1
|
Optimized Dosing: The Next Step in Precision Medicine in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Drugs 2021; 82:15-32. [PMID: 34894338 DOI: 10.1007/s40265-021-01654-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
In oncology, and especially in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), dose optimization is often a neglected part of precision medicine. Many drugs are still being administered in "one dose fits all" regimens or based on parameters that are often only minor determinants for systemic exposure. These dosing approaches often introduce additional pharmacokinetic variability and do not add to treatment outcomes. Fortunately, pharmacological knowledge is increasing, providing valuable information regarding the potential of, for example, therapeutic drug monitoring. This article focuses on the evidence for the most promising and easily implemented optimized dosing approaches for the small-molecule inhibitors, chemotherapeutic agents, and monoclonal antibodies as treatment options currently approved for NSCLC. Despite limitations such as investigations having been conducted in oncological diseases other than NSCLC or the retrospective origin of many analyses, an alternative dosing regimen could be beneficial for treatment outcomes, prescriber convenience, or financial burden on healthcare systems. This review of the literature provides recommendations on the implementation of dose optimization and advice regarding promising strategies that deserve further research in NSCLC.
Collapse
|
2
|
Zhao D, Chen J, Chu M, Wang J. Prolonged low-dose infusion for gemcitabine: a systematic review. Onco Targets Ther 2019; 12:4859-4868. [PMID: 31417283 PMCID: PMC6593688 DOI: 10.2147/ott.s210117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2019] [Accepted: 05/15/2019] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The present standard dose of gemcitabine (Gem), a pyrimidine antimetabolite, is 1,000-1,250 mg/m2, and the infusion time is 30 min. However, pharmacological studies have demonstrated that Gem with prolonged infusion could attain a better accumulation rate of Gem triphosphate (active metabolites of Gem), indicating that Gem with prolonged infusion is superior to 30-min infusion. Thus, this systematic review aims to provide some references for Gem administered as a prolonged infusion. Methods We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CNKI, for trials. Keywords were "Gem," "prolonged infusion," and "low-dose." In addition, we used the Cochrane Handbook V5.1.0 and methodological index for non-randomized studies to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, respectively. Furthermore, Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and the PRISMA statement were adopted. Results We systematically reviewed 19 studies (5 RCTs and 14 non-RCTs). All studies assessed the efficacy and safety of Gem administered as a prolonged low-dose infusion (P-LDI) and reported that Gem administered as P-LDI was effective and well tolerated. Conclusion Gem administered as P-LDI is effective, safe, and economical, especially suited for patients with poor performance status or without good economic condition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dehua Zhao
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, The Third Hospital of Mianyang (Sichuan Mental Health Center), Mianyang 621000, People's Republic of China
| | - Jing Chen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, The Third Hospital of Mianyang (Sichuan Mental Health Center), Mianyang 621000, People's Republic of China
| | - Mingming Chu
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Third Military Medical University, Chongqing 400037, People's Republic of China
| | - Jisheng Wang
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, The Third Hospital of Mianyang (Sichuan Mental Health Center), Mianyang 621000, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Patil V, Noronha V, Joshi A, Chougule A, Kannan S, Bhattacharjee A, Goud S, More S, Chandrasekharan A, Menon N, Srinivas S, Vallathol DH, Dsouza H, Majumdar S, Das S, Zawar A, Khaddar S, Kumar A, Singh G, Kumar KAP, Ravind R, Trivedi V, Behel V, Mahajan A, Janu A, Purandare N, Prabhash K. Phase III Non-inferiority Study Evaluating Efficacy and Safety of Low Dose Gemcitabine Compared to Standard Dose Gemcitabine With Platinum in Advanced Squamous Lung Cancer. EClinicalMedicine 2019; 9:19-25. [PMID: 31143878 PMCID: PMC6510888 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.03.