Search

Introduction Despite the advances in radiation techniques and chemotherapy, survival with current platinum-based chemotherapy and concomitant thoracic radiation remains dismal. Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, modulates apoptosis and cell cycle through disruption of protein degradation. The combination of bortezomib and carboplatin/paclitaxel and concurrent radiation in unresectable stage III non–small-cell lung cancer was evaluated in this phase I/II study. Methods Patients with histologic or cytologic confirmed stage III nonmetastatic non–small-cell lung cancer who were candidates for radiation therapy were eligible. In the phase I portion, patients received escalating doses of bortezomib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin concomitantly with thoracic radiation (60 Gy/30 daily fractions) using a modified 3 + 3 design. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion was the 12-month survival rate (12MS). A one-stage design with an interim analysis yielded 81% power to detect a true 12MS of 75%, with a 0.09 level of significance if the true 12MS was 60% using a sample size of 60 patients. Secondary endpoints consisted of adverse events (AEs), overall survival, progression-free survival, and the confirmed response rate. Results Thirty-one patients enrolled during the phase I portion of the trial, of which four cancelled before receiving treatment, leaving 27 evaluable patients. Of these 27 patients, two dose-limiting toxicities were observed, one (grade 3 pneumonitis) at dose level 1 (bortezomib at 0.5 mg/m 2 , paclitaxel at 150 mg/m 2 , and carboplatin at area under the curve of 5) and one (grade 4 neutropenia lasting ≥8 days) at dose level 6 (bortezomib 1.2 mg/m 2 , paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 , and carboplatin at area under the curve of 6). During the phase I portion, the most common grade 3 of 4 AEs were leukopenia (44%), neutropenia (37%), dyspnea (22%), and dysphagia (11%). Dose level 6 was declared to be the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and the phase II portion of the study opened. After the first 26 evaluable patients were enrolled to the RP2D, a per protocol interim analysis occurred. Of these 26 patients, 23 (88%) survived at least 6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 70–98%), which was enough to continue to full accrual per study design. However, due to slow accrual, the study was stopped after 27 evaluable patients were enrolled (6—phase I RP2D; 21—phase II). Of these 27 patients, the 12MS was 73% (95% CI, 58–92%), the median overall survival was 25.0 months (95% CI, 15.6–35.8), and the median progression-free survival was 8.4 months (95% CI, 4.1–10.5). The confirmed response rate was 26% (seven of 27; 95% CI, 11–46%), consisting of four partial responses and three complete responses. Grade 3+ and grade 4+ AEs occurred in 82% and 56% of patients, respectively. One patient experienced grade 5 pneumonitis that was possibly related to the treatment. Grade 3 and 4 hematological toxicities were observed in 82% and 56% patients, respectively. Conclusions The addition of bortezomib to concurrent carboplatin/paclitaxel and radiation seemed to be feasible, although associated with increased hematological toxicities. A favorable median overall survival of 25 months suggests a potential benefit for this regimen.

Background We hypothesized that the combination of bevacizumab, carboplatin, and pemetrexed will be an effective first-line regimen in fit, elderly patients with nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer. Methods Treatment-naive, stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer patients more than 70 years old with good performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1) and adequate organ function were eligible. Carboplatin area under the curve 6, pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 , and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg were administered on day 1 of each 21-day cycle (up to six cycles) followed by maintenance pemetrexed and bevacizumab. The primary end point of 6-month progression-free survival rate of at least 70% was assessed using a one-stage binomial design. Quality of life (QOL) questionnaires were administered. Polymorphisms in genes encoding relevant proteins (drug targets, transport, and metabolism proteins) were correlated with treatment outcome. Results Fifty-seven eligible patients were enrolled. Median age was 74.5 years. Median treatment cycles received was 6. The most common grade 3 or higher non-hematologic adverse events were fatigue (26%) and hypertension (11%); 16% had grade 4 neutropenia and 6.5% had grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Three patients experienced grade 3/4 hemorrhagic events (one pulmonary, two gastrointestinal). Primary end point of PFS6 was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.9–73%). Median PFS was 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.9–10.1), median overall survival was 13.7 months (95% CI: 9.4–16.8). Polymorphic KDR and VEGFA variants correlated with survival and toxicity, respectively. There was no significant change in overall QOL scores over time. Conclusion This regimen is feasible and did not decrease the QOL in this study population. However, it did not meet the primary efficacy end point.

Purpose This study was undertaken to explore the response rate of a first-line, three-drug regimen that consisted of bortezomib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, or gastric cardia. Patients and Methods Patients with the above diagnosis and acceptable organ function were treated intravenously on a 21-day cycle with the following: bortezomib 1.2 mg/m 2 on days 1, 4, and 8; paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2 on day 2; and carboplatin with an area under the curve of 6 on day 2. Patients received indefinite treatment unless they manifested tumor progression or severe adverse events. All were monitored for tumor response as well as other clinical outcomes. Results The cohort included 35 eligible patients with a median age of 59 years (range, 36–78) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0, 1, and 2 in 60%, 34%, and 6% of patients, respectively. Although this regimen was well tolerated, the tumor response rate was lower than that anticipated at 23% (95% confidence interval: 10%, 40%), thereby prompting premature study closure. There were no complete responses. The median survival for the cohort was 8.9 months (95% confidence interval: 5.9, 12.8). Conclusion As prescribed in this trial and for this indication, this regimen does not merit further testing.