A phase-ii study testing weekly platinum derivative combination chemotherapy as 2nd-line treatment in patients with advanced small-cell lung-cancer

A phase II trial was conducted to determine the effectiveness of weekly administration of cisplatin (25 mg/m(2) on day 1) and carboplatin (100 mg/m(2) on day 1) as salvage chemotherapy for patients with small cell lung cancer after first-line chemotherapy without platinum derivatives. Of 40 eligible patients, 38 were evaluable for response. Interval between last course of first-line chemotherapy and first course of salvage therapy was less than 3 months in 34 and greater in 4. Five partial responses (13%; confidence interval at 95%:0.01-0.25) were documented (including 4 in patients with a treatment-free interval <3 months) as well as 8 no change, 21 progressions and 4 early deaths due to malignant disease. Toxicity consisted mainly of moderate thrombopenia and leucopenia. Grade I nephrotoxicity was observed in 6 patients. In conclusion, weekly administration of moderate doses of cisplatin and carboplatin as salvage chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer appeared feasible and was associated with a moderate but definitive anticancer activity.

How much can patients, with low Karnofsky performance status and advanced non-small cell lung cancer, benefit from cisplatin-based chemotherapy? A retrospective analysis of a phase III randomised trial

19516

Background: Performance status (PS) is a strong independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with advanced non- small cell lung cancer and administration of platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) in patients with poor PS is associated to more severe toxicity. Our purpose was to determine whether poor PS patients (ie those registered with a performance index of 60–70 on the Karnofsky scale) could benefit from CT in terms of clinical improvement defined as reaching, during CT, a PS of at least 80 on the same scale (ECOG PS 0 or 1). Methods: Retrospective analysis of a randomised trial performed in advanced NSCLC where 485 patients received three courses of GIP (gemcitabine + ifosfamide + cisplatin) induction CT, in order to determine the potential clinical benefit of conventional cisplatin-based CT in patients with poor PS defined as 60–70 on the Karnofsky scale. Results: 387 (80%) patients had good PS (Karnofsky 80–100) and 98 (20%) poor PS. Response rates were respectively 38 and 28% (p=0.06), no independent predictive value for PS was found using response to CT as endpoint. Clinical improvement was observed in 25% (95% CI : 15%-38%) of the poor PS patients (respectively 38%, 20% and 14% in case of response, no change and progression, p=0.05). Nine additional patients improved from 60 to 70 during induction CT. Improvement occurred earlier in responders (rates of patients with improvement were 12% after 1 course, 31% after 2 courses and 38% after 3 courses compared to 3%, 5% and 17% in the non responders). Survival of patients with poor PS was significantly worse but survival of responders was similar, whatever initial poor or good PS (logrank test after landmark, p=0.47, HR=1.18, 95%CI: 0.76–1.84 for poor responders). If non fatal toxicity was relatively similar as well as dose intensity delivered after 3 CT courses, there were more toxic deaths (including vascular and cardiac fatalities) in poor PS patients (2.1% versus 9.2%; p=0.002). Conclusions: Although toxicity is increased, combination chemotherapy is associated with clinical improvement in a non negligible rate of patients with poor PS in case of advanced NSCLC.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A phase III randomised trial comparing sequential to standard chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

7012

Background: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy and taxans are effective treatments for advanced NSCLC. We performed a phase III randomised trial to determine if the sequential administration of cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by paclitaxel is superior to a cisplatin-based standard chemotherapy, with the use of paclitaxel as salvage treatment. Methods: Untreated advanced NSCLC with adequate PS, hematological, hepatic, cardiac and renal functions were treated by 3 courses of GIP (cisplatin 50 mg/m2, ifosfamide 3 g/m2, gemcitabine 1 g/m2). Patients with a non-progressing tumour were randomised between 3 further courses of GIP or 3 courses of paclitaxel (225 mg/m2). To detect an increase in the survival rates (primary endpoint) from 20% in the GIP arm to 35% in the sequential arm, with 80% probability using a two-sided logrank test with a significance level of 5%, we needed to observe 178 events, requiring to randomise 123 patients in each arm. Results: From January 2000 to February 2004, 485 patients received 3 courses of induction GIP of which 140 were randomised in the GIP arm and 141 in the paclitaxel arm. Median survival times were 14.1 (95% CI: 12.0–16.3) and 16.4 (95% CI: 14.0–18.8) months for the paclitaxel and the GIP arms, respectively (p = 0.17). When treatment comparison was adjusted for the two independent prognostic factors (sex and haemoglobin) revealed by a Cox multivariate analysis, the observed HR was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.63–1.09) in favour of the GIP arm (p = 0.10). There were more grades III/IV thrombopenia with GIP (p< 0.01) and more alopecia with paclitaxel (p = 0.04). Conclusion: Sequential cisplatin-based chemotherapy by paclitaxel does not result in better survival than standard chemotherapy, with the use of paclitaxel as salvage treatment.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.