Search

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. We report 5-year results from the phase III KEYNOTE-042 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02220894). Eligible patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR/ALK alterations and with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 1% received pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 35 cycles or chemotherapy (carboplatin + paclitaxel or pemetrexed) for 4-6 cycles with optional maintenance pemetrexed. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) in PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%, ≥ 20%, and ≥ 1% groups. Patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab with ≥ stable disease could begin second-course pembrolizumab upon progression. One thousand two hundred seventy-four patients were randomly assigned (pembrolizumab, n = 637; chemotherapy, n = 637). Median follow-up time was 61.1 (range, 50.0-76.3) months. OS outcomes favored pembrolizumab ( v chemotherapy) regardless of PD-L1 TPS (hazard ratio [95% CI] for TPS ≥ 50%, 0.68 [0.57 to 0.81]; TPS ≥ 20%, 0.75 [0.64 to 0.87]; TPS ≥ 1%, 0.79 [0.70 to 0.89]), with estimated 5-year OS rates with pembrolizumab of 21.9%, 19.4%, and 16.6%, respectively. No new toxicities were identified. Objective response rate was 84.3% among 102 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab and 15.2% among 33 patients who received second-course pembrolizumab. First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy continued to show durable clinical benefit versus chemotherapy after 5 years of follow-up in PD-L1-positive, locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC without EGFR/ALK alterations and remains a standard of care.

Background: First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy improves overall and progression-free survival in patients with untreated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer with a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score (TPS) of 50% or greater. We investigated overall survival after treatment with pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater., Methods: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was done in 213 medical centres in 32 countries. Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without a sensitising EGFR mutation or ALK translocation and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 or 1, life expectancy 3 months or longer, and a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater. Randomisation was computer generated, accessed via an interactive voice-response and integrated web-response system, and stratified by region of enrolment (east Asia vs rest of world), ECOG performance status score (0 vs 1), histology (squamous vs non-squamous), and PD-L1 TPS (≥50% vs 1-49%). Enrolled patients were randomly assigned 1:1 in blocks of four per stratum to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles or the investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy for four to six cycles. Primary endpoints were overall survival in patients with a TPS of 50% or greater, 20% or greater, and 1% or greater (one-sided significance thresholds, p=0·0122, p=0·0120, and p=0·0124, respectively) in the intention-to-treat population, assessed sequentially if the previous findings were significant. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02220894., Findings: From Dec 19, 2014, to March 6, 2017, 1274 patients (902 men, 372 women, median age 63 years [IQR 57-69]) with a PD-L1 TPS of 1% or greater were allocated to pembrolizumab (n=637) or chemotherapy (n=637) and included in the intention-to-treat population. 599 (47%) had a TPS of 50% or greater and 818 patients (64%) had a TPS of 20% or greater. As of Feb 26, 2018, median follow-up was 12·8 months. Overall survival was significantly longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group in all three TPS populations (≥50% hazard ratio 0·69, 95% CI 0·56-0·85, p=0·0003; ≥20% 0·77, 0·64-0·92, p=0·0020, and ≥1% 0·81, 0·71-0·93, p=0·0018). The median surival values by TPS population were 20·0 months (95% CI 15·4-24·9) for pembrolizumab versus 12·2 months (10·4-14·2) for chemotherapy, 17·7 months (15·3-22·1) versus 13·0 months (11·6-15·3), and 16·7 months (13·9-19·7) versus 12·1 months (11·3-13·3), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 113 (18%) of 636 treated patients in the pembrolizumab group and in 252 (41%) of 615 in the chemotherapy group and led to death in 13 (2%) and 14 (2%) patients, respectively., Interpretation: The benefit-to-risk profile suggests that pembrolizumab monotherapy can be extended as first-line therapy to patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without sensitising EGFR or ALK alterations and with low PD-L1 TPS., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an adenocarcinoma component are recommended to undergo epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing when being considered for EGFR targeted therapy. We conducted an exploratory analysis to inform the clinical utility of EGFR mutation testing in blood cell-free DNA using the cobas ® EGFR Mutation Test v2., Materials and Methods: Two EGFR mutation tests, a tissue-based assay (cobas ® v1) and a tissue- and blood-based assay (cobas ® v2) were used to analyze matched biopsy and