Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing after first-line taxane-based chemotherapy: a phase II study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group

Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine Combination Chemotherapy in Taxane-Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Phase II Study of the Kinki Multidisciplinary Breast Oncology Group (KMBOG) 1015

Background: This phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the chemotherapy combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in taxane-pretreated Japanese metastatic breast cancer patients. Methods: In this multicenter, phase II, single-arm study, patients with recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer were administered gemcitabine (1,200 mg/m2) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate, and other endpoints included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results: A total of 42 patients were enrolled in this study. The objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were 24 and 43%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 4.0 months. The median overall survival was 11.1 months. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was the most common hematologic toxicity, occurring in 22 patients (54%). Nonhematologic toxicity was moderate and transient, with fatigue (48%) being the most common condition and no severe adverse event reported. Conclusion: The combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine is an effective and tolerable regimen for HER2-negative, taxane-pretreated, metastatic breast cancer patients in Japan.

Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine (GemVin) Regimen

The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of antineoplastic therapy, and the agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases. Questions or suggestions for topics should be addressed to Dominic A. Solimando, Jr, President, Oncology Pharmacy Services, Inc., 4201 Wilson Blvd #110-545, Arlington, VA 22203, e-mail: OncRxSvc@comcast.net; or J. Aubrey Waddell, Professor, University of Tennessee College of Pharmacy; Oncology Pharmacist, Pharmacy Department, Blount Memorial Hospital, 907 E. Lamar Alexander Parkway, Maryville, TN 37804, e-mail: waddfour@charter.net.

Phase I and II Study of Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine in Heavily Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer and Review of the Literature

Background: Many phase II trials investigated the combination of Gemcitabine (G) and Vinorelbine (V) in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with variable outcomes. This study was conducted to explore whether this combination was effective and tolerable in MBC patients who were heavily pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. Methods: A phase I study was conducted first to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the G and V combination in MBC patients. Then, a phase II study evaluated the response rates, the median time to progression (TTP), the overall survival (OS) as well as the toxicities resulting from this combination at the MTD. Results: Nine patients were enrolled in the phase I study. The MTD was identified as 700mg/m² of G on days 1 and 8 in combination with 15 mg/m² of V on days 2 and 9, every 21 days. Twenty-one of 25 patients involved in the phase II study were evaluable for response. No complete or partial responses were achieved; 6 patients (24.0%) had stable disease and 15 (60.0%) progressed. The median TTP was 2 months and the median OS 10 months. Grade 3/4 Neutropenia was the major hematologic toxicity, occurring in 52% of the cycles. The most common non-hematologic grade 3/4 toxicities were fatigue (18%), myalgias (17%) and arthralgias (13%). Conclusion: In heavily pretreated patients with MBC, the combination of G and V at the doses stated above was ineffective as it did not induce partial or complete responses. Other chemotherapy agents or combinations should be evaluated in future studies.

Gemcitabine in metastatic breast cancer

Gemcitabine is a pyrimidine antimetabolite which has shown activity in metastatic breast cancer both as a single agent, but also in various combination regimens. It is characterized by a unique mechanism of action which includes cytotoxic self-potentiation, masked DNA chain termination and potent inhibition of DNA repair. The clinical application of gemcitabine is supported by a favorable toxicity profile. In metastatic breast cancer, several Phase II trials document the activity of gemcitabine in pretreated and unpretreated patients. In a single Phase III trial performed in elderly patients not pretreated, gemcitabine was inferior to epirubicin. High activity has, however, been obtained by the combination of gemcitabine with taxanes such as paclitaxel or docetaxel. In a randomized trial performed in anthracycline-pretreated patients, the combined use of gemcitabine and paclitaxel induced a significant improvement not only of response rate and time to disease progression, but also caused a significant increase in quality of life and survival when compared with paclitaxel alone. The combination of gemcitabine with vinorelbine and cisplatin has been validated in numerous Phase II trials and promises reliable activity in anthracycline- and/or taxane-pretreated patients. Triple-agent regimens such as gemcitabine/epirubicin/paclitaxel provided consistently high response rates in Phase II trials, but failed to show superiority over the 5-fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide regimen in a randomized Phase III trial. Based on high response rates and pathological complete remission rates achieved by preoperative induction therapy with gemcitabine/epirubicin/taxane regimens, ongoing trials focus on the incorporation of gemcitabine into neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimens.

Significance of Kampo, traditional Japanese medicine, in supportive care of cancer patients

The current standard treatment for cancer is a multidisciplinary therapy whereby various types of treatment are properly combined. Chemotherapy with multiple anticancer drugs is now common, and traditional, complementary, and alternative therapies are adopted as supportive measures. Medical care in Japan is distinguished by the ability for patients to access both Western and Kampo medical cares at the same time. There is a high degree of trust in the safety of Kampo therapies because they are practiced by medical doctors who are educated with fundamental diagnosis of Western medicine. Highly reliable clinical studies are being published, demonstrating that palliative or supportive care for cancer patients using Kampo preparations alleviates adverse effects of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. This paper reports the circumstances around cancer care in Japan where traditional therapeutic Kampo formulas are used for patients undergoing cancer treatment with cutting-edge chemotherapy, specifically to alleviate adverse effects of anticancer drugs.

Gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Elderly patients with MBC received gemcitabine 1,000 mg m(-2) and vinorelbine 25 mg m(-2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles. The primary end points were objective response and toxicity. The secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and prognostic factors associated with disease control, PFS, and OS.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients with a median age of 73 years (range, 65-84 years) were included. The response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors was 33.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.4 to 46.2%). At a median follow-up of 16.2 months, median PFS and OS were 6.2 (95% CI, 4.6 to 7.8) and 17.0 months (95% CI, 14.5 to 19.5), respectively. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events included neutropenia (25.5%), anemia (13.7%), thrombocytopenia (9.8%), fatigue (5.9%), constipation (3.9%), neuropathy (3.9%), and hepatotoxicity (3.9%). Neutropenic fever occurred in 2 patients. There was one toxic death due to massive gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The study of prognostic factors did not reveal any predictive factor of disease control, while response to treatment and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was the main factor conditioning PFS and OS, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine is active and safe in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer.

