A phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: clinical outcomes and quality of life

NAMI-A and KP1019/1339, Two Iconic Ruthenium Anticancer Drug Candidates Face-to-Face: A Case Story in Medicinal Inorganic Chemistry

NAMI-A ((ImH)[trans-RuCl₄(dmso-S)(Im)], Im = imidazole) and KP1019/1339 (KP1019 = (IndH)[trans-RuCl₄(Ind)₂], Ind = indazole; KP1339 = Na[trans-RuCl₄(Ind)₂]) are two structurally related ruthenium(III) coordination compounds that have attracted a lot of attention in the medicinal inorganic chemistry scientific community as promising anticancer drug candidates. This has led to a considerable amount of studies on their respective chemico-biological features and to the eventual admission of both to clinical trials. The encouraging pharmacological performances qualified KP1019 mainly as a cytotoxic agent for the treatment of platinum-resistant colorectal cancers, whereas the non-cytotoxic NAMI-A has gained the reputation of being a very effective antimetastatic drug. A critical and strictly comparative analysis of the studies conducted so far on NAMI-A and KP1019 allows us to define the state of the art of these experimental ruthenium drugs in terms of the respective pharmacological profiles and potential clinical applications, and to gain some insight into the inherent molecular mechanisms. Despite their evident structural relatedness, deeply distinct biological and pharmacological profiles do emerge. Overall, these two iconic ruthenium complexes form an exemplary and unique case in the field of medicinal inorganic chemistry.

Use of the lung cancer-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire EORTC QLQ-LC13 in clinical trials: A systematic review of the literature 20 years after its development

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ-LC13) covers 13 typical symptoms of lung cancer patients and was the first module developed in conjunction with the EORTC core quality-of-life (QL) questionnaire. This review investigates how the module has been used and reported in cancer clinical trials in the 20 years since its publication. Thirty-six databases were searched with a prespecified algorithm. This search plus an additional hand search generated 770 hits, 240 of which were clinical studies. Two raters extracted data using a coding scheme. Analyses focused on the randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Of the 240 clinical studies that were identified using the LC13, 109 (45%) were RCTs. More than half of the RCTs were phase 3 trials (n = 58). Twenty RCTs considered QL as the primary endpoint, and 68 considered it as a secondary endpoint. QL results were addressed in the results section of the article (n = 89) or in the abstract (n = 92); and, in half of the articles, QL results were presented in the form of tables (n = 53) or figures (n = 43). Furthermore, QL results had an impact on the evaluation of the therapy that could be clearly demonstrated in the 47 RCTs that yielded QL differences between treatment and control groups. The EORTC QLQ-LC13 fulfilled its mission to be used as a standard instrument in lung cancer clinical trials. An update of the LC13 is underway to keep up with new therapeutic trends and to ensure optimized and relevant QL assessment in future trials.

[Phase II trial of improved regimen with gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer]

背景与目的

吉西他滨与铂类的联合化疗是晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC）最常用的治疗方案。通常3周方案中的吉西他滨需间隔1周给药。为提高依从性，本研究将吉西他滨第8天给药时间调整为第5天，并评价调整方案一线治疗晚期NSCLC的疗效及安全性。

方法

2007年10月-2009年10月共入组83例晚期NSCLC患者，采用吉西他滨1, 000 mg/m²-1, 250 mg/m²第1天、第5天静脉滴注30 min，联合顺铂75 mg/m²，或联合卡铂（AUC=5）第1天静滴，每21天为1周期，每例至少完成2周期治疗后评价疗效，观察毒性反应及无进展生存期和总生存期。

结果

83例患者的客观有效率为37.3%，中位无进展生存期和中位生存期分别为6.1个月和15.0个月，1年、2年生存率分别为57.8%与16.2%。调整方案的主要不良反应为血液学毒性与胃肠道反应，Ⅲ度-Ⅳ度白细胞、血红蛋白、血小板减少发生率分别为26.5%、10.8%、7.2%，联合顺铂治疗组Ⅲ度-Ⅳ度胃肠道反应发生率为27.5%。无治疗相关死亡。

结论

吉西他滨联合铂类5天调整方案一线治疗晚期NSCLC疗效肯定，毒副反应可耐受，值得进一步开展随机对照研究。

Phase II trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

AIM

To investigate the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine (dFdC) administered on d 1 and 5 plus cisplatin administered on d 1 in chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