blood samples (897 paired samples) from three Asian studies of first-line erlotinib with similar intent-to-treat populations. ENSURE was a phase III comparison of erlotinib and gemcitabine/platinum, FASTACT-2 was a phase III study of gemcitabine/platinum plus erlotinib or placebo, and ASPIRATION was a single-arm phase II study of erlotinib. Agreement statistics were evaluated, based on sensitivity and specificity between the two assays in subgroups of patients with increasing tumor burden., Results: Patients with discordant EGFR (tissue+/plasma-) mutation status achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with concordant (tissue+/plasma+) mutation status. Tumor burden was significantly greater in patients with concordant versus discordant mutations. Pooled analyses of data from the three studies showed a sensitivity of 72.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67.8-76.1) and a specificity of 97.9% (95% CI 96.0-99.0) for blood-based testing; sensitivity was greatest in patients with larger baseline tumors., Conclusions: Blood-based EGFR mutation testing demonstrated high specificity and good sensitivity, and offers a convenient and easily accessible diagnostic method to complement tissue-based tests. Patients with a discordant mutation status in plasma and tissue, had improved survival outcomes compared with those with a concordant mutation status, which may be due to their lower tumor burden. These data help to inform the clinical utility of this blood-based assay for the detection of EGFR mutations., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The FASTACT-2 study of intercalated erlotinib with chemotherapy in Asian patients found that EGFR mutations were the main driver behind the significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit noted in the overall population. Further exploratory biomarker analyses were conducted to provide additional insight., Materials and Methods: This multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III study investigated intercalated first-line erlotinib or placebo with gemcitabine/platinum, followed by maintenance erlotinib or placebo, for patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Provision of samples for biomarker analysis was encouraged but not mandatory. The following biomarkers were analyzed (in order of priority): EGFR mutation by cobas(®) test, KRAS mutation by cobas(®)KRAS test, HER2 by immunohistochemistry (IHC), HER3 by IHC, ERCC1 by IHC, EGFR gene copy number by fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and EGFR by IHC. All subgroups were assessed for PFS (primary endpoint), overall survival (OS), non-progression rate and objective response rate., Results: Overall, 256 patients provided samples for analysis. Considerable overlap was noted among biomarkers, except for EGFR and KRAS mutations, which are mutually exclusive. Other than EGFR mutations (p<0.0001), no other biomarkers were significantly predictive of outcomes in a treatment-by-biomarker interaction test, although ERCC1 IHC-positive status was predictive of improved OS for the erlotinib arm versus placebo in EGFR wild-type patients (median 18.4 vs 9.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] HR=0.32, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.14-0.69, p=0.0024)., Conclusion: Activating EGFR mutations were predictive for improved treatment outcomes with a first-line intercalated regimen of chemotherapy and erlotinib in NSCLC. ERCC1 status may have some predictive value in EGFR wild-type disease, but requires further investigation., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The efficacy results from an open-label, randomized, multicenter study found no significant difference in progression-free survival between pemetrexed plus cisplatin followed by maintenance gefitinib (PC/G) and gefitinib monotherapy (G) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status (hazard ratio favored PC/G). The present report describes the quality of life (QoL) results from that trial., Patients and Methods: Chemotherapy-naive, East Asian, light ex-smokers or never-smokers with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and unknown EGFR mutation status (n = 236) were randomly assigned (1:1) to PC/G or G. EGFR mutation status was subsequently determined for 74 patients. The symptoms and QoL were assessed using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS). The time to worsening of symptoms (TWS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: In the overall population, the TWS was generally longer in the G group (n = 109) than in the PC/G group (n = 109) for the LCSS symptoms classified as treatment-related (loss of appetite, fatigue) and tumor-related (cough, dyspnea, hemoptysis, pain). In the subgroup of patients with wild-type EGFR, the TWS was generally longer in the PC/G group (n = 13) than in the G group (n = 8) for the tumor-related LCSS symptoms., Conclusion: In this study population clinically selected to respond to gefitinib, the LCSS scores were more favorable in the G group than in the PC/G group. Patients with wild-type EGFR tended to show greater improvement in tumor-related LCSS symptoms with chemotherapy than with gefitinib alone. These LCSS outcomes provide further evidence that patients with wild-type EGFR might not benefit from first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with gefitinib., (Copyright © 2016 Eli Lilly and Company. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The primary analysis of this open-label, randomized, multicenter phase 3 study revealed no significant difference in progression-free survival between pemetrexed plus cisplatin followed by maintenance gefitinib (PC/G) and gefitinib monotherapy (G) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation status; however, the hazard ratio favored PC/G. This report describes the final overall survival (OS) results., Methods: Chemonaive, East Asian light ex-smokers/never-smokers with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC and unknown EGFR mutation status were randomized (1:1) to PC/G (n = 118) or G (n = 118). EGFR mutation status was retrospectively determined for 76 patients, 52 (68.4%) of whom had EGFR-mutated tumors (exon 19 deletions in 26 and L858R point mutation in 24). OS was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01017874)., Results: Median OS was similar in the PC/G (26.9 months) and G (27.9 months) groups (hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-1.31, p = 0.717). Median OS was longer with PC/G than with G in patients with EGFR wild-type tumors (28.4 versus 8.9 months) and longer with G than with PC/G in patients with EGFR-mutated tumors (45.7 versus 32.4 months), especially those with exon 19 deletions. Second-line postdiscontinuation therapy was common and included chemotherapy (PC/G, 41 of 118 [34.7%]; G, 73 of 118 [61.9%]) and rechallenge with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (PC/G, 27 of 118 [22.9%]; G, 9 of 118 [7.6%])., Conclusions: The progression-free survival and OS results from this study further demonstrate the importance of determining EGFR mutation status to select the most appropriate first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC., (Copyright © 2015 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Advances in oncology research have led to identification of tumor-specific biomarkers, some of which are important predictive indicators and ideal targets for novel therapeutics. One such biomarker in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Patients with NSCLC who harbor an activating EGFR mutation show a more favorable response to treatment with an EGFR inhibitor, such as gefitinib, erlotinib, or afatinib, than to chemotherapy. The prevalence of EGFR mutations in East Asian patients is higher than that in other populations, and in some clinical settings, patients have been treated with EGFR inhibitors based on clinicopathologic characteristics with no information on EGFR status. However, based on results from a series of studies in which East Asian patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC were treated with EGFR inhibitors alone or in combination with standard chemotherapy, this may not be the best practice because EGFR mutation status was found to be a key predictor of outcome. Data from these studies highlight the necessity of EGFR testing in determining the most suitable treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

Purpose: Blood-based circulating-free (cf) tumor DNA may be an alternative to tissue-based EGFR mutation testing in NSCLC. This exploratory analysis compares matched tumor and blood samples from the FASTACT-2 study., Experimental Design: Patients were randomized to receive six cycles of gemcitabine/platinum plus sequential erlotinib or placebo. EGFR mutation testing was performed using the cobas tissue test and the cobas blood test (in development). Blood samples at baseline, cycle 3, and progression were assessed for blood test detection rate, sensitivity, and specificity; concordance with matched tumor analysis (n = 238), and correlation with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Concordance between tissue and blood tests was 88%, with blood test sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 96%. Median PFS was 13.1 versus 6.0 months for erlotinib and placebo, respectively, for those with baseline EGFR mut(+) cfDNA [HR, 0.22; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.14-0.33, P < 0.0001] and 6.2 versus 6.1 months, respectively, for the EGFR mut(-) cfDNA subgroup (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65-1.04, P = 0.1076). For patients with EGFR mut(+) cfDNA at baseline, median PFS was 7.2 versus 12.0 months for cycle 3 EGFR mut(+) cfDNA versus cycle 3 EGFR mut(-) patients, respectively (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21-0.48, P < 0.0001); median OS by cycle 3 status was 18.2 and 31.9 months, respectively (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.84, P = 0.0066)., Conclusions: Blood-based EGFR mutation analysis is relatively sensitive and highly specific. Dynamic changes in cfDNA EGFR mutation status relative to baseline may predict clinical outcomes., (©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: In the Iressa Pan-ASia Study (IPASS), gefitinib claimed improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus carboplatin-paclitaxel in clinically selected lung cancer patients. The primary objective of this study was to assess the PFS of pemetrexed-cisplatin (PC) followed by gefitinib maintenance versus gefitinib monotherapy in an IPASS-like