A phase II study of gemcitabine combined with vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is an unmet need for new combination treatments, especially for aggressive, visceral, and high tumor burden metastatic breast cancer. Gemcitabine (GEM) has shown synergy with vinorelbine (VRL) in preclinical models, and has a toxicity profile that is different from VRL, another recently approved cytotoxic drug that seems to be effective in the treatment of breast cancer.

METHODS

We studied the efficacy and side effects of the GEM-VRL combination as first-line chemotherapy in patients in an open-label, single arm, phase II study in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had been previously treated with an anthracycline-based regimen in the adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting.

RESULTS

Of the 74 patients enrolled, 72 patients were evaluable for the primary treatment outcome (tumor response rates). Four patients (6%) had a complete response and 26 patients (36%) had a partial response. Nineteen patients (26%) had stable disease. The median time to disease progression was 37 weeks (range, 1-60 weeks). Median duration of response was 43 weeks (range, 8.6 to 55 weeks) and one-year survival was 77% (95% confidence interval, 64% to 86%). Grade 3-4 neutropenia without fever was reported in 10% of patients, thrombocytopenia in 1%, and febrile neutropenia in 11%. The most common clinical grade 3-4 toxicities were nausea (24%) and diarrhea and stomatitis (11% each). Hospitalizations for adverse events mainly due to anemia, febrile neutropenia, septic shock and hepatic failure occurred in 7%.

CONCLUSION

With an overall response rate of 42%, the GEM-VRL combination had promising efficacy and good tolerability in metastatic breast cancer patients.

Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

An increasing proportion of patients are exposed to anthracyclines and/or taxanes in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Re-exposure in the metastatic stage is limited by drug resistance, thus evaluation of non-cross-resistant regimens is mandatory.

METHODS

Anthracycline-pretreated patients were randomly assigned to three gemcitabine-based regimens. Chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine 1.000 mg m(-2) plus vinorelbin 25 mg m(-2) on days 1+8 (GemVin), or plus cisplatin 30 mg m(-2) on days 1+8 (GemCis), or plus capecitabine 650 mg m(-2) b.i.d. orally days 1-14 (GemCap), q3w. The primary end point was response rate.

RESULTS

A total of 141 patients were recruited on the trial. The overall response rates were 39.0% (GemVin), 47.7% (GemCis) and 34.7% (GemCap). Median progression-free survival was estimated with 5.7, 6.9 and 8.3 months, respectively. Corresponding median survival times were 17.5 (GemVin), 13.0 (GemCis) and 19.4 months (GemCap). Neutropenia ≥grade 3 occurred in 16.7% (Gem/Vin), 4.4% (GemCis) and 0% (Gem/Cap), whereas non-haematological toxicities were rarely severe except grade 3 hand-foot syndrome in 2.0% of the GemCap patients (per patient analysis).

CONCLUSIONS

This randomised phase II trial has revealed comparable results for three gemcitabine-based regimens regarding treatment efficacy and toxicity. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to be a worthwhile treatment option for pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Phase II study of weekly gemcitabine and vinorelbine for children with recurrent or refractory Hodgkin's disease: a children's oncology group report

PURPOSE

The Children's Oncology Group conducted this phase II study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine and vinorelbine (GV) in pediatric patients with heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory Hodgkin's disease. Both agents have significant single-agent response rates in this setting.

METHODS

GV was given on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day treatment cycle: vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2)/dose administered via intravenous (IV) push before gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2)/dose IV over 100 minutes. Any patients who demonstrated a measurable response (complete response [CR], very good partial response [VGPR], or partial response [PR]) were considered to have experienced a response to GV. Response was evaluated after every two cycles. A two-stage minimax rule was used to test the null hypothesis that the response rate is

RESULTS

Thirty eligible patients with a median age of 17.7 years (range, 10.7 to 29.4 years) were enrolled. All patients had received at least two prior chemotherapy regimens, and 17 patients had undergone prior autologous stem-cell transplantation. Hematologic toxicity was predominant in all treatment cycles. Nonhematologic grade 3 to 4 toxicity, including elevated hepatic enzymes and hyperbilirubinemia, was less common. Pericardial and pleural effusions developed in one patient after cycles 4 and 5 of GV, consistent with gemcitabine-induced radiation recall. There were no toxic deaths. Measurable responses were seen in 19 (76%) of 25 assessable patients (95% exact binomial CI, 55% to 91%), including six CRs, 11 VGPRs, and two PRs.

CONCLUSION

GV is an effective and well-tolerated reinduction regimen for children with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin's disease.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adolescent
• Adult
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects
• Child
• Deoxycytidine/administration & dosage
• Deoxycytidine/adverse effects
• Deoxycytidine/analogs & derivatives
• Disease-Free Survival
• Drug Administration Schedule
• Hodgkin Disease/drug therapy
• Humans
• Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy
• Treatment Outcome
• Vinblastine/administration & dosage
• Vinblastine/adverse effects
• Vinblastine/analogs & derivatives
• Vinorelbine
• Young Adult
• Gemcitabine

Collapse

Grants

• U10 CA098543 NCI NIH HHS
• CA98543 NCI NIH HHS

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Peter D Cole Children's Oncology Group, Arcadia, CA, USA.
Cindy L Schwartz
Richard A Drachtman
Pedro A de Alarcon
Lu Chen
Tanya M Trippett

Collapse

Phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with anthracycline- and taxane- pretreated metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

