Jett, James R.

Purpose Irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) improved survival over etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in Japanese patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (E-SCLC). To confirm those results and discern the potential role of population-related pharmacogenomics (PG) in outcomes, we conducted a large randomized trial of identical design to the Japanese trial in North American patients with E-SCLC. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to IP (irinotecan 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15; cisplatin 60 mg/m2 day 1, every 4 weeks) or EP (etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1 through 3; cisplatin 80 mg/m2 day 1, every 3 weeks). Blood specimens for genomic DNA analysis were collected before random assignment in 169 patients. Results Of 671 patients, 651 were eligible (324 and 327 patients in the IP and EP arms, respectively). Response rates with IP and EP were 60% and 57%, respectively (P = .56). Median progression-free survival for IP and EP was 5.8 and 5.2 months, respectively (P = .07). Median overall survival for IP and EP was 9.9 and 9.1 months, respectively (P = .71). Severe diarrhea was more common with IP (19% v 3%); severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were higher with EP versus IP (68% v 33% and 15% v 4%, respectively). PG analysis showed that ABCB1 (C3435T)T/T (membrane transport) was associated with IP-related diarrhea; UGT1A1 (G-3156A)A/A (drug metabolism) was associated with IP-related neutropenia. Conclusion This large North American trial failed to confirm the previously reported survival benefit observed with IP in Japanese patients. Both regimens produced comparable efficacy, with less hematologic and greater gastrointestinal toxicity with IP. These results emphasize the potential importance of PG in interpreting trials of cancer therapy.

Abstract There is a great need for a screening test that results in the detection of asymptomatic lung cancer, at a time when there is a substantially better chance for curative treatment. Based on the significant limitations in the results reported to date from nonrandomized, observational screening trials, the authors do not recommend computed tomography screening for lung cancer at this time. Results of two major randomized controlled trials will soon be available.

Purpose Early clinical studies with gefitinib showed promising efficacy and mild toxicity in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Thus, gefitinib was an ideal agent to evaluate in a maintenance setting in stage III disease. Patients and Methods Untreated patients with stage III NSCLC, a performance score of 0 to 1, and adequate organ function were eligible. All patients received cisplatin 50 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8 plus etoposide 50 mg/m 2 on days 1 to 5, every 28 days for two cycles with concurrent thoracic radiation (1.8- to 2-Gy fractions per day; total dose, 61 Gy) followed by three cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 . Patients whose disease did not progress were randomly assigned to gefitinib 250 mg/d or placebo until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or the end of 5 years. The planned sample size was 672 patients to confer power of 0.89 to detect a 33% increase over the expected median survival time of 21 months (one-sided P = .025, log-rank test). Random assignment was stratified by stage, histology, and measurable versus nonmeasurable disease. Results Enrollment began in July 2001. An unplanned interim analysis conducted in April 2005 rejected the alternative hypothesis of improved survival at the P = .0015 level for 243 randomly assigned patients. The study closed, and preliminary results were reported. Now, with a median follow-up time of 27 months, median survival time was 23 months for gefitinib (n = 118) and 35 months for placebo (n = 125; two-sided P = .013). The toxic death rate was 2% with gefitinib compared with 0% for placebo. Conclusion In this unselected population, gefitinib did not improve survival. Decreased survival was a result of tumor progression and not gefitinib toxicity.

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 To answer the question, “should elderly non–small-cell lung cancer patients be offered elderly-specific trials?” Patients and Methods The North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) performed a pooled analysis of elderly patients who participated in elderly-specific trials (required age ≥ 65 years) and age-unspecified trials (required age ≥ 18 years). Between 1998 and 2000, all NCCTG non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with incurable cancer, age ≥ 65 years, and receiving first-line chemotherapy were included. A total of 118 elderly patients participated in elderly-specific trials, and 108, in age-unspecified trials. Demographics and outcomes were compared based on trial type. Results The median age of elderly patients in elderly-specific trials was greater: median (range): 73 years (65 to 87) and 70 years (65 to 85), respectively (P < .001), as was the percentage older than 80 years: 17% and 3%, respectively (P = .0008). Median survival times were 232 and 302 days, respectively (P = .08). After adjustment for baseline age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score, cancer stage, and body mass index, this survival difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio = 1.25; P = .16). Grade 3 or worse nonhematologic adverse event rates were greater in age-unspecified trials (81% v 57%, respectively; P < .001), as were grade 3 or worse hematologic events (68% v 10%, respectively; P < .001). Conclusion Elderly patients in NSCLC elderly-specific trials suffered lower rates of severe adverse events with no statistically significant differences in survival. It seems that elderly-specific trials are providing quality care and helping to define optimal cancer therapy in the elderly, particularly among the “oldest of the old.”