population., Methods: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, eligible patients were ⩾18 years, chemonaïve, East Asian, light ex-smokers/never-smokers with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1 and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status who enrolled at 12 sites in Asia. Patients randomly received (1:1) pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus cisplatin (75mg/m(2)) for six 21-day cycles, followed by gefitinib maintenance or gefitinib monotherapy (250 mg/day). Patient tissue was retrospectively analysed for EGFR mutations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01017874., Findings: Between 23rd November 2009 and 27th April 2012, 253 patients entered, and 236 patients were randomly assigned to and treated with PC therapy (N=114) and gefitinib monotherapy (N=118). Between-arm baseline characteristics were balanced. PFS was not significantly different between treatment arms (p=0.217). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.13). The HR should be cautiously interpreted as it was not constant. EGFR mutation status was determined for 74 tissue samples; 50 (67.6%) had mutations. In a pre-specified subgroup analysis, only the treatment-by-EGFR mutation interaction was significant (p=0.008) for PFS. For the entire treatment period, a higher proportion of patients in the PC/gefitinib arm versus gefitinib experienced possibly drug-related grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events (39 of 114 [34%] versus 19 of 118 [16%]; p=0.002)., Interpretation: In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, PFS was not significantly different. In the biomarker-assessable population, front-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy was not efficacious in patients with wild-type EGFR. Identification of EGFR mutation status is key in the management of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer., Funding: Eli Lilly and Company., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population., Methods: In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15-28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883779., Findings: From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months [95% CI 7·2-8·3], vs 6·0 months [5·6-7·1], hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·47-0·69]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3-20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7-17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 [0·64-0·99]; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months [12·9-20·4] vs 6·9 months [5·3-7·6], HR 0·25 [0·16-0·39]; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months [22·2-undefined], vs 20·6 months [14·2-26·9], HR 0·48 [0·27-0·84]; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 [29%] patients and 55 [25%], respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 [14%] and 31 [14%], respectively), and anaemia (26 [12%] and 21 [9%], respectively)., Interpretation: Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status., Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the correlation between the change of serum c-reactive protein (CRP) levels and response to chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer., Material and Method: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who received the first line chemotherapy were measured serum CRP levels prior to treatment. Chemotherapy regimen was given to patients according to physicians and radiologic imaging was evaluated after two or three cycles of treatment. Serum CRP levels were measured first time at pre-treatment and second time in patients who had pre-treatment serum CRP levels greater than normal range (3 mg/l) at the time of response assessment or clinical progression. The primary endpoint was the correlation between change of serum CRP levels and radiologic response. The secondary endpoint was the prevalence of elevated CRP levels in advanced NSCLC patients and correlation between initial CRP levels and progression free survival (PFS)., Results: Fifty four patients were enrolled. Prevalence of elevated CRP levels in advanced NSCLC was 76%. Thirty patients had serial serum CRP measured. There was correlation between change in serum CRP levels and response to treatment (r = 0.43, p = 0.018, spearman rank). There was significant correlation between response to treatment and decrease in CRP levels greater than 50% (p = 0.009, Fisher's exact test). In contrast there was no correlation between progression and increase in CRP levels (p = 0.640, Fisher's exact test). All patients with serial CRP levels decreased to normal range (< 3 mg/ l) had response to chemotherapy. High pre-treatment CRP levels (> 100 mg/l) correlated with poor PFS. Median PFS for patients with pre-treatment CRP levels of 3-30 mg/l, 30-100 mg/l and >100 mg/l was 23.0 weeks, 13.0 weeks and 6.3 weeks, respectively. Patients with serial CRP levels less than 3 mg/l had greater PFS than patients with serial CRP levels higher than 3 mg/l (p = 0.026, log rank test)., Conclusion: The present study suggested that high levels of pre-treatment serum CRP and persistent CRP in serum was a poor prognostic factor. The decrease in CRP levels greater than 50% was a simple method to predict the response to treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small lung cancer.