In each combination cycle, gemcitabine was administered at a dose of 1250 mg/m(2) as a 30 min intravenous (iv) infusion on d 1 and 5 followed by cisplatin at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) as a 3 h iv infusion on d 1 every 3 weeks. There was an interval of 1 h between the two infusions. Clinical response and toxicity of the regimen were observed. Furthermore, the plasma concentrations of gemcitabine (dFdC) and its metabolite (dFdU) at different time points were detected during the first cycle of infusion. Pharmacokinetic software (PKS) was used to estimate the pharmacokinetic parameters of gemcitabine and its metabolite dFdU.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients was enrolled in the study. The median age was 54 years (range 27-75 years), and most patients were in good clinical condition. Twenty-seven patients received two or more treatment cycles. The overall clinical response rate was 33.3%. The median overall survival time was 13 months. The estimated median time to tumor progression (TTP) was 6.2 months, and the 1-year survival rate was 55.6%. Toxicities were tolerated. The main toxicity was myelosuppression; 35.7% of patients had grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities and 28.6% had grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities, which were commonly gastrointestinal responses. The pharmacokinetic parameters of dFdC and dFdU were not different between pre- and post-administration of gemcitabine on d 1 and 5. dFdU was minimal (0.729+/-0.637 microg/mL) before gemcitabine was infused on d 5, and gemcitabine was not present.

CONCLUSION

The regimen is active and well tolerated in chemonaive patients with advanced NSCLC. After gemcitabine was administered on d 1 and 5, the pharmacokinetic parameters of dFdC and dFdU showed no difference from those before the infusion, and dFdU was minimal before gemcitabine was administered on d 5.

[A meta analysis of gemcitabine plus platinum chemotherapy compared with single-agent chemotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Whether gemcitabine plus platinum chemotherapy is superior to gemcitabine or platinum single-agent chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still in dispute, and the aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine combining platinum chemotherapy for patients with NSCLC.

METHODS

We searched relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from VIP, CBM, CNKI, the Cochrane library, PUBMED and EMBASE. We traced the related references and experts in this field and communicated with other authors to obtain the information that has not been found. We made quality assessment of qualified RCTs assessed by the exclusion and inclusion criteria and used RevMan 5.0 provided by the Cochrane Collaboration to perform meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were eligible and included 984 patients. Meta analysis results suggested that: compared with gecitabine single-agent chemotherapy, the combination had a statistically significant benefit in increasing the response rate (OR = 3.29, 95% CI: 1.79-6.05, P = 0.000 1) and 2-year survival rate (OR = 3.22, 95% CI: 1.45-7.12, P = 0.004) while increased the risk of the incidence of adverse reactions, especially the grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (RR = 8.16, 95% CI: 1.71-39.07, P = 0.009); compared with cisplatin single-agent chemotherapy, the combination had a statistically significant benefit in increasing the response rate (OR = 3.51, 95% CI: 2.20-5.60, P < 0.01) and 1-year survival rate (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.16-2.41, P = 0.006) while increased the risk of the incidence of adverse reactions, especially the grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (OR = 28.55, 95% CI: 14.06-57.04, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Compared with single-agent chemotherapy, the combining can significantly improve the efficiency and survival rate while increase the toxicity rare. The results still need to be proved by high quality RCTs.

Pemetrexed in first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

Pemetrexed is an antitumor agent traditionally used as monotherapy for the second-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as well as in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of chemonaïve patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma. Recently, pemetrexed has been approved in combination with cisplatin for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC other than predominantly squamous cell histology. Studies that support the development of this indication are detailed in this review. We performed a PubMed/Medline database search to identify relevant literature from 1998 until August 2008. Bibliographies from identified references were searched, as well as were abstracts from the most relevant congresses in lung cancer area (American Society of Clinical Oncology Congress, World Conferences of Lung Cancer). We detailed pemetrexed studies in the first-line setting of NSCLC treatment, in monotherapy, in combination with platinum and also, with other agents. Data regarding efficacy differences related to different histologic types were also analyzed.

Palliative care in lung cancer: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition)

GOALS/OBJECTIVES: To review the scientific evidence on symptoms and specific complications that are associated with lung cancer, and the methods available to palliate those symptoms and complications.

