Search

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the antiemetic effectiveness and tolerability of Navoban® (tropisetron) and Zofran® (ondansetron) following high-dose (≥ 50 mg/m2) cisplatin chemotherapy. In a randomised, multi-centre, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study, 117 evalua

Pirarubicin (THP) (Roger Bellon Laboratory, France) is a new anthracycline under clinical development. In order to assess the efficacy and toxicity of the drug in small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC), we have undertaken this trial in front-line therapy in patients with metastatic disease, PS less than 3 and at least one evaluable lesion. Responses were assessed after two cycles of THP (60 mg/m2 i.v. bolus every 3-4 weeks) and a further cross over to VP16 + CDDP (three cycles) was systematic whatever the response to THP. This crossover was performed after only one cycle in case of obvious progression. From June 1988 to April 1990, 32 patients were enrolled: 6 were ineligible (4 non-SCLC, 2 M0), 26 patients were fully evaluable for THP and 18 patients for VP16-CDDP. The characteristics of the patients were as follows: mean age 57.4 years (38-71); T4: 54%; T3: 27%; T2: 19%; N3: 62%; N2: 35%; No: 4%. The efficacy was as follows 1 complete response and 2 partial responses (confirmed by endoscopy); 12 patients received only one cycle because of obvious progression; the overall response rate is 12% (95% confidence interval 0-24%). The patient who had complete response after pirarubicin remained in CR after VP16-CDDP, whereas the 2 patients who had partial response achieved CR for one and PR for the other; among the 15 who did not respond 1 CR and 7 PR were observed. The only significant toxicity of THP was granulopenia without infection. THP seems to be an effective anthracycline in SCLC, and the study is continuing. A response could be reached in 50% of the nonresponders with standard therapy and 10 of 24 patients (42%) finally responded. Therefore, this schedule for testing new drugs in metastatic SCLC appears ethically acceptable.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and carboplatin in the treatment of previously untreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).A randomized phase II study was conducted by the Groupe Français de Pneumo-Cancérologie (GFPC) in 15 centers. The patients were randomized in either arm A (GC): gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8+carboplatin AUC 6 mg/(mLmin) on day 1; or in arm B (VP): vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 weekly+cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1. Treatment cycles were repeated every 3 weeks.A total of 100 patients were randomized with stage IV or stage III NSCLC with malignant pleural effusion: 51 patients in arm A and 49 patients in arm B. A total of 190 cycles were administered in the GC arm and 172 cycles in the VP arm, with a median of four cycles per patient in each arm. The dose intensity was 84.9% for gemcitabine, 99.8% for carboplatin, 97.7% for cisplatin and 67.7% for vinorelbine. The objective response rates were 19.6% (95% CI, 9.8-33.1) for GC and 29.2% (95% CI, 17.0-44.1) for VP in an ITT analysis. The response duration was 169 days in arm A and 226 days in arm B. The TTP was similar with 140 days (GC) and 148 days (VP), respectively. Overall survival rates were 334 days in the GC combination and 304 days in the VP combination. Overall, the treatment was safe and toxicities observed were different in each arm: neutropenia was the most common toxicity in the VP treatment, whereas thrombocytopenia was more frequent in the GC combination. Anemia was similar in both arms. Non-haematologic toxicity was mild. One toxic death in arm A and three toxic deaths in arm B were observed.In terms of response rate, the gemcitabine-carboplatin combination was not efficient enough to allow further phase III study. Survival data are in the same range as the standard arm. This chemotherapy is feasible and may represent an alternative to a standard cisplatin-based regimen, allowing treatment in an outpatient setting.

The most satisfactory treatment for patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is combination chemotherapy-radiotherapy (CT-RT). The optimal treatment modalities remain to be determined.We conducted a multicenter phase II trial of the docetaxel-radiotherapy combination after induction chemotherapy with cisplatin-vinorelbine. The main endpoint was the objective response rate.Patient with inoperable stage locally advanced NSCLC received induction chemotherapy consisting of two cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on D1 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 on D1, D8, D15 and D22. Patients with responses or stable disease then received concurrent RT-CT consisting of 25 mg/m2/week docetaxel and single-fraction radiotherapy (66 grays (Gy) in 33 fractions) over 6.5 weeks.Fifty-six patients were enrolled from 1 July 2000 to 31 December 2001. Sixteen patients left the trial after induction chemotherapy, eight for progression, five for toxicity, and two for intercurrent events. One patient underwent surgery after induction chemotherapy. In total, 40 of the 56 patients received RT-CT. Twelve (30%) of these 40 patients experienced grade III or IV pulmonary or esophageal toxicity. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the objective response rate was 46.4% (95% CI 33.0-60.2). The median time to progression was 6.2 months [1.1-26.0]. The median survival time was 13 months [0.3-44.9 months]. Nine patients progressed during RT-CT, six with brain metastases.Weekly docetaxel with concurrent radiotherapy, following chemotherapy is acceptable. The tumor response rate is moderate. Further trials are required to determine the risk-benefit relationship of this treatment schedule, and the possible benefit of adding other cytotoxic drugs.