Abstract Purpose: Akt is a signal transduction protein that plays a central role in inhibiting apoptosis in a variety of cell types including human cancer cells. In cell lines derived from human non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs), Akt has been shown to confer chemoresistance by inhibition of apoptosis in response to different chemotherapeutic agents including platinum-based agents, which are often the first-line therapy for NSCLCs. Only 20% to 30% of patients with NSCLC treated with chemotherapy have clinical evidence of response. The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not overexpression of activated Akt [i.e., phosphorylated Akt (pAkt)] is correlated with survival. Experimental Design: We studied tumors from 61 patients with NSCLC in three tissue microarrays. All patients were followed for a period of 10 years or until death. The arrays were studied immunohistochemically with antibodies against pAkt, p53, and Ki-67. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in survival between the 14 patients with strong pAkt staining and the 47 patients with weak to absent pAkt staining both by log-rank (P = 0.0416) and Breslow analysis (P = 0.0446). Difference in survival time with respect to pAkt status was also statistically significant even after accounting for stage at diagnosis (P = 0.004). Neither p53 nor Ki-67 was a statistically significant prognostic factor. Conclusions: Overexpression of pAkt is an independent prognostic factor. Additional studies of human NSCLCs are warranted to drive the development of targeted tumor-specific antineoplastic therapies.

Abstract Past lung cancer screening trials in the United States with chest X-ray and sputum cytology were not able to show any decrease in lung cancer mortality; however, these trials are over 20 years old. Recent follow-up of the Mayo Lung Project showed a better survival from lung cancer in the screened arm, but no difference in overall mortality, suggesting an overdiagnosis of nonfatal cancers. Recent reports of low radiation dose spiral computed tomography (CT) chest screening for lung cancer have shown that CT screening detects cancers at a smaller size than chest X-rays. To date, there have been no randomized trials of CT versus observation or chest radiographs for screening purposes. All data available thus far on CT screening are from phase II proof-of-principle trials. The major limitations of CT screening, discussed here, include (a) a high rate of nodule detection: over 50% of participants will have at least one noncalcified nodule; (b) resulting follow-up CT scans, associated with increased costs; (c) cost and morbidity of biopsy or resection of benign noncalcified nodule (20-25% of such procedures in several trials); and (d) a small, but difficult to quantify, risk of cancer associated with multiple follow-up CT scans.

Purpose A randomized three-arm phase II study was undertaken to evaluate the optimum administration schedule of pemetrexed and gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naïve patients with non–small-cell lung cancer. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to three schedules of pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2, separated by a 90-minute interval, on a 21-day cycle as follows: schedule A, pemetrexed followed by gemcitabine on day 1 and gemcitabine on day 8; schedule B, gemcitabine followed by pemetrexed on day 1 and gemcitabine on day 8; and schedule C, gemcitabine on day 1 and pemetrexed followed by gemcitabine on day 8. Results One hundred fifty-two eligible patients (schedule A, n = 59; schedule B, n = 31, and schedule C, n = 62) received a median of five (schedule A), two (schedule B), and four (schedule C) treatment cycles. Overall, 66% of patients experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia. Common grade 3 and 4 nonhematologic toxicities were dyspnea (11%), fatigue (16%), and transaminase elevation (9%). Schedule A seemed less toxic compared with schedule C (grade 3 or 4 events: 86% v 94%, respectively; P = .19; grade 4 events: 39% v 48%, respectively; P = .30). Schedule B was closed at interim analysis for inferior efficacy. Schedule A, with a confirmed response rate of 31% (95% CI, 20% to 45%), met the protocol-defined efficacy criteria, whereas schedule C, with a confirmed response rate of 16.1% (95% CI, 11% to 34%), did not. Median survival time and time to progression were 11.4 and 4.4 months, respectively, with no observable difference between the arms. Conclusion Pemetrexed and gemcitabine administered as outlined for schedule A met the protocol-defined efficacy criteria, was less toxic compared with the other treatment schedules, and should be further evaluated.

Abstract Rationale Phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity of lung cancer likely precludes the identification of a single predictive marker and suggests the importance of identifying and measuring multiple markers. Objectives We describe the use of a fluorescent protein microarray to identify and measure multiple non–small cell lung cancer–associated antibodies and show how simultaneous measurements can be combined into a single diagnostic assay. Methods T7 phage cDNA libraries of non–small cell lung cancer were first biopanned with plasma samples from normal subjects and patients with non–small cell lung cancer to enrich the component of tumor-associated proteins, and then applied to microarray slides. Two hundred twelve immunogenic phage-expressed proteins were identified from roughly 4,000 clones, using high-throughput screening with patient plasmas and assayed with 40 cancer and 41 normal plasma samples. Twenty patient and 21 normal plasma samples were randomly chosen and used for statistical determination of the predictive value of each putative marker. Statistical analysis identified antibody reactivity to seven unique phage-expressed proteins that were significantly different (p &lt; 0.01) between patient and normal groups. The remaining 20 patient and 20 normal plasma samples were used as an independent test of the predictive ability of the selected markers. Main Results Measurements of the 5 most predictive phage proteins were combined in a logistic regression model that achieved 90% sensitivity and 95% specificity in prediction of patient samples, whereas leave-one-out statistical analysis achieved 88.9% diagnostic accuracy among all 81 samples. Conclusion Our data indicate that antibody profiling is a promising approach that could achieve high diagnostic accuracy for non–small cell lung cancer.