Weekly docetaxel with either gemcitabine or vinorelbine as second-line treatment in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: Phase II trials of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network

Metronomic Chemotherapy

Simple Summary

The present article reviews the state of the art of metronomic chemotherapy use to treat the principal types of cancers, namely breast, non-small cell lung cancer and colorectal ones, and of the most recent progresses in understanding the underlying mechanisms of action. Areas of novelty, in terms of new regimens, new types of cancer suitable for Metronomic chemotherapy (mCHT) and the overview of current ongoing trials, along with a critical review of them, are also provided.

Abstract

Metronomic chemotherapy treatment (mCHT) refers to the chronic administration of low doses chemotherapy that can sustain prolonged, and active plasma levels of drugs, producing favorable tolerability and it is a new promising therapeutic approach in solid and in hematologic tumors. mCHT has not only a direct effect on tumor cells, but also an action on cell microenvironment, by inhibiting tumor angiogenesis, or promoting immune response and for these reasons can be considered a multi-target therapy itself. Here we review the state of the art of mCHT use in some classical tumour types, such as breast and no small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), see what is new regarding most recent data in different cancer types, such as glioblastoma (GBL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and new drugs with potential metronomic administration. Finally, a look at the strategic use of mCHT in the context of health emergencies, or in low –and middle-income countries (LMICs), where access to adequate healthcare is often not easy, is mandatory, as we always need to bear in in mind that equity in care must be a compulsory part of our medical work and research.

Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Intratumoral Injection of Cisplatin for the Treatment of Isolated Mediastinal Recurrence of Lung Cancer

Isolated hilar and mediastinal recurrence (IMHR) following external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in patients with lung cancer is common. These patients do not have many treatment options and are usually offered palliative chemotherapy or best supportive care. Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided intratumoral injection of cisplatin (ITC) is a novel approach for these patients. The procedure is performed under conscious sedation. The lesion is located with a bronchoscopy using EBUS, and a 22-gauge EBUS needle is advanced through the working channel of the scope and locked in position. Under ultrasound guidance, the wall of the tracheobronchial tree is punctured and the needle is moved into the target lesion. The needle stylet is then removed and cisplatin (40 mg/40 mL) is injected into the lesion. One to two sites are treated per session. Details of the procedure are described in the protocol section of paper. At our center, 50 sites were treated in 36 patients (19 males, 17 females). The mean age of our cohort was 61.9 ±8.5 years. We performed final analyses on 35 patients and 41 sites. 24/35 (69%) had complete or partial response (responders), whereas 11/35 (31%) had stable or progressive disease (non-responders). Overall, survival in our group was 8 months (95% CI of 6-11 months), with patients who responded having significantly better survival than the ones who did not.

Treatment of isolated mediastinal and hilar recurrence of lung cancer with bronchoscopic endobronchial ultrasound guided intratumoral injection of chemotherapy with cisplatin

PURPOSE

A common pattern of recurrence in lung cancer after receiving full dose external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to targeted sites is isolated mediastinal and hilar recurrence (IMHR). Treatment options for these patients are limited to palliative radiation, chemotherapy, and/or best supportive care. We describe our experience with treating IMHR with bronchoscopic endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) guided intratumoral injection of cisplatin (ITC).

METHODS

Patients treated between Jan 2009-September 2014 with ITC for IMHR were included. Patient demographics, tumor histology, size, concurrent therapy, location, number of sites treated, treatment sessions, and encounters were abstracted. Responses were analyzed on follow-up scans 8-12 weeks after the last treatment session using RECIST 1.1 criteria. Locoregional recurrence, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival were measured.

RESULTS

50 sites were treated in 36 patients (19 males, 17 females) with mean age 61.9±8.5 years. Eight sites treated on subsequent encounters were excluded and one patient had an unevaluable response, leaving 35 patients and 41 sites for final analysis. 24/35 (69%) had complete or partial response (responders), whereas 11/35 (31%) had stable or progressive disease (non-responders). There were no significant differences in response based on histology, size, and concurrent therapy. Median survival for the group was 8 months (95% CI of 6-11 mo). Responders had significantly higher survival and PFS than non-responders. Two patients treated with concurrent EBRT, developed broncho-mediastinal fistula.

