Phase I trial of multiple cycles of high-dose carboplatin, paclitaxel, and topotecan with peripheral-blood stem-cell support as front-line therapy.

PURPOSE: To determine the safety and feasibility of delivering multiple cycles of front-line high-dose carboplatin, paclitaxel, and topotecan with peripheral-blood stem-cell (PBSC) support. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were required to have a malignant solid tumor for which they had received no prior chemotherapy. Mobilization of PBSC was achieved with either filgrastim alone or in combination with cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel. Patients then received three or four cycles of high-dose carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve [AUC] 16), paclitaxel (250 mg/m(2)), and topotecan (10-15 mg/m(2)), with the latter two agents administered as 24-hour infusions and supported with PBSC and filgrastim. Cycles were repeated every 28 days. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled onto the trial and were assessable for toxicity and clinical outcome. Dose-limiting toxicities were stomatitis and prolonged hematopoietic recovery. The maximum-tolerated dose of topotecan was 12.5 mg/m(2) when given with high-dose carboplatin and paclitaxel for three cycles. Four cycles were able to be given with a dose of topotecan of 10 mg/m(2). The pharmacokinetics of each compound were not affected by the other agents. Eleven (85%) of 13 patients with assessable disease responded. CONCLUSION: Multiple cycles of high-dose carboplatin, paclitaxel, and topotecan can be safely administered with filgrastim and PBSC support. The recommended doses for phase II study are carboplatin AUC 16, paclitaxel 250 mg/m(2), and topotecan 10 mg/m(2). Trials are currently being conducted with this regimen as front-line treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer and extensive small-cell carcinoma. This approach remains experimental and should be used only in the context of a clinical trial.

Phase II trial of induction high-dose chemotherapy followed by surgical resection and radiation therapy for patients with marginally resectable non-small cell carcinoma of the lung.

The combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel is an active regimen in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Historically, patients with stage III disease have manifested higher response rates than patients with metastatic disease, and patients achieving a pathologic complete response to induction chemoradiation therapy prior to surgery have shown better long-term outcome. Based upon our pilot data using high-dose carboplatin and paclitaxel, we designed a phase II trial in patients with marginally resectable stage IIIA NSCLC. Ten patients, with bulky nodal stage IIIA disease, initially received etoposide (2 g/m2) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC). Two cycles, 28 days apart, of carboplatin (AUC 12 in seven patients; AUC 16 in three patients) and paclitaxel (250 mg/m2) were administered with filgrastim (5 microg/kg) and PBSC support. After re-evaluation, patients underwent a thoracotomy followed by radiotherapy (44-60 Gy) if deemed resectable, or radiotherapy alone (60 Gy) if not resectable. The median age was 58.5 years (48-66) with a median ECOG performance status of 0 (0-1). Histology was adenocarcinoma in seven patients; the remainder had either squamous cell, large cell or bronchoalveolar carcinoma. Based on CT radiography, the overall response rate was 40%. Eight of ten patients underwent resection with four right pneumonectomies, three right upper lobectomies and one wedge resection of the right upper lobe. Six patients had a complete resection. Of eight patients resected, four were downstaged by induction therapy, three remained unchanged and one was found to have more extensive disease. The remaining two patients developed metastatic disease while receiving chemotherapy. The median dose of postoperative radiotherapy was 54 Gy (35-66 Gy). Actual median follow-up for all patients was 89 weeks (25 to 136+). The actuarial median overall survival was 124 weeks (25 to 136+) and time to progression was 57 weeks (17 to 136+). The median dose of carboplatin delivered expressed as mg/m2 was 779 (615-1540). Neutropenic fever occurred in two patients during the initial mobilization cycle only. The median number of units of RBC and/or platelets transfused was 0 (0-2 and 0-6, respectively). There were no significant non-hematologic toxicities. High-dose induction chemotherapy with stem cell rescue is feasible and safe with an acceptable response rate. Thoracotomy, including pneumonectomy and postoperative radiotherapy, were well tolerated by patients after undergoing high-dose induction chemotherapy with no apparent increase in peri-operative morbidity. The pathologic complete response rate was low--one out of ten patients. These results indicate that dose escalation of induction chemotherapy does not improve response rates even in this highly selected patient population. Accordingly, the complexity and potential toxicity of high-dose chemotherapy, as delivered in this trial as neoadjuvant treatment of non-small cell lung cancer, is not warranted.

Phase I trial of multiple cycles of high-dose chemotherapy supported by autologous peripheral-blood stem cells.