METHODS

MEDLINE literature review (through March 2006) for all studies published in the English language, including case series and case reports, since 1966 using the following medical subject heading terms: bone metastases; brain metastases; cough; dyspnea; electrocautery; hemoptysis; interventional bronchoscopy; laser; pain management; pleural effusions; spinal cord metastases; superior vena cava syndrome; and tracheoesophageal fistula.

RESULTS

Pulmonary symptoms that may require palliation in patients who have lung cancer include those caused by the primary cancer itself (dyspnea, wheezing, cough, hemoptysis, chest pain), or locoregional metastases within the thorax (superior vena cava syndrome, tracheoesophageal fistula, pleural effusions, ribs, and pleura). Respiratory symptoms can also result from complications of lung cancer treatment or from comorbid conditions. Constitutional symptoms are common and require attention and care. Symptoms referable to distant extrathoracic metastases to bone, brain, spinal cord, and liver pose additional problems that require a specific response for optimal symptom control. There are excellent scientific data regarding the management of many of these issues, with lesser evidence from case series or expert opinion on other aspects of providing palliative care for lung cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliation of symptoms and complications in lung cancer patients is possible, and physicians who provide such care must be knowledgeable about these issues.

Phase II study of the combination of gemcitabine and nedaplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

We examined the efficacy and safety of the combination of gemcitabine and nedaplatin in patients with untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Thirty-four patients (24 men and 10 women) with a mean age of 69 years (range, 39-75 years) were treated every 3 weeks with gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8) and nedaplatin (100 mg/m(2) on day 1). Four patients had stage IIIB disease and 30 patients had stage IV disease. None of the 33 patients achieved a complete response, but 10 achieved a partial response, for a response rate of 30.3% (95% confidence interval, 15.6-48.7%). One patient could not be evaluated for response because only one course of chemotherapy had been administered due to grade 3 eruption. The median survival time was 9.0 months (range, 1-17 months). Grades 3-4 hematological toxicities included leukopenia in 47% of patients, neutropenia in 62%, thrombocytopenia in 56%, and anemia in 44%. Grades 3-4 nonhematological toxicities included nausea and vomiting in 6% of patients, diarrhea in 3%, and hepatic dysfunction in 9%. There were no treatment-related deaths. The dose intensities were 89.6% and 86.7%, respectively, of the planned doses of gemcitabine and nedaplatin. Our results suggest that the combination of gemcitabine and nedaplatin is an acceptable treatment for patients with previously untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Chronic Cough Due to Lung Tumors

GOALS/OBJECTIVES: To review the scientific evidence on cough associated with tumors in the lungs.

METHODS

MEDLINE literature review (through March 2004) for all studies published in the English language, including case series and case reports, since 1966 using the medical subject heading terms "cough" and "lung neoplasms."

RESULTS

Primary bronchogenic carcinoma is the most common lethal neoplasm in the United States. Malignancies that arise in other organs will often metastasize to the lungs. Any form of cancer involving the lungs may be associated with cough. However, cough is far more likely to indicate involvement of the airways than the lung parenchyma because of the location of cough receptors. Cough is present in >65% of patients at the time lung cancer is diagnosed, and productive cough is present in >25% of patients. While cough as a presenting symptom of lung cancer is common, many studies have shown that lung cancer is the cause of chronic cough in <or=2% of all patients who present with a chronic cough.

CONCLUSIONS

Bronchoscopy is usually indicated when there is suspicion of airway involvement by a malignancy. Conversely, bronchoscopy usually should not be performed to assess a cough for the possibility of lung cancer when there is little risk for lung cancer (nonsmokers) and when there are normal findings on a plain chest radiograph. If the lung cancer can be removed surgically, cough will usually abate. Radiation therapy, chemotherapy (especially with gemcitabine), and endobronchial treatment methods likely will improve cough caused by lung cancer. Centrally acting narcotic antitussive agents are usually administered for the control of cough caused by lung cancer when other treatment methods fail.