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2018] [Revised: 03/16/2019] [Accepted: 03/19/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prolonged infusion of low dose gemcitabine (PLDG) in combination with platinum has shown promising activity in terms of improved response rate and progression free survival (PFS); especially in squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Hence, we conducted a phase 3 randomized non-inferiority study with the primary objective of comparing the overall survival (OS) between PLDG and standard dose of gemcitabine with platinum. METHODOLOGY Adult subjects (age ≥ 18 years), with stages IIIB-IV, NSCLC (squamous) and ECOG performance status of ≤ 2 were randomized 1:1 into either carboplatin with standard dose gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenous over 30 min, days 1 and 8) (STD-G arm) or carboplatin along with low dose gemcitabine (250 mg/m2 intravenous over 6 h, days 1 and 8) (LOW-G arm) for a maximum of 6 cycles. Tumor response was assessed by RECIST criteria version 1.1 every 2 cycles till 6th cycle and thereafter at 2 monthly intervals till progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival. 308 patients were randomized, 155 in STD-G arm and 153 in LOW-G arm, respectively. RESULTS The median overall survival in STD-G arm was 6.8 months (95%CI 5.3-8.5) versus 8.4 months (95%CI 7-10.3) in the LOW-G arm (HR-0.890 (90%CI 0.725-1.092). The results with per protocol analysis were in line with these results. There was no statistical difference in progression free survival (HR-0.949; 90%CI 0.867-1.280) and adverse event rate between the 2 arms. CONCLUSION This study suggests that PLDG is an alternative to the standard gemcitabine schedule in squamous NSCLC, and either of these can be selected subject to patient convenience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vijay Patil
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Vanita Noronha
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Amit Joshi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Anuradha Chougule
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Sadhana Kannan
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Atanu Bhattacharjee
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Supriya Goud
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Sucheta More
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Arun Chandrasekharan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Nandini Menon
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Sujay Srinivas
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Dilip Harindran Vallathol
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Hollis Dsouza
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Swaratika Majumdar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Sudeep Das
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Abhinav Zawar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Satvik Khaddar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Amit Kumar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Gunjesh Singh
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Kanteti Aditya Pavan Kumar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Rahul Ravind
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Vaishakhi Trivedi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Vichitra Behel
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Abhishek Mahajan
- Department of Radiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Amit Janu
- Department of Radiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Nilendu Purandare
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Kumar Prabhash
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
- Corresponding author at: Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai 400012, India.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fixed-dose rate infusion and standard rate infusion of gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of six trials. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2012; 70:861-73. [PMID: 23053260 DOI: 10.1007/s00280-012-1974-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2012] [Accepted: 09/11/2012] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the response, survival, hematological and non-hematological toxicities of gemcitabine administrated at fixed-dose rate infusion (10 mg/m(2)/min, FDR) and standard 30 min infusion in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS Electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched using key words of "gemcitabine," "fixed-dose rate," "non-small-cell lung cancer" and their alternative spellings. An expanded search of references of relative articles was also performed. The last search was performed on September 10, 2012. Primary endpoints were overall survival rate (ORR) and 1-year survival rate (1-year SR); hematological and non-hematological toxicities were secondary endpoints. RESULTS Six randomized controlled trials, involving 867 patients, met our inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Pooled results showed that FDR infusion of gemcitabine had an equal ORR (RR = 0.91, 95 % CI: 0.74-1.13; heterogeneity p = 0.39) and 1-year SR (RR = 1.09, 95 % CI: 0.93-1.29; heterogeneity p = 0.75) compared with standard infusion. Subgroup analysis found that chemotherapy drug combinations do not affect the results of ORR or 1-year SR. Patients received FDR infusion, however, experienced more grade 3/4 hematological (neutropenia, leukopenia and anemia) and non-hematological (diarrhea and fatigue) toxicities. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis found that FDR infusion of gemcitabine had equal ORR and 1-year SR with standard infusion in patients with advanced NSCLC, while FDR infusion was associated with more grade 3/4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities.
