Sequential chemotherapy of cisplatin and vinorelbine followed by paclitaxel and gemcitabine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

A randomized phase II trial assessing in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with stable disease after two courses of cisplatin-gemcitabine an early modification of chemotherapy doublet with paclitaxel-gemcitabine versus continuation of cisplatin-gemcitabine chemotherapy (GFPC 03-01 Study)

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the optimal treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and stable disease after cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The objective of the trial was to evaluate a switch to a different dual-agent chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer and stable disease after two cycles of cisplatin (P) and gemcitabine (G) (P day1 (d(1)): 75 mg/m(2), G: 1250 mg/m(2) d(1) and d(8) every 3 weeks) were randomized to receive either two further cycles of PG (arm A) or paclitaxel (100 mg/m(2) d(1), d(8), d(15)) plus gemcitabine (1250 mg/m(2) d(1) and d(8), every 4 weeks) (arm B).

RESULTS

Two-hundred-twenty-eight patients were enrolled between October 2003 and August 2006. After two cycles of PG, 98 patients (43%) had stable disease; 87 were randomized: 45 to arm A and 42 to arm B. The objective response rates were 15.6% (6.5-29.4) and 21.4% (10.3-36.8) in arms A and B. Overall survival after randomization was 9.6 months (7.0-13.8) in arm A and 9.3 months (7.4-13.3) in arm B. Adverse events were similar in the two arms for hematological and non hematological toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential first-line chemotherapy in these patients is feasible with no difference in response rates. These results do not warrant a phase III trial.

A phase III randomised trial comparing sequential chemotherapy using cisplatin-based regimen and paclitaxel to cisplatin-based chemotherapy alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to determine whether in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the sequential administration of cisplatin-based chemotherapy and paclitaxel (Taxol) is superior to a cisplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by paclitaxel as salvage treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 485 chemotherapy naive patients with advanced NSCLC were treated with three courses of GIP (gemcitibine + ifosfamide + cisplatin), consisting of cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) on day 1, ifosfamide 3 g/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1 g/m(2) on days 1 and 8. Patients with nonprogressive disease were then randomised to further similar courses of GIP or courses of paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2) over 3 h every 3 weeks).

RESULTS

Objective response or nonprogression after induction GIP occurred in 174 and 115 patients, respectively. After randomisation, there were 140 patients in the GIP arm and 141 in the paclitaxel arm. In terms of postrandomisation survival, there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.17) between the two arms. Median times were 9.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.8-11.6] and 11.9 (95% CI 9.4-14.3) months for paclitaxel and GIP, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex and haemoglobin were independent prognostic factors. After adjustment for these factors, the observed hazard ratio was 0.81 (95% CI 0.63-1.04) in favour of GIP (P = 0.10). Toxicity was tolerable; there was a significantly higher rate of grades III/IV thrombocytopenia with GIP and more alopecia with paclitaxel.

CONCLUSION

Sequential chemotherapy using cisplatin-based regimen followed by paclitaxel does not result in better outcome than cisplatin-based chemotherapy using taxane as salvage treatment.

Sequential, Alternating, and Maintenance/Consolidation Chemotherapy in Advanced Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Review of the Literature

A platinum-based doublet with a third-generation agent (paclitaxel, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, docetaxel) represents the standard first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with good performance status (PS). Traditional chemotherapy provides response rates of 20%-40% and a median survival of 8-10 months. In an attempt to improve its outcome, alternative schedules have been proposed, namely sequential, alternating, and maintenance/consolidation therapy. Sequential chemotherapy with a platinum-based doublet followed by a single agent is feasible in patients with good PS; preliminary results from randomized phase III trials with combination chemotherapy as a comparator are promising, suggesting similar efficacy and a better toxicity profile for the sequential arm. The use of sequential single agents is an option for elderly and frail patients unsuitable for a platinum-based combination. Based on trials published so far, it is unlikely that an alternating chemotherapy strategy will be proven superior to standard chemotherapy in patients with good PS. However, sufficient evidence exists that it could be appropriate in the elderly or in unfit individuals. Consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy may provide additional benefit for patients achieving disease control after standard first-line chemotherapy. Better results are seen when maintenance consists of an agent that has proven active in the induction phase. Further evaluation of this strategy, as well as of consolidation/maintenance therapy with targeted agents, is warranted. In conclusion, these approaches may improve the outcome in selected patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, but further results from randomized trials are needed. In the meantime, sequential, alternating, and maintenance/consolidation therapy should still be considered investigational.

