First-line gemcitabine with cisplatin or epirubicin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wachters FM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2394313 | biostudies-other | 2003 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundExtensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) is characterized by rapid progression and relapse, despite high initial response rates to chemotherapy. The primary objective of this trial was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of amrubicin and cisplatin (AP) combination therapy compared with the standard first-line regimen of etoposide and cisplatin (EP) for previously untreated ED-SCLC in a Chinese population. When non-inferiority was verified, the objective was switched from non-inferiority to superiority.MethodsFrom June 2008 to July 2010, 300 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to AP and EP groups. AP-treated patients received cisplatin (60 mg/m(2), day 1) and amrubicin (40 mg/m(2), days 1-3) once every 21 days. EP-treated patients received cisplatin (80 mg/m(2), day 1) and etoposide (100 mg/m(2), days 1-3) once every 21 days. Treatment was continued for four to six cycles, except in cases of progressive disease or toxicity, and patient refusal.ResultsMedian overall survival (OS) for AP vs. EP treatment was 11.8 vs. 10.3 months (p = 0.08), respectively, demonstrating non-inferiority of AP to EP (AP group: 95% confidence interval for hazard ratio 0.63-1.03 months). Median progression-free survival and overall response rates for AP vs. EP groups were 6.8 vs. 5.7 months (p = 0.35) and 69.8% vs. 57.3%, respectively. Drug-related adverse events in both groups were similar, with neutropenia being the most frequent (AP 54.4%; EP 44.0%). Leukopenia, pyrexia, and fatigue were more prevalent in the AP group, but all were clinically reversible and manageable.ConclusionsAP therapy demonstrated non-inferiority to EP therapy, prolonging OS for 1.5 months, but this difference was not statistically significant; thus we propose AP as a promising treatment option for ED-SCLC in China.Trial registrationThis trial was registered on 10 April 2008 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00660504).
| S-EPMC4826513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this phase II, multicentre trial, patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) were treated with a combination of gemcitabine, epirubicin and paclitaxel (GET). The primary objective of this study was to determine the tolerability and activity in terms of complete responce (CR) and overall response rate of the GET combination in this patient population. Patients with no prior treatment for MBC, and at least one bidimensionally measurable lesion received gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) intravenously (i.v.) over 30 min on days 1 and 4, followed by epirubicin i.v. at 90 mg m(-2) on day 1, and paclitaxel 175 mg m(-2) over 3 h on day 1, every 21 days, up to eight courses. From May 1999 to June 2000, 48 patients were enrolled from seven Italian institutions. A total of 297 chemotherapy courses were administered with a median of six cycles patient(-1) (range 1-8). Seven patients (15%) obtained CR and 27 patients (56%) had partial responce, for an overall response rate of 71% (95% CI: 58.3-83.7). After a median follow-up of 23.7 months (range 7.0-34.4), median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (95% CI: 9.2-11.7), and median overall survival 25.9 months. The main haematological toxicity consisted of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia that occurred in 62% of cycles (22% grade 4 and 40% grade 3). The GET combination is active and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for MBC.
| S-EPMC2395340 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundBevacizumab, the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent, provides clinical benefit when combined with platinum-based chemotherapy in first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We report the final overall survival (OS) analysis from the phase III AVAiL trial.Patients and methodsPatients (n = 1043) received cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) for up to six cycles plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (n = 345), bevacizumab 15 mg/kg (n = 351) or placebo (n = 347) every 3 weeks until progression. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); OS was a secondary end point.ResultsSignificant PFS prolongation with bevacizumab compared with placebo was maintained with longer follow-up {hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.75 (0.64-0.87), P = 0.0003 and 0.85 (0.73-1.00), P = 0.0456} for the 7.5 and 15 mg/kg groups, respectively. Median OS was >13 months in all treatment groups; nevertheless, OS was not significantly increased with bevacizumab [HR (95% CI) 0.93 (0.78-1.11), P = 0.420 and 1.03 (0.86-1.23), P = 0.761] for the 7.5 and 15 mg/kg groups, respectively, versus placebo. Most patients ( approximately 62%) received multiple lines of poststudy treatment. Updated safety results are consistent with those previously reported.ConclusionsFinal analysis of AVAiL confirms the efficacy of bevacizumab when combined with cisplatin-gemcitabine. The PFS benefit did not translate into a significant OS benefit, possibly due to high use of efficacious second-line therapies.
| S-EPMC2924992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this trial was to compare both the efficacy and the safety of a weekly nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) plus cisplatin vs. gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsA total of 84 participants received either 100 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel each week on d 1, 8 and 15 of a 28 day cycle, as well as cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on d 1 every three weeks (nab-TP arm); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on d 1 and 8, plus cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on d 1 every three weeks (GP arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary end points were overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS).ResultsAccording to our analysis, the median PFS was 4.8 months for the nab-TP arm vs. 5.2 months for the GP arm (P=0.55). Analysis showed the median OS was 14.6 months for participants who were in the nab-TP arm vs. 15.1 months for those in the GP arm (P=0.94). Besides, nab-TP showed OS advantages over GP in patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (26.7 vs. 15.3 months, P=0.046) and patients with a performance status of 0 (23.5 vs. 14.7 months, P=0.020). It was found that incidences of drug-related grade 3 or 4 toxicities were comparable between the two treatment arms.ConclusionsTherefore, it can be seen that weekly nab-TP treatment has a similar efficacy and tolerability to GP treatment for patients who are undergoing their first-line treatment for NSCLC. It could be that survival differences among platinum doublets in the context of both EGFR mutation and performance status have the potential to be the basis for our further clinical trials.