Metastatic breast cancer patients are usually exposed to taxane and anthracycline as neoadjuvant, adjuvant and palliative chemotherapeutic agents. This study was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of the use of a gemcitabine and cisplatin (GP) combination treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer that were pretreated with anthracycline and taxane.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated the use of a GP regimen (1,000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine administered on days 1 and 8 plus 60 mg/m(2) cisplatin administered on day 1 every 3 weeks) in 38 breast cancer patients who had received prior chemotherapy with anthracycline and taxane as an adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy, or as a palliative therapy.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 49 years (age range, 35 approximately 69 years). The overall response rate was 28.9% in 11 patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 14 approximately 44%). The median time to progression was 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.6 approximately 6.8 months). Median survival was 19.5 months (95% CI, 11.2 approximately 27.8 months). Major grade 3/4 hematological toxicity was due to leukopenia (36 of 157 cycles, 23.1%). Non-hematological toxicity was rarely severe; grade 1/2 nausea and vomiting were observed in 37.8% of the patients. There were no treatment related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the use of gemcitabine plus cisplatin appears to be effective and has an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with advanced breast cancer that have been pretreated with anthracycline and taxane.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination chemotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced breast cancer

PURPOSE

Anthracycline and taxanes are effective agents in advanced breast cancer and prolong survival times. Some patients achieve prolongation of life with capecitabine, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine, even after failure of both anthracycline and taxanes. We analyzed the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination chemotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients who received gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination chemotherapy at the Seoul National University Hospital were reviewed. Gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) were administered intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2006, 57 patients were eligible (median age, 45 years), and the median number of previous chemotherapy regimens was 3 (range, 1 approximately 5). The overall response rate was 30% (95% CI, 18.1 approximately 41.9), and the disease control rate was 46% (PR, 30%; SD, 16%). The median duration of follow-up was 33.4 months, the median time-to-progression (TTP) was 3.9 months, and the median overall survival was 10.8 months. None of the patients with patients with anthracycline and taxane primary resistance showed a response and the median TTP for these patients was significantly shorter than that of other patients (1.9 vs. 4.4 months; p=0.018). Although the efficacy was unsatisfactory in patients with both anthracycline and taxane primary resistance, gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination chemotherapy showed comparable efficacy in anthracycline- and/or taxane-sensitive patients and the patients with secondary resistance, even after failure of second-line therapy. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (18.1%) and febrile neutropenia (0.3%), and non-hematologic toxicities were tolerable.

CONCLUSION

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination chemotherapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced breast cancer was effective and tolerable.

First-line chemotherapy for HER-2 negative metastatic breast cancer patients who received anthracyclines as adjuvant treatment

The treatment decision for patients with metastatic breast cancer who have received anthracyclines within the course of adjuvant chemotherapy is troublesome, particularly if trastuzumab and hormonal treatment are not indicated. In the first part of this review we discuss the value of retreatment with anthracyclines, a topic that has been indirectly evaluated by retrospective studies with conflicting results and within a small phase III trial with a negative outcome. Evidence on liposomal anthracyclines is also reviewed. In the second part of the review, alternative options of first-line chemotherapy are discussed. These include taxanes as single agents, taxanes in combination with other cytotoxic drugs, combinations without anthracyclines and taxanes, and innovative treatments including target-based agents. Both the amount and the quality of evidence on these treatments are poor. Few phase III studies are available and most of them have been performed with registrative aims sponsored by the companies who own the winning drug. Beyond indications derived from such studies, there is a great need for more clinical research in this setting.

Role of gemcitabine in metastatic breast cancer patients: a short review

Many active cytotoxic drugs, given according to a number of different regimens are approved for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients. However, these therapies have not changed the outcome of patients affected by this malignancy. As a consequence, the balance between chemotherapy-induced side effects and relief of cancer-related symptoms must be carefully considered in this setting. Gemcitabine is an antimetabolite that is incorporated as a triphosphate into DNA. As a single agent, it yields responses rates ranging from 14% to 37% in chemotherapy-naïve patients and from 12% to 30% in patients previously treated with anthracyclines and/or taxanes. In combination with paclitaxel, it produces a significantly higher response rate (41.4% vs. 26.2%), longer time to progression (6.1 vs. 4 months) and significantly higher overall survival (18.6 vs. 15.8 months) than paclitaxel alone. In addition, a phase III study revealed that gemcitabine plus docetaxel is as effective as capecitabine plus docetaxel, but causes significantly less non-haematologic toxicity. Lastly, in another phase III trial, progression free survival was significantly longer with the combination of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine than with vinorelbine alone (6 vs. 4 months), but without a significant difference in overall survival; the incidence of haematologic toxicity was higher in the group treated with combined therapy. Novel gemcitabine combinations are being investigated in phase II studies.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination chemotherapy for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas: results of a phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Single-agent gemcitabine and vinorelbine have activity in treatment of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas. The combination of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine has activity against several forms of metastatic carcinoma with acceptable toxicity. This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma.

METHODS

A single academic center performed this phase II trial. Eligible patients had unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas, Eastern Cooperative Group performance status of 0-2, adequate organ function, and <or=1 prior regimen. Gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 was given over 90 minutes on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle after administration of vinorelbine 25 mg/m2. Dosing schedule was modified for toxicity (doses constant but administered on Days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle). Dose reductions were allowed if unacceptable toxicities recurred.

RESULTS

The study accrued 40 patients, and 248 dosing cycles were administered (range, 1-32). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Of 9 episodes of grade 4 toxicities, 8 were hematologic. Of 38 episodes of grade 3 toxicity, 24 were hematologic. Clinical benefit was seen in 25% of patients and was defined as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) at >4 months. There has been 1 CR lasting >1 year in a patient with high-grade pleomorphic spindle-cell sarcoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemcitabine given by a fixed-dose rate of infusion combined with vinorelbine was associated with clinically meaningful rates of disease control in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. Toxicity was acceptable. This study contributed to data that have supported the administration of fixed-dose rate gemcitabine-based drug regimens in soft-tissue sarcomas.

Gemcitabine in the management of metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A systematic review of the evidence for gemcitabine chemotherapy, alone or in combination, in women with metastatic/advanced breast cancer was undertaken in order to determine gemcitabine's role in the first-line and/or second-line or greater setting.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the American Society of Clinical Oncologists, San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium proceedings, and the Cochrane Library were searched through September 2006 for randomized controlled trials and non-randomized phase two trials.

