Back to Authors

Gandara, David R.

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1784-048X

Mayo Clinic

UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center

Citations 24

Phase III Trial of Irinotecan/Cisplatin Compared With Etoposide/Cisplatin in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Clinical and Pharmacogenomic Results From SWOG S0124
Lara, Primo N. , Natale, Ronald B., Crowley, John, Lenz, Heinz Josef, Carleton, Jane E., Jett, James R., Langer, Corey J. , Kuebler, J. Philip , Dakhil, Shaker R. , Chansky, Kari, Gandara, David R. , Redman, Mary W. , Carleton, Jane E., Gandara, David

Journal of Clinical Oncology | April 7, 2009 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 15 | Pages: 2530-2535

10.1200/jco.2008.20.1061 Get It

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.
Phase III Trial of Maintenance Gefitinib or Placebo After Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy and Docetaxel Consolidation in Inoperable Stage III Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: SWOG S0023
Kelly, Karen , Chansky, Kari, Gaspar, Laurie E., Albain, Kathy S. , Jett, James R., Ung, Yee , Lau, Derick, Crowley, John J., Gandara, David R. , Kelly, Karen , Gandara, David

Journal of Clinical Oncology | March 31, 2008 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 15 | Pages: 2450-2456

10.1200/jco.2007.14.4824 Get It

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.