chemotherapy with paclitaxel plus cisplatin, followed by vinorelbine, followed by gemcitabine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: an Alpe-Adria Thoracic Oncology Multidisciplinary group study (ATOM 001)

Aim of this study was to determine the activity and toxicity of a sequential chemotherapy regimen in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Fifty-one previously untreated stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients were enrolled to receive two cycles of cisplatin plus paclitaxel (80/175 mg/m(2) every 21 days), followed by two cycles of vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days), followed by two cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days). Forty-one patients (82%) completed the planned six cycles. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was the major toxicity (41% of patients) and it was mainly associated with vinorelbine administration. Response rate after cisplatin plus paclitaxel was 18%; this percentage increased to 41% after vinorelbine, and it reached 43% upon completion of the entire six cycle treatment program. Median survival time was 14.4 months, 1-year survival rate was 53%, and 2-year survival rate was 18%. Median time to disease progression was 6.8 months. This sequential chemotherapy regimen is feasible and active in patients with advanced NSCLC. This pilot experience provides the basis for an ongoing randomized phase III trial comparing our sequential regimen versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine.

Randomized Phase II Trial of Sequential Chemotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (SWOG 9806)

PURPOSE

Improving chemotherapeutic efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will require the development of new drugs or new strategies to better use currently available agents. Sequential administration offers an opportunity to increase drug diversity while maintaining dose intensity. On the basis of the data indicating the activity of taxanes as second-line therapy and the lack of efficacy for more than three cycles of platinum-based therapy, this randomized Phase II study tested the concept of planned sequential chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients with selected stage IIIb (pleural effusion)/stage IV NSCLC, performance status of 0-1 and normal organ function were eligible.

THERAPY

arm 1, carboplatin (area under the curve = 5.5 mg/ml x min day 1) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 every 21 days x 3) followed by paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2) every 21 days x 3) or arm 2, cisplatin (100 mg/m(2) day 1), vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 every 21 d x 3) followed by docetaxel (75-100 mg/m(2) every 21 days x 3).

RESULTS

Two-hundred four patients were accrued, of whom, 178 were eligible and evaluable. Eighty percent of patients were stage IV on arm 1 and 85% on arm 2. Response rates were 21 and 28% on arms 1 and 2, respectively. Median, 1-year and 2-year survivals were 9 months, 34 and 13%, and 9 months, 36 and 8%, on arms 1 and 2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential therapy, as used in this study, resulted in comparable efficacy to previous Southwest Oncology Group trials of two drug combinations in this population; however, it failed to meet criteria for further study.

Phase II study of alternating chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

We assessed the use of alternating drugs with differing mechanisms of action as treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that the shape of a dose-response curve would be determined by the major mechanisms of resistance of a cancer to the drug being studied. Assessment of data from published clinical trials suggested that if our hypothesis were correct resistance of non-small cell lung cancer to most agents is due to "saturable passive" resistance mechanisms (non-competitive inhibition of drug effect due to deficiency of a factor required for drug effect) rather than to "active" resistance mechanisms (competitive inhibition of drug effect due to excess of a factor) or to "non-saturable passive resistance (due to factor alteration or mutation). Using drugs with differing mechanisms of action is a strategy that might be of value against passive resistance.

METHOD

In patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, we used four alternating cisplatin-based regimens. In each regimen, cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) was given iv on day 1 of each course. The regimens were: cisplatin + vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) days 1, 8 and 15, cisplatin + gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) days 1, 8 and 15, cisplatin + paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) day 1 iv over 1h, and cisplatin + etoposide 100 mg/m(2) po days 1-6. Patients were assigned randomly to different regimen sequences. Patients first received 1 course of each of these 4 regimens, then received 1 further course of each of single agent vinorelbine, gemcitabine, paclitaxel and etoposide (at the same doses as in courses 1-4), without cisplatin. (Cisplatin was omitted from courses 5-8 to limit cumulative toxicity.) Change in tumor size was measured after each course.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were entered. One patient achieved complete remission and nine achieved partial remissions, for an objective response rate of 28% (95% confidence intervals, 13-43%). Nineteen patients (53%) (95% confidence intervals, 37-69%) had stable disease. Eleven patients had growth of >10% on one regimen followed by tumor shrinkage of >10% on a later one. Median survival was 8.1 months, 1-year survival was 28% and 2-year survival was 6%. No unexpected toxicity was seen.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of four alternating regimens is feasible in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Response rates and survival times were comparable to those observed for standard chemotherapy approaches, suggesting that this strategy does not offer any major advantage. We plan to explore the hypothesis that this approach failed since tumor cells surviving first exposure to chemotherapy rapidly down-regulate their ability to undergo apoptosis.