BACKGROUND The efficacies of granisetron plus dexamethasone and dexamethasone alone in controlling delayed nausea and vomiting after cisplatin chemotherapy (> or = 69 mg/m2) were compared in a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled comparative study. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 654 patients (of whom 619 were evaluable) received prophylactic granisetron plus dexamethasone before chemotherapy on day 0; on day 1 complete responders and non-responders were randomized separately to receive dexamethasone, 8 mg b.d. p.o., with either granisetron, 1 mg b.d. p.o., or matching placebo for six days. RESULTS Over days 1-6 the complete response rates were 54.5% (dexamethasone group) and 52.1% (dexamethasone plus granisetron group). Response rates were higher over days 4-6 (71.8% and 70.7%, respectively) than over days 1-3 (60.4% and 57.9%, respectively). Significantly more patients who responded to antiemetic treatment during day 0 were responders over days 1-6 (63% vs. 17%; P < 0.001). No other treatment-related differences were found. Adverse events tended to be minor, with constipation and headache the most common. Overall, there were no significant differences in the safety profiles of the two regimens, but constipation and abdominal pain were significantly more common in the dexamethasone plus granisetron group. CONCLUSIONS Granisetron plus dexamethasone did not appear to confer additional benefit over use of dexamethasone alone in controlling delayed nausea and vomiting following cisplatin chemotherapy. Control of acute nausea and vomiting, however, appeared to be an important factor influencing delayed nausea and vomiting.

A Phase I trial of carboplatin therapy was performed on patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer who had been previously treated with cisplatin, mitomycin and a vinca aklaloïd. This was administered as a daily bolus infusion or as a continuous infusion for 6 weeks with concurrent daily thoracic radiation. All patients had to be objective responders or to show no change after chemotherapy. The carboplatin was started at 10 mg/m2 per day, and increased to 15 mg/m2 per day and 20 mg/m2 per day, if treatment was feasible in successive cohorts of at least six patients. The radiation therapy consisted of 62-66 Gray on the tumor and the ipsilateral mediastinal nodes, 50 Gray on the mediastinum and 40-45 Gray on the supraclavicular lymph nodes. Twenty-nine patients took part in this study. Thrombocytopenia was the principal dose-limiting toxicity, with 15 mg/m2 per day of bolus or continuous infusion. Other toxicities included a fall in haemoglobin level, a fall in white-blood cell count, nausea and vomiting. The median survival time was 12 months, but the response rate cannot be determined among patients selected on the basis of response to chemotherapy. The recommended Phase II dose for patients previously treated with cisplatin containing chemotherapy, is 10 mg/m2 per day of either a bolus or continuous infusion.

The study was designed to evaluate the value of vinorelbine in a cisplatin-mitomycin-vinca alkaloid regimen for treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A group of 227 patients with inoperable NSCLC in stage III (58%) or stage IV (42%) were included in this randomized multicenter trial comparing a reference regimen (VDS group, n = 113) cisplatin (120 mg/m2 on day 1, day 29 and day 71), mitomycin (8 mg/m2 on day 1, day 29 and day 71) and vindesine (3 mg/m2/week for 5 weeks and then every 2 weeks up to the 15th week) to a cisplatin-mitomycin-vinorelbine combination (VNB group, n = 114), with cisplatin and mitomycin at the same doses, and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2/week for 16 weeks. The objective response rate (evaluated at 17th week) was 17% in the VDS group and 25% in the VNB group (P = 0.15). Median survival was 33.4 weeks and 34.5 weeks in the VDS and VNB arms, respectively. Overall survival duration was not significantly different between the two arms (logrank test, P = 0.20) despite a trend to an increased survival in the VNB group. This essentially benefited the patients with stage III disease with a clear-cut lengthening of median (45.9 vs. 33.4 weeks) and 1 year survival (44.6% vs. 26.2%, P0.05) in favor of the VNB group. Nevertheless, there was no significant difference in overall survival (logrank, P = 0.13). Survival duration of the patients with stage IV disease was comparable in the two arms (logrank test, P = 0.90). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was found in 61% and 87% of the VDS and VNB groups, respectively (P0.01). Grade 2-4 peripheral neuropathy was observed in 23% of the patients in the VDS group and in 6% of the patients in the VNB group (P0.01). Replacement of vindesine by vinorelbine in a cisplatin-mitomycin-vinca alkaloid chemotherapeutic regimen did not lead to a significant improvement in objective response rate or in duration of survival. There was a reduction in neurotoxicity at the expense of an increased hematologic toxicity. However, for patients with stage III disease there was an increase in 1 year survival with the vinorelbine combination.