RESULTS

Eighty-three trials were identified, including four randomized phase III trials. All of the phase III trials included first-line patients. Two of the phase III trails demonstrated clinical benefit with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in terms of superior efficacy or less toxicity while two phase III trials found no clinical benefit based on less efficacy or increased toxicity. Although 78 phase II trials of gemcitabine alone or in combination with other chemotherapy agents were identified, few combinations showed results compelling enough to warrant randomized trials.

CONCLUSION

Available data do not support the acceptance of gemcitabine as a standard therapeutic option in women with metastatic breast cancer in the third-line or greater setting, nor should it be considered as first-line therapy in anthracycline naïve women. Gemcitabine appears to be most effective when administered with a taxane (docetaxel/paclitaxel) in the first- or second-line setting, with gemcitabine/taxane combinations representing a viable alternative to currently accepted taxane combinations such as capecitabine/docetaxel. There is no evidence at this time to support the use of gemcitabine triplets, given the equal efficacy to anthracycline triplets and the added toxicity.

Gemcitabine plus vinorelbine versus vinorelbine monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes: final results of the phase III Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM) trial

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare the additional benefit of gemcitabine when combined with vinorelbine above that of standard vinorelbine treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

In this phase III, multicentre, open-label, randomised study, 252 women with locally recurrent and metastatic breast cancer who had been pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes were randomly assigned single-agent vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8) or gemcitabine plus vinorelbine (1200/30 mg/m(2), days 1 and 8). Both study treatments were administered intravenously every 21 days until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or stoppage at the request of investigator or patient. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival. Secondary objectives included assessments of response rate, disease duration, overall survival, and characterisation of the toxicity profiles of both regimens. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00128310.

FINDINGS

Between 2001 and 2005, 252 women were recruited and randomised for treatment. One of these patients was ineligible. Prognostic factors were well balanced between treatment groups (median number of metastatic sites in combination group 2 (range 0-5) and in vinorelbine group 2 (range 1-6); visceral disease in 76% and 75% of patients, respectively). Median progression-free survival was 6.0 months (95% CI 4.8-7.1) for patients given gemcitabine plus vinorelbine and 4.0 months (2.9-5.1) for those assigned vinorelbine; there was 1.9 months of difference (hazard ratio 0.66 [0.50-0.88]; p=0.0028). Overall survival was 15.9 months (12.6-19.1) for the gemcitabine plus vinorelbine group and 16.4 months (11.6-21.0) for the vinorelbine group; there was 0.5 months of difference (hazard ratio 1.04 [0.78-1.39]; p=0.8046). Objective response rates were 36% for patients assigned gemcitabine plus vinorelbine (n=45) and 26% for those assigned vinorelbine (n=33) (p=0.093). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was reported in 75 (61% [52-70]) of the participants assigned gemcitabine plus vinorelbine, compared with 55 (44% [35-53]) of those assigned vinorelbine alone (p=0.0074). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 13 (11%) of those assigned gemcitabine plus vinorelbine, and in seven (6%) of those assigned vinorelbine alone (p=0.15). Incidences of grade 3 or 4 non-haematological toxic effects were similar between the two treatment groups.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with metastatic breast cancer assigned gemcitabine and vinorelbine had better progression-free survival compared with those assigned vinorelbine alone. However, this finding did not translate into a difference in overall survival. Although toxicity was manageable, patients in the combined group had more haematological toxic effects. These factors should be taken into account when deciding which chemotherapy patients should receive.

Which benefit from adding gemcitabine to vinorelbine in elderly (≥70 years) women with metastatic breast cancer? Early interruption of a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Since vinorelbine and gemcitabine are both active in breast cancer with moderate toxicity, in 2002 we started a phase II trial with a combination regimen in elderly patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To evaluate complete plus partial response rates and toxicity of first-line vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks, in women>or=70 years with advanced breast cancer and measurable lesions. All patients underwent multidimensional geriatric assessment before enrollment. A two-step design was applied, and the trial would be completed if an overall response rate>or=30% was obtained with a grade 3-grade 4 (G3-G4) toxicity rate<or=25% (excluding neutropenia) in the first step.

RESULTS

Twelve eligible patients had a median age of 74 years. At MGA, eight patients were fit, three vulnerable, one frail due to major depression; only two patients had G3 comorbidities according to Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric. Seventy-five percent of patients had visceral disease. We obtained only one partial remission (11.1%) and six stabilizations of disease in nine assessable patients, with a time to progression of 3 months. Three patients (25%) experienced G3 neutropenia, and three patients (25%) developed G3 anemia (one patient) and G3 gastrointestinal toxicity (two patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The promising response rates obtained with this combination by other authors could not be confirmed in our small cohort of older women with breast cancer, therefore the trial was prematurely terminated. We do not recommend the co-administration of gemcitabine to vinorelbine in women>or=70 years outside the setting of controlled clinical trials.

Gemcitabine single or combination chemotherapy in post anthracycline and taxane salvage treatment of metastatic breast cancer: retrospective analysis of 124 patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, particularly in patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated 2(nd)-line or greater metastatic breast cancer, and to compare gemcitabine monotherapy (G) with two gemcitabine-based doublets, gemcitabine/vinorelbine (GV) and gemcitabine/capecitabine (GX).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of 124 consecutive patients who progressed after anthracycline- and taxane-containing chemotherapy, 58 received G alone, 38 received GV, and 28 received GX; their outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The median number of prior metastatic chemotherapy regimens was 2 (range 0 approximately 4). Visceral metastases were observed in 65 patients (51.4%). The overall response rate was 19.3% (21 partial responses). After a median follow-up period of 21.4 months, the overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.5 approximately 9.6 months) and the median time to progression was 3.1 months (95% CI: 2.0 approximately 4.2 months). Compared with monotherapy (G), combination therapy with vinorelbine or capecitabine (GV/GX) was associated with a significantly higher response rate (8.2% vs. 28.3%, p=0.008) and a significantly longer median time to progression (2.8 vs. 3.5 months; p=0.028), but overall survival did not differ between the groups (7.4 vs. 8.2 months, respectively; p=0.54). Most of the adverse treatment-related events were mild to moderate in intensity. The most common adverse event was hematologic toxicity. Multivariate analysis showed that poor performance status and a short disease-free interval were independent prognostic factors for impaired overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of gemcitabine with vinorelbine or capecitabine was an active and well-tolerated treatment option for taxane- and anthracycline-pretreated 2(nd)-line or greater metastatic breast cancer patients, and gemcitabine-based doublets were more beneficial than gemcitabine monotherapy in alleviating symptoms for these patients.