Collapse
|
6
|
A phase II trial of low-dose gemcitabine in a prolonged infusion and cisplatin for malignant pleural mesothelioma. Anticancer Drugs 2012; 23:230-8. [PMID: 22027538 DOI: 10.1097/cad.0b013e32834d7a1c] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
After a favorable experience with gemcitabine at a low dose in a prolonged infusion in combination with cisplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, here, we present the results from a phase II trial for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Eligible patients had biopsy-proven malignant pleural mesothelioma, were chemo-naive, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, had normal hematopoietic liver and renal function, and gave informed consent. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 250 mg/m in a 6-h infusion on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin at 75 mg/m on day 2 of a 3-week cycle for four cycles, followed by two additional cycles without cisplatin. Seventy-eight patients (58 men, 20 women; age 33-82 years, median 58) were recruited into the trial. The histologic types were as follows: epitheloid 56 (71.8%); four sarcomatoid (5.1%); mixed 15 (19.2%); and mesothelioma, three not otherwise specified (3.8%). Grades 3-4 toxicity included two (2.6%) patients with anemia, 18 (23.1%) with neutropenia, and one with nausea/vomiting. Reversible thrombocytosis with platelets over 1000-10/l was recorded in 10 (12.8%) patients and grade 2 alopecia in 60 (76.9%). Four (5.1%) patients showed a complete response and 35 (44.9%) showed a partial response with a response rate of 39/78 (50%). Minimal response or stable disease was seen in 35 (44.9%), whereas only four (5.1%) patients progressed during treatment. Most patients reported symptomatic improvement with a higher or a stable quality of life score in 70 (89.7%) cases. The median progression-free survival was 8.0 months (confidence interval 6.9-9.0). The median overall survival was 17.0 months (confidence interval 14.7-19.2). One-year, two-year, and three-year survival rates were 67.3, 32.7, and 19.8%, respectively. Epitheloid histological type was the only statistically significant favorable prognostic factor for progression-free survival and overall survival. Because of the acceptable toxicity, remarkable activity, and reasonable cost, this treatment should be further explored.
Collapse
|
7
|
Two schedules of chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer in poor performance status: a phase II randomized trial. Anticancer Drugs 2010; 21:662-8. [PMID: 20453635 DOI: 10.1097/cad.0b013e32833ab7a0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
We present experience from a phase II randomized clinical trial, comparing standard gemcitabine as monotherapy with low-dose gemcitabine in long infusion in a doublet with cisplatin at reduced dose for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and who are unfit for standard platin-based chemotherapy. Eligible patients had microscopically confirmed NSCLC in stage IIIB (wet) or IV, were chemo-naive, and were in poor performance status or presented with significant comorbidity. Standard treatment with gemcitabine, 1250 mg/m in 20-30 min on days 1 and 8 as monotherapy (arm A) was compared with low-dose gemcitabine in long infusion (200 mg/m in 6 h on day 1) and cisplatin at 60 mg/m on day 2 (arm B). Both treatment schedules were repeated every 3 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or to a maximum of six cycles. A total of 112 patients (83 male, 29 female, median age 66 years) were randomized between arm A (57 patients) and B (55 patients). The two groups were balanced for prognostic factors. Fifty-three patients in arm A and 52 in arm B received at least one application of chemotherapy and were evaluable for toxicity and response. The median number of cycles was four and five for arms A and B, respectively. Except for grade 3 anemia (one patient in arm A and two in arm B), no other major toxicity was seen. Regarding response to treatment, arm B was superior: 1 complete response and 13 partial remissions (response rate 26.9%) as compared with five partial remissions (response rate 9.4%) in arm A (P<0.01). The median time to progression was 3.8 and 5.6 months, and the median survival was 4.3 and 6.8 months for arms A and B, respectively (P<0.05). Treatment with low-dose gemcitabine in long infusion and cisplatin at reduced dose has very low toxicity, is effective, was found to be superior to monotherapy with gemcitabine in standard doses, and is suitable for patients with NSCLC who cannot tolerate a standard platin-based doublet.
