Marks, Randolph S.

Purpose To evaluate the outcome of patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (L-SCLC) treated with cisplatin and etoposide (PE), early prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI), and high-dose twice-daily thoracic radiotherapy (bid RT). Patients and Methods A total of 76 assessable patients were treated on this phase II trial, which included six cycles of PE. PCI (25 Gy/10 fractions) was delivered during cycle 3 to responding patients. Cycles 4 and 5 included concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic RT (30 Gy/20 bid fractions, a 2-week break, and another 30 Gy/20 bid fractions). Results Of the 76 assessable patients, 74 patients (97%) suffered grade 3 or greater (3+) toxicity and 61 patients (80%) had grade 4 or greater (4+) toxicity. Of these adverse events, grade 3+ hematologic toxicity occurred in 72 patients (95%), and grade 3+ nonhematologic toxicity occurred in 55 patients (72%). Only one (2%) of the 61 patients who received PCI experienced treatment failure in the brain. The 5-year survival rate of the 76 assessable patients was 24% (median, 20 months). The 5-year survival rate of the 64 patients who received thoracic RT was 29% (median, 22 months). The 5-year cumulative incidence of in-field treatment failure was 34%. Conclusion This regimen included a high total dose of bid TRT, which resulted in a favorable 5-year survival rate. Local failure remains a problem that will require additional investigation. Newer technology should allow the safe administration of greater doses of RT, which should improve patient outcome. Data from eight trials were combined to demonstrate a relationship between RT dose fractionation and 5-year survival.

AbstractPurpose: To evaluate the combination of sorafenib and gefitinib in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer.Experimental Design: In this dose-escalation trial, patients received oral sorafenib (200-400 mg) twice daily with gefitinib (250 mg orally) once daily to identify the recommended dose for phase II trials (RDP; part A). The pharmacokinetics of the RDP were characterized further in additional patients (part B) receiving single-agent gefitinib or sorafenib for 21 days followed by a 7-day washout with crossover to the other agent for an additional 21 days. Patients then received the combination of sorafenib plus gefitinib in 28-day cycles. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor efficacy were evaluated. Potential drug-drug interactions and the relationship between pharmacokinetics and toxicity were also assessed.Results: Thirty-one patients were treated (n = 12, part A; n = 19, part B). Most adverse events were grade 1/2. The most frequent grade 3/4 events included diarrhea and elevated alanine aminotransferase (both 9.7%). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred (part A: elevated alanine aminotransferase at 400 mg twice daily). Gefitinib had no effect on sorafenib pharmacokinetics. However, gefitinib Cmax (26%) and area under the curve (38%) were reduced by concomitant sorafenib. One patient had a partial response; 20 (65%; n = 8, part A; n = 12, part B) had stable disease ≥4 months. The RDP was sorafenib 400 mg twice daily with gefitinib 250 mg once daily.Conclusions: Sorafenib combined with gefitinib is well tolerated, with promising efficacy in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer. Studies to further investigate the significance of the reduction in gefitinib exposure by sorafenib are warranted.

Purpose In patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme, to determine whether cisplatin plus carmustine (BCNU) administered before and concurrently with radiation therapy (RT) improves survival compared with BCNU and RT and whether survival using accelerated RT (ART) is equivalent to survival using standard RT (SRT). Patients and Methods After surgery, patients were stratified by age, performance score, extent of surgical resection, and histology (glioblastoma v gliosarcoma) and then randomly assigned to arm A (BCNU plus SRT), arm B (BCNU plus ART), arm C (cisplatin plus BCNU plus SRT), or arm D (cisplatin plus BCNU plus ART). Results Four hundred fifty-one patients were randomly assigned, and 401 were eligible. Frequent toxicities included myelosuppression, vomiting, sensory neuropathy, and ototoxicity and were worse with cisplatin. There was no difference in toxicity between SRT and ART. Median survival times and 2-year survival rates for patients who received BCNU plus RT (arms A and B) compared with cisplatin, BCNU, and RT (arms C and D) were 10.1 v 11.5 months, respectively, and 11.5% v 13.7%, respectively (P = .19). Median survival times and 2-year survival rates for patients who received SRT (arms A and C) compared with ART (arms B and D) were 11.2 v 10.5 months, respectively, and 13.8% v 11.4%, respectively (P = .33). Conclusion Cisplatin administered concurrently with BCNU and RT resulted in more toxicity but provided no significant improvement in survival. SRT and ART produced similar toxicity and survival.