Collaborative phase I and II studies of the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer are ongoing at five centres in the UK and France. In the initial completed phase I study, 16 patients (15 evaluable) have been entered using a fixed dose of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 given as a 30 min intravenous infusion weekly for 3 weeks. On the third week the gemcitabine was immediately followed by cisplatin with pre- and post-hydration. This regimen required only 1 night of hospitalization every 4 weeks. The study design was for sequential groups of patients to receive 3 dose levels of cisplatin (60 mg/m2, 75 mg/m2 and 100 mg/m2) but these doses would be modified and the number of patients at any dose level could be increased if significant toxicity was observed. Three patients were to be entered at the first two dose levels and 10 patients were to confirm the maximum tolerated dose (if reached) or expand the database on toxicity at the final predetermined dose level. The major haematological toxicities were neutropenia (grade 4 in 3 patients) and thrombocytopenia (grade 3 or 4 in 5 patients) but both were of short duration and uncomplicated. Grade 3 nausea and vomiting occurred in 12 patients but was no worse than would be expected from cisplatin alone. Alopecia was not a problem (no hair loss in 10 patients and grade 1 or 2 in 6 patients) and no significant renal or neurotoxicity was seen. A phase II study using cisplatin 100 mg/m2 in combination with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 has been opened and to date 19 patients are evaluable for response. Eight (42%) have achieved partial remissions. The study is ongoing and will recruit 50 evaluable patients.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the antiemetic effectiveness and tolerability of Navoban (tropisetron) and Zofran (ondansetron) following high-dose (or = 50 mg/m2) cisplatin chemotherapy. In a randomised, multi-centre, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study, 117 evaluable chemotherapy-naive patients who received Navoban were compared with 114 who received Zofran. Patient diary cards were used to assess both acute (Day 1) and delayed (Days 2-6) nausea and vomiting. Total control of acute vomiting was achieved in 54% of Navoban and 65% of Zofran patients (p = 0.052), and total control of acute nausea in 66% and 62% respectively (p = 0.655). Total control of delayed vomiting was achieved in 44% of Navoban patients and 46% of Zofran patients (p = 0.765), and of delayed nausea in 56% and 47% respectively (p = 0.207). Both reactions combined were totally prevented during the entire 6-day trial period in 22% of Navoban and 24% of Zofran patients (NS), while a further 42% of patients in both groups remained largely free from both nausea and emesis. The few adverse reactions (e.g. headache, constipation, diarrhoea) were mainly mild and typical of the 5-HT3-receptor antagonists. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in efficacy and tolerability between Navoban 5 mg once daily and the highest recommended dose of Zofran (32 mg on Day 1, followed by 8 mg three times a day).

An individual dose adaptation for cisplatin (CDDP), etoposide and gallium chloride (GaCl3) was proposed to improve the efficacy of this combination chemotherapy and avoid its toxicity. A clinical study was performed in 28 non small cell lung cancer patients, to verify this hypothesis. CDDP and etoposide were administered as continuous infusions every 3 weeks and GaCl3 orally during and between the CDDP-etoposide sequential infusions. CDDP doses were adjusted to achieve, during each 5 day infusion, an area under the total plasma platinum concentrations versus time curve (AUC Pt 0-120) ranging between 80,000 and 100,000 micrograms/l.h. Etoposide dosages were 120 mg/24 h during days 1-3 of the CDDP infusion. GaCl3 dosages were adjusted to obtain plasma gallium (Ga) concentrations ranging between 200 and 400 micrograms/l. The proposed methods of adaptation were successful from a pharmacokinetic point of view as AUC Pt 0-120 were respectively 81351 +/- 4788, 88268 +/- 8451 and 88331 +/- 8778 micrograms/l.h during the first 3 courses, and plasma Ga concentrations, determined during the 2nd and 3rd CDDP courses, 16 hours after the beginning of the CDDP infusion, were respectively 264 +/- 127 and 313 +/- 186 micrograms/l. However, these results were not pharmacodynamically successful and the therapeutic window was not confirmed. Past clinical trials with GaCl3 will be reviewed, as well as the factors which modify the pharmacokinetics or the pharmacodynamic effects of CDDP and GaCl3. From this review, an optimal dosage of 400 mg GaCl3 could be proposed to potentiate a combination chemotherapy with a platinum compound. The target AUC of the platinum compound should be the AUC avoiding its cumulative toxicity.

