Final Overall Survival Analysis of the SOGUG Phase 2 MAJA Study: Maintenance Vinflunine Versus Best Supportive Care After First-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The MAJA study compared vinflunine (VFL) plus best supportive care (BSC) maintenance therapy versus BSC alone in advanced urothelial carcinoma responsive to first-line chemotherapy. The primary end point of progression-free survival was achieved. We present the final overall survival (OS) and long-term follow-up safety analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled, and a subsequent post hoc analysis was performed on the basis of radiologic response or stabilization to first-line cisplatin/gemcitabine (CG) chemotherapy (4-6 cycles), according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). VFL + BSC versus BSC alone were randomly assigned until disease progression. RESULTS: At final analysis, 58 patients (66.7%) had died while 29 (33.3%) had survived; the BSC arm had higher mortality (VFL + BSC, n = 26, 59.1% vs. BSC, n = 32, 74.4%). Median follow-up of surviving patients was 38.8 months (interquartile range, 23.8-61.6). Median OS was 16.7 months (95% confidence interval, 0-34.5) in VFL and 13.2 months (95% confidence interval, 6-20.4) in the BSC groups (hazard ratio, 0.736; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.24, P = .182). Post hoc group division did not affect median OS in either study arm. CONCLUSION: Final analysis supported a benefit of VFL in maintenance therapy in patients with disease control after first-line treatment with CG, with no unexpected long-term adverse effects. The study was insufficiently powered to show a significant OS advantage.

A phase II study of vinorelbine and estramustine in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of vinorelbine in combination with estramustine in patients with chemotherapy-naïve hormone-refractory prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients received vinorelbine (i.v. 25 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks and estramustine (oral, 600 mg/m2) daily. Eligible patients were required to have progressive metastatic disease following the first hormonal manipulation. RESULTS: Of the 51 patients enrolled (median age = 69 years), 84% presented bone involvement and 75% had at least two organs involved at the time of study entry and 47 were evaluable for treatment efficacy. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) response (> or =50% decrease) which was the primary efficacy criterion was reported in 21 patients (41.2%) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in 20 patients (48.8%) in the per protocol (PP) population. Of the 7 patients with measurable disease, 2 achieved partial response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.7 months (range: 1.9-8.6) and 14.3 months (range: 4.2-21.2), respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was reported in 6.1% of patients and in 1% of cycles. The incidence of complicated neutropenia (febrile neutropenia reported in 1 patient and septic shock with severe neutropenia reported in 2 patients) was 5.8%. The most frequent grade 3-4 non-haematological events (% of patients > or =5%) included anorexia (10%), thrombosis/embolism (8%), vomiting and hypotension (6% each). There were 3 toxic deaths (5.9 %) resulting from pulmonary embolism, angina pectoris, and septic shock. The impact of combined chemotherapy on the quality-of-life (QL) of the patients was assessed between baseline and the first evaluation scheduled at 6 weeks indicated a marked reduction in pain while the rest of the symptoms remained stable. Overall, health status improved slightly over the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that the combination of vinorelbine and estramustine is an active regimen in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer who had not been treated previously with chemotherapy. Main toxicities included complicated neutropenia even though the incidence of severe neutropenia was low. We observed a higher incidence of toxic deaths which could have been related to the regimen of estramustine used in the study.

A phase II study of vinorelbine and estramustine in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer

No disponible

Introduction. This phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of vinorelbine in combination with estramustine in patients with chemotherapy- naïve hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Material and methods. Patients received vinorelbine (i.v. 25 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks and estramustine (oral, 600 mg/m2) daily. Eligible patients were required to have progressive metastatic disease following the first hormonal manipulation. Results. Of the 51 patients enrolled (median age = 69 years), 84% presented bone involvement and 75% had at least two organs involved at the time of study entry and 47 were evaluable for treatment efficacy. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) response (≥50% decrease) which was the primary efficacy criterion was reported in 21 patients (41.2%) in the intent- to-treat (ITT) population and in 20 patients (48.8%) in the per protocol (PP) population. Of the 7 patients with measurable disease, 2 achieved partial response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.7 months (range: 1.9-8.6) and 14.3 months (range: 4.2-21.2), respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was reported in 6.1% of patients and in 1% of cycles. The incidence of complicated neutropenia (febrile neutropenia reported in 1 patient and septic shock with severe neutropenia reported in 2 patients) was 5.8%. The most frequent grade 3-4 non-haematological events (% of patients ≥5%) included anorexia (10%), thrombosis/embolism (8%), vomiting and hypotension (6% each). There were 3 toxic deaths (5.9 %) resulting from pulmonary embolism, angina pectoris, and septic shock. The imimpact of combined chemotherapy on the quality-oflife (QL) of the patients was assessed between baseline and the first evaluation scheduled at 6 weeks indicated a marked reduction in pain while the rest of the symptoms remained stable. Overall, health status improved slightly over the treatment period. Conclusions. This study confirmed that the combination of vinorelbine and estramustine is an active regimen in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer who had not been treated previously with chemotherapy. Main toxicities included complicated neutropenia even though the incidence of severe neutropenia was low. We observed a higher incidence of toxic deaths which could have been related to the regimen of estramustine used in the study