Purpose To determine, in a randomized comparison, whether the addition of paclitaxel to etoposide and cisplatin improves the time to progression and overall survival in patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) compared with standard etoposide and cisplatin and to compare the regimens' toxicity. Patients and Methods Eligible patients (N = 587) with untreated extensive SCLC were randomly assigned to receive either cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 and etoposide 80 mg/m2 on days 1 through 3 administered every 3 weeks for six cycles (EP) or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 over 4 hours on day 1, and etoposide 80 mg/m2 on days 1 to 3 followed by recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on days 4 to 18 administered every 3 weeks for six cycles (PET). Results Reporting of demographics, response, and survival included 565 patients, of whom 282 were randomly assigned to receive EP and 283 were assigned to receive PET. Overall response rates were 68% for the EP arm and 75% for the PET arm. Median failure-free survival time was 5.9 months for the EP arm and 6 months for the PET arm (P = .179). Median overall survival time was 9.9 months for patients on EP and 10.6 months for patients on PET (P = .169). Toxic deaths occurred in 2.4% of the patients on EP and 6.5% of patients on PET. Conclusion PET did not improve the time to progression or survival in patients with extensive SCLC compared with EP alone and was associated with unacceptable toxicity.

Purpose Patients with incurable cancer are faced with difficult decisions regarding whether to take chemotherapy in an attempt to preserve the quality and/or prolong the quantity of their lives. The average prolongation in survival with chemotherapy compared with best supportive care has not been well described. Methods We performed a literature search using PUBMED combined with expert inquiry to identify trials comparing cytotoxic chemotherapy with best supportive care. Twenty-five randomized, controlled clinical trials comparing cytotoxic chemotherapy with best supportive care were identified. Sixteen trials (64%) were in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data were extracted and analyzed. Results Sufficient data for statistical modeling were available for NSCLC trials. The mean sample size of the NSCLC trials was 175 patients. Response rates in the treatment arms for NSCLC ranged from 7% to 42%. A relationship between response rate and survival was observed for NSCLC. The estimated relationship for NSCLC suggested that each 3.3% increase in response rate correlated, on average, with a 1-week increase in median survival, and each 2% increase in response rate correlated, on average, with a 1% increase in 1-year survival. The mean increase in 1-year survival for trials of agents with at least a 20% response rate in NSCLC was 16%. Formulas are provided to help estimate how a given response rate may effect median and 1-year survival relative to best supportive care alone for NSCLC. Conclusion We found a relationship between response rate and both median and 1-year survival in NSCLC. This information may help oncologists estimate how an NSCLC chemotherapy regimen with a given response rate can, on average, impact survival relative to supportive care alone.

Purpose: This phase II study was undertaken to define the efficacy and pharmacodynamics of R115777, a farnesyl transferase inhibitor, in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. Patients and Methods: Forty-four patients with measurable stage IIIB (pleural effusion) or stage IV disease received 193 courses of treatment (median, 2.0; range, 1 to 22) with R115777 300 mg administered orally twice daily for 21 of every 28 days. Buccal mucosa samples and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected before and after 8 days of treatment to evaluate inhibition of farnesyl transferase in vivo. Results: No objective complete or partial responses were documented. Seven patients (16%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8% to 31%) had disease stabilization for greater than 6 months. Median survival was 7.7 months (95% CI, 6.5 to 10.5) and time to progression was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1). The most severe toxicity was neutropenia (9% grade 3, 7% grade 4) and the most common toxicities were anemia (50% grade 1 or 2, 5% grade 3) and anorexia (50% grade 1 or 2, 2% grade 3). Mild peripheral neuropathy occurred in 25% of patients. Evidence of farnesyl transferase inhibition was documented in 83% of patients. Conclusion: Single-agent R115777 was well tolerated in patients with advanced NSCLC, but demonstrated minimal clinical activity. Inhibition of farnesylation in vivo was consistently documented. On the basis of promising results of farnesyl transferase inhibitor combinations with standard chemotherapy agents, future studies of this agent in NSCLC should be in combination with systemic chemotherapy.