Biweekly gemcitabine plus vinorelbine in first-line metastatic breast cancer: efficacy and correlation with HER2 extracellular domain

Purpose. To assess the toxicity and efficacy of biweekly gemcitabine plus vinorelbine in first-line advanced breast cancer, and to establish whether circulating HER2 ECD levels correlate with the efficacy of the combination. Patients and methods. 52 patients were treated with gemcitabine 2500 mg/m(2) plus vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2), both on day 1 of 14-day cycles, for a maximum of 10 cycles. Baseline serum levels of HER2 ECD were assessed with an ELISA. Results. All patients were evaluable for toxicity, and 50 for efficacy. Overall toxicity was moderate. Grade 3 neutropenia occurred in 35% of patients and grade 4 in 19%. Other grade 3 toxicities were observed in less than 6%. There was one episode of febrile neutropenia, and one death after cycle three. Overall response rate was 52% (95% CI: 38% to 66%), with 2 patients achieving a CR (4%). Response rate did not correlate with HER2 ECD, with 50% of HER2 ECD positive patients responding, vs 48.5% of the HER2 ECD negative. Median overall survival was 24.6 months. Conclusion. Gemcitabine plus vinorelbine, given as an every-two-week schedule, is an active regimen in advanced breast carcinoma. This combination can be an option when anthracyclines and taxanes are not preferred. HER2 ECD has no predictive value in this non-taxane combination.

Mitoxantrone plus gemcitabine in pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer

Gemcitabine and mitoxantrone have both shown significant antitumor activity in patients with breast cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination as second or third-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Forty-six previously treated patients with MBC were enrolled from June 2000 to November 2002. Mean age was 56 years and ECOG performance status was < or =2. All patients received mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2, D8 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, D1+8 every 21 days for 6 cycles. There were no complete responders. Objective response was observed in 12 patients (26%), 15 (33%) patients had stable disease, 15 (33%) had progressive disease and 4 (9%) were non-evaluable. At median follow-up of 27.8 months, overall survival was 13.3 months (range 0.6-33.8+) and the median time to disease progression (TTP) was 4.4 months (range 0.2-33.8). Toxicities (grade 3-4) were as follows: leukopenia 18 (39%), neutropenia 19 (41%), thrombocytopenia 4 (8.5%), anemia 6 (13%) and alopecia 1 (2%). Febrile neutropenia was recorded in 2 (4%) patients. There were no treatment related deaths. The authors conclude that the combination of mitoxantrone and gemcitabine is an effective regimen in pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer. Toxicity was manageable.

Vinorelbine in the management of breast cancer: New perspectives, revived role in the era of targeted therapy

Vinorelbine is a semi-synthetic vinca alkaloid that has been shown active in many tumour types and is currently registered for the treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This agent has a generally favourable safety profile, and may be suitable for use in special populations such as the elderly and/or frail patient. However, with the taxanes firmly established as standard second line treatment for ABC after failure of an anthracycline, vinorelbine has been generally relegated for use as third line therapy, in competition with the oral compound capecitabine. More recently, the exciting results observed with the combination of vinorelbine and trastuzumab in patients with Her-2 overexpressing/amplified tumours, as well as the development of a reliable formulation and revised schedule of oral vinorelbine with proven activity in ABC appear to have revived the interest in this compound in the management of this disease. There are still a number of unanswered questions that will have to be addressed by properly designed, adequately powered randomised clinical trials.

Role of Gemcitabine in Breast Cancer Management: An Update

Anthracyclines and the taxanes are now used earlier in the course of therapy for metastatic breast cancer, and increasingly as part of adjuvant treatment. Accordingly, novel therapies are warranted, including alternatives to anthracyclines and combination strategies in the setting of disease resistance to or disease progression after anthracycline and taxane therapy. Gemcitabine is part of this strategy. The gemcitabine/paclitaxel combination has emerged as part of a new standard of combination therapy for advanced breast cancer, based on phase III data showing superiority of this combination over paclitaxel alone in the first-line therapy setting. Gemcitabine alone, or in combination with paclitaxel and other agents, is also undergoing evaluation in other settings including the refractory metastatic setting, as part of management of patients with HER2-positive disease, and also as part of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer.

Gemcitabine as prolonged infusion and vinorelbine in anthracycline and/or taxane pretreated metastatic breast cancer: a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine are active agents for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Prolonged infusion of gemcitabine can result in higher levels of active metabolites compared to shorter administration. This phase II trial was initiated to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of gemcitabine as prolonged infusion in combination with vinorelbine in anthracycline and/or taxane pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who had received one prior line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease were treated with gemcitabine (350 mg/m2 as 4 h infusion) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles.

RESULTS

Of 26 patients enrolled, 84% had received prior anthracycline treatment and 50% prior taxane therapy. In total, one complete and six partial responses were achieved, accounting for an overall response rate of 30.4%. The clinical benefit rate was 47.8%. Median duration of response and median time to progression were 7.3 months and 4.6 months, respectively. Median overall survival was 14.5 months. Although the predominant toxicity was myelosuppression with grade 3/4 neutropenia in 42% of patients, few neutropenic complications resulted. Non-hematological toxicity was generally moderate. Most common non-hematologic toxicities were nausea, vomiting, alopecia, peripheral neuropathy and elevation of liver enzymes.