Collapse
|
8
|
Caffo O, Fallani S, Marangon E, Nobili S, Cassetta MI, Murgia V, Sala F, Novelli A, Mini E, Zucchetti M, Galligioni E. Pharmacokinetic study of gemcitabine, given as prolonged infusion at fixed dose rate, in combination with cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2010; 65:1197-202. [PMID: 20140616 DOI: 10.1007/s00280-010-1255-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2009] [Accepted: 01/12/2010] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Although some studies have suggested that gemcitabine delivered as a fixed dose rate (FDR) infusion of 10 mg/m(2)/min could be more effective than when administered as the standard 30-min infusion, the available pharmacokinetic data are still too limited to draw definitive conclusions. This study is aimed to investigate the plasmatic and intracellular pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine given as FDR at doses of 600 and 1,200 mg/m(2) in combination with 75 mg/m(2) of cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHOD The patients were divided into two groups receiving different initial doses of the drug: 4 patients received 600 mg/m(2) gemcitabine 60-min i.v. infusion and 4 patients 1,200 mg/m(2) gemcitabine 120-min i.v. infusion both as a FDR of 10 mg/m(2)/min on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle (at first cycle). At the second cycle, all patients were treated with gemcitabine at 1,200 mg/m(2) 120-min i.v. infusion (FDR of 10 mg/m(2)/min) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. At each cycle, gemcitabine was administered alone on day one, and in combination with 75 mg/m(2) of cisplatin on day 8. Plasmatic and intracellular pharmacokinetic analyses were performed on blood samples collected at defined time points before, during and after gemcitabine infusion. RESULTS The plasmatic pharmacokinetic parameters were clearly different when the patients received a higher gemcitabine dose in the second cycle compared to the lower dose of the first course; in the same time, the intracellular drug levels were not modified. Comparing the pharmacokinetic parameters of different patients treated at different dose levels, the results appeared to be quite similar. CONCLUSIONS A substantially higher accumulation of metabolites in peripheral blood mononuclear cells was observed when the longer infusion time was employed, suggesting a pharmacological advantage for this treatment schedule.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Orazio Caffo
- Medical Oncology Department, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Gemcitabine in brief versus prolonged low-dose infusion, both combined with cisplatin, for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized phase II clinical trial. J Thorac Oncol 2009; 4:1148-55. [PMID: 19546818 DOI: 10.1097/jto.0b013e3181ae280f] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Gemcitabine in low dose in prolonged infusion is a treatment with documented activity against a variety of tumors. We here report the first randomized trial to compare standard brief and low-dose prolonged infusion of gemcitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients had non-small cell lung cancer in stage IIIB (wet) or IV, Karnofsky performance status 100 to 70 (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-2), measurable disease, were chemonaïve and fulfilled the standard criteria for chemotherapy. In arm A (standard treatment), gemcitabine was given at 1250 mg/m(2) in 20 to 30 minutes and in arm B (prolonged infusion) at 250 mg/m(2) in 6 hours infusion. All patients received gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin at 75 mg/m(2) on day 2 of a 3-week cycle for four cycles, followed by two cycles of gemcitabine as monotherapy. RESULTS A total of 249 patients (188 men and 61 women, median age 58 years) were randomized between arm A (125 patients) and arm B (124 patients). Adenocarcinoma (53.9%) was the predominant histologic type; 92% of patients were in stage IV. The two groups were balanced for prognostic factors; however, group A had fewer patients with significant weight loss and no patient with lung cancer as a second malignancy or after radiotherapy for brain metastases. Grade 3 or greater toxicity was rare: anemia in 0.8 and 3.2%, neutropenia in 21.6 and 22.6%, thrombocytopenia in 0 and 1.6%, and nausea/vomiting in 4 and 8.1% for arms A and B, respectively. Alopecia was seen in 54.5% of patients in arm B, as compared with 9.7% in arm A. No patient died of treatment-related toxicity. During cycle 5, 47.7% of patients in arm A and 60.7% in arm B reported improved well-being, as compared with the status before chemotherapy. Patients in arm A had no complete remission, 32.8% partial responses, 48% minimal responses or stable disease, 13.6% progressions, and 5.6% were not evaluable. For arm B, the corresponding figures are as follows: complete remission 0.8%, partial responses 46% (for overall response rate of 46.8%), minimal responses or stable disease 36.3%, progression 12.1%, and not evaluable 4.8%. Median progression-free survival was 5.5 and 6.0 months, median overall survival was 10.1 and 10.0 months, and 1-year survival was 46.6 and 41.1% for arms A and B, respectively. For the 71 patients with squamous carcinoma, arm B seems superior to arm A, as seen by the higher overall response rate (51.3 versus 35.5%), longer median progression-free survival (6.2 versus 4.9 months), and longer median survival (11.3 versus 8.5 months). However, because of the small number of patients, these differences did not reach the level of statistical significance. CONCLUSION In the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer, gemcitabine in low dose in prolonged infusion in combination with cisplatin has low toxicity and has activity comparable with gemcitabine in higher dose in standard brief infusion. Low-dose gemcitabine may be preferred for incurable cancer among economically deprivileged patients. In addition, apparent superior activity against squamous carcinoma opens new perspectives and deserves further research.
Collapse
|