A prospective, multicentre clinical trial comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus etoposide in patients with locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Cisplatin-gemcitabine (PG) and cisplatin-etoposide (PE) combinations are active regimens for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The present study aimed to compare PG with PE in the treatment of patients with stage IIIB and IV NSCLC.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a prospective, multicentre trial. A total of 166 patients were enrolled into the study and received either gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 8 and 15 plus cisplatin (80 mg/m(2)) on day 2 every 4 weeks, or etoposide (100 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 2 and 3 plus cisplatin (80 mg/m(2)) on day 1 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was superior in the PG group (54.8%vs 39.0%, P=0.045). There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups, with respective median and 1-year survival of 38 weeks and 33.3% for the PG group, and 34 weeks and 23.2% for the PE group. There was also no statistical difference for time to progression between the two groups. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were seen more frequently in the PG group (grade 3 neutropenia, 33.3%vs 15.9%, P=0.012; grade 3 thrombocytopenia, 27.4%vs 3.7%, P<0.001 and grade 4 thrombocytopenia, 10.7%vs 1.2%, P=0.018).

CONCLUSION

PG is an active chemotherapy regimen and has a better response rate than PE in advanced NSCLC, although there was no difference in time to progression and overall survival. A higher incidence of haematological toxicity was seen with PG than with PE.

Quality‐of‐Life Considerations in Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer: Effect of Topotecan on Symptom Palliation and Quality of Life

Key goals in the treatment of lung cancer are to improve both survival and quality of life (QOL). While formal techniques are frequently used to evaluate survival and response, such rigor is used less often in assessing the impact of treatment on quality of life. Many patients with lung cancer are elderly and have complex medical histories and a myriad of comorbidities. In these patients, with limited survival expectations, symptom palliation, quality of life, and convenience of therapy are especially important end points. Indeed, clinical trials are now incorporating symptom scores and QOL outcomes in their designs (now combined as "patient reported outcomes" or PROs). Moreover, symptom palliation correlates well with QOL and survival duration, providing further rationale for therapy selection based on these parameters. The potential palliative and QOL benefits of chemotherapy have been investigated for several agents in lung cancer trials. Of these, topotecan (Hycamtin; GlaxoSmithKline; Philadelphia, PA) is the best characterized in relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). In a phase III trial of topotecan versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin (Adriamycin; Bedford Laboratories; Bedford, OH), and vincristine (Oncovin; Eli Lilly and Company; Indianapolis, IN) (CAV) in patients with recurrent SCLC, topotecan was associated with statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in general symptoms (e.g., fatigue and interference with daily activity) and disease-specific symptoms (e.g., dyspnea and hoarseness). Moreover, the introduction of oral therapies, such as oral topotecan, may increase the convenience of therapy by reducing the time needed for therapy and the need for frequent venipuncture. This review summarizes the role of chemotherapy in symptom palliation, with an emphasis on the impact of topotecan therapy on symptom parameters in patients with relapsed SCLC and the emerging role of oral therapy in this setting.

Non-toxic and short treatment with gemcitabine inhibits in vitro migration of HT-1080 cells

Gemcitabine has demonstrated clinical activity in solid tumors. Several in vitro studies were carried out regarding its metabolism, toxicity and cell cycle effects, but none was done on the anti-metastasis potential of the drug. We sought to determine the effect of gemcitabine concentrations on migration velocity of HT-1080 cells at concentrations which do not alter cell cycle progression and proliferation. Cells were treated for 1 or 5 h at IC10-70 of gemcitabine in order to estimate its effects on viability, proliferation and migration capacity using flow cytometry and microscopy imaging, respectively. The gemcitabine treatment for 1 h had no effect on cell proliferation, viability, cycle or migration on HT-1080 cells. Even though the 5 h of exposure at IC10, IC20 and IC50 concentrations did not affect cell viability, proliferation and cell cycle repartition, the mean velocity of HT-1080 dramatically decreased by 50 and 30%, respectively. Gemcitabine at IC70 concentrations for 5 h of exposure first induced a time course inhibition of proliferation, together with a decrease in viability and altered cell morphology, and then inhibited cell migration by 50%. These data suggest the possibility to couple the anti-migratory property of gemcitabine with the known anti-tumoral effect in the treatment of tumors with high metastatic potential.

Combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin as first-line therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The prognosis of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is extremely poor. Many prospective randomized trials on patients with advanced NSCLC suggested systemic chemotherapy improves both the survival and quality of life. A phase II trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of the combination chemotherapy of gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-four patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC were enrolled. The patients received a cisplatin, 75 mg/m(2), infusion over 30 minutes on days 1, followed by a gemcitabine, 1,250 mg/m(2), infusion over 30 minutes on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 64 years (range: 27 approximately 75). Forty-one patients were assessable for response and toxicity analyses. The overall response rate was 53.6%, but with no complete remissions. The median time to progression was 5.6 months (range: 1 approximately 15.4). The median survival was 14.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 13.8 approximately 22.5). A total of 179 cycles were administered, with a median of 4 cycles of chemotherapy, ranging from 2 to 9 cycles. The most common hematological toxicities were NCI grades 3/4 neutropenia (24%) and thrombocytopenia (7.8%). The most common non-hematological toxicity was fatigue (42.4%). There were no life-threatening toxicity or treatment related mortalities. The median duration of follow up was 9.4 months, ranging from 1.6 to 30.3 months.

CONCLUSION

In this trial, the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin showed significant activity, with acceptable and manageable toxicities as a first-line regimen for patients with advanced NSCLC.

Quality-of-life trials in lung cancer: past achievements and future challenges

Much work has been done regarding QOL in lung cancer trials. There are now several validated QOL instruments, particularly for patients with lung cancer. Past accomplishments include key trials demonstrating a benefit of chemotherapy or radiation in patients with advanced NSCLC not only regarding traditional endpoints but also by improving palliation and aspects of QOL such as pain and dyspnea. More recently, studies have emerged that incorporate QOL in patients with locally advanced disease. Key challenges relate to the optimal design and successful completion of these QOL studies. Missing data remains a key problem in many QOL studies, particularly in lung cancer trials. Future studies should focus on incorporating QOL into phase III studies with clear hypotheses that can ultimately lead to clinically meaningful interventions.

Phase I study of the combination of gemcitabine and nedaplatin for treatment of previously untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer

This trial was conducted to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), principal toxicity, and recommend dose for phase II study of the combination of gemcitabine and nedaplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with previously untreated NSCLC were eligible if they had a performance status of 0-2, were 75 years or younger, and had adequate organ function. The doses of gemcitabine (days 1, 8) and nedaplatin (day 1) studied were 800/60, 800/70, 800/80, 1000/80, and 1000/100 (mg/m(2)), repeated every 3 weeks. Toxicity could be assessed in all 21 patients enrolled, response could be assessed in 20 patients. The patients were 12 men and 9 women with a mean age of 69 years (range, 47-75 years). Four patients had stage IIIB disease and 17 patients had stage IV disease. The most common histologic type was adenocarcinoma. The MTD was not reached even at the highest doses. The most frequent toxic effects were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia: grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia was observed in 19% of patients, and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in 24% of patients. Nonhematologic toxicities were mild. Grade 3 hepatic dysfunction occurred in 3 patients. Relatively few patients required dose modifications. The median dose-intensities were 91.5 and 93.1%, respectively, of the planned doses of gemcitabine and nedaplatin. The overall response rate was 35% (95% confidence interval, 15.4-59.2%). All responses were seen above level 3. The MTD was not reached even at the highest combination doses. We recommend doses of 1000 mg/m(2) of gemcitabine and 100 mg/m(2) of nedaplatin for phase II study. This combination chemotherapy is active and well tolerated and warrants phase II study.

The Validity and Clinical Utility of Symptom Monitoring in Advanced Lung Cancer: A Literature Review

Symptom monitoring and quality-of-life (QOL) evaluation in lung cancer patients might improve care. Brief, valid, and responsive tools are available to measure symptoms and their effect on QOL. Instruments available for use in lung cancer patients can be classified into 3 categories: generic, cancer-specific, and lung cancer symptom-specific. These instruments might assist clinicians in assessing and interpreting treatment outcomes from the patient perspective. They also can assist in treatment decision making, symptom palliation, and they might even be prognostic of survival. Over the past 20 years, these brief evaluations have been used in clinical trials to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Now, with the advent of less toxic, targeted molecular therapies such as gefitinib (Iressa) in non-small-cell lung cancer, these instruments' value in showing symptomatic improvement from tumor control or regression might be further enhanced. To date, however, such assessments are not widely implemented in routine clinical practice. To better understand benefits of such assessments, we review existing evidence surrounding the instruments' use, evaluate their success, and highlight recent developments. We hope to encourage clinicians to incorporate these evaluations in clinical practice.