CONCLUSION

EBUS guided intratumoral cisplatin for IMHR appears to be safe and effective, and may represent a new treatment paradigm for this patient population.

Weekly Vinorelbine and Docetaxel as Second-Line Chemotherapy for Pretreated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: a Phase I-II Trial

Docetaxel was proven to be effective as second-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC after failure of platinum-based front-line chemotherapy. We designed this phase I/II study to define the Maximum Tolerated Dose of weekly docetaxel combined with weekly vinorelbine, and subsequently evaluate tolerability and activity of this schedule in NSCLC patients who were progressive after treatment with either cisplatin and gemcitabine or carboplatin and paclitaxel regimens. To be eligible for the study, patients were required to have a WHO performance status < or =2, failure after at least two cycles of first platinum-based chemotherapy, and no prior treatment with docetaxel and vinorelbine. A total of 27 patients were enrolled in this phase I/II study. A weekly docetaxel dose of 25 mg/m2 was recommended in combination with fixed vinorelbine dose of 20 mg/m2, and 24 patients were treated at this dose level. Severe neutropenia (62%) and febrile neutropenia (29%) were the most frequent toxicities, with 83% of patients requiring dose modification or delay. In the phase II study, 5 (21%) patients obtained a partial response, 8 (33%) patients had stable disease, whereas 10 (42%) patients progressed. After a median follow-up of 18.7 months, median survival was 8 months, with 30% surviving at 1 year. Regardless of the use of weekly docetaxel schedule, this regimen was highly myelosuppressive, and did not seem to improve response rate and survival compared to single-agent docetaxel. No further developments of this schedule are warranted.

Pulmonary toxicity among cancer patients treated with a combination of docetaxel and gemcitabine: a meta-analysis of clinical trials

PURPOSE

The combination of docetaxel and gemcitabine was tested in several studies in patients with lung, breast, and pancreatic cancers and other tumor entities. Some studies reported cases of severe or even fatal pulmonary toxicity that led to early termination of some trials. We created a meta-analysis model of published studies to identify explanatory factors for docetaxel-gemcitabine-dependent pulmonary toxicity.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE/Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Clinical Trials database for prospective full-text studies that used a schedule of docetaxel and gemcitabine to treat a malignant disease. We performed a meta-analysis for proportions using the arcsine transformation and a meta-regression using a generalized linear mixed model based on a binomial distribution and a logit link.

RESULTS

We included 103 trials with 113 treatment arms comprising 5,065 patients (major entities included non-small cell lung cancer (n = 2,550), breast cancer (n = 1,119), pancreatic cancer (n = 466), and urothelial cancer (n = 161)). For the incidence of severe lung toxicity (common toxicity criteria [CTC] grades 3-5), we found a combined estimate of 2.70% (95% CI 2.26, 3.14). The estimate for the proportion of fatal cases was 0.35% (95% CI 0.21, 0.58). We found that the sequence of the chemotherapy schedule had no influence on the incidence of severe pulmonary adverse events (F-test F = 0.65, df = 3,113, P = 0.58) nor did the study phase, treatment line or ethnicity of the participants. We found that patients with breast cancer, compared to lung cancer patients, developed severe lung toxicity less frequently (OR = 0.18, 95% CI (0.09, 0.36)).

CONCLUSION

We could not demonstrate that a particular chemotherapy sequence of docetaxel-gemcitabine is associated with excess pulmonary toxicity. Patients with lung cancer are at a higher risk for severe pulmonary side effects with docetaxel-gemcitabine than are patients with breast cancer.

Phase II study of vinorelbine and docetaxel in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer as frontline and second-line therapy

OBJECTIVES

Combination chemotherapy with third-generation, nonplatinum agents (ie, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, taxanes, or camptothecins) represents a well-tolerated frontline treatment option for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and might play a role as salvage therapy as well. The aim of this phase 2 study was to investigate the use of docetaxel and vinorelbine in the frontline and second-line setting in patients with incurable non-small-cell lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-eight patients (42 untreated, 36 previously treated) were administered vinorelbine (20 mg/m) on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel (75 mg/m for untreated patients; 60 mg/m for previously treated patients for cycle 1, increased to 75 mg/m for the subsequent cycles in the absence of grade 3 fever/neutropenia) on day 8, repeated every 21 days, with routine filgrastim support.

