Second-line treatment with irinotecan plus cisplatin vs cisplatin of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer pretreated with taxanes and gemcitabine: a multicenter randomised phase II study

The aim of this study was to compare the irinotecan/cisplatin regimen with cisplatin as second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) pretreated with a taxane/gemcitabine regimen. Patients (n=147) with stage IV NSCLC pretreated with a taxane/gemcitabine regimen were randomly assigned to receive either irinotecan (110 mg m−2, day 1 and 100 mg m−2, day 8) and cisplatin (80 mg m−2, day 8) (IC; n=74) or CDDP (80 mg m−2, day 1) (C; n=73) every 3 weeks. Patients treated with IC and C had a median survival of 7.8 and 8.8 months, respectively (P=0.933). The 1-year survival rate was 34.3% for IC-treated patients and 31.7% for C-treated patients. Cox's regression analysis revealed that response to treatment (hazard ratio (HR)=2.787; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1578–4.922) and performance status (HR=1.865; 95% CI: 1.199–2.872) was independent prognostic factors for survival. Overall response rate was 22.5% (95% CI: 12.8–32.2%) for IC-treated patients and 7.0% (95% CI: 1.15–13.6%) for C-treated patients (P=0.012); tumour growth control (partial remission (PR)+stable disease (SD)) was observed in 26 (38%) IC and 25 (36%) C patients (P=0.878). There was no difference in terms of quality of life between the two chemotherapy arms. The incidence of febrile neutropenia, grade 3 and 4 neutropenia and grade 3 and 4 diarrhoea was significantly higher in the IC- than the C-treated patients. Other toxicities were mild. There were no treatment-related deaths in either arm. The IC regimen did not confer a survival benefit compared with C as second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC pretreated with a taxane/gemcitabine regimen, despite its better efficacy in terms of response rate

A randomized phase III study of the docetaxel/carboplatin combination versus docetaxel single-agent as second line treatment for patients with advanced/metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To compare the activity and toxicity of docetaxel/carboplatin (DC) doublet vs single agent docetaxel (D) as second-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients pre-treated with front-line platinum-free regimens, were randomized to receive either docetaxel/carboplatin (DC), (docetaxel 50 mg/m²; carboplatin AUC4; both drugs administered on days 1 and 15) or docetaxel single-agent (D), (docetaxel 50 mg/m²on days 1 and 15).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Response rate was similar between the two arms (DC vs D: 10.4% vs 7.7%; p = 0.764). After a median follow-up time of 28.0 months for DC arm and 34.5 months for D arm, progression free survival (PFS) was significantly higher in the DC arm (DC vs D:3.33 months vs 2.60 months; p-value = 0.012), while no significant difference was observed in terms of overall survival (OS) (DC vs D: 10.3 months vs 7.70 months; p-value = 0.550). Chemotherapy was well-tolerated and grade III/IV toxicities were relatively infrequent. No toxic deaths were observed.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study has not achieved its primary objective of significant OS prolongation with docetaxel/carboplatin combination over single-agent docetaxel in patients who had not received front-line docetaxel; however, the docetaxel/carboplatin combination was associated with a significant clinical benefit in terms of PFS.</p

Sequential versus alternating administration of cisplatin/etoposide and topotecan as first-line treatment in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: Preliminary results of a phase III trial of the hellenic oncology research group