PURPOSE: To determine the safety and feasibility of delivering multiple cycles of front-line high-dose carboplatin and paclitaxel with hematopoietic peripheral-blood stem cell (PBSC) support. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were required to have a malignant solid tumor for which they had received no prior chemotherapy. Mobilization of PBSC was achieved with cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). After one cycle of conventional-dose carboplatin and cyclophosphamide with GM-CSF, patients received multiple cycles of high-dose carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve [AUC], 12 to 20) and paclitaxel (250 mg/m(2)) with PBSC and GM-CSF repeated every 28 days. RESULTS: Twenty-four of 28 patients were assessable for toxicity and clinical outcome. Dose-limiting toxicities were dehydration, diarrhea, and electrolyte imbalances. The maximum-tolerated dose of carboplatin was AUC 16 (equivalent to a median of 1,189 mg/m(2)). The relationship of target AUC to measured AUC was linear (r(2) =. 29; P =.0011). The overall response rate was 96%, with a complete clinical response rate of 67%. The median time to progression from the first PBSC reinfusion was 49.5 weeks (range, 8 to 156+ weeks). CONCLUSION: Multiple cycles of high-dose carboplatin (AUC 16) and paclitaxel (250 mg/m(2)) can be safely administered with GM-CSF and PBSC support. Although this regimen is safe, feasible, and active, the use of multiple cycles of high-dose chemotherapy as front-line treatment remains experimental and should only be used in the context of a clinical trial.

Effect of low-intensity warfarin anticoagulation on level of activity of the hemostatic system in patients with atrial fibrillation. BAATAF Investigators.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Boston Area Anticoagulation Trial for Atrial Fibrillation (BAATAF) demonstrated that low-intensity warfarin anticoagulation can, with safety, sharply reduce the rate of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. The beneficial effect of warfarin was presumably related to a decrease in clot formation in the cardiac atria and subsequent embolization. METHODS: To assess the effect of warfarin therapy on in vivo clotting in patients in the BAATAF, we measured the plasma level of prothrombin activation fragment F1+2. One sample was obtained from 125 patients from the BAATAF; 62 were taking warfarin and 63 were not taking warfarin (control group). RESULTS: The warfarin group had a 71% lower mean F1+2 level than the control group (mean F1+2 of 1.57 nmol/L in the control group compared with a mean of 0.46 nmol/L in the warfarin group; P < .001). F1+2 levels were higher in older subjects but were consistently lower in the warfarin group at all ages. Fifty-two percent of patients in the control group were taking chronic aspirin therapy at the time their F1+2 level was measured. Control patients taking aspirin had F1+2 levels very similar to control patients not taking aspirin (mean of 1.52 nmol/L for control patients on aspirin compared with 1.64 nmol/L for control patients off aspirin; P > .1). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that prothrombin activation was significantly suppressed in vivo by warfarin but not aspirin among patients in the BAATAF. These findings correlate with the marked reduction in ischemic stroke noted among patients in the warfarin treatment group observed in the BAATAF.

Monitoring "mini-intensity" anticoagulation with warfarin: comparison of the prothrombin time using a sensitive thromboplastin with prothrombin fragment F1+2 levels.

Treatment with warfarin using a target International Normalized Ratio (INR) range of 1.7 to 2.5 is efficacious for many clinical indications, but the minimal intensity of anticoagulation required for antithrombotic protection has yet to be determined. To evaluate whether patients could be reliably monitored with a less intense regimen, we anticoagulated patients with warfarin for several months using a target INR range of 1.3 to 1.6 as determined by prothrombin time (PT) using a sensitive thromboplastin (Dade IS, International Sensitivity Index [ISI] = 1.3). Plasma measurements of F1+2, a marker of factor Xa action on prothrombin in vivo, were also obtained to determine the suppressive effect of warfarin on hemostatic system activity. Overall, 20 of 21 patients with a history of cerebrovascular events (mean age, 61 years) could be reliably regulated with warfarin in the target INR range. F1+2 levels were significantly suppressed from baseline in all patients, with a mean reduction of 49% (range, 28% to 78%). We found a significant relationship between the extent of suppression of prothrombin activation levels and the baseline measurements. A mean reduction of 65% was observed for those patients with baseline F1+2 greater than or equal to 1.5 nmol/L, but only 38% for baseline F1+2 less than or equal to 0.5 nmol/L. Overall, 68% of plasma samples obtained during stable anticoagulation were within the target INR range. PTs were also determined on all plasma samples with two thromboplastins of lower sensitivity (C+, ISI = 2.09; and automated simplastin, ISI = 2.10). Only 47% and 35% of PT determinations, respectively, were within the target range with these reagents. We conclude that prothrombin activation can be significantly suppressed in vivo with use of warfarin in an INR range of 1.3 to 1.6. This level of anticoagulation can be reliably achieved by monitoring PTs with a thromboplastin of high sensitivity.