RESULTS

The most common grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicities were diarrhea, dyspnea, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting (5% each). Grade 3 to 4 granulocytopenia occurred in 55% of the patients, however only 5% experienced febrile neutropenia. Response rates were 13% in the chemotherapy-naive cohort and 9% in previously treated patients. Median time to progression was 2.9 and 3.0 months and median overall survival was 15.0 and 6.2 months, for the frontline and second-line patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with historical controls, in the first-line setting, the combination of docetaxel and vinorelbine did not demonstrate increased efficacy advantages over platinum- or other nonplatinum-based doublets. In the second-line setting, single agent chemotherapy is as effective as, and less toxic than the docetaxel-vinorelbine combination, and the former remains the cytotoxic treatment of choice.

Phase I study of amrubicin and vinorelbine in non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Combination chemotherapy comprising amrubicin and vinorelbine as a second-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been fully evaluated. To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD), the present phase I study examined patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

The subjects were nine patients with histologically confirmed advanced NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, prior platinum-based first-line chemotherapy, and measurable or evaluable lesions. Treatment consisted of five dose levels, with amrubicin 35-45 mg/m2 administered as a 5-min intravenous infusion on days 1-3 and vinorelbine 15-25 mg/m2 given as a 1-h intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

All patients had received carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was seen in two of six patients (febrile neutropenia and deep vein thrombosis ) at level 1, allowing us to conduct level 2. At level 2, all three patients experienced DLT (leucopenia > or =4 days in one patient; febrile neutropenia in three patients; and infection in two patients), and this level was determined as the MTD. Subsequently, level 1 (amrubicin 35 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 15 mg/m2) was defined as the RD. Responses in the nine patients included a partial response in one patient and stable disease in four patients.

CONCLUSION

As second-line therapy, the RD of the combination of amrubicin and vinorelbine is 35 mg/m2 and 15 mg/m2, respectively. Further study should proceed to clarify the efficacy of this regimen.

Does an optimal therapeutic sequence exist in advanced non-small cell lung cancer?

BACKGROUND

A growing percentage of patients affected by advanced non-small cell lung cancer who progressed after first-line chemotherapy still have a good performance status and require second-line treatment.

OBJECTIVE

An overview of the state of the art of second-line therapeutic options is presented.

METHODS

The scope of the review is to give an update on the therapeutic options currently available for the second-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Among chemotherapeutic drugs docetaxel and pemetrexed have been approved for second-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Although the drugs are equiactive in terms of response rate and survival parameters the latter has a clear-cut advantage in terms of tolerability and quality of life. Therefore, pemetrexed is considered the best second-line therapeutic option in order to avoid severe side effects. Among biologic agents the tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefinitib and erlotinib have been largely tested, but only the latter has been approved for second- and third-line treatment. Erlotinib has been reported to be particularly active in patients with adenocarcinoma, in females, in patients of Asian ethnicity and in epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and it is also active in the third-line setting. At present, no direct head to head comparison of erlotinib with any chemotherapeutic agent has been performed. A rational decision tree may therefore include pemetrexed or docetaxel (the former preferred for tolerability) or erlotinib as standard second-line therapy. Erlotinib has been also shown to be active as third-line treatment: however, in cases of patients with clinical characteristics suggesting a good response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, erlotinib may be employed in an earlier phase.