| S-EPMC6513743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) combination therapy has been the standard palliative chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). No randomized clinical trials have been able to demonstrate the survival benefit over GC during the past decade. In our previous phase II trial, adding S-1 to GC (GCS) showed promising efficacy and we aimed to determine whether GCS could improve overall survival compared with GC for patients with advanced BTC.MethodsWe performed a mulitcenter, randomized phase III trial across 39 centers. Enrolled patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to either the GCS or GC arm. The GCS regimen comprised gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 ) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2 ) infusion on day 1 and 80 mg/m2 of S-1 on days 1-7 every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and adverse events (AEs). This study is registered with Clinical trial identification: NCT02182778.ResultsBetween July 2014 and February 2016, 246 patients were enrolled. The median OS and 1-year OS rate were 13.5 months and 59.4% in the GCS arm and 12.6 months and 53.7% in the GC arm, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79, 90% confidence interval [CI]: 0.628-0.996; P = .046 [stratified log-rank test]). Median PFS was 7.4 months in the GCS arm and 5.5 months in the GC arm (HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.577-0.970; P = .015). RR was 41.5% in the GCS arm and 15.0% in the GC arm. Grade 3 or worse AEs did not show significant differences between the two arms.ConclusionsGCS is the first regimen which demonstrated survival benefits as well as higher RR over GC in a randomized phase III trial and could be the new first-line standard chemotherapy for advanced BTC. To exploit the advantage of its high RR, GCS is now tested in the neoadjuvant setting in a randomized phase III trial for potentially resectable BTC.
| S-EPMC10086809 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine a standard combination chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we conducted a phase III trial of irinotecan (CPT-11) to test the hypotheses that CPT-11+cisplatin is superior to cisplatin+vindesine and that CPT-11 monotherapy is not inferior to cisplatin+vindesine. A total of 398 patients with previously untreated NSCLC were randomised to receive cisplatin+CPT-11 (CPT-P), cisplatin+vindesine (VDS-P) or CPT-11 alone (CPT). In the CPT-P arm, CPT-11 60 mg m(-2) was administered on days 1, 8 and 15, and cisplatin 80 mg m(-2) was administered on day 1. In the VDS-P arm, cisplatin 80 mg m(-2) was administered on day 1, and vindesine 3 mg m(-2) was administered on days 1, 8 and 15. In the CPT arm, CPT-11 100 mg m(-2) was administered on days 1, 8 and 15. The median survival time was 50.0 weeks for patients on CPT-P, 45.6 weeks for those on VDS-P and 46.0 weeks for those on CPT (P=0.115, CPT-P vs VDS-P; P=0.089, CPT vs VDS-P), and the hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65-1.11) for CPT-P vs VDS-P and 0.83 (0.64-1.09) for CPT vs VDS-P. The response rate was 43.7% for patients on CPT-P, 31.7% for those on VDS-P and 20.5% for those on CPT. Major adverse reactions were grade 4 neutropenia observed in 37, 54 and 8% of the patients on CPT-P, VDS-P and CPT, respectively; and grades 3 and 4 diarrhoea observed in 12, 3 and 15% of the patients, respectively. CPT-P therapy produces comparable survival to VDS-P in patients with advanced NSCLC. CPT-11 monotherapy is not inferior to VDS-P in terms of survival. The CPT-11-containing regimen is one of the most efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of advanced NSCLC.
| S-EPMC2747545 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundOutcomes with current chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (MUC) remain poor. Lenalidomide, an antiangiogenic and immunomodulatory agent, enhances the effects of chemotherapy in preclinical studies. In this phase Ib/II study, we sought to determine a tolerable dose of lenalidomide in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin (GCL) in patients with MUC and to explore the safety and activity of this regimen.MethodsPatients with chemotherapy-naïve MUC received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 21 days. In phase Ib, there were four planned escalating dose levels of lenalidomide (10, 15, 20, and 25 mg) daily on days 1-14.ResultsSeven patients received GCL in phase Ib. The dose of lenalidomide was not escalated beyond 10 mg because of cytopenias requiring repeated dose delays and reductions. Two additional patients were enrolled in phase II, but the study was ultimately terminated due to poor tolerability and slow accrual. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events were cytopenias and diarrhea. Three of the nine patients experienced an objective response (one complete response, two partial responses).ConclusionChronic administration of the GCL regimen was poorly tolerated because of additive and cumulative myelosuppression.