CONCLUSION

Gemcitabine as prolonged infusion and vinorelbine are a safe and effective combination treatment in anthracycline and/or taxane pretreated patients. Approximately 47.8% of patients derived clinical benefit from treatment. This regimen represents a therapeutic option for patients receiving second-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer.

In vivo synergism between docetaxel and gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer: General concepts and future perspectives

The docetaxel and gemcitabine combination is an active regimen as salvage therapy in taxane-resistant or taxane-refractory patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We recently conducted a phase II study administering this combination to patients with MBC after docetaxel failure, with remarkably high response rates that could be attributed to an in vivo synergism between the two drugs. Women with MBC who were refractory or resistant to docetaxel monotherapy as first- or second-line treatment were recruited. Patients with progressive or stable disease after receiving a minimum of four cycles of docetaxel received gemcitabine 900 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus docetaxel 100 mg/m(2)on day 8, every 3 weeks. Forty-six percent of patients responded (three complete responses, 20 partial responses), while 28% had stable disease and 26% had progressive disease. Median duration of response was 6.07 +/- 2.43 months. Neutropenia was the only grade 4 toxicity, and reported in seven patients. Other grade 3 toxicities included neutropenia (12 patients), thrombocytopenia (seven patients), and anemia (one patient), while nonhematologic toxicities were easily manageable. These data outline the importance of a rational combination of existing, active chemotherapeutic agents for MBC, and broadens our perspectives for more effective combination regimens in various solid tumors in the future.

Role of gemcitabine in the treatment of advanced and metastatic breast cancer

Gemcitabine is an antimetabolite drug with proven antitumor activity and tolerability in metastatic breast cancer. In a total of nine studies, gemcitabine monotherapy has reached response rates of up to 37% in the first-line setting, 26% in the second-line setting, and 18% or better in the third-line setting. Gemcitabine is an excellent choice for combination therapy by its unique mechanism of action and favorable toxicity profile, thus limiting the risk of pretreatment-related drug resistance and overlapping toxicity, and by its potential for synergistic interaction with some combination partners as indicated in preclinical studies. Numerous phase II clinical studies have combined gemcitabine with other active agents such as the taxanes, vinorelbine, vindesine, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, as well as anthracyclines across various regimens and conditions of pretreatment. Most of these two-drug combinations have consistently demonstrated higher efficacy than either single agent, particularly in pretreated patients. Even higher efficacy has been obtained with triple-drug regimens including gemcitabine, anthracyclines (epirubicin or doxorubicin), and paclitaxel; these regimens have yielded overall response rates of 58-92% as first-line treatment. In view of these results, gemcitabine may be regarded as a valuable alternative to the palliative treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and an excellent option for the development of effective combination treatment not only in first-line therapy, but also for intensively pretreated patients previously exposed to anthracyclines and/or the taxanes.

Single-agent capecitabine: a reference treatment for taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer?

The treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer that has progressed despite previous anthracycline- and taxane-based therapy is a challenge for oncologists. Several agents, including vinorelbine, gemcitabine, pemetrexed, and particularly capecitabine, have been evaluated in this setting, either alone or in combination with other cytotoxic agents. The efficacy of many of these agents has not yet been clearly established in this setting, as the majority have been evaluated in a limited number of patients and predominantly in single-center trials. Furthermore, some agents with clinically meaningful activity are often associated with significant toxicity, particularly myelosuppression and neuropathy, while less toxic agents/regimens often exchange improved tolerability for reduced activity. Capecitabine, an oral chemotherapeutic, is the agent that has been evaluated most extensively in this setting. A large, phase II trial (n = 163) conducted in North America demonstrated a disease control rate of 63%, including an objective response rate of 20%, median time to disease progression of 3.0 months, and median survival of approximately 1 year. Adverse events were typically mild to moderate in intensity and could be controlled with treatment interruption or, if necessary, dose adjustment to each individual's tolerable dose. Data recently reported from three other large trials in taxane-pretreated patients have revealed similar efficacy and tolerability. Together, these four trials show that single-agent capecitabine, in a population of 500 patients, consistently produced clinically meaningful efficacy, including median survival of approximately 1 year, with a favorable safety profile. Myelosuppression and alopecia were particularly rare. In addition, the oral administration of capecitabine, which enables convenient, patient-oriented therapy, makes it an attractive treatment for patients. Based primarily on the results of the pivotal trial, capecitabine received regulatory approval as treatment for anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated (paclitaxel-pretreated in the U.S.) metastatic breast cancer. In light of the confirmatory results of subsequent large trials, capecitabine is now considered a reference treatment in this setting, as no other agent has consistently demonstrated such high efficacy in as large a patient population.

Synergistic effect of sequential administration of mitoguazone (MGBG) and gemcitabine in treating tissue cultured human breast cancer cells and mammary rat tumors

Modulation of cancer chemotherapeutic drugs has been attempted to increase efficacy and overcome resistance to the chemotherapeutic agent. Studies have shown schedule-dependent interactions in combined use of chemotherapeutic drugs. Mitoguazone (MGBG), an old drug with possible modulating activity, was used in combination with gemcitabine, a relatively new cancer drug, in treating tissue cultured human breast cancer cells and mammary rat tumors. Tissue cultured BOT-2 cancer cells were first treated with varying concentrations of gemcitabine and MGBG, independently. Combinations of the two drugs were then used with different scheduled administrations. Marked synergistic activity was found between gemcitabine and MGBG when the MGBG was given first, followed by gemcitabine 24 hours later. A non-toxic dose of MGBG enhanced the toxicity of gemcitabine by eight orders of magnitude using MTT assays in the tissue cultured human breast cancer cell study. The sequential administration of MGBG and gemcitabine also increased the survival rate of rats bearing mammary tumors in our pilot animal study.