Purpose: This study investigated whether sequential administration of erlotinib and chemotherapy improves clinical outcomes versus chemotherapy alone in unselected, chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Previously untreated patients (n = 154) with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib (150 mg/d) or placebo on days 15 to 28 of a 4-week cycle that included gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8) and either cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) day 1) or carboplatin (5 x area under the serum concentration-time curve, day 1). The primary end point was nonprogression rate (NPR) at 8 weeks. Secondary end points included tumor response rate, NPR at 16 weeks, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety., Results: The NPR at 8 weeks was 80.3% in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin (GC)-erlotinib arm (n = 76) and 76.9% in the GC-placebo arm (n = 78). At 16 weeks, the NPR was 64.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 53.8% for GC-placebo. The response rate was 35.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 24.4% for GC-placebo. PFS was significantly longer with GC-erlotinib than with GC-placebo (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.47; log-rank P = .0002; median, 29.4 v 23.4 weeks); this benefit was consistent across all clinical subgroups. There was no significant difference in OS. The addition of erlotinib to chemotherapy was well tolerated, with no increase in hematologic toxicity, and no treatment-related interstitial lung disease., Conclusion: Sequential administration of erlotinib following gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy led to a significant improvement in PFS. This treatment approach warrants further investigation in a phase III study.

We conducted a phase II trial to investigate the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiation in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Thirty patients with inoperable NSCLC were enrolled onto a multicenter phase II trial of concurrent chemoradiation therapy. Patients received six weekly cycles of paclitaxel 45 mg/m(2) over 1 h; carboplatin at (area under the curve) AUC 2; and radiation therapy of 60 Gy. Radiation was administered to the primary tumor and regional lymph nodes (40 Gy over 4 weeks) followed by a boost to the primary tumor (20 Gy in 2 weeks). After the initial phase of concurrent chemoradiation, patients received an additional four cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) over 3 h and carboplatin at AUC 6 every 3 weeks. The overall objective response rate of 30 assessable patients was 76.7%. At the median follow-up time of 13.1 months, the median survival time was 14.5 months (95% CI, 10.59-18.48). The median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (95% CI, 7.72-13.28). The major toxicity was hematologic. The incidence of grade 3 esophagitis was 10%. In conclusion, this chemoradiation regimen is well tolerated and shows significant clinical results for locally advanced NSCLC. Locoregional failure rate remains an important issue with this newer chemotherapeutic regimen. A novel chemotherapy and radiation therapy is clearly needed.

We designed a phase II study to determine the feasibility and toxicity of concomitant radiotherapy and Paclitaxel/Carboplatin followed by adjuvant chemotherapy of the same regimen in patients with newly diagnosed inoperable stage III A/B non-small cell lung cancer. Patients were irradiated with a total dose of 66 Gy. Weekly courses of Paclitaxel 45 mg/m2 and Carboplatin AUC 2 were administered intravenously during the irradiation period. After completion of concurrent chemoradiotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy with Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 and Carboplatin AUC 6 intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 cycles were given. Since March 1998, 15 patients have been enrolled. All patients were assessable for efficacy and toxicity after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Eleven patients were assessable for efficacy and toxicity after adjuvant chemotherapy. After concomitant chemoradiotherapy, complete response (CR) was documented in 2 of 15 (13%). Partial response (PR) was documented in 9 of 15 (60%). After completion of adjuvant chemotherapy in 11 patients, the overall response rate was 91 per cent. (18% CR, 73% PR). There were 8 per cent gr. 3-4 neutropenia which occurred during adjuvant chemotherapy. Concomitant Paclitaxel/Carboplatin and radiotherapy are promising modalities in the treatment of inoperable stage III A/B non-small cell lung cancer.