Anaesthetic implications of anticancer chemotherapy

In anaesthetic practice we deal with cancer patients who are scheduled for operations on tumours or other manifestations of malignant disease. Those patients are often debilitated and have significant weight loss accompanied with hypoproteinaemia, anaemia and coagulation disorders. Oncological patients usually present to the anaesthetist before tumour disease surgery, but they are also candidates for elective operations (e.g. hernia repair) and urgent/emergency surgery (e.g. trauma, fractures and ileus). Chemotherapeutic agents given to these patients are potentially noxious, can affect the conduct of anaesthesia and, furthermore, may aggravate the patient's condition. In this review the most commonly used cytostatic drug regimens and their common side-effects are listed. Some preclinical studies on anaesthetic and cytostatic drug metabolism and interactions are emphasized, as well as clinically relevant perioperative alterations that may affect anaesthetic management in cancer patients. An anaesthetist may have to modify a routine anaesthetic regimen in cancer patients especially if anticancer chemotherapeutics were given. Clinically silent toxic drug effects may become apparent during operation, trauma or in the early postoperative course in such patients. Altered reactions to commonly used anaesthetics in patients receiving chemotherapeutics and an impaired stress reaction may occur in such patients. Special attention must be drawn to protection against opportunistic infections.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: current status and future prospects

Of the patients with non-small cell lung cancer, 60% present with localised or locally advanced disease. Although they may be considered potentially curable, the vast majority will die, usually from systemic disease. So far, adjuvant (postoperative) therapy has failed to demonstrate benefit. In contrast, chemotherapy has demonstrated clear advantages when administered prior to, or concurrently with radiotherapy in Stage III disease or prior to surgery in Stage III disease. Chemotherapy administered prior to surgery, termed neoadjuvant therapy, in Stage I and II disease has been demonstrated to be feasible. Several trials employing currently available agents have yielded promising results. Whether these regimens will result in an unequivocal benefit is the subject of several ongoing studies in the US and Europe. Current research is focusing on the role of newer drugs including novel antitubulin agents, growth factor receptor antagonists, eicosanoid modulators and various other agents.

Consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: phase II Southwest Oncology Group Study S9504

PURPOSE

To test the concept of taxane sequencing in combined-modality therapy, this phase II trial (S9504) evaluated consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with pathologically documented stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results were compared with those of the predecessor study (S9019) with identical eligibility, staging criteria, and treatment, excepting docetaxel consolidation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment consisted of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 29, and 36, etoposide 50 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and 29 through 33, and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy (total dose of 61 Gy). Consolidation docetaxel started 4 to 6 weeks after chemoradiotherapy at an initial dose of 75 mg/m2.

RESULTS

Stage subsets (tumor-node-metastasis system) in 83 eligible patients were as follows: T4N0/1, 31 patients (37%); T4N2, 22 patients (27%), and T1-3N3, 30 patients (36%). Concurrent chemoradiotherapy was generally well tolerated, but two patients died from probable radiation-associated pneumonitis. Neutropenia during consolidation docetaxel was common (57% with grade 4) and most frequent during escalation to 100 mg/m2. Median progression-free survival was 16 months, median survival was 26 months, and 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 76%, 54%, and 37%, respectively. Brain metastasis was the most common site of failure. In S9019, median survival was 15 months and 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 58%, 34%, and 17%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIB NSCLC is feasible and generally tolerable, and results compare favorably with the predecessor trial S9019. Nevertheless, this study remains hypothesis-generating and does not provide definitive evidence of the benefit of this approach. Phase III trials evaluating the S9504 regimen have been initiated to validate these results.

Overview of bladder cancer trials in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B

The Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) Genitourinary Committee has developed a broad range of clinical trials across most stages of bladder cancer. Recurrence rates of superficial bladder cancer after transurethral resection range from 50-70%. Although adjuvant bacillus Calmette-Guerin reduces the risk of disease recurrence or progression, only 30% of patients have long-term disease-free survival. Because the development of novel secondline agents is needed, the CALGB is evaluating the utility of intravesicle gemcitabine as well as an oral proapoptotic agent (CP-461). In patients with locally advanced disease with an increased risk of disease recurrence after cystectomy, a randomized trial of conventional chemotherapy versus sequential dose-dense therapy is under development. The gemcitabine/cisplatin combination has become a commonly used regimen for the treatment of advanced transitional cell carcinoma (TCC). The CALGB is undertaking a Phase II study that incorporates a fixed dose rate gemcitabine infusion in this regimen, together with a selective epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, Iressa (Astra Zeneca, Wilmington, DE). In patients with renal insufficiency, a regimen of carboplatin, gemcitabine, and Iressa is planned. Novel agents, including arsenic trioxide and trastuzumab (Herceptin; Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA), are being evaluated as secondline therapy in patients with advanced TCC who have disease progression after frontline therapy.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine followed by docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a multi-institutional phase II trial of nonplatinum sequential triplet combination chemotherapy (JMTO LC00-02)