Gemcitabine/vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with anthracyclines: results of a phase II trial

This phase II study was designed to evaluate the response rate (RR) and toxicity of gemcitabine/vinorelbine in patients with metastatic breast cancer. All patients had previously received anthracyclines. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1200 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Median age was 59 years (range, 33-73 years). Ten patients had received only adjuvant therapy with anthracyclines. The remaining 15 patients had received chemotherapy for metastatic disease, including taxanes in 11 cases. Four patients could not be evaluated for response. By intent-to-treat analysis, the overall RR was 44% (95% CI, 24.4%-65%). Median duration of response and median time to treatment failure were 21 and 17 weeks, respectively. The main toxicity was hematologic, with grade 3/4 neutropenia occurring in 13 patients and 1 patient developing febrile neutropenia. Two deaths from pneumonia occurred. These results reveal an encouraging activity with a reasonable toxicity profile in a patient population with an unfavorable prognosis. Our group is conducting a randomized study to compare this combination with vinorelbine alone in patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure to respond to anthracyclines and taxanes

The combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine is an active regimen as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated with taxanes and/or anthracyclines: a phase I-II study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine and vinorelbine (GemVin), in patients with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with anthracyclines alone or with taxanes. Patients and methods. Nine patients were entered into the phase I and 50 patients were entered into the phase II study. Gemcitabine was administered beginning with the dose of 800 mg/m2 and vinorelbine was given at the fixed dose of 25 mg/m2, both on days 1 and 8, every 21 days. Escalated dose levels of gemcitabine were planned by increments of 200 mg/m2 per level. The median age of the 50 assessable patients for the phase II study was 56.5 years (range 30-70) and median performance status (PS, ECOG score), 1 (range 0-2). The dominant sites of metastases were viscera in 40, bone in five and soft tissue in five patients. First-line chemotherapy for metastatic disease with taxanes and anthracyclines or with anthracyclines alone was administered in 36 and 14 patients, respectively.

RESULTS

The optimal schedule for the combination was gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2. The maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine was 1000 mg/m2, with grade 4 neutropenia occurring in two cases at this dose level. Overall, 267 cycles were given to the 50 patients enrolled into the phase II (mean 5.3; range 3-9). The schedule was well tolerated: three patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia and another four patients experienced grade 3 anemia. Non-hematological toxicities were moderate. A major objective response was observed in 42% of patients (95% confidence interval (CI), 28-57%), with complete remission in four (8%) and partial response in 17 (34%) patients. The median time to progression was 6 months. Activity as well as toxicity were similar in the subgroups of the patients pretreated either with combinations of taxanes and anthracyclines or anthracyclines alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal GemVin schedule is an effective and well tolerated second-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer pre-treated with anthracycline-based schedules or with combinations of anthracyclines and taxanes.

Phase I/II study of gemcitabine plus mitoxantrone as salvage chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer

The purpose of this study was to determine the maximum-tolerated dose of gemcitabine plus mitoxantrone in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and to evaluate activity and toxicity of this combination in a phase II trial. Sixty-three patients with MBC, previously treated with chemotherapy including anthracycline and/or taxanes, were treated with mitoxantrone 10 or 12 mg m(-2) intravenously on day 1 plus gemcitabine in escalating doses from 600 to 1200 mg m(-2) intravenously on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. In phase I, on 23 patients entered on study, dose-limiting toxicity occurred at the dosage of 1200 mg m(-2) gemcitabine and 10 mg m(-2) mitoxantrone, with three out of five patients developing grade 4 neutropenia. In phase II, with gemcitabine administered at 1000 mg m(-2) and mitoxantrone at 10 mg m(-2), 12 (30%) out of 40 assessable patients responded, even if no complete response was obtained. Moreover, stable disease was observed in eight (20%) patients. The median time to treatment failure was 22 weeks (range, 2-33), and median survival was 42 weeks (range, 2-92). Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia were observed in 12 (30%) and one (2.5%) cases respectively; grade 3 thrombocytopenia was observed in two patients (5%), grade 2 mucositis in two patients (5%), grade 3 anaemia in two patients (5%), grade 3 alopecia in one patient (2.5%) and asymptomatic cardiotoxicity in three patients (8%), respectively. In conclusion, the doses of 10 mg m(-2) (day 1) for mitoxantrone and 1000 mg m(-2) for gemcitabine (days 1-8) every 3 weeks resulted active and safe in MBC. Further investigations in less heavily pretreated patients are warranted.

Gemcitabine in combination with vinorelbine for treatment of advanced breast cancer

Several cytotoxic drugs have substantial antitumor activity against breast cancer. Combination cytotoxic regimens are associated with higher response rates and longer durations of response and survival than single-agent regimens. However, combination regimens of conventional agents have not changed the course of advanced disease. Since 1990, several newer cytotoxic agents have been developed and integrated into management strategies for advanced breast cancer. Gemcitabine and vinorelbine are 2 such newer cytotoxic agents that have demonstrated promising antitumor activity and favorable toxicity profiles as single-agent therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Gemcitabine and vinorelbine have different mechanisms of antitumor activity, good therapeutic indices, and nonoverlapping toxicities. The combination of these 2 drugs has been evaluated for the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Preliminary results from phase II clinical trials suggest that gemcitabine/vinorelbine with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor is effective first- or second-line therapy for advanced breast cancer and has a favorable safety profile. Further studies of the gemcitabine/ vinorelbine combination regimen are warranted

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination in patients with metastatic breast cancer

Both gemcitabine and vinorelbine as single agents have significant activity against metastatic breast cancer, with an overall response rate ranging from 14% to 40%. Because each drug has different mechanisms of action and toxicity profile, we have evaluated the activity and tolerability as a combined regimen in metastatic breast cancer patients. Thirty-two breast cancer patients with prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease received a combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine at 1,200 and 30 mg/m2, respectively. The drugs were administered on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day cycle. The study was designed to evaluate the response rate, the duration of response, the time to progression, and overall survival. Toxicity and tolerability of this combination were also evaluated. Out of 32 patients analyzed, a complete response was achieved in 2 patients (6.3%) and a partial response in 12 patients (37.5%), with an overall response rate of 43.8%. After a median follow-up of 7 months, the median duration of response was 5.3 months, and the time to progression was 5.0 months. Overall survival was not reached because the majority of the patients were alive at the time of analysis. The gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination was tolerable, with hematologic toxicity being the most common side-effect. Three patients suffered from grade 4 neutropenia, and none suffered from grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Nonhematologic toxicity was minimal and transient, with nausea and phlebitis being the most common. The gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination at the previously specified doses shows significant activity in metastatic breast cancer patients. The treatment is well tolerated and has an acceptable toxicity profile. In patients previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes, this combination regimen offers an alternative treatment with preservation of a good quality of life.

