Eosinophilic pneumonia associated with daptomycin: a case report and a review of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Although several studies did not demonstrate that daptomycin may cause significantly higher rates of pulmonary adverse effects when compared with vancomycin or penicillinase-resistant penicillins, there have been a few case reports of severe pulmonary complications associated with daptomycin administration.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A rare case of eosinophilic pneumonia occurring 10 days after daptomycin administration in a 78-year-old Caucasian man with possible infectious endocarditis is described. He developed new onset fever, up to 38.5°C, with bilateral pulmonary crackles on physical examination and with no signs of severe respiratory failure. A chest computed tomography-scan showed bilateral nodular consolidations with air bronchograms and pleural effusions. Immediate discontinuation of daptomycin was followed by vigorous improvement of clinical signs and symptoms with progressive resolution of pulmonary consolidations a month later.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Physicians should be aware of this rare but serious complication during daptomycin treatment, and prompt discontinuation of the offending agent, with or without additional supportive treatment, must occur immediately.</p

Phase III randomised trial of doxorubicin-based chemotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer

This randomised trial compared platinum-based to anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer (limited or extensive stage) and ⩽2 adverse prognostic factors. Patients were randomised to receive six cycles of either ACE (doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 i.v., cyclophosphamide 1 g/m2 i.v. and etoposide 120 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1, then etoposide 240 mg/m2 orally for 2 days) or PE (cisplatin 80 mg/m2 and etoposide 120 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1, then etoposide 240 mg/m2 orally for 2 days) given for every 3 weeks. For patients where cisplatin was not suitable, carboplatin (AUC6) was substituted. A total of 280 patients were included (139 ACE, 141 PE). The response rates were 72% for ACE and 77% for PE. One-year survival rates were 34 and 38% (P=0.497), respectively and 2-year survival was the same (12%) for both arms. For LD patients, the median survival was 10.9 months for ACE and 12.6 months for PE (P=0.51); for ED patients median survival was 8.3 months and 7.5 months, respectively. More grades 3 and 4 neutropenia (90 vs 57%, P<0.005) and grades 3 and 4 infections (73 vs 29%, P<0.005) occurred with ACE, resulting in more days of hospitalisation and greater i.v. antibiotic use. ACE was associated with a higher risk of neutropenic sepsis than PE and with a trend towards worse outcome in patients with LD, and should not be studied further in this group of patients

Phase II trial of sequential gefitinib after minor response or partial response to chemotherapy in Chinese patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Basic research of gefitinib (Iressa, ZD1839) has demonstrated the combination effects of gefitinib and chemotherapy were sequence-dependent. To evaluate the efficacy of sequential administration of gefitinib following a minor response or partial response to two to three cycles of chemotherapy, a phase II clinical trial was done in Chinese patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Thirty-three consecutive patients with advanced NSCLC that had been pretreated with at least one chemotherapeutic regimen and were responding to chemotherapy following 2 to 3 cycles of treatment, entered the trial from May 2004 to February 2006. Patients received gefitinib at an oral dose of 250 mg once daily for 4 weeks. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. The objective response rate was 24.2% (8 of 33)(95% CI, 11% to 42%). The symptom improvement rate was 54.5% (18 of 33) (95% CI, 41% to 69%). The median duration of response was 7 months (95%CI, 4.0 to 13.2 months). The median time to disease progression (TTP) was 6.5 months (95%CI, 0.7 to 16.6 months). The median overall survival time (OS) was 9.8 months (range, 2.1 to 18.0 months), and the actuarial 1-year survival was 36.4%. Toxicity was relatively mild and included only one patient (3.0%) with grade 4 diarrhea, 1 (3.0%) with grade 3 rash, 1 (3.0%) with grade 3 nausea, and 1 with grade 3 vomiting (3.0%). CONCLUSION: Preliminary results suggest that sequential administration of gefitinib following a response to chemotherapy may be beneficial for Chinese patients with advanced NSCLC. Further randomized clinical trials are needed

Randomized phase II study with two gemcitabine- and docetaxel-based combinations as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Docetaxel and gemcitabine combinations have proven active for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare two treatment schedules, one based on our own preclinical data and the other selected from the literature.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with stage IV NSCLC and at least one bidimensionally-measurable lesion were eligible. Adequate bone marrow reserve, normal hepatic and renal function, and an ECOG performance status of 0 to 2 were required. No prior chemotherapy was permitted. Patients were randomized to arm A (docetaxel 70 mg/m²on day 1 and gemcitabine 900 mg/m²on days 3–8, every 3 weeks) or B (gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, and docetaxel 70 mg/m2 on day 8, every 3 weeks).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The objective response rate was 20% (95% CI:10.0–35.9) and 18% (95% CI:8.6–33.9) in arms A and B, respectively. Disease control rates were very similar (54% in arm A and 53% in arm B). No differences were noted in median survival (32 vs. 33 weeks) or 1-year survival (33% vs. 35%). Toxicity was mild in both treatment arms.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results highlighted acceptable activity and survival outcomes for both experimental and empirical schedules as first-line treatment of NSCLC, suggesting the potential usefulness of drug sequencing based on preclinical models.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>IOR 162 02</p

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

The case for the introduction of new chemotherapy agents in the treatment of advanced non small cell lung cancer in the wake of the findings of The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE)

After years of nihilism towards the use of chemotherapy for non small cell lung cancer in the UK it would appear that we have now reached the point where the use of chemotherapy to relieve symptoms, maintain quality of life, and prolong life, are now accepted for informed patients with good performance status willing to accept short-term toxicities. The use of the new agents vinorelbine, gemcitabine and paclitaxel in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin are all active regimens which offer small but real advantages over standard UK triple therapies (MVP, MIC) in terms of resource use, toxicity profiles and response rates. Overall survival could be increased by as much as 10% at one year on indirect comparisons. The use of docetaxel as second line therapy now offers lung cancer patients a second bite of the cherry, and should overall also prolong survival. It is only in embracing these small gains that we can currently make progress in the treatment of NSCLC