| S-EPMC4153455 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is no standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) in cisplatin-ineligible (cisplatin-unfit) patients. The study assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of two vinflunine-based cytotoxic regimens in this setting.Patients and methodsPatients with aUC a creatinine clearance (CrCl) of <60 but ≥30 ml/min, performance status 0 or 1 and no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease were randomized (1 : 1). They received vinflunine 250 or 280 mg/m(2) (based on baseline CrCl) on day 1, plus either gemcitabine [750 mg/m(2) escalated to 1000 mg/m(2) in cycle 2 if no toxicity grade (G) ≥2 on days 1 and 8 (VG) or plus carboplatin area under the curve 4.5 day 1 (VC) every 21 days]. To detect a 22% improvement in each arm compared with H0 (41%) in the primary end point, disease control rate (DCR = complete response + partial response + stable disease), 31 assessable patients per arm were required (α = 5%, β = 20%).ResultsSixty-nine patients were enrolled (34 VG, 35 VC). Less G3/4 haematological adverse events (AEs) were reported with VG: neutropaenia was seen in 38% (versus 68% with VC) and febrile neutropaenia in 3% (versus 14% with VC) of patients. No major differences were observed for non-haematological AEs. DCR was 77% in both groups; overall response rate (ORR) was 44.1% versus 28.6%, with a median progression-free survival of 5.9 versus 6.1 months and median OS of 14.0 versus 12.8 months with VG and VC, respectively.ConclusionBoth vinflunine-based doublets offer a similar DCR, ORR and OS. The better haematological tolerance favours the VG combination, which warrants further study. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV PROTOCOL IDENTIFIER: NCT 01599013.
| S-EPMC4769994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeGEM20110714 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01528618), the first randomized, phase III study of systemic chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), reported significant progression-free survival improvement with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) versus fluorouracil plus cisplatin (FP; hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.68; P < .001). Data from the final analysis of overall survival (OS) are presented here.MethodsFrom February 2012 to October 2015, 362 patients were randomly assigned to receive either GP (gemcitabine 1 g/m2 once daily on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 once daily on day 1; n = 181) or FP (fluorouracil 4 g/m2 in continuous intravenous infusion over 96 hours and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 once daily on day 1; n = 181) once every 21 days. The primary end point was progression-free survival, which has been previously reported; OS was a secondary end point.ResultsAfter a median follow-up time of 69.5 months with GP and 69.7 months with FP, 148 (81.8%) and 166 (91.7%) deaths occurred in the GP and FP arms, respectively. The estimated hazard ratio for OS was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.90; two-sided P = .004). The median OS was 22.1 months (95% CI, 19.2 to 25.0 months) with GP versus 18.6 months (95% CI, 15.4 to 21.7 months) with FP. The OS probabilities at 1, 3, and 5 years were 79.9% versus 71.8%, 31.0% versus 20.4%, and 19.2% versus 7.8%, respectively. Poststudy therapy was administered in 51.9% and 55.2% of patients in the GP and FP arms, respectively.ConclusionAmong patients with previously untreated advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma, those who receive GP have longer OS than those receive FP. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin should be considered a preferred front-line option for these patients.
| S-EPMC8500603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceGemcitabine with platinum has limited efficacy for treatment of advanced cholangiocarcinoma, necessitating an evaluation of alternative drug combinations. Recent evidence suggests that paclitaxel may potentiate gemcitabine activity.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab)-paclitaxel is safe and effective for treatment of advanced cholangiocarcinoma.Design, setting, and participantsThis single-arm, 2-stage, phase 2 clinical trial was conducted at 23 community and academic centers across the United States and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older enrolled between September 2014 and March 2016 had confirmed advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma without prior systemic therapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 0 to 1 and a Child-Pugh score less than 8. Previous surgery, radiation, or liver-directed therapies were permitted.InterventionsPatients received intravenous nab-paclitaxel, 125 mg/m2, followed by gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day treatment cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was improvement in 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate (null and alternative hypotheses of 55% and 70%, respectively) in the evaluable population. Secondary outcomes included median overall survival (OS), PFS, time to progression, best overall response rate, disease control rate, safety and toxicity, and association of change in carbohydrate antigen 19-9 with survival.ResultsSeventy-four patients with a median age of 62 (range, 36-87) years, including 44 women (60%), were enrolled. Patients received a median of 6 (range, 1-18) treatment cycles, and the median follow-up was 10.2 (range, 0.6-27.3) months. The observed 6-month PFS rate of 61% (95% CI, 48%-73%) did not favor the alternative hypothesis. Median PFS was 7.7 (95% CI, 5.4-13.1) months, median OS was 12.4 (95% CI, 9.2-15.9) months, and median time to progression was 7.7 (95% CI, 6.1-13.1) months. The confirmed best overall response rate and disease control rate were 30% and 66%, respectively. Hazard ratios for an association between a change in serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and median PFS as well as median OS were 2.02 (95% CI, 0.86-4.75) (P = .10) and 1.54 (95% CI, 0.64-3.71) (P = .34), respectively. The most common treatment-related hematologic and nonhematologic adverse events at grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (43%) and fatigue (14%), respectively.Conclusions and relevanceAlthough the trial did not meet its primary efficacy end point, the results indicate that a nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine regimen was well tolerated and may be an alternative option to current therapeutic approaches for advanced cholangiocarcinoma.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02181634.
| S-EPMC6440720 | biostudies-literature