An EORTC-IDBBC phase I study of gemcitabine and continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil in patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to anthracyclines or pre-treated with both anthracyclines and taxanes

The aim of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and potential activity of combined gemcitabine and continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients that are resistant to anthracyclines or have been pretreated with both anthracyclines and taxanes. 15 patients with MBC were studied at three European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer centres. 13 patients had received both anthracylines and taxanes. Gemcitabine was given intravenously (i.v.) on days 1 and 8, and 5-FU as a continuous i.v. infusion on days 1 through to 14, both drugs given in a 21-day schedule at four different dose levels. Both were given at doses commonly used for the single agents for the last dose level (dose level 4). One of 6 patients at level 4 (gemcitabine 1200 mg/m2 and 5-FU 250 mg/m2/day) had a DLT, a grade 3 stomatitis and skin toxicity. One DLT, a grade 3 transaminase rise and thrombosis, occurred in a patient at level 2 (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and 5-FU 200 mg/m2/day). Thus, the MTD was not reached. One partial response and four disease stabilisations were observed. Only 1 patient withdrew from the treatment due to toxicity. The MTD was not reached in the phase I study. The combination of gemcitabine and 5-FU is well tolerated at doses up to 1200 mg/m2 given on days 1 and 8 and 250 mg/m2/day given on days 1 through to 14, respectively, every 21 days. The clinical benefit rate (responses plus no change of at least 6 months) was 33% with one partial response, suggesting that MBC patients with prior anthracycline and taxane therapy may derive significant benefit from this combination with minimal toxicity.

Phase II trial of biweekly administration of vinorelbine and gemcitabine in pretreated advanced breast cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of gemcitabine (GEM) plus vinorelbine (VRL) administered biweekly in pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Advanced breast cancer patients without response, with stable disease, or with recurrence within 6 months of prior treatment were given GEM 1,000 mg/m(2) and VRL 25 mg/m(2), once every 2 weeks for at least six cycles.

RESULTS

Of the 51 patients enrolled, 50 (median, age 58 years; range, 34 to 76 years) were assessable. All patients had prior chemotherapy with an anthracycline-related regimen that included taxanes in 50% of the cases. Four patients (8%) had a complete response (CR) and 23 (46%) had a partial response (PR), for an overall response rate of 54%; 16 (32%) had stable disease and 7 (14%) experienced disease progression. Response occurred mainly in patients with soft tissue (83.3%) and lung metastasis (66.7%). Response duration was 4 to 8+, 4 to 9+, and 4 to 9 months for those with CR, PR, and stable disease, respectively. The regimen was well tolerated, with grade 1 to 2 myelotoxicity and asthenia reported. No patient required a dose reduction. Gastrointestinal side effects were negligible. Patients received 99.7% (range, 93.0% to 100.0%) of the planned dose-intensity of each drug.

CONCLUSION

GEM in combination with VRL is an active regimen for advanced breast cancer patients, and biweekly administration significantly reduces myelotoxicity.

Phase I/II study of gemcitabine in association with vinorelbine for metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine (G) and vinorelbine (V) have favorable safety profile and antitumor activity in metastatic breast cancer. To exploit their different mechanism of action and lack of overlapping toxicity, we performed a phase I and II study of G and V in combination.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-three patients with metastatic breast cancer were treated. In the dose-finding phase, seven cohorts of patients (22 women) received increasing doses to determine the dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination. Patients recruited in the phase II portion of the study (31 women) received the dose level immediately below the one defined as MTD (i.e., G 1200 mg/m2, V 30 mg/m2, on day 1 and day 8, every 3 weeks).

RESULTS

Dose escalation was discontinued at G 1400mg/m2 and V 30 mg/m2 because of toxic death due to thrombocytopenia and CNS hemorrage. No other limiting toxicities were observed, and tolerability was similar at all dose levels studied in the escalation portion of the study. The main toxicity was granulocytopenia of grade 3/4 in 36 and 48% of the patients on phase I and II respectively, without episodes of neutropenic fever. Thrombocytopenia was uncommon. Other side effects were usually mild to moderate. In 46 evaluable patients, the response rate was 24% (complete response 7%, partial response 17%). Disease stabilization was observed in further 17%. The median duration of response was 12 months (range 5-14) and the median survival was 20 months (range 1 to 45+).

CONCLUSIONS

G and V, on day 1 and 8 of 3-weekly cycles, can safely be administered to patients with metastatic breast cancer at the dose of 1200 and 30 mg/m2, respectively. The antitumor activity of G and V in combination was similar to that reported when using either drug as single agent.

Systemic therapy

A large body of data on systemic therapy has been presented and published in the past year, including new information on primary risk reduction, patient selection for adjuvant systemic therapy, and anthracycline-analogs. New data on ongoing adjuvant trials (including taxane studies), unpublished updates from the fourth Oxford Overview in September 2000, and provocative data on ovarian ablation were important features of the November 2000 National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on Adjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer. Important new data on anti-estrogen therapy, including aromatase inhibitors and pure antiestrogens, further expand the role of the oldest targeted breast cancer therapy. Trastuzumab and other novel compounds are being investigated as single-agents and in combination with conventional systemic approaches. Discussions on the long-term effects of adjuvant therapy have taken center stage also. These and other important ongoing developments since 2000 are examined in this review article.