Background: This trial was designed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of sequential versus alternating administration of cisplatin/etoposide and topotecan in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients and methods: Two hundred eighty-four chemotherapy-naive patients were randomized between the sequential therapy arm (n = 142; 4 cycles of cisplatin 75 mg/m2 intravenously [I.V.] on day 1 with etoposide 100 mg/m2 per day I.V. on days 1-3 followed by 4 cycles of topotecan 1.5 mg/m2 per day I.V. on days 1-5) and the alternating arm (n = 142; same doses of cisplatin/etoposide on cycles 1, 3, 5, and 7 and topotecan on cycles 2, 4, 6, and 8). Treatment cycles for both regimens were administered every 3 weeks. Results: At this preliminary analysis, no statistically significant difference in the overall response rate, duration of response, time to disease progression, or median survival was observed between the 2 arms. A total of 756 cycles of the sequential therapy and 830 cycles of the alternating therapy were administered, with a median numbers of 6 and 7 cycles per patient, respectively. Topotecan was administered in 85 patients on the sequential arm and 132 patients on the alternating arm. Dose reductions for toxicity were similar in both arms. Grade 3/4 toxicities in the sequential and alternating arms, respectively, included neutropenia (51% and 52%; P = NS), anemia (12% and 11%; P = NS), febrile neutropenia (7% and 9%; P = NS), thrombocytopenia (19% and 20%; P = NS), and asthenia (8% and 2%; P = 0.02). There were 4 toxicity-related deaths in the sequential arm versus 3 in the alternating arm. Conclusion: Our preliminary conclusion is that the sequential and alternating regimens resulted in comparable activity and tolerability in previously untreated patients with extensive-stage SCLC

Docetaxel versus docetaxel plus cisplatin as front-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized, multicenter phase III trial

Purpose To compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) or docetaxel (D) alone. Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either DC (n = 167; docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1, cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 2, and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) 150 mug/m(2)/d on days 3 to 9) or D (n = 152; 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 without rhG-CSF) every 3 weeks. Results The overall response rates were 36.5% for DC (three complete responses and 58 partial responses) and 21.7% for D (one complete response and 32 partial responses; P = .004). The median OS was 10.5 months (range, 0.5 to 41 months) and 8.0 months (range, 0.5 to 41 months) for DC and D, respectively (P = .200). The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 44% and 19% for DC and 43% and 15% for D, respectively. Median times to tumor progression were 4.0 and 2.5 months for DC and D, respectively (P = .580). Grade 2/3 anemia was significantly higher with DC than with D (33% v 16%; P = .0001). Fifteen (9%) DC and 12 (8%) D patients developed febrile neutropenia. Grade 3/4 nausea/vomiting (P = .0001), diarrhea (P = .007), neurotoxicity (P = .017), and nephroroxicity (P = .006) were significantly more common with DC than with D. There were five treatment-related deaths in the DC group and one in the D (P = .098). Conclusion DC regimen resulted in a higher response rate but without improvement in median time to tumor progession or OS compared with D. D could be a reasonable front-line chemotherapy for patients who cannot tolerate cisplatin. (C) 2004 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

Docetaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in elderly patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and use of a geriatric assessment: Lessons from a prematurely closed Hellenic Oncology Research Group randomized phase III study

Objectives To compare first-line treatment with docetaxel plus gemcitabine (DG) versus gemcitabine (G) in elderly patients with advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naïve patients with inoperable stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, ≥ 70 years, with an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0–2 were enrolled. Patients were stratified by PS and disease stage and randomized to either DG (docetaxel 30 mg/m2 plus gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 i.v.) or G (gemcitabine 1200 mg/m2 i.v.) on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. The study&apos;s primary end-point was overall survival (OS). Results In this prematurely closed study, 106 patients with a median age of 75 years (range, 70–92) were enrolled (DG: n = 54; G: n = 52); 77 (73%) had stage IV disease and 18 (17%) a PS of 2. There was no difference in terms of median OS (14.6 vs 12.2 months; p = 0.121), progression-free survival (PFS) (3.4 vs 2.6 months; p = 0.757) and overall response rate (26.0% vs 15.4%; p = 0.233) between DG and G arm, respectively. Patients with an Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) score &amp;lt; 7 had significantly lower median OS (7.6 vs 15.4 months; p = 0.002) and median PFS (1.7 vs 4.4 months; p = 0.009) than patients with higher IADL score. The regimens were well tolerated with no significant difference in severe toxicity. Conclusion DG and G demonstrated comparable efficacy in elderly patients with NSCLC and high IADL score was correlated with superior clinical outcome. © 2016 Elsevier Inc