The efficacy of the association of cisplatinum-mitomycine and vindesine on inoperable non-small cell bronchial cancer has been assessed in a prospective study. Cisplatinum 120 mg/m2 and mitomycine 8 mg/m2 on day 1, day 28 and day 70, and vindesine 3 mg/m2 once per week for the first cycle, once every 15 days for the second and third cycles. 98 patients were included in the study between February 1989 and June 1990: there were 89 men and 9 women with a mean age of 60. There were 57 epidermoid cancers, 22 adenocarcinomas, 1 neuroendocrine carcinoma and 18 large cell cancers. There was an objective response (RO) in 25% (of whom 5% had a complete response) without any significant difference between the 56 cancers at stage III (32% RO) and 42 cancers in stage IV (17% RO). The median survival of the responders was 14 months again 5 months for the non-responders. The initial loss of weight seemed to be a prognostic factor because the number of objective responders was significantly greater in the patients with only a small weight loss: 37% of RO if the weight loss was less than 5%, against 11% for a weight loss of greater than 5%. The myelotoxicity of this association was important because 85% of those patients presented with a leucopenia at least grade II OMS. Peripheral neuropathies occurred in 27% of cases: 4 cases of cardiotoxicity were reported.

The usual form of chemotherapy of metastatic small cell lung cancer gives a 50% objective response with a mean survival of 7-8 months. We have tested a new antimitotic drug using pirarubicin alone in 26 patients. After the second treatment we noticed a response level of 12% with moderate toxicity. Then, we undertook classical chemotherapy using cisplatin-V16. After 3 doses the response level was 50% with a median survival of 32 weeks. In our study the use of a single drug pirarubicin in metastatic small cell cancer did not appear to worsen the chance of survival in patients if polychemotherapy was carried out immediately in cases which failed on the single drug. Our monotherapy did not appear to induce resistance to affective polychemotherapy. This method applied carefully to patients with metastatic disease with a strict follow up may be utilised in the assessment of the efficacy of the newer antimitotic drugs.

Between November 1983 and November 1988, 60 patients with cerebral metastases arising from primary lung cancer were treated with chemotherapy. Thirty patients received a 5-day course of cisplatin (total dose: 200 mg/sq.m). The remaining 30 patients received VP 16 in doses of 250 mg/sq.m. administered 12-hourly by intravenous infusion over one hour (total dose: 1,500 mg/sq.m.). Twenty-seven percent of the patients who received cisplatin showed objective responses as assessed by computerized tomography; 10% had serious toxic reactions. Thirty percent of the patients who received VP 16 showed objective responses, but 43% had severe bone marrow aplasia resulting in a 33% death rate due to infection. The median survival of responders was 8 months in both treatment groups. The objective response rates as assessed by histology were 33% in patients with oat-cell carcinoma and 27% in patients with other histological types. VP 16 must be abandoned, being too toxic in high doses. High-dose cisplatin can be used in the treatment of cerebral metastases of lung cancer, side by side with radiotherapy.

CDDP is one of the most active single drugs in non small cell lung carcinoma. High doses of 200 mg/m2 are well tolerated when fractionated doses are used over a period of 5 d. Twenty-four consecutive patients (male, age range 38-70 y) with brain metastasis of lung carcinoma were included in this study. The total dose of CDDP - 200 mg/m2 - was divided into 5 equal daily fractions, infused over 6 h. Parenteral hydratation commenced the night before therapy. Efficiency was assessed by means of CT scan 15-30 d after the last course of chemotherapy. Complete response was achieved if no lesion was found on the CT scan; partial deafness 2 cases, renal toxicity 1 case, severe myelotoxicity 2 cases. Efficiency: failure was observed in 17 cases, objective responses in 7 cases (2 cases without injection contrast in the tumor, 3 partial regressions, 2 complete regressions). Thirty per cent of patients in this study exhibited an objective response with low toxicity. CDDP seems to be very useful in cerebral metastasis of lung carcinoma.

Fifteen patients were given vindesine (VDS) either by iv bolus injections at doses ranging from 0.7 to 1.2 mg/m2 or by 5-day infusions (total dose: 5 mg/m2), in combination with cisplatin (20 mg/m2/day) and bleomycin (6 mg/m2/day) for 5 days. For bolus injections, the total dose of VDS in one treatment was completed to 5 mg/m2 by infusion on Days 4 and 5. Drug concentrations in plasma and urine were measured by radioimmunoassay. Plasma concentration decay curves after bolus injection presented the expected triphasic shape, whereas for infusions, plasma concentrations increased and reached steady-state after about 30 hours and declined in a biphasic way after infusion discontinuation. Steady-state concentrations ranged from 4 to 15 micrograms/L and showed important variations among patients. Clearances estimated from the area under the concentration-time curves were significantly smaller for infusions than for bolus injections. This observation was interpreted as an indication of VDS pharmacokinetic nonlinearity. Terminal half-lives and renal clearances were not significantly different for the two types of administration. Toxicity of the treatment was generally limited, except for one major renal failure; two patients showed objective tumor regression after therapy.