Docetaxel/gemcitabine or cisplatin/gemcitabine followed by docetaxel in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): results of a multicentre randomized phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Most patients (pts) with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive either single agents or chemotherapy doublets. Recent studies have demonstrated that triple-agent therapies may improve the response rate, but are associated with significant toxicity, and frequently do not prolong survival. A sequential triple-agent schedule may combine acceptable tolerability and good efficacy. We therefore conducted a multicentre, prospectively randomized study that evaluates a sequential three-drug schedule and a platinum-free doublet regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The pts with union international contre le cancer (UICC) stage IV NSCLC were randomized to one of two schedules: in arm Doc-Gem, they received gemcitabine (900 mg/m(2), 30 min infusion) on days 1 and 8, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2), 1 h infusion) on day 1, repeated every 3 weeks up to six cycles. In arm Cis-Gem-->Doc, gemcitabine (900 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (70 mg/m(2), 1 h infusion, day 1) were given for three cycles, followed by three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2), day 1, repeated every 3 weeks).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirteen pts were randomized to arms Doc-Gem (55 pts) and Cis-Gem-->Doc (58 pts). With Doc-Gem, 20.4% of pts responded to the treatment whereas 31.0% responded in arm Cis-Gem-->Doc (overall response, intent-to-treat, difference not significant). The median time to progression was 3.6 months in arm Doc-Gem [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4, 5.9] and 5.2 months in arm Cis-Gem-->Doc (95% CI 3.1, 7.3). The median survival was 8.7 months with treatment Doc-Gem (95% CI 5.7, 11.6) and 9.4 months with treatment Cis-Gem-->Doc (95% CI 7.8, 11.0). The 1-year survival rates were 34 and 35%, respectively. Mild to moderate leukopenia was frequently seen with both schedules. Other common adverse events (AE) were nausea/vomiting, thrombocytopenia, anaemia, diarrhoea, and infections. No significant differences in AEs were observed between the schedules except for nausea/vomiting, which occurred more frequently with Cis-Gem-->Doc.

CONCLUSION

The sequential therapy comprising cisplatin, gemcitabine, and docetaxel demonstrated promising tumour control whereas the platinum-free combination (docetaxel/gemcitabine) was very well tolerated. However, the schedules resulted in comparable survival to recent large trials in pts with advanced NSCLC. The present results do not justify further phase III investigation.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine followed by weekly docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II trial of sequential chemotherapy

Objective. We conducted this phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the sequential nonplatinum combination chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine (GEM) and vinorelbine (VNR) followed by weekly docetaxel (DOC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

stage IV NSCLC, Performance status =/< 2, adequate renal, hepatic and bone marrow function. Treatment consisted on: VNR 25 mg/m(2) plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle, followed by docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) weekly until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results. 21 stage IV patients were enrolled. All patients are evaluable for treatment response and toxicity profile. The mean age of the patients was 63 years (range: 51 to 72) with 18 (86%) males and 3 (14%) females. Histology types were: adenocarcinoma in 8 patients (38%), large cell carcinoma in 1 patients (5%) and squamous cell carcinoma in 12 patients (57%). The majority of the patients had and ECOG PS of 1. Eight patients (38%) did not complete six cycles of gemcitabine-navelbine. The median number of cycles of gemcitabine-navelbine was 4 (range 2-6) Of the 13 patients (61%) who completed six cycles of gemcitabine-navelbine, all of them went on to receive weekly docetaxel and received at least 3 cycles, with a median number of 8 cycles (range 3- 16). The overall response rate was 33%. Respect survival, the minimum follow-up was 6 months (range, 6-25 months). The median survival time (MST) was 7.9 months, and the 1-year survival was 30%, and the median progression-free survival was 4.7 months. Toxicity was mild, well tolerated and mostly hematologic. In the GEM/VNR cycle, grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 14%, two patients with febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 anaemia in 1 patients (5%) and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 1 patient (5%). Nonhematologic toxicity was also mild: 1 patient with Grade 3 skin toxicity with docetaxel, 1 patient with grade 3 infection, 2 patients with grade 3 astenia and 1 patient with a mild allergic reaction postchemotherapy treatment with docetaxel. Conclusion. The sequential triplet nonplatinum chemotherapy consisted of GEM/VNR followed by weekly DOC is active and can be administered safely in advanced NSCLC. Our results are similar with other sequential regimens and did not represent a significant improvement in the treatment of this disease.

A multicenter phase II study of sequential vinorelbine and cisplatin followed by docetaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the activity and toxicity of the sequential administration of vinorelbine/cisplatin (VC regimen) followed by the docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG regimen) combination in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND TREATMENT

Fifty-nine previously untreated patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC received three cycles of cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1), and vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; VC regimen), followed by six cycles of docetaxel (65 mg/m(2), day 1) and gemcitabine (1,500 mg/m(2), day 1), (DG regimen) every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

One (1.7%) complete and 26 (44.1%) partial responses were achieved for an overall response rate of 45.8% (95% CI 33.05-58.48%); 12 (20.3%) patients had stable disease and 20 (33.9%) progressive disease. The median time to progression was 5.3 months, the median survival time 12.5 months and the 1-year survival rate 51%. The main toxicity was grade III/IV neutropenia occurring in 25.5% of patients; all other hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities were relatively infrequent.

CONCLUSIONS

The sequential administration of VC and DG regimens was well tolerated and active against advanced NSCLC and merits to be further evaluated against a single doublet.