Biweekly administration of docetaxel and vinorelbine as second-line chemotherapy for patients with stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer: a phase II study of the Galician Lung Cancer Group (GGCP 013-02)

The current report aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of a biweekly administration of docetaxel and vinorelbine to patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, who had previously been treated for this disease. In a prospective, multicenter, open-label, phase II trial, patients received 40 mg/m of docetaxel and 20 mg/m of vinorelbine on days 1 and 15, every 28 days. Treatment continued for up to a maximum of six cycles, unless disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred, or consent was withdrawn. Fifty patients were enrolled in the study and they received 174 cycles of chemotherapy, with a median of three cycles per patient. All patients were evaluated for efficacy and toxicity in an intention-to-treat analysis. The overall response rate was 10% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1-19], including one complete response (2%) and four partial responses (8%). Previous chemotherapy of 80% of the responders included paclitaxel. Median time to disease progression was 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.2-4.3) and median overall survival was 6.5 months (95% CI: 2.5-9.2). The survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 18% (95% CI: 7-29) and 4% (95% CI: 0-10), respectively. The most frequent severe toxicities were neutropenia (20% of patients) and leukopenia (8% of patients). Other toxicities appeared in 4% or fewer of the patients. Biweekly administration of docetaxel and vinorelbine is feasible as a second-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer patients, but its level of activity and toxicity does not suggest any advantage compared with the results obtained with single-agent docetaxel in the same setting.

Docetaxel, Vinorelbine, and Zoledronic Acid as First-Line Treatment in Patients with Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer: A Phase II Study

OBJECTIVES

Combining antineoplastic agents is the key to improving the treatment options for men with hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). The current study investigated the combination of docetaxel, vinorelbine, and zoledronic acid as a first-line treatment for HRPC.

METHODS

Patients were treated repeatedly with docetaxel (25 mg/mq) and vinorelbine (10 mg/mq) intravenously for three consecutive weeks followed by a 1-wk rest until disease progression or side effects. Zoledronic acid was administered every 4 wk. Changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and objective responses were evaluated after two and three cycles, respectively. Toxicity and pain evaluation, based on pain intensity reduction and analgesic drug reduction, were assessed every cycle.

RESULTS

Forty men with HRPC (median age: 65 yr) were treated. Among 38 evaluable patients, complete and major PSA responses were observed in seven (18%) and 12 (32%), respectively; a partial objective response was observed in six of 15 (40%) patients with measurable disease. Neutropenia (25%) was the most important grade 3 haematologic toxicity observed. Only three patients (7.5%) reported grade 4 neutropenia. Nineteen patients (47.5%) achieved a reduction of pain intensity and analgesic drug use after two cycles. Median progression-free survival was 7 mo (95% CI: 2-10 mo), with a median overall survival of 17 mo (95% CI: 6-22 mo).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of docetaxel, vinorelbine, and zoledronic acid is associated with improvement in biochemical, objective, and pain responses and is well tolerated as a first-line treatment for HRPC.

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 phase II study of days 1 and 8 combination of docetaxel plus gemcitabine for the second-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and good performance status

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a combination consisting of second-line docetaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

histologically confirmed advanced NSCLC with progressive disease to platinum-based chemotherapy, ECOG performance status (PS) 0 or 1, and adequate kidney, liver and bone marrow function. Treatment consisted of docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) i.v. over 60 min followed by gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) i.v. over 30 min on days 1 and 8 of each 3-week cycle for a planned six cycles or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

Of the 52 patients enrolled, 50 were evaluable for response and toxicity. The mean age was 59 years (range 42-79), 46 male and 4 female. Histology subtypes were: adenocarcinoma 26 patients, bronchioloalveolar 1 patient, large cell carcinoma 5 patients, and squamous cell carcinoma 18 patients. Thirty-eight patients had ECOG PS 1 and 12 patients had PS 0. The median number of cycles administered was four (range 2-6). The overall response rate was 28%. The median follow-up was 9 months (range 5-34 months). The median survival time (MST) was 8.2 months (95% CI, 4-12%), and the 1-year survival was 25%. The median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI, 2-6%). In the Cox regression model, survival was only significantly affected by the PS. The median survival in patients with PS 0 was 17.8 months (95% CI, 18.8-21.8%) compared with a median survival for patients with PS 1 of 6.1 months (95% CI, 4.1-8.2%) (P=0.0057).

TOXICITY

three patients had grade 3 anemia, three patients had grade 3 thrombocytopenia, four patients had grade 3 neutropenia and only one patient developed grade 4 febrile neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicity was also mild; the most frequent was asthenia, with grade 3 in eight patients (16%), and one patient with grade 4.