To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the sequential nonplatinum combination chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) followed by docetaxel (DOC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we conducted the multiinstitutional phase II study. A total of 44 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC were treated with GEM 1000 mg m(-2) and VNR 25 mg m(-2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for three cycles. DOC 60 mg m(-2) was then administrated intravenously at 3-week intervals for three cycles. Patients were evaluated for response and toxicity with each cycle of the treatment. The major objective response rate was 47.7% (95% confidence interval (CI), 33.8-62.1%). Median survival time (MST) was 15.7 months and 1-year survival rate was 59%. In the GEM/VNR cycle, grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 36.3%, grade 3/4 anaemia in two patients (4.5%) and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in one patient (2.3%). Grade 3 pneumonitis occurred in two patients (4.5%) in GEM/VNR cycles. In the DOC cycles, grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 39.4% but no patient experienced grade 3/4 anaemia or thrombocytopenia. Of the 44 eligible patients, 33 patients completed three cycles of GEM/VNR and 22 patients completed six cycles of planned chemotherapy (three cycles of GEM/VNR followed by three cycles of DOC). The sequential triplet nonplatinum chemotherapy consisted of GEM/VNR followed by DOC, and was very active and well tolerated. This study forms the basis for an ongoing phase III trial that compares this nonplatinum triplet and standard platinum doublet combination (carboplatin/paclitaxel).

Gemcitabine and Carboplatin Regimens in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Focus on Randomized Phase III Trials

In the past decade unequivocal evidence regarding the benefit of platinum-based chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has emerged. Several regimens consisting of either cisplatin or carboplatin combined with agents such as paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, or irinotecan have demonstrated superiority over older combinations or single-agent platinums. These regimens have roughly equivalent activity in terms of response and survival. The major differences have been in terms of toxicities and expense. Gemcitabine/carboplatin is a combination with clear activity in advanced disease and excellent tolerability. Unlike taxane-based therapy, there is minimal neuropathy and little alopecia. For registration purposes, gemcitabine was initially combined with cisplatin. Regimens combining gemcitabine with carboplatin reported a similar rate of myelotoxicity (primarily thrombocytopenia) as gemcitabine/cisplatin. The observation that a 21-day schedule in which carboplatin is administered on day 1 and gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 could substantially reduce this toxicity provided a preferred schedule for administration. The major factor limiting acceptance of this regimen was the absence of phase III data. This year a number of phase III trials were presented, which coupled with the results of large, multicenter phase II studies (including one from a US cooperative group), has now established gemcitabine/carboplatin as a standard regimen for the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Its excellent toxicity profile has also led several groups to utilize the regimen as a platform for combination with newer drugs.

Gemcitabine in non-small cell lung cancer

Gemcitabine is considered to be one of the most active drugs in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). When used as a single agent, gemcitabine yielded response rates consistently > 20%, with a uniformly good tolerance profile. Preclinical data indicated synergism between gemcitabine and platinum compounds, such as cisplatin or carboplatin. The gemcitabine-cisplatin combination is considered one of the reference regimens for advanced NSCLC and the recommended schedule is gemcitabine 1000 - 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 - 8 and cisplatin 70 - 80 mg/m(2) on days 1 or 2. In order to avoid many of the non-haematological toxicities associated with cisplatin, several trials evaluated the gemcitabine-carboplatin combination. Previous trials using the 28-day schedule showed unacceptable haematological toxicity. Recent studies demonstrated the activity and feasibility of gemcitabine-carboplatin combination using a 21-day schedule, with carboplatin administered on day 1 and gemcitabine on days 1 and 8. Gemcitabine can be combined with one of the other new agents, such as the taxanes or vinorelbine, to create novel non-platinum-doublets. Although encouraging, the available data are still conflicting and non-platinum-based combinations are not indicated outside clinical trials. Three-drug combinations increased toxicity and failed to demonstrate any advantage over standard doublets in advanced NSCLC. Gemcitabine is active and well tolerated in elderly patients and represents a reasonable therapeutic option. Although no Phase III trials have been conducted to compare gemcitabine to the best supportive care or docetaxel in pretreated NSCLC, gemcitabine alone or in combination with vinorelbine or one of the taxanes can be considered a valid option for second-line treatment in patients who had a previous response or who achieved stable disease with a platinum-containing regimen. Gemcitabine is considered the most radiopotentiating agent available amongst the newer agents we have in terms of activity and toxicity, but the routine use of gemcitabine in combination with radical thoracic radiotherapy, although promising, is not yet recommended. Further testing of gemcitabine-based combinations with concurrent radiation is underway.