CONCLUSION

This regimen of docetaxel in combination with gemcitabine in advanced second-line NSCLC is an active and safe regimen.

Docetaxel-associated epiphora

Docetaxel is a semisynthetic taxane indicated for the treatment of advanced breast, prostate, and non-small cell lung cancers; it is also used for the treatment of various other solid tumors. The standard intermittent dosage of docetaxel is 60-100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. At this dose and schedule, myelosuppression is common and neutropenia is usually the dose-limiting toxicity. Weekly administration of docetaxel 20-42 mg/m2 is being tested in the treatment of advanced solid tumors in order to improve patient tolerance by reducing the interval dose and to maintain therapeutic efficacy by increasing overall dose intensity. Asthenia and peripheral neuropathy can limit continued administration of weekly docetaxel. Epiphora (excess tearing due to narrowing or blockage of the lacrimal outflow passages) is associated with repeated weekly administration of docetaxel. This adverse effect can interfere with activities of daily life and negatively affect quality of life. Epiphora may be an underreported adverse effect of treatment because of underrecognition by clinicians and patient embarrassment with respect to seemingly uncontrolled tearing. The use of weekly docetaxel administration is expanding; therefore, patients should be educated to recognize and report signs and symptoms of epiphora. It is important for clinicians participating in the care of patients undergoing treatment with docetaxel to monitor for excess tearing and signs of eye irritation to ensure timely management of treatment-related epiphora.

Weekly Short Infusion of Taxotere at a 4 Week Cycle in Chinese Patients with Advanced NSCLC Who Have Failed or Relapsed after the Frontline Platinum-based Non-Taxane Chemotherapy—A Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

This Phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of weekly docetaxel at a 4 week cycle in second-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who failed to respond or relapsed after the frontline platinum-based, non-taxane regimen.

METHODS

Patients with histologically confirmed and progressive NSCLC after one platinum-based, non-taxane regimen were eligible for this study. Performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function were required. Patients were treated with docetaxel 40 mg/m(2)/week for three consecutive weeks then following 1 week of rest. Cycles were repeated every 4 weeks for a maximum total of six cycles. Docetaxel was administered intravenously for 30 min with dexamethasone premedication.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were eligible for this study. Hematologic toxicity was very mild and with the major toxicity of anemia. Non-hematologic toxicities were modest, Grades 3-4 mucositis, diarrhea and peripheral neuropathy occurred in 6-13% of patients and caused dose modifications. Fatigue (48%) was common but not severe with only 6% of Grades 3-4 toxicity. The overall response rate (ORR) was 13% [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.9-23%]. The median survival time (MST) for all patients was 25.0 weeks (95% CI, 12.7-37.3), and the 1 year survival was 31% (95% CI, 17-58%). For patients with PS 0-1, MST was 29.7 weeks and 1 year survival was 36%.

CONCLUSIONS

Weekly docetaxel appeared to be well tolerated as second-line therapy for patients with NSCLC. The efficacy for this regimen was comparable with the standard 3 week schedule but hematologic toxicity was markedly reduced. A schedule of three consecutive weeks, with a 1 week break, may diminish the frequency of fatigue and diarrhea when compared with a schedule of six consecutive weeks.

Second-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Among advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, most will resist or relapse after first-line chemotherapy. As a result, second-line therapy has been a major focus for clinical research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was carried out from 1996 to February 2005.

RESULTS

Second-line chemotherapy provides pre-treated NSCLC patients with a clear survival advantage. Docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks is the present standard second-line chemotherapy. Despite promising results regarding efficacy and toxicity in phase III studies, a docetaxel weekly schedule could not be recommended. Pemetrexed recently emerged as an alternative with similar efficacy and less toxicity. Although the combination of two drugs was not associated with a survival benefit when compared with single-agent chemotherapy, such regimens induced a dramatic increase in toxicities and therefore mono-chemotherapy remains the standard as second-line therapy. Finally, few new agents were reported with better results than those used previously and clinical research on second-line therapy currently focuses on combinations with targeted therapies.

CONCLUSION

Second-line chemotherapy offers NSCLC patients a small but significant survival improvement. However, this field of clinical research needs further investigations in order to answer certain remaining questions especially concerning targeted therapies.

Weekly docetaxel and vinorelbine (VIN-DOX) as first line treatment in patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The current study investigated the clinical benefit, the impact on biochemical and objective response and tolerability of weekly docetaxel with vinorelbine (VIN-DOX) in symptomatic patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC).

METHODS

Patients were treated with docetaxel 25 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 20 mg/m2, intravenously for 6 consecutive weeks followed by a 2 week rest repeatedly until disease progression. Clinical benefit evaluations, based on Karnofsky performance status (KPS) and pain measure, were assessed weekly during therapy. A clinical benefit response was defined as a sustained (> or =4 weeks) improvements in one of these parameters. Changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, tumoral response and toxicity also were evaluated.

RESULTS

19 men (median age 68 years), were treated. Overall, 42% of patients achieved a KPS significant change and positive pain response; 47% achieved a 50% or greater reduction in PSA. The objective response rate was observed in 2 of 9 patients with measurable disease (22%). The most important toxicity was neutropenia (Grade 3 = 32%).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of weekly VIN-DOX appears to be feasible. VIN-DOX was found to be associated with improvement in clinical benefit response and biochemical response and well tolerated as first line treatment in HRPC.

Second-line chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

Several agents have been evaluated for the second-line treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The TAX 317 trial found that patients treated with docetaxel (Taxotere) 75 mg/m2 had significantly longer survival than those treated with best supportive care alone. In addition, symptom control was better for patients who received chemotherapy. The TAX 320 trial found that treatment with docetaxel 75 or 100 mg/m2 resulted in significantly higher response rates than treatment with vinorelbine (Navelbine) or ifosfamide (Mitoxana), and the 1-year survival rate was also significantly better for patients treated with docetaxel 75 mg/m2. A large randomized trial compared pemetrexed (LY-231514 or Alimta) 500 mg/m2 with docetaxel 75 mg/m2. Response and survival rates were similar in the two treatment arms, however, the toxicity profile of pemetrexed was superior to that of docetaxel with significantly less Grade 3/4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. Fewer patients in the pemetrexed arm required hospitalization. Topotecan (Hycamtin) 2.3 mg/m2/day orally for 5 days has been compared with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 in a large 800-patient study. The results of this trial are awaited. Gemcitabine (Gemzar) and irinotecan (Campto) have been evaluated both as single agents and in combination with each other and study results do not suggest that either of these drugs is superior to docetaxel or pemetrexed. The vinca alkaloid vinorelbine has proved to be inferior to docetaxel in a randomized trial. The epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors gefitinib (ZD1839, Iressa) and erlotinib (CP-358774, OSI 774, Tarceva) have been evaluated in Phase II trials in the second- and third-line setting. Both drugs have demonstrated interesting response rates ranging from 10 to almost 20%. The results of placebo-controlled randomized trials of this family of drugs are awaited. In summary, several studies have now found a definite role for the second-line treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

An overview of current results with the gemcitabine and docetaxel combination as initial and salvage chemotherapy regimen in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

The activity of single-agent docetaxel in patients with platinum pretreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been established in two recent large randomized phase III trials, either against best supportive care or versus single-agent vinorelbine/ifosfamide. Moreover, single-agent gemcitabine has demonstrated significant activity and clinical benefit in platinum- and paclitaxel-pretreated advanced NSCLC. Combination regimens employing these two agents in various doses and schedules have recently been initiated. The gemcitabine/docetaxel combination with or without G-CSF support as salvage therapy of NSCLC pre-treated with platinum+/-paclitaxel-based regimens has been evaluated in four recently published phase II clinical studies and has been shown to represent a tolerable and active regimen in this setting, yielding a 10-33% response rate, thus, warranting randomized comparisons to single-agent gemcitabine or docetaxel, drugs currently recommended in second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.

Weekly docetaxel in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer: a phase II trial

Docetaxel has consistently demonstrated its high activity as an antineoplastic agent in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. However, 90% of patients receiving the recommended dose of 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks will develop grade 3 or 4 neutropenia. Recent data suggest that the safety profile of a weekly docetaxel regimen compared favorably with the standard 3-week schedule. Thus, we initiated a phase II study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of weekly docetaxel in pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer. Twenty patients with advanced, anthra-cycline-refractory breast cancer were included in this phase II trial. Docetaxel was administered at a starting dose of 40 mg/m2, repeated once a week for 3 consecutive weeks followed by a 1-week rest period (1 cycle). Patients were evaluated for tumor response every 8 weeks (after every other cycle). Therapy was continued for a maximum of six courses in patients showing tumor response or stable disease. Twenty patients received a total of 204 weekly infusions of docetaxel. The mean number of treatments was 10.2 (range 1-18). Eighteen patients were assessable for response. Five patients achieved a partial response and six patients showed either stable disease or a minor response. Seven patients had disease progression. The median survival was 7.8 months. Grade 3/4 leukopenia occurred in two patients. No other grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities were observed. The following grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities were seen: nausea/vomiting (one patient), infection (one patient), mucositis (two patients) and diarrhea (one patient). Three patients withdrew from the study due to dose-limiting toxicities (one due to severe neutropenia and two due to mucositis). We conclude that administration of docetaxel at a dose of 40 mg/m2 was effective and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer. This regimen is associated with only mild myelosuppression.

Phase II non-randomized study of three different sequences of docetaxel and vinorelbine in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Docetaxel and vinorelbine as single agents and in combination with cisplatin have shown significant activity in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Significant neutropenia has been observed with the combination of docetaxel/vinorelbine. To gain insight into the potential synergism of this combination, we examined three different sequences of docetaxel 75 and vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2), every 3 weeks, in locally advanced and metastatic NSCLC patients. About 14 patients were evaluable in each schedule: schedule A, docetaxel day 1, vinorelbine days 1 and 6; schedule B, docetaxel day 6, vinorelbine days 1 and 6; schedule C, docetaxel day 1, vinorelbine days 6 and 15. Response rates were: 42.8, 7.1 and 21.4% for schedules A, B and C, respectively (P=0.01, schedule A vs. B). Median survival time was 16, 6.5 and 10.6 months for schedules A, B and C, respectively (P=0.04, schedule A vs. B). Neutropenia was the commonest toxicity; 43% of patients in schedule A and 57% of patients in schedule B had a febrile neutropenia episode. Prophylactic granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) was prescribed in schedule C after the first episode of febrile neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicities were mild in all three schedules. For future studies, schedule A with lower doses is recommended.

The Role of Weekly Docetaxel in the Treatment of Advanced non—small-Cell Lung Cancer

Docetaxel is one of the most active single agents in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Weekly administration of docetaxel markedly reduces myelosuppression and also reduces nonhematologic toxicity. Phase II trials with single-agent weekly docetaxel have been completed in first- and second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC; preliminary results of treatment with weekly docetaxel-based combination regimens are also available. In patients who were elderly or had poor performance status, weekly docetaxel produced a 19% response rate, 28% 1-year survival, and was well tolerated. As second-line therapy, response rates to weekly docetaxel were similar to results with administration every 3 weeks, although no direct comparisons exist. Combination regimens, particularly weekly docetaxel/gemcitabine, also appear active and well tolerated and should be further evaluated. Addition of various targeted agents (eg, epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors, antiangiogenesis agents) also merits evaluation.

The Role of Docetaxel in Nonplatinum-Based Combination Chemotherapy for non—small-Cell Lung Cancer

A number of newer chemotherapeutic agents including docetaxel, gemcitabine, irinotecan, and vinorelbine have demonstrated substantial activity in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Their palliative role as single agents and in combination with platinum has been well defined in NSCLC. More recently, combining these agents without platinum has been the primary objective of numerous worldwide clinical trials. Two of these docetaxel/nonplatinum-based combinations have demonstrated comparable activity to platinum-based regimens in randomized trials. While platinum-based chemotherapy remains an important therapy for treatment of NSCLC, nonplatinum combinations may be a reasonable alternative for patients. These docetaxel/nonplatinum combinations warrant further evaluation in randomized trials to define their optimal